FRAP law -- say what?
09-18-11, 01:41 AM
#26
Cycle Year Round
My memory of the whole issue is old and no longer complete, but:
Probably a portion of this, that got adopted by Montgomery or PG county as their local minimum speed mandate.
May have even been some deal of just the cops interpreting it as law. It was a messed up deal at any rate.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/e...oc/mdspeed.pdf
Probably a portion of this, that got adopted by Montgomery or PG county as their local minimum speed mandate.
May have even been some deal of just the cops interpreting it as law. It was a messed up deal at any rate.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/e...oc/mdspeed.pdf
Minimum Speed Limit: I. A person shall not operate willfully operate a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic. Tran. '21-804(a)
II. A person, who is driving a vehicle either (1) at 10 MPH or more below the posted speed limit or (2) at less than the normal speed of traffic, shall drive in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway. Tran. '21-
301(b)
Posted (Minimum) Speed Limit: Based on engineering and traffic investigations, the State Highway
Administration or a local government may establish a minimum speed limit
on a highway or part thereof. Tran. ''21-804(b) & 21-1409
II. A person, who is driving a vehicle either (1) at 10 MPH or more below the posted speed limit or (2) at less than the normal speed of traffic, shall drive in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway. Tran. '21-
301(b)
Posted (Minimum) Speed Limit: Based on engineering and traffic investigations, the State Highway
Administration or a local government may establish a minimum speed limit
on a highway or part thereof. Tran. ''21-804(b) & 21-1409
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
09-18-11, 04:23 AM
#27
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
\\
that's right. bike traffic is regulated under EITHER the BIKES FRAP laws (generally quite permissive)
OR the SMV-FRAP laws (not nearly as permissive for bike traffic) in 49 of the 50 states.
in some states, bikes are regulated by the SMV-FRAP laws. And in those states SMV FRAP laws are interpreted fairly uniform across state lines. These SMV-FRAP laws uniformly regulate bicyclists to operate FRAP at all times with extremely limited explicit exceptions for full lane use.
bicycle FRAP laws are generally much more permissive.
one thing every rider must be aware of: FRAP laws regulating bike traffic exist in 49 of the 50 states, and in that sole outlier state, bicyclists and slow moving vehicles still possess a long standing common law obligation to share the road and turn out to the right even if there is no statutory obligation to do so.
that's right. bike traffic is regulated under EITHER the BIKES FRAP laws (generally quite permissive)
OR the SMV-FRAP laws (not nearly as permissive for bike traffic) in 49 of the 50 states.
in some states, bikes are regulated by the SMV-FRAP laws. And in those states SMV FRAP laws are interpreted fairly uniform across state lines. These SMV-FRAP laws uniformly regulate bicyclists to operate FRAP at all times with extremely limited explicit exceptions for full lane use.
bicycle FRAP laws are generally much more permissive.
one thing every rider must be aware of: FRAP laws regulating bike traffic exist in 49 of the 50 states, and in that sole outlier state, bicyclists and slow moving vehicles still possess a long standing common law obligation to share the road and turn out to the right even if there is no statutory obligation to do so.
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-18-11 at 04:52 AM.
09-18-11, 01:09 PM
#28
24-Speed Machine
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Posts: 6,058
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
My memory of the whole issue is old and no longer complete, but:
Probably a portion of this, that got adopted by Montgomery or PG county as their local minimum speed mandate.
May have even been some deal of just the cops interpreting it as law. It was a messed up deal at any rate.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/e...oc/mdspeed.pdf
Probably a portion of this, that got adopted by Montgomery or PG county as their local minimum speed mandate.
May have even been some deal of just the cops interpreting it as law. It was a messed up deal at any rate.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/e...oc/mdspeed.pdf
The city closest to me sided with the state. Also, I researched it at City Hall and found out the city law came into existence in 1957, when the city was no where near the size it is now and the center of the city was a small intersection next to the train station and, the city law came out of people repeatedly being run into on the sidewalk.
09-18-11, 01:33 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
\\
that's right. bike traffic is regulated under EITHER the BIKES FRAP laws (generally quite permissive)
OR the SMV-FRAP laws (not nearly as permissive for bike traffic) in 49 of the 50 states.
in some states, bikes are regulated by the SMV-FRAP laws. And in those states SMV FRAP laws are interpreted fairly uniform across state lines. These SMV-FRAP laws uniformly regulate bicyclists to operate FRAP at all times with extremely limited explicit exceptions for full lane use.
bicycle FRAP laws are generally much more permissive.
one thing every rider must be aware of: FRAP laws regulating bike traffic exist in 49 of the 50 states, and in that sole outlier state, bicyclists and slow moving vehicles still possess a long standing common law obligation to share the road and turn out to the right even if there is no statutory obligation to do so.
that's right. bike traffic is regulated under EITHER the BIKES FRAP laws (generally quite permissive)
OR the SMV-FRAP laws (not nearly as permissive for bike traffic) in 49 of the 50 states.
in some states, bikes are regulated by the SMV-FRAP laws. And in those states SMV FRAP laws are interpreted fairly uniform across state lines. These SMV-FRAP laws uniformly regulate bicyclists to operate FRAP at all times with extremely limited explicit exceptions for full lane use.
bicycle FRAP laws are generally much more permissive.
one thing every rider must be aware of: FRAP laws regulating bike traffic exist in 49 of the 50 states, and in that sole outlier state, bicyclists and slow moving vehicles still possess a long standing common law obligation to share the road and turn out to the right even if there is no statutory obligation to do so.
09-18-11, 01:39 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edgewater, CO
Posts: 3,213
Bikes: Tons
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Not all states even use FRAP wording.
Colorado, for example, is as far right as safe.
See CRS 42-4-1412:
See all of 42-4-1412 for the full exceptions.
Colorado, for example, is as far right as safe.
See CRS 42-4-1412:
42-4-1412. Operation of bicycles and other human-powered vehicles.
(5) (a) ANY PERSON OPERATING A BICYCLE UPON A ROADWAY AT LESS THAN THE NORMAL SPEED OF TRAFFIC SHALL RIDE IN THE RIGHT-HAND LANE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
(I) IF THE RIGHT-HAND LANE THEN AVAILABLE FOR TRAFFIC IS WIDE ENOUGH TO BE SAFELY SHARED WITH OVERTAKING VEHICLES, A BICYCLIST SHALL RIDE FAR ENOUGH TO THE RIGHT AS JUDGED SAFE BY THE BICYCLIST TO FACILITATE THE MOVEMENT OF SUCH OVERTAKING VEHICLES UNLESS OTHER CONDITIONS MAKE IT UNSAFE TO DO SO.
(5) (a) ANY PERSON OPERATING A BICYCLE UPON A ROADWAY AT LESS THAN THE NORMAL SPEED OF TRAFFIC SHALL RIDE IN THE RIGHT-HAND LANE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
(I) IF THE RIGHT-HAND LANE THEN AVAILABLE FOR TRAFFIC IS WIDE ENOUGH TO BE SAFELY SHARED WITH OVERTAKING VEHICLES, A BICYCLIST SHALL RIDE FAR ENOUGH TO THE RIGHT AS JUDGED SAFE BY THE BICYCLIST TO FACILITATE THE MOVEMENT OF SUCH OVERTAKING VEHICLES UNLESS OTHER CONDITIONS MAKE IT UNSAFE TO DO SO.
09-18-11, 05:31 PM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 88
Bikes: Fuji Cross Pro, Montague Paratrooper Mtn Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Ohio's "Practicable" statute
4511.55 in Ohio says this:
4511.55 Operating bicycles and motorcycles on roadway.
(A) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable obeying all traffic rules applicable to vehicles and exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.
(B) Persons riding bicycles or motorcycles upon a roadway shall ride not more than two abreast in a single lane, except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles or motorcycles.
(C) This section does not require a person operating a bicycle to ride at the edge of the roadway when it is unreasonable or unsafe to do so. Conditions that may require riding away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is too narrow for the bicycle and an overtaking vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
-----
So Ohio doesn't have a "FRAP" ["far right as practicable"] but a "as near to the ride SIDE of the roadway as PRACTICABLE" law. Prior to 2006, section (C) was not in the law.
The word "practicable" is not defined. It is used frequently in many contexts and in many different statutes in Ohio law - some 230+ times. However, when you do a Lexis search, only 7 cases pop up citing 4511.55
I have always argued in "bike" cases that "practicable" does NOT mean "hug the white line" but means "safe and reasonable" - arguing that the Ohio legislature would not mandate a lane position that is not safe and reasonable.
The OHio Bicycle Federation pushed the addition of Section (C). We wrote it, and it became part of the Better Bicycling Bill, which was passed into law in 2006. Section (C) shows not "exceptions" but circumstances when "practicable" might mean taking more of the lane - or even taking the entire lane when the lane is too narrow. Thus, not an "exception" but factors which expand the concept of what can be considered "practicable."
So "FRAP" in Ohio is a dynamic concept. It can change foot by foot depending on conditions. A practicable place to ride can change on the same section of the same road day to day or hour by hour. A rain storm, shattered beer bottle, debris, gravel, pothole, parked car, etc can ALL be considered when determining if your lane position is safe and reasonable and, therefore, "practicable."
Steve Magas
4511.55 Operating bicycles and motorcycles on roadway.
(A) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable obeying all traffic rules applicable to vehicles and exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.
(B) Persons riding bicycles or motorcycles upon a roadway shall ride not more than two abreast in a single lane, except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles or motorcycles.
(C) This section does not require a person operating a bicycle to ride at the edge of the roadway when it is unreasonable or unsafe to do so. Conditions that may require riding away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is too narrow for the bicycle and an overtaking vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
-----
So Ohio doesn't have a "FRAP" ["far right as practicable"] but a "as near to the ride SIDE of the roadway as PRACTICABLE" law. Prior to 2006, section (C) was not in the law.
The word "practicable" is not defined. It is used frequently in many contexts and in many different statutes in Ohio law - some 230+ times. However, when you do a Lexis search, only 7 cases pop up citing 4511.55
I have always argued in "bike" cases that "practicable" does NOT mean "hug the white line" but means "safe and reasonable" - arguing that the Ohio legislature would not mandate a lane position that is not safe and reasonable.
The OHio Bicycle Federation pushed the addition of Section (C). We wrote it, and it became part of the Better Bicycling Bill, which was passed into law in 2006. Section (C) shows not "exceptions" but circumstances when "practicable" might mean taking more of the lane - or even taking the entire lane when the lane is too narrow. Thus, not an "exception" but factors which expand the concept of what can be considered "practicable."
So "FRAP" in Ohio is a dynamic concept. It can change foot by foot depending on conditions. A practicable place to ride can change on the same section of the same road day to day or hour by hour. A rain storm, shattered beer bottle, debris, gravel, pothole, parked car, etc can ALL be considered when determining if your lane position is safe and reasonable and, therefore, "practicable."
Steve Magas
09-18-11, 06:45 PM
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: S. E. Michigan
Posts: 513
Bikes: Mongoose Switchback
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 300 of 1949OPERATION OF BICYCLES, MOTORCYCLES AND TOY VEHICLES
257.660 Bicycles…; operation on roadway; use of bicycle path; passing; operation of bicycle or moped on sidewalk…Sec. 660.
(1) A person operating an electric personal assistive mobility device, low-speed vehicle, or moped upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction. A motorcycle is entitled to full use of a lane, and a motor vehicle shall not be driven in such a manner as to deprive a motorcycle of the full use of a lane. This subsection does not apply to motorcycles operated 2 abreast in a single lane.
(2) A person riding an electric personal assistive mobility device, motorcycle, or moped upon a roadway shall not ride more than 2 abreast except on a path or part of a roadway set aside for the exclusive use of those vehicles.
(3) Where a usable and designated path for bicycles is provided adjacent to a highway or street, a person operating an electric personal assistive mobility device may, by local ordinance, be required to use that path.
(4) A person operating a motorcycle, moped, low-speed vehicle, or electric personal assistive mobility device shall not pass between lines of traffic, but may pass on the left of traffic moving in his or her direction in the case of a 2-way street or on the left or right of traffic in the case of a 1-way street, in an unoccupied lane.
(5) A person operating an electric personal assistive mobility device on a sidewalk constructed for the use of pedestrians shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian and shall give an audible signal before overtaking and passing the pedestrian.
(6) A moped or low-speed vehicle shall not be operated on a sidewalk constructed for the use of pedestrians.
(7) A low-speed vehicle shall be operated at a speed of not to exceed 25 miles per hour and shall not be operated on a highway or street with a speed limit of more than 35 miles per hour except for the purpose of crossing that highway or street. The state transportation department may prohibit the operation of a low-speed vehicle on any highway or street under its jurisdiction if it determines that the prohibition is necessary in the interest of public safety.
(8) This section does not apply to a police officer in the performance of his or her official duties.
(9) An electric personal assistive mobility device shall be operated at a speed not to exceed 15 miles per hour and shall not be operated on a highway or street with a speed limit of more than 25 miles per hour except to cross that highway or street.
(10) The governing body of a county, a city, a village, an entity created under the urban cooperation act of 1967, 1967 (Ex Sess) PA 7, MCL 124.501 to 124.512, or a township may, by ordinance, which is based on the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens, regulate the operation of electric personal assistive mobility devices on sidewalks, highways or streets, or crosswalks. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a governing body of a county, city, village, entity created under the urban cooperation act of 1967, 1967 (Ex Sess) PA 7, MCL 124.501 to 124.512, or township may prohibit the operation of electric personal assistive mobility devices in an area open to pedestrian traffic adjacent to a waterfront or on a trail under their jurisdiction or in a downtown or
central business district. Signs indicating the regulation shall be conspicuously posted in the area where the use of an electric personal assistive mobility device is regulated.
(11) Operation of an electric personal assistive mobility device is prohibited in a special charter city and a state park under the jurisdiction of the Mackinac Island state park commission.
(12) Operation of an electric personal assistive mobility device may be prohibited in a historic district.
(13) The department of natural resources may by order regulate the use of electric personal assistive mobility devices on all lands under its control.
257.660a Operation of bicycle upon highway or street; riding close to right-hand curb or edge of roadway; exceptions.A person operating a bicycle upon a highway or street at less than the existing speed of traffic shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except as follows:
(a) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or any other vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
(b) When preparing to turn left.
(c) When conditions make the right-hand edge of the roadway unsafe or reasonably unusable by bicycles, including, but not limited to, surface hazards, an uneven roadway surface, drain openings, debris, parked or moving vehicles or bicycles, pedestrians, animals, or other obstacles, or if the lane is too narrow to permit a vehicle to safely overtake and pass a bicycle.
(d) When operating a bicycle in a lane in which the traffic is turning right but the individual intends to go straight through the intersection.
(e) When operating a bicycle upon a 1-way highway or street that has 2 or more marked traffic lanes, in which case the individual may ride as near the left-hand curb or edge of that roadway as practicable.
But in Vancouver, BC
City of Vancouver Street and Traffic By-Law No. 2849
(as of March 30, 1999)
Slow Moving Vehicles
59.
The driver of every slow moving vehicle shall drive such vehicle as close as possible to the right hand edge or curb of any street unless it is impracticable to travel on such side. For the purpose of this section a bicycle shall be regarded at all times as a slow moving vehicle.
Last edited by catmandew52; 09-18-11 at 07:38 PM.
09-18-11, 07:19 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass
Posts: 874
Bikes: I just ride them, they own me.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Massachusetts is not a FRAP state, has no FRAP reference nor requirement.
Neither are bicycles "slow moving vehicles" see eg. MGL ch.90,sec.1 et.seq..
Specifically bicycles in Massachusetts have a full and equal right to the travel lane, MGL ch.85, sec.11B. Interestingly, MGL ch.85, sec.11B is often cited as the "Massachusetts Bicycle Law." While this is generally accepted, it is not complete either. Specifically the most recent (2009) amendments to the Massachusetts General Laws as relating to bicycle operation and bicycles did rewrites to certain sections of chapter 85, but also added bicycle specific language to some sections of chapters 89 ("The Law of the Road" chapter) and 90 ("Motor Vehicle and Aircraft" chapter) adding specific bicycle language to clarify the motorists duties when approaching a bicyclist in or on the road. (Note, a pedal bicycle in Massachusetts is not a "motor vehicle" but merely a "vehicle" and has been the law of the Commonwealth for a very long time.)
About as close as Massachusetts comes to FRAP is in MGL ch.85, sec.11B(1) which does not "relieve a bicyclist of the duty to facilitate overtaking as required by section 2 of chapter 89." MGL ch.89, sec.2, and MGL ch.90, sec.14 were amended during the most recent Bicycle Law update to specifically and explicitly require motor vehicle operators when approaching a bicycle to exhaust several other alternatives to attempt a pass.
As with any vehicle about to be passed, a bicyclist generally "shall not unnecessarily obstruct" the passing vehicle. MGL ch.89,sec.2. That is it, and that general language has not been held to require FRAP for bicycles in Massachusetts. Additionally, however, this general duty, not to unnecessarily obstruct, is secondary to the specific duty of the approaching and passing vehicle to "slow, "move left" into all or "part of adjacent lane" or to "wait" until safe to do so, especially as related to bicycles. MGL ch.89, sec.2 and MGL ch.90, sec.14 which as stated has new and specific verbiage regarding passing bicycles.
HTH as far as Massachusetts is concerned
zac
Neither are bicycles "slow moving vehicles" see eg. MGL ch.90,sec.1 et.seq..
Specifically bicycles in Massachusetts have a full and equal right to the travel lane, MGL ch.85, sec.11B. Interestingly, MGL ch.85, sec.11B is often cited as the "Massachusetts Bicycle Law." While this is generally accepted, it is not complete either. Specifically the most recent (2009) amendments to the Massachusetts General Laws as relating to bicycle operation and bicycles did rewrites to certain sections of chapter 85, but also added bicycle specific language to some sections of chapters 89 ("The Law of the Road" chapter) and 90 ("Motor Vehicle and Aircraft" chapter) adding specific bicycle language to clarify the motorists duties when approaching a bicyclist in or on the road. (Note, a pedal bicycle in Massachusetts is not a "motor vehicle" but merely a "vehicle" and has been the law of the Commonwealth for a very long time.)
About as close as Massachusetts comes to FRAP is in MGL ch.85, sec.11B(1) which does not "relieve a bicyclist of the duty to facilitate overtaking as required by section 2 of chapter 89." MGL ch.89, sec.2, and MGL ch.90, sec.14 were amended during the most recent Bicycle Law update to specifically and explicitly require motor vehicle operators when approaching a bicycle to exhaust several other alternatives to attempt a pass.
As with any vehicle about to be passed, a bicyclist generally "shall not unnecessarily obstruct" the passing vehicle. MGL ch.89,sec.2. That is it, and that general language has not been held to require FRAP for bicycles in Massachusetts. Additionally, however, this general duty, not to unnecessarily obstruct, is secondary to the specific duty of the approaching and passing vehicle to "slow, "move left" into all or "part of adjacent lane" or to "wait" until safe to do so, especially as related to bicycles. MGL ch.89, sec.2 and MGL ch.90, sec.14 which as stated has new and specific verbiage regarding passing bicycles.
HTH as far as Massachusetts is concerned
zac
__________________
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
Last edited by zac; 09-18-11 at 08:00 PM.
09-18-11, 07:31 PM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: S. E. Michigan
Posts: 513
Bikes: Mongoose Switchback
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Title: Law defines bicycles as slow moving vehicles
https://shermanoaks.patch.com/article...ving-vehicle-3
Anybody in/near Sherman Oaks know how far this has gone in regards to AG's opinion?
https://shermanoaks.patch.com/article...ving-vehicle-3
Anybody in/near Sherman Oaks know how far this has gone in regards to AG's opinion?
09-18-11, 07:37 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pacific, WA
Posts: 1,260
Bikes: Custom 531ST touring, Bilenky Viewpoint, Bianchi Milano, vintage Condor racer
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Very true, and a frequent source of confusion in this group.
In Washington State, both laws apply to bicycles.
The bicycle-specific law says:
RCW 46.61.770
Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited-access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane if such exists.
(2) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
The more general slow-moving vehicle law says:
RCW 46.61.427
Slow-moving vehicle to pull off roadway.
On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow moving vehicle, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in a line, shall turn off the roadway wherever sufficient area for a safe turn-out 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.
Note that the bicycle-specific "far right as safe" law applies whenever a bicycle is moving "a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place", regardless of how many lanes a road has or what difficulties an overtaking vehicle might experience in passing the cyclist.
The "slow moving vehicle" law, on the other hand, applies only "On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe," and when "five or more vehicles are formed in a line" behind the slow-moving vehicle -- a much more narrowly-defined situation.
Complying with the bicycle-specific "far right as safe" law never requires a cyclist to pull off the road to let others pass; the more narrowly-tailored "slow moving vehicle" rule does, if there's a safe place to pull off.
One further source of confusion and conflation, "impeding" is separately regulated, and in many states applies only to motor vehicles:
RCW 46.61.425
Minimum speed regulation — Passing slow moving vehicle.
(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law: PROVIDED, That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety.
In Washington State, both laws apply to bicycles.
The bicycle-specific law says:
RCW 46.61.770
Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited-access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane if such exists.
(2) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
The more general slow-moving vehicle law says:
RCW 46.61.427
Slow-moving vehicle to pull off roadway.
On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe because of traffic in the opposite direction or other conditions, a slow moving vehicle, behind which five or more vehicles are formed in a line, shall turn off the roadway wherever sufficient area for a safe turn-out 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.
Note that the bicycle-specific "far right as safe" law applies whenever a bicycle is moving "a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place", regardless of how many lanes a road has or what difficulties an overtaking vehicle might experience in passing the cyclist.
The "slow moving vehicle" law, on the other hand, applies only "On a two-lane highway where passing is unsafe," and when "five or more vehicles are formed in a line" behind the slow-moving vehicle -- a much more narrowly-defined situation.
Complying with the bicycle-specific "far right as safe" law never requires a cyclist to pull off the road to let others pass; the more narrowly-tailored "slow moving vehicle" rule does, if there's a safe place to pull off.
One further source of confusion and conflation, "impeding" is separately regulated, and in many states applies only to motor vehicles:
RCW 46.61.425
Minimum speed regulation — Passing slow moving vehicle.
(1) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law: PROVIDED, That a person following a vehicle driving at less than the legal maximum speed and desiring to pass such vehicle may exceed the speed limit, subject to the provisions of RCW 46.61.120 on highways having only one lane of traffic in each direction, at only such a speed and for only such a distance as is necessary to complete the pass with a reasonable margin of safety.
Last edited by jputnam; 09-18-11 at 07:47 PM.
09-18-11, 07:37 PM
#37
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
4511.55 in Ohio says this:
4511.55 Operating bicycles and motorcycles on roadway.
(A) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable obeying all traffic rules applicable to vehicles and exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.
(B) Persons riding bicycles or motorcycles upon a roadway shall ride not more than two abreast in a single lane, except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles or motorcycles.
(C) This section does not require a person operating a bicycle to ride at the edge of the roadway when it is unreasonable or unsafe to do so. Conditions that may require riding away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is too narrow for the bicycle and an overtaking vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
-----
So Ohio doesn't have a "FRAP" ["far right as practicable"] but a "as near to the ride SIDE of the roadway as PRACTICABLE" law. Prior to 2006, section (C) was not in the law.
The word "practicable" is not defined. It is used frequently in many contexts and in many different statutes in Ohio law - some 230+ times. However, when you do a Lexis search, only 7 cases pop up citing 4511.55
I have always argued in "bike" cases that "practicable" does NOT mean "hug the white line" but means "safe and reasonable" - arguing that the Ohio legislature would not mandate a lane position that is not safe and reasonable.
The OHio Bicycle Federation pushed the addition of Section (C). We wrote it, and it became part of the Better Bicycling Bill, which was passed into law in 2006. Section (C) shows not "exceptions" but circumstances when "practicable" might mean taking more of the lane - or even taking the entire lane when the lane is too narrow. Thus, not an "exception" but factors which expand the concept of what can be considered "practicable."
So "FRAP" in Ohio is a dynamic concept. It can change foot by foot depending on conditions. A practicable place to ride can change on the same section of the same road day to day or hour by hour. A rain storm, shattered beer bottle, debris, gravel, pothole, parked car, etc can ALL be considered when determining if your lane position is safe and reasonable and, therefore, "practicable."
Steve Magas
4511.55 Operating bicycles and motorcycles on roadway.
(A) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable obeying all traffic rules applicable to vehicles and exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.
(B) Persons riding bicycles or motorcycles upon a roadway shall ride not more than two abreast in a single lane, except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles or motorcycles.
(C) This section does not require a person operating a bicycle to ride at the edge of the roadway when it is unreasonable or unsafe to do so. Conditions that may require riding away from the edge of the roadway include when necessary to avoid fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, surface hazards, or if it otherwise is unsafe or impracticable to do so, including if the lane is too narrow for the bicycle and an overtaking vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.
-----
So Ohio doesn't have a "FRAP" ["far right as practicable"] but a "as near to the ride SIDE of the roadway as PRACTICABLE" law. Prior to 2006, section (C) was not in the law.
The word "practicable" is not defined. It is used frequently in many contexts and in many different statutes in Ohio law - some 230+ times. However, when you do a Lexis search, only 7 cases pop up citing 4511.55
I have always argued in "bike" cases that "practicable" does NOT mean "hug the white line" but means "safe and reasonable" - arguing that the Ohio legislature would not mandate a lane position that is not safe and reasonable.
The OHio Bicycle Federation pushed the addition of Section (C). We wrote it, and it became part of the Better Bicycling Bill, which was passed into law in 2006. Section (C) shows not "exceptions" but circumstances when "practicable" might mean taking more of the lane - or even taking the entire lane when the lane is too narrow. Thus, not an "exception" but factors which expand the concept of what can be considered "practicable."
So "FRAP" in Ohio is a dynamic concept. It can change foot by foot depending on conditions. A practicable place to ride can change on the same section of the same road day to day or hour by hour. A rain storm, shattered beer bottle, debris, gravel, pothole, parked car, etc can ALL be considered when determining if your lane position is safe and reasonable and, therefore, "practicable."
Steve Magas
isn't that right.
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-19-11 at 04:09 AM.
09-18-11, 07:49 PM
#38
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
yes, a frequent source of confusion
many states have a SMV FRAP law that regulates slow moving vehicles operate FRAP.
SMV FRAP laws sometimes are supplemented by, but are distinctly different from, "pull off roadway onto an improved shoulder" laws.
yes, it is a bit confusing, as joshua has illustrated.
there are clearly written SMV FRAP provisions in states like Idaho that apply to vehicles and not bikes....
"Upon all highways any vehicle proceeding at less than normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing, shall be driven in the right-hand lane available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the highway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway."
because Idaho has a BIKES-FRAP law that supplants and overrides the general SMV-FRAP laws.....
"POSITION ON HIGHWAY. (1) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations:
(a) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.
(b) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
(c) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions including fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards or substandard width lanes that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge."
and thats' the way it is in over 40 states....... the SMV and BIKES FRAP laws do NOT both apply, in any state. a SMV-POR law is an entirely different animal.
most states regulate bicycle traffic to operate, generally speaking, as near to the right as is practicable and safe in the presence of faster traffic overtaking. it appears two, maybe three states do not have a general SMV-FRAP requirement. I previously had thought Arkansas was the only outlier...
here is a comment from a highly regarded online resource on improving bicycle laws.... i think john allen contributed the bulk of the article..... i do NOT think the article interprets Massachusetts law correctly.
Originally Posted by a guide to improving bicycle laws
Most states have a rule requiring slow-moving vehicles to keep to the right. (Massachusetts again is an exception: that state requires all drivers to use the right lane except when passing or preparing a left turn.) The standard version (UVC) of this statute reads as follows:
“Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road, alley, or driveway.”
“Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road, alley, or driveway.”
far better the generally more permissive bikes-FRAP laws as illustrated by that bike lawyer guy.
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-18-11 at 08:36 PM.
09-18-11, 08:15 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass
Posts: 874
Bikes: I just ride them, they own me.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
i am surprised but went back and reread the RCW..... it appears washington state does not have a FRAP law for slow moving vehicles, it has a SMV- pull off roadway law.
yes, a frequent source of confusion
many states have a SMV FRAP law that regulates slow moving vehicles operate FRAP.
SMV FRAP laws sometimes are supplemented by, but are distinctly different from, "pull off roadway onto an improved shoulder" laws.
yes, it is a bit confusing, as joshua has illustrated.
there are clearly written SMV FRAP provisions in states like North Dakota that apply to vehicles and not bikes.....
"Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at
the time and place and under the conditions then existing must be driven in the
right-hand lane then available for traffic,or as close as practicable to the right-hand
curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle
proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn in an intersection or
into a private road or driveway."
and there are states that have SMV-FRAP laws that apply to all vehicles and do not have bike specific FRAP laws.
most states have some form of SMV-FRAP law that regulates bicycle traffic to operate, generally speaking, as near to the right as is practicable and safe in the presence of faster traffic overtaking. only arkansas is absent a SMV-FRAP requirement. Massachusetts is an odd bird, but has a slowly driven traffic shall not unduly delay and shall turnout' law applicable but written in a nearly impenetrable yankee legalese.
here is a comment from a highly regarded online resource on improving bicycle laws.... i think john allen contributed the bulk of the article.....
Originally Posted by a guide to improving bicycle laws
Most states have a rule requiring slow-moving vehicles to keep to the right. (Massachusetts again is an exception: that state requires all drivers to use the right lane except when passing or preparing a left turn.) The standard version (UVC) of this statute reads as follows:
“Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road, alley, or driveway.”
yes, a frequent source of confusion
many states have a SMV FRAP law that regulates slow moving vehicles operate FRAP.
SMV FRAP laws sometimes are supplemented by, but are distinctly different from, "pull off roadway onto an improved shoulder" laws.
yes, it is a bit confusing, as joshua has illustrated.
there are clearly written SMV FRAP provisions in states like North Dakota that apply to vehicles and not bikes.....
"Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at
the time and place and under the conditions then existing must be driven in the
right-hand lane then available for traffic,or as close as practicable to the right-hand
curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle
proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn in an intersection or
into a private road or driveway."
and there are states that have SMV-FRAP laws that apply to all vehicles and do not have bike specific FRAP laws.
most states have some form of SMV-FRAP law that regulates bicycle traffic to operate, generally speaking, as near to the right as is practicable and safe in the presence of faster traffic overtaking. only arkansas is absent a SMV-FRAP requirement. Massachusetts is an odd bird, but has a slowly driven traffic shall not unduly delay and shall turnout' law applicable but written in a nearly impenetrable yankee legalese.
here is a comment from a highly regarded online resource on improving bicycle laws.... i think john allen contributed the bulk of the article.....
Originally Posted by a guide to improving bicycle laws
Most states have a rule requiring slow-moving vehicles to keep to the right. (Massachusetts again is an exception: that state requires all drivers to use the right lane except when passing or preparing a left turn.) The standard version (UVC) of this statute reads as follows:
“Upon all roadways any vehicle proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall be driven in the right-hand lane then available for traffic, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road, alley, or driveway.”
HTH
zac
__________________
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
09-18-11, 08:27 PM
#40
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
zac, you may think bikes need not share the road in Massachusetts, but savvy cyclists share the road if safe. massachusetts traffic law - written in convoluted yankee legalese - DOES regulate bikes to share the road if safe to do so.
here's what your state DMV has to say about pulling to the right - its QED..
"If you are being passed by another vehicle, you must slow down and stay to the right. Allow
the other driver to pass safely."
and here it is spelled out in the actual commonwealth of massachusetts rules of the road....
" Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the right in favor of the overtaking vehicle on visible signal and shall not increase the speed of his vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle.'
besides - isn't it the considerate thing to do?
sharing the road when safe to do so is part and parcel with responsible, mature bicycling dontchyaknow. its absolutely FRAPalicious!
here's what your state DMV has to say about pulling to the right - its QED..
"If you are being passed by another vehicle, you must slow down and stay to the right. Allow
the other driver to pass safely."
and here it is spelled out in the actual commonwealth of massachusetts rules of the road....
" Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the right in favor of the overtaking vehicle on visible signal and shall not increase the speed of his vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle.'
besides - isn't it the considerate thing to do?
sharing the road when safe to do so is part and parcel with responsible, mature bicycling dontchyaknow. its absolutely FRAPalicious!
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-18-11 at 08:38 PM.
09-18-11, 08:59 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass
Posts: 874
Bikes: I just ride them, they own me.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
zac, you may think bikes need not share the road in Massachusetts, but savvy cyclists share the road if safe. i believe the 'shall not unduly delay' clauses in massachusetts law - written in nearly impenetrable yankee legalese - DO regulate bikes to share the road if safe to do so.
besides - isn't it the considerate thing to do?
sharing the road when safe to do so is part and parcel with responsible, mature bicycling dontchyaknow.
besides - isn't it the considerate thing to do?
sharing the road when safe to do so is part and parcel with responsible, mature bicycling dontchyaknow.
Whether the laws are written in nearly impenetrable yankee legalese...I suppose I am used to said lawyer speak.
Absolutely, sharing the road is the considerate and mature thing to do. Please don't interpret my posts as anything but and attempt to put into less yankee legalese the General Laws of the Commonwealth, as I understand them.
As you know, there is no one size fits all way of riding, and when it comes down to it, an experienced cyclist knows that he has to adapt to certain situations and roads to operate in a safe, sane and predictable manner. I ride for enjoyment (with family in tow), commuting (lower speed), and fitness (higher speed), and in so doing can ride the same roads in three different manners, all dependent upon my own speed and manner or operation and the level of traffic on the road at the particular time. The laws attempt to add predictability to shared road use, but do so with an understanding and acceptance that not all bicyclists have the same abilities and are vulnerable road users.
It amuses me to no end to hear the comments that just because a close pass did not result in contact that it is not to be of concern. Well that is not the intended legislative purpose of the Laws of the Commonwealth. It was recognized that bicyclists can be unpredictable in their direction of travel, due to things beyond their control as well as due to their own lack of control or perfect control. It was because of this recognized and foreseeable unpredictability that the Legislature required the motorist to essentially pass a bicyclist with a greater duty of care than almost any other road user.
__________________
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
Last edited by zac; 09-18-11 at 09:07 PM.
09-19-11, 03:41 AM
#42
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
(Zac, i hope you can respond to my finished posts instead of responding to my first draft. i edit after posting for clarity.)
right. so you tend to cite authority, zac?
I did for you, just above - your states DMV and the code of the commonwealth of massachusetts.
Bicyclists in Massachusetts have a statutory duty to not delay other traffic and to turn out to the right so as to not unnecessarily delay faster traffic wishing to overtake.
your assertion the law has 'never been held' to form a binding ruling is neither here nor there.
Bike traffic IS regulated under that rule of the road in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
In words used in many other states, operate as near to the right as is safe, or as far right as practicable to share the road with faster traffic wishing to overtake.
that's not that complicated or onerous, is it, zac?
echoes and is evocative of your
mesh those practicably safe considerations with the laws of the commonwealth of massachusetts, and bicyclists have the duty to not unnecessarily delay, to turn out to the right, operating safely right to share the road.
QED.
the principles of road sharing and turning out to the right are long standing common law duties that predate and are the foundation for the widespread statutory requirements to do so.
right. so you tend to cite authority, zac?
I did for you, just above - your states DMV and the code of the commonwealth of massachusetts.
Bicyclists in Massachusetts have a statutory duty to not delay other traffic and to turn out to the right so as to not unnecessarily delay faster traffic wishing to overtake.
your assertion the law has 'never been held' to form a binding ruling is neither here nor there.
Bike traffic IS regulated under that rule of the road in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
In words used in many other states, operate as near to the right as is safe, or as far right as practicable to share the road with faster traffic wishing to overtake.
that's not that complicated or onerous, is it, zac?
Originally Posted by bike lawyer
I have always argued in "bike" cases that "practicable" does NOT mean "hug the white line" but means "safe and reasonable" - arguing that the Ohio legislature would not mandate a lane position that is not safe and reasonable.
Originally Posted by zac
an experienced cyclist knows that he has to adapt to certain situations and roads to operate in a safe, sane and predictable manner.
QED.
the principles of road sharing and turning out to the right are long standing common law duties that predate and are the foundation for the widespread statutory requirements to do so.
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-19-11 at 03:58 AM.
09-19-11, 04:06 AM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 464
Bikes: Sun EZ-Speedster SX, Volae Expedition
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Do you know what proscribes means? You're saying that the law prohibits sharing the road if it is safe to do so?
09-19-11, 04:09 AM
#44
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
sorry, bad spellng, dude. waiting for William Safire to step in.........
prescribe, not proscribe.
let me go back and correct that for you. my bad. i hope you got the intent of my statement despite the poor initial word useage.
what do YOU think about (not my spelling but) cyclists duties in Ohio, then, benjdm - legally prescribed to share the road if safe to do so, ride practicably right?
Benjdm - what is your appraisal of states requirements on bicyclists -
Do cyclists in most states have a statutory duty to share the road and operate to the right, safely, when faster traffic wishes to overtake?
by my read of the laws, this is a duty in 49 of the 50 states.
What are the laws regarding bikes position on roadway in the state that you live in?
prescribe, not proscribe.
let me go back and correct that for you. my bad. i hope you got the intent of my statement despite the poor initial word useage.
what do YOU think about (not my spelling but) cyclists duties in Ohio, then, benjdm - legally prescribed to share the road if safe to do so, ride practicably right?
Benjdm - what is your appraisal of states requirements on bicyclists -
Do cyclists in most states have a statutory duty to share the road and operate to the right, safely, when faster traffic wishes to overtake?
by my read of the laws, this is a duty in 49 of the 50 states.
What are the laws regarding bikes position on roadway in the state that you live in?
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-19-11 at 05:42 AM.
09-19-11, 07:06 AM
#45
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Posts: 14,278
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4260 Post(s)
Liked 1,364 Times
in
945 Posts
Minimum Speed Limit: I. A person shall not operate willfully operate a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic. Tran. '21-804(a)
II. A person, who is driving a vehicle either (1) at 10 MPH or more below the posted speed limit or (2) at less than the normal speed of traffic, shall drive in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway. Tran. '21-
301(b)
Posted (Minimum) Speed Limit: Based on engineering and traffic investigations, the State Highway
Administration or a local government may establish a minimum speed limit
on a highway or part thereof. Tran. ''21-804(b) & 21-1409
II. A person, who is driving a vehicle either (1) at 10 MPH or more below the posted speed limit or (2) at less than the normal speed of traffic, shall drive in the right-hand lane then available for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway. Tran. '21-
301(b)
Posted (Minimum) Speed Limit: Based on engineering and traffic investigations, the State Highway
Administration or a local government may establish a minimum speed limit
on a highway or part thereof. Tran. ''21-804(b) & 21-1409
Posted minimum speeds are not usual. They are only typically found on limited access highways (where cyclists are typically prohibited).
Last edited by njkayaker; 09-19-11 at 07:17 AM.
09-19-11, 10:25 AM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass
Posts: 874
Bikes: I just ride them, they own me.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
(Zac, i hope you can respond to my finished posts instead of responding to my first draft. i edit after posting for clarity.)
right. so you tend to cite authority, zac?
I did for you, just above - your states DMV and the code of the commonwealth of massachusetts.
Bicyclists in Massachusetts have a statutory duty to not delay other traffic and to turn out to the right so as to not unnecessarily delay faster traffic wishing to overtake.
your assertion the law has 'never been held' to form a binding ruling is neither here nor there.
Bike traffic IS regulated under that rule of the road in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
In words used in many other states, operate as near to the right as is safe, or as far right as practicable to share the road with faster traffic wishing to overtake.
that's not that complicated or onerous, is it, zac?
echoes and is evocative of your
mesh those practicably safe considerations with the laws of the commonwealth of massachusetts, and bicyclists have the duty to not unnecessarily delay, to turn out to the right, operating safely right to share the road.
QED.
the principles of road sharing and turning out to the right are long standing common law duties that predate and are the foundation for the widespread statutory requirements to do so.
right. so you tend to cite authority, zac?
I did for you, just above - your states DMV and the code of the commonwealth of massachusetts.
Bicyclists in Massachusetts have a statutory duty to not delay other traffic and to turn out to the right so as to not unnecessarily delay faster traffic wishing to overtake.
your assertion the law has 'never been held' to form a binding ruling is neither here nor there.
Bike traffic IS regulated under that rule of the road in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
In words used in many other states, operate as near to the right as is safe, or as far right as practicable to share the road with faster traffic wishing to overtake.
that's not that complicated or onerous, is it, zac?
echoes and is evocative of your
mesh those practicably safe considerations with the laws of the commonwealth of massachusetts, and bicyclists have the duty to not unnecessarily delay, to turn out to the right, operating safely right to share the road.
QED.
the principles of road sharing and turning out to the right are long standing common law duties that predate and are the foundation for the widespread statutory requirements to do so.
Please don't change your posts after the fact, couple of reasons: First, no, I will not go back and review, as I have no idea when you are finished editing. I will respond to the post as is quoted; secondly, reserve your edits for grammar and spelling and perhaps clarity, but leave the substantive changes for another post, just makes things easier to follow along.
I am not entirely sure what your post is getting at with respect to my original post here. I was posting that Mass does not have a FRAP provision nor requirement as far as bicycles are concerned. My original post cites the relevant laws here in the Commonwealth. If you would like to point out the Massachusetts FRAP provision, or the statute that requires bicycles to turn out and surrender the road to overtaking vehicles, I would be glad to review, as I have seemed to overlook those requirements.
Additionally, if you cite common law, please point me to the relevant Massachusetts case that so interprets a FRAP requirement to the relevant Massachusetts General Law or Regulation as it applies to bicycles, again, I seem to be unaware of it. Keeping in mind, of course, all the new language and specific language that relates to bicycles on the road.
right. so you tend to cite authority, zac?
I did for you, just above - your states DMV and the code of the commonwealth of massachusetts.
that's not that complicated or onerous, is it, zac?
__________________
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
Last edited by zac; 09-19-11 at 10:44 AM.
09-19-11, 10:30 AM
#47
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
the commonwealth of massachussetts words their road sharing requirement a bit more archaically than states that have adopted the UVC, zac. your original post DID NOT cite the relevant statute, zac. you ARE overlooking the relevant statute in the commonwealths' law of the road.
"Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the right in favor of the overtaking vehicle on visible signal and shall not increase the speed of his vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle."
overtaken vehicles give way to the right, dude. share the road, FRAP say what?
"Except when overtaking and passing on the right is permitted, the driver of an overtaken vehicle shall give way to the right in favor of the overtaking vehicle on visible signal and shall not increase the speed of his vehicle until completely passed by the overtaking vehicle."
overtaken vehicles give way to the right, dude. share the road, FRAP say what?
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-19-11 at 10:45 AM.
09-19-11, 10:36 AM
#48
totally louche
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
9 Posts
since i can't go back and add to my posts for Zac, here's some more grist..... asking if your states laws are too complicated or onerous is NOT condescending, look at the level of misunderstanding about road sharing laws exhibited by many of the posters to this thread.
As with any vehicle about to be passed, a bicyclist generally "shall not unnecessarily obstruct" in massachusetts, coupled to the law obligating slowly driven vehicles give way to the right work in conjunction to require cyclists to safely move right so as to share the road and not unnecessarily obstruct if turning out to the right is safe......
come on, zac. operating safely right, operating as far right as is safe and practicable, required to "turn out to the right", HOWEVER the statutory duty is written, operation of bikes on roads in the presence of faster traffic is simple and QED.
49 of the 50 states have a FRAP (or similarly worded or of similar intent) requirement of bicyclists.
its NOT an onerous condition to share the road and turn out to the right if safe to do so, to not unduly obstruct faster traffic wishing to overtake now, is it, Zac? its statutory law in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
not to mention savvy, traffic smart cycling.
49 of the 50 states states regulate bicycle traffic to operate, generally speaking, as near to the right as is practicable and safe in the presence of faster traffic overtaking so as to not unduly delay faster traffic wishing to overtake.
Share the road.
As with any vehicle about to be passed, a bicyclist generally "shall not unnecessarily obstruct" in massachusetts, coupled to the law obligating slowly driven vehicles give way to the right work in conjunction to require cyclists to safely move right so as to share the road and not unnecessarily obstruct if turning out to the right is safe......
come on, zac. operating safely right, operating as far right as is safe and practicable, required to "turn out to the right", HOWEVER the statutory duty is written, operation of bikes on roads in the presence of faster traffic is simple and QED.
49 of the 50 states have a FRAP (or similarly worded or of similar intent) requirement of bicyclists.
its NOT an onerous condition to share the road and turn out to the right if safe to do so, to not unduly obstruct faster traffic wishing to overtake now, is it, Zac? its statutory law in the commonwealth of massachusetts.
not to mention savvy, traffic smart cycling.
49 of the 50 states states regulate bicycle traffic to operate, generally speaking, as near to the right as is practicable and safe in the presence of faster traffic overtaking so as to not unduly delay faster traffic wishing to overtake.
Share the road.
Last edited by Bekologist; 09-19-11 at 12:01 PM.
09-19-11, 01:14 PM
#49
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 88
Bikes: Fuji Cross Pro, Montague Paratrooper Mtn Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Zac - you have to learn to ignore Bek - his Law-Degree-In A-Box from the Crackerjack School of Law provides him with exclusive authority to expectorate definitive legal analysis of the laws of all 50 states. When you see his 'wisdom' just step away from the computer and don't let it touch you... if you engage, it just gets muckier and muckier...
For example his "so as not to unduly delay faster traffic wishing to overtake" language is just bogus. There is no such concept in the traffic law - otherwise bikes would be pulling over for mail trucks who would be pulling over for overloaded dump trucks who would be pulling over for busses who would be pulling over for cars who would be pulling over for Ferraris...
Steve Magas
For example his "so as not to unduly delay faster traffic wishing to overtake" language is just bogus. There is no such concept in the traffic law - otherwise bikes would be pulling over for mail trucks who would be pulling over for overloaded dump trucks who would be pulling over for busses who would be pulling over for cars who would be pulling over for Ferraris...
Steve Magas
09-19-11, 02:11 PM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass
Posts: 874
Bikes: I just ride them, they own me.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Zac - you have to learn to ignore Bek - his Law-Degree-In A-Box from the Crackerjack School of Law provides him with exclusive authority to expectorate definitive legal analysis of the laws of all 50 states. When you see his 'wisdom' just step away from the computer and don't let it touch you... if you engage, it just gets muckier and muckier...
For example his "so as not to unduly delay faster traffic wishing to overtake" language is just bogus. There is no such concept in the traffic law - otherwise bikes would be pulling over for mail trucks who would be pulling over for overloaded dump trucks who would be pulling over for busses who would be pulling over for cars who would be pulling over for Ferraris...
Steve Magas
For example his "so as not to unduly delay faster traffic wishing to overtake" language is just bogus. There is no such concept in the traffic law - otherwise bikes would be pulling over for mail trucks who would be pulling over for overloaded dump trucks who would be pulling over for busses who would be pulling over for cars who would be pulling over for Ferraris...
Steve Magas
Just to edit my own post, since it has not been replied to yet: Assuming even arguendo that phrase does apply to bicycles, how exactly is that FRAP? Where is the requirement to ride to the right as far as practicable? when in fact the law of the Commonwealth spefically grants bicycles the full and equal right to the travel lane MGL 85/11B? All that phrase is, is a requirement to yield to the overtaking vehicle after a pass and not to speed up and prevent a clean return to the lane. I fail to see how a bicycle would even do that.
Steve, I enjoy you posts too, best clearing that docket.
__________________
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
trans female, out and proud!
Hammer Nutrition 15% Referral Discount
MassBike.org - Same Road, Same Rules
Last edited by zac; 09-19-11 at 02:56 PM.