My question involves a bicyclist traffic lane rights issue in the state of California based on CVC 21202, however most states have similar laws to California's CVC 21202:
Here is the full text, with the parts I want to concentrate on emphasized:
Just in case that doesn't work, here's the text again, with emphasis on exception (a)(3):
21202.
(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a “substandard width lane” is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
(b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable.
The reason for the "substandard width lane" exception has valid safety reasons behind it, but they're not widely known and understood. A cyclist riding at the edge of such a lane invites dangerously-close passes - remember, the passing vehicle must straddle the adjacent lane to pass, so the cyclist being at the edge does not enable faster traffic to (safely) pass without using the adjacent lane. Sometimes this works fine, but all too often a motorist realizes too late that the adjacent lane is occupied and resorts to passing the cyclist dangerously close. Sometimes cyclists are hit like this. Ask any cyclist and they'll know what I'm saying. So the idea is to let the cyclist choose a position in the lane that makes it abundantly clear to motorists approaching from behind that they need to use the adjacent lane, at least partially, to pass, and to plan accordingly.
This "substandard width lane" wording has been on the books since the 1970s but what exactly constituted "a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane" has always been under some debate. In recent years, however, Bikes May Use Full Lane (BMUFL) signs and Shared Lane Markings (sharrows) have been added to the MUTCD and the CA MUTCD, and traffic engineers all over the state have been designating some lanes that they have determined to meet this criteria (generally any lane under 14 feet in width, which is most lanes; typical freeway lanes are 11-12 feet wide). This means that cyclists riding in lanes so marked are not subject to the 21202 edict, " ride as close as practicable to the right", because the "substandard width lane" exception applies.
So here's my question... a day before sharrows are painted or a BMUFL signs is posted, the lane about to be so designated is the same width. I mean, if it's "substandard width" on Wednesday when it got sharrows, then it must have been a "substandard width lane" on Tuesday before it got sharrowed; paint and signs do not change the width, of course. So these designations simply make it easier to identify such lanes. But surely there other lanes (like these were before they are designated) which are not so designated but are never-the-less "substandard width", and cyclists riding in those lanes are also not subject to the 21202 "keep right" edict?
The graphic claims that almost no roads have lanes that are wide enough (14 feet) to safely share side-by-side. If that's true, and as far as I can tell it is, why do we even have 21202 (and similar laws in other states) on the books? Is it just to intimate cyclists to get out of the way of cars?
Here is the full text, with the parts I want to concentrate on emphasized:
Just in case that doesn't work, here's the text again, with emphasis on exception (a)(3):
21202.
(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
(1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
(2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or substandard width lanes) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, a “substandard width lane” is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
(4) When approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.
(b) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway of a highway, which highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable.
The reason for the "substandard width lane" exception has valid safety reasons behind it, but they're not widely known and understood. A cyclist riding at the edge of such a lane invites dangerously-close passes - remember, the passing vehicle must straddle the adjacent lane to pass, so the cyclist being at the edge does not enable faster traffic to (safely) pass without using the adjacent lane. Sometimes this works fine, but all too often a motorist realizes too late that the adjacent lane is occupied and resorts to passing the cyclist dangerously close. Sometimes cyclists are hit like this. Ask any cyclist and they'll know what I'm saying. So the idea is to let the cyclist choose a position in the lane that makes it abundantly clear to motorists approaching from behind that they need to use the adjacent lane, at least partially, to pass, and to plan accordingly.
This "substandard width lane" wording has been on the books since the 1970s but what exactly constituted "a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane" has always been under some debate. In recent years, however, Bikes May Use Full Lane (BMUFL) signs and Shared Lane Markings (sharrows) have been added to the MUTCD and the CA MUTCD, and traffic engineers all over the state have been designating some lanes that they have determined to meet this criteria (generally any lane under 14 feet in width, which is most lanes; typical freeway lanes are 11-12 feet wide). This means that cyclists riding in lanes so marked are not subject to the 21202 edict, " ride as close as practicable to the right", because the "substandard width lane" exception applies.
So here's my question... a day before sharrows are painted or a BMUFL signs is posted, the lane about to be so designated is the same width. I mean, if it's "substandard width" on Wednesday when it got sharrows, then it must have been a "substandard width lane" on Tuesday before it got sharrowed; paint and signs do not change the width, of course. So these designations simply make it easier to identify such lanes. But surely there other lanes (like these were before they are designated) which are not so designated but are never-the-less "substandard width", and cyclists riding in those lanes are also not subject to the 21202 "keep right" edict?
The graphic claims that almost no roads have lanes that are wide enough (14 feet) to safely share side-by-side. If that's true, and as far as I can tell it is, why do we even have 21202 (and similar laws in other states) on the books? Is it just to intimate cyclists to get out of the way of cars?
Traffic Lane Violations: Lane Sharing by Bicycles in California
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire