Lane Position Choices
As a cyclist, you are driving a narrow vehicle. As such, when riding on roads, you have a choice about where to position yourself. Car drivers don't have to think about this; they just aim their vehicle between the lines. But you do.
Three weeks ago, we presented Four Reasons to Avoid the Edge of the Road:
Adequately wide (at least 5 feet) paved shoulders on rural roads provide a comfortable place for us slower travelers to ride without worrying overmuch about the faster motorists behind us. Paved shoulders in urban areas can be more problematic, even if they are wide enough. Frequent intersections and driveways on urban streets provide many more potential conflict points than rural roads. Larger car-centric suburban roads, with their traffic volume and many commercial driveways, can be the worst for this, even when they have adequately wide shoulders, which many don't.
A drawback to shoulder riding is that you are not relevant to the motorists in the travel lane. On rural roads, this is generally not a problem, although still there are documented cases of "motorist drift" into a shoulder by distracted drivers. But as a cyclist in urban and suburban environments, you want to be where motorists are already looking for other traffic, not off to the side where you are subject to being not seen or noticed at intersections. (Further reading: Inattentional blindness)
An urban or suburban paved shoulder may also include drain grates and other fall hazards. Where there is a curb, debris piles up because the curb keeps it from being swept off the road.
In Maine, cyclists are legally allowed to ride in a paved shoulder, but they are not required to (paragraph 2-A). I am not familiar with the law in other states.
So the takeaway on shoulders is that they may or may not be appropriate, depending on width, condition, and potential conflicts. It's your choice.
Because of such misunderstanding and harassment, most cyclists feel they must stick to the edge all the time. Our "Four Reasons to Avoid the Edge" post summarized general reasons that that's not always appropriate. One of them, in the words of our Maine state statute, was:
How narrow is too narrow? Check out this graphic from CyclingSavvy.org:
Here's the basic math:
So what do you if the lane is too narrow? Legally, you are entitled to ride right in the middle of it, even all the time, as long as it is that narrow. Doing otherwise in a tight situation can lead to close passing, or even a sideswipe crash. This graphic from the previous post is worth posting again:
In practice, being in the middle all the time may not be necessary or even desirable. On a two lane road (meaning one lane in each direction), most motorists are very willing to move partially or even completely out of the lane to make a safe pass, if there is no oncoming traffic. So in that case, riding in the right portion of the lane, though not legally required, encourages the following motorist to go ahead and pass, while it is currently safe. On the other hand, if there is oncoming traffic and you judge it unsafe to be passed, riding in the middle or even in the left portion of the lane is good "passive" discouragement, to ensure the motorist waits behind you. If there is any question, you can give a little "stay back" hand signal, left arm out diagonally, palm back. If they still don't get it, waving the arm back and forth is extremely effective in letting all but the most stubborn motorist know that they should not pass! Most drivers will immediately drop back upon seeing a cyclist do this. When it becomes safe to pass again, you should move back to the right and probably give a friendly wave or head nod to confirm that it's okay to be passed now, as well as thank them for their patience. In fact, the more strongly you've told them to stay back, the more imperative it is to intentionally "release" them afterwards, as they will now likely be waiting from another sign from you to proceed. It's like magic!
Pro-tip: In most states, it's legal either implicitly or explicitly for a motorist to cross a double yellow line to pass a bicyclist (Maine statute, paragraph 1-A).
On large suburban roads of more than one lane in each direction, CyclingSavvy does actually encourage riding in the middle of the lane at all times. That's because it's harder for both you and a following motorist to confirm that it's safe for the motorist to move into the adjacent lane, because you both have to look behind you. In fact, you have to look behind the car behind you, in the next lane over! That's just not reliable. The "control and release" we teach on two-lane roads just isn't practical on these larger roads, so we recommend the simpler and clearer option of riding in the middle all the time. The motorist behind you is capable enough to change lanes to pass just as if they were passing another slow moving vehicle like a street sweeper or stopped transit bus. And they don't have to worry about oncoming traffic to do it.
The fear of being hit from behind is the starting point for most peoples' thoughts about bike safety. So staying to the side does sound like a reasonable sounding approach for how to avoid that fate. Hopefully this and the previous lane position post have demonstrated why that approach is too simplistic.
But, people may ask, what about the speed differential? That is dangerous, right? What if I'm on a twisty, hilly country road, and I go around a curve or crest a hill, and there's a bicycle right in front of me, and I can't stop in time?
On a relatively flat and straight stretch of road, a bicyclist in front you will be visible long before you need to do anything about it. Sight distance is typically several times longer than reaction distance. This gives you plenty of time to react and either brake or move over to pass, as appropriate. Furthermore, anyone seeing a bicyclist knows immediately that there is likely to be a speed differential, so no time is wasted trying to figure that out, as it might be if it was just another car going slowly.
Bicyclists, you can help by riding in a centered lane position (more visible), wearing bright colors, and using lights. (Lights are legally required at night, highly recommended in daytime low light conditions like rain, fog, or dusk, and can be helpful even in broad daylight.)
What about that winding rural road? In my experience, what happens here is that long before the cyclist rides into a blind spot like a curve or over a hill, they have been approaching that blind spot for a while. Either a motorist has been behind them long enough to have seen them before they went into it, or the motorist is far enough back that they themselves don't go into it until the bicyclist is further ahead of it, providing sufficient reaction time. I admit that I don't know of any studies about this, but in my 20 years of experience, all rural blind spot situations have resolved themselves in one of these two ways.
Motorists, of course, obey the damn speed limit! It's there for a reason.
I'll end with one of my favorite official signs, from the bicycle section of the federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Much clearer than "Share the Road". Happy Riding!
Three weeks ago, we presented Four Reasons to Avoid the Edge of the Road:
- Hazards
- Intersections
- Visibility & Vantage
- Better Passing
Shoulders
Let get this one out of the way. Should you ride on paved shoulders? Definately maybe.Adequately wide (at least 5 feet) paved shoulders on rural roads provide a comfortable place for us slower travelers to ride without worrying overmuch about the faster motorists behind us. Paved shoulders in urban areas can be more problematic, even if they are wide enough. Frequent intersections and driveways on urban streets provide many more potential conflict points than rural roads. Larger car-centric suburban roads, with their traffic volume and many commercial driveways, can be the worst for this, even when they have adequately wide shoulders, which many don't.
A drawback to shoulder riding is that you are not relevant to the motorists in the travel lane. On rural roads, this is generally not a problem, although still there are documented cases of "motorist drift" into a shoulder by distracted drivers. But as a cyclist in urban and suburban environments, you want to be where motorists are already looking for other traffic, not off to the side where you are subject to being not seen or noticed at intersections. (Further reading: Inattentional blindness)
An urban or suburban paved shoulder may also include drain grates and other fall hazards. Where there is a curb, debris piles up because the curb keeps it from being swept off the road.
In Maine, cyclists are legally allowed to ride in a paved shoulder, but they are not required to (paragraph 2-A). I am not familiar with the law in other states.
So the takeaway on shoulders is that they may or may not be appropriate, depending on width, condition, and potential conflicts. It's your choice.
Travel Lanes
The old "Share the Road" sign, although well-intentioned, has generally been more confusing than helpful in regards to actually sharing the road. Is the sign directed at motorists, or cyclists? Exactly how is the road to be shared? Does it mean cyclists are entitled to whatever space they need, and motorists must only pass when safe (the intended meaning)? Or does it mean cyclists are supposed to always squeeze themselves at the edge to make sure cars can get by? Many of us have had motorists take the latter interpretation as a basis for yelling at us about our presence in "their lane".Because of such misunderstanding and harassment, most cyclists feel they must stick to the edge all the time. Our "Four Reasons to Avoid the Edge" post summarized general reasons that that's not always appropriate. One of them, in the words of our Maine state statute, was:
When necessary to avoid hazardous conditions, including, but not limited to ... a lane of substandard width that makes it unsafe to continue along the right portion of the way. For purposes of this paragraph, "lane of substandard width" means a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle or roller skier and a vehicle to travel safely side by side in the lane.So the law is clear that we are not required to stay to the right in a "substandard" width lane, which it defines as a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to fit side by side between the lines.
How narrow is too narrow? Check out this graphic from CyclingSavvy.org:
 |
| (C) CyclingSavvy.org |
Here's the basic math:
- Bicyclist operating space: 4 feet
- Minimum legal passing clearance: 3 feet
- Average width of a passenger car: 7 feet (trucks and buses are bigger!)
So what do you if the lane is too narrow? Legally, you are entitled to ride right in the middle of it, even all the time, as long as it is that narrow. Doing otherwise in a tight situation can lead to close passing, or even a sideswipe crash. This graphic from the previous post is worth posting again:
Pro-tip: In most states, it's legal either implicitly or explicitly for a motorist to cross a double yellow line to pass a bicyclist (Maine statute, paragraph 1-A).
On large suburban roads of more than one lane in each direction, CyclingSavvy does actually encourage riding in the middle of the lane at all times. That's because it's harder for both you and a following motorist to confirm that it's safe for the motorist to move into the adjacent lane, because you both have to look behind you. In fact, you have to look behind the car behind you, in the next lane over! That's just not reliable. The "control and release" we teach on two-lane roads just isn't practical on these larger roads, so we recommend the simpler and clearer option of riding in the middle all the time. The motorist behind you is capable enough to change lanes to pass just as if they were passing another slow moving vehicle like a street sweeper or stopped transit bus. And they don't have to worry about oncoming traffic to do it.
Bike Lanes
This can be a larger topic all by itself, but for purposes of this post, you can simply think of bike lanes as paved shoulders that have a bike icon in them. (And if they don't, they're not a bike lane, just a paved shoulder.) They have all the same drawbacks, like lack of visibility and relevance. You must keep this in mind if you are using an urban or suburban bike lane! Intersections are especially problematic, just as they are with shoulders. Bike lanes that are separated from the travel lane by barriers or parked cars are even more so. Like paved shoulders, sometimes they are an okay choice, sometimes not. As we say in CyclingSavvy, "Don't let the paint think for you!" The paint doesn't know your situation.No room for bikes?
This statement is often made by writers of letters to the editor and other opinionated persons, concerning roads whose lanes are too narrow for bikes and cars to share side by side in the same lane. The bias is unfortunately sometimes reinforced by advocates of bicycle infrastructure who want to encourage construction of bicycle lanes as a way to "give bicyclists a place on the road". Such statements ignore the fact that bicycles already have a legal place on the road. But because such statements from both groups are often founded on reasonable safety fears, I wanted to give a few words to address that concern.The fear of being hit from behind is the starting point for most peoples' thoughts about bike safety. So staying to the side does sound like a reasonable sounding approach for how to avoid that fate. Hopefully this and the previous lane position post have demonstrated why that approach is too simplistic.
But, people may ask, what about the speed differential? That is dangerous, right? What if I'm on a twisty, hilly country road, and I go around a curve or crest a hill, and there's a bicycle right in front of me, and I can't stop in time?
On a relatively flat and straight stretch of road, a bicyclist in front you will be visible long before you need to do anything about it. Sight distance is typically several times longer than reaction distance. This gives you plenty of time to react and either brake or move over to pass, as appropriate. Furthermore, anyone seeing a bicyclist knows immediately that there is likely to be a speed differential, so no time is wasted trying to figure that out, as it might be if it was just another car going slowly.
Bicyclists, you can help by riding in a centered lane position (more visible), wearing bright colors, and using lights. (Lights are legally required at night, highly recommended in daytime low light conditions like rain, fog, or dusk, and can be helpful even in broad daylight.)
What about that winding rural road? In my experience, what happens here is that long before the cyclist rides into a blind spot like a curve or over a hill, they have been approaching that blind spot for a while. Either a motorist has been behind them long enough to have seen them before they went into it, or the motorist is far enough back that they themselves don't go into it until the bicyclist is further ahead of it, providing sufficient reaction time. I admit that I don't know of any studies about this, but in my 20 years of experience, all rural blind spot situations have resolved themselves in one of these two ways.
Motorists, of course, obey the damn speed limit! It's there for a reason.
I'll end with one of my favorite official signs, from the bicycle section of the federal Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Much clearer than "Share the Road". Happy Riding!
 |
| MUTCD Sign R4-11 |
Comments
Post a Comment