Clarification on Ohio Bike Law

[alison]

I often ride my bike east from my home in the Heights area which often takes me through Pepper Pike where there are many signs posted requiring bicycles to ride single file and we always do.

My understanding of the Ohio bicycle laws is that a city has every right to require this because it does not contradict any general rules of the road. Here is the latest bike law, as far as I know: www.ohiobike.org/bicycle-law-digest.html

There have been several occasions in which I have come upon, while driving, packs of cyclist riding two (or more) abreast on these same rodes, going right past these signs. I admit it irritates me a bit.

But am I wrong? Should these cyclists me allowed to ride two abreast even though the signs say not to?

Alison

[Aussie Rob]

IT's my understanding that we have every right to ride two abrest re: the revised code.

4511.55 Riding Bicycles - Every person operating a bicycle on a roadway shall ride as near to
the right side of the roadway as practicable obeying all traffic rules applicable to vehicles, and
exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.
Persons riding bicycles on a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast in a single lane, except
on paths or parts of roadways set aside for that purpose.

Although the code also says this -

4511.07 Local Traffic Regulations - Local authorities may regulate the operation of bicycles
and require registration and licensing.

Frankly, ill abide by the explicit law rather than the vague one. If im not obstructing traffic, or if im traveling near the speed limit (25 in a 30) then ill ride two abreast until i see/hear a car back then ill move over to give them room.

[Steve Yutzy]

So the spirit of the law is to prevent delays to motorist traffic
I like Rob's approach, as it's sensitive to the fact that there are cars on the road as well

Really, it probably goes back to the "share the road" mantra that we like to preach, and the fact that sharing doesn't mean just cars co-existing with us, but also us co-existing with cars

With that said, "DON'T BE ONE OF THE CYCLISTS THAT BLOWS THROUGH STOP SIGNS AND BLATANTLY DISREGARDS TRAFFIC LAWS"
You're making it worse for all of us, and side mirrors of motorists that you've conditioned to hate cyclists really hurt when they hit you

Although it generally tends to be true that the person is smart and people are dumb, there's no shame in being that guy at a group ride that insists on following the rules (stopping at stop signs/lights/etc)

Set a good example

[Brandon]

Taken from the Ohio bicycle code:

Section 4511.55(B) allows riding two abreast. However, cyclists should avoid unnecessary delay to other traffic. Please be courteous and "single up" when other drivers wish to pass if such passing is safe and reasonable. There is no violation if any of the following apply: (1) If there is no traffic being delayed; (2) If the cyclists are traveling as fast as other traffic; (3) If traffic can reasonably pass by using another lane; (4) If the lane is too narrow or it is otherwise unsafe for passing.

So, there is only a need to single up when you are delaying traffic and it is "safe and reasonable" for the cars to pass, otherwise you can continue to ride two abrest.

Also, notice part (3) of this section. If there is another lane to pass, that lane is yours as a cyclist. I am of the opinion that pairs of cyclists SHOULD ride 2 abrest, which makes them much more visible. This is not to say that falling into single file to allow cars to pass is not a good idea (you know, when there is a "car back")....but causing a motorist 10 or 15 seconds of their time to assure they see you and respect your right to the road is fine IMO. Isn't the speed limit through most of Pepper Pike 25 anyways? Hell, I'd probably take the whole lane, because even if I was in my car, I'd only be going 23 ;-)

[MattCollister]

I abide by the laws of physics. A 200-lb cyclist will always lose to a 2,000-lb car.

I've never felt comfortable riding out in the middle of the lane. In spite of the logic that it supposedly makes you more visible. That "feels" to me like asking for trouble.

[Aussie Rob]

The old mantra of "you'll be in the right....DEAD right" eh?

I love riding in the middle of the lane. Less debris, smoother asphalt, and it doesn't leave the car *just* enough room to try and pass, thus buzzing me and leaving me to merely hope that they know the dimensions of their car.

I believe in riding assertively yet courteously; i think it's safer. Then again, 90% of my riding is in the metroparks which is a different animal to more open roads.

[elizabeth]

hmm Are there laws like this for runners? I can see the two abreast thing with bikes but I am wondering what the running "laws" dictate when there is no sidewalk and you are running against traffic. I tend to run as a group and move over to single file when cars are coming (and jump into ditches and bushes when cars swerve to hit you, Matt is definitely right about those laws of physics).

We've run into some trouble with a Solon cop recently who thinks we should be single file at all times. If anyone knows if there is an actual law that states this let me know.

Thanks!

[alison]

The signs in Pepper Pike that I am referring to include bicycles, runners and walkers, stating all should be single file. I could find no indication in Ohio law (http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/4511.50) as to how many across you can run/walk, and if there are no signs stating such a single-file ordinance in Solon, I think you could argue the point.

And this is part of my original question. If you were to be stopped for a ticket because you were riding two abreast, rather than single file in an area with adequate signage for single file riding, who would be in the wrong here? It is not a black and while subject . . . but I am leaning towards shame on the cyclist for disregarding the signs, though is sounds like others don't agree.

[Aussie Rob]

The law is the law regardless of what signs some shmuck in city hall puts up.

If you get ticketed, you just fight it. If the law is on your side, case closed you win. I'm going to ask a lawyer cyclist i know this wednesday and see what he says. I'm curious to know how this would go down in the real world.

[bprack]

I think I would tend to lean towards Matt's side on the bike. I'm sure we have all had our incidents with motorists and would rather keep them at a minimal until Ohio does something to protect the people who care about their bodies and the environment. "GIVE US A DEDICATED BIKE LANE" That would be a start to making it safer for everyone, especially in the Metroparks.

[Aussie Rob]

I'd be happy if they just lowered the speed limit in the metroparks to 25 and actually enforced it. That way we'd pretty much be at or near the speed limit ourselves and obstructing nobody. Hell, i can already see the competition for the first person to get booked for speeding on their bike already!

I don't have a lot of sympathy for a motorist who's hammering through the parkway....if you're in such a hurry, take 71!

[bberk1]

Who sees signs anyway when you're biking. Head down looking just a couple feet ahead. right? Assume for the best.

[Jack Carney]

Follow the laws as best you can but be smart, courteous and above all use common sense because unless you have a death wish it won't matter who was "right" when you get mowed down. The ticket is another matter and it is an interesting topic.

My pet peeve on this subject - the motorist who waits until they are a foot behind you to blare their horn and scare the hell out of you. I have almost crashed before when that happened. I do appreciate people who give a polite tap of the horn when they are approaching to let you know they are there.

[Brandon]

Rob, I'd be interested to see what the attorney you mention would have to say about this. I have a feeling there is no definitive answer because the law is so vague and leaves much up for interpretation.

It is my understanding that the state law gives the cyclist many road rights that are not always upheld by local municipalities, who might attempt to ticket you for riding 2 abrest when it is legal (and safer) to do so. Contacting the city to 1) question the signs and 2) inform them it contradicts state law might not be a bad idea.

IMO it is often most practicable to ride in the lane towards the right (near where a cars right tire might be), not exactly in the middle of the lane. Riding here 1) makes you more visible 2) means you don't have to swerve all over (and possibly into moving traffic) to avoid large rocks, roadkill, tree limbs, etc. 3) does not allow cars to pass within inches of you on your bike because they cannot squeeze by, they have to wait for a good time to pass....or you can wait for a good time to move further to the right or into the berm.

I typically feel safer on the right side of the lane because I don't often find a berm or "bike lane" that is free from debris and wide enough for me to swerve to avoid such things without swerving into traffic or into a tree. We are typically moving along @ 15-25 mph on vehicles (aka bicycles) that don't handle riding over debris very well.

[MattCollister]

NTBADH, but.....

So I was riding yesterday, by myself, enjoying the morning, minding my own business. I was heading north on River Road, just south of Gates Mills. I came to and through one of those corners right by the river, south of the village, and suddenly found myself heading straight into the grill of an oncoming car. He was in my lane, attempting to pass a group of bikes riding 2 or 3 abreast, heading south. We had plenty of room to take evasive action, but I rode off into the shoulder to be safe. I must have scared the piss out of the driver too.

I don't think he would have had to pull out so far to pass a single-file of bikes. And I think most of the communities along River Road, including GM, have signs telling cyclists to ride single file. Now, you can say that the driver had no business trying to pass anything on a semi-blind curve. I'll give you that. But as Rob pointed out above, something about being "dead right."

[Charlie]

Glad to hear you didn't get hit. As I began reading, I thought I was having a flashback to two years ago.

[JenCollister]

Yesterday was a beautiful day to ride, but I think the motorists were a little cranky. I heard a guy come flying up on Sam and me as we approached a stop sign. I checked both ways, there was no one coming, so we went for it without stopping fully in order to get out of the motorist's way as fast as possible. Instead of pleasing him, he went on a tirade. He said "D*mn you cyclists - that was a stop sign!" He also used some more choice words as he drove up next to me including calling us "a$$holes". Wow, haven't been called that in awhile, if ever. There was nothing I could do about it, so I ignored him and thankfully, he went about his day. Yes, he was right in that we should have stopped, but he was probably a little nuts too. Just another reason to be careful out there! Note that I stopped at the rest of the stop signs.

[bberk1]

Times like those you wish you had your carry and conceal permit. I might be able to run, bike and swim more then him, but kung fu is not my strong suit.

[traciezamiska]

jen - i've been in your situation before. since i was 'fighting' with an escalade, i had a few choice words of my own. i think your california stop was appropriate considering the circumstances. unfortunately, there are many cyclists who don't obey any traffic laws and i think those cranky drivers take it out on everyone.

i agree with many of the above comments. regardless of the laws, i think it is most important to make decisions based on the place you are riding and common sense. there isn't one section of river road that i would ride two or more. it is too winding and narrow and i know that people drive over the speed limit all the time (something i am myself very guilty of on stretches).

regardless of what our rights our as vehicles on the road, we aren't going to win a battle with a car/truck. i'm all about standing up for principle and what is right, but when it is between me and a car, i choose living! all we can do is keep riding, safely and continue obeying the traffic laws ourselves! that in itself raises awareness.

[Brian Luther]

Most motorists with, "driving issues", are just annoyed with cyclists.

If your not hugging the white line or the far right edge of the pavement, motorists are not happy.

It only gets worse, when there are, two or more cyclists ridding together as a group. Some day soon Cleveland may decide to extend the roadways to accommodate us cyclists, i.e. bike lane or wider berms...... ;D

City streets versus country roads, the country is a "bit" more accommodating for cyclists.

Brian

[Jack Carney]

Maybe we could hire this guy to represent CTC in our quest for safer cycling on the streets of Cleveland.

www.breitbart.tv/?p=90483

[Brooks Modie]

I completely agree that cyclists need to pay attention to traffic, follow all applicable traffic laws and make as little impact as possible to the traffic and overall environment around us. Here is my dilemma:

Generally I find it safer to cross an intersection with a red light that has no traffic crossing perpendicular to my route. I know this is breaking the law and violating what I wrote in the first sentence but here is why I do it: If I were to stop at that red light and wait in line for the light to turn green I am inevitably going to slow down the flow of traffic by 1. clipping back into my pedal, 2. resuming pedalling and getting up to speed and 3. trying to watch out for and steer around cars that are turning.
I have on numerous occasions followed what the law states only to be honked at, sworn at etc.. because I was in the way of cars trying to get through or turn at the intersection.

I find it much easier on myself and those stopped at the light that if it is clear for me to go, I will go. This way does not impede any motorist and gives me time to get through the intersection and off to the side of the road. I know this method is wrong and can be viewed as me being above the law or not caring about the law, giving a bad name to cyclists but I do it because I have found it to be a safe way for myself and motorists to share the road.

I am interested in how others get through intersections or what your opinions are of how I ride.

Brooks

[chuckm]

I'm with George on this one. Won't pass a car stopped at a red light. If I'm by myself, and there's traffic around, I'll come to a complete stop at signs and lights, no traffic and I still slow down. If I'm riding with others, I'll encourge them to do the same, but am willing to stick with however they do it so as not to screw up flow of the ride.