Question about the bike/walking trail

This is an annual thread, same stuff every year.

Type A drivers from the big city in too big a hurry on their beach vacation to leave a little room for a cyclist on a road that only allows 35 MPH anyway. Type A cyclists from the big city pedalling 3 wide on 30A, defying the cars to pass them. Exhale, folks, it's the beach. You're on vacation.

You mean, can't we all just be B's?

I posted this a few years ago. Maybe it's time for a refresher:

State law clearly places the responsibility with the driver of a motor vehicle to avoid colliding with a human powered vehicle:

Your Legal Responsibilities as a Motor Vehicle Driver
Driver Responsibility to Exercise Care
(Section 316.130, F.S.)

Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian or any person propelling a human-powered vehicle and give warning when necessary and exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any obviously confused or incapacitated person.

Overtaking and Passing a Vehicle
(Sections 316.083, 316.085, F.S.)

The driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left thereof at a safe distance and shall not again drive to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the overtaken vehicle. A driver overtaking a bicycle must maintain a horizontal clearance of at least 3 feet [�316.083]. Three feet is a minimum "safe distance" for passing a cyclist under typical urban conditions; when the passing vehicle is large, towing a trailer, or traveling at much higher speed, greater lateral clearance is needed.

To pass a cyclist with safe clearance, it may be necessary for a motorist to enter (at least partially) the next lane, when and where it is safe to do so.
No vehicle shall be driven to the left side of the center of the roadway in overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction unless the left side is clearly visible and free of oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance ahead to permit passing to be made without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction. In every event an overtaking vehicle must return to an authorized lane of travel as soon as practicable and, in the event the passing movement involves the use of a lane authorized for vehicles approaching from the opposite direction, before coming within 200 feet of any approaching vehicle [�316.085].

The Double Yellow Line: The prohibition of passing in a no-passing zone does not apply when an obstruction exists making it necessary to drive to the left of the center of the highway [�316.0875(3)]. Thus, when a cyclist is traveling so slowly as to constitute an "obstruction," a motorist may cross the center line in a no-passing zone to pass the cyclist if the way is clear to do so, i.e., when it can be seen that any oncoming traffic is far enough ahead that the motorist could finish passing before coming within 200 feet of an oncoming vehicle.

About 1 percent of bicycle-motor vehicle crashes involve motorists who misjudge the width or length necessary to pass a cyclist. Close passing causes some cyclists to "hug the curb," or ride on the sidewalk, where crash risk actually increases.

Driving Speeds
(Sections 316.183, 316.185, F.S.)

No person shall drive a vehicle on a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing. In every event, speed shall be controlled as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, or vehicle on or entering the highway in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care.

The driver of every vehicle shall drive at an appropriately reduced speed when approaching and going around a curve; approaching a hill crest; traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway; and when any special hazard exists with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions.

The fact that a driver is traveling at less than the speed limit does not relieve him of the duty to reduce speed in such conditions. A driver must reduce speed as necessary to avoid colliding with any person legally present on the street.

Opening and Closing Vehicle Doors
(Section 316.2005, F.S.)

No person shall open any
door on a motor vehicle unless and until it is reasonably safe to do so and can be done without interfering with the movement of other traffic, nor shall any person leave a door open on the side of a vehicle available to moving traffic for a period of time longer than necessary to load or unload passengers.

You mean, can't we all just be B's?

:lolabove:

[h=4]316.123 Vehicle entering stop or yield intersection.[/h]
(1) The right-of-way at an intersection may be indicated by stop signs or yield signs as authorized in s. 316.006. (2)(a) Except when directed to proceed by a police officer or traffic control signal, every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop intersection indicated by a stop sign shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then at the point nearest the intersecting roadway where the driver has a view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roadway before entering the intersection. After having stopped, the driver shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle which has entered the intersection from another highway or which is approaching so closely on said highway as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time when the driver is moving across or within the intersection.

WowWeeeeee!! I really didn't mean to get the wheels turning(no pun intended) on the inquiry.I only wondered if anyone got hurt on a bicycle.I guess it's an emotional issue for those involved on the subject.However,I will live to ride again next vacation by staying on my side of the path!!

This is an annual thread, same stuff every year.

Type A drivers from the big city in too big a hurry on their beach vacation to leave a little room for a cyclist on a road that only allows 35 MPH anyway. Type A cyclists from the big city pedalling 3 wide on 30A, defying the cars to pass them. Exhale, folks, it's the beach. You're on vacation.

Our daughter and son-in-law live in Midtown ATL. It is common to see a single bicyclist taking up an entire lane on Peach, W Peach, Spring, 10th, etc., even in 5 PM traffic. People deal with it, even though they're anxious to get home from work.

Not everyone is on vacation at the beach, but we all need to respect the bicyclists using the road for transportation or exercise who obey the traffic laws.

Respect is a two way street. No pun intended ( well maybe a little ).

This can be a touchy subject. I feel that the bikers do have a right to SHARE the road. That calls for cooperation from bikes and cars. My biggest complaint from the car side is the general refusal of bikers to yield to faster traffic. There are rules against blocking the flow of traffic. So if you are on your bike and cars are piling up in either or both directions, you should yield. As a motorist I should be cautious and also share the road. It rarely happens that way though. As far as the bike path, most places in the rest of the world would treat it like the school hallway. Slower traffic to the right, faster traffic on the left. When you approach to pass, you say "on your left" to indicate that you are about to pass on the left (This would require that everyone using the bike path keep at least one ear free of mp3's etc. Btw that would be a good idea for personal safety anyway). This system works for kids in kindergarten. We all have a right to use the road and a duty to share it. On a personal note I have to say, wanting to ride a bike on 30a or 98 is crazy between the traffic and the heat. My momma taught me not to play in traffic and I am just not a fan of heat stroke. It doesn't matter who is legal or right because these roads are very dangerous for everyone and we all need to be careful and look out for the other guy. I know someone who has hit a biker that veered in front of him and I had a very good friend who was killed by a truck that he rode his bike head on into. So be very careful no matter what you drive! You will have to live with it regarless of who was at fault.
To the bikers I would like to add this... The way you feel about families and kids holding you up is much like the way the car drivers feel when you hold them up on the road especially when they are trying to get their work done.
To the motorists, Take a deep breath and share. You live in a tourist area so plan on extra time to get where you are going.
Maybe we need our own version of Middle Beach Road with a lane for walkers, a lane for bikers and a lane for golf carts. The cars can stay on 30a and 98.
If you bike, motor bike, drive a car or a cart, push a baby buggy or rollerblade or walk with or without a dog or skateboard or whatever, be careful and be kind.

we definitely need a bigger bike lane for bikers. I know they have a right to ride the road but I have come very close to being hit head on by a car at a curve in Seagrove, due to a biker. There is just no room. It scares the heck out of me. And I am definitely Type B. I will wait until all is clear before I drive around a biker. Still very scary.

My friend was telling me about two bikers riding side by side down 30A - they would not ride single file and made everyone just stay behind them. That is so wrong.

My friend was telling me about two bikers riding side by side down 30A - they would not ride single file and made everyone just stay behind them. That is so wrong.

As a cyclists, I agree this is just wrong. On a busy street always ride single file.

River>throwing you a bone<Otter

.
My friend was telling me about two bikers riding side by side down 30A - they would not ride single file and made everyone just stay behind them. That is so wrong.

Though I personally only ride single file, there are sound reasons to ride two abreast. It decreases the distance and time a passing vehicle has to spend in the passing lane. It also discourages drivers from "squeezing" past the cyclist while there is oncoming traffic. They have to wait until the passing lane is clear. It is also not illegal in many situations. Read the following statute and the interpretation that follows.

FS 316.2065 (6)

Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway may not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles. Persons riding two abreast may not impede traffic when traveling at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing.

A substandard-width lane, which is too narrow for a bicycle and another vehicle to travel safely side-by-side, a minimum width of 14 feet, is one of the specific exceptions to the “keep right” provisions in FS 316.2065, Bicycle Regulations.

A single cyclist impeding traffic in a narrow lane, and many other circumstances, may be entirely legal. In many situations is also the safest option for cyclists. “Taking the lane” in substandard-width lanes discourages motor vehicle operators from attempting to pass in an unsafe and illegal manner. The farther a cyclist is to the right in narrow lanes, the closer and more dangerous the pass by motor vehicles. Impatient and illegal unsafe passing endangers not only the cyclist, but possibly the overtaking driver and oncoming traffic.

OPD Officer, Bill Edgar, rides two-abreast with Mighk Wilson on Robinson St in downtown Orlando.

The purpose of the statute is to safely facilitate traffic flow. If cyclists riding two-abreast are not impeding traffic, they are in compliance with the law. That can happen in a number of ways.

Note that cyclists in a bike lane may ride two, three, or more abreast.

The statute specifies “traveling at less than the normal speed of traffic”, so if the cyclists riding abreast are traveling at the “normal speed of traffic” or faster, they are within the law.

Obviously, if there is no other traffic, they are not impeding anyone.

If they are on a multi-lane roadway in either a narrow lane or a wide outside lane, and traffic can easily change lanes to pass, they are ok also. They are not impeding traffic.

Even if the roadway is a single wide lane in each direction, if there is no on-coming traffic, two cyclists riding double are not impeding traffic, since overtaking traffic can easily move to the on-coming lane to pass.

The statute does not clearly state it, but if one cyclist is legally impeding traffic in a narrow lane, and a second cyclist is riding alongside, the two of them are not impeding traffic more than the single cyclist. They are complying with the intent of the law.

To strictly meet the letter of the law, they would single up and ride one behind the other while taking the lane.

So does it matter if the are riding two-abreast or singled up and taking the lane in that situation? They are riding safely. The impact on traffic is the same. Other drivers must wait until a safe and legal opportunity to pass.

The only situation in which the “impeding traffic” part of this statute is truly violated when cyclists are riding two-abreast is when:

they are in a lane which is 14 feet wide, and
traveling slower than the “normal speed of traffic”, and
there is no means of easily overtaking and passing by changing lanes.
In that case, the cyclists should single up and “keep right”

Officers should insure they are fully versed in the statute and understand all of the possible combinations above and exercise their discretion to insure that the statutory intent of safe and reasonable traffic flow is fulfilled.

One last point: Note that the statute says “Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway”. The paved shoulder is not part of the roadway by statutory definition, so that must be taken into consideration when evaluating this situation.

What about the guy who was rollerblading on 30-A back in March? I was down there over Spring Break and he was westbound in the westbound lane near Camp Creek, iPod & earphones in use, rolling from side to side within the westbound lane and thus taking up the entire lane; seems a bit dangerous.

As to the bike issue, I ride a mountain bike, so if I do ride on the road and cars/traffic begin to stress me out, I can just hop on to the shoulder in the area where I live or get over to the multi-use path in an area like 30-A. I always use the multi-use path when pulling my daughter in her bike trailer; the path is great for rides like that. One night my wife rode her bike and I rode mine, towing the trailer, to go to dinner at Flip-Flops, something we can't do back home!

I run about 30-40 miles a week and learned long ago to run against traffic and step on to the shoulder any time a vehicle approaches; even on the shoulder, I've had drivers veer towards me and buzz me to "send a message" I guess. That being siad, a couple of unpleasant observations I've made on the 30-A multi-use path and/or on the road:

-Near the Seagrove Tom Thumb at the Somerset Bridge crossing, motor vehicles were stopped in both directions to let pedestrian families cross in the pedestrian crosswalk. A large cycling group was coming through (wearing spandex and on bikes that cost $1,000+ as Kurt referenced, of the Lance Armstrong professional cylist look) and the lead cyclist yelled at some kids who were crossing in the crosswalk as if pedestrians are supposed to yield to cylcists (he actually said something to that regard, that the kids aren't supposed to cross in front of them because they can't stop or something).

-On 30-A at the intersection with 395 in Seagrove, a family (adults and children, on cruiser bikes and NOT of the spandex variety) was travelling west on their bikes towards Seaside. There are little "mini" STOP signs on the multi-use path to regulate traffic of vehicles and pedestrians crossing 395 at this intersection. However, the family on bikes did not slow down at all, much less stop, although they were led by the parents. They flew right through the STOP sign that was placed there to instruct traffic on the multi-use path to stop!

I'm not trying to pick on cyclists, but since we're discussing cyclists on the path and roads, I thought these 2 observations may be relevant, and I'd love to hear other peoples' comments or defense of the cyclists in either incident.

Agreed. There is a plethora of ignorance and self-centered behavior to spread around. But morally and according to motor vehicle law there is a larger burden placed on the motor vehicle operator and their 2 tons of steel than the cyclist and the pedestrian. Just as the cyclist has a larger responsibility than pedestrians. So all this rhetoric of inconsiderate drivers, cyclists and pedestrians is actually irrelevant. If you elect to drive you should accept this added burden.

I believe just the presence of the multi-use path inflames the resentment against cyclists using the roadway. Many times motorists have yelled the equivalent of "use the path" (substitute colorful language not suitable to this forum). So, at least for some people, the problem is with this mindset - CYCLISTS BELONG ON THE PATH. Let's work to end this misconception.

About twice a week I commute by bicycle from North Jersey through Manhattan to Brooklyn. It doesn't get more crowded than Manhattan. Cars, trucks, taxis, pedestrians and cyclists all carving out their piece of broken roadway from the limited real estate. Yet it works. I don't get yelled out just because I am cycling in the street. If you think cyclists are out of control on 30A you ain't seen nothin' till you've seen them in Manhattan.

Change your mindset. A post above cites the cyclist in the roadway as the reason they almost had a head on accident instead of placing the blame where it squarely belongs - on the driver improperly passing.

If you do the math (which I once did in a previous post), time expended being delayed by cyclists in the roadway can be measured in seconds. Especially since most drivers more than make-up for the delay while passing. Nothing compared to the delays through Seaside in the summer. If you are driving 30A end to end and time is of the essence you would be better served by 98.

Take a deep breath, enjoy the view while being mindful of the ignorant and inconsiderate cyclists and pedestrians. Be thankful for what you have.