Judy asked:  If I am backing out of my driveway and a bicyclist is using the sidewalk, which crosses my driveway, which one of us has the right-of-way? Obviously, I look before I back out, but I have seen kids in my neighborhood who race up and down the sidewalks, where there are hedges, trees, etc., obstructing full views from a driver’s seat of an auto, and suddenly there is a car backing out of his own driveway, not even seeing that a kid is racing by on his bike.  What does the law say?

Answer

Motorists must stop and yield to bicyclists and pedestrians when entering the roadway across a sidewalk area.  Please see:

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/08/crosswalks-driveways-and-bicycles/

NE2 asked:  When is it legal to switch between vehicle and pedestrian modes?  Cyclists have the enviable position of being either a vehicle operator (when riding on the road) or a pedestrian (when riding on the sidewalk or in a crosswalk). But how can you switch between the two? To give a few examples:

1) Turning left at a traffic light onto the near-side sidewalk. Is there a legal way to do this without turning right onto the sidewalk and then turning around and crossing?

2) Turning right at a traffic light from the sidewalk onto the road (the reverse of the above). Are you allowed to “turn right on don’t walk”?

3) Turning left from a divided highway onto a path at a crosswalk controlled by pedestrian signals. Once you enter the median, are you allowed to cross the other direction, despite facing a “Don’t walk?”

4) Using a parking lot to avoid an intersection. This is illegal in a car per 316.074(2) Obedience to and required traffic control devices. But it’s legal to walk through a parking lot, so you would not necessarily be “driving” from one roadway to another if you switch to pedestrian mode on crossing the sidewalk.

Answer

Don’t confuse the nature of a vehicle with the rights and responsibilities of the driver or pedestrian.

A bicycle is always a vehicle, whether on the roadway or the sidewalk.

s. 316.003 – Definitions

(75) Vehicle – Every device, in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway ….

(2) Bicycle – Every vehicle propelled solely by human power ….  having two tandem wheels, and including any device generally recognized as a bicycle though equipped with two front or two rear wheels. The term does not include such a vehicle with a seat height of no more than 25 inches from the ground when the seat is adjusted to its highest position or a scooter or similar device.

A bicyclist has the same rights and duties as drivers of other vehicles.

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, except as to special regulations in this chapter, and except as to provisions of this chapter which by their nature can have no application.

A bicyclist on the sidewalk is not a pedestrian, but has the rights and duties of a pedestrian.  A bicycle on the sidewalk is still a vehicle and the operator must comply with applicable statutes, such as those requiring lights.

(10) A person propelling a vehicle by human power upon and along a sidewalk, or across a roadway upon and along a crosswalk, has all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances.

A cyclist does not have the option of switching between modes.  That happens automatically.  The statutes that apply and whether the cyclist has the rights and duties of a roadway driver or a pedestrian are defined by the physical location of the bicycle at the time.   A cyclist does have the option of changing the location of the bicycle, and can move between the roadway and the sidewalk as desired as long as the appropriate laws are followed.

I believe if you carefully consider the scenarios posed in the question or others, using the concept of drivers and pedestrian’s rights and duties and the actual location of the bicycle, you will see that the answers will be pretty clear.

I believe you are correct that the intent of the law is to give cyclists the freedom to use sidewalks and roadways as best suits their needs and their safety.

Emily asked:  I recently decided to ride my bike to and from work. I have to travel along a roadway that has no bike lane but has sidewalks on both sides. There is a carwash/restaurant that puts an advertisement sign directly on the sidewalk only allowing about a foot of space closest to the street to pass. As I was trying to avoid/pass the sign, I fell off of my bike into the middle of the street. Luckily, my riding partner was able to block the oncoming traffic and I only sprained my ankle. Is it legal to block the sidewalk in this manner?

Answer

Let’s begin with the reminder that sidewalks are intended for pedestrians, but cyclists may use them unless prohibited by local ordinance.  This is one of many unexpected hazards that endanger cyclists on sidewalks.

Advertising that interferes with safe passage is not generally allowed on transportation facilities.

s. 334.03 – Definitions – When used in the Florida Transportation Code, the term:

(31) “Transportation facility” means any means for the transportation of people or property from place to place which is constructed, operated, or maintained in whole or in part from public funds. The term includes the property or property rights, both real and personal, which have been or may be established by public bodies for the transportation of people or property from place to place. The following applies to transportation facilities outside municipalities.

s. 337.406 – Unlawful Use of State Transportation Facility Right-of-Way; Penalties

(1) Except when leased …. or otherwise authorized by the rules of the department, it is unlawful to make any use of the right-of-way of any state transportation facility, including appendages thereto, outside of an incorporated municipality in any manner that interferes with the safe and efficient movement of people and property from place to place on the transportation facility. Failure to prohibit the use of right-of-way in this manner will endanger the health, safety, and general welfare of the public by causing distractions to motorists, unsafe pedestrian movement within travel lanes, sudden stoppage or slowdown of traffic, rapid lane changing and other dangerous traffic movement, increased vehicular accidents, and motorist injuries and fatalities. Such prohibited uses include, but are not limited to, the free distribution or sale, or display or solicitation for free distribution or sale, of any merchandise, goods, property or services; the solicitation for charitable purposes; …. Local governmental entities may, within their respective jurisdictions, initiate enforcement action by the appropriate code enforcement authority or law enforcement authority for a violation of this section.

The following ordinance seems to be targeting individuals standing in the roadway, but selected sections may also be applicable.  In Chapter 316, streets and highways are defined as all public right-of-way, including sidewalks.

s. 316.2045 – Obstruction of Public Streets, Highways, and Roads

(1) It is unlawful for any person or persons willfully to obstruct the free, convenient, and normal use of any public street, highway, or road by impeding, hindering, stifling, retarding, or restraining traffic or passage thereon, …. or by endangering the safe movement of vehicles or pedestrians traveling thereon.

For regulations about transportation facilities within municipalities, there may also be local ordinances that prohibit obstruction of sidewalks that can be found at this link, or in your county code of ordinances:

http://www.municode.com/

You may also want to contact your local police department to determine the requirements.

Pete asked:  There is a multi-use trail that places stop or yield signs facing trail users where the trail crosses roads or entrances into business, and the crosswalks are marked. While riding recently, we approached one of the yield signs.  I yielded and determined that I could clear the intersection before I impeded traffic and I did.  My riding partner, who was following behind me stopped at the yield sign, then followed me through the cross walk.  Her bike was practically out of the crosswalk when an approaching car slammed on his brakes and got out to confront my friend for not yielding to him as the sign said.  (The only traffic marking for cars is the marked crosswalk)  My question-Since yield and stop signs are vehicle traffic signs, are they being improperly applied?  And do those signs over ride the rights we have as cyclist/pedestrians in a cross walk?

Answer

Bicycles are vehicles and cyclists have the same rights and duties as other drivers.  The signs are appropriate. Cyclists on the bike path must obey the applicable signs.  They have the duty to stop and yield as appropriate to other traffic.

s. 316.123 – Vehicle Entering Stop or Yield Intersection

(1) The right-of-way at an intersection may be indicated by stop signs or yield signs.

(2)(a) …. every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop intersection indicated by a stop sign shall stop.  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.

(3) The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign shall, in obedience to such sign, slow down to a speed reasonable for the existing conditions and, if required for safety to stop, shall stop before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection.  After slowing or stopping, the driver shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time the driver is moving across or within the intersection.

A cyclist in a crosswalk has the rights and duties of a pedestrian.  Note that the bicycle is still a vehicle.

s. 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(10) A person propelling a vehicle by human power upon and along a sidewalk, or across a roadway upon and along a crosswalk, has all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances.

The statutes are not always perfect in their application.  It would appear there is a conflict when there is a yield sign in only one direction and a marked crosswalk present.

Even so, once a cyclist (pedestrian) is in a crosswalk, even after having violated s. 316.123 above, it would seem the motorist must yield if possible.

s. 316.130 – Pedestrians; Traffic Regulations

(c) When traffic control signals are not in place or in operation and there is no signage indicating otherwise, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if need be to so yield, to a pedestrian (bicyclist) crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian (bicyclist) is upon the half of the roadway upon which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger.

The above does not eliminate the requirement for the cyclist (pedestrian) to use caution and only enter the roadway or crosswalk when it is safe to do so.

(8) No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.

Jim asked: My family, which includes several experienced cyclists, is visiting xxx in Florida and have had some interesting experiences with police and a bike shop employee who have told us that we cannot ride on the roadway and we must ride on the pathway that is a large sidewalk/paved area.  My take is that the path is not designated a bike path via symbol or signage and it is littered with people puttering on beach bikes, kids on trikes and walkers, all getting in the way of us trying to ride at 20-30+ mph.  In reading the documentation here and elsewhere my take is that if there is a designated bike path with symbol and signage I am to ride there otherwise, as is the case here, we should ride on the road.

Answer

Even if the area is marked and signed or otherwise designated as a bike path, cyclists are never required to use a bicycle path or a sidewalk.  Cyclists may use a paved shoulder, sidewalk (Unless prohibited by local ordinance), or a bike path if they so desire, but it is not required.  A bike path is not a bike lane, which is a portion of the roadway marked for the use of bicyclists.  Use of a marked bike lane by cyclists riding in the roadway is mandatory under some circumstances.

You should ask anyone who thinks otherwise to show you the statute that requires it.  They will not be able to do so.  Please see this and the other posts related to sidewalks, bike paths and bike lanes:

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/01/bicycles-must-use-sidewalk/

I suggest that you take this information to the local police and ask them to clarify the situation for all users.

Guillermo asked:  I made a right turn into commercial shopping area and out of nowhere an officer on a bike on the sidewalk almost hit my car.  He said I was not looking for pedestrians’ right of way.  In reality, I did not see him.  Who is at fault on this situation?

Answer

Bicyclists on the sidewalk have the same rights and duties as pedestrians.

s. 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(10) A person propelling a vehicle by human power upon and along a sidewalk, or across a roadway upon and along a crosswalk, has all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances.

If the driver is crossing a sidewalk while entering the roadway from a driveway, there is a specific statute that requires the driver to yield to pedestrians (bicyclists) on the sidewalk.

s. 316.125 – Vehicle Entering Highway from Private Road or Driveway or Emerging from Alley, Driveway or Building

(2) The driver of a vehicle emerging from an alley, building, private road or driveway within a business or residence district shall stop the vehicle immediately prior to driving onto a sidewalk or onto the sidewalk area extending across the alley, building entrance, road or driveway, or in the event there is no sidewalk area, shall stop at the point nearest the street to be entered where the driver has a view of approaching traffic thereon and shall yield to all vehicles and pedestrians which are so close thereto as to constitute an immediate hazard.

See this previous post:

http://flbikelaw.org/2009/10/drivers-and-cyclists-at-driveways/

The statutes about drivers crossing a sidewalk while entering a driveway from another roadway are less specific, but also require drivers to yield to pedestrians (bicyclists) on the sidewalk or crosswalk.

A crosswalk can be marked or unmarked, and is the connection of the sidewalk across the roadway, which in this case is the driveway.

s. 316.003 – Definitions

(6) Crosswalk

(a) That part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway, measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway.

(b) Any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface.

Drivers must yield to pedestrians (bicyclists) in or approaching a crosswalk.

s. 316.130 – Pedestrians; Traffic Regulations

(7)(c) When traffic control signals are not in place or in operation and there is no signage indicating otherwise, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if need be to so yield, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the roadway upon which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger.

Additionally, there are two statutes that require due care to avoid colliding with pedestrians or bicyclists.

s. 316.130 – Pedestrian; Traffic Regulations

(15) 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 ….

s. 316.185 – Special Hazards

The fact that the speed of a vehicle is lower than the prescribed limits shall not relieve the driver from the duty to decrease speed …. when special hazards exist or may exist with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or other roadway conditions, and speed shall be decreased as may be necessary to avoid colliding with any person, vehicle, or other conveyance on or entering the street in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due care.

Stacey asked:  Why do I have to walk a bike across the bridges in Del Ray?

Answer

You don’t.  Please see:

http://flbikelaw.org/2010/01/walk-bicycle-across-bridge/

The sign in question in the post was removed shortly after cyclists took this information to local officials.  If there is such a sign in Delray, I recommend you do the same.

I also recommend that you join the South Florida Bicycle Coalition, which is the local advocacy group in your area, and ask them to look into it.  Go to:

http://sfbikecoalition.wordpress.com/

Shawn asked:  What defines a sidewalk or bicycle path?  Must signage be posted to designate a sidewalk or bicycle path?  Do certain size characteristics accompany sidewalks or bicycle paths so as to alert motorized vehicle operators to avoid traveling on them?  A link to any Florida Statute governing this area of law would be greatly appreciated.

Answer

The definitions are as follows:

s. 316.003 – Definitions

(47) Sidewalk – That portion of a street between the curbline, or the lateral line, of a roadway and the adjacent property lines, intended for use by pedestrians.

(63) Bicycle Path – Any road, path, or way that is open to bicycle travel, which road, path, or way is physically separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space or by a barrier and is located either within the highway right-of-way or within an independent right-of-way.

A bicycle path is not a bike lane, which is a part of the roadway.  There are signs that are used to designate bike paths, but none that I know of for sidewalks, and none that are indicated in the statutes themselves.   It seems the burden is on drivers of motor vehicles to understand the boundaries of the roadway and remain therein.

The national Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is adopted by FDOT and gives uses and specs for standard signs and pavement markings.  FDOT design standards may give specific guidance on the requirements for bike path signs.

You would have to find case law, design standards or other information about the width of sidewalks and bike paths and other methods of discouraging motorists from mistaking them for roadways.  It is not in the statutes and not within the scope of this site.

I encourage everyone to check the statutes at this link.   We want to empower officers and cyclists to fully understand the statutes and take action accordingly.

http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0300-0399/0316/0316ContentsIndex.html&StatuteYear=2010&Title=->2010->Chapter 316

Two questions are common.

1. What is the impact of the bike lane provision on cyclists on the sidewalk?
2. What is the effect of the change on the group riders that ride 3, 4 or more abreast and use the roadway?

An officer forwarded the following Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) legal bulletin that addresses the change.  As far as I can determine, this is extent of the bulletin.

“Amends F.S. 316.2065(5)(a) to require bicycle riders to remain in a lane marked for bicycle use and if such a lane is not provided, riders must stay as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except as otherwise provided in the law.” (My emphasis)

First, let’s dispel the idea that this change has anything whatsoever to do with riding on the sidewalk.  This is the language that will appear in the change to the statutes on September 1^st.

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(5)(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride in the lane marked for bicycle use or, if no lane is marked for bicycle use, as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except ….

The sidewalk is not part of the roadway, so there is no effect on cyclists riding on the sidewalk.  The FDLE bulletin omits that part, leading to possible confusion.

This is that officer’s comment about the change in the law.

“I have talked to other officers and you are right, it is similar to prior verbiage, however it appears to be more explicit in stating that when a bike lane is present, cyclists must use it. In past conversations I have told you of the dilemma I am tasked with in dealing with pack riders who ride sometimes six abreast. Officers who read this new law and compared with 316.2065 (6) will definitely have and easier time understanding the laws new wording. However, this could be misconstrued and cause for future tensions with cyclists.”

The FDLE bulletin says “…. except as otherwise provided in the law”? What does that mean?

The bulletin does what virtually always happens, and ignores the exceptions, the exact problem I mentioned in the previous article about HB 971.  This memo stresses the times when a cyclist is required to keep right, and does not address all the other situations when a cyclist must leave the right side of the roadway, or a bike lane, for a lot of reasons.  I can’t imagine any statute suggesting that a cyclist or any other driver should stay in a lane or take any other action if it is not safe. Why not tell the law enforcement community that, instead of ignoring it?

This new change will reinforce the belief by many, including cyclists, that cyclists must always keep right and in bike lanes, even if they are endangered when they do so.

Many do not understand that the exceptions are the most important part of 2065(5) to the safety of cyclists and their right to use the roadways.  ”Keep right! Get out of my way!” is the only apparent concern.  Too many cyclists do just that, endangering themselves in the process.

The FDLE bulletin does nothing to change that.

Let’s not confuse the change in the law in 971 with the law that has always prohibited cyclists from riding more than two abreast.

FS 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.

Cyclists that ride as a mob are breaking the law and always have been.  Learn the law! Pull them over! Give them citations!  What’s so hard about that?  I have railed about that for years.

Until we get an understanding in Florida that cyclists riding legally do, in fact, have a right to ride as legitimate roadway users, we will continue to be the state with the worst bicycle crash record in the nation.  CA is second, and has more than twice the population.

Here is an email I received recently that shows the problem.

“I live in a bicycle friendly area and ride 300 miles per week, and motorists and bicyclists get along generally very well.  I spend my winters in Florida and I must tell you the difference is like night & day.  While it’s one thing to have a law on the books, it’s quite another to deploy it and apply it.  I don’t believe Fla. has done that.  I try to keep my mileage up while in Fla., but I’m pretty much on pins & needles the whole time as most motorists haven’t a clue as to how to negotiate a bicyclist regardless what lane they’re in or how fast they’re going.

What a huge education process you face!”

We hope to help change that with the Bicycle Law Enforcement Program.

Bob asked:  I was told by a University police officer yesterday that I had to use the bike lane (as opposed to riding on the adjacent sidewalk, which I was doing at the moment).  Is that correct?  I thought bicyclists still had the option to use the sidewalk, regardless of whether a bike lane on the street is present.  I think there’s a lot of confusion whether HB 971 prohibits sidewalk bicycle riding when the street has a bike lane.  My reading of HB 971 doesn’t address any changes in rights of bicycles to sidewalks.

Answer

Your reading of HB 971 is correct.  The change that will occur when the provisions of HB 971 go into effect on September 1 has nothing to do with riding a bicycle on the sidewalk, whether there is a bicycle lane or not.  That change only applies to cyclists in the roadway, as does the rest of that subsection of the bicycle regulations.  When amended, it will read as follows:

FS 316.2065 – Bicycle Regulations

(5)(a) Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing shall ride in the lane marked for bicycle use or, if no lane is marked for bicycle use, as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway ….

(And let’s not forget about all the exceptions in the law that allow cyclists to leave the ride side of the roadway, and situations that require a cyclist to use correct roadway position avoid unsafe conditions and other reasons.)

A sidewalk is not part of the roadway.

There is no Florida statute that prohibits cyclists from using the sidewalk.  See:

http://flbikelaw.org/2009/07/bicycles-on-sidewalks/

The university may have regulations that do prohibit cyclists from using sidewalks.  Check with the university police department.