Re: Folk Transportation [was Re: Greedy, arrogant bike shop owner] - Page 2

04-01-2004, 07:51 PM

>R15757 at [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote on 4/1/04 2:59 AM:
> But almost every day I see people who clearly fancy themselves vehicular
> cyclists who resort to lane-taking far too quickly, and for far too long. I
> know this because I am able to ride the same exact streets not only faster but
> without significantly disrupting motor traffic. Their technique leaves
> something to be desired and is a bit of a mystery to me. I think that
> improvements in handling skills and experience, the lack of which makes any
> busy road seem more narrow than it really is, and more intensive route finding
> will be the best medicine for these misguided souls.
> Lane taking is often necessary, it's true, but really only in brief flashes
> and
> moments here and there, one or two cars at a time, unless something goes
> horribly wrong. That's not to say I don't ride in the lane, I always ride way
> way out in the middle of the street unless traffic is closing from behind, but
> this is not "lane taking." When you're moving the same speed as motors or when
> there are none around you can take all the lane you want for as long as you
> want. But it is my firm belief that exagerrated lane-taking in front of faster
> vehicles is needed far less often than one might think, and the safety
> benefits
> it brings are usually marginal enough to be canceled by the sheer hassle of
> the
> endeavor.
> When I see a beginner using this crutch technique to get down a busy street,
> no. It's a little _sad_, but not annoying to me personally.
> When I see an old veteran doing the defiant exagerrated lane taking thing,
> with
> a look on their face like "I dare you to honk at me", and doing it where I
> know
> for a fact no clear necessity exists, yes it annoys me. Especially when there
> is an empty street that is just as fast (and without lights) one block to the
> east or west. I wish these bastards would just put their bikes in the garage
> and give it up already. These guys are transportational cycling's biggest PR
> problem. Every time they go for a ride, they give the impression that riding
> in
> traffic is all about conflict, anger, and general difficulty. (It's not.)
> Every time one of these guys rides their bike to or from work it makes it more
> difficult for me to ride those same streets.
> Little Napoleonic thing going on there perhaps. Cyclists are so used to
> getting
> pushed around at intersections, maybe they find themselves with the
> opportunity
> to control a lane and the drivers in it, they reflexively lower the boom.
> Abused children tend to abuse their children.

The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)
Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of.

04-01-2004, 07:51 PM

>R15757 at [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote on 4/1/04 2:59 AM:
> But almost every day I see people who clearly fancy themselves vehicular
> cyclists who resort to lane-taking far too quickly, and for far too long. I
> know this because I am able to ride the same exact streets not only faster but
> without significantly disrupting motor traffic. Their technique leaves
> something to be desired and is a bit of a mystery to me. I think that
> improvements in handling skills and experience, the lack of which makes any
> busy road seem more narrow than it really is, and more intensive route finding
> will be the best medicine for these misguided souls.
> Lane taking is often necessary, it's true, but really only in brief flashes
> and
> moments here and there, one or two cars at a time, unless something goes
> horribly wrong. That's not to say I don't ride in the lane, I always ride way
> way out in the middle of the street unless traffic is closing from behind, but
> this is not "lane taking." When you're moving the same speed as motors or when
> there are none around you can take all the lane you want for as long as you
> want. But it is my firm belief that exagerrated lane-taking in front of faster
> vehicles is needed far less often than one might think, and the safety
> benefits
> it brings are usually marginal enough to be canceled by the sheer hassle of
> the
> endeavor.
> When I see a beginner using this crutch technique to get down a busy street,
> no. It's a little _sad_, but not annoying to me personally.
> When I see an old veteran doing the defiant exagerrated lane taking thing,
> with
> a look on their face like "I dare you to honk at me", and doing it where I
> know
> for a fact no clear necessity exists, yes it annoys me. Especially when there
> is an empty street that is just as fast (and without lights) one block to the
> east or west. I wish these bastards would just put their bikes in the garage
> and give it up already. These guys are transportational cycling's biggest PR
> problem. Every time they go for a ride, they give the impression that riding
> in
> traffic is all about conflict, anger, and general difficulty. (It's not.)
> Every time one of these guys rides their bike to or from work it makes it more
> difficult for me to ride those same streets.
> Little Napoleonic thing going on there perhaps. Cyclists are so used to
> getting
> pushed around at intersections, maybe they find themselves with the
> opportunity
> to control a lane and the drivers in it, they reflexively lower the boom.
> Abused children tend to abuse their children.

The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)
Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of.

04-01-2004, 07:51 PM

>R15757 at [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] wrote on 4/1/04 2:59 AM:
> But almost every day I see people who clearly fancy themselves vehicular
> cyclists who resort to lane-taking far too quickly, and for far too long. I
> know this because I am able to ride the same exact streets not only faster but
> without significantly disrupting motor traffic. Their technique leaves
> something to be desired and is a bit of a mystery to me. I think that
> improvements in handling skills and experience, the lack of which makes any
> busy road seem more narrow than it really is, and more intensive route finding
> will be the best medicine for these misguided souls.
> Lane taking is often necessary, it's true, but really only in brief flashes
> and
> moments here and there, one or two cars at a time, unless something goes
> horribly wrong. That's not to say I don't ride in the lane, I always ride way
> way out in the middle of the street unless traffic is closing from behind, but
> this is not "lane taking." When you're moving the same speed as motors or when
> there are none around you can take all the lane you want for as long as you
> want. But it is my firm belief that exagerrated lane-taking in front of faster
> vehicles is needed far less often than one might think, and the safety
> benefits
> it brings are usually marginal enough to be canceled by the sheer hassle of
> the
> endeavor.
> When I see a beginner using this crutch technique to get down a busy street,
> no. It's a little _sad_, but not annoying to me personally.
> When I see an old veteran doing the defiant exagerrated lane taking thing,
> with
> a look on their face like "I dare you to honk at me", and doing it where I
> know
> for a fact no clear necessity exists, yes it annoys me. Especially when there
> is an empty street that is just as fast (and without lights) one block to the
> east or west. I wish these bastards would just put their bikes in the garage
> and give it up already. These guys are transportational cycling's biggest PR
> problem. Every time they go for a ride, they give the impression that riding
> in
> traffic is all about conflict, anger, and general difficulty. (It's not.)
> Every time one of these guys rides their bike to or from work it makes it more
> difficult for me to ride those same streets.
> Little Napoleonic thing going on there perhaps. Cyclists are so used to
> getting
> pushed around at intersections, maybe they find themselves with the
> opportunity
> to control a lane and the drivers in it, they reflexively lower the boom.
> Abused children tend to abuse their children.

The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)
Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of.

04-01-2004, 08:41 PM

Jay jay wrote:

<< The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)
Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of. >>

I suspect you might have misread the law a bit in your own favor, although I'm
not familiar with Ontario's laws. I would be surprised and impressed if the law
was really as you stated it. Typically it is not dictated that a cyclist
"should be a minimum" distance from the road's edge, but rather that they are
entitled to an area of that size on the right side. In fact it is usually
implied that cyclists should _stay within_ this space unless certain conditions
exist, parked cars, debris, too-narrow lane necessitating lane-taking, setting
up for a left turn, etcetera.

It is true that cyclists need to self-interpret these arbitrary laws in order
to ride safely.

I do not share your apparent lack of compromise about riding to the right.

Robert

04-01-2004, 08:41 PM

Jay jay wrote:

<< The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)
Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of. >>

I suspect you might have misread the law a bit in your own favor, although I'm
not familiar with Ontario's laws. I would be surprised and impressed if the law
was really as you stated it. Typically it is not dictated that a cyclist
"should be a minimum" distance from the road's edge, but rather that they are
entitled to an area of that size on the right side. In fact it is usually
implied that cyclists should _stay within_ this space unless certain conditions
exist, parked cars, debris, too-narrow lane necessitating lane-taking, setting
up for a left turn, etcetera.

It is true that cyclists need to self-interpret these arbitrary laws in order
to ride safely.

I do not share your apparent lack of compromise about riding to the right.

Robert

04-01-2004, 08:41 PM

Jay jay wrote:

<< The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)
Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of. >>

I suspect you might have misread the law a bit in your own favor, although I'm
not familiar with Ontario's laws. I would be surprised and impressed if the law
was really as you stated it. Typically it is not dictated that a cyclist
"should be a minimum" distance from the road's edge, but rather that they are
entitled to an area of that size on the right side. In fact it is usually
implied that cyclists should _stay within_ this space unless certain conditions
exist, parked cars, debris, too-narrow lane necessitating lane-taking, setting
up for a left turn, etcetera.

It is true that cyclists need to self-interpret these arbitrary laws in order
to ride safely.

I do not share your apparent lack of compromise about riding to the right.

Robert

04-01-2004, 11:12 PM

Thu, 01 Apr 2004 23:51:51 -0500, <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Jay <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
>MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
>(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
>one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
>These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
>potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)

Maybe it says that in the drivers handbooks as recommended practice.
The Highways Traffic Act has a much different reading.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

147. (1) Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the
normal speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where
practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for
traffic or as close as practicable to the right hand curb or edge of
the roadway.

148. (1) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting
another vehicle shall turn out to the right from the centre of the
roadway, allowing the other vehicle one-half of the roadway free.
\
Vehicles meeting bicycles
(4) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting a
person travelling on a bicycle shall allow the cyclist sufficient room
on the roadway to pass.
Bicycles overtaken
(6) Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is
overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed
shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to
pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the
left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision.

>Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
>of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of.

I read section 147 to mean that if you're travelling at the speed of
traffic you're entitled to the lane, otherwise as far right as
"practicable". That's usually somewhere around the right tire rut.
--
zk

04-01-2004, 11:12 PM

Thu, 01 Apr 2004 23:51:51 -0500, <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Jay <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
>MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
>(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
>one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
>These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
>potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)

Maybe it says that in the drivers handbooks as recommended practice.
The Highways Traffic Act has a much different reading.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

147. (1) Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the
normal speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where
practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for
traffic or as close as practicable to the right hand curb or edge of
the roadway.

148. (1) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting
another vehicle shall turn out to the right from the centre of the
roadway, allowing the other vehicle one-half of the roadway free.
\
Vehicles meeting bicycles
(4) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting a
person travelling on a bicycle shall allow the cyclist sufficient room
on the roadway to pass.
Bicycles overtaken
(6) Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is
overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed
shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to
pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the
left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision.

>Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
>of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of.

I read section 147 to mean that if you're travelling at the speed of
traffic you're entitled to the lane, otherwise as far right as
"practicable". That's usually somewhere around the right tire rut.
--
zk

04-01-2004, 11:12 PM

Thu, 01 Apr 2004 23:51:51 -0500, <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]>,
Jay <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:

>The Ministry of Transportation in Ontario expects that cyclists should be a
>MINIMUM of one metre (39 in) from the edge of the driven portion of the road
>(where the asphalt begins) and that motor vehicles should pass a MINIMUM of
>one metre ( 39in) from the left side of the outer portion of bike/rider.
>These minimums are expected be be increased for matters of safety ( glass,
>potholes, intersections, unsafe passing areas, etc)

Maybe it says that in the drivers handbooks as recommended practice.
The Highways Traffic Act has a much different reading.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

147. (1) Any vehicle travelling upon a roadway at less than the
normal speed of traffic at that time and place shall, where
practicable, be driven in the right-hand lane then available for
traffic or as close as practicable to the right hand curb or edge of
the roadway.

148. (1) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting
another vehicle shall turn out to the right from the centre of the
roadway, allowing the other vehicle one-half of the roadway free.
\
Vehicles meeting bicycles
(4) Every person in charge of a vehicle on a highway meeting a
person travelling on a bicycle shall allow the cyclist sufficient room
on the roadway to pass.
Bicycles overtaken
(6) Every person on a bicycle or motor assisted bicycle who is
overtaken by a vehicle or equestrian travelling at a greater speed
shall turn out to the right and allow the vehicle or equestrian to
pass and the vehicle or equestrian overtaking shall turn out to the
left so far as may be necessary to avoid a collision.

>Cling closer to edge if YOU want, but I need manuveuring room on both sides
>of my cycle that motor vehicle operators may not be aware of.

I read section 147 to mean that if you're travelling at the speed of
traffic you're entitled to the lane, otherwise as far right as
"practicable". That's usually somewhere around the right tire rut.
--
zk

04-01-2004, 11:19 PM

Thu, 01 Apr 2004 22:41:02 -0500, <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ].edu>,
"frkrygow" <"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> wrote:

>I think the situation is analogous to an elderly driver at a stop sign,
>waiting to pull out into a busy four lane.

Two of my local folk cycling heros are in their eighties.

The Scottish lady with the nice Raleigh three speed rides in the
street, rolls stop signs, uses hand signals and "jumps curbs" to use
pedestrian crosswalks.

Today I spoke with a guy I've seen all over town. He's been riding
single speed bikes since he was nine (a BSA). His last car was a 1949
Dodge. He's eighty two and rides in the streets, back lanes and a few
sidewalks.
--
zk