Bike Forums - etiquette when passing

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)

- Commuting (https://www.bikeforums.net/commuting/)

- - etiquette when passing (https://www.bikeforums.net/commuting/929970-etiquette-when-passing.html)

Read the facts and law. This involves passing on the right, whereas passing on the left is legal. In BC, filter to the left of stopped cars, but in the same lane, and assuming it is safe, you should be OK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jralbert (Post 16429202)

Augh! See, I wanted to leave this alone when I saw alan's reply, but I just can't stand to see the argument made unopposed that the law somehow supports filtering or lane splitting. The Act in question was indeed written originally to describe motor vehicles; when roadway cycling became commonplace, the Legislature extended the Act with a section (183) to specifically describe variances for bicycles, which section begins with a clause asserting that "In addition to the duties imposed by this section, a person operating a cycle on a highway has the same rights and duties as a driver of a vehicle." Just to forestall further nitpicking, the term 'highway' is defined by the Act as "...every road, street, lane or right of way designed or intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles".
....

Glad to give you an opportunity to present your case :lol:

I wasn't intending to argue that the law somehow supported lane splitting but I can see how ambiguous it was. I differentiate between lane splitting vs lane sharing while riding FRAP. While the latter may technically be "lane splitting", and 158 prohibits passing on the right by drivers of vehicles, I don't see how that can be applied in practice to bicycles passing vehicles on the right side when riding FRAP. Otherwise there would be no lane sharing by bicycles, no? You wouldn't even be able to ride past a line of stopped cars with even 6 feet of clearance, unless there was a delineated lane there. So I'd suspect that in this particular case, drivers of vehicles would be construed as motor vehicles.

In other words, passing on the right with room on the roadway right edge is OK, passing on the right between lanes not OK. If that's true, then the statute has to be interpreted accordingly.

Another thought: if the traffic is really jammed up, you could likely just lane split all the way up to the light. And if the jam continues on the other side of the light such that cars on your side still won't move much, then you could still head on though the light and continue splitting.

This instead of using the sidewalk, if splitting is legal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatrickGSR94 (Post 16429448)

That's why I said I would take the sidewalk if it were literally jammed up solid between lights with cars barely inching along. It would be stupid to sit on your bike forever in that mess.

I did not take a look the "street view" image...I agree there are some instances where taking the sidewalk would be a decent option.

Quote:

One of the great things about cycling is being able to go where cars cannot go.

And I think the same aphorism applies to lane splitting. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by wphamilton (Post 16429515)

Happy to oblige! The way I read the statute as being intended (note, I'm not in any way legally qualified), bicycles are full-on vehicles, entitled to a space in the lane like any other. The Act requires that cyclists travel in the right portion of their lane as much as practicable, but if another vehicle wishes to overtake me, by the Act they're required to signal their intention, and perform a partial or full lane-change manoeuvre to do so. Once they have done so, I can only overtake them on the left, and by the same process: signalling, and proceeding around their vehicle when safe. So if a vehicle passes me and then comes to a stop behind a line of traffic stopped at a light, I'm obliged to either hold my position in the lane behind them, or if possible safely overtake them on the left - but I can't then worm my way back into the right-hand lane at the stop line. If I want to proceed in either lane, I need a full lane-width space in which to do so. This does mean that traffic passes me and stays ahead of me, which I don't prefer, but that's the way it is if I have to ride in a non-bike lane, so that's how I ride. Where possible, I choose routes that have bike lanes, solving the whole problem outright.

You'll have to look at the laws of your own state/province. Then find local custom. You can also look at local bike blogs, for you I suggest ibiketo.ca .

In Massachusetts
Chapter 85
Section 11B. Every person operating a bicycle [emphasis mine] upon a way, as defined in section one of chapter ninety, shall have the right to use all public ways in the commonwealth except limited access or express state highways where signs specifically prohibiting bicycles have been posted, and shall be subject to the traffic laws and regulations of the commonwealth and the special regulations contained in this section, except that: (1) the bicycle operator may keep to the right when passing a motor vehicle which is moving in the travel lane of the way [emphasis mine]...

In case you are wondering:
Chapter 89
Section 2. ... The driver of a vehicle may, if the roadway is free from obstruction and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles, overtake and pass upon the right [emphasis mine] of another vehicle when the vehicle overtaken is (a) making or about to make a left turn, (b) upon a one-way street, or (c) upon any roadway on which traffic is restricted to one direction of movement.

So 85.11B makes clear that on the wide shared lane, bikes can pass on the right.

Finally, even with law and custom, safety trumps all.

But worrying about people in cars getting angry because you get to your destination while they wait in queues? You all up north are way too polite at times.

-mr. bill