How much space do you want?

This is what large vehicles look like in a 12ft lane. A cyclist is 2ft wide (AASHTO says 30″). How much more lane width would be needed for a cyclist to ride a reasonable distance from the edge and be afforded reasonable operating space and comfortable passing clearance from these vehicles at a 20-40mph speed differential?

dually

trailer

semi

If there were multiple lanes, wouldn’t you prefer they just change lanes?

The State of Florida grants motorcycle drivers the full use of the lane. Bicycle drivers are more exposed and passed at higher speed differentials and yet we are expected to share a lane that is only 2 feet wider than the ones pictured above… even when there are other lanes available for passing.

I have never taken the position that a cyclist should always claim a 14 foot lane, only that we should have the option to when we feel it is appropriate.

Oddly enough, I have also not yet had a motorist honk at me while claiming a 14ft lane. They simply change lanes and pass. It doesn’t inconvenience them and it doesn’t piss them off. I do try to avoid arterial roads with WCLs at busy times. I would prefer to use a road with multiple narrow lanes because I am more comfortable controlling the lane.

Lane control has more benefits than delivering good passing clearance. Once, I found myself on Tuscawilla at rush hour. The traffic was thick, so I shared the 14ft outside lane. As I approached Gabriella Ln., a line of cars passed me and turned right in front of me, completely cutting me off at the intersection. Even though I was turning right there, I had to negotiate a maneuver to the left to keep from getting pinched in the corner.

Any time a cyclist operates alongside traffic, he is at a disadvantage. We make choices and trade-offs between comfort and courtesy, where appropriate. We should never make trade-offs between safety and courtesy or between safety and comfort. I am a very courteous cyclist, but I rarely trade comfort to create the illusion of courtesy. The few times I have, I’ve regretted it.

Whatever choices we make should be our own. They should be informed choices (which is why we offer information here). Our choices should not be dictated or inhibited by outside forces — like discriminatory laws — but most of all, other cyclists!

It annoys the hell out of me that people who have never ridden with me will misconstrue what I write and paint me as a dogmatic road hog. I am always aware of my surroundings. I have a relatively low tolerance for having traffic behind me that is unable to pass, though I do have a realistic sense of time. It is a rare occasion (a couple times a year) that I end up in that situation, because I choose my routes to avoid such circumstances. When it does happen, I make a right turn and either take a different road or wait for the platoon to pass and come back onto the same road. Do I have to write this disclaimer every time I talk about lane control?

24 replies
  1. ha1ku
    ha1ku says:

    No, I don’t think you need to make that disclaimer at all. Your regular readers are already familiar with your cycling habits. More importantly, you are motivated by a sincere concern for personal safety and the safety of others.

    Five bucks says when the word “road hog” comes to mind, it isn’t about safety. It’s about inconvenience. Many people might not honestly admit that, but I think it’s true.

  2. Rantwick
    Rantwick says:

    Hey Keri,

    Ha1ku is right in that your regular readers “know” you and how your ride and no discalimer is necessary for us.

    However, we all hope that motorists will read this stuff sometimes, and the disclaimer may help them understand that you and others who ride your way are not selfish, just sensible.

    I see disclaimers like yours (and mine in conversation) as a necessary thing for gaining better acceptance.

  3. Wayne Pein
    Wayne Pein says:

    Very well said.

    When people “know” they are right, they often go into either attack mode or misconstrue mode when faced with realities that contradict their long held beliefs.

    “The State of Florida grants motorcycle drivers the full use of the lane. Bicycle drivers are more exposed and passed at higher speed differentials and yet we are expected to share a lane that is only 2 feet wider than the ones pictured above… even when there are other lanes available for passing.”

    Well, according to FL bicycles don’t have any width and exist in the ether. So naturally there is no passing distance requirement. But wait! There IS a 3 foot passing law (Let’s assume for a minute that that makes sense. And never mind that IF a passing law exists then it should be 5 feet.)

    Heavy trucks are 8.5 feet and may have mirrors bringing this to 10 feet. 3 feet of passing clearance equals 13 feet. Since bicycles have no width and therefore can ride right on the right edgeline (so there is no need for x feet of buffer from the side, 13 feet is just fine for lane sharing (as long as the motorist drives along the left lane line; never mind that they may have a hard time seeing a bicycle that has no width so may drive down the center of the lane).

    Wayne

    Therefore, 14 ft

  4. Keri
    Keri says:

    Rantwick,

    I’m a fan of communicating with motorists. If I know someone is going to have to wait behind me for a few seconds, I’ll make some small signal to let him know I’m aware he’s there. I typically offer a thank-you wave when he passes. I feel like most of the interactions (even when they have to wait) are positive.

    Last week I was on a narrow 2-lane road and an SUV driver came up behind me and honked. I looked back, and put my hand back with a gesture that said “please be patient and don’t pass.” There was oncoming traffic and a curve ahead. Once the traffic cleared and we were around the curve, I made a slight gesture to the right to let him know I expected him to pass. He gave me about 6 feet of clearance and showed no indication of annoyance. I like to hope that kind of interaction causes a thought process about why I was riding where I was. Who knows.

  5. andrewp
    andrewp says:

    Keri and Fred have opened my eyes to multi-lane cycling. I guarantee you: ask anyone who doesn’t cycle what they think about it (cycling on a 4 lane road) being safe, and they’ll tell you that you have a death wish.

    Ain’t so.

    But, it gets stickier when we get to 2 lane/high volume roads. When to take the lane, when is OK/safe to share, when is it OK to back up traffic because they cannot pass safely, how fast is cycling fast enough when on a road like this, etc — these are points worthy of more discussion.

    Unless you are ChipSeal — I’m betting he adhears to an old Itailian driving quote:

    “Whattsa behinda me, doesn’t a matta …” 🙂

  6. Abhishek
    Abhishek says:

    I debate a trade off between safety and courtesy twice a day on my two mile commute home from work.

    There is a small section of road with two narrow lanes, no median or shoulder. I have tried being courteous and stayed on the right side of the lane. After multiple close encounters, including one where a motorist was mad enough to spit at me while passing, I have decided to control that section of the road. By controlling the lane, I avoid the situation where an irritated motorist position themselves next to me and dish out their frustration. I have also begun leaving work 30 mins after the main rush hour starts.

    The next part of the road is four lanes with a median but no shoulder. The outside lane is less than 14 feet wide but I stay on the right side. There is a quality of subjective safety riding on that road on the right. At the intersection, however, I move over and control the lane till I pass it. This avoids any right hooks.

    Unfortunately, any alternate route adds about 6 miles one way!

    Safety and Comfort go hand in hand. Lack of safety is lack of comfort.

  7. Keri
    Keri says:

    Shek said:
    “Safety and Comfort go hand in hand.”

    That is true for a cyclist who knows where the risks are, and where they are not.

    Many cyclists choose the sidewalk for comfort, but don’t understand the risk—thus ride too fast and are taken by surprise when suddenly they almost get hit by a car. They are far less safe where they are comfortable than if they were controlling the adjacent traffic lane, but they would be very uncomfortable doing that – at first – until they adjusted to the realization that it is, indeed, safe.

    Likewise with bike lanes, they often provide a false sense of security for people who don’t know about door zones, coffin corners or common intersection risks. People who don’t know about those things are much more comfortable in a bike lane, whereas I am much more comfortable controlling a traffic lane.

    But it sounds like you have some serious civility problems up there in Jax. This is the monkey-wrench in the safety/comfort equation. If militant, hostile motorists are trying to prevent you from doing what’s safe, that would certainly be uncomfortable.

  8. Keri
    Keri says:

    Shek also said:
    “Unfortunately, any alternate route adds about 6 miles one way!”

    I’d say you have a connectivity problem in Jax, too. IMO, the lack of connectivity and lack of civility are related.

  9. Kevin Love
    Kevin Love says:

    Andrew asked:

    “But, it gets stickier when we get to 2 lane/high volume roads. When to take the lane, when is OK/safe to share, when is it OK to back up traffic because they cannot pass safely, how fast is cycling fast enough when on a road like this, etc — these are points worthy of more discussion.”

    Kevin’s answers:

    When to take the lane – always.

    When is it OK to back up traffic because they cannot pass safely – always.

    How fast is cycling fast enough when on a road like this – as fast as I currently feel like cycling.

  10. Keri
    Keri says:

    ChipSeal wrote a really good post on his blog addressing motorist entitlement attitudes. It really strikes to the heart of our cultural hypocrisy about traffic delays and who causes them.

    I recommend you all read and ponder it:

    Inane Comments in a Newspaper

  11. Laura
    Laura says:

    Being fairly new to this blog/forum, I’m not as familiar obviously with everyone’s particular position on various issues. I apologized in the other thread and I’ll say so here, I didn’t mean to get anyone’s dander up.

    In the planning field we often use a term called context sensitive design and I think that’s absolutely appropriate when designing roadways. Number of lanes, surrounding land use, posted speed limits, number of curb cuts, types of traffic (residential? transit? trucks?) and number of daily trips.

    I also absolutely agree that safety is paramount for the most vulnerable users.

  12. Laura
    Laura says:

    and in answer to Keri’s question, I’ll take a 6′ bike lane – on a multi-lane roadway with 20-40 mph speed differential and truck traffic.

  13. fred_dot_u
    fred_dot_u says:

    I don’t know about opening anyone’s eyes to multi-lane cycling, but I’ll certainly agree about the heavy-traffic two-lane roads. They are usually narrow lanes, often overloaded due to under-estimated growth and as of late, under-funded road building. Only one roadway in my area comes to mind as being the worst (for me) and I’ve done the pull-over routine twice on the same trip. The first set of passes was five vehicles, while the second pass meant waiting for twenty-three automobiles and trucks to continue on.

    In case it’s not obvious, traffic flow in the opposite direction was just as heavy, making passing impossible.

    Lucky for me, I get fewer client calls on this roadway, probably due to the economy, but also the roadway is going four-lanes and is already so, in parts. It just changes the pinch points, though. Nice touch, they have zero striping for ersatz bike lanes or shoulder markings on the completed sections.

  14. Steve A
    Steve A says:

    I pretty much agreed with everything Keri WROTE in her post.

    UNFORTUNATELY, two of my engineers were grilling me about cyclists on Monday, so the post smacked me right in the face. The key is that one complained about a cyclist riding straight down the middle of the MIDDLE Lane, going uphill, on a Beltline Road overpass in Dallas County. He assured me the cyclist was not moving over to get ready for a left turn – just going straight. Not having seen the event, all I could say was I couldn’t think of a reason to be riding there. It would also seem inappropriate, even if there were no FTR law, violating the “slower traffic keep right” principle.

    If one of them were to look at the PICTURES on Keri’s post, they’d think I was misleading them as part of my membership in a secret, satanic, cycling suicide cult . They’d not notice the air vent reflection in the bottom two pictures…

  15. ChipSeal
    ChipSeal says:

    How fast is cycling fast enough when on a road like this?

    This is a great question andrewp, and it should be answered often and loudly.

    The notion that if you can’t keep up, you should stay out of the way is firmly ingrained in our psyche. The notion is codified in the slow-moving-vehicle statutes. It is evident in the emphasis in maximizing traffic volumes and high speed limits.

    But a bicycle has a very limited motor, and a cyclist could never be considered “fast” when compared with a motor vehicle. Further, on a thirty MPH road, a motorist will not notice the difference between a cyclist going ten MPH and another going fifteen. In practical terms, any speed for a cyclist will be nearly the same for a motorist in how he has to interact with you.

    It is not about your speed, it is about your position in the lane that is important. My average speed is 14 MPH, but I will be taking the lane at six MPH when going up a hill near me.

    Here is my thought experiment that helped me: If a large inanimate object was placed in the center of the lane, say a couch or a grandfather’s clock, how long it be before it was hit? In my opinion, because the objects are instantly recognized as a fixed impediment, it would be avoided until nightfall.

    All this to say, go as slow or as fast as you wish based on any factor except courtesy to motorists. Any efforts to go fast for their sake will not be noticed. It won’t be appreciated. It will increase your anxiety and stress for no practical purpose.

  16. Laura
    Laura says:

    Speaking of engineers – I butt heads with them all the time so imagine my surprise to feel like I’m butting heads with my fellow cyclists too!

  17. Kevin Love
    Kevin Love says:

    ChipSeal wrote:

    “…a cyclist could never be considered “fast” when compared with a motor vehicle.”

    Kevin’s comment:

    Urban motor vehicle speeds in major cities average from 10-15 km/hr depending upon the city. I’ve seen numbers for London, England that show 19th century horse-drawn traffic was faster than motor vehicle traffic today.

    A recent study of The Gardiner Expressway, a fully-segregated “high-speed” car highway showed average speed during the PM rush to be a not-so-high 36 km/hr. Source:
    http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/dbdocs/451ad1fc5015e.pdf

    Some of Toronto’s major urban streets, such as Wellesley, have peak hour average motor vehicle speeds less than 5 km/hr. Major Indian cities such as Bombay have similar average motor vehicle speeds.

    I see from The New York Times that average motor vehicle speed on 37th Street in Manhattan is 2.7 miles per hour. I’ll post the link seperately to avoid the spam killer robot.

    In short, a bicycle is the fastest private urban vehicle in existence.

  18. Keri
    Keri says:

    Laura said:

    “Speaking of engineers – I butt heads with them all the time so imagine my surprise to feel like I’m butting heads with my fellow cyclists too!”

    Welcome to cyclist advocacy 🙂

    But this isn’t butting heads. Check out the Chainguard listserve or the LCI listserve (that’s LCIs only). If you really want to beat your head against the wall – go to Bikeforums.net A&S forum.

  19. Kevin Love
    Kevin Love says:

    Laura said:

    “Speaking of engineers – I butt heads with them all the time so imagine my surprise to feel like I’m butting heads with my fellow cyclists too!”

    Kevin’s comment:

    I think that this is an internet phenomenon. In Real Life, although there are disagreements about priorities, utility cyclists are more-or-less all in agreement about where we should be going in terms of infrastructure, laws and public policy.

    The same can be said for car advocates, who fairly consistently advocate for fully-segregated car infrastructure.

    There are a few fringe issues that get the fringe worked up, like helmet laws, but my strategy is to simply ignore that issue.

    Yvonne Bambrick, leader of the Toronto Cyclists Union, gives the example here by providing a bicycle safety video in which the subject of helmets is studiously ignored by her. See:

    http://www.thestar.com/videozone/638869

    Amusingly enough, The Star’s editors felt the need to put in a final slide after the video. I can just imagine the discussion in the editorial room…

  20. José
    José says:

    I also ride that section of road that Abhishek is talking about everyday. I have had 3 bad moments there (all of which I have mentioned in here or the forum). One of those moments was when a police officer told me to ride on the far right side of the road.

    When I ride that segment, I control the lane. Motorists have been generally corteous with a couple of exceptions. The street is generally busy, and I try to ride fast through that section and get out of there as soon as I can.

    I don’t know if my speed (+/- 20 mph) plays a factor in the motorists perceptions, but it surely helps me to just get out of that predicament fast.

Comments are closed.