Bike Forums

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Advocacy & Safety (https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/)
-   -   no passing zones and passing traffic on empty two lane highways (https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/820942-no-passing-zones-passing-traffic-empty-two-lane-highways.html)

genec 05-28-12 04:10 PM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14275997)
Some observations from my ride today got me wondering about how other riders are treated by traffic when people are riding in a no passing zone and it's clear for the motorists to pass.


What's everyone's experience with traffic and solid double yellow lines? Anyone have much success preventing high speed traffic from passing in a no passing zone when the road is clear?

An interesting "lesson" I got a couple decades ago when touring in Mexico. The main road (only road) that goes the length of Baja is a narrow two lane blacktop road... sometimes it has a stripe down the middle, sometimes not. Some areas have fewer potholes than others. When I bike toured down that road years ago what I noticed was the locals would pass well to the left of me, while they often straddled the middle of the road... even big trucks and buses would do this. Americans however, refused to cross the yellow line. Now we are not talking about major freeway traffic on this road, and sightlines can vary greatly, and the last thing you should depend on were signs and lines. When the locals saw you on the road, they gave you plenty of room and waited to pass until they could see the way was clear. Americans would not do this and would crowd you to get you to pull off the road.

I think part of the no passing thing is that Americans are not taught so much how to drive, but how to obey the rules... ("stay between the lines, the lines are your friend.")

contango 05-28-12 04:27 PM


Originally Posted by Digital_Cowboy (Post 14281477)
But sadly as has been said before too many people ignore even the yield signs. Not even bothering to slow down in the least little bit.

If people ignore signs and ignore rules how is introducing more rules going to help?

John Forester 05-28-12 05:09 PM


Originally Posted by hagen2456 (Post 14280574)
Thanks for your answer. My guess is that having "too many" no passing zones will make drivers tend to ignore them. Like the "too many" stop signs I've read about here, too. I wonder what makes traffic planners implement "too many" whatever.

The decision to paint a double-yellow center line is made by considering the sight distance required to safely overtake a vehicle that is moving rather close to the speed limit. The newest versions of the overtaking law allow overtaking of very slow vehicles, despite a double-yellow line, provided that there is sufficient sight distance for the overtaking movement to be completed safely. I presume that these versions are likely to spread to more states.

Bekologist 05-28-12 06:56 PM

Many of the newest versions of the passing laws specifically refer to bicyclists being passed in no passing zones. All the ones I've read about, anyways.

Question : Is passing bicycles in a no-passing zone one of the amorphous "rules of the road"?

CB HI 05-29-12 01:45 AM


Originally Posted by contango (Post 14280679)
In PA I see people passing Amish buggies all the time regardless of whether there's a double-yellow down the middle of the road. As far as I can tell (I'm usually there for only a few weeks each year so don't know every nuance of the local laws) it's considered a perfectly acceptable thing to do when faced with such a slow-moving vehicle.

I imagine it's either technically illegal but never enforced, or there's some threshold below which a vehicle is deemed sufficiently slow-moving that passing across a double-yellow is legal.

PA has similar law and handles it the same as Florida.


(2) When an obstruction exists making it necessary to
drive to the left of the center of the roadway, provided the
driver yields the right-of-way to all vehicles traveling in
the proper direction upon the unobstructed portion of the
roadway within such distance as to constitute a hazard.
http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/v...3.001.000.html

contango 05-29-12 02:57 AM


Originally Posted by CB HI (Post 14284045)
PA has similar law and handles it the same as Florida.



http://law.onecle.com/pennsylvania/v...3.001.000.html

That section just says the normal place for a vehicle is on the right hand side of the road unless passing something. Unless I missed something it doesn't say anything about when it is legal to overtake.

CB HI 05-29-12 03:30 AM

PA no passing zone law


§ 3307. No-passing zones.
(a) Establishment and marking.--The department and local
authorities may determine those portions of any highway under
their respective jurisdictions where overtaking and passing or
driving on the left side of the roadway would be especially
hazardous and shall by appropriate signs or markings on the
roadway indicate the beginning and end of such zones and when
the signs or markings are in place and clearly visible to an
ordinarily observant person every driver of a vehicle shall obey
the directions of the signs or markings. Signs shall be placed
to indicate the beginning and end of each no-passing zone.
(b) Compliance by drivers.--Where signs and markings are in
place to define a no-passing zone as set forth in subsection
(a), no driver shall at any time drive on the left side of the
roadway within the no-passing zone or on the left side of any
pavement striping designed to mark a no-passing zone throughout
its length.
(c) Application of section.--This section does not apply
under the conditions described in section 3301(a)(2) and (5)

(relating to driving on right side of roadway).
The no passing law is exempted for obstructions which SMV became legally considered.


3301 a. (2) When an obstruction exists making it necessary to
drive to the left of the center of the roadway,
provided the
driver yields the right-of-way to all vehicles traveling in
the proper direction upon the unobstructed portion of the
roadway within such distance as to constitute a hazard.

unterhausen 05-29-12 04:34 AM

the part about yielding the right of way is widely ignored. It's a little scary. I have a theory that there used to be a lot more head-on accidents and people have gotten complacent

Bekologist 05-29-12 05:55 AM


Originally Posted by CB HI (Post 14284109)
PA no passing zone law



The no passing law is exempted for obstructions which SMV became legally considered.

actually, not quite. it was illegal for motorists to pass bicyclists under that allowance until Pennsylvania added language specifically mentioning pedalcycles and passing in no passing zones. previous to which, it was technically illegal for motorists to pass a bicyclist in a no passing zone.

HB 171, Pennsylvania's 4 foot safe passing law, included language allowing passing of pedalcycles in no passing zones.


Originally Posted by penn four foot passing law
(b.1) Overtaking pedalcycles.‑‑It is permissible to pass a pedalcycle, if done in accordance with sections 3303(a)(3) (relating to overtaking vehicle on the left) and 3305 (relating to limitations on overtaking on the left).

states generally don't allow passing other vehicles, including bicyclists, under 'obstructing' standards in no passing zones. no passing zones are quite restrictive of road users and passing.

It's too bad florida claims bikes can be passed as "obstructions" across double yellow lines.

one of the de facto rules of the road exhibited everywhere - pass bicyclists in no passing zones if safe.

Here's an example from a state that specifically allows passing bicyclists in a no passing zone, Kansas...


Originally Posted by Kansas traffic code 8-1516
The driver of a vehicle may pass a bicycle proceeding in the same direction in a no-passing zone with the duty to execute the pass only when it is safe to do so.

So, the question remains: should motor vehicles be allowed to pass bicyclists in no passing zones if safe to do so? Should states codify this allowance as part of safe passing legislation? do these types of laws make bicycle traffic more acceptable to other road users when encountering bikes in no passing zones?

John Forester 05-29-12 11:53 AM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14284307)
actually, not quite. it was illegal for motorists to pass bicyclists under that allowance until Pennsylvania added language specifically mentioning pedalcycles and passing in no passing zones. previous to which, it was technically illegal for motorists to pass a bicyclist in a no passing zone.

HB 171, Pennsylvania's 4 foot safe passing law, included language allowing passing of pedalcycles in no passing zones.



states generally don't allow passing other vehicles, including bicyclists, under 'obstructing' standards in no passing zones. no passing zones are quite restrictive of road users and passing.

It's too bad florida claims bikes can be passed as "obstructions" across double yellow lines.

one of the de facto rules of the road exhibited everywhere - pass bicyclists in no passing zones if safe.

Here's an example from a state that specifically allows passing bicyclists in a no passing zone, Kansas...



So, the question remains: should motor vehicles be allowed to pass bicyclists in no passing zones if safe to do so? Should states codify this allowance as part of safe passing legislation? do these types of laws make bicycle traffic more acceptable to other road users when encountering bikes in no passing zones?

The preferred version of the modified no-passing law refers to the speed of the slower vehicle. No-passing zones are calculated for the sight distance required to overtake a vehicle traveling near the speed limit by the typical passenger car. The modified version says that if the slower vehicle is moving at less than some fraction of the speed limit, say less than half, then it is permissible to overtake that vehicle if there is sufficient clear sight distance for that overtaking to be safe. The difference does not depend on the width of the slower vehicle, but to its speed relative to "normal" traffic, which is the correct engineering principle.

Bekologist 05-29-12 01:28 PM

the preferred version?

inaccurate mumbo jumbo about the 'engineering' of passing aside, :rolleyes: no passing zones are designated significantly differently than john postulates -example of a states' no passing standards

should states legalize passing bicyclists in no-passing zones, similar to Kansas law?


Originally Posted by kansas traffic statute 8-1516
The driver of a vehicle may pass a bicycle proceeding in the same direction in a no-passing zone with the duty to execute the pass only when it is safe to do so.

Do motorists frequently pass you in no passing zones?

Do you consider it a de facto rule of the road, that motorists will pass you while bicycling, even in a no passing zone if its safe to do so?

Would knowing its legal to pass bicyclists in no passing zones enhance motorists' acceptance of bicyclists on the roads?

I consider them positive steps in traffic law, both as recognition of a de facto rule of traffic, and the laws' legitimacy factor. (I already know bicyclists are legitimate road users, its just not all motorists think this)

John Forester 05-29-12 02:35 PM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14286060)
the preferred version?

inaccurate mumbo jumbo about the 'engineering' of passing aside, :rolleyes: no passing zones are designated significantly differently than john postulates -example of a states' no passing standards
snips

Bek is here claiming that designating no-passing zones is not done according to the sight distance required for overtaking of typical motor vehicle by another typical motor vehicle, which is what I described. The standard that Bek offers to refute my argument does not refute my argument at all. In addition to whatever the highway designer designated on the plans, the standard describes a system for measuring sight distance and comparing the sight distance available to a table giving greater required sight distance for higher speeds of travel, as designated by the speed limit signs.

Bek is now making his standard argument in favor of a law that allows overtaking a cyclist within a no-passing zone instead of a law that allows overtaking a similarly slow vehicle within a no-passing zone. The mere mention of "bicycle" in such a law enables Bek to claim that it represents cyclists' rights, while the more accurate "slowly moving vehicle" law, while providing equal protection for cyclists as well as matching the engineering requirements, would not allow Bek to advance a claim of cyclists' rights. Nothing but propaganda in Bek's argument.

Paul Barnard 05-29-12 03:22 PM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14284307)



So, the question remains: should motor vehicles be allowed to pass bicyclists in no passing zones if safe to do so? ?



The question to me is why shouldn't they?

What are the pros and cons?

contango 05-29-12 05:37 PM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14286060)
Do motorists frequently pass you in no passing zones?

Do you consider it a de facto rule of the road, that motorists will pass you while bicycling, even in a no passing zone if its safe to do so?

Would knowing its legal to pass bicyclists in no passing zones enhance motorists' acceptance of bicyclists on the roads?

I consider them positive steps in traffic law, both as recognition of a de facto rule of traffic, and the laws' legitimacy factor. (I already know bicyclists are legitimate road users, its just not all motorists think this)

In the UK:

Motorists frequently pass me despite double white lines down the middle of the road (our version of your double yellow lines). I don't have a problem with it, if the road ahead is clear there's no reason why I need to be a rolling roadblock.

I expect motorists to pass me if it is safe to do so. If the posted speed limit is significantly faster than I can manage on my bike why wouldn't any motorist want to go at closer to the posted speed limit, if they could safely pass me?

genec 05-29-12 05:41 PM


Originally Posted by contango (Post 14287171)
In the UK:

Motorists frequently pass me despite double white lines down the middle of the road (our version of your double yellow lines). I don't have a problem with it, if the road ahead is clear there's no reason why I need to be a rolling roadblock.

I expect motorists to pass me if it is safe to do so. If the posted speed limit is significantly faster than I can manage on my bike why wouldn't any motorist want to go at closer to the posted speed limit, if they could safely pass me?

Agreed... now if only the motorists would do this in a safe and good manner... see my post #51 above.

John Forester (I think) made a comment here or on another thread about too many laws leading to motorists "checking off boxes" when they drive...

Digital_Cowboy 05-29-12 08:54 PM


Originally Posted by John Forester (Post 14282701)
The decision to paint a double-yellow center line is made by considering the sight distance required to safely overtake a vehicle that is moving rather close to the speed limit. The newest versions of the overtaking law allow overtaking of very slow vehicles, despite a double-yellow line, provided that there is sufficient sight distance for the overtaking movement to be completed safely. I presume that these versions are likely to spread to more states.

John,

Sadly, it's been my experience that too many motorists do not allow sufficient time/space for the traffic that is in the correct lane to pass/clear before they make their pass by crossing over the double-yellow line. Or at best they don't allow enough space between themselves and the bicycle that they are attempting to pass.

contango 05-30-12 01:14 AM


Originally Posted by genec (Post 14287188)
Agreed... now if only the motorists would do this in a safe and good manner... see my post #51 above.

My experience (again in the UK) is that the overwhelming majority of motorists do it in a safe and good manner. Only yesterday I was effectively a rolling roadblock going up a hill with a 50mph limit when the best I could do towards the top was more like 10mph. The road was narrow and had oncoming traffic, and the cars behind me waited until they could safely pass. For my part when I had an opportunity to pull over and let them pass I did.


John Forester (I think) made a comment here or on another thread about too many laws leading to motorists "checking off boxes" when they drive...
Someone made the point, and I referenced it on another thread making a similar point. Too many hard-and-fast rules lulls people into a false sense of security that as long as they tick all the boxes they are safe drivers - it discourages people from thinking for themselves and reading the road for themselves. It is clearly nonsensical to believe that someone in a remote office can tell me exactly how I should be driving at any given time when I can see the road ahead of me and they can't. Or, as a poster on another forum put it, looking where you are going is the best way to get up-to-the-second hazard information.

CB HI 05-30-12 01:42 AM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14284307)
actually, not quite. it was illegal for motorists to pass bicyclists under that allowance until Pennsylvania added language specifically mentioning pedalcycles and passing in no passing zones. previous to which, it was technically illegal for motorists to pass a bicyclist in a no passing zone.

actually, not quite. It was legal before to pass any SMV including cyclist under the obstruction exemption I cited. PA has decided to add specific law making it expressly clear that cyclist can be passed. That was done to quite objections to the 3 feet passing law.

So an extra law for something that was already legal. Simply adds more confusion on the meaning of the laws in totality.

Bekologist 05-30-12 05:43 AM


Originally Posted by CB HI (Post 14288612)
actually, not quite. It was legal before to pass any SMV including cyclist under the obstruction exemption I cited. PA has decided to add specific law making it expressly clear that cyclist can be passed. That was done to quite objections to the 3 feet passing law.

So an extra law for something that was already legal. Simply adds more confusion on the meaning of the laws in totality.


That's debatable. Most states are clear that no passing zones mean no passing. Pennsylvania may have been ambiguous like florida's, which required road users to think of bicycles not as 'road users' but as 'obstructions' when passing. A pretty sorry state of affairs.


The addition to Pennsylvania law clarifies it is legal to pass the most frequently encountered slow moving vehicle in no passing zones in pennsylvania. it is a clarification in the law, and one that likely enhances acceptance of bicyclists sharing narrow two lane roads with motorists.

jon c. 05-30-12 06:03 AM

Virtually all my riding in on two lane roads with double lines (rural FL panhandle). Passing zones are few and far between, but so are other vehicles on many of these roads. It would be insane for drivers not to pass across the double line. They'd often have to sit behind me for a mile or more. Every once in a while, I get a driver, usually a teen aged female, who won't cross the lines. I hate it when they do that.

John Forester 05-30-12 10:39 AM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14288802)
snip

The addition to Pennsylvania law clarifies it is legal to pass the most frequently encountered slow moving vehicle in no passing zones in pennsylvania. it is a clarification in the law, and one that likely enhances acceptance of bicyclists sharing narrow two lane roads with motorists.

Bek, as always, advocates the mention of bicycle in traffic law, because of the propaganda value of that situation. A law that says that it becomes lawful to overtake a bicycle in a no-passing zone implies that there is something magical about the bicycle that makes such safe and lawful. A law based on the slow relative speed of any vehicle indicates that the issue is one of relative speeds and therefore the shorter distance required for overtaking the very slowly-moving vehicle.

Bekologist 05-30-12 10:44 AM

.....statutory regulation of vehicles interacting with bikes in traffic code can aid in legitimizing bike traffic to other road users- why yes, John.

How astute of you.

John Forester 05-30-12 10:54 AM


Originally Posted by Bekologist (Post 14290003)
.....statutory regulation of vehicles interacting with bikes in traffic code can aid in legitimizing bike traffic to other road users- why yes, John.

How astute of you.

There is a big difference between regulating cyclists as a class, which has opened the door to legitimately discriminating against cyclists as second-class road users, and regulating the movements of all drivers of vehicles when they move slowly, which provides for equality of treatment.

Bekologist 05-30-12 11:07 AM

....and some laws are preferential towards bicyclists, and treat bicyclists preferentially. Most of the 20 state safe passing laws are a good example.

I get passed by motorists across the double yellow line all the time. Maybe more states should make it legal. Sometimes states include it in safe passing legislation.



There's no reason for state traffic laws need to be strictly vehicle neutral. There can be positive value and preferential treatment as a result of bike and vulnerable road user specific laws clarifying how other traffic operates around bicyclists and vulnerable road users.

Sometimes bike traffic should be treated differently than the motor vehicles, both in statute and in practice.

phoebeisis 05-30-12 11:12 AM

"is something magical about the bicycle that makes such safe and lawful."

Yes their dimensions are magical- bikes are
short 6 feet
narrow 2.5 feet
slow 15 mph-
easy to safely pass-
hence the magically sensible laws allowing the double yellow pass.
Bikes aren't cars.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:46 PM.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.