“Idaho stop” bill introduced in Arizona — would permit bicyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs when safe to do so
Bicycles, Rolling Stops, and the Idaho Stop from Spencer Boomhower on Vimeo.
I got a call yesterday from my State legislator, Daniel Patterson, who told me that the “Bike safe-yield” bill had been introduced again this year. This bill would permit bikes to treat stop signs as yield signs when safe to do so. I really support this bill as it would solve a fundamental problem with the application of our car-based traffic laws to bicyclists.
The bill does not permit cyclists to blow through stop signs. It permits bicyclists to slow to the speed necessary to determine whether an intersection is safe for them to pass through without coming to a complete stop. We already have these signs all over town in the form of “Yield” signs on those intersections where authorities conclude it is unnecessary to require vehicles to come to a complete stop. This bill would recognize that such intersections are far more common for bicyclists than for motorists.
Bicyclists have unimpeded views around them, they are usually traveling more slowly, they are more aware of their surroundings, and they don’t generally hurt anyone but themselves when they hit something. This bill improves the conditions for bicyclists considerably, and helps get cyclists off the main arterial roads because it permits them to navigate lesser-used streets that have lots of stop signs.
This practice is already in place in Idaho, and has been called the “Idaho stop.” Bob Mionske has a lot of information on the Idaho law; a good place to start is here.
The relevant part of the bill reads:
C. The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign and any person who is at least sixteen years of age and who is riding a bicycle approaching a yield sign or a stop sign shall slow down in obedience to the sign to a speed reasonable for the existing conditions and shall yield the right‑of‑way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time the driver or bicycle rider is moving across or within the intersection. If after driving or riding past a yield sign or stop sign without stopping the driver or bicycle rider is involved in a collision with a vehicle in the intersection, the collision is prima facie evidence of the driver’s or bicycle rider’s failure to yield the right‑of‑way.
The bill is here.
Rep. Patterson has said he will need support from the cycling community, something that fell short last year when this bill was introduced.
–Erik Ryberg
February 3rd, 2010 at 10:08 am
This is great news, how can one do more to support this? I’ll spread the work like crazy.
February 3rd, 2010 at 10:38 am
Thanks Erik :^)
Who should I contact to support this for Chandler? I exchanged emails with somebody last fall, but I forget who…
Doug
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:10 am
If this passes, I wonder what the city will do to replace the revenue bonanza that the 3rd and Treat intersection provides?
February 3rd, 2010 at 11:16 am
What can we do to show support?
How did support fall short last year?
February 3rd, 2010 at 12:02 pm
[...] out TBL’s post on the bill that was introduced, for a second year in a row, which allows cyclist to roll through [...]
February 3rd, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Mike McKisson at Tucson Velo has put up a forum section devoted to this:
http://tucsonvelo.com/forum/index.php?topic=19.msg39#msg39
EBR
February 4th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
[...] brilliant, but there are those who don’t. Just days after the Idaho Stop fails in Utah, Arizona takes up the debate. Iowa cyclists push for a vulnerable user and three foot passing law, while San Antonio considers a [...]
February 6th, 2010 at 12:00 pm
[...] More on HB2633 here. [...]
March 2nd, 2010 at 3:12 pm
So, why should a car have to stop at a stop sign, if the driver can “determine whether an intersection is safe for them to pass through”?
Stop means stop; if you want drivers to respoect you, obey the traffic laws. Period.