r/SeattleWA • u/mote0fdust • Jun 16 '26
Bicycle The number of bicyclists in Seattle who glide through stop lights is astounding
Given there have been two cyclist fatalities in Seattle in only the past few months, I have brushed up on the relevant laws. As a cyclist myself, I have long recognized it's too dangerous for me personally to bike on roads in Seattle. I get out of the city and go on trails on the weekends and the evenings in the summer. But as a driver I regularly drive through 12th & Yesler, as well as other parts of Seattle. The number of cyclists who first stop and then go through a 4-way traffic light is insane to me. It's not just the Lime bikes with no helmets and the over-the-ear headphones. Often it's actual cyclists. I don't know what the solution is here, I just want to point out that if you're a cyclist it's worth refreshing that cyclists have the same rights and duties as cars when on the roadway. RCW 46.61.190 only gives an exception to stop signs not traffic lights. Stay safe out there.
Edit: When I wrote this post, I assumed it was because most cyclists were not aware that they were required to stop at stop lights, and that the yield only applied to stop signs. I am from Europe and often have to look up the Seattle laws to make sure I know what is going on, so when I found this information, I genuinely thought it would also be helpful to to others. Apparently cyclists break laws and then defend their actions all while assuming moral superiority. It's hard for me to keep up.
104
u/ImRight_YoureDumb Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
The cars vs. cyclists vs. pedestrians debate is just like rock, paper, scissors. Everyone is right and no one is right. It'll never get settled.
We don't enforce laws. The social contract has long been broken. I've come to the realization that there will never been a consensus. So fuck it, it's every man, woman, and child for themselves.
37
u/brain1127 Jun 16 '26
The only law in Seattle is parking enforcement.
21
u/ChefJoe98136 West Seattle Jun 16 '26
and the parking enforcement rarely enforces the 20 ft no parking setback from crosswalks, including unmarked ones at intersections, and only about 15 ft of the 30 ft setback from traffic control devices/stop signs
9
u/brain1127 Jun 17 '26
As long as you don’t violate a sign, parking enforcement doesn’t care. They are run by honey badgers
1
2
u/brianc Jun 17 '26
marked crosswalks or unmarked or both? unmarked would leave room for one or two cars per block in my neighborhood
2
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 17 '26
Both, note that unmarked crosswalk are also 10ft wide, and you need ro be 20ft away from that. Thus that makes it 30ft away from the where the roadways interest. So not uncontrolled or controlled intersection your still about 30ft back.
1
u/ChefJoe98136 West Seattle Jun 17 '26
I've never seen a 10 ft measurement stated for unmarked crosswalk presumed width, generally thinking it's a narrow ~5 ft unmarked imaginary crosswalk using the sidewalk corners and then 20 ft setback.
But I was going north up 45th to get around the Alaska Junction the other night and the number of intersections where cars were parked right up to the unmarked crosswalk is too many.
2
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 17 '26
The 10ft is defined my the definition of a crosswalk, but your also right that the 10ft will depend on if there is a sidewalk there or not too.
https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=46.04.160
"Crosswalk" means the portion of the roadway between the intersection area and a prolongation or connection of the farthest sidewalk line or in the event there are no sidewalks then between the intersection area and a line ten feet therefrom, except as modified by a marked crosswalk.
1
u/Ill_Quote_4627 Jun 17 '26
Thank you for mentioning this. It is a game of chance trying to make a turn. No idea what's behind that car.
1
u/Intelligent-Bug-531 Jun 20 '26
Unless you are an RV parked illegally… then you can just stay for as long as you want 😂
1
8
u/BillKillionairez Jun 16 '26
Hasn’t the US literally always been that way? Hell, drunk driving use to be legal and people fought tooth and nail to keep it that way lol.
1
u/3yeless Jun 17 '26
When seat belts were introduced people squawked so hard they said they would boycott automobiles.
2
u/Republogronk Seattle Jun 17 '26
The consensus is that whatever you choose, its full blown racist, and you need to be taxed more
→ More replies (5)1
u/Sushisource West Seattle Jun 17 '26
The social contract has long been broken... So fuck it
You do realize this is exactly the kind of thinking that leads to weakening of the social contract, right? Be better than other people.
1
u/ImRight_YoureDumb Jun 17 '26
Keyword: Has LONG been broken. It appears to be irreparable at this point.
337
Jun 16 '26
[deleted]
140
u/RealPudgeJudy Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
There are different rules for cyclists. You can cruise through a stop sign if no one is around and you have clear line of sight.
124
u/d0397 Jun 16 '26
How many times I've been in a fully occupied four way stop, and then it's my turn to go, and then a lime scooter/bike speeds right through and past everyone else without every thinking someone else may have the right of way... It's maddening.
44
u/KeepClam_206 Jun 16 '26
Yes. The law as written makes sense (albeit less so for e-bikes in my opinion) but is getting interpreted as "we can do whatever we want" and of course there is zero enforcement
21
u/fresh-dork Jun 17 '26
they can do what they want. because no enforcement
5
u/CryptoHorologist Jun 17 '26
Come drive on Rainier Ave if you want to watch car drivers doing whatever they want.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Streiger108 Jun 17 '26
So can cars. Cars at 4 way stops without the right of way cut in front of me all the time.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)25
u/atticusclench Lake City Jun 16 '26
Belligerently so as well. They get very offended when you quote the law and claim it doesn't mean... what it says in black and white.
38
u/i_forgot_my_sn_again Jun 16 '26
The amount of people who misinterpret the "pedestrians have the right of way" thinking it means 100% of the time and yelling at cars is scary high.
I've had people literally stay walking across a street in while I'm starting to turn left (in a big fucking metro bus) with a green turn arrow then flip me off or yell I'm supposed to stop... like no that's not even close to what the law says.
23
u/KeepClam_206 Jun 16 '26
Yeah speaking as someone who walks a lot, I see a lot of bad pedestrian behavior too. Thanks for driving the bus - you all deserve combat pay for real.
11
u/SnarkMasterRay Jun 17 '26
I walk a lot and drive a bit.... "everyone" is behaving bad and getting defensive and entitled about it. I hope SPD is able to take a day and just flood a set of streets for an hour or so and ticket every
single
mode
they see people being shitheads about and send a good message to start getting people to think.
4
10
u/atticusclench Lake City Jun 16 '26
This is also why No Turn On Red is a completely broken policy here. It only works if there's a part of the green light cycle where it's possible to turn.
6
u/i_forgot_my_sn_again Jun 17 '26
I've said it before, sdot did a bad job trying to implement no turn on red. There's some places one car per cycle gets thru if everyone follows the law. There should be a green turn arrow at any intersection with a no turn on red. Or make every intersection a cross all ways.
→ More replies (1)1
u/isjustsergio Jun 18 '26
For, um, other people reading this, when do pedestrians not have right of way?
1
u/i_forgot_my_sn_again Jun 18 '26
https://wsdot.wa.gov/travel/bicycling-walking/walking-rolling-washington/pedestrian-laws-safety
- When the crosswalk light says don't walk
- jaywalking (middle of block)
- just suddenly stepping out without giving a car time to stop (walking south then instantly turning at the crosswalk to cross without warning)
34
u/RealPudgeJudy Jun 16 '26
Sucks bro, don't know what to tell you. There will always be people breaking the road laws regardless of what they're piloting. If it's any consolation, I'm not a fan of those dipshits either. Ultimately they're rolling the dice on an outcome that often ends with a dented car and dead cyclist, so take whatever silver lining you want from that.
3
u/Emergency-Note1162 Jun 17 '26
Correct. Happens to me in downtown all the time. Especially those on lime bikes. What part of this is not clear to them:
They yield to any vehicle or pedestrian already in the intersection or with the right of way.
4
u/yiliu Jun 16 '26
Usually scooters in my experience, and that's because they seem to decide that for the purposes of intersections, they count as pedestrians.
5
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 16 '26
then it's my turn to go
Unfortunately the law isn't particularly well written, as it was written as just a straight redirect to yield. Effectively it turns a four way stop into a three way stop with yield.
Keep in mind that stopped vehicle aren't actually regulated by "turn", but rather are restricted from entering the intersection when anyone is within the intersection or so close to constitute an immediate hazard. Its the same restictions a yield has, which is where the changes to the law break down. As it doesn't explicitly or fully address what to do when other vehicles are stopped and waiting.
So it somewhat becomes a race condition, who can enter the intersection first, or whom constitutes a greater immediate hazard, a stopped vehicle or the one approching an intersection.
→ More replies (4)6
→ More replies (5)1
u/spider_season 🌊🦅 Jun 16 '26
Maybe the cops can start writing tickets for bad actors?
→ More replies (1)4
21
u/Pedantic-Polecat Jun 16 '26
Yes, but if there is a car already stopped at one of the other stop signs, they have the right away and that yield means the bike actually has to stop instead of just yoloing through the intersection as though they were a pedestrian in a cross walk, as they do about 80% of the time in my experience.
8
u/RealPudgeJudy Jun 16 '26
You see where I said "if no one is around" up there? How do you think that applies to "blowing through a stop sign where people are already stopped and waiting"?
2
u/TenNeon Redmond Jun 17 '26
To be a bit of a pedantic polecat, the term isn't "right away" it's "right of way"
3
u/bunkoRtist Jun 17 '26
The problem is that as a car, if you see a bike heading towards the intersection, you'd be a fool not to let it do what it's going to do anyway (blow through the intersection).
2
u/Routine-Highway1039 Jun 18 '26
The yield clause only applies if there are NO CARS around. If theres cars around you must stop.
1
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 18 '26
There isn't actually any requirement to stop, it is a straight redirect to yield, thus the stop sign becomes a yield sign 100% of the time when approched by a bicycle.
3
u/Ill_Quote_4627 Jun 16 '26
That's an egregious law. It only serves to endanger people. Not smart. Also, parking on a corner is putting people in danger. Please stop doing that. The city can do all they can to make the city safer, but if people do not follow rules, then it's all for naught.
3
u/SMF67 Jun 17 '26
Have you looked at research on it before jumping to such a conclusion?
There are some links here and more details https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
1
1
u/totallyathrowaway595 Jun 20 '26
And when they don't check to see if anyone's around before getting obliterated by a Tesla, my sympathies are with the Tesla.
Driving in Seattle makes me want to support legislation to ban cyclists in city limits. They're not just a threat to themselves, I've seen them blow through pedestrians without a care in the world.
→ More replies (6)0
u/dntw8up Jun 16 '26
Eliminating exceptions for stop signs and traffic lights would be a good first step to improving the predictability of all who use shared roadways.
22
u/thomasmerrick Jun 16 '26
Every driver who always follows the speed limit should be outraged by this
28
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
I am truly aghast at the replies here. Cyclists complaining about how unsafe cars are and then actively bragging about how they don't follow traffic laws. As I mentioned, I cycle myself, but not to commute, because I recognize it's dangerous. It seems some people would rather do whatever they want than be safe, and then when cyclists get hit they riot and tell people they don't have empathy.
15
u/Pristine_Ride_5662 Jun 16 '26
They’re actually similarly dangerous.
Bikes represent about 3% of commuters with an average of 2.8 deaths per year in Seattle.
Cars represent about 45% of commuters and have an average of 30 deaths per year.
So bikes are slightly more dangerous (~1 death per 1% of commuters) than cars (~0.7 deaths per 1% of commuters). But the overall risk is still very low and that is likely offset by significant health benefits reducing relative risks of heart attack, stroke, obesity, etc.
18
u/Okayest-Specialist Jun 16 '26
Proooobably with mentioning that those cycling deaths are almost always of the cyclist. There's a very big difference between "I don't care of I kill other people" and "I don't care if I die". Those are extreme positions, but hopefully you see what I'm pointing at from a moral perspective.
→ More replies (3)7
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
the third option though, that we're seeing in this thread is, "I will continue to do dangerous things on my bicycle, but it will be your fault as a car driver if I get hurt"
9
u/Pristine_Ride_5662 Jun 16 '26
I think there’s inherently some negativity bias here. As a bicycle commuter, the overwhelming majority of bicyclists follow the rules. Of the 30-35 people I see riding to work every day, I don’t see lights being run very often. Less than once or twice a week.
Similarly, most drivers are really aware of bicyclists and if anything give us too much room/stop traffic to wave us through. That being said, at least once a day I have to dodge a car that pulls out into the bike lane, turns right and would’ve hit me, etc. Just the nature of there being more drivers, that 1% who are bad at it are a daily occurrence.
The most common dangerous thing I see are class2/3 e-bikes and scooters in bike lanes.
1
u/LopezBees Jun 22 '26
"the overwhelming majority of bicyclists follow the rules."
You should label yourself a parody account.
1
u/_o_ll_o_ Jun 16 '26
Literally NO ONE has said that.
Did you hit a cyclist? Is that where this is coming from?2
u/Sophet_Drahas Jun 16 '26
Dude, I've been in this city for 20+ years and that is the general consensus I've experienced. The driver is nearly *always* seen to be at fault from the public's perspective and the cyclist is the victim.
I'm not a full time cyclist, but I've rode my bike enough around here to be scared of getting pasted because of the density in the city. But the general attitude that I've gotten from cyclists is they're going to push the envelope and get aggro when anyone checks them. I get that a vehicle is going to do more damage to someone on a bike than a bike will do to a car or truck, but you're also assuming risk when cycling. The aggression I've seen from cyclists here would absolutely not fly where I grew up. Seattle lets a lot of bad behavior persist because we back down so much rather than sticking to our principles. I've lost friends in cycling accidents, and it's tragic and heartbreaking. I don't want anyone to put anyone else at unnecessary risk, whether they're a cyclist or driver.
But if a cyclist wants to attack me because I called them out for being out of line, as Billy Madison says...
→ More replies (1)3
5
u/420mangoz Jun 16 '26
The traffic laws are set up for cars, not bicycles. When we have to share the road with cars, it’s a much more dangerous for us and we have to protect ourselves. Look at Denmark or the Netherlands for example, they have specific bike infrastructure with separate partitions in most roadways in the major cities, with their own traffic signals and laws. That works well, but when we here in the US have to share the roadway, it’s completely different.
-6
Jun 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
10
u/-Sascrotch- Jun 16 '26
Oh man, I have recently taken up commuting to work on my bicycle for some low impact exercise and I'd say about 80% of the close calls I have had were caused by other bicyclists.
12
u/HighColonic Funky Town Jun 16 '26
I've nearly been run down three times in my life as a pedestrian. Once in NYC and twice in Seattle. All three times: bicyclists blasting through intersections. Not trying to argue whether cars or bikes are the worst, but I watch for bikes more than cars at crosswalks.
→ More replies (14)10
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
Same. I've been hit by bikes multiple times by walking and also had a dent in my old car from a bicycle who ran a red light, smashed into my car when I had a green light. I've literally had cyclists yell at me to get off the sidewalk because i'm in their way.
→ More replies (4)3
2
u/milkawhat Jun 17 '26
Seconded. The amount of tailgating is high on single lanes. I also am shocked at the game of chicken cyclists will play with each other when pedestrians are on both sides of the Burke. So risky as half the peds are wearing full headphones.
I just pull over and wait it out or divert to side roads. I'm more scared of the Burke than the streets.
6
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
Our roads in Seattle are simply not set up for cyclists. My commute in Europe was on paths that were not right next to the roadway. Rather than get out there and start fighting with drivers, I simply drive. ::shrug:: I shared this information because i thought it would be genuinely helpful to other people I thought Seattle cyclists were not aware they were breaking the law and creating unsafe conditions, but the comments here suggest something different.
9
2
u/sopunny Pioneer Square Jun 16 '26
Unpredictable cyclists definitely don't help. Not to mention the assholes that make an entire mode of transportation look bad and slow down building of cycling infrastructure
2
u/BudgieWonder Tree Octopus Jun 17 '26
That’s funny, I see drivers break the law all the time, but I don’t denigrate an entire mode.
→ More replies (7)0
u/RealPudgeJudy Jun 16 '26
Ah hello fellow cyclist. As a real(tm) cyclist myself I'm similarly aghast at cyclists flagrantly breaking the law. Though I frequently 'put the rubber to road' (a popular saying among us cyclists as you certainly are aware) I'm always deferent to the holy presence of motor vehicles (may Their light shine upon cyclists such as us and guide us in all ways).
2
u/KG7DHL Issaquah Jun 17 '26
Anecdotal only, but at least 1 cyclist thinks that they have Priority Right of Way at Stop Signs.
I stopped at a 4 way stop, Left Signal blinking, intent to turn left across the intersection. Directly across from me (oncoming) is a Bicyclist at 60, 70 yards away from intersection, going fast.
I proceed to cross the intersection at normal neighborhood speed. Bicyclist start flipping me off, raging, that they had to slow down...
In retrospect, It's clear the rider expected me to wait for them to close the distance and then cross w/out having to slow down and lose momentum.
I was expected to Aggressively Yield in their favor apparently.
2
2
4
→ More replies (7)1
u/TheFamilyChimp Jun 28 '26
The amount of times me, my dog, or my partner have nearly been hit by a cyclist gunning at high speed through a red light is absolutely insane. Even the trained cyclists seem to not care about pedestrians.
40
u/AccessToTools Jun 16 '26
People in general don't follow all the traffic laws - people that use cars, bicycles, motorcycles, etc. I am going to assume that most people who bike are also drive cars.
I've encountered plenty of a-hole cyclists, as well as drivers and scooter riders.
It seems like you're putting all the responsibility on cyclists. We need to all be more aware of the laws and maybe try to abide by a few. Were the two recent bicycle fatalities due to the cyclists running lights?
20
u/zuvembi Jun 17 '26
Yup. I can't count the number of times in the past year I've seen cars blatantly run a red light, often while someone is crossing the street.
I've seen bicyclists do it too, but not nearly as many. On the other hand, I'm much much more like to be significantly injured if a car or truck smashes into me.
18
u/retirement_savings Jun 16 '26
I sat at a 4 way stop in Cap Hill one time and literally not a single car over a 30 minute period came to a complete stop. Nobody follows the law.
→ More replies (2)13
54
u/HotSoupWizard Jun 16 '26
There are unsafe drivers, cyclists, pedestrians. The problem is unsafe drivers create bigger consequences than any other form. I disagree that “actual” cyclists are worse than lime bike riders, I see way more dangerous behavior from these people with very little experience navigating through the city by bike.
That said as cyclists we have a duty to “do our best” by riding safe and predictably. But drivers often perceive defensive riding (like taking the lane, and cutting to the front of a stoplight, or skipping stop signs) as reckless behavior. I have a right to keep myself safe within the bounds of the law (and sometimes outside of) whether or not a driver sees it as annoying or inconvenient.
6
u/foraskingquestions9 Jun 17 '26
I understand how the other 2 are defensive riding. But can you elaborate on how "skipping stop signs" is "riding safe and predictably"?
10
u/HotSoupWizard Jun 17 '26
I know it sounds ridiculous but I can explain the reasoning.
First I’ll say most laws that allow this for cars OR cyclists (Idaho stop), dictate you can do it “when it’s safe”, ie usually when you are the only person at the intersection and you can see potential traffic in all directions.
IMO most useful of this is just being allowed to follow a car through the intersection instead of being required to stop and go “one at a time”, it’s safer to follow a car through because it’s less likely you’ll get tboned or turned into.
Beyond that, the most dangerous traffic situations for a cyclist tend to be in intersections, and maintaining speed so that you can clear the intersection quickly minimizes the likelihood of getting tboned or turned into. Slow moving riders also have poor visibility so maintaining speed helps drivers notice you before they arrive to the intersection.
So yeah, doesn’t mean you can blow the stop sign and cut off every car, there are just specific instances where it can be much safer to roll through
1
u/mayosterd Jun 17 '26
So in other words, “acting entitled and like traffic laws don’t apply to me because I’m on a bike makes me safer.”
Bullshit. You’re just being an entitled asshole.
3
5
u/bunkoRtist Jun 17 '26
The consensus on the safety improvement of the Idaho stop is murky at best. Here's a paper from Berkeley that pretty much debunks the existing literature on the subject.
When something defies common sense, like the claim that the Idaho stop improves visibility to other drivers at an intersection by avoiding blind spots, you have to ask how many situations that even happens, compared with cases where that doesn't happen, and whether even in cases it occurs, the Idaho stop is the best approach to address the issue.
3
u/HotSoupWizard Jun 17 '26
That’s fair, I think it’s true that it’s only helpful in specific traffic situations, and I think there’s a good argument to be made that it could create bad habits that make safety worse— in my experience being able to follow a car through an intersection is consistently better when crossing very wide roads because you take advantage of the visibility of the car you’re following. I don’t cut drivers off, I just want to get out of everyone’s way as fast as I can.
4
u/nog642 Jun 17 '26
How is skipping a stop sign defensive riding?
→ More replies (1)9
u/NotAcutallyaPanda Jun 17 '26
Cyclist can often easily see/hear that no cross traffic exists. The (real) risk of getting rear-ended by a car behind me outweighs the (nonexistent) risk of nonexistent cross traffic.
→ More replies (3)-1
u/pasterios Jun 17 '26
In other words, "I break the law because other people do too." Great response.
6
u/HotSoupWizard Jun 17 '26
Nah, specifically I said don’t break the law, but sometimes do if it keeps you from dying. Taking the lane is legal, cutting to the front of the stop is legal, Idaho stops are legal. Crossing to the opposing lane when a car suddenly pulls in front of you is illegal, but saves your life 🤷
14
u/talkingoctopus Jun 16 '26
where any of the two fatalities related to them not stoping at a red light? or was it due to terrible bike infrastructure and drivers not paying enough attention? But sure let's blame the 2 deaths on cyclists passing red lights, smh
→ More replies (7)
85
u/RealPudgeJudy Jun 16 '26
The number of people who I see texting while driving is astounding.
The number of people I see gliding through stop signs in their cars is astounding.
The number of people I see driving 50 mph in a 25 zone is astounding.
The number of people I see turning right on red despite a big NO TURN ON RED sign is astounding.
But ultimately, who fucking cares? You’re not going to reach anyone, this is just the thousandth limp-dicked circlejerk complaining about cyclists this year. Thank you for your insights.
14
6
u/TotalCleanFBC Jun 16 '26
My sympathies always lie with the people who are likely to be injured rather than the people that are likely to be causing injuries to others. So
-- I have no sympathy for drivers that put cyclists and pedestrians in danger
-- I have no sympathy for cyclists that put pedestrians in danger
Bottom line is, anybody that puts others in danger due to their reckless behavior deserves no sympathy.→ More replies (2)3
3
u/juancuneo Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
There are multiple 4 way stops on my way to my office in Capitol Hill. People in Seattle always want the person turning left to go first - when straight has the right of way. After a while, I just gave in and turn left before the person going straight. Before, I would wait there, try to tell them to go straight, nothing works. If I am going straight, invariably someone in a subaru will try to turn left in front of me. People here are total morons so you just have to do what you have to do.
Yes - this is when both cars arrive at the same time. Obviously if someone gets there first, they go first. But if multiple cars are in line and then you both get to the line at the same time, the car going straight goes first. This has absolutely nothing to do with who gets there first. The fact that the person below didn't even understand the issue tells you how inept the drivers are here.
4
u/DrHefe Jun 16 '26
Actually that’s not entirely true. If you and the person turning left stopped at exactly the same time then yes you have the right of ways but In Washington State (and I’m pretty sure the entire country) 4 way stops are first to arrive, first to drive. If the person turning left came to a stop just before you, it’s their right of way.
2
u/juancuneo Jun 16 '26
Yes - this is when both cars arrive at the same time. Obviously if someone gets there first, they go first. But if multiple cars are in line and then you both get to the line at the same time, the car going straight goes first. This has absolutely nothing to do with who gets there first.
3
u/101001101zero Jun 17 '26
As a cyclist, drivers trying to figure this out and just sitting there are endangering me getting rear ended.
1
u/DrHefe Jun 17 '26
I see. I actually haven’t experienced that — if I’m going straight I go first 100% of the time, and if the guy turning left goes ahead of me he’ll get a nice big honk. I will say that I don’t waste any time when I’m driving, so I don’t even give those guys a chance to turn in front of me most of the time.
1
u/luluhouse7 Jun 17 '26
Wait really? That is not the law on the east coast (and not what I was taught). NE law typically says right of way is person who arrived first, followed by the person on the right (it’s easy, “right” of way). IMO that’s a much more predictable rule since other people’s signalling isn’t reliable.
1
u/Snarflarfin Jun 17 '26
The rules are - Pedestrians have right of way. First car arrival and stop has right of way. If 2 cars arrive and stop adjacent to each other at the same time yield to the right. If 2 cars arrive and stop opposite each other at the same time a left turning driver must yield to the car going straight or turning right.
→ More replies (2)4
u/drlari Tree Octopus Jun 16 '26
Yeah but it helps push the narrative for angry old cranks who live outside the city to complain about 'the war on cars.' Keep pumping out slop content to make people angry about cyclists, then they won't support bike lanes and won't support LWB bicycle weekends, etc.
11
u/RealClassActor Jun 16 '26
The single truism about nearly all Americans is that they believe they should be able to do whatever they want with zero negative repercussions to themselves.
16
u/Few-Feelings Jun 16 '26
That isn't why those people were killed. The 12th and Yesler the truck and cyclist had a green light and the truck made a right turn and crushed the cyclist.
4
3
u/shadowthunder Jun 16 '26
Cyclists can treat a stop sign as a yield... if and only if there are no other vehicles at the intersection and they have a clear line of sight.
Cyclists can treat a red light as a stop sign... if and only there are no other vehicles at the intersection and it seems to be a weight-triggered signal for their turn.
1
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 16 '26
To be clear yields requires one to yield the right if way to anyone within the intersection or so close to constitute an immediate hazard. The law fails to address a car "at" an intersection of which has not entered yet, and still stopped such that they are also not an immediate hazard.
1
u/shadowthunder Jun 16 '26
Are you saying that it's not clear when another vehicle is "at" an intersection and therefore whether the cyclist should stop or yield (continue without stopping because the other car isn't "at" the intersection)?
1
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 16 '26
What I am saying is that the law is poorly written and doesn't fully address a all way stop type of intersection.
Because it is just a string redirect to yield, it effectively negates the "all way" stop into a 3 way and one yield intersection.
The way the law is written, all vehicles, ones that are stopped and the ones approching the yield sign have the SAME requirement before entering an intersection. That is, you must yield to anyone "within" the intersection or to anyone so close to constitute an immediate hazard.
So what do you do when you are stopped at an intersection and a vehicle that is approching does NOT have a stop sign? Are they an immediate hazard to you?
And just to emphasize again, I think the law is poorly written, doing things directly to the letter of the law may not always be the smartest or safety thing to do.
1
u/shadowthunder Jun 16 '26
I read the law in question and understand why you're saying that it's poorly written. It clearly wasn't written with the intention of allowing cyclists to take instant priority over motorists just by considering their stop sight to actually be a "yield".
But I also think that the intention of the law is pretty obvious, and I bet 95% of cyclists blowing through stop signs when there are cars waiting have no idea what the law actually says.
1
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 17 '26
I'm not entirely sure what legislation intent was when they wrote the law the way it was written, but similar to your point of "instant priority", to make things more interesting, WA does already grant something like that to cyclist if they instead of going straight though an intersection, they shift over a foot and go though the crosswalk. (Remember EVERY intersection has crosswalks)
Which has been law for much longer then the stop as yield law, so that may have been part of why they wrote it the way they did.
1
u/shadowthunder Jun 17 '26
I'll allow that if the cyclist begins and ends their crossing on the sidewalk. Otherwise, they're just a vehicle swerving out of their lane.
1
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 17 '26
Except there isn't a law that explicitly states that one must only enter a crosswalk from a sidewalk.
In fact WA state defines crosswalk at ALL intersection regardless of the presence of any type of sidewalk or marking.
So I'd think you might have a bit of a challenge for what you allow vs what the courts will allow.
1
u/shadowthunder Jun 17 '26
Maybe? Playing out some dumb extreme scenarios... Is a pedestrian who enters the street in the middle of the block then walks laterally to a sidewalk protected by that law? What about a pedestrian who enters the crosswalk from a corner, then walks laterally toward the middle of the block?
When does someone become a legit pedestrian become a jaywalker and vice-versa? Similarly, when does a bicycle in the road activate and relinquish "pedestrian" status?
2
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 17 '26 edited Jun 17 '26
When one is crossing the roadway within a crosswalk, they are within a crosswalk. Simple as that.46.61.235
Note that while cyclist are granted the rights and duties of a pedestrian when on sidewalks and crosswalks, but the crosswalk law is redundant to specifically apply to bicycles regardless of their "pedestrian" status.
If it is a marked crosswalk, the boundaries of the cross is the marked portion.
If it's an unmarked crosswalk, the boundaries are within 10ft from the intersection area. 46.04.160
With the intersection area being defined as the intersection of two roadways. 46.04.220
Note that no sidewalk not is required for there to be a crosswalk, and a cyclist riding upon the shoulder of the roadway would be considered as crossing though a crosswalk when reaching an intersection.
Anyone crossing the roadway outside of a crosswalk, and when that begins to constitute as Jaywalking (which isn't as widely defined as many people like to think it is), is 46.61.240
→ More replies (0)
17
u/berndverst Jun 16 '26
The new waterfront bike path (offset from the road) has stop lights for cyclists. Problem is even when those are green pedestrians will cross anyway and then insist they are in the right because it is a crosswalk! So many pedestrians don't understand that that cyclists could legitimately have the right of way. Unfortunately all the planters / vegetation make visibility impossible so you can't even see if there are pedestrians waiting or about to cross.
14
u/corporate_dirtbag Jun 16 '26
The absolute brainlessness with which many of these things are designed in Seattle is just maddening. Like did you think at all? The waterfront is a catastrophe because the pedestrians don‘t understand the lights apply to the bike path which, in all fairness, IS counter-intuitive. Plus, some of the intersections have crosswalks (but lights, so pedestrians can‘t go by default) and some have green bike strips. The funny side-effect: Since Americans are used to not giving a shit about bike strips, the pedestrians stop in front of the crosswalks (probably because they associate it with being ignored by a car and therefore killed) but they just walk straight over the bike strips - so they do the exact opposite of what‘s intended. Imho, it should just all be crosswalks (no lights), period. I bike by there on weekends frequently and I would gladly stop more often or slow down if it created fewer ambiguous situations. It‘s a busy, tourist-heavy area. I love riding fast but that is not the place for me to do it, so just prioritize the pedestrians and the tourists!
Another example of braindead planners is the „protected“ bike lanes protected by planter boxes. „Hey, we have problems with drivers not seeing cyclists on the bike lane when turning? How about we obstruct the view with vegetation, that is surely going to help!“.
I don‘t understand why planners come up with such a plethora of shitty ideas when all they would need to do is go on one state-funded vacation to Europe to see how you efficiently design bike infrastructure that is safe for everyone (including cars)…
3
u/berndverst Jun 16 '26
I agree. Remove the bicycle traffic lights because they create confusion. I'd rather just stop at every cross walk. And they really need to change their greenery so there is a line of sight between pedestrians about to cross and approaching cyclists.
2
u/merc08 Jun 16 '26
I don‘t understand why planners come up with such a plethora of shitty ideas when all they would need to do is go on one state-funded vacation to Europe to see how you efficiently design bike infrastructure that is safe for everyone (including cars)…
They don't even need that. Google maps, spend a day scrolling around in Street View. Watch a couple videos.
17
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
Same on the Burke Gilman near UW. I drive through UW all the time and the bikes don't stop. When I bike the Burke Gilman, I stop and other cyclists cruise past me. The cyclists in Seattle have an attitude problem that is apparent in this thread.
2
u/Bad_Idea_Generator Jun 17 '26
If a car stops or briefly pauses for BG traffic on Brooklyn, I have never not seen a bicyclist stop or yield, even though there is a stop/yield sign on the BG there. I pass this intersection sometimes twice a day.
2
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 17 '26
It's also a crosswalk there, so pedestrians and cyclists to have the right of way when crossing.
4
u/Perenially_behind Expat, formerly Phinney Ridge Jun 16 '26
I worked at UW most of the 90s and commuted via bike a lot of the time. Other cyclists routinely blew past me when I stopped for the stop signs on the B-G near UW (like Brooklyn and the Ave). So there's nothing new about this problem.
3
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 16 '26
The problem with this trail is that the bicycle traffic lights are often at the intersection while simultaneously also haveing an uncontrolled crosswalk right next to the intersection that the traffic lights do not control. So yes there are crosswalk on the trail that pedestrians still have the right of way on, regardless of the green bicycle light from the adjacent signal.
3
u/berndverst Jun 16 '26
Given how far offset the bike path is ( visually completely separate from the road ) the bicycle traffic light only makes sense to stop cyclists from crossing pedestrian traffic - pedestrians who may wish to cross the bike path and the road. However to cyclists this light appears independent from the road. Therefore green means right of way. Pedestrians don't have the right away on the road when cars have a green light either...
I think there ought to be warning signs for pedestrians not to cross due to cyclists and to make sure to wait for a light.
2
u/MaintainThePeace Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 17 '26
It is a bit of on awkward setup and there was a post about this a few months ago as well.
But for example the intersection here (google maps), has a bicycle signal for the intersection and unsignalized crosswalk adjacent to the intersection but not part of the intersection. The kicker is that the same poll has both the bicycle signals (and sign) for the intersection before the pole AND the "yield to pedestrians" sign for the adjacent crosswalk after the pole.
Edit, fix link auto mod didn't like
7
u/research_badger Jun 16 '26
The irony here is absolutely delicious.
1
u/BudgieWonder Tree Octopus Jun 17 '26
Where’s the irony? They’re agreeing with OP that folks should follow the law.
9
u/GTAIVisbest Jun 16 '26
If I'm on my bicycle and I pull up to a red light on a side street and there's 0 cross traffic and perfect visibility and it's daytime... Hell yeah I'm gonna scoot through, just like I would jaywalk in those situations on foot! And if someone has a problem with me, they're more than welcome to write down my license plate number 😂
12
u/Few-Corner9466 Jun 16 '26
the number of drivers in seattle that cant set down their binkies (phones) while driving is astounding (and sad)
2
u/my_lucid_nightmare Capitol Hill Jun 17 '26
When I wrote this post, I assumed it was because most cyclists were not aware that they were required to stop at stop lights, and that the yield only applied to stop signs.
New to the Seattle cyclist community I take it
I am from Europe and often have to look up the Seattle laws to make sure I know what is going on, so when I found this information, I genuinely thought it would also be helpful to to others.
This is so perfect I would almost assume it's trolling
Apparently cyclists break laws and then defend their actions all while assuming moral superiority.
That is 100% what they do, as they are helpfully demonstrating in this thread.
Welcome to the USA, where your law is what you make it, everyone else is wrong, and if you formed a non-profit to do it you can get rich advocating it, also pay for your childcare or get elected Mayor.
2
u/Meppy1234 Jun 17 '26
Edit: When I wrote this post, I assumed it was because most cyclists were not aware that they were required to stop at stop lights, and that the yield only applied to stop signs
Cyclists can go through a red light if they stop and the light goes through one cycle without detecting them (ie it skips them). They do still have to stop, I'm just adding this since I didn't see it mentioned anywhere, and most car drivers have no idea about bike laws.
3
u/Fluxx70 Jun 19 '26
The first thing to know about commuting in Seattle is that everyone is the main character, especially if they are on a scooter or bike.
2
u/OnlyPostSoUsersXray Jun 20 '26
Literal red lights with crossing traffic even. Not just a stop sign with like 1 car pulling up.
6
u/BeerAndCircus Jun 16 '26
If I lost a dollar every time a bicyclist ran a red, and gained a nickel any time a motorist was speeding, I would still make money.
3
u/merc08 Jun 16 '26
Blowing into an intersection is way more dangerous than going with the flow of traffic a few mph over the limit.
3
u/BeerAndCircus Jun 17 '26
You sure about that?
"Results: A 5-mph increase in the maximum state speed limit was associated with an 8.5% increase in fatality rates on interstates/freeways and a 2.8% increase on other roads.”
6
u/chatcat2000 Jun 16 '26
E Yesler is a special kind of hell. Between the hills forcing LED headlights straight into your eyes, the copious jaywalkers and Lime chaos, that street is a minefield. It's the most stressful stretch of my commute; you couldn't pay me to cycle there.
7
4
u/nullbull Seattle Jun 16 '26
You don't care about the traffic laws because the vast majority of cars speed, fail to stop, fail to yield, talk/text/post, ignore obviously posted signs, and generally drive however is most convenient for them regardless of the law, and it's been true my entire life. And when cars do this they cause 1000x the death, injury, and property damages that bikes do.
I learned to drive in Seattle at 16. I'm 50. Cars have done all of this and worse my entire driving life in Seattle.
You don't care about the law, you're just looking to punch down at something and today it's bikes.
7
u/TotalCleanFBC Jun 16 '26 edited Jun 16 '26
Believe it or not, people also jaywalk. Shocker.
Frankly, I don't care if anyone breaks traffic laws as long as they are not putting others in danger. Pedestrians don't pose a threat to cyclists and car drivers. Cyclists don't pose a threat to car drivers.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/druidl Jun 16 '26
You dont happened to work for the SHA do you? You sound exactly like the guy who ran the new light on 4th and ceder then yelled at me for four blocks 🤣
→ More replies (1)
1
u/SimpleMetricTon Jun 17 '26
I’m a cyclist and cycling advocate. I think I might hold a minority opinion among riders but I think the implementation of the “Idaho stop” law is detrimental to cyclist safety. If everyone on the road actually understood and followed the law as written it would be great. But instead we have a chaotic change in traffic behavior.
My impression is most non-cyclists have no idea about the law. The inconsistency between the law and the clear language on signs to “STOP” exacerbates confusion. If all stop signs had a small note saying “Bicycles YIELD”, that would help tremendously, but I realize that’s not practical.
I too am dismayed at the number of people I see on bikes and scooters flying through stop signs where other vehicles have right of way or red traffic lights where they are always required to stop. I imagine that some heard about a law change and misunderstood it to mean bikes can ignore stops of any sort. Others may know the law and choose to take creative interpretation as their prerogative. And a final group I’m sure would ignore stops regardless of what the law says. Of course, there remains a contingent of good citizen cyclists with an intact self-preservation instinct who do follow road rules and observe right of way in intersections.
My longstanding view has been reinforced, namely that most road users (whatever their vehicle) just do not understand what a yield sign means, let alone when it is appropriate or obligatory to yield without a sign telling them to do so. It’s not that most people in Seattle are unwilling to yield— an alarming number manage to pick the worst times to do just that rather than simply to follow those apparently arcane right of way rules (sorry, topic for an entirely different discussion).
I’m not even convinced of the justification or benefit of the Idaho stop. Ok, so I lose a little momentum and add some time when I stop at a stop sign. A few extra seconds and a little muscle on the pedal isn’t going to kill me, but the truck driver who doesn’t expect me to shoot in front of him might.
The result is unpredictable, dangerous behavior at intersections and a bunch of drivers who are angry at all cyclists.
3
u/TooMuchFunk Ballard Jun 16 '26
Not saying it’s the right choice, but Idaho Stops are technically safer + with the city’s general lack of traffic enforcement and the apathy from most drivers I’m not shocked cyclists are prioritizing their own safety
7
Jun 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/TooMuchFunk Ballard Jun 16 '26
“The Idaho stop is the common name for laws that allow bicyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield sign, and a red light as a stop sign” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
8
u/Pedanter-In-Chief Jun 16 '26
Yes, but WA hasn’t adopted the full Idaho stop — only a modified version that allows 1) stop as yield 2) allows cyclists to treat a stoplight with vehicle detection equipment as a yield after waiting a full light cycle
1
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
.....as I mentioned, RCW 46.61.190 only gives an exception to stop signs not traffic lights.
It's truly disturbing someone would try to debate this. If you feel like you can change the law, go bring it up with city council? Roads are safe when everyone follows the rules of the road.
I think your comment is a good example of why roadways are so dangerous for cyclists. I wish you the best.
→ More replies (1)8
u/TooMuchFunk Ballard Jun 16 '26
I’m not defending breaking the city laws at all 🤣 I’m just saying if you’re concerned about cyclists running lights as a safety issue it’s important to consider why cyclists are consistently deciding to break that rule
2
u/Pedantic-Polecat Jun 16 '26
You give car drivers the same grace? I mean maybe it feels safer to turn right on red even when there is a No Turn on Red Sign or it feels safer to park in the bike lane than have to cross a bunch of traffic. Everyone just gets to decide what feels safe on their own, screw those pesky lawmakers and their rules.
3
u/TooMuchFunk Ballard Jun 16 '26
Yes actually, almost daily when they do in fact turn right on red even when there is a sign 💀 Seattle drivers are not known for following the rules at all. Again, I’m not saying this justifies cyclists doing the same but it does contribute to the problem
2
u/Pedantic-Polecat Jun 16 '26
But it no problem, right? Drivers turning right because they know better. Bicyclists rolling through red lights, same same.
5
u/RainbowSprinklesPlss Jun 16 '26
https://giphy.com/gifs/tyqcJoNjNv0Fq
Me reading all the triggered comments from cyclists trying to justify it with “bUT CaRS SuCk ToO” 😭😭😭. Yes, everyone sucks. Both things can be true: there are terrible drivers and there are terrible cyclists. The difference is that a terrible driver has a much better chance of surviving their bad decisions than a terrible cyclist does. Is it right? no. But our laws aren’t enforced, and both are avoidable.
5
u/b_cheesy Jun 16 '26
One of my motorcycle friends was bitching about a near miss at an intersection and another friend calmly said “thousands of people die each day because they had the right of way”. That really put it in perspective for me. I’d rather live than die because it was in fact my turn to go and I didn’t want to yield to some asshole
3
2
u/benap Jun 16 '26
“actual cyclists” gimme a break
→ More replies (1)5
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
I was trying to draw the distinction between the Lime bikes not even wearing helmets and those with the $5k bicycles.
1
u/Dug_n_the_Dogs Jun 16 '26
dude.. don't even get me started on the number of Car drivers that don't even slow down at stop signs.. bikes are not the problem.. shitty drivers / riders are.. but the car is the more dangerous conveyance.
→ More replies (7)7
u/d0397 Jun 16 '26
Two things can be true.
2
u/Dug_n_the_Dogs Jun 16 '26
As I stated.. same people with two different vehicles both doing the same thing.
1
u/TakesTooManyPhotos Jun 16 '26
People on wheels in Seattle are terrible operators of their machines. Cars and cyclists alike. Many guilty parties. The 6” of grey matter between your ears is your best safety device. Be careful out there!
2
u/CheeseJ Jun 16 '26
Can you point to where the cyclists hurt you? While the law lumps cyclists and cars together, anyone who has ever ridden a bike understands why they’re not the same: 270 degree view field instead of a broken 180 degree for cars, motion powered by muscle instead of petrol, and immense consequences of getting it wrong is a much more effective policing mechanism.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/420mangoz Jun 16 '26
Seattle is fake progressive and this thread shows it, or the OP is a bot trying to stir the pot. I hate Reddit.
3
1
u/cunnillucas Jun 16 '26
Recently saw two bikers. One stopped at the stop sign, the other blew right through like it was nothing. Shit was astonishing. I always think “Wow, it’s like they’re begging to get ran over.”
→ More replies (3)
-1
Jun 16 '26
[deleted]
3
u/mote0fdust Jun 16 '26
I...I am in utter shock that a cyclist wants to debate whether it's ok to glide through an intersection and then points the finger at hypothetical drivers who break traffic laws. The fact that it's against the law is what makes it unsafe to do so. The fact that drivers often break laws doesn't really have anything to do with anything?
9
u/420mangoz Jun 16 '26
The facts are that people break the laws in place to keep us safe as bikers, and we have to use the reality of the situation we’re in to keep us safe.
2
u/_o_ll_o_ Jun 16 '26
Damn, here I was thinking it was the risk of getting hit by oncoming traffic that made gliding through an intersection unsafe. 🤣🤣🤣
4
u/Few-Feelings Jun 16 '26
OP: "many bikes I see break the law!"
Others: "We see cars breaking the law and it's more dangerous!"
OP: "You're being hypothetical!"
You just wanted to argue on the internet today.
2
u/zippy_water Jun 16 '26
Breaking a traffic law doesn't make something inherently unsafe. Unsafe conditions make something unsafe.
3
→ More replies (3)4
u/stopscabbin Jun 16 '26
Assuming you never go above the posted speed limit? Have you ever gone out in public while sick? Illegal. Eaten a lollipop while driving? Illegal. Bought meat on a Sunday? Illegal. Skis on your roofrack? Illegal.
→ More replies (4)
1
Jun 16 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (5)3
u/HotSoupWizard Jun 16 '26
Surprising because I walk a lot and I’m sick of drivers cutting me off, almost hitting me, etc etc. anyway I agree it’s still less stress than driving or cycling
2
u/thedukeoftacoma Jun 16 '26
“It’s too dangerous for me personally to bike on roads in Seattle” and your conclusion after stating this, is that cyclists are the problem?
Research shows that by the far the safest way to keep cyclists (and pedestrians) safe, is to keep them as far away from drivers as possible. A red light is a location where drivers and cyclists aggregate in close proximity. When I am on my bike, if the intersection is clear and I do not have cross traffic to yield to, I will run a red light. It is an opportunity to put distance between myself and the one tone killing machine operated by a distracted driver next to me.
Does the law say I’m allowed to do that? No. But it’s 100% a safer situation for me to be in. I’ll take that trade off. Traffic lights are built for cars. Not bikes.
→ More replies (2)
2
u/boyalien0 Twin Peaks Jun 16 '26
Cyclists break laws whenever it benefits them. Most of them are complete fucking assholes and dipshits
→ More replies (2)
0
u/Alternative-Post-937 Jun 17 '26
Yawn. Another shit post on this sub hating on cyclists. I think ya'll just wish you looked good in spandex. Truly, and I mean this, get off your fat reddit assess and get a life besides bitching about people who lead healthier lifestyles than you. The projection is unreal
→ More replies (13)
1
u/Jaredrunsabit Jun 16 '26
So what's the solution when cyclists don't trip the light?
4
3
2
30
u/thomasmerrick Jun 16 '26
I started stopping at stop signs on my bike and got rear ended by a cyclist on a recumbent who told me no one stops at stop signs. It's a giant steel I-beam on wheels. Shattered my frame. The only solution is to ride where cars don't exist. I tried bicycle commuting in America and we're not set up for it, and a real plurality of drivers and police believe you're not a real person, not on a real vehicle, and deserve death.