View Single Post
Old 04-17-07 | 04:10 PM
  #105  
genec's Avatar
genec
genec
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 27,072
Likes: 4,533
From: West Coast

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Originally Posted by John Forester
I am going to discuss the motorist-right-turn right-hook car-bike collision accident, without reference to any particular one of the postings. And, I should remind all of you, this analysis, based on traffic engineering, traffic law, and on human factors, was done almost forty years ago, with diagrams also, and has been in easily available print form for thirty years. This is just one of the many items that people who consider themselves competent to discuss bicycle traffic operations should know about, whether or not they agree with the conclusion.

Consider the motorist who intends to turn right at the next intersection. He has already moved near the right-hand curb. He is looking where he intends to go, because he doesn't want to hit something that is in his path, and he intends to steer his vehicle along the curve of the normal road surface. He has to look ahead for traffic moving in the opposite direction that might be turning left, and which might, although it should not, cause complications. He has to look for traffic coming from his left, across the intersection. And he has to look for pedestrian traffic on the sidewalks that might enter the crosswalk. He can see all of this by merely moving his eyes, which is a quick movement. Traffic that is overtaking him on his left does not concern him. The traffic system is set up so that he doesn't have to consider traffic overtaking on his right, and to see such traffic he would have to turn his head, which prevents him from seeing other things with which he is properly concerned.

Any cyclist who tries to overtake a motorist who is turning right is just plain foolish. Yet, that is the feeling that is encouraged by a bike lane, and many do so. It is true that it would be best practice, and in some states it is required, for the motorist to merge into the bike lane considerably before reaching the intersection, on the grounds that a merge is much safer than a turn across, and once the motorist is occupying the bike lane, a cyclist should be on notice not to try to overtake, even if there appears to be room. But, corners being what they are, and vehicles having different lengths and turn radii, and a bit of laziness, there often is room. The cyclist who wishes to overtake a motorist should move left and overtake on the proper side, just as long as the possibility exists that the motorist might turn right.

I repeat, bike lanes and bike-lane stripes contradict the rules of the road and disrupt traffic, causing higher risk than should be present.
The flaw in your comments is that if the motorist "has already moved near the right-hand curb," there would be no room for a cyclist to come up on the right. And the laws of California support just that, in that those laws tell the motorist to merge into the bike lane, and a merge requires ensuring that the way is clear before joining that flow.

While the cyclist should indeed move left in such situation, at the same time the motorist should look, then merge right.

That last sentence included two "should" conditions which are often overlooked by both motorists and cyclists.
genec is offline  
Reply