The Idaho Stop

In Idaho, cyclists are allowed under law to treat stop signs like yields. Oregon is now considering the Idaho Stop. Cool right?

Well I posted this story, http://www.howwedrive.com/2009/02/10/when-is-a-stop-sign-not-a-stop-sign/, in my gchat status message. Most people replied back with "this crazy cyclist did this or that" or "this car ran me off the road" stories. I'm glad this article stirred reactions from both sides, because roads are a space for both cars and bicycles; unfortunately, they are not designed for both cars and bicycles; they are designed for cars.

The article's point is the following:

• Bicycles are supposed to be on the road.
• Roads are designed for cars.
  
• Not all rules of the road make sense for cyclists
• Example, stopping/accellerating for cars is easy, push the pedal. For cyclists it requires much more energy, push the pedal many times over. That's why they don't stop at stop signs. This discourages them from cycling in a predictable manner.
  
• In order to make roads safer for cyclists, you cannot continue to discount cyclists' concerns.
  

This is just one example, and a great one, of the fact that bicycles don't get special treatment; they're different. (Note: I don't feel the Idaho Stop is not the only solution to the problem at hand. Other options include timing of traffic lights for cyclists, called green waves, or adjusting the enforcment of laws.)

In the future, cyclists will continue to ride on the road. Our planning and laws need to account for them. The hope is that it's safer for cyclists and it encourages more people to ride. DC is taking a nice step towards multiuse roads with the redesign of U St/16 St/New Hampshire; they are installing a contraflow bike lane and bike only traffic signal.

For more coverage check out GreaterGreaterWashington, WashCycle, and StreetsBlogs.