Scott asked:  Last week I was stopped by a LEO in Palm Springs, FL while riding my bike on a 25mph 10′ wide lane on a residential street.  My lane position was slightly left of the right tire track.  The LEO insisted first that I must ride 3 feet from the road edge, then after reviewing the statute he insisted all the way to the road edge.  He threatened to cite me if I didn’t comply. What is the correct lane position on such a road and am I required to move over for traffic wishing to travel at a higher rate of speed. Or are they required to pass when it is safe to do so?

Answer

Please see:

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/01/substandard-width-lanes-even-more/

For other posts about this topic click on “substandard-width lanes,” “narrow lanes” and “lane position” in the tag cloud on the intro page.

I suggest that you provide this information to the police department and ask them to inform their officers.  This is another post that might be helpful to them.

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/04/a-department-bulletin-to-help-officers-understand-cyclist-safety-and-lane-use/

David also asked: Yesterday (Sunday, April 1) on the Rickenbacker Causeway in Miami, a police officer was getting all upset about a group of about 50 – 100 cyclists taking up a whole lane of the road. He was screaming out of his window for us to “keep right.” The Rickenbacker causeway also has a bike lane painted on it. Could you please discuss the legal status of a group of cyclists taking an entire lane in a double-lane road? From reading your site, I believe a) that we are not impeding traffic because there is still another lane for vehicles to pass. b) we are indeed violating the “two abreast” rule.  c) We are not obligated to be in the bike lane because we are passing a steady stream of slower cyclists who are in the bike lane. d) If (hypothetically speaking) the bike lane was empty, we’d still spill over into the road lane, this time violating the statute. So, what rights does a large group of cyclists have to cycle as a group in the road?

Answer

Short answer:  None.

A cycling group is not a defined entity in the statutes.  Rather, each cyclist is operating a vehicle and has the same rights and duties as other drivers while in the roadway.  A bicycle lane is part of the roadway.

Cyclists do have some advantages not applicable to drivers of motor vehicles, such as no requirement to have a driver’s license, no points for a violation of traffic laws and  legally impeding traffic under some circumstances.  On the other hand, they are also required to “keep right” and in the bike lane under some circumstances.  There are many other posts on this site about the exceptions to the “keep right” rules and impeding traffic.

The premise of your question is already answered in your statement, “We are indeed violating the ‘two abreast’ rule.”  If you are admittedly operating unlawfully, how can we devise a statutory justification?

The provisions in the statutes that apply are:

s. 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(1) Every person propelling a vehicle by human power has all of the rights and all of the duties applicable to the driver of any other vehicle under this chapter

Let’s not conveniently forget the part about “all the duties” of other drivers.

One of those duties is to comply with the provision that cyclists

(6) …. may not ride more than two abreast at any time except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.

Another is the requirement to ride within a single lane.  A bicycle lane is a lane.

(6) (Cont.) 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 and shall ride within a single lane.

Cyclists when traveling in a group do not have any special privileges.  In fact, they have a greater responsibility to ride lawfully since their presence creates problems for others.  I am aware of numerous situations throughout the state in which cyclists traveling in large groups routinely run lights and unlawfully take up a full lane and overflow into the adjacent lane, even the lane for on-coming traffic.   Among other locations, I have heard the complaint about Rickenbacker Causeway that groups sometimes overflow into both main travel lanes.  Some groups seem to feel that the roadway is their own personal racing venue, and that the laws do not apply to them.

I fully understand the fact that some cyclists travel in groups for a feeling of security that is not necessarily provided by a respect for the laws and cycling rights by others and full and fair enforcement of the laws that should protect cyclists.

Another consideration that is not addressed in the statutes is that when large groups of cyclists do ride legally, single file and taking the lane in substandard-width lanes, the line can be so long that it becomes virtually impossible for motorists to legally and safely overtake and pass.

I recommend joining organized cycling groups such as the Florida Bicycle Association, or in your area, the South Florida Cycling Coalition, to help them help you to resolve these problems and create a more cycling-friendly environment in Florida.

Alan asked: I do a lot of riding in downtown St Augustine. It’s close, cramped, and traffic is poorly regulated. These streets were laid hundreds of years ago and weren’t meant for heavy traffic. When I’m late for work, I “take the lane” and ride along with traffic because the speed limit is low enough that I can keep up. My question is this: There are intersections in town where there is a stop light, but one of the four intersecting streets is for pedestrians only. Therefore, traffic is never coming from or going to this street. Is it legal for me to move to the right side of the road, overtake a backed up line of cars at the red light, and pass through the red light with the entrance to the pedestrian street on my right? I am not crossing any avenues for traffic and am simply moving as a pedestrian would across the mouth of a pedestrian only street. Am I doing something illegal?

Answer

Good on you for using proper lane positioning.  I’m afraid that’s the end of the kudos though.  I suggest that you leave a few minutes early and drive your bicycle like other vehicle drivers.

If you are crossing the street within the roadway you are running the light, which is clearly unlawful.

If you are on the sidewalk for any part of this maneuver, you are violating a St. Augustine ordinance that prohibits bicyclists on sidewalks.  If vehicles are not permitted, the pedestrian street you mention is a sidewalk.

Sec. 24-107. – Riding on sidewalks prohibited.

No person shall ride or use any bicycle upon any sidewalk upon any of the streets or lanes within the corporate limits of the city.

If you are passing vehicles on the right when they are stopped for a crosswalk at the light, you may be violating this statute:

s. 316.130 – Pedestrians, Traffic Regulations

(9) Whenever any vehicle is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass such stopped vehicle.

Passing should be accomplished on the left except when passing on the right is specifically allowed.

s. 316.083 – Overtaking and Passing a Vehicle

The following rules shall govern the overtaking and passing of vehicles proceeding in the same direction, subject to those limitations, exceptions, and special rules hereinafter stated:

(1) The driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle proceeding in the same direction …. shall pass to the left thereof at a safe distance

s. 316.084 – When Overtaking on the Right is Permitted

(1) The driver of a vehicle may overtake and pass on the right of another vehicle only under the following conditions:

(b) Upon a street or highway with unobstructed pavement not occupied by parked vehicles of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving traffic in each direction;

(c) Upon a one-way street, or upon any roadway on which traffic is restricted to one direction of movement, where the roadway is free from obstructions and of sufficient width for two or more lines of moving vehicles.

If you are passing vehicles within the same lane, you are violating .083 and .084, since the lanes in St. Augustine are of substandard-width and not wide enough for “two lines of moving vehicles”.

s. 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(5)(a)3 …. A “substandard-width lane” is a lane that is too narrow for a bicycle and another vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.

The minimum width of a lane that allows “two lines of moving vehicles” is 14 feet.  The lanes in St. Augustine are not 14 feet wide, except on the west side of the Bridge of Lions and about 100 feet of the northbound wide curb lane on US 1 at San Carlos.  Maybe others, but most are less than 12 feet, particularly in old town.

FDOT Plans Preparation Manual

Chapter 8 – Bicycle Facilities

Section 8.4.3 Wide Curb Lanes

Wide outside curb lanes are through lanes which provide a minimum of 14 feet in width. This width allows most motor vehicles to pass cyclists within the travel lane, which is not possible in more typical 10-12 foot wide travel lanes.

If you are using another roadway to avoid the light, you are violating this statute:

s. 316.074 - Obedience to and Required Traffic Control Devices

(2) No person shall drive any vehicle from a roadway to another roadway to avoid obeying the indicated traffic control indicated by such traffic control device.

See also:

http://flbikelaw.org/2011/06/queue-jumping-bicyclists/

NE2 asked:  Why is 14 feet the accepted minimum for a “substandard-width” lane.  Florida Statute 316.515(1) says that a vehicle may be 102 inches (8.5 feet) wide, not including safety devices (e.g. mirrors). I don’t know how far mirrors are allowed to stick out, but I would assume at least 6 inches on each side. With a 3 foot passing clearance, that leaves only 1.5 feet for the bike in a 14-foot lane, certainly not enough for safe operation.

Answer

You have correctly cited the applicable statute.

s. 316.515 – Maximum Width, Height, Length

(1) Width Limitation – The total outside width of any vehicle or the load thereon may not exceed 102 inches, exclusive of safety devices determined by the department to be necessary for the safe and efficient operation of motor vehicles.

Vehicles that are even wider may be encountered on the roadways.  It is not realistic to try to define a substandard-width lane based on the widest vehicle that could possibly be on the road.  Rather, it is defined based on the safety of the roadway users.

We must look at this question from the different perspectives of the cyclist and the overtaking driver.

A substandard width lane is defined in the bicycle regulations, and is one of the many conditions and circumstances that gives the cyclist the right to leave the right-most curb or edge of the roadway. I believe the intent of that provision is to allow a cyclist to control the lane and discourage unsafe passing within narrow lanes. Note that the statute does not specify the actual width of a substandard-width lane.

s.  316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(5)(a) 3. For the purposes of this subsection, a “substandard-width lane” is a lane too narrow for a bicycle and another vehicle to travel safely side by side within the lane.

Without regard to the width of the lane, the burden for safety when overtaking and passing a bicyclist lies entirely with the overtaking driver if the cyclist is otherwise obeying the law.  The driver must pass at a safe distance, and no less than 3 feet.

s.  316.083 – Overtaking and Passing A Vehicle

(1) …. The driver of a vehicle overtaking a bicycle or other nonmotorized vehicle must pass the bicycle or other nonmotorized vehicle at a safe distance of not less than 3 feet between the vehicle and the bicycle or other nonmotorized vehicle.

The driver of the overtaking vehicle must make the determination that it is safe before passing.  The driver of a Smart Car may be able to safely pass within a 12-foot wide lane if the cyclist is to the right.  The driver of the vehicle you describe in the question will have to wait until it is safe to change lanes to pass a cyclist in a lane that is 14 feet or even wider.

The width of 14 feet is derived from Florida Department of Transportation planning and design guidelines.  Note that they also indicate the 14 feet is the width that allows MOST motor vehicles to safely pass a cyclist while remaining within the lane.  Drivers of wider vehicles must change lanes to pass.

Plans Preparation Manual

Chapter 8 – Bicycle Facilities

Section 8.4.3 Wide Curb Lanes

Wide outside curb lanes are through lanes which provide a minimum of 14 feet in width.  This width allows most motor vehicles to pass cyclists within the travel lane, which is not possible in more typical 10-12 foot wide travel lanes.

Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets and Highways (Florida Greenbook)

Chapter 9 – Bicycle Facilities

B.3  Curb Lanes

Fourteen feet is the recommended lane width for shared use in a wide curb lane, and is the minimum width that will allow passenger cars to safely pass bicyclists within a single lane.

More detail of the various rights and responsibilities of roadway users can be found in the post on Substandard-Width Lanes.

In reference to the substandard-width lane:  As you know, I work on A1A which is a substandard-width lane roadway. The speed limit is 35 miles per hour and there is a no passing zone. If a bike rider was riding single or double and not maintaining the normal flow of traffic would this be a violation?
If not, could you please explain where you are getting your legal opinion for this statute?

Answer:

I will address this in three separate posts.

1. Is this a violation? In this post.
2. No passing zone.
3. Legal basis for this site.

It appears that we have crossed messages and you haven’t seen the previous post about bicyclists riding abreast and impeding traffic.  I believe that answers most of the question, but I will add the following:

There doesn’t seem to be any question about the single cyclist taking the lane in a substandard-width lane.  The statute is quite clear that in that case the cyclist is not required to keep right, even if other traffic is impeded.

If two cyclists are impeding traffic while riding abreast in a wide outside lane (14 feet minimum width), it is a violation and they should keep right and single up.

Now imagine a single cyclist taking the lane in a narrow lane and a second cyclist riding ten feet behind or ten feet ahead, but not exactly abreast, or one behind the other.  They are not riding abreast, and may be legally impeding traffic.  If they move alongside each other they are now riding abreast, and impeding traffic exactly as they were before.  If the phrase in the statute is taken out of context, and the intent of the statute is not considered, some might conclude that a violation has occurred.  Common sense would dictate otherwise.

Two cyclists riding abreast in a narrow lane are impeding traffic, but no more than the single cyclist taking the lane.

This is an example of the statutes being written without clearly considering and accounting for all possible circumstances.  I believe this is one that needs to be clarified.

Writing citations that are based on such a tenuous interpretation of one phrase the statute and disregarding the intent of the statute would not seem to be an effective use of an officer’s valuable time.  There are plenty of opportunities to cite illegal acts that might result in cyclists and motorists being endangered.  Illegal passing is one of the most common and most dangerous on narrow roadways.