Keri Caffrey, of Commute Orlando, just published this photo on Facebook. Her cutline indicates that drivers were giving them a full lane of passing width until they arrived at this bicycle lane. Then look what happened.
By the way, that looks like 3 feet of clearence to me. Two things are going wrong here:
- Florida has a 3-foot passing law. So this trucker is well within his rights (although not making a superior moral choice).
- Drivers treat that white line like a barrier (hint: it ain’t). So you tend to be passed much more closely riding in a poorly designed bicycle lane.
Think hard. Is this really what you want on the roads around Springfield?
If you want to spend money, let’s expand the greenways. If you want infrastructure, I’m all for talking about a separate, superior system (i.e. bicycle superiority at intersections) similar to what the Dutch have.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=ff6dada9-6c49-420b-8065-533e01c64e86)
Comments 11
Now I understand that nonsense question on the LAB Traffic 101 test about the wind from trucks causing a loss of control. I have never been passed that closely by a big truck. Not even before I learned the finer points on how to encourage motorists to make safe choices.
Posted 16 Apr 2010 at 6:01 pm ¶This driver was being a dick. The pass was preceded by him laying on the horn during several seconds which he could have been changing lanes. He encountered us just before the beginning of the bike lane. Once the bike lane started, we went into it (as we legally have to via the FTR law). At that point we gave up the ability to defend ourselves from a close pass. He actually was up against the bike lane line as he passed me, and then into the bike lane just afterward. I have the company name and truck number and I intend to deal with his employer.
Aside from the deliberateness… there was not a whole lot of space to the truck’s left in the lane. It would have been an uncomfortable pass even if he wasn’t being a jerk.
I have footage of more than a half dozen other trucks passing us with full lane changes on the road with no bike lane. No problems with no bike lane, they just change lanes.
Posted 16 Apr 2010 at 7:22 pm ¶This does not look like FUN!
OK, I’m thinking, really hard. Is this what anyone wants, having a big truck make a close pass on sub-standard bike lane? Nah, no ones wants that, it is about choices. Cyclist have more control than they realize. Use a different road with less traffic, heavy traffic or use this road and CONTROL THE LANE.
Since cycling is always more greener, safer and super in Europe, here is fun summer reading.
International Scan Summary Report On Pedestrian And Bicyclist Safety And Mobility, Jun 2009.
pdf version
Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety and Mobility in Europe, Feb 2010
Personally, there is no park between where I live and work, doubt it would ever happen and in any case I’m not waiting. Consider John Adams, “Risk and freedom”, page 10.
Judgments about whether safety can be promoted by means of vehicle and road engineering, or by altering road user behaviour, depend on the views taken about the possibilities for making roads and vehicles more “foolproof” on the one hand, and for making human beings less “foolish” on the other.
A little cyclist education makes all roads usable, safe and convenient.
Posted 16 Apr 2010 at 8:17 pm ¶The bike lane meets standards. It looks substandard because of the lens distortion.
There is no alternate route to where we were going.
Because of the FTR law, controlling the lane is not legal when there is a bike lane because the bike lane is part of the roadway.
Cyclist education is undermined by bike lanes. WTF good is empowerment if you can’t use it because the road has been altered to remove your right to control your space?
Posted 16 Apr 2010 at 8:59 pm ¶here’s the video:
Posted 16 Apr 2010 at 10:04 pm ¶http://www.vimeo.com/10995861
Sorry I did not get in on the conversation last night. Thanks for all the interesting comments!
Posted 17 Apr 2010 at 6:55 am ¶Thanks Keri for the clarification, lens can distort reality like marketers. OK thru Ohio’s distorted legal lens I am not obligated to use the bike lane. The City of Columbus, Ohio explicitly states cyclist are NOT required to use a bike lane. From experience I know a bike lane after winter is full of debris so I would hold my line in the traffic lane and ignore the bike lane. The truck could easily pass within a few seconds.
Now that I’ve seen the video and encourage all interested readers to. I agree the truck driver was continuing to harass (honking) and possibly attempting vehicular assault. Video evidence seems incontestable and two witness, a commercial truck driver know better. I hope you and Andrew each file a complaint with the company. It looks bad for the company and very bad for the driver, his meal ticket depends on safe driving. The truck driver honking adds to my reason for holding my line in the traffic lane, the driver sees you. Once a cyclist moves from “in front of” to the right side of large truck it’s more difficult for the driver to see you and easier to misjudge how close they are passing.
In this situation, cyclist can make the smart choice control the lane or risk a (rare but adrenalin-spiking) unintentional/intention “close passing” incidents. Just a little thinking, no physical courage, just confidence.
Posted 17 Apr 2010 at 1:20 pm ¶If I thought he was going to do what he did, I definitely would have stayed in the lane and made him change lanes.
In the moment, I figured he’d be moving left as we were moving right and we’d be better off. You never know what variables you’re dealing with in the moment. This could have played out worse. We could have stayed in the lane and he could have hit us and then everyone in this fucked up culture would blame us for not being in our place.
In the end, we were not hit AND we have a perfect tool — a video which shows us doing everything we are expected to do, him endangering our lives out of a lack of perspective, a sense of entitlement and uncontrolled anger. We have an opportunity to get the attention of a trucking company and offer a positive solution (Rodney and I are scheming that now) that increases the awareness of a lot of people.
Simply filing a complaint and (likely) having that driver fired, would be good revenge, but that driver would then be out on the road filled with more rage against cyclists in his private vehicle. If fellow drivers see that as unjust, that increases their hostility toward cyclists. I want to be smart about this and create opportunity.
Andy, if you have any thoughts on this, let me know.
Posted 17 Apr 2010 at 2:07 pm ¶Keri… It’s difficult to know if the driver would be fired. It seems reasonable to at least call the company, complain, and give them a link to the video. Along with the complaint, you could volunteer to give their drivers as crash course in dealing with cyclists — similar to your law enforcement program. You have cred and credentials! That could snowball into helping other companies the same way. Perhaps, then, the best way to look at this: opportunity.
Posted 17 Apr 2010 at 4:02 pm ¶That’s kinda along the lines I was thinking. Offer education to all the drivers, use it as a PR opportunity for the company… maybe get them to be a sponsor in our civility initiative. That driver’s behavior was so blatantly intentional and dangerous, I imagine their risk management people might not want him on the payroll. I’d like to take the guy for a bike ride and give him a different perspective.
Posted 17 Apr 2010 at 5:54 pm ¶To give an idea of how much the camera lens distorts, here are the measurements of that bike lane (via Rodney):
Bike lane is 68.5 inches to curb face. 18.5 inches gutter pan. 50 inches on the bike lane itself. (It didn’t even look that big to me in person!) Outside travel lane is 11 feet +/- 1.5 inches.
Can you believe there are people who propose shoehorning bike lanes with even less space for both the BL and travel lane? With friends like that…
Posted 25 Apr 2010 at 8:04 am ¶