Q1 – Cyclists are illegal on Texas freeways – T or F?
Q2 – A cyclist should not be in the right-turn-only lane if going straight – T or F?
Q3 – A cyclist can “take the lane” even if there’s a bike lane – T or F?
Answer 1 - False – Most people, including most cyclists, think it's illegal to ride on the freeway, but it’s only illegal to ride on any limited access highway in Texas if it’s been posted. I’ve never seen such a posting myself and, in some cases, an interstate highway may be the safest place to ride due to the lack of crossing movements. Ref Texas Transportation Code 545.065
Answer 2 - False – There is no exception in Texas in the “Far To the Right” (FTR) laws for cyclists in not wanting to be in a RT lane when they want to go straight. You get hit in that through lane, you are in violation of the FTR law even though operating safely. This is a law I violate daily, blatently, and unapologetically - regardless of whether police are present or not. Strictly speaking, you are in violation if you aren't as far to the right as practicable even if you want to go straight through the intersection. Forester talks about this one in his book. Ref Texas Transportation Code 551.103
If I were to be tagged with this violation, I would attempt to claim that exception 3 applied, but I'd still probably be found "guilty!"
Answer 3 - True or False, nobody's really sure (Ref same as answer 2 above) – PM Summer scores this one as “F.” In reality, it’s a little fuzzy, and I don’t know of any prosecutions, so I’d score it as “T.” But keep reading for #4 & 5 - this gets better…
5 comments:
Surely, it is not "practicable" to ride in a turn lane when not turning!
Q3: OPERATION ON ROADWAY. Sec 551.104
(a) A person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, unless:(4) the person is operating a bicycle in an outside lane that is:
(A) less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that laneIn other words, if there is a bike lane, you must be in it. This is how the City of Austin understands the law, and use to enforce it. There is no other reasonable understanding of the wording, I do not believe.
Tags are giving me fits.
(A) less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that lane-
In other words, if there is a bike lane, you must be in it. This is how the City of Austin understands the law, and use to enforce it. There is no other reasonable understanding of the wording, I do not believe.
A lesson here is that we should always strive to SIMPLIFY law, not make it more convoluted. But then, how would lawyers make their livings?
FYI: Herman May has posted an excellent dissection of the new Colorado Safe Passing law on the Chainguard list.
http://sports.groups.yahoo.com/group/chainguard/
stu42j, I'm sure you've seen cyclists riding in right-turn lanes without turning many times. They're just being law abiding citizens, unlike cycle scofflaws.
John Forester, in EFFECTIVE CYCLING Chapter 29, explains how the right-turn-only exception got left out of the law. Personally, I wish he'd been a little slower on the uptake...
Post a Comment