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.

Gary asked: This is in regards to a column, Dr. Delay, in a newspaper.

The article states:

Who has right of way? Bicycle or car?

Reader wrote to the Doc about an incident she recently observed involving a bicycle and a car. She posed a question about right of way:

“Assume a bike and a car are traveling in the same direction in the same lane. As they approach an intersection, the traffic light is green. They reach the corner at the same time, with the bike on the outside of the car. The bike rider wants to continue on through the intersection, but the person driving the car wants to turn right. Who has the right of way? I saw this scenario this week. I don’t know if the car signaled, but the alert bike rider gave way for the car and then proceeded through the intersection. It scared me to think what could have happened. I have seen bikes approach a red light and not even stop. This is especially stupid if a car turns right on red. What is the correct thing to do?”

Doc’s answer:

The first problem with this scenario is the third sentence (“They reach the corner at the same time, with the bike on the outside of the car”). Cyclists are by law expected to behave in traffic as they would were they driving a car or motorcycle — they are not to be riding abreast of any vehicle in a single lane (bike or car or motorcycle, etc.). So because the cyclist should not have been next to the car in the same lane it was appropriate that he/she gave way but the point of “Share the Road” is to truly share the road and make the same sound decisions when traveling on two wheels one would make while operating on four. And if it’s not cool to run a red light in your car, the same holds true when you’re on a bike.

I believe she has done a disservice to cyclists by telling the public the cyclist was wrong, when in my interpretation of the law, the motorist was overtaking the cyclist and must give 3 feet, and since the cyclist was not turning, would have the right-of-way.

If she was wrong, may I quote your response in a letter I will write to her.

Answer

The Doc is wrong for a number of reasons, and you are welcome to quote verbatim anything in this article.

I must note that the Doc is correct that cyclists have the same rights and duties as other drivers and running red lights is not legal for any driver. However, “Share the Road” does not necessarily mean yielding to other drivers.  It means riding legally and safely.  When doing so, it may “delay” other traffic, but it is not unlawful.  The question is not whether cars or bicycles have the right of way.  Both must comply with their legal responsibilities.

This is the classic “right hook” situation.

First, the doc is wrong by answering a question without having all the facts.  Is this a substandard-width lane or a wide curb lane?  Who is overtaking whom?  It isn’t possible to accurately answer the question without that information.

Next, the Doc states,

“…. because the cyclist should not have been next to the car in the same lane…. they are not to be riding abreast of any vehicle in a single lane (bike or car or motorcycle, etc.).”

I don’t know where the Doc got that, but it is absolutely wrong.  Two bicyclists cannot ride abreast under certain circumstances, but riding abreast of other vehicles is perfectly legal and is done all the time.  The statute that applies is:

s. 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(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 and shall ride within a single lane.

Let’s discuss lane width.  If the lane is wide enough for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to travel safely side by side (Minimum 14 feet according to the Department of Transportation) there is no reason they can’t do so.  It is not unlawful.

The article does not indicate that one was overtaking the other, but it is unlikely that they were travelling at exactly the same speed as they approached the intersection. One or the other is overtaking and passing at some point.  The overtaking driver must insure it is safe to do so. Motorists are required to safely pass no closer than three feet from a cyclist. s. 316.083

If the lane is less than 14 feet wide, it is a substandard-width lane and if they are both within the lane and traveling side by side, the overtaking driver is violating the statute.

For a full discussion of substandard-width lanes, see this post:

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

Let’s disregard the lane width issue, and assume they were traveling side by side at the same speed as they approached the intersection.  What are their respective responsibilities?

The cyclist is apparently keeping right and riding legally unless passing on the right, which may or may not be legal, depending on the circumstances such as lane width.

The motorist is required to keep as far to the right as is practicable when preparing for a right turn.  If the motorist has left enough room to the right for a bicyclist, even one passing on the right, is the motorist as far right as is practicable?   If the motorist can’t safely move as far right as is practicable to prepare for the right turn because the cyclist is present, the motorist must slow and yield, then move right.  s. 316.151

The motorist shall not drive from a direct course unless it can be done safely and without interfering with the safe operation of any vehicle. s. 316.085

The motorist may not move right or left upon a highway unless such movement can be done with reasonable safety. s. 316.155

A full discussion of right turns at intersections and safe cycling practices is at this post:

http://flbikelaw.org/2009/08/138/

You may want to suggest that Doc read these posts and refer readers to Ask Geo for accurate information about cycling.

Dana asked:  As more bicycles and riders enter our roadways and ride in traffic with motor vehicles, I am concerned that certain bike riders that I encounter seem to display a righteous indignance about the “3 foot law” when they are being overtaken by a car, but the same riders do not seem to think this law applies when traffic comes to a halt at traffic signal or intersection. I’ll describe a certain aggravating situation I have dubbed: “leap-frogging.”

For example: Two or more bike riders are riding abreast in the right lane of traffic on a multilane roadway in heavy traffic. Cars behind the bikes are unable to change lanes and safely pass because of the speed differential of traffic created by the impediment of slow-moving bikes in the right lane, versus the rapidly moving cars in the left lane. When an opening in traffic allows a car following the bikes to change lanes and safely pass the group of bikes in the left lane, all is well again until traffic reaches the next intersection or signal.

At the intersection, the cars stop and maintain their positions in line, while the group of cyclists break their lane-controlling two-abreast formation to overtake the stopped vehicles by narrowly passing between the cars to set themselves up at the head of the line of traffic waiting for the signal to change. They have now successfully, but illegally, leap-frogged the vehicle(s) that had safely and patiently overtaken them prior.

In other posts on your site, you have encouraged cyclists to get the license plate number of motor vehicles that have violated the 3 foot law, and to report that information to law enforcement (presumably so that the offender might receive a citation, and/or fine). However, in the leap-frogging situation, it is nearly impossible to identify the violating cyclist(s), because they do not display any identification or registration. Cyclists operate with nearly complete anonymity, and because of this, some cyclists extend this notion to being able to operate their vehicles on the roadway with impunity because they cannot be readily identified or reported to law enforcement for any alleged violations of the uniform traffic laws. Even if they are caught in the illegal act by law enforcement, and receive a citation, they do not suffer the same consequences as a motorist cited with a moving violation, that carries with it the consequences of “points” and/or increased insurance costs, etc.

My Question Is: How can laws be equally enforced against motorists and bicyclists when this unequal identification loophole for bikes exists, and where cyclists have no real fear of being identified by other vehicles, thus avoiding possible citation or punishment?

In my opinion, if cyclists have all of the rights and duties applicable to other drivers (i.e. pursuant to s. 316.2065 Fla. Stat.), then they should be burdened with the same duty to display a registration, as do other low-speed vehicles (See by analogy: s. 316.2122 Fla. Stat., which applies to low-speed motor vehicles). Allowing this double-standard under the law to endure, and the illegal behavior that it promotes with the leap-frogging members of the cycling population, will only serve to continue to increase the friction between the motoring and cycling communities, because of actual and perceived inequities.

I would encourage you to consider that the issue raised in my question falls squarely within one of your quoted maxims on your site:  ”Creating a safer and more hospitable environment for cycling requires law enforcement equity.”

Answer

Some of your comments have been cut for the sake of brevity.  I don’t believe they affect the main theme of your question.

Another name for this is queue-jumping, a common occurrence.  Under some circumstances, it may be unlawful.

s. 316.083 – Overtaking and Passing a Vehicle

(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. 316.089 – Driving on Roadways Laned for Traffic - Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules, in addition to all others consistent herewith, shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane

However, the “three foot “ law does not apply to bicyclists overtaking motor vehicles, only to other drivers (Including bicyclists) overtaking bicycles.

s. 316.083 continues:

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.

Cyclists overtaking and passing on the right is not unlawful under certain circumstances, such as when the lane is wide enough to allow two lines of traffic.  That is not defined any further, indicating the problems with some of the statutes.

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.

Cyclists may use a paved shoulder.  Drivers of motor vehicles may not.

Let’s assume this is a substandard-width lane with a curb and no paved shoulder.

Whether the cyclists are riding two abreast or single file in a substandard-width lane is inconsequential.  Motorists must change lanes to pass.  See Substandard-Width Lanes.

I certainly agree that this behavior is rude and unsafe.  It also is illogical.  Even if t is done within the laws, these cyclists have just passed and ticked off the drivers who will again be trying to pass them when the light changes.  Instead of using the normal traffic patterns of ebb and flow to their advantage by waiting until the traffic abates or waiting in line behind other drivers, they are endangering themselves and irritating the people who will be trying to pass them.

Obtaining information and reporting unlawful actions is encouraged for both cyclists and motorists.  Unfortunately, in many instances, cyclists claim their reports to law enforcement about non-criminal traffic violations are met with “Since we didn’t observe it, we can’t take action”.  Even recording a plate number does not help in many cases.  Having a license plate on a bicycle could be the same.

We encourage officers to cite violations by cyclists.  If all law enforcement would take violations of the laws about bicycling seriously and accurately cite all cyclists and motorists for infractions, we could make a big change to the roadway environment and greatly reduce the conflict, crashes, deaths and injuries.

The deaths and injuries of cyclists are frequently the result of their own illegal actions.

Continued reporting of violations can make law enforcement and other government officials aware of a chronic problem, which will eventually get attention and the locations that present problems can be identified.  Reporting violations is recommended for all roadway users.  Cycling groups usually ride the same routes on the same days.  Have you called the police when these incidents occur?

As you said, our purpose is “Creating a safer and more hospitable environment for cycling requires law enforcement equity.”  We do that by making information about the laws available for everyone to use for education and enforcement.

You are proposing a change to the laws, which may result from better education about the problems with the laws as they are written, but that is not the mission of this site.  We can only help educate users of this site about existing laws.

Licensing of bicyclists has been discussed for many years.  The Florida Bicycle Association has a legislative agenda to propose changes to the laws.  I will separately forward your suggestion to them for their consideration.  I will ask them to address it directly with you.

Kathy asked:  Vehicle traveling on 3 lane busy road in rush hour traffic. 2 way with turn lane in the middle for intersection with stoplight. Vehicle stopped at light and needs to get into turn lane (approximately 5 cars back).  Checked all mirrors with no oncoming traffic from the rear.  Inched out from a stop to get into turn lane.  Bicyclist has gotten in the lane on the driver’s side in the blind spot not a foot parallel to the car. As car turned into turn lane, bicycle and car collided. Does bicycle have right of way when all other traffic is stopped for a light and he is riding in my lane on my left side?

Answer

From the information you have provided, it is difficult to determine exactly what happened.  The cyclist may not report the details in the same way and we don’t have the benefit of unbiased witnesses.  The following are some comments and the statutes that apply.

You state that you checked your mirrors and there was no oncoming traffic from the rear, which apparently is not the case, since the cyclist was passing.

You indicated that you did not see the cyclist due to the blind spot in your mirrors. It is difficult to understand how you could determine that the cyclist was less than one foot from your vehicle if, as you stated, you didn’t see him. We are cautioned not to rely on our mirrors since they could be improperly adjusted, resulting in a blind spot.

Florida statutes require that we insure it is safe before changing lanes or moving left or right in the roadway.

s. 316.155 – When Signal Required

(1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a highway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety…. in the event any other vehicle may be affected by the movement.

s. 316.089 – Driving on Roadways Laned for Traffic

Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules, in addition to all others consistent herewith, shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.

s. 316.085 – Limitations on Overtaking, Passing, Changing Lanes and Changing Course

(2) No vehicle shall be driven from a direct course in any lane on any highway until the driver has determined that the vehicle is not being approached or passed by any other vehicle in the lane or on the side to which the driver desires to move and that the move can be completely made with safety and without interfering with the safe operation of any vehicle approaching from the same direction.

It also isn’t clear why a cyclist would pass a motor vehicle on the left side with only one foot of clearance if the adjacent lane was clear, particularly if your left turn indicator was flashing, as is required for moving laterally in the roadway.

s. 316.155 – When Signal Required

….and then only after giving an appropriate signal….

A cyclist in the left turn lane with the intent to turn left is entitled to use the full lane.

s. 316.151 – Required Position and Method of Turning at Intersections

(1) The driver of a vehicle intending to turn at an intersection shall do so as follows:

(b) Left Turn – ….A person riding a bicycle and intending to turn left in accordance with this section is entitled to the full use of the lane from which the turn may legally be made….

If in fact the cyclist was passing at a distance of less than one foot, he may not have been passing at the safe distance required by the statutes.

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….

Rodney asked:  Does the three-foot minimum passing statute apply to motorists if a cyclist is operating in a designated bicycle lane?

If not, wouldn’t it be more prudent to forgo the use of the bicycle lane with regards to unsafe speed differentials and passing clearances between the cyclist and motorist?

Answer

In the applicable statute, there is no reference to the use of bike lanes or any other lane considerations.  A motorist is required to safely pass a bicyclists no closer than three feet, wherever they may be.  See Bicycles May Use Full Lane.

There are many who believe, with some supporting evidence, that motorists pass bicyclists more closely when they are in a bicycle lane.  I am not aware of any formal studies that provide definitive evidence one way or the other.

D. asked:  I was reading about the question about a bicyclist turning left from near the center on a rural two lane without signaling.  http://flbikelaw.org/2010/03/left-turn-by-bicyclist/ However, what if the bicyclist is in fact signaling for a left turn after checking behind to control the lane?  But while initiating the turn, a motorist approaching from the rear, makes a passing maneuver and there is a collision.  What does the law say about that?

Answer

Let’s assume the overtaking driver can legally pass if the cyclist or another vehicle is not turning left.  Also assume the cyclist is turning into a driveway.  If the situation occurs at an intersection, other statutes apply.

The first premise is that drivers are cautioned to exercise due care to avoid colliding with a bicyclist.

FS 316.130 – Pedestrians; Traffic Regulations

(15) …. every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with …. any person propelling a human-powered vehicle.

Passing any vehicle if it is known that a left turn is intended would not seem to be exercising due care.

Another statute addresses the “due care” obligations of vehicle operators.

FS 316.183 – Unlawful Speed

(1) No person shall drive  …. at a speed that is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing …. speed shall be controlled as may be necessary to avoid colliding with (anything) in compliance with …. the duty of all persons to use due care.

Other statutes address the obligations of drivers when moving laterally on a roadway and when turning.

FS 316.089 – Driving on Roadways Laned for Traffic

(1) A vehicle …. shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such movement can be made with safety.

FS 316.085 – Limitations on Overtaking, Passing, Changing Lanes and Changing Course

(2)  No vehicle shall be driven from a direct course …. until the driver has determined that the vehicle is not being approached or passed by another vehicle in the lane or to the side which the driver desires to move and that the move can be made with safety and without interfering with the safe operation of any vehicle approaching from the same direction.

FS 316.155 – When Signal Required

(1) No person may turn a vehicle from a direct course or move right or left upon a highway unless and until such movement can be made with reasonable safety …. after giving an appropriate signal ….

FS 316.122 – Vehicle Turning Left

The driver of a vehicle intending to turn left …. shall yield right-of-way to …. vehicles lawfully passing on the left …. so close thereto as to constitute an immediate hazard.

FS 316.083 – Overtaking and Passing a Vehicle

(1) The driver of a vehicle overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction …. shall pass to the left thereof at a safe distance …. not less than 3 feet between the vehicle and the bicycle ….

These are the laws that apply.  Any finding of fault is left to someone who has access to all of the details of a particular situation.  The timing of each party’s actions would determine the requirements and responsibilities.  If the cyclist was actually executing a turn and was in the left lane when the overtaking driver moved out of the original lane to pass, the decision would be different from the case of the overtaking vehicle in the left lane well before the cyclist signaled and began the turn.  More than likely, the situation will be less clear.

Ron also asked:  And to further the rights of a shoulder-traveling cyclist, a vehicle in the oncoming lane of a two-lane road should not overtake another vehicle in the oncoming lane if there is bicycle traffic in the opposite direction if that cycling traffic is in the zone required to effect the pass. Even if the cyclist is on the shoulder, correct?

I have encountered such a situation on a State Road, and it gives one cause for serious concern!

Answer

The law prohibits passing if a vehicle (bicycle) in the roadway is approaching from the opposite direction in a two-lane roadway, and the overtaking driver cannot return to the original lane in a timely manner.

FS 316.082 – Passing Vehicles Proceeding in Opposite Directions

(2) Upon roadways having width for not more than one line of traffic in each direction, each driver shall give to the other at least one-half of the main-traveled portion of the roadway, as nearly as possible.

A bicycle on the paved shoulder is not in the main-traveled portion of the roadway.

FS 316.085 – Limitations on Overtaking, Passing, Changing Lanes and Changing Course

(1) 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 …. such left side is clearly visible and free of oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance ahead to permit such overtaking and passing to be completely made without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction of any vehicle overtaken.  …. in the event  the passing movement involves the use of a lane authorized for vehicles approaching in the opposite direction, before coming within 200 feet of any approaching vehicle.

The operative phrase is “use of the lane authorized for vehicles approaching from the opposite direction”.  The lane is part of the main-traveled portion of the roadway.  The shoulder is not.

Some might argue that the overtaking driver is “interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction”, but how far off the roadway would the bicyclist need to be to clearly not be “interfered with”?  How close to the centerline can a vehicle be when approaching another vehicle in the opposing lane?  There is no precise measured distance.

A driver may not overtake and pass another vehicle if a bicyclist is closely approaching from the opposite direction in the roadway, but may do so if the cyclist is not in the roadway.