Make sure to only ride your bicycle at night with a light on the front. It’s good for safety, and it’s legally required.

Click here to see a story of what happened to somebody who didn’t.

A new campaign will help bicyclists ride safer after dark, now that it gets dark around 5 p.m.ish.

It’s called “See and Be Seen,” and it promotes safe bike riding at night, including using the legally required lights so drivers can see them. There will be an education part of it, the police are boosting enforcement of bicycling violations and local bike shops will be providing discounts on lights, according to the city of Bellingham.

“Using bike lights is a simple yet effective way to increase safety for everyone – cyclists, motorists and pedestrians,” said Kim Brown, City Transportation Options Coordinator. “Lights are particularly important this time of year when the days are getting shorter and darker.”

The following local bike shops are offering discounts throughout November:

1. Fantatik Bike Company
2. Jack’s Bicycle Center
3. Fairhaven Bike and Ski
4. Kulshan Cycles
5. Bellingham REI
6. WWU Outdoor Center.

Both Bellingham police and Western Washington University police are increasing enforcment of bike light violations, according to the city. Under state law, it’s illegal to ride at night without a white front light and rear red reflector. A blinking red light in the back isn’t legally required, although it can be helpful. Police will be able to give coupons for lights. You can put lights and reflectors on your clothes and backpack, but it’s not legal unless you have the required equipment on your bike.

“A lot of people don’t know that it’s illegal to ride a bike after dark without a light,” says Bellingham Police Department Sergeant David Richards. “We will be making an effort to enforce this law more, to increase safety for bicyclists, motorists and others.”

Click here for more information.

The Christian Science Monitor has a very interesting new article on texting and talking while driving, and it talks about how some high-profile fatal crashes are starting to turn the tide in state legislatures, which have been somewhat hesitant to ban the practices.

Click here to read the article.

The article points out the challenges though: Many, many people use cell phones or other wireless devices while driving and the practice is hard to enforce for police. Still, there are new technologies that could help save us, devices that will automatically block incoming texts and return a sentence saying the person is driving.

What do you think?

Are you a vehicularist or a facilitator?

Vehicularists tend to see bicycles as vehicles, meaning they should ride in the road and obey all laws that vehicles have to follow. They see separated bike lanes as elitists (this article even points out that Hitler was a fan of separated bike lanes).

Facilitators see fundamental differences between bikes and cars, and they say separated trails can encourage bicycle riders. The traffic laws were written to cars and they don’t reasonably apply to bicycles. A rolling stop through an intersection without any cars can be safe for a bicycle, but not necessarily so for the car.

This was in a very entertaining article in Slate. A Traffic Talk reader sent this to me suggesting that enforcement of bicycle laws will become a national issue.

Click here to read the article.

What did you think about the column?

There is more on the driver blowing through a stop sign in the Columbia neighborhood.

Neighbors talked more about on the e-mail neighborhood newsletter from Flip Breskin sent out today.

DANGEROUS DRIVING
10/14 I also witnessed the driver run the stop sign at Utter and Connecticut yesterday at 8:49. I live in a house on that corner, and my nine-year-old son walks to school every day, so it made my heart drop. It must’ve been Katrina who honked—thank you!
Dannon Traxler

10/13 In the future, I’m fairly sure that if someone witnesses something like this and is able to get a license plate number (a description of the person driving and additional witnesses would be even better) the B’ham police will follow up on this. (I am just thinking of the time someone did a hit and run on my car on Walnut. 2 witnesses, description of vehicle and driver and plate number and the police were really excellent in handling it. Different situation, yes, but the one Katrina described could have had way worse consequences.)

Susan Casey Bennett

Click here to see my last post on this topic.

Ferndale officials are asking the City Council to approve reducing the speed limit on a section of Trigg Road and increasing it on a section of Hovander Road.

Ferndale Public Works officials say that Trigg Road has seen residential development that now justifies lowering the speed limit from 35 mph to 25 mph. That would be for the stretch east of Portal Way to city limits.

Public Works and Police agree that the limit could safely be increased for a stretch of Hovander Road because the roadway design allows safe driving at 35 mph. Also, data shows that most drivers go almost 39 mph on this stretch anyway. This would be for the stretch from Nielsen Road south to city limits.

Staff estimates it would cost the city about $500 to move speed signs.

The City Council will consider approving the speed limit change during its Monday meeting, which starts at 6 p.m. and is held in City Hall Annex, at the corner of Second Avenue and Vista Drive.

Click here for more information.

Here is the view of Hovander where the speed was be increased, courtesy of Google Street View:

And this is looking down the stretch of Trigg Road that would have the speed lowered:

This is from Katrina Schmitt, a neighbor in Bellingham’s Columbia neighborhood. It was sent out via neighbor Flip Breskin’s newsletter:

10/ 13 It’s 8:49am and do you know how you are driving?

It’s the time kids are on the streets getting to school. I just watched someone driving way faster than the speed limit run the stop sign at Utter & Connecticut St and nearly get T-BONED!

I sure wish a roundabout was at the intersection of Utter/W. Connecticut. Imagine it was a child peddling down the street heading to school and got hit. If not a roundabout, maybe better “visual” for the intersection.

When are you breaking the law by running a red light?

I’m not a lawyer, but it appears that you can’t enter the intersection on a red. If you’re facing a red, you have to stop before the intersection. I presume that means you can enter on a yellow.

Here’s what the law says about yellows (RCW 46.61.055):

(a) Vehicle operators facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal are thereby warned that the related green movement is being terminated or that a red indication will be exhibited immediately thereafter when vehicular traffic shall not enter the intersection.

And here’s what it says about red lights:

Vehicle operators facing a steady circular red signal alone shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection control area and shall remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown.

According to American Traffic Solutions, which specializes in red-light cameras, they take photos for violations that have to show the vehicle not yet in the intersection and the light already red (see first rear image below):

First rear image: The “A” shot is captured from the rear approach showing: the scene of the violation including the back of the violating vehicle in front of the violation line; one or more visible red light signals; and a clear image of the license plate of the offending vehicle, all from the single, base image.

Second rear image: The “B” shot is also captured from the rear approach showing: the scene of the violation including the back of the violating vehicle after the rear axle has crossed the stop line and the vehicle has illegally entered the intersection; one or more visible red light signals; and a clear image of the license plate of the offending vehicle, all from the single, base image.

I was just looking through the state laws and I found this one specifically referring to drunken bicyclists.

It appears it’s not illegal, although an officer could take you into protective custody if you’re so drunk that you’re likely to harm yourself or others. Even then, it’s not considered an arrest.

Here’s what the law says:

RCW 46.61.790
Intoxicated bicyclists.

(1) A law enforcement officer may offer to transport a bicycle rider who appears to be under the influence of alcohol or any drug and who is walking or moving along or within the right-of-way of a public roadway, unless the bicycle rider is to be taken into protective custody under RCW 70.96A.120. The law enforcement officer offering to transport an intoxicated bicycle rider under this section shall:

(a) Transport the intoxicated bicycle rider to a safe place; or

(b) Release the intoxicated bicycle rider to a competent person.

(2) The law enforcement officer shall not provide the assistance offered if the bicycle rider refuses to accept it. No suit or action may be commenced or prosecuted against the law enforcement officer, law enforcement agency, the state of Washington, or any political subdivision of the state for any act resulting from the refusal of the bicycle rider to accept this assistance.

(3) The law enforcement officer may impound the bicycle operated by an intoxicated bicycle rider if the officer determines that impoundment is necessary to reduce a threat to public safety, and there are no reasonable alternatives to impoundment. The bicyclist will be given a written notice of when and where the impounded bicycle may be reclaimed. The bicycle may be reclaimed by the bicycle rider when the bicycle rider no longer appears to be intoxicated, or by an individual who can establish ownership of the bicycle. The bicycle must be returned without payment of a fee. If the bicycle is not reclaimed within thirty days, it will be subject to sale or disposal consistent with agency procedures.

So, I have to admit that I was pretty bored the other night when I decided to count cars.

But what I saw was pretty interesting.

I was sitting on my girlfriend’s porch near East Chestnut and North Forest streets with a brewsky watching cars go through the interesection. I tallied how many went through and how many ran red lights.

I watched from about 8 p.m. to 8:15 p.m. on a Friday night.

Here’s what I found:

• 182 vehicles total went through the intersection
• 8 vehicles ran red lights. That’s 4.4 percent of vehicle running the light (I counted it a run-light runner if any part of the vehicle was in the intersection when the light turned red)
• All red light runners were going up the hill on Chestnut
• The worst violator was a VW bus that went into the intersection after it had turned red. No others were nearly that bad.

I just looked up the official Bellingham Public Works statistics on red-light runner crashes there from 2006 through 2008. Here’s some data from that:

• 5 crashes occured
• 4 occured in 2006 and 1 in 2008
• 3 were caused by vehicles running reds down Forest
• 4 people total were injured
• 3 were during daylight

Click here to see the spreadsheet I did on this intersection.