Thursday, April 8, 2010

Bike Lane Challenge- The Right-turn Right-of-Way Conundrum

We'd like to introduce you to a new bikePHL feature- the Bike Lane Challenge! Each challenge will present a bike lane or other urban riding scenario, and we want to hear how you would approach it. Show off your traffic expertise!

We will post the answer in a few days. Good luck!
--
The Right-turn Right-of-Way Conundrum:

You're in a bike lane next to a line of cars waiting to turn right and you want to go straight. After slowing to let a car pass you go straight, but then the next motorist who wants to turn honks at you. Who has the right of way, the bicyclist or the turning motorist? What's the best thing to do in this situation? Remember to keep safety in mind!
Post your answer below!

P.S.- If you have any scenarios that you'd like to suggest for a future Bike Lane Challenge, we'd love to hear them! Please email any ideas to max@bicyclecoalition.org. Thank you!
Posted by Max at 11:01 AM
Labels:

20 comments:

  1. The bicycle has the right of way like any vehicle moving straight through the intersection. The cyclist should try to get eye contact with the driver and be prepared to stop if the car does not yield.
    ReplyDelete
  2. I tend to give the car the right of way because I assume everyone in a car wants to kill me. But I believe the rule is cars yield to bikes and pedestrians. Bikes yield to pedestrians.
    ReplyDelete
  4. Since you can confirm that the driver saw you (the honking), I'd say that you should attempt to continue (carefully of course).
    ReplyDelete
  5. If all the cars in the right lane really do want to turn right, I would move from the bike lane into the right car lane, or perhaps the far right side of the left car lane

    Much depends on the actual intersection. What if there isn't a bike lane? Or what if there's a protected right turn light? e.g. Montgomery Drive crossing over Belmont Ave to S. Georges Hill Dr. At that particular intersection I ride over to the right side of the left lane to go straight.
    ReplyDelete
  6. This exists right after the Chestnut St bridge heading into Center City. Just join the right (or left) lane of motor vehicle traffic and continue straight.
    ReplyDelete
  7. The bike has the right away. A motorist is suppose to give the right away to bike if the biker is following the rules of the road as well. If the biker is already within the bike then he/she should continue going straight. If the motorist is already a head of the biker than, for safety reasons the biker should let the motorist go first.
    ReplyDelete
  8. let's be realistic here...the cars wanting to turn right will actually be in the bike lane.

    the cyclists as well as pedestrians have the right of way, but people in cages rarely like to yield to anything smaller in size.
    ReplyDelete
  9. Motor vehicles should yield to Bicycles and Bicycles should yield to Pedestrians. If there is no adjustment of the bike lane to the left of stopped motor vehicle traffic waiting to make a right turn, I would look and continue straight after making eye contact with drivers. If I do not make eye contact, I would most likely yield to the motor vehicle making that right turn. I've come close to smashing the right rear of automobiles many times.
    Hey, can anyone at the Coalition contact the people who write the drivers manual for PA and have them add more Bicycle related scenarios for new driver interaction?
    ReplyDelete
  10. Shoulder check well ahead, and when clear, move to the left and out of the bike lane. Problem solved. Later, return to the scene and make the bike lane AASHTO Green Book compliant by liberal use of tarmac colored paint.
    ReplyDelete
  11. Actually, if you look at the white lane dividers. The solid white line to keep autos out of the bike lane ends a few hundred feet prior to the intersection allowing autos to enter the right lane to complete right turns. The automobile should merge right using its turn signal and get into the correct lane for turning right. The bicyclist should yield to the car (if in front) and wait for the traffic flow to start again, allowing the car in front the chance to turn right. The bicyclist can now proceed in the bike lane, straight across the intersection.
    ReplyDelete
  12. After re-reading the scenario, the solution is to not get into that scenario. Merge into the line of cars well ahead of the intersection. If they're all turning right, move to the left side of the traffic lane. If it's a right turn only lane, then the design is defective and you should be completely to the left of the turning lane, in a through lane.
    ReplyDelete
  13. If the second motorist is honking at you they see you. Keep going. I believe the cyclist has the right of way as all non-turning traffic does. Also, in the picture above the lines of the bike lane are not broken. I believe the broken lines you usually see at intersections are there to give preference to the motorist.

    Generally speaking it is always safest to assume all cars are driving to intentionally or unintentionally harm you. It's better to yield to them and live to fight...I mean ride, another day. At least until we can make more motorists share the road peacefully.
    ReplyDelete
  14. If there is a bike lane as shown, or in California where it is legal to have more than one vehicle in a lane, as long as there is a vehicle to the right (in this case the bicycle) a vehicle to the left may not turn right. IOW the bike has right of way.

    That said, in such a situation I move into the car lane between two cars, or even to the left part of the car lane, so as not to impede traffic unduly.
    ReplyDelete
  15. Shouldn't there be clear legal answers to these questions, rather than an internet poll?

    (i) Are the motorists legally required to merge into the bike lane before turning right?

    I gather this is required in California; this should eliminate right hook problems and uses the same traffic patterns at all intersections. It does force bicyclists to pass on the left where it is generally expected like other traffic.

    (2) Are motorists legally prohibited from using the bike lane, even when they want to turn right?

    I gather this is the law in Oregon; in this case motorists and bicyclists need to use different rules at intersections, depending on whether there is a bike lane.

    (3) Can bicyclists be cited or held at fault in collisions for leaving the bike lane to avoid right turning vehicles (motor and bicycle)?


    So far in my experience, motorists have not entered the bike lane (situation 2), and then honked and swore at me to get off the road when they want to turn right. When I used the main lane (traffic lights and congestion kept the automobiles so slow they were impeding my bicycle), the motorists insisted I was NEVER allowed to leave the bike lane and used more profanity and honked far more aggressively than I ever heard before bike lanes were installed.

    To me, the real questions are:

    Can't we eliminate these conflicts by making motorists merge right before turning, and let bicyclists pass on the left at all intersections?(I haven't seen it in Philadelphia)

    As far as I know, bicyclists are never legally required to use the bike lanes, especially if it is dangerous. I think (hope) state laws will prohibit the City Council from enforcing proposals that make all bicycling violate some regulation, or require the use of door zones or right hook lanes.

    Do the police have consistent views, or does it depend on the individual officer?

    If the police view is consistent, what do they enforce?
    ReplyDelete
  16. This comment has been removed by the author.
    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by the author.
    ReplyDelete
  18. I just got hit and reported a hit and run. The dude insisted it was my fault because I didn't yield to him...

    Oregon law makes it pretty clear:
    http://www.stc-law.com/bike_right_turn.html

    Bikes are mandated to stay in the bike lane. Cars must yield to any bikes in the bike lane when turning right. If a bicycle is in the bike lane at an intersection, and gets hit by a car turning right, it is the motorist's fault.
    ReplyDelete
  19. Uh, yea...

    The cyclist has right of way, but a cyclist who doesn't yield will eventually end of as a corpse with the right of way. It only takes one turning car that didn't see you. There is no way to know if the turning car even knows the cyclist is there. "I thought I'd made eye contact" is a poor epitath.
    ReplyDelete
  20. So whats the point of having these laws that gives the cyclist the right of way, if the cyclist has to ignore them anyways and yield to the car?

    There needs to be a better system than just a spraypainted line on the should of the street. I hear in Denmark they have traffic lights for bicycles to make left turns safely.
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)