Another cyclist Killed!!

[smiles]

This one bothers me because it is close to home!!

http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp

It also bothers me since it my understanding that if I was going straight at
that point I was to be in the thru traffic lane and not on the right of the
turn lane. Also, the "turn lane" is long and striped such that there are "no
cross zones", hence if a cyclist was to stay to the right of the turn lane
it would be breaking the law also.

The county claims it put a bike lane on this roadway, but it's not striped
for one, especially at that point. And to boot they have a 16 inch "rumple
strip" on the white line, so it forces you over into the lane or into the
glass and ****.

s
http://boardnbike.com

 

[Andre]

This is an all-too-common roadway feature that stimies cyclists. A long
right turn only exit lane that forces cyclists into dangerous situations
that can end badly. Personally, I stay to the right of the right turn exit
lane, looking back far down the road. When it's clear, I sprint like a
maniac to get back into the main road, just as the exit lane is separating.
The only time I ride the left side of the exit lane to merge smoothly with
the straight-through lane is when the road is blatantly deserted. Also, the
early time of day of this accident made for poor visibility. My policy is
to always assume brain-deadness behind the wheel, which typically helps to
avoid accidents...

--
--------------------------
Andre Charlebois
AGC-PC support
http://agc-pc.tripod.com
BPE, MCSE4.0, CNA, A+

"smiles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This one bothers me because it is close to home!!
>
>
http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp
>
> It also bothers me since it my understanding that if I was going straight
at
> that point I was to be in the thru traffic lane and not on the right of
the
> turn lane. Also, the "turn lane" is long and striped such that there are
"no
> cross zones", hence if a cyclist was to stay to the right of the turn lane
> it would be breaking the law also.
>
> The county claims it put a bike lane on this roadway, but it's not striped
> for one, especially at that point. And to boot they have a 16 inch "rumple
> strip" on the white line, so it forces you over into the lane or into the
> glass and ****.
>
> s
> http://boardnbike.com
>
>

 

[psycholist]

"smiles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> This one bothers me because it is close to home!!
>
>
http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D7732E075.asp
>
> It also bothers me since it my understanding that if I was going straight
at
> that point I was to be in the thru traffic lane and not on the right of
the
> turn lane. Also, the "turn lane" is long and striped such that there are
"no
> cross zones", hence if a cyclist was to stay to the right of the turn lane
> it would be breaking the law also.
>
> The county claims it put a bike lane on this roadway, but it's not striped
> for one, especially at that point. And to boot they have a 16 inch "rumple
> strip" on the white line, so it forces you over into the lane or into the
> glass and ****.
>
> s
> http://boardnbike.com
>
>

I don't live far from there. At 5:00 a.m. it's still pitch dark. The
article doesn't speak to how the riders were dressed or if they had lights.
I think the interpretation of the law saying they weren't sufficiently to
the right is bogus given the presence of the turn lane. I also think that,
generally, if you hit someone from behind, it's your fault. But in the
pitch dark and not knowing about lighting, I don't think it's too safe to
jump to any conclusions about this story.

But I feel for the family and friends in their loss.

Bob C.

 

[Badger_South]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:42:18 GMT, "Andre" <[email protected]> wrote:

>This is an all-too-common roadway feature that stimies cyclists. A long
>right turn only exit lane that forces cyclists into dangerous situations
>that can end badly. Personally, I stay to the right of the right turn exit
>lane, looking back far down the road. When it's clear, I sprint like a
>maniac to get back into the main road, just as the exit lane is separating.
>The only time I ride the left side of the exit lane to merge smoothly with
>the straight-through lane is when the road is blatantly deserted. Also, the
>early time of day of this accident made for poor visibility. My policy is
>to always assume brain-deadness behind the wheel, which typically helps to
>avoid accidents...
>
>--
>--------------------------
>Andre Charlebois
>AGC-PC support
>http://agc-pc.tripod.com
>BPE, MCSE4.0, CNA, A+

This is a problem, b/c if one is behaving like a 'vehicle', the natural
position, if you're going straight, would be taking the regular lane (past
the turnpoint), or at least riding the rightmost tire track of the normal
lane. However, then a faster vehicle wishing to turn right can end up
passing you on the right, and in fact, if you don't take the lane you're
in, you could be passed closely on the left at the same time - at least
theoretically.

I try and speed past the turn point, in the regular lane, in the tire
track, just as a regular car would do, but time it so as not to be passed.
It's a doable sprint on a 25-35mph road most of the time, but the one time
I was passed it was a bit disconcerting to see a vehicle go by on my right,
I must say! ;-)

If you ride to the right in the turn lane, you risk being trapped and
prevented from returning to the road - however, it's easy enough to go
ahead and turn and come back around in a pinch. It just seems a bit too
passive to always be hugging the curb, no matter what, imo.

On the incident, it's not clear if the riders were adequately lighted and
vested.

-B

 

[Badger_South]

On Fri, 27 Aug 2004 10:04:31 -0400, "psycholist" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I don't live far from there. At 5:00 a.m. it's still pitch dark. The
>article doesn't speak to how the riders were dressed or if they had lights.
>I think the interpretation of the law saying they weren't sufficiently to
>the right is bogus given the presence of the turn lane. I also think that,
>generally, if you hit someone from behind, it's your fault. But in the
>pitch dark and not knowing about lighting, I don't think it's too safe to
>jump to any conclusions about this story.
>
>But I feel for the family and friends in their loss.
>
>Bob C.

Jeeze, no shite, if you hit someone from behind in my neck of the woods,
you can believe it would be your fault. It's that old 'didn't see 'em'
defense - mitigated, certainly if they were wearing no lights, no rear
reflectors, no vests, etc.

The article said: "Witnesses said Serrano had been bicycling at the left
edge of the right-turn-only lane, bordering closely on the right lane of
continuing traffic."

There were 'witnesses' at 5:00am? Whoa. What about a statement from the
other biker? Most experienced riders would be more-or-less hypervigilant at
such problem points, imo.

If indeed the law was to be at the right edge, then the riders were at the
minus right edge, or left edge of the turn lane. I tend to doubt the
'drifted' into the thru lane witness accounts. Who would notice such a
thing at 5:00am - "look, Hyram, that bicyclist is
drifting...and...and...he's near invisible to the traffic behind him".
Yeah.

I'd be calling for an accident reconstruction analysis. Of course it's only
a dayum biker. ;-(

-B

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>This one bothers me because it is close to home!!
>http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D
7732E075.asp
>It also bothers me since it my understanding that if I was going straight at
>that point I was to be in the thru traffic lane and not on the right of the
>turn lane. Also, the "turn lane" is long and striped such that there are "no
>cross zones", hence if a cyclist was to stay to the right of the turn lane
>it would be breaking the law also.
>The county claims it put a bike lane on this roadway, but it's not striped
>for one, especially at that point. And to boot they have a 16 inch "rumple
>strip" on the white line, so it forces you over into the lane or into the
>glass and ****.
>s
>http://boardnbike.com

Another example of why bicycle lanes are not always a good idea. They are
placing blame on the cyclist because he was not in the bicycle lane. I wonder
if the cyclist had a rear light and any kind of reflectors on them or the bike.
----------------
Alex

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
>This one bothers me because it is close to home!!
>http://www.gwinnettdailyonline.com/GDP/archive/articleACDD9B49A821457788919E3D
7732E075.asp
>It also bothers me since it my understanding that if I was going straight at
>that point I was to be in the thru traffic lane and not on the right of the
>turn lane. Also, the "turn lane" is long and striped such that there are "no
>cross zones", hence if a cyclist was to stay to the right of the turn lane
>it would be breaking the law also.
>The county claims it put a bike lane on this roadway, but it's not striped
>for one, especially at that point. And to boot they have a 16 inch "rumple
>strip" on the white line, so it forces you over into the lane or into the
>glass and ****.
>s
>http://boardnbike.com

Another example of why bicycle lanes are not always a good idea. They are
placing blame on the cyclist because he was not in the bicycle lane. I wonder
if the cyclist had a rear light and any kind of reflectors on them or the bike.
----------------
Alex

 

[Pete]

"Alex Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> Another example of why bicycle lanes are not always a good idea. They are
> placing blame on the cyclist because he was not in the bicycle lane. I
wonder
> if the cyclist had a rear light and any kind of reflectors on them or the
bike.

>Alex

The article provided by the OP made no mention of a bicycle lane. It stated
the investigating officer said no charges would be filed because cyclists
are required to be on the right edge of the road. I'll bet he's wrong about
the law. Cops are notorious for ignorance about rules of the road as they
apply to cyclists. It sounds to me as though the rider was proceeding
correctly, that is, on the right edge of the through lane. Whether or not he
had lighting appropriate to the conditions is another story.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/25/2004

 

[jquinn1]

The cop is wrong. You are required to be in the right of the lane you are
traveling in. In this case the street has one lane going straight in both
directions and a right turn only lane for people going into a parking lot.
In that situation you have to ride in the middle lane or you have to make a
right turn. Moving over abruptly at the last minute would get you a ticket
in a car.
Scene of the crime:
http://terraserver-usa.com/addressi...+30024&Lon=-84.091691432075&Lat=34.0494990008


"Pete" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Alex Rodriguez" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>> Another example of why bicycle lanes are not always a good idea. They
>> are
>> placing blame on the cyclist because he was not in the bicycle lane. I
> wonder
>> if the cyclist had a rear light and any kind of reflectors on them or the
> bike.
>
>>Alex
>
> The article provided by the OP made no mention of a bicycle lane. It
> stated
> the investigating officer said no charges would be filed because cyclists
> are required to be on the right edge of the road. I'll bet he's wrong
> about
> the law. Cops are notorious for ignorance about rules of the road as they
> apply to cyclists. It sounds to me as though the rider was proceeding
> correctly, that is, on the right edge of the through lane. Whether or not
> he
> had lighting appropriate to the conditions is another story.
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.742 / Virus Database: 495 - Release Date: 8/25/2004
>
>

 

[smiles]

"psycholist" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I don't live far from there. At 5:00 a.m. it's still pitch dark. The
> article doesn't speak to how the riders were dressed or if they had
lights.
> I think the interpretation of the law saying they weren't sufficiently to
> the right is bogus given the presence of the turn lane. I also think
that,
> generally, if you hit someone from behind, it's your fault. But in the
> pitch dark and not knowing about lighting, I don't think it's too safe to
> jump to any conclusions about this story.
>
> But I feel for the family and friends in their loss.

I went to the "scene" ... and talked with a cop about the accident. There
were 150+ feet of skid marks, from a 45mph Prelude stopping, fishy!! ...
also, the roadway is 55 not 45 ... the skids started in the turn lane ... a
family has a great loss and there is a kid who has been confirmed that
roadies are in his way, since he killed one and is getting off!!

s
http://boardnbike.com

 

[smiles]

"Pete" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> The article provided by the OP made no mention of a bicycle lane. It
stated
> the investigating officer said no charges would be filed because cyclists
> are required to be on the right edge of the road. I'll bet he's wrong
about
> the law. Cops are notorious for ignorance about rules of the road as they
> apply to cyclists. It sounds to me as though the rider was proceeding
> correctly, that is, on the right edge of the through lane. Whether or not
he
> had lighting appropriate to the conditions is another story.

The county claims bike lines but as you can see from a follup posters link
there is no striped bike lanes ... this is the actual scene:

http://terraserver-usa.com/addressi...achtree+Industrial+Blvd+NW,+Suwanee,+GA+30024

the skids started at the first drive (after impact, in the turn lane) and
went to the second drive entrance.

s
http://boardnbike.com