right hook

[lokey]

I was going north in a bike lane on a multilane city street. I stop at a
light - not a cross-street intersection but a plaza entrance on the west
side and a senior's complex entrance on the right but still controlled by
signal lights.

I am first at the intersection. A public transit mobility bus [not a
standard bus but one for people with mobility handicaps] pulls up beside me.
Then before the light changes the bus starts inching forward anticipating
the light change so that he is blocking the crosswalk and half his length
ahead of me when the light turns and he makes his right turn in front of me.

I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too many
years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.

--
'Nobody here gets out alive' -jim morrison

[Bob Wheeler]

lokey wrote:
> I was going north in a bike lane on a multilane city street. I stop at a
> light - not a cross-street intersection but a plaza entrance on the west
> side and a senior's complex entrance on the right but still controlled by
> signal lights.
>
> I am first at the intersection. A public transit mobility bus [not a
> standard bus but one for people with mobility handicaps] pulls up beside me.
> Then before the light changes the bus starts inching forward anticipating
> the light change so that he is blocking the crosswalk and half his length
> ahead of me when the light turns and he makes his right turn in front of me.
>
> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too many
> years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.
>
> --
> 'Nobody here gets out alive' -jim morrison
>
>

You should call. Last week, here in Delaware, a cyclist became a
quadriplegic because a car with trailer made a right turn in front of
him. You were stopped, he was not unfortunately.

--
Bob Wheeler --- http://www.bobwheeler.com/
ECHIP, Inc. ---
Randomness comes in bunches.

[Ken]

"lokey" > wrote in
:
> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too
> many
> years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.

Definately complain, especially if you got the license plate number.

[Fritz M]

lokey wrote:

> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too many
> years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.

Definitely complain and ask for a response on the actions they will
take to ensure this does not happen again.

In my experience, public agencies are pretty good about responding.
Private companies[1] don't make any response at all. I file police
reports on them now.

RFM
--
[1] Two incidents over the past three years that I've reported on:

* Right-hooked by the speeding driver of a Western Disposal (Boulder,
Colorado) trash truck. I bailed into the ditch to avoid death/maiming.
That one was *close*. My complaint to Western Disposal ended up
(apparently) in a black hole.

* Yellow Freight. I was in straight-through lane waiting for light, to
the left of the stripe seperating my lane from right-turn lane.
Right-turning tractor-trailer comes in behind me, swings wide for the
right turn and instead of waiting for me to get out of the way, the
driver just goes. I'm assertive and hold my place and the tire actually
bumps me before I slide myself into the car next to me. I filed a
police report on that one and I also complained to Yellow. No response
from Yellow, and the police told me that truck was registered in
Illinois and there wasn't much they could do.

[Frank Drackman]

"lokey" > wrote in message
...
>
> I was going north in a bike lane on a multilane city street. I stop at a
> light - not a cross-street intersection but a plaza entrance on the west
> side and a senior's complex entrance on the right but still controlled by
> signal lights.
>
> I am first at the intersection. A public transit mobility bus [not a
> standard bus but one for people with mobility handicaps] pulls up beside
> me. Then before the light changes the bus starts inching forward
> anticipating the light change so that he is blocking the crosswalk and
> half his length ahead of me when the light turns and he makes his right
> turn in front of me.
>
> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too
> many years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a
> cyclist.
>
> --
> 'Nobody here gets out alive' -jim morrison
>
>

I recently filed a complaint with our local transit agency for a similar
issue. They responded to my complaint and kept me informed through out the
process. He was a new driver during a probation period and after reviewing
his history the acency decided not to hire him full-time

[[email protected]]

lokey wrote:
>
>
> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too many
> years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.

You absolutely should call. Better yet, write a letter. They can put
it in the driver's file.

Also, when you're stopped at a light, you should be in the center of
the lane to prevent that precise problem.

- Frank Krygowski

[Neil Brooks]

"lokey" > wrote:

> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too many
>years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.

In all seriousness: why *wouldn't* you call?

Glad you're ok.

[lokey]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>
>
> lokey wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too
>> many
>> years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.
>
> You absolutely should call. Better yet, write a letter. They can put
> it in the driver's file.
>
> Also, when you're stopped at a light, you should be in the center of
> the lane to prevent that precise problem.

Without getting into the whole 'bike lane good/bike lane bad' thing: it
was a bikelaned street. I was in the bike lane and the bus driver was in the
first automotive lane.

--
'Just because you're wearing a tie
Doesn't mean you're bloody important'
-chumbawamba

[rdclark]

wrote:

> Also, when you're stopped at a light, you should be in the center of
> the lane to prevent that precise problem.

He was in a bike lane, illustrating one reason why bike lanes suck. As
you indicate, when I approach a light in a bike lane in this situation,
I usually take the rightmost full thru lane while waiting for the
light, and merge back into the bike lane as I cross the intersection.
Trucks and buses in that lane often can't even see you if you're on
their right in the bike lane, and even if they can, they don't.

RichC

[lokey]

"Neil Brooks" > wrote in message
...
> "lokey" > wrote:
>
>> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too
>> many
>>years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.
>
> In all seriousness: why *wouldn't* you call?
>
> Glad you're ok.


I wasn't really at risk as I was stopped. If I had come up after him as
the light changed to green I would have been at risk.

What really irritated me was that it wasn't like I had ridden up to the
light after the bus and the driver did not notice me - still no excuse but
understandable. But the bus had come up behind me so there really is no
excuse for not seeing me. And _then_ to turn in front of me: I was tempted
to confront the driver but instead I resorted to cant [Calm blue ocean, calm
blue ocean] and got on with my ride to the lake.

Just so you know - I did call Guelph Transit. They said they'd get back to
me. Other than that and the driver caused fatality a few years ago I do have
a favourable opinion of GT. They converted their buses to bio-diesel and run
the service with a balanced budget.

--
'When a man is wrong and won't admit it,
he always gets angry.' -thomas c haliburton

[Joe Canuck]

lokey wrote:

> I was going north in a bike lane on a multilane city street. I stop at a
> light - not a cross-street intersection but a plaza entrance on the west
> side and a senior's complex entrance on the right but still controlled by
> signal lights.
>
> I am first at the intersection. A public transit mobility bus [not a
> standard bus but one for people with mobility handicaps] pulls up beside me.
> Then before the light changes the bus starts inching forward anticipating
> the light change so that he is blocking the crosswalk and half his length
> ahead of me when the light turns and he makes his right turn in front of me.
>
> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too many
> years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.
>
> --
> 'Nobody here gets out alive' -jim morrison
>
>

If you noted the vehicle plate number, time of day, and street... I
would definitely call it in.

Unfortunately, where I come from motorists also seem to think they can
try to beat the pedestrians waiting to cross at the light when they try
to turn after waiting for the light.

When the pedestrian "walk" sign is up the motorists are supposed to
wait, many don't even both glancing to see the state of the "walk" sign.

[jj]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 13:15:06 -0400, "lokey" > wrote:

>I wasn't really at risk as I was stopped. If I had come up after him as
>the light changed to green I would have been at risk.
>
> What really irritated me was that it wasn't like I had ridden up to the
>light after the bus and the driver did not notice me - still no excuse but
>understandable. But the bus had come up behind me so there really is no
>excuse for not seeing me. And _then_ to turn in front of me: I was tempted
>to confront the driver but instead I resorted to cant [Calm blue ocean, calm
>blue ocean] and got on with my ride to the lake.

I've also experienced this phenomena - some drivers of city busses take on
this attitude that they are large slow juggernauts that can intimidate the
traffic around them and they know that they can pull out of a bus stop into
traffic and cause any cars around them to divert or brake - afterall
getting a scratch or dent on the side of your bus is not such a big deal
(though you really don't want that) - but if it's your car that's
upsetting.

These few bus drivers, or 18 wheeler drivers get this sense that it's their
road and you -must- yield, even if you have to drive into someone's yard,
or stop.

Having acquired this 'sense' of juggernautery <g>, it's extremely easy to
transefer to a little biker - there is probably a feeling that you are just
a cartoon to be bumped aside - I doubt they imagine you actually getting
hurt and mangled - it would be cartoon blood and they'd grab your foot like
the roadrunner cartoon and blowy you back up to normal size.

So-o-o it's best to be forewarned and not put yourself in a vulnerable
position around them. Frank'scomment II think) to take the center of the
auto lane and then merge back after the light is a good one and I use this
also. I get right out in front of them and puff up to full 230lb
bodybuilder size and get 'seen'. ;-) Uh, I also know that sometimes I have
to get out of their way, or even ride up a sidestreet to let the threat
pass.

Glad you weren't hurt.

jj

[Zoot Katz]

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 15:40:56 -0400, >,
Joe Canuck > wrote, in part:

>
>Unfortunately, where I come from motorists also seem to think they can
>try to beat the pedestrians waiting to cross at the light when they try
>to turn after waiting for the light.

Monday I almost got wiped by a chrome and vanity plated Hummer while
crossing in a cross walk. They didn't feel like waiting for a guy on
crutches. Their left-turn was more important. I could have reached out
and touched her shiny black scud. She'd have creamed a car had there
been one approaching the intersection on the side street I was
crossing. She had to go into their lane to cut me off so you know that
I was fully occupying the x-walk before she started her turn.

BTW, The BC vanity plate read "MAGGIE".
--
zk

[Frank Drackman]

"jj" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 13:15:06 -0400, "lokey" > wrote:
>
<SNIP>

> I've also experienced this phenomena - some drivers of city busses take on
> this attitude that they are large slow juggernauts that can intimidate the
> traffic around them and they know that they can pull out of a bus stop
> into
> traffic and cause any cars around them to divert or brake - afterall
> getting a scratch or dent on the side of your bus is not such a big deal
> (though you really don't want that) - but if it's your car that's
> upsetting.
>

In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a stop.
Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.

[Neil Brooks]

Zoot Katz > wrote:

>Fri, 03 Jun 2005 15:40:56 -0400, >,
>Joe Canuck > wrote, in part:
>
>>
>>Unfortunately, where I come from motorists also seem to think they can
>>try to beat the pedestrians waiting to cross at the light when they try
>>to turn after waiting for the light.
>
>Monday I almost got wiped by a chrome and vanity plated Hummer while
>crossing in a cross walk. They didn't feel like waiting for a guy on
>crutches. Their left-turn was more important. I could have reached out
>and touched her shiny black scud. She'd have creamed a car had there
>been one approaching the intersection on the side street I was
>crossing. She had to go into their lane to cut me off so you know that
>I was fully occupying the x-walk before she started her turn.
>
>BTW, The BC vanity plate read "MAGGIE".

In the apocalyptic scourge, she goes first.

I was going to begin with HUMMER drivers anyway . . .

Incidentally, was she selling Prada knock-offs?

[jj]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:13:38 -0700, "Frank Drackman"
> wrote:

>
>"jj" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 13:15:06 -0400, "lokey" > wrote:
>>
><SNIP>
>
>> I've also experienced this phenomena - some drivers of city busses take on
>> this attitude that they are large slow juggernauts that can intimidate the
>> traffic around them and they know that they can pull out of a bus stop
>> into
>> traffic and cause any cars around them to divert or brake - afterall
>> getting a scratch or dent on the side of your bus is not such a big deal
>> (though you really don't want that) - but if it's your car that's
>> upsetting.
>>
>
>In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a stop.
>Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.

Um, this isn't really addressing the bad behavior of some bus drivers and
the transfer of this 'attitude' or delusion onto interactions with
cyclists, is it?

IMO, it's better for the big guy to look out for and yield to the little
guy in the street.

When you say 'your area' do you mean your city has a specific law to yield
to all busses? What if a cyclist can not yield at the time - does this give
the bus driver a legal right or tip the scales in the driver's benefit?

May I suggest you examine the wording and intent of the actual law, b/c
this seems to be an all around 'bad idea'. FWIW, I do think that a majority
of bus drivers -do- look out for cars and pedestrians and cyclists
-despite- what 'right' to pull out into already moving traffic that city
ordinance has given them. Further this doesn't absolve a cyclist from
taking prudent actions. I only bring in the bus-car interaction as a way to
explain the development of this 'attitude' that some bus drivers may
exhibit towards cyclists. Heh, why do I have to have an explanation? Well
guess it's a little hard for me to understand how big steel container
drivers feel threatened and need to act out towards harmless things trying
to share the road - so I've postulated a chain of events.

jj

[lokey]

"Frank Drackman" > wrote in message
...

> In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a stop.
> Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.

I am familiar with these types of bylaws. In my case the bus was not
pulling into traffic from a stop. He was making a right turn at a light.
And as described I doubt any jurisdiction gives the bus driver the right to
right turn before the light has changed.

--
'I can pull up by the curb
I can make it on the road
Going mobile' -the who

[lokey]

"jj" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:13:38 -0700, "Frank Drackman"
> > wrote:
[...]
>>In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a stop.
>>Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.
[...]
> When you say 'your area' do you mean your city has a specific law to yield
> to all busses? What if a cyclist can not yield at the time - does this
> give
> the bus driver a legal right or tip the scales in the driver's benefit?

If it is like the ones I'm aware of: A bus pulling into traffic from a bus
stop has the right-of-way and other vehicles must cede that right to allow
it to return to traffic rather than the usual rule where the vehicle trying
to pull into traffic has to wait for an opening and the through traffic has
the right-of-way.

> May I suggest you examine the wording and intent of the actual law, b/c
> this seems to be an all around 'bad idea'.

It gives a precedence to public transit which I agree with.

However I reiterate: this was not the situation in my case. The bus was not
pulling into traffic from a bus stop. He was making a right turn without
ceding to the vehicle in the bike lane as well as anticipating the light.

--
'What's an aptitude test?'
'A suitability test, Ricky'
'I'll wear a suit if I have to.'
-from the trailer park boys

[jj]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 18:36:24 -0400, "lokey" > wrote:

>
>"jj" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:13:38 -0700, "Frank Drackman"
>> > wrote:
>[...]
>>>In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a stop.
>>>Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.
>[...]
>> When you say 'your area' do you mean your city has a specific law to yield
>> to all busses? What if a cyclist can not yield at the time - does this
>> give the bus driver a legal right or tip the scales in the driver's benefit?
>
> If it is like the ones I'm aware of: A bus pulling into traffic from a bus
>stop has the right-of-way and other vehicles must cede that right to allow
>it to return to traffic rather than the usual rule where the vehicle trying
>to pull into traffic has to wait for an opening and the through traffic has
>the right-of-way.

Huh? To do this - give a bus an automatic right-of-way you'dhave to equip
it with a siren and flashing lights. This is what works for emergency
vehicles. But busses don't have this. OK, I kid a little - the obvious way
to do this would be better city planning and better bus-stop design. But
when you say usual rule you seem to be saying like all vehicles pulling out
into traffic it's up to -them- to yield - it's mostly physics - moving
vehicles and inertia vs stopped vehicles and time.

>> May I suggest you examine the wording and intent of the actual law, b/c
>> this seems to be an all around 'bad idea'.
>
> It gives a precedence to public transit which I agree with.

While I like public transit, I wouldn't impose a law that's counter to the
ways that merging bodys safely merge.

> However I reiterate: this was not the situation in my case. The bus was not
>pulling into traffic from a bus stop. He was making a right turn without
>ceding to the vehicle in the bike lane as well as anticipating the light.

I hate saying this but the vehicle in the bike lane, if stopped would be
the more obvious of the two to cede, maybe... Plus now you know that you
must take the traffic lane, then merge back into the bike lane to be safe
in admittedly tricky situations like this, with bad engineering design (I
think you were kinda setup to get hooked with this kind of design. I'm just
relieved you weren't moving into the intersection as the light popped green
- then you probably would have had a dangerous situation develop maybe
faster than you could react.)

But you're right. I did get off on a tangent. My bad. (you can guess what
kind of scary situations we have where I live where the busses cut into
and dive out of the narrow bike lanes to drop off passengers as cyclists
dive for cover). ;-)

-B

[lokey]

"jj" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 18:36:24 -0400, "lokey" > wrote:
>>"jj" > wrote in message
...
>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:13:38 -0700, "Frank Drackman"
>>> > wrote:
[...]
>>>>In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a stop.
>>>>Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.
[...]
>>> When you say 'your area' do you mean your city has a specific law to
>>> yield
>>> to all busses? What if a cyclist can not yield at the time - does this
>>> give the bus driver a legal right or tip the scales in the driver's
>>> benefit?
>>
>> If it is like the ones I'm aware of: A bus pulling into traffic from a
>> bus
>>stop has the right-of-way and other vehicles must cede that right to allow
>>it to return to traffic rather than the usual rule where the vehicle
>>trying
>>to pull into traffic has to wait for an opening and the through traffic
>>has
>>the right-of-way.
>
> Huh? To do this - give a bus an automatic right-of-way you'dhave to equip
> it with a siren and flashing lights. This is what works for emergency
> vehicles. But busses don't have this. OK, I kid a little - the obvious way
> to do this would be better city planning and better bus-stop design. But
> when you say usual rule you seem to be saying like all vehicles pulling
> out
> into traffic it's up to -them- to yield - it's mostly physics - moving
> vehicles and inertia vs stopped vehicles and time.

Legality. Maybe Bob Hunt would like to chime in but:

If Car A is pulling into traffic from a stop and is hit by through-traffic
Car B, then Car A is considered to be at fault.

With this Bus Bylaw: If Bus C is pulling into traffic from a bus stop and
is hit by through-traffic Car D then Car D is at fault.

I dunno what the legality would be if Car D is also a bus.

:)

[...]
> I hate saying this but the vehicle in the bike lane, if stopped would be
> the more obvious of the two to cede, maybe...

I agree, and I did cede and not ride into the turning bus. I have a
personal motto in such instances: 'I'd rather be alive than right'.

But in this case I think the bus driver committed two infractions: Making
an unsafe right turn, cutting off another vehicle [Me], and starting his
turn before the light changed.

--
'Television is a weapon of mass distraction.'
-larry gelbart

[Zoot Katz]

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:54:50 -0400,
>, >
wrote:

>> It gives a precedence to public transit which I agree with.
>
>While I like public transit, I wouldn't impose a law that's counter to the
>ways that merging bodys safely merge.

The bus signals, you yield. Period. That's the law here too.
We've simply codified the law of the jungle.
--
zk

[gds]

Zoot Katz wrote:
>
> The bus signals, you yield. Period. That's the law here too.
> We've simply codified the law of the jungle.
> --

And besides the legal issue there is also the law of survival. While I
understand folks get a bit agitated when some large, motorized vehicle
suddenly occupies their space I think that the complaint is secondary
to survival.
Regardless of who may be in the right I have no desire to have a
collision with a bus (or car) and so I assume primary and full
respoonsibility for my safety-- and that almost always means being
alert and yielding to the big guys.

[jj]

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 16:42:40 -0700, Zoot Katz >
wrote:

>Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:54:50 -0400,
>, >
>wrote:
>
>>> It gives a precedence to public transit which I agree with.
>>
>>While I like public transit, I wouldn't impose a law that's counter to the
>>ways that merging bodys safely merge.
>
>The bus signals, you yield. Period. That's the law here too.
>We've simply codified the law of the jungle.

Hehe. OK, I'll concede that. <slaps forehead>

Besides being courteous, how would a diver know if that law is on the
books? I don't know of anyone who has been ticked for 'failing to yield to
a city bus', but I'm apparenly a moron on this. ;-)

What if you're on the bike and you come screaming past him at 20mph in the
rightmost tire track, and he signals and begins to pull out simultaneously
into your lane. Do you slam on the brakes to let him out? Er...would one be
required to....I mean.

jj

[Zoot Katz]

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 19:54:38 -0400,
>, >
wrote:

>Besides being courteous, how would a diver know if that law is on the
>books? I don't know of anyone who has been ticked for 'failing to yield to
>a city bus', but I'm apparenly a moron on this. ;-)

Big retro reflective sign on the left corner of the bus says in huge
letters "YIELD - It's the Law" and then in slightly smaller letters
"Thanks" or "Thank You", something like that.
--
zk

[jj]

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 17:02:09 -0700, Zoot Katz >
wrote:

>Fri, 03 Jun 2005 19:54:38 -0400,
>, >
>wrote:
>
>>Besides being courteous, how would a diver know if that law is on the
>>books? I don't know of anyone who has been ticked for 'failing to yield to
>>a city bus', but I'm apparenly a moron on this. ;-)
>
>Big retro reflective sign on the left corner of the bus says in huge
>letters "YIELD - It's the Law" and then in slightly smaller letters
>"Thanks" or "Thank You", something like that.

No signs like that on our city busses.

I have to ask then -

is it normal behavior for busses in your locale to block for each other
tying up two of three lanes?

to only pull partway into their cut-out thus blocking traffic with their
caboose end?

to suddenly cut over three lanes of traffic diagonally to get into the left
turn lane?

Our busses may be more aggressive b/e we don't have a yield law. I'm sure
it drives them bonkers trying to keep their schedule in some of this
traffic, leading to chance-taking. I can deal in the car. But riding a bike
up the hill past their transfer area (about the only way into the
University from my house) can be like dodging bumper-cars!

jj

[Claire Petersky]

Zoot Katz wrote in message ...

>The bus signals, you yield. Period. That's the law here too.
>We've simply codified the law of the jungle.

Actually, I'm just fine with that -- as long as the driver signals. It's
actually quite helpful to me riding through city traffic. I'm sharing the
right hand lane with the bus, maybe my progress is slow because I'm climbing
a hill. I look to the bus to see if it's signalling. If it has its right
signal on, I slow and let it ahead. If it has its flashers on, I know --
it's loading passengers, and I can go ahead and pass it. What's hard is when
it's just sitting there, and there's no signal at all. If the driver starts
to pull out it's unexpected. Legally, I'm supposed to yield, but it would
have been very nice if the driver would have given me a little warning. I
try to study the tires as I approach a bus just sitting at stop, to try to
anticipate what its actions are going to be, which isn't always successful.
That's why the signal is so helpful.


Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
Personal page: http://www.geocities.com/cpetersky/
See the books I've set free at:
http://bookcrossing.com/referr*al/Cpetersky

[Zoot Katz]

Fri, 03 Jun 2005 20:54:21 -0400,
>,
> wrote, in part:

>is it normal behavior for busses in your locale to block for each other
>tying up two of three lanes?
>
Sometimes, as there are both trolley and diesel busses so they do
occasionally cover for each other and one trolley can't pass another.

>to only pull partway into their cut-out thus blocking traffic with their
>caboose end?
>
Depends on if some bonehead has parked their scud in a bus stop.

>to suddenly cut over three lanes of traffic diagonally to get into the left
>turn lane?

They signal. You yield. They go. No problem.

Vancouver has a different philosophy about transportation planning
which keeps us consistently ranked among the most livable cities in
the world. (tied for #2 again this year, #1 in North America)

We've prioritised the movement of people on foot, bicycles and via
public transit, and the movement of goods over the movement of private
automobiles. We've fought hard since the sixties to keep freeways out
of the city and it's paid off.
--
zk

[Brian Huntley]

Zoot Katz wrote:
> Big retro reflective sign on the left corner of the bus says in huge
> letters "YIELD - It's the Law" and then in slightly smaller letters
> "Thanks" or "Thank You", something like that.

In Toronto, where a similar law passed recently (01/01/2005, I
believe), they made the yield stickers larger and removed the "Please"
once they had the legal system on their side.

[Leo Lichtman]

I realize this is OT from the original post, but I'd like to make some
comments on the "Yield to Merging Buses" part of the thread. It is very
rational to allow buses to enter the traffic stream without waiting for a
long line of traffic to clear. These are large and clumsy vehicles,
performing a public service, anfd required to keep to a reasonable schedule.
If bus drivers were not given a little extra help, the job would be
impossible. The nrext point is that the bus driver does NOT have the right
to barge into the traffic stream if it fails to yield. At least not where I
live. The California Vehicle Code makes it clear that rules require the
driver to *yield* the right of way, but it is also specified that the other
driver does not have the right of way until it is yielded.

In other words, a bus driver is required to observe the traffic from the
rear, and is permitted to pull out AFTER a gap is created for him by one of
the cars. I don't know what the law is here, but I have always tried to
give buses a break. along with anyone else who may be having a difficult
time entering the traffic flow.

[Bruce & Lois Nelson]

I don't know about where you are, but some jurisdictions police will accept
a report, and issue the drive a warning. Meaningless? Not the one I heard
about. The local cops watched for infractions of any kind by a "warned
vehicle".

Report what she did. You never know.

Bruce

"Zoot Katz" > wrote in message
...
> Fri, 03 Jun 2005 15:40:56 -0400, >,
> Joe Canuck > wrote, in part:
>
> >
> >Unfortunately, where I come from motorists also seem to think they can
> >try to beat the pedestrians waiting to cross at the light when they try
> >to turn after waiting for the light.
>
> Monday I almost got wiped by a chrome and vanity plated Hummer while
> crossing in a cross walk. They didn't feel like waiting for a guy on
> crutches. Their left-turn was more important. I could have reached out
> and touched her shiny black scud. She'd have creamed a car had there
> been one approaching the intersection on the side street I was
> crossing. She had to go into their lane to cut me off so you know that
> I was fully occupying the x-walk before she started her turn.
>
> BTW, The BC vanity plate read "MAGGIE".
> --
> zk

[Bruce & Lois Nelson]

The law in Toronto & Guelph is the same. The driver must signal & wait
for an opening. However, a driver who is reasonably behind the bus when the
signal starts and who does not yield can be fined.

This does not apply to the issue that started this thread. The bus driver
made an unsafe right turn, and his employer needs to know what he did, so
that they can advise him of the potential result of what he did. Mirror
and shoulder checks must be made before making a right turn to avoid
pedestrians, cyclists & wheelchair operators. The law is not signal & go,
it is signal to indicate intent, look searchingly to ensure the way is
clear, and go when the way is clear.

Bruce

"Leo Lichtman" > wrote in message
...
> I realize this is OT from the original post, but I'd like to make some
> comments on the "Yield to Merging Buses" part of the thread. It is very
> rational to allow buses to enter the traffic stream without waiting for a
> long line of traffic to clear. These are large and clumsy vehicles,
> performing a public service, anfd required to keep to a reasonable
schedule.
> If bus drivers were not given a little extra help, the job would be
> impossible. The nrext point is that the bus driver does NOT have the
right
> to barge into the traffic stream if it fails to yield. At least not where
I
> live. The California Vehicle Code makes it clear that rules require the
> driver to *yield* the right of way, but it is also specified that the
other
> driver does not have the right of way until it is yielded.
>
> In other words, a bus driver is required to observe the traffic from the
> rear, and is permitted to pull out AFTER a gap is created for him by one
of
> the cars. I don't know what the law is here, but I have always tried to
> give buses a break. along with anyone else who may be having a difficult
> time entering the traffic flow.
>
>

[Bruce & Lois Nelson]

Report the driver. You should have done so immediately.

Bruce

"lokey" > wrote in message
...
>
> I was going north in a bike lane on a multilane city street. I stop at a
> light - not a cross-street intersection but a plaza entrance on the west
> side and a senior's complex entrance on the right but still controlled by
> signal lights.
>
> I am first at the intersection. A public transit mobility bus [not a
> standard bus but one for people with mobility handicaps] pulls up beside
me.
> Then before the light changes the bus starts inching forward anticipating
> the light change so that he is blocking the crosswalk and half his length
> ahead of me when the light turns and he makes his right turn in front of
me.
>
> I'm pondering calling the Transit Service to make a complaint. Not too
many
> years ago a bus driver was convicted of causing the death of a cyclist.
>
> --
> 'Nobody here gets out alive' -jim morrison
>
>

[jj]

On Sat, 4 Jun 2005 10:42:49 -0400, "Bruce & Lois Nelson"
> wrote:

>I don't know about where you are, but some jurisdictions police will accept
>a report, and issue the drive a warning. Meaningless? Not the one I heard
>about. The local cops watched for infractions of any kind by a "warned
>vehicle".
>
>Report what she did. You never know.
>
>Bruce

BN, it makes it hard to reply when you post on top...but...

I have also been gestured at, brushed by and honked at crossing a crosswalk
(last year) while visibly limping with a cane. I was 3/4 of the way across
and the person was speeding toward the intersection trying to make the
light, I guess. It's unusual, b/c usually people will give an injured
person some slack. I suspect it's about the timing. I think the person felt
I was taking too long to get across - but it's not like I was doing a
'strut and dis' kind of walk - I literally was going at the best speed my
injury would allow. Hope zk got the license number.

jj

>
>"Zoot Katz" > wrote in message
...
>> Fri, 03 Jun 2005 15:40:56 -0400, >,
>> Joe Canuck > wrote, in part:
>>
>> >
>> >Unfortunately, where I come from motorists also seem to think they can
>> >try to beat the pedestrians waiting to cross at the light when they try
>> >to turn after waiting for the light.
>>
>> Monday I almost got wiped by a chrome and vanity plated Hummer while
>> crossing in a cross walk. They didn't feel like waiting for a guy on
>> crutches. Their left-turn was more important. I could have reached out
>> and touched her shiny black scud. She'd have creamed a car had there
>> been one approaching the intersection on the side street I was
>> crossing. She had to go into their lane to cut me off so you know that
>> I was fully occupying the x-walk before she started her turn.
>>
>> BTW, The BC vanity plate read "MAGGIE".
>> --
>> zk
>

[Zoot Katz]

Sat, 04 Jun 2005 12:31:29 -0400,
>, >
wrote:

>Hope zk got the license number.

Vanity plate said "MAGGIE". Only witless to the event was the
passenger.

Cops didn't even want to hear about the guy who backed into me last
year. My wrist still hurts from that. Apparently because he'd stopped
to ask if I needed an ambulance, everything was okay with them.
Insurance company blew it off because he said I ran into him and there
was no witless willing to come forward. I guess drivers are supposedly
more credible than cyclists.

The only satisfaction I've ever gotten from the police is when I was
assaulted by a raging cager. They were curious why the license number
didn't match the vehicle description. Bozo boy's insurance had expired
on his Benz SUV so he'd pulled the plate off his econobox and used it.
They called to say that they're sorry they couldn't do anything about
the assault since there were no witlesses but that they'd impounded
the Benz and it was going to cost him money to get it back.

Cops? bah! I'd rather not have to deal with them, thanks.
--
zk

[OnTwoWheels]

"lokey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "jj" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 18:36:24 -0400, "lokey" > wrote:
> >>"jj" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2005 14:13:38 -0700, "Frank Drackman"
> >>> > wrote:
> [...]
> >>>>In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a
stop.
> >>>>Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.
> [...]
> >>> When you say 'your area' do you mean your city has a specific law to
> >>> yield
> >>> to all busses? What if a cyclist can not yield at the time - does this
> >>> give the bus driver a legal right or tip the scales in the driver's
> >>> benefit?
> >>
> >> If it is like the ones I'm aware of: A bus pulling into traffic from a
> >> bus
> >>stop has the right-of-way and other vehicles must cede that right to
allow
> >>it to return to traffic rather than the usual rule where the vehicle
> >>trying
> >>to pull into traffic has to wait for an opening and the through traffic
> >>has
> >>the right-of-way.
> >
> > Huh? To do this - give a bus an automatic right-of-way you'dhave to
equip
> > it with a siren and flashing lights. This is what works for emergency
> > vehicles. But busses don't have this. OK, I kid a little - the obvious
way
> > to do this would be better city planning and better bus-stop design. But
> > when you say usual rule you seem to be saying like all vehicles pulling
> > out
> > into traffic it's up to -them- to yield - it's mostly physics - moving
> > vehicles and inertia vs stopped vehicles and time.
>
> Legality. Maybe Bob Hunt would like to chime in but:
>
> If Car A is pulling into traffic from a stop and is hit by
through-traffic
> Car B, then Car A is considered to be at fault.
>
> With this Bus Bylaw: If Bus C is pulling into traffic from a bus stop and
> is hit by through-traffic Car D then Car D is at fault.
>
> I dunno what the legality would be if Car D is also a bus.
>
> :)
>

We have the same law here. I have never read it but I would assume that
yielding to a bus is like the law we have about vehicles yielding to
pedestrians in the crosswalk (which I have read). I don't believe it gives
the bus the right to pull out in front of someone at speed. I think it
means that cars can't continue to stream by without ever letting the bus
out. The wording on the books regarding pedestrians is something to the
effect of "a pedestrian in the crosswalk has the right of way, but cannot
just jump out in traffic". As such, it makes sense to me.

[OnTwoWheels]

"lokey" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Frank Drackman" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > In my area the bus has the right to just pull into traffic from a stop.
> > Drivers have to yeild to the bus, not the bus to other drivers.
>
> I am familiar with these types of bylaws. In my case the bus was not
> pulling into traffic from a stop. He was making a right turn at a light.
> And as described I doubt any jurisdiction gives the bus driver the right
to
> right turn before the light has changed.
>

Nor would it give that driver the right to turn right from a lane left of
the rightmost lane (especially if there were traffic in the rightmost lane).

[Zoot Katz]

Sun, 05 Jun 2005 05:28:06 GMT,
>, "OnTwoWheels"
> wrote, in part:

>
>Nor would it give that driver the right to turn right from a lane left of
>the rightmost lane (especially if there were traffic in the rightmost lane).


If the rightmost lane is exclusively a bicycle lane it demonstrates
the problem with bike lanes and the status of cycling in a car-centric
economy/culture.
Right turns on red are legal here so is see this crap all the time.
--
zk

[Zoot Katz]

Sun, 05 Jun 2005 05:22:27 GMT,
>, "OnTwoWheels"
> wrote:

> I think it
>means that cars can't continue to stream by without ever letting the bus
>out.

No. It says "YIELD" on the back of the bus. That means "yield". When
the bus is signalling and starting to move, you yield.
It's that simple.
--
zk

[Zoot Katz]

Sat, 04 Jun 2005 23:31:21 -0700,
>, It was late when,
Zoot Katz > posted the following stupidity:

>Sun, 05 Jun 2005 05:22:27 GMT,
>, "OnTwoWheels"
> wrote:
>
>> I think it
>>means that cars can't continue to stream by without ever letting the bus
>>out.
>
>No. It says "YIELD" on the back of the bus. That means "yield". When
>the bus is signalling and starting to move, you yield.
>It's that simple.

duh! Read it agian, Zoot. That _is_ what they said.

Oh, never mind.
--
zk

[lokey]

I went for a another ride today.

Another right hook.

This time it was a soccer mom yakking on a cell phone. The kicker is that
there wasn't a turn to make. It was straight [well curving as in a
residential street but no cross street] road. she passes me and cut's over
so I have to ht the brakes.

*sigh*


--
'If I were wrong, one would be enough'
-albert einstein

[Tom Keats]

In article >,
"lokey" > writes:
>
> I went for a another ride today.
>
> Another right hook.
>
> This time it was a soccer mom yakking on a cell phone. The kicker is that
> there wasn't a turn to make. It was straight [well curving as in a
> residential street but no cross street] road. she passes me and cut's over
> so I have to ht the brakes.
>
> *sigh*

What with tinted windows, I usually can't even tell if
they're yakking on a cell phone, unless my sightline
goes straight into their front windshields.

If so many drivers didn't insist on tinted windows, I
wouldn't have to widen my door zone as much as I do,
and as Neil Brooks was recently reminded of, to his
chagrine.

Tinted windows are a selfish, thoughtless affectation.
Sometimes I wonder how many drivers who complain about
cyclists taking the lane as they ride past a string of
parked cars, have tinted windows.

Anyhow, I got sidetracked on my rant about tinted windows.
I find the experience you recount to be rather similar to
the "rear ender" scenario described in Subject: 6.1
("Bicycling in America") of the FAQ. It's too bad such
events have to be as typical as they are. I guess we just
have to deal with them as best as we can.


cheers,
Tom

--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca

[Leo Lichtman]

"lokey" wrote: (clip) she passes me and cut's over so I have to ht the
brakes. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
She may have been talking ABOUT YOU on the phone, saying something like,
"This jerk on a bike ought to be on the sidewalk. I'll show him!"

[J.V.]

"Zoot Katz" > wrote in message
...
> Sun, 05 Jun 2005 05:28:06 GMT,
> >, "OnTwoWheels"
> > wrote, in part:
>
> >
> >Nor would it give that driver the right to turn right from a lane left of
> >the rightmost lane (especially if there were traffic in the rightmost
lane).
>
>
> If the rightmost lane is exclusively a bicycle lane it demonstrates
> the problem with bike lanes and the status of cycling in a car-centric
> economy/culture.
> Right turns on red are legal here so is see this crap all the time.
> --
> zk

I fully agree with you. I feel bike lanes are not better in any specific
case than roads without them. I feel they are worse. What cars are
supposed to do, (and here at least the bike lanes are marked properly with a
dotted line preceding intersections) is move into the bike lane behind
bicylists that are in front of them or in front of cyclists that are behind
them forming a queue where all right turners line up in order of arrival.
Cyclists going straight will then have room to go around the left of right
turning cars that supposedly have their blinkers on. Of course so much for
what is safe, logical, the law and courteous.

There is one effect of bike lanes in this area that is positive, and that is
that there are many cyclists on the road who I really don't believe would be
there if it weren't for the feeling of "I am protected and entitled to be
here". They don't realize that many motor vehicle operators take them as
"you belong off the road" lanes.

But that is for this area only, elsewhere in more car centric areas even
close by there are miles of bike lanes completly empty.