You're riding along in a wide outside lane. Maybe it has a bike lane stripe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You're riding a few feet from the right edge of the road. Faster same direction traffic is light, but you are passed occasionally.

Up ahead, the outside lane narrows. Maybe it's due to construction. Maybe it's due to a left turn lane being added to the road. Maybe you're transitioning from a place where there is no onstreet parallel parking to where there is. Maybe the road simply narrows. It doesn't really matter. The point is, the outside lane (including BL if one is present) goes from being "wide enough to be safely shared side-by-side" to "too narrow to be safely shared". If there is a bike lane stripe, it disappears.

If you think about this general situation, and some of your regular routes, I suspect you will recognize that this happens fairly often. I bring it up because I rarely see cyclists do the "right thing" in these fairly common situations. What they seem to think and feel is that as long as they maintain their line of travel relative to the right edge of road, they continue to have the right-of-way to proceed. What they don't seem to recognize is that they are merging left relative to the left edge of the outside lane. Whether they are simply maintaining their path or merging is crucial to determining right-of-way relative to traffic that is in the process of passing them.

Forgetting bikes for a second, consider a road with multiple lanes in the given direction where the right lane ends. Say there is a car in the rightmost (outside) lane, and another beside and just behind him in the adjacent lane to the left. As they approach the point where the right lane ends and merges with the adjacent lane, who has the right-of-way? Who is required to yield to whom?

In both scenarios the person to the right should yield to the driver adjacent on the left who is in the process of overtaking. You can't just cut in front of him. You need to wait to let him pass before you move into his path, or you need to signal and negotiate for right of way to merge left into his path. But I almost never see cyclists even look back in these situations, much less yield and/or negotiate for right of way.

Can you think of any situations like this on your regular routes? How do you handle them?

Pretty much every single place from massilon to cleveland where ive road it is exactly the reverse Near the major intersections the lanes widen to allow for more lanes and the right turn lane (outside lane) is much wider than the strait only and left turn lane. I am sure you have seen the this vehicle makes wide right turns on the back of every city bus and semi. Well thats why the out side right turn lanes are wider.

Pretty much every single place from massilon to cleveland where ive road it is exactly the reverse Near the major intersections the lanes widen to allow for more lanes and the right turn lane (outside lane) is much wider than the strait only and left turn lane. I am sure you have seen the this vehicle makes wide right turns on the back of every city bus and semi. Well thats why the out side right turn lanes are wider.
Indeed, there are also many places where the outside lane widens, especially at approaches to major intersections. Obviously, that's not what I'm talking about.

On your next ride, look for places where the outside lane narrows, any place where you need to move left relative to the left edge of the outside lane, and try to pay attention to how you handle it.

I can think of serveral places on my commute that do just that. If I can move over before the lane I am in goes away, I do. Sometimes I have had to stop and handle it as a right turn when traffic was clear. But then I possessed the lane.

FWIW On another group I brought up the subject how it is preferable with roads that taper that they taper in from the left rather then the right.

I can think of serveral places on my commute that do just that. If I can move over before the lane I am in goes away, I do. Sometimes I have had to stop and handle it as a right turn when traffic was clear. But then I possessed the lane.
I'm not talking about situations where the outside lane disappears. I'm talking about the analogous situation: where the outside lane narrows.
It's analogous because prior to the narrowing, when the lane is shared, it is being treated as if there are two lanes. Later, when the lane is too narrow to be shared, it's not. So it's like the "virtual lane" you're in disappears. My point is few cyclists seem to treat it like that. They behave as if there virtual lane continues along the right edge of even the outside lane when it is narrow.

When there is a bike lane, and it ends, the transition is a bit more obvious. But even then cyclists seem to just plow ahead without looking back or giving merging a thought.

The shorter of my commute routes has 4 areas like that on the way in and 6 on the way home (6.7 miles one way) where the pavement width decreases due to a shoulder disappearing or a wide outside lane becoming narrow. I handle these by riding centerish to begin with so that I don't have to deal with last second merges. Depending on my speed, some of the wide areas are too short to even use so I ignore them. When I do use them, I negotiate back into lane through lookbacks and hand signals when necessary. The other commuter who I see often does look back and negotiate the merges as well although he tends to stay to the right any time there is room. The other cyclists I have encountered in these areas hold a steady line a few feet from the road edge.

My longer commute (due to construction) has one area where the right lane ends on the way in. I'm almost always making that right turn onto that road with only a few other vehicles and the first light we encounter (just before the lane ends) is usually red so I ride in the middle lane and keep up with traffic. There is a shoulder for most of the rest of the ride but there are enough intersections that I generally don't use it. When I do, I do have to negotiate back into traffic before the next intersection or right turn lane appears in which case I lookback and use hand signals when necessary to negotiate. Every other cyclist I encounter on this road just stays in the shoulder/right turn lanes to go straight.

In such situations as you describe, HH, and there are many that I encounter, I will look in my mirror to see if anyone is coming and if they are and the way ahead poses problems if they try to pass me, then I'll move out to the center to block people from passing me. If for some reason I cannot do this (people are right on my tail for instance), then I shrink a little closer to the edge and hope for the best.

You're riding along in a wide outside lane. Maybe it has a bike lane stripe, maybe not. It doesn't matter. You're riding a few feet from the right edge of the road. Faster same direction traffic is light, but you are passed occasionally.

Up ahead, the outside lane narrows. Maybe it's due to construction. Maybe it's due to a left turn lane being added to the road. Maybe you're transitioning from a place where there is no onstreet parallel parking to where there is. Maybe the road simply narrows. It doesn't really matter. The point is, the outside lane (including BL if one is present) goes from being "wide enough to be safely shared side-by-side" to "too narrow to be safely shared". If there is a bike lane stripe, it disappears.

If you think about this general situation, and some of your regular routes, I suspect you will recognize that this happens fairly often. I bring it up because I rarely see cyclists do the "right thing" in these fairly common situations. What they seem to think and feel is that as long as they maintain their line of travel relative to the right edge of road, they continue to have the right-of-way to proceed. What they don't seem to recognize is that they are merging left relative to the left edge of the outside lane. Whether they are simply maintaining their path or merging is crucial to determining right-of-way relative to traffic that is in the process of passing them.

Forgetting bikes for a second, consider a road with multiple lanes in the given direction where the right lane ends. Say there is a car in the rightmost (outside) lane, and another beside and just behind him in the adjacent lane to the left. As they approach the point where the right lane ends and merges with the adjacent lane, who has the right-of-way? Who is required to yield to whom?

In both scenarios the person to the right should yield to the driver adjacent on the left who is in the process of overtaking. You can't just cut in front of him. You need to wait to let him pass before you move into his path, or you need to signal and negotiate for right of way to merge left into his path. But I almost never see cyclists even look back in these situations, much less yield and/or negotiate for right of way.

Can you think of any situations like this on your regular routes? How do you handle them?


The difference between a road with a BL and the same situation being presented to motorists, is that in the case of the nice wide car lane (for sake of simplicity... please) there is a nice sign erected some distance before that says "lane ends, merge left." That does not occur for BL... so there is no notice to either the cyclist, nor the motorist in the adjacent lane that some negotiation may need to take place. (this is exactly what happens on Miramar road east bound... )

As far as ROW... well, the motorist in the ending lane should signal and move over when there is space to do so... They should anticipate their needs, plan ahead, signal and merge. However, what often happens is the guy in the ending lane "guns it" and tries to cut off the driver in the next lane left... waiting until the last second to make this move.

The difference between a road with a BL and the same situation being presented to motorists, is that in the case of the nice wide car lane (for sake of simplicity... please) there is a nice sign erected some distance before that says "lane ends, merge left." That does not occur for BL... so there is no notice to either the cyclist, nor the motorist in the adjacent lane that some negotiation may need to take place. (this is exactly what happens on Miramar road east bound... )

As far as ROW... well, the motorist in the ending lane should signal and move over when there is space to do so... They should anticipate their needs, plan ahead, signal and merge. However, what often happens is the guy in the ending lane "guns it" and tries to cut off the driver in the next lane left... waiting until the last second to make this move.

How would you like to see this? (click on it to see larger image)

51335

The difference between a road with a BL and the same situation being presented to motorists, is that in the case of the nice wide car lane (for sake of simplicity... please) there is a nice sign erected some distance before that says "lane ends, merge left." That does not occur for BL... so there is no notice to either the cyclist, nor the motorist in the adjacent lane that some negotiation may need to take place. (this is exactly what happens on Miramar road east bound... )

Funny you mention that because the one plus that I have found with bike lanes near me is that some (the ones on the arterials heading towards Philly from my house) are signed before they end letting you know that you need to merge left (a common occurence over the small bridges). The signs are tiny and probably only readable at cyclist speed but they are better than nothing. Obviously, you could remove the stripe and just post "lane narrows" and I'd be even happier.

How would you like to see this? (click on it to see larger image)

51335

Perfect... honestly. Of course a bit larger so everyone can know why the heck I am moving left... that would be quite nice.

As it is now, it only says "Bike lane ends" just as the line ends... along with "Bike Route Begins" (which is really a misnomer as the Bike Route has occured the whole way the BL existed... )

Funny you mention that because the one plus that I have found with bike lanes near me is that some (the ones on the arterials heading towards Philly from my house) are signed before they end letting you know that you need to merge left (a common occurence over the small bridges). The signs are tiny and probably only readable at cyclist speed but they are better than nothing. Obviously, you could remove the stripe and just post "lane narrows" and I'd be even happier.

The only problem with just "lane narrows" is that the 50MPH motorists don't consider that perhaps it narrows for cyclists too. (not that they "consider" us much at all anyway... )

Perfect... honestly. Of course a bit larger so everyone can know why the heck I am moving left... that would be quite nice.

As it is now, it only says "Bike lane ends" just as the line ends... along with "Bike Route Begins" (which is really a misnomer as the Bike Route has occured the whole way the BL existed... )
That's not true.

There are distinct classes of bikeways in CA, and a "bike lane" (class 2) is one class of a bikeway while a "bike route" (class 3) is another. If it is a class 2 then it is not a class 3, by definition.

The only problem with just "lane narrows" is that the 50MPH motorists don't consider that perhaps it narrows for cyclists too. (not that they "consider" us much at all anyway... )

But it tells me, the cyclist, all I need to know. It can be tough to judge a lane width at night in the rain or even on a really bright sunny day at certain speeds.

The only problem with just "lane narrows" is that the 50MPH motorists don't consider that perhaps it narrows for cyclists too. (not that they "consider" us much at all anyway... )
That doesn't matter, since the merger (the cyclist) has to yield, which is the main point of this thread.

If the driver who has the right of way happens to decide to yield to the cyclist, so the cyclist can merge left into the narrowing lane in front of him, that's nice, but it's not his duty or obligation.

The sign is a good one, but what'll happen in the real world is everybody in a car will do whatever it takes not to get stuck behind the bike merging left.

Nothing, absolutely NOTHING, will make motorists into patient, polite sharers of the road except getting them on their bikes instead.

That doesn't matter, since the merger (the cyclist) has to yield, which is the main point of this thread.

If the driver who has the right of way happens to decide to yield to the cyclist, so the cyclist can merge left into the narrowing lane in front of him, that's nice, but it's not his duty or obligation.

If I am well in front of a motorist, and there is plenty of room... I will signal and take the lane. That he has to slow down at some point should not be an issue. In a case like that I don't have to yield and there should be no doubt in the motorists mind that I am in the right place. (you would do the same thing when making a left turn with approaching traffic in a lane to your left, )

I'm controlling the lane if necessary BEFORE the narrowing begins.

what if its a line of cars spooling up to turn left in front of you that is causing the 'virtual' narrowing?

If I am well in front of a motorist, and there is plenty of room... I will signal and take the lane. That he has to slow down at some point should not be an issue. In a case like that I don't have to yield and there should be no doubt in the motorists mind that I am in the right place. (you would do the same thing when making a left turn with approaching traffic in a lane to your left, )
Well, duh. If you can establish your right of way within the lane well before he has reached, of course he has to slow down. But this is no different from riding in any narrow lane. That can be handled by posting "share the road" signs at the narrowing like are sometimes posted on any road with a narrow lane (for which I've found no utility, but whatever). The focus here is on the dynamics of transitioning from wide to narrow, and the cyclist's obligation to yield (assuming he has been riding off to the side) during the transition to anyone who is already in the process of passing him, or about to pass him.

The best way to handle it is what JJ essentially described above. Establish early the right-of-way you'll need once the road narrows, before it narrows. Don't wait until you're forced to merge into the path of adjacent traffic.

I'm controlling the lane if necessary BEFORE the narrowing begins.

what if its a line of cars spooling up to turn left in front of you that is causing the 'virtual' narrowing?
2 points for the first sentence.

I can't picture the scenario you're describing in the second sentence, but I think the answer is the same. Regardless of the cause of the narrowing, you should take control early and not wait until you're forced to merge left.

Well, duh. If you can establish your right of way within the lane well before he has reached, of course he has to slow down. But this is no different from riding in any narrow lane. That can be handled by posting "share the road" signs at the narrowing like are sometimes posted on any road with a narrow lane (for which I've found no utility, but whatever). The focus here is on the dynamics of transitioning from wide to narrow, and the cyclist's obligation to yield (assuming he has been riding off to the side) during the transition to anyone who is already in the process of passing him, or about to pass him.

The best way to handle it is what JJ essentially described above. Establish early the right-of-way you'll need once the road narrows, before it narrows. Don't wait until you're forced to merge into the path of adjacent traffic.

This is where I think the signs help... by establishing the fact that the road narrows... nothing worse than to be riding along and suddenly find that the road got narrower and you couldn't tell due to traffic conditions... motorists get a fair warning... cyclists do not.

A road narrowing sign tells you that change is up ahead. It gives you time to establish that ROW.

I know the road narrows on Miramar... and dammit too often I forget exactly where. Why do I have to memorize the roads, and drivers of other vehicles don't?

can't picture cars that are travelling towards you lineing up to turn left in front of you? causing a virtual 'narrowing' of the road ahead?

can't picture cars turning left in front of you causing a narrowing of the road ahead? interesting.......

can't picture cars that are travelling towards you lineing up to turn left in front of you? causing a virtual 'narrowing' of the road ahead?

can't picture cars turning left in front of you causing a narrowing of the road ahead? interesting.......
Oh, you're talking about left-turners in oncoming traffic! I did not get that at all. I still don't see it though. Why would oncoming traffic be on my half of the road?

YOUR half?

interesting black and white analysis of very fluid and often chaotic traffic dynamics.

do I really need to spell out how oncoming, turning traffic can 'narrow' the roadway?

do I really need to spell out how oncoming, turning traffic can 'narrow' the roadway?
Yes. Sorry, I'm being dense, apparently.

YOUR half?

interesting black and white analysis of very fluid and often chaotic traffic dynamics.
Most roads have a stripe down the center clearly demarcating sections for each direction of travel, usually but not always divided half and half.

Yes. Sorry, I'm being dense, apparently.

Yes, I'd say. (you know, serge, sometimes it seems like you hardly bicycle.....) When does oncoming traffic effectively narrow the roadway?

unstriped neighborhood streets. a car waiting to turn left into a driveway.

a center turn lane, normally open and clear for cars to merge partially in to pass wide around you, when filled with cars, 'constricts' the smooth passing motion of cars overtaking you, effectively 'narrowing' the lane.

cars waiting to turn,crossing the faded center line with just a bicyclist (you) up ahead, to allow cars behind to pass them on their right more smoothly.

Cars poking into the lane from a turn lane or in the middle of the road, waiting to travel in your direction, in center lane having just crossed from a driveway or store.

any gravel road with a church driveway or industrial park (landfill, etc) with turning traffic as seen often on the outskirts of more rural communities.


the effect of cars in the opposite lane, when spooling up to turn, effectively narrow your lane by limiting the ability of cars to partially merge into opposite lane and pass you in a marginally wide lane.

these are all examples of oncoming and turning traffic effectively narrowing the lane.


is that enough examples? or are you still going to play 'dense'? it honestly sounds more like traffic naivete to me. which I can understand, coming from you. you obviously, (due your naivete?) didn't consider moving vehicles having the potential to narrow your travel lane.

oh, and how about just cars up ahead, all sorts of traffic scenarios, waiting to turn left, travelling in the same direction.. they ALSO narrow the lane.....


are you dense? apparantly so.

oh, and in your first post, you are confusing driving a car and merging with operating a bicycle.

you start off discussing bicycling, then you go on to discuss driving. you confuse driving with bicycling once again. you mention later in this thread that you DIDN'T mean when the right lane ends, but in comparing bicycling to driving in the first post, you use that analogy of the right lane ending.

serge, I'm disappointed in your confusing analogies and equating very dissimilar traffic dynamics.

Yes, I'd say. (you know, serge, sometimes it seems like you hardly bicycle.....) When does oncoming traffic effectively narrow the roadway?

unstriped neighborhood streets. a car waiting to turn left into a driveway.
This thread is about when the outside LANE narrows. An outside lane implies striping.

a center turn lane, normally open and clear for cars to merge partially in to pass wide around you, when filled with cars, 'constricts' the smooth passing motion of cars overtaking you, effectively 'narrowing' the lane.
Whether the center turn lane is occupied or not does affect the width of the adjacent lane, which is either wide enough to be shared side-by-side by bike and vehicle, both fully within the lane, or not.

cars waiting to turn,crossing the faded center line with just a bicyclist (you) up ahead, to allow cars behind to pass them on their right more smoothly.

Cars poking into the lane from a turn lane or in the middle of the road, waiting to travel in your direction, in center lane having just crossed from a driveway or store.
I can't recall ever seeing that happen, but I'll take your word for it, and can imagine it. Yeah, in that case, if the lane is normally wide, but becomes narrow because of the encroaching oncoming left-turners, it should be treated like a wide-to-narrow transition. In fact, if there is a bike lane, and the encroaching oncoming left turners effectively narrow the adjacent lane such that same-direction vehicles need to drive in the bike lane, then the cyclist should ignore the bike lane and move left.

By the way, if "just a bicycle (you)", and no other same-direction traffic, the implications of the wide to narrow transition are relatively inconsequential. I'd be taking the lane regardless of the lane width in any urban or suburban setting anyway, when there is no other same-direction traffic.


any gravel road with a church driveway or industrial park (landfill, etc) with turning traffic as seen often on the outskirts of more rural communities.I've never seen lanes on a gravel road. Again, this topic is about roads with marked lanes where the marked outside lane transitions from being wide to narrow.


the effect of cars in the opposite lane, when spooling up to turn, effectively narrow your lane by limiting the ability of cars to partially merge into opposite lane and pass you in a marginally wide lane.

these are all examples of oncoming and turning traffic effectively narrowing the lane.If passing cars need to partially merge into the opposite lane, then it's not a wide lane in the first place. This thread is not about "marginally wide" lanes, which present their own unique problems and demands on positioning. A worthy topic, no doubt, but not relevant to this thread.


is that enough examples? or are you still going to play 'dense'? it honestly sounds more like traffic naivete to me. which I can understand, coming from you. you obviously, (due your naivete?) didn't consider moving vehicles having the potential to narrow your travel lane.

oh, and how about just cars up ahead, all sorts of traffic scenarios, waiting to turn left, travelling in the same direction.. they ALSO narrow the lane.....


are you dense? apparantly so.Your ad hominem attacks are immature and take away from what you have to offer on this forum, Bek.

oh, and in your first post, you are confusing driving a car and merging with operating a bicycle.
You are conflating "confusing" with "comparing".

you start off discussing bicycling, then you go on to discuss driving.
Well, yes. I compared the situation of bicycling near the right edge while approaching a wide-lane-to-narrow-lane transition with driving a car in the outside lane while approaching an n-lane to a n-1-lane transition. It's called drawing an analogy, and you repeatedly reveal difficulty in comprehending the utility of doing so.

you confuse driving with bicycling once again.
You conflate "confuse" with "compare" once again.

you mention later in this thread that you DIDN'T mean when the right lane ends, but in comparing bicycling to driving in the first post, you use that analogy of the right lane ending.
Yes, the subject is bicycling in a wide-lane-to-narrow-lane transition situation. I did use the analogy of the right lane ending to illustrate who has the right-of-way and why.

serge, I'm disappointed in your confusing analogies and equating very dissimilar traffic dynamics.You're confusing drawing analogies between two things with equating those two things.

To draw a valid analogy between two things does not require equating those two things. That's what you don't seem to understand.
To draw a valid analogy between two things, the two things only have to be comparable in certain respects within the scope of the analogy.

You might want to read the Wikipedia article on analogy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analogy).

Indeed, there are also many places where the outside lane widens, especially at approaches to major intersections. Obviously, that's not what I'm talking about.

On your next ride, look for places where the outside lane narrows, any place where you need to move left relative to the left edge of the outside lane, and try to pay attention to how you handle it.

Thats just it there are no such places with in 20+ miles of me. In all cases where the lane (outside or other wise) does any thing at all other than staying the same width give or take a few inches it gets wider. My general way of using a WOL is i stay towards the left side (still more or less middle of lane at a stop light just a tad left of center of lane) This way when a car comes up behind me to turn right i can just scoot over a little bit to let them make their turn and not need worry about getting stuck on the right edge when i want to go strait. I also avoid any chance of having a car cross my path aka right hook.

Whether the center turn lane is occupied or not does affect the width of the adjacent lane, which is either wide enough to be shared side-by-side by bike and vehicle, both fully within the lane, or not.




Your ad hominem attacks are immature and take away from what you have to offer on this forum, Bek.

sorry, helemt head, you called yourself dense, and I agree with you.

i mention a half dozen scenarios where traffic oncoming effectively 'narrows the lane' and you still think none of that is relevant to bicycling. I disagree with your point of view. oncoming traffic DOES effectively 'narrow' the lane for bicyclists.

I'm sticking with my guns- it sounds like you're suffering from traffic naivete, head.

And stop arguing sematics, head. it really detracts from the quality of this forum when you pontificate word meanings and suggest wikipedia articles.

you're confused in your comparisions of bicycling and driving. in the original post you mention a narrowing same lane while bicycling, then attempt to draw comparisions to a lane ending while driving- not the same situation at all. a flawed 'analogy' and not similar enough to be compared, dude.

Thats just it there are no such places with in 20+ miles of me. In all cases where the lane (outside or other wise) does any thing at all other than staying the same width give or take a few inches it gets wider. My general way of using a WOL is i stay towards the left side (still more or less middle of lane at a stop light just a tad left of center of lane) This way when a car comes up behind me to turn right i can just scoot over a little bit to let them make their turn and not need worry about getting stuck on the right edge when i want to go strait. I also avoid any chance of having a car cross my path aka right hook.
You never encounter parked cars, construction activity or any other obstructions that effectively narrow the outside lane?

i think a savvy bicyclist will recognize obstructions to passing them up ahead do effectively narrow the lane-

it can be turning traffic, delivery trucks parked in the median, a median planter strip. all of these, and more, effectively 'narrow the lane' by limiting space overtaking vehicles have to pass.

how much more clear can that be?

arguing about lane stripes and nuance about lane width is secondary; a traffic obstruction ahead and to the left effectively narrows the lane.

I ride into this scenario daily. a truck is parked in the median, a planter strip is coming up. Do I maintain my same position in the lane? NO. I move left to control the lane if necessary because the lane is effectively narrowing. lines of left turning traffic also effectively narrow the lane. so do cars encroaching into the road from side streets.

capiche? to fail to recognize these commonplace riding scenarios, is, once again, an indication of head's traffic cycling naivete.

i think a savvy bicyclist will recognize obstructions to passing them up ahead do effectively narrow the lane-

it can be turning traffic, delivery trucks parked in the median, a median planter strip. all of these, and more, effectively 'narrow the lane' by limiting space overtaking vehicles have to pass.

how much more clear can that be?

arguing about lane stripes and nuance about lane width is secondary; a traffic obstruction ahead and to the left effectively narrows the lane.

I ride into this scenario daily. a truck is parked in the median, a planter strip is coming up. Do I maintain my same position in the lane? NO. I move left to control the lane if necessary because the lane is effectively narrowing. lines of left turning traffic also effectively narrow the lane. so do cars encroaching into the road from side streets.

capiche? to fail to recognize these commonplace riding scenarios, is, once again, an indication of head's traffic cycling naivete.
You're missing the whole point of this thread. There are all kinds of causes of lane narrowing. I never meant to imply that the only conditions that cause lane narrowing are the ones listed in the OP.

The point of this thread is to recognize that the leftward lateral adjustment required of a right-biased cyclist by a wide to narrow lane transition is effectively a merge, and the cyclist is obligated to yield or negotiate with any traffic to his left sharing the wide lane prior to the narrowing, including faster traffic behind but about to pass him. You can't just proceed blindly ahead assuming you have the ROW simply because you're maintaining a travel line that is a fairly constant distance relative to the right edge of the traveled way. Again, I bring this up because that is how most cyclists seem to ride: as long as they are as far right as practicable, they seem to think they have the right-of-way to proceed, period.

The myriad of reasons that can create the narrowing are beside the point.

You never encounter parked cars, construction activity or any other obstructions that effectively narrow the outside lane?

I do not consider a parking lane to be part of a travel lane. In fact here you can and will get ticketed if you try to use it as such. Parking lanes all end no less than 1/3 mile from major intersections. Example http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=1214307 The out side lanes here are a good bit wider than it looks. You can follow wooster road a long distance before you see the parking lane section. 31 /clevemass has no parking lanes (clevemass is a great road to ride on bikes bikes are simply expected to be there). You can go out 20 miles from that intersection and see nothing but the same every where.

I do not consider a parking lane to be part of a travel lane. In fact here you can and will get ticketed if you try to use it as such. Parking lanes all end no less than 1/3 mile from major intersections. Example http://www.gmap-pedometer.com/?r=1214307 The out side lanes here are a good bit wider than it looks. You can follow wooster road a long distance before you see the parking lane section. 31 /clevemass has no parking lanes (clevemass is a great road to ride on bikes bikes are simply expected to be there). You can go out 20 miles from that intersection and see nothing but the same every where.
Okay, let's say you're going east on Wooster Road, cross 31st, merge left, then turn left (north) onto 30th. For the sake of example, imagine that the two parked cars are parked further north up the road. Where would you ride on that street, and would not the presence of the parked cars cause you to need to move left? If yes, would you just move left, or would you look back first, make sure no one faster is close behind you and in the process of about to pass you, and, if they are, recognize that they have the right-of-way and you need to yield until they pass or yield to you?

I will ride in the parking lane if it comes to that.

Okay, let's say you're going east on Wooster Road, cross 31st, merge left, then turn left (north) onto 30th. For the sake of example, imagine that the two parked cars are parked further north up the road. Where would you ride on that street, and would not the presence of the parked cars cause you to need to move left? If yes, would you just move left, or would you look back first, make sure no one faster is close behind you and in the process of about to pass you, and, if they are, recognize that they have the right-of-way and you need to yield until they pass or yield to you?

Simple thats not a travel lane to begin with thats the parking lane. Meaning your not suppose to be driving there or riding there to begin with. And if you choose to do so its your own fault when you get stuck in the parking lane.

In other words that lane is never a wide outside lane to begin with.

Simple thats not a travel lane to begin with thats the parking lane. Meaning your not suppose to be driving there or riding there to begin with. And if you choose to do so its your own fault when you get stuck in the parking lane.

In other words that lane is never a wide outside lane to begin with.
That's a parking lane? On 30th? That street looks way too narrow to support 36' of width (10' travel lanes, one in each direction, plus 8' parking lanes, one in each direction).

It looks to me like even a car has to merge left into the oncoming lane in order to get around parked cars.

That's a parking lane? On 30th? That street looks way too narrow to support 36' of width (10' travel lanes, one in each direction, plus 8' parking lanes, one in each direction).

It looks to me like even a car has to merge left into the oncoming lane in order to get around parked cars.
Oops sorry i had it on hybrid to show street etc names but forget hybrid adds a line overlay showing the road etc. The white line on the road is not a stripe its part of the map overlay. Turn to satellite instead. I added some route markers on my end the cars there are about .0015 miles wide (lol) and the road surface is .0056 miles wide making the road 3.733 times as wide as the cars. So that leave 3/4 a car width between the parked car (if at curb) and any car that would pass it. Also note that that street is very short and has a 25mph speed limit (road is .0999 miles long)

Oops sorry i had it on hybrid to show street etc names but forget hybrid adds a line overlay showing the road etc. The white line on the road is not a stripe its part of the map overlay. Turn to satellite instead. I added some route markers on my end the cars there are about .0015 miles wide (lol) and the road surface is .0056 miles wide making the road 3.733 times as wide as the cars. So that leave 3/4 a car width between the parked car (if at curb) and any car that would pass it. Also note that that street is very short and has a 25mph speed limit (road is .0999 miles long)
Which brings us back to my question. So on that street wouldn't you adjust left to go around the parked cars?

If so, would you just adjust left, or would you look back and make sure you're not about to be passed, recognizing that you are obligated to yield if you are?

Which brings us back to my question. So on that street wouldn't you adjust left to go around the parked cars?

If so, would you just adjust left, or would you look back and make sure you're not about to be passed, recognizing that you are obligated to yield if you are?


No because i would never be that far right to begin with. When I change lanes i do look behind me regardless so thats a moot point. Again in the case of parking lanes I never need to adjust left to avoid the lane as im never in it to start with.

No because i would never be that far right to begin with. When I change lanes i do look behind me regardless so thats a moot point. Again in the case of parking lanes I never need to adjust left to avoid the lane as im never in it to start with.

:fight::fight::fight:

I thought we established there is no parking lane on this road, that the parked cars encroach into space used by normal through vehicular traffic, requiring all through drivers to merge left, and car drivers to encroach into the oncoming side, to get around them.

head. you brought up lane narrowing from the right, (parked cars, ho hum - snoozers!) and I brought up, what about lanes narrowing from the left?

why is that not valid? it doesn't mesh with your lil' lesson plan you preordained for this thread?

head. you brought up lane narrowing from the right, (parked cars, ho hum - snoozers!) and I brought up, what about lanes narrowing from the left?

why is that not valid? it doesn't mesh with your lil' lesson plan you preordained for this thread?
Who said it's not valid? IT IS VALID. Maybe it's a Seattle thing, because I don't think it happens very much. I can't think of when it does. But if narrowing from the left forces traffic to move right, then they are the ones that are supposed to yield if moving right puts them in potential conflict with a cyclist.

head. get with the program. riding a bike on the roads is not an orderly process entertained soley by striped lines of paint on a road.

you often talk of ignoring the lines. which is what I'm alluding to when i talk about the lane narrowing from the left- obstructions- traffic, planters, parked delivery trucks- that effectively narrow the lane, but from the left and not the right.

you also often go on and on about your lane position should be determined by traffic overtaking you.... now, i find that a difficult scenario to duplicate, but IF this is the case, think of this scenario now for a second....traffic is passing you wide in a lane. up ahead, a traffic obstruction - turning traffic, a planter, a delivery truck- is going to choke the road down so the traffic overtaking you will have less room to pass wide. what is coming up is a narrowing of your lane, independant of the striped lines on the road. do you see this?

This happens to me, daily, on my rides.

the fact that you cannot think of road scenarios where the travelled lane is narrowed from the left by traffic or other obstacles in the road reminds me of your sophmoric traffic skills you masquerade around this forum like you're a bicycling superhero.

I'm bringing into your lanes narrowing discussion that bicyclists must also watch for virtual narrowing of the travelled way from the left -by turning traffic, parking medians, delivery trucks, etc, and adjust their lane position accordingly.

you seem to indicate that the vehicles overtaking as a lane narrows from the left need to yield to traffic ahead of them to the right, which directly contradicts your advice that bicyclists need to yield to traffic as they move left.

I think you need to take this one back to the drawing board, think about it. really think about it.

i agree your intent for this lil' edumacational thread is good hearted, but don't limit yourself to such black and white analysis of riding a bike on the roads- its quite a bit more dynamic and disorderly than you conjecture.