[an error occurred while processing this directive]

LATEST SUBMISSIONS

Give bicyclists a brake — share the road

Saturday, October 27 at 12:00 PM

This Speakout has not been edited.

By Sara Heffron

About three weeks ago, I was hit by a car while riding my bicycle. That brisk, chilly Monday morning I had spent at a local university in Lakewood, about 10 minutes away by bike. Riding home, I was beginning to think about what the rest of my day would look like — when all of a sudden, I was on the pavement, encompassed by pain and dazed by a hard fall. Immediately, an ambulance was brought to my aid — the driver I had collided with was fine. In shock, I was brought to the hospital and X-rayed, and then told that I had a triple hairline fracture in my right arm, among other scrapes and bruises from the road. I am right handed. I would not be able to go to school or work for two weeks following.

This particular accident occurred as I was crossing the street on a crosswalk, and collided with the car. I had looked before crossing, but failed to see the vehicle, and she failed to yield, as well. She sustained an injury solely limited to her car — but she was able to continue her day. I sustained injuries that are still affecting me greatly, as well as being absent from school and work for nearly two weeks.

It is Colorado state law that when riding upon or along sidewalks or crosswalks, cyclists be given the same rights as pedestrians. However, local ordinances prevent this — it is actually illegal for cyclists to ride on the sidewalks. –And, as one can see in my situation, cyclists are often NOT yielded to, regardless of the situation. Many of my friends ride bicycles, and most of us have gotten in accidents where it was part of or entirely the driver’s fault; many times drivers feel like they will be faster than the bike, when in reality, it is often the other way around.

Especially in downtown Denver, bikes are fast! But to fight the misconception car drivers have of bicycles is difficult, especially without a casing of metal, plastic, and airbags surrounding you. So, if cyclists aren’t legally allowed on the sidewalk, and we have to fight to remain on the road, then where should bicycles be ridden? I think the answer to this question is quite simple and should be obvious: bike lanes!

Let’s be honest, there are tons of bikes in the Denver-metro area; it’s a great city to ride a bike in. There are some bikes lanes on streets mainly in the suburbs, but I think they should be put in on every road! It would be a very beneficial thing to do — the bikers would finally have clarity on *where* to ride, and having an extra lane while still obeying vehicle traffic laws, car drivers would know more of what to next expect of the rider. In my situation, I think a bike lane would have saved me from the accident — I actually would not have had to cross the street at all! It would be such and encouragement from the city if more lanes were added — I mean, cyclists are doing society a big favor by not polluting the air with gasoline — let’s give back to the cyclists! Bikers should not have to keep guessing where to ride, and as a consequence, get hit by cars who don’t respect the cyclist. We all too emphatically grow up on bikes saying, “SHARE THE ROAD!” but it seems as if when a license falls into our hands, we forget the bike. But let’ not forget; let’s reward the bikers for being more friendly to the earth! For once, I would like to see something constructive done by the city that I am proud of. My suggestion is this: let’s REALLY SHARE the road and put in more lanes that bikers deserve!

Sara Heffron is a resident of Lakewood.

READER COMMENTS

You are mistaken on the crosswalk issue. The law was changed a year or 2 ago to allow riders to ride in crosswalks.

However, you are absolutely right on the stopsign and "on your left" warnings. Riders should ride without headphones and ALWAYS give a warning of passing on the left. Some riders just don't know, but need to be told. I've had some riders yell at me, as though I've insulted them by warning of a passing on my bike when they can't see (or hear) me.

Riders just need to remember that pedestrians legally have the right of way, and cars will take the right of way, as a practical matter, whether legal or not.

As between riders, if you can't hear me warn you, it's your fault. If you don't warn me when passing, it's your fault. Keep your eyes AND ears open.

Posted by EyesANDEars on November 6, 2007 03:16 PM

Sarah said she was riding home when all of the sudden she was on the pavement. She must have been riding her bike in the crosswalk which is wrong; if she wants to use the crosswalk then she is supposed to dismount and then becomes a pedestrian otherwise she is a vehicle and must comply with laws just like any other vehicle; since she did not dismount there is the potential that she is at fault. As to bike lanes; it would not be practical to have ALL streets modified to accomadate bike lanes. My experience with bicyclists is that MOST don't think they have to follow traffic laws especially STOP SIGNS and the use of crooswalks. Also when using pedistrian/bike paths i estimate that only about a third of bicyclists are considerate of me walking the path; please let pedistrians know you are coming-up on them by saying " on your left" and SHARE THE PATH!

Posted by brain on November 3, 2007 12:52 PM

Wow, you're soooooo smart!

I'm aggressive if some idiot rides their bike out in front of me....yep, now go play in traffic,
smarty, the world will soon be rid of you. Notice, too, that I'm not the only one on this thread that holds my opinion. I guess we're all chomping at the bit to run someone over, right?
You don't know a thing about me, and yet you claim to know quite a bit about me. Just showing your intelligence (or lack thereof) with that.

And, yes, do come see Damn Yankees, it's a great show. Tickets only $17.00, much cheaper than the world series, phone 303.772.5200, tell them you know the director.

Posted by RickyLee on November 2, 2007 12:12 PM

Thanks Richard (aptly named) Lee Landrum II. I've just printed out this blog and will file it under "moron" so that it can be recalled when your stupid a** gets charged or sued. It's just too bad that actions resulting from your aggressive stupidity can't be prevented ahead of time. I'll take some comfort in knowing that you'll mostly stay in the sticks of Longmont.

p.s. go see Damn Yankees!, directed by a moron.

Posted by Goinmyway? on November 2, 2007 11:06 AM

Yes, it will be great comfort knowing I'll not be charged with vehicular homicide because some moron rode their bicycle into traffic without checking to see if there's a vehicle coming.

Anonymous? That's you, dumbass, not me.
You go play in traffic, too, smarty, I think you'll soon be weeded out of the gene pool. Too bad your mommie shirked her duty in not teaching you to look before you walk/ride into traffic. Good luck with that.

Richard Lee Landrum II
Longmont

(pretty anonymous, huh?)

Posted by RickyLee on November 2, 2007 10:03 AM

No, Jim, the word is "entitlement" as in a "warped sense of it." Let's look at your language.

"I've seen bikes all over my part of the state, the majority of whom obey the basic law of road sharing. But there certainly are some who don't. Who time their passing through an intersection without concern for traffic control devices (stop signs)."

Now just substitute the word "car" for the word "bike". Tell me you don't run a stop sign when no one is around.

"Who seem to believe that on a road NOT marked with a bike lane, their going 10 MPH on a road marked for 30+ isn't a problem, it is."

Guess what?, 30+ is the maximum safe speed...not a minimum. That means it is not against the law to ride 10 mph on that street. Can't slow down?, oh, it's because you're entitled to drive as fast as the maximum will allow. Passing when there is insufficient room is against the law. But car drivers are allowed to break the law in this case just to get where they're going a little faster, aren't they?

Finally, the idea that auto drivers are the only one's paying for roads is simply not realistic or true and just exemplifies the idea that auto drivers feel entitled. It's YOUR road, so someone in a car can't use it. And even if you could show that (primarily) money from cars pays for roads isn't that how it should be? I mean, how much wear and tear does a car cause versus a bike?

When it comes down to it, it's sad that there are people like you and RickyLee that will feel no remorse when you kill someone by accident, just because you feel that you have a "right" to. They got what they deserved, didn't they? I feel like a life was saved during the short time this kept you on this blog and off of the street.

Posted by Goinmyway? on November 2, 2007 09:21 AM

Bike versus car, bike loses every time so far.
And it hardly matters much if the car driver was "illegally" operating his/her car at the time. That is if/when the bike rider is hit, regardless of what man made laws are violated, the over ridding law of mass wins every time. And knowing that your survivors can "win" a lawsuit, doesn't make the dead bike rider any less dead, does it?
I've seen bikes all over my part of the state, the majority of whom obey the basic law of road sharing. But there certainly are some who don't. Who time their passing through an intersection without concern for traffic control devices (stop signs). Who seem to believe that on a road NOT marked with a bike lane, their going 10 MPH on a road marked for 30+ isn't a problem, it is.
Finally, a heck of a lot of the maintenance money for the roads that bike riders DEMAND we car drivers 'share' is paid for by taxes on fuel used by the cars. In other words, you aren't paying for the upkeep of the very road you DEMAND I share with you, while some of you refuse to obey the same laws that will get ME a ticket.
I believe the word is hypocrisy.

Posted by Jim in Erie on November 2, 2007 08:22 AM

RickyLee, how about this one? If you kill someone with your car, will it be of comfort to you that you had the right of way? If you answer yes to that, you're as bad as aiming for them.

Don't be an anonymous/passive/aggressive idiot. You know bicycles can, do, and have a right to, use the streets. Look out for them, and don't try to squeeze past them when there isn't enough room.

Posted by Goinmyway? on November 1, 2007 05:22 PM

YAY! RickyLee proves the point again!

Hey kids, better not trick or treat in RickyLee's neighborhood. He's gunnin' for you because you're playing in his street. "You'll be just as dead, no matter who's at fault."

He's Awesome!

Posted by RickyLeefan on October 31, 2007 02:41 PM

"fan"

you sure make an intelligent point. Go play in traffic.

Posted by RickyLee on October 31, 2007 12:16 PM

Although today's lighter bikes produce less front end damage to your car, remember that ANY bike can scratch your paint or even break expensive plastic parts. Be careful out there.

Posted by truthy on October 31, 2007 09:55 AM

You may not like this, but you have to follow the rules when you operate a vehicle on the road. That means you have to OPERATE A VEHICLE, not daydream, not have BOTH ears covered by your mp3 player; LOTS of rules apply...
And if you operate that vehicle on the SIDEWALK, you have to follow those rules that PEDESTRIANS follow. Like obeying traffic lights and CHECKING BOTH WAYS before you move off that curb into traffic....
Too many cyclists forget these rules, then wonder why they get clobbered when they forget..
Share the road also means share the responsibility for using it....The same goes for Trails and Paths...The operative word is SHARE..
not be a greedy HOG....

Posted by Art from Evergreen on October 30, 2007 09:29 PM

YAY! I knew he wouldn't disappoint! Run 'em down RickyLee, run 'em down.

Posted by RickyLeefan on October 30, 2007 05:56 PM

Goinmyway.

Once again....if you're killed by a car while riding your bicycle, will it be of comfort to you that you had the right-of-way? Will that make it better for your family?

Don't be a Boulder-esq idiot....
LOOK BEFORE YOU RIDE INTO TRAFFIC,
because, if I don't see you, you'll be just as dead, no matter who's at fault.

Posted by RickyLee on October 30, 2007 05:40 PM

You think only auto registration and personal property taxes from cars pay for roads? No wonder we can't get a pothole fixed.

No, everyone pays for roads, regardless of whether you own a car or not.

The problem of "entitlement" is exemplified by your mistaken belief that only car owners pay for roads. Thus, car drivers feel more entitled to the road. This belief in entitlement pushes drivers to treat bicycles (and even motorcyclists) with hostility.

Thus, again, the converse is true: auto drivers should exercise MORE care than bicyclists or motorcyclists because of the speed and size differential. Instead, entitlement makes them believe that bicycles and motorcycles should exercise more care because they don't belong in the road, which is strictly reserved for cars.

The fact that a driver is wrapped in steel and tinted windows, and thus virtually anonymous, allows a driver to exercise this entitlement with hostility.

Posted by Goinmyway? on October 30, 2007 02:52 PM

Goinmyway:
"What gives auto drivers the right to clog traffic"? 1) About 3000 lbs comes to mind and 2) taxes. People who drive cars on the road pay auto taxes for the right to do so. When a 3000-lb car collides with a cyclist, most likely the cyclist dies. And, we can argue all day about whether or not the cyclist was in the right or who was to blame and none of that matters. The bottom line is, lives will be tragically affected. My father-in-law used to ride motorcycles and twice he was broadsided. Both cases involved older women who were at fault when they each ran stop signs prior to hitting him. In the 2nd accident, my mother-in-law was on the back of the motorcycle and she wound up spending over 3 months in intensive care - much of which she was not expected to survive. Cyclists pose an even greater hazzard given their speed is usually 2-3 times slower than the cars they're competing with. So, do cyclists have the right to ride in the middle of the road? Of course. But, does it makes sense the give them that right, given the speed and size differential? Absolutely not.

Posted by Ugly Duck on October 30, 2007 01:59 PM

Ugly Duck, bicycles are a part of "traffic". Thus, the converse could be said. What gives auto drivers the right to clog traffic?

"And, it wouldn't matter who was found at fault, the outcome would still be the same. " On the contrary, it would matter who was found at fault. Vehicular Homicide is a crime. So, unless you're referring to every "outcome" being killing someone, ruining two families, and spending several years in jail, fault is an important component to consider.

Posted by Goinmyway? on October 30, 2007 12:54 PM

Most certainly some type of bike lane should be built immediately, with bike lanes displayed all over Denver and the surrounding metro area.
The people in Denver drive like idiots most of the time.
8 out of 10 times when I look in a vehicle that has done something stupid on the road, the person inside is multi-tasking of some sort.
These idiots are like loaded weapons on our roads.

Posted by J W on October 30, 2007 12:19 PM

Although I recognize the fact that the law gives bike riders the same "rights" to the road that are offered to motor vehicle operators, logic and common sense suggest the two cannot safely coexist. A bike rider may demand his/her right to ride in the middle of a lane but, in the end he/she may be dead right. And, it wouldn't matter who was found at fault, the outcome would still be the same. I also cannot agree completely that bike lanes are the answer because when two or more bikers are riding together, it is very common to see them riding side by side (rather than in tandem) -- sometimes 3 and 4 abreast -- even to the point they are extended way beyond the bike lane and clear out into the lane(s) intended for cars. It is as if they are defying traffic to hit them while trying to make the point that they have the "right" to be there -- the right to clog traffic.

Posted by Ugly Duck on October 30, 2007 12:06 PM

Sara, When cycllists have to start licensing their bikes like motorists do, then they maight have money to buil you a bike lane. Until then try a bike PATH.

Posted by JMO on October 29, 2007 05:24 PM

If a cyclist wants cars to share the road they need to obey the same laws. The red octogan shaped sign is a stop sign. It means stop at the intersection. Don't expect special treatment because you want to ride your bike in the street.

Posted by kg on October 29, 2007 05:20 PM

I think we should all just run bicyclists over with our 6-wheel, 2 ton pickups, just like RickyLee would do. Unfortunately I can't seem to find a truck big enough or heavy enough to clear 2 lanes of traffic and the road shoulder. I'll just add 3 foot extensions on my mirrors. That should do it.

Posted by RickyLeefan on October 29, 2007 02:00 PM

Sara, I'm sorry for your injuries. I use to cycle a long time ago. Hopping on my bike for a 50-100 mile bike ride was not uncommon. In fact, I was almost 19 before I got my drivers license. I didn't need it nor did I have a use for it. I've been driving now for over 20+years and have noticed how much more rude and inconsiderate the motor vehicle drivers have become.

Unfortunately, I have also noticed many cyclist on the road with an attitude of owning the road. They run stop signs, stop lights, often travel the wrong way down a one-way street, and get in the middle of traffic thus impeding traffic flow. Cyclists are big on share the road while trying to monopolize the road themselves. Roads were made for motorized vehicles NOT bikes. Granted the motorists need to pay more attention but the blunt of the responsibility needs to rest with the cyclists, they are on the motorists road way.

Bottom line, we all need to pay closer attention to others and stop the "me first" attitude that has become so prevalent throughout all societies.

Posted by Harry on October 29, 2007 11:42 AM

Bottom line, we all need to pay closer attention to others and stop the "me first" attitude that has become so prevalent throughout all societies.

Posted by Harry on October 29, 2007 11:30 AM

Sara, I feel bad that you got hurt.

However you gave a very important clue that made you just as wrong as the driver of the vehicle.

You said, "You were riding home thinking about what the rest of your day would be like " .

When riding a bike or a car you should be focused and thinking about traffic around you not thinking of other things.

Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on October 29, 2007 07:22 AM

My mommie taught me to make sure there wasn't any cars coming before I stepped into traffic, too bad your's didn't. I'm quite willing to share the road. Time and again I see bicyclists riding three, four abreast, blocking traffic, and seemingly oblivious. My point is, and you learned it the hard way, that a bicyclist isn't going to win the battle with four thousand pounds of steel. So when you're in the hospital, will it really matter who had the right-of-way? I don't think so. You're very lucky to not have been injured much worse, or even killed. LOOK BEFORE YOU STEP/RIDE
INTO TRAFFIC.

Posted by RickyLee on October 28, 2007 11:38 AM