I’m a resident here in Cupertino, and I ride my bicycle daily. This past month, while biking on the weekend, I’ve noticed a problem, specifically that some road users in the form of scooters and bicycles are going the wrong way on the road.
Reason 1: It’s the law
According to California Vehicle Codes VEH 21200 for bicycles, and 21221 for motorized scooter, the operator is “subject to all the provisions applicable to the driver of a vehicle.“ In other words, the cyclist or person riding the scooter must follow the same rules as drivers and travel on the right hand side of the road (see VEH 21650).
Ride with the flow of traffic.
It’s safer for you, for other cyclists, and it’s the law.
Reason 2: It reduces crash severity
The law is here for good a good reason – it’s here to ensure the safety of not only you but all road users. By ensuring users are traveling with traffic, instead of counter to traffic, the maximum speed for a collision is reduces. If two bicycles collide, they might have an effective speed of 50 MPH if both are traveling at 25 MPH towards each other. While this may be an unlikely event, this could do significantly more damage to the road user than a much lower speed collision.
Reason 3: It prevents crashes
A couple of weeks ago, I was turning left onto Blaney Ave (green line on the map), and someone was biking south in the bike lane traveling going the wrong way (red line on the map). After looking both ways, I saw the bicycle but barely recognized that they were traveling towards me, and not away from me as I would have expected. I almost pulled out in front of them which would have resulted in a crash. If they were traveling in the correct direction, and so were on the opposite side of the road, this would not have been a near-miss collision.
It’s important when you are biking that you handle your bike and follow the rules in the ways that other road users expect. Not doing so can lead to an accident.
What to do if you are considering riding against traffic
So, what can we do about this? If you find yourself about to go against traffic, why not cross the street instead at a light? As an alternative, you could go with traffic and make a u-turn at the appropriate spot, or even take a side street or a different route that doesn’t require you to cross the street. Sometimes there are convenient parking lots which can be used to get you off busy roads. And lastly, you could dismount and walk on the sidewalk for a short distance if needed. If you are riding with someone twelve or under, you can even ride on the sidewalk the whole way!
I could write may pages about unsafe situations that I’ve seen with collisions or near misses, but I’ll leave you with this – please don’t compromise the safety of yourself and others simply because it’s inconvenient and don’t want to spend an extra minute crossing the road. When you go the wrong way on the road, you’re making it more dangerous for everyone and build a bad reputation for non-car road users.
When I was a kid riding a bike there were no bike lanes. Lots of times no side walks. It was safer to ride against traffic so you could see what was coming and move to the other side t. There was a fear of being hit from behind. I still get that feeling in the bike lane. Cars don’t see you. You have to see them to be safe. I don’t see many bikes in the bike lane. You take any alternative then riding with cars. It is safer for you on a bike to see what’s coming than leaving in up to someone driving a fast car to see you in time when you could have been out of the way in the first place. If you are passing slow moving cars they tend to pull out on you because they don’t see you in their mirrors. If they see you coming the other way they will avoid hitting you and the bike hitting them .Having that law gets drivers of the hook for not seeing you. By having this law and bike lanes it protects drivers more then bicyclist. A bike is the same as a walking when it comes to a speed of a car. Why then place a bike in a path of a car he can’t see. And might have avoided being hit had he seen the car coming. I’m right on this.
Hi Daniel, thanks for your comment!
I’m sorry to hear that you do not like bike lanes. We agree that cars pose the greatest danger to people who bike. We will, however, continue to support bike lanes, especially protected bike lanes which separate cars from bicycles and pedestrians.
We agree that off-street lanes, paths, and trails (which I will lump under the general category of “trails”) are the best and safest way to get anywhere. However, this doesn’t mean they should be the only way cyclists can get where they need to go safely. Obviously, the overwhelming majority of businesses and destinations anyone wants to get to are not found adjacent to trails. At some point, sometimes for a long way, a cyclist must use regular streets to get where they want to go. This cyclist may be a child on the way to school–this is most common–or perhaps someone who wants to run errands but not add to our local traffic. They deserve to have a reasonable amount of protection.
Secondly, a bike lane helps cars THINK about cyclists sharing the road. If you bike–which I don’t know if you still do–then you know how many times you are honked at by drivers for doing something perfectly legal and safe, such as riding down the middle of a road marked with sharrows (those little painted bicycle markings in the center of streets that tell everyone that cyclists can be in the middle of the lane). Sometimes drivers get irate and try to pass very close to scare a cyclist. Roads should be for everyone–not just the biggest and heaviest vehicles.
Much like ADA ramps and curb cuts have made life better for so many, such as parents with strollers, bike lanes also help more than just cyclists, too. They also help pedestrians, as it provides a buffer between drive lanes and where they walk. I have also seen a lot of cars use them to pull over when needed.
Last, I agree some bike lanes aren’t used very much. Before we decide that all bike lanes are useless, perhaps we should ask why those particular lanes aren’t used much because usually there are severe design issues. One example I can think of is the bike lane on Miller Avenue south of Creekside Park. I never see anyone in that lane. Why not? There’s several reasons that make sense. (1) Miller Avenue is a 30 mph road where traffic routinely goes 40+ mph. (2) The bike lane is next to a narrow parking area in front of homes, which means that parked cars often encroach in the lane (or can easily “door” a cyclist). (3) The bike lane just disappears as it gets close to the Bollinger Road intersection, and the road is just wide enough that cars tend to create a right turn lane. (4) North of Creekside Park, there is no bike lane at all–just those little bike markings on a 30+ mph curving road with side parking showing bikes should share the lane. It’s incredibly dangerous there to bike–most people who do just do it illegally on the sidewalk. These are just some of the reasons bike lanes aren’t utilized as much as they could be. Traffic engineers need to take a more holistic approach (like Complete Streets design) which considers many factors, instead of just painting a stripe down the side of a road and calling it done.
The last thing I want to mention is that protected (class IV) lanes, like are on Stevens Creek Boulevard between Tantau and De Anza, solve many of the issues that you are concerned about. Cyclists can see traffic easily, and they are in a separate lane from cars. I hope that you support these lanes whenever they are proposed.