Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Advocacy & Safety (http://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/)
-   -   Slower traffic must 'turn out to the right' (http://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/917343-slower-traffic-must-turn-out-right.html)

asmac 10-10-13 04:39 PM

Slower traffic must 'turn out to the right'
 
I came across this from Ontario's Highway Traffic Act. Does 148(6) suggest that I can't take the lane if it's impeding faster traffic? It's news to me. Is this a common provision in other jurisdictions? Can anyone explain what 'turn out to the right' actually means?

Rules for Passing
According to the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, vehicles travelling on Ontario's roadways must pass each other safely. Faster vehicles must yield to slower moving vehicles on the road. All vehicles must appropriately position themselves for safe passing.

Section 148(6), states "Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision."

Section 148(8), states "No person in charge of a vehicle shall pass or attempt to pass another vehicle going in the same direction on a highway unless the roadway, (a) in front of and to the left of the vehicle to be passed is safely free from approaching traffic; and (b) to the left of the vehicle passing or attempting to pass is safely free from overtaking traffic."

DX-MAN 10-10-13 07:30 PM

NAL, but I interpret that to mean "move right" if you are taking the lane; what does the OHTA say about the rights of bikes on the road?

njkayaker 10-10-13 08:06 PM

What dx-man said. The key to the meaning is the "turn out to the left" phrase: it has to be the same thing except being left. (In the US, "turning out" means pulling-off out of the travel lane.)

Chris516 10-10-13 09:36 PM

The 'turn out' language in the law, is weird.

njkayaker 10-10-13 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris516 (Post 16151129)
The 'turn out' language in the law, is weird.

Welcome to Canada!

B. Carfree 10-10-13 11:11 PM

I suspect this is one of those laws that originated before roads were striped with lanes. Keeping right/turning out right meant to move your vehicle out of the center of the roadway, not out of the right lane. I don't think it precludes taking the lane or requires gutter-hugging to invite a close pass, but I'm neither a lawyer nor Canadian, so I don't really have any bacon on the line here.

FBinNY 10-10-13 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B. Carfree (Post 16151298)
I suspect this is one of those laws that originated before roads were striped with lanes. Keeping right/turning out right meant to move your vehicle out of the center of the roadway, not out of the right lane. I don't think it precludes taking the lane or requires gutter-hugging to invite a close pass, but I'm neither a lawyer nor Canadian, so I don't really have any bacon on the line here.

I agree with this view. It's basic rules of the road - pass to the left, move right to be passed (right, but not off the road).

gerald_g 10-10-13 11:43 PM

Anyone been "overtaken by an equestrian travelling at a greater speed" lately?

Looigi 10-11-13 07:29 AM

They way I understand it and the way the concept is applied in rural areas of the US is if you're impeding traffic, pull over and the let them pass when the opportunity presents itself. On long climbing roads there are often lanes that allow pulling over and slowing if necessary to let the traffic accumulated behind to pass. On a bike, I take the lane as I deem appropriate, and then allow those behind to pass when a reasonable (as judged by me) opportunity presents itself. The issue, of course, is what others and the law might deem appropriate, but these disagreements very rarely escalate past a bit of horn honking, name calling, or finger "pointing".

joejack951 10-11-13 08:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FBinNY (Post 16151309)
I agree with this view. It's basic rules of the road - pass to the left, move right to be passed (right, but not off the road).

The law in DE and PA states that you should "turn out" to the right and off the road. What good does moving right in the lane if it still doesn't allow for safe passing? As slow traffic if moving right meant safe passing, you probably should have been there all along.

DE law: 4125. Turning off roadway by slow-moving vehicle. On a 2-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow-moving vehicle, behind which 5 or more vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following to proceed. As used in this section, a slow-moving vehicle is one which is proceeding at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place.

Link: http://delcode.delaware.gov/title21/...03/index.shtml

Note that in Delaware "roadway" does not include the shoulder or berm which is what I interpret to be a safe area for turnout. I'll occasionally use a driveway or turn off onto another road depending on how much traffic I'm delaying.

howsteepisit 10-11-13 11:15 AM

At least in 1990, in California required that you pull over and let faster traffic pass on mountain roads when 6 or 7 cars were backed up behind. I partially recall this because I missed this question on my drivers license exam. As I have not lived in CA for 11 years now, I have no need to recall the exact number.

jputnam 10-11-13 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerald_g (Post 16151327)
Anyone been "overtaken by an equestrian travelling at a greater speed" lately?

A couple of months ago, grinding up a hill... but I was on the pavement, and he was galloping up the unpaved shoulder, so he passed to my right while I moved left to leave more room.

njkayaker 10-11-13 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by howsteepisit (Post 16152548)
At least in 1990, in California required that you pull over and let faster traffic pass on mountain roads when 6 or 7 cars were backed up behind. I partially recall this because I missed this question on my drivers license exam. As I have not lived in CA for 11 years now, I have no need to recall the exact number.

CA still has that law but it requires a designated place to pull-over into.

Quote:

Originally Posted by joejack951 (Post 16151928)
The law in DE and PA states that you should "turn out" to the right and off the road. What good does moving right in the lane if it still doesn't allow for safe passing? As slow traffic if moving right meant safe passing, you probably should have been there all along.

DE law: 4125. Turning off roadway by slow-moving vehicle. On a 2-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow-moving vehicle, behind which 5 or more vehicles are formed in line, shall turn off the roadway wherever sufficient area for a safe turnout exists, in order to permit the vehicles following to proceed. As used in this section, a slow-moving vehicle is one which is proceeding at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place.

Link: http://delcode.delaware.gov/title21/...03/index.shtml

Note that in Delaware "roadway" does not include the shoulder or berm which is what I interpret to be a safe area for turnout. I'll occasionally use a driveway or turn off onto another road depending on how much traffic I'm delaying.

The Canadian law doesn't have this phrase.

I suspect the Canadian law corresponds to this CA law (most states have a similar law).

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21753.htm

Quote:

21753. Except when passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall safely move to the right-hand side of the highway in favor of the overtaking vehicle after an audible signal or a momentary flash of headlights by the overtaking vehicle, and shall not increase the speed of his or her vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle. This section does not require the driver of an overtaken vehicle to drive on the shoulder of the highway in order to allow the overtaking vehicle to pass.

joejack951 10-11-13 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by njkayaker (Post 16152916)
The Canadian law doesn't have this phrase.

I suspect the Canadian law corresponds to this CA law (most states have a similar law).

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21753.htm

Yeah, I realized after I reread the Canadian law that it isn't saying to turn off the roadway. It reads much more like the law you've quoted, which ends with a statement that clarifies its intent as a law that does NOT require the "passee" to drive off the roadway.

njkayaker 10-11-13 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joejack951 (Post 16152942)
Yeah, I realized after I reread the Canadian law that it isn't saying to turn off the roadway. It reads much more like the law you've quoted, which ends with a statement that clarifies its intent as a law that does NOT require the "passee" to drive off the roadway.

Note that the overtaking vehicle is also required to "turn out" too (just like the vehicle being passed is required to do) but in the opposite direction.

Since it doesn't make any sense that the overtaking vehicle is required to leave the roadway,"turn out" can't reasonably be interpreted to mean different things for the two vehicles.

Quote:

<overtaking vehicle> shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary

howsteepisit 10-11-13 03:16 PM

Note that new CA law (1997) says a drivers should get to the right lane to get out of the way if the guy behind flashes his lights at you - How obnoxious is that? Says that if you are driving the speed limit in the left lane and some scofflaw speeds up behind you and flashes his lights you are to get out of his way. Although, I do not see this happening on my bike, but I suppose it could as much as many other things called out in A&S.

spivonious 10-11-13 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by howsteepisit (Post 16153334)
Note that new CA law (1997) says a drivers should get to the right lane to get out of the way if the guy behind flashes his lights at you - How obnoxious is that? Says that if you are driving the speed limit in the left lane and some scofflaw speeds up behind you and flashes his lights you are to get out of his way. Although, I do not see this happening on my bike, but I suppose it could as much as many other things called out in A&S.

That matches the law in most of Europe (AFAIK). I find it's best to get out of the way of speeders; who knows what other laws they want to break?

njkayaker 10-11-13 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by howsteepisit (Post 16153334)
Note that new CA law (1997) says a drivers should get to the right lane to get out of the way if the guy behind flashes his lights at you - How obnoxious is that? Says that if you are driving the speed limit in the left lane and some scofflaw speeds up behind you and flashes his lights you are to get out of his way. Although, I do not see this happening on my bike, but I suppose it could as much as many other things called out in A&S.

Yes, you legally have to move over even if the other person is speeding. The fact that another person is breaking the law doesn't mean you can also break the law. Anyway, your speedometer likely reads high (it's common), which means you might think somebody is speeding when they aren't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by spivonious (Post 16153370)
That matches the law in most of Europe (AFAIK). I find it's best to get out of the way of speeders; who knows what other laws they want to break?

It's the case in most states in the US.

I-Like-To-Bike 10-11-13 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spivonious (Post 16153370)
That matches the law in most of Europe (AFAIK). I find it's best to get out of the way of speeders; who knows what other laws they want to break?

I believe flashing headlights as a signal to "Get outta da way dumkopf!" was made illegal in Germany about ten years; last time I was driving in Germany the fast boys in the left lane would leave their left turn indicator on as a signal to "Get outta da way dumkopf!"

Chris516 10-11-13 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerald_g (Post 16151327)
Anyone been "overtaken by an equestrian travelling at a greater speed" lately?

That had me laughing. I can see a horse galloping at 40mph(top speed), when off the road. But not on the road.

B. Carfree 10-11-13 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spivonious (Post 16153370)
That matches the law in most of Europe (AFAIK). I find it's best to get out of the way of speeders; who knows what other laws they want to break?

I take the Pollyanna approach and assume they are speeding to the hospital with a medical emergency. Even if I'm wrong at that moment, drivers like that will eventually speed to the hospital, it's just likely to be in an ambulance.

Rollfast 10-13-13 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asmac (Post 16150406)
I came across this from Ontario's Highway Traffic Act. Does 148(6) suggest that I can't take the lane if it's impeding faster traffic? It's news to me. Is this a common provision in other jurisdictions? Can anyone explain what 'turn out to the right' actually means?

Rules for Passing
According to the Ontario Highway Traffic Act, vehicles travelling on Ontario's roadways must pass each other safely. Faster vehicles must yield to slower moving vehicles on the road. All vehicles must appropriately position themselves for safe passing.

Section 148(6), states "Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision."

Section 148(8), states "No person in charge of a vehicle shall pass or attempt to pass another vehicle going in the same direction on a highway unless the roadway, (a) in front of and to the left of the vehicle to be passed is safely free from approaching traffic; and (b) to the left of the vehicle passing or attempting to pass is safely free from overtaking traffic."

I believe this has to mainly do with roads with multiple lanes in one direction. In my area there are lanes incorporated into some stretches of rural highways with single lanes to turn out and allow swifter traffic to move ahead. Farm vehicles and other slow moving vehicles can turn out and drivers who prefer to go slower can also.

This isn't a bicycle ordinance, it's a general traffic regulation not specificly aimed at bike lanes.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:16 AM.