New signs in town (Manchester, Clayton: maintenance, law, most dangerous)

[Hazel W]

Please allow me to share something ironic. New traffic signs are appearing around town. They tell me - I do not know if it is fact - that the city of Sunset Hills put them up. Whatever, does anyone miss anything here? The signs read "Begin to turn right - Yield to bikers".

Fine, I'm all for yielding to bikers on right turns - and giving them some rights anywhere. However, are there any pedestrians here? Only you and I will see the irony of those signs. Protect bikers but nevermind the pedestrians. Open season on pedestrians year-round.

As long as I raise the issue, I'll add this for the few who do care. "Turn right on red" is a most dangerous privilege. The driver - assumeing that he does stop first as required and many don't - is looking to his left to see when he can turn. Meanwhile there is a pedestrian on his right trying to cross the street on a Walk light.

I know what causes some drivers to believe the opposite but the fact is that pedestrians do have the right of way on a Walk light. It is only when we are children that we are told to "wait for the cars to go". Of course, you can be a long time dead trying to use your rights. And cities don't have signs to remind anyone. So, be careful out that and yield to bikers.

[Sundaydrive00]

Originally Posted by Hazel W

Please allow me to share something ironic. New traffic signs are appearing around town. They tell me - I do not know if it is fact - that the city of Sunset Hills put them up. Whatever, does anyone miss anything here? The signs read "Begin to turn right - Yield to bikers".

Fine, I'm all for yielding to bikers on right turns - and giving them some rights anywhere. However, are there any pedestrians here? Only you and I will see the irony of those signs. Protect bikers but nevermind the pedestrians. Open season on pedestrians year-round.

As long as I raise the issue, I'll add this for the few who do care. "Turn right on red" is a most dangerous privilege. The driver - assumeing that he does stop first as required and many don't - is looking to his left to see when he can turn. Meanwhile there is a pedestrian on his right trying to cross the street on a Walk light.

I know what causes some drivers to believe the opposite but the fact is that pedestrians do have the right of way on a Walk light. It is only when we are children that we are told to "wait for the cars to go". Of course, you can be a long time dead trying to use your rights. And cities don't have signs to remind anyone. So, be careful out that and yield to bikers.

If they're going to put bike specific signs out they need ones reminding bicyclists to obey traffic rules. I cannot even begin to count the number of times I've almost hit someone on a bike because they decided to blow through a red light or a stop sign (especially where cross traffic doesn't stop). I'm perfectly fine with sharing the road with bikes, I often ride my bike places, but I just don't understand why so many bicyclists don't believe the rules apply to them. Or why they would even want to play chicken with a car, that is not a game where the bike is going to come out on top.

[BoomBoxing]

Originally Posted by Sundaydrive00

If they're going to put bike specific signs out they need ones reminding bicyclists to obey traffic rules. I cannot even begin to count the number of times I've almost hit someone on a bike because they decided to blow through a red light or a stop sign (especially where cross traffic doesn't stop). I'm perfectly fine with sharing the road with bikes, I often ride my bike places, but I just don't understand why so many bicyclists don't believe the rules apply to them. Or why they would even want to play chicken with a car, that is not a game where the bike is going to come out on top.

Because the "rules of traffic" are safer to follow than the actual "rules of the road." If you've ridden your bike on the street surely you can undertsand why it's ridiculous to expect a cyclist to come to a complete stop at a stop sign. Yes you should definitely brake, slow down, and ensure that it is safe to pass and not blow through like you said.

Stop lights are different. Cyclists are actually permitted by law in most states, including MO, to run red lights if they are at one that needs a "trigger" of some sort that a bike is too light to activate. A good example of this is Mancheter at Macklind in south city near the Hill. Any other time, yes as a cyclist you should definitely stop at a red light. BUT - I will admit that I will get a head start when riding lest the legions of angry cars behind me get annoyed that they have to wait a few extra seconds while I get up to speed. I am sure they are much happier I am moving and out of their way as soon as possible.

[Hazel W]

Originally Posted by BoomBoxing

Because the "rules of traffic" are safer to follow than the actual "rules of the road." If you've ridden your bike on the street surely you can undertsand why it's ridiculous to expect a cyclist to come to a complete stop at a stop sign. Yes you should definitely brake, slow down, and ensure that it is safe to pass and not blow through like you said.

Stop lights are different. Cyclists are actually permitted by law in most states, including MO, to run red lights if they are at one that needs a "trigger" of some sort that a bike is too light to activate. A good example of this is Mancheter at Macklind in south city near the Hill. Any other time, yes as a cyclist you should definitely stop at a red light. BUT - I will admit that I will get a head start when riding lest the legions of angry cars behind me get annoyed that they have to wait a few extra seconds while I get up to speed. I am sure they are much happier I am moving and out of their way as soon as possible.

All very true but it wasn't the bikers I was talking about - other than agreeing. It was the fact that the city would tell drivers to yield to bikers but they do nothing to protect pedestrians. I have even had policemen (one) cut me off as he turned on red in front of me and sent me scurrying back to the curb.

So, what I was trying to say is that, if they can put up signs reminding drivers to be careful of bikers, can't they do the same for pedestrians? Nope. Also, make very busy corners totally pedestrian-safe. I don't know if it still exists but, in far downtown St Louis city, there used to be a crossing where all lights, in ever direction, turned red at the same time and pedestrians crossed all at once. Now, that is a safe crossing.

Ah well, it isn't going to happen. So, if you walk - a few of us do - be careful.

Now, do you want to hear a funny? I have only been hit by a vehicle once. What was it? A bicycle.

Happy day. Hazel

[BoomBoxing]

^That's a good point. Here in DC, they are are signs in the middle of the street reminding motorists that they must yield to pedestrians crossing the street. It would be a good idea to put those up around the busier pedestrian areas of the city such as downtown, South Grand, CWE, the Loop.

As for downtown, I think Market and Tucker should get a lane axed to make them less imposing to pedestrians, along with the lid over I-70.

[Hazel W]

Originally Posted by BoomBoxing

^That's a good point. Here in DC, they are are signs in the middle of the street reminding motorists that they must yield to pedestrians crossing the street. It would be a good idea to put those up around the busier pedestrian areas of the city such as downtown, South Grand, CWE, the Loop.

As for downtown, I think Market and Tucker should get a lane axed to make them less imposing to pedestrians, along with the lid over I-70.

All very good ideas which is why no one will do them. Even the sidewalks become parking lots. Not in the downtown city, I imagine but in the suburbs. Have you never seen cars parked on sidewalks. Even AT&T does it. They always - in every town I've ever been in - park their trucks on the sidewalk forcing pedestrians out into the street.

While we are on the subject, how about culverts that slope directly from the street across the "pavement" and down into creeks or sewer lines. Gravois is full of them. There are no "real" sidewalks there. What we are walking on is the pavement of parking lots. But they are safe - generally, except for these culvert runoffs. There is one near the Sappington post office, for example. You have to go out into the street to get around it - unless you have suction cups on your shoes and feel acrobatic. There's another at Fort Sumter Lane. Farther down, there are more. I suppose these are in other places and they leave nowhere to walk.

Life is such fun!

[zach_33]

Originally Posted by Hazel W

As long as I raise the issue, I'll add this for the few who do care. "Turn right on red" is a most dangerous privilege. The driver - assumeing that he does stop first as required and many don't - is looking to his left to see when he can turn. Meanwhile there is a pedestrian on his right trying to cross the street on a Walk light.

I had someone honk at me recently in a situation as you described above when I was crossing at a light where the white cross sign was solidly lit. FPP and Big Bend. Pissed me off.

[Hazel W]

Please let me correct one thing. I said I did not know for sure that those signs are from Sunset Hills. This morning I learned from them that (quote) it is a maintenance issue that Modot maintains. I assume that means that MoDot posted them and they are likely appearing all over Missouri, wouldn't you think?

I wanted to straighten that out. Hazel

[Sundaydrive00]

Originally Posted by BoomBoxing

Because the "rules of traffic" are safer to follow than the actual "rules of the road." If you've ridden your bike on the street surely you can undertsand why it's ridiculous to expect a cyclist to come to a complete stop at a stop sign. Yes you should definitely brake, slow down, and ensure that it is safe to pass and not blow through like you said.

Stop lights are different. Cyclists are actually permitted by law in most states, including MO, to run red lights if they are at one that needs a "trigger" of some sort that a bike is too light to activate. A good example of this is Mancheter at Macklind in south city near the Hill. Any other time, yes as a cyclist you should definitely stop at a red light. BUT - I will admit that I will get a head start when riding lest the legions of angry cars behind me get annoyed that they have to wait a few extra seconds while I get up to speed. I am sure they are much happier I am moving and out of their way as soon as possible.

I was talking more about bikes that go through red lights as there are cars going through the green light, causing the cars to have to slam on breaks in order not to kill the biker. If they must fly through a stop sign or red light they need to do it in a safe manner. I would much rather wait those few extra seconds for the bike rider to get up to speed then to see them hit by a car.

Manchester and Macklind isn't really a busy area, so I can see bikes going through there. Where I seem to run into it a lot is up near forest park at the of Clayton/Skinker/Oakland intersection. There are always so many cars there, that light will always turn green.

[Hazel W]

I also wondered about that bit about bikers going through red lights business. Seems terribly dangerous. The last I knew, there was a simple and easy way to stop a bike as fast as - or faster than - you can stop a car.

Hazel