New Bill to Require Drivers to Yield 4-Foot Safety Buffer to Cyclists (Pittsburgh: move, bike)

[ditchdigger]

i'd be interested to see what law they're referring to in the part you quoted,

Probably this one:

3364. Minimum speed regulation.

(a) Impeding movement of traffic prohibited.--Except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law, no person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

(b) Slow moving vehicle to drive off roadway.--

(1) Except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law, whenever any person drives a vehicle upon a roadway having width for not more than one lane of traffic in each direction at less than the maximum posted speed and at such a slow speed as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, the driver shall, at the first opportunity when and where it is reasonable and safe to do so and after giving appropriate signal, drive completely off the roadway and onto the berm or shoulder of the highway. The driver may return to the roadway after giving appropriate signal only when the movement can be made in safety and so as not to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

(2) A pedalcycle may be operated at a safe and reasonable speed appropriate for the pedalcycle. A pedalcycle operator shall use reasonable efforts so as not to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

Because, like yours said, all the rules of the road apply equally to bicycles, plus the rules specific to them. And it's probably in the interpretation of words like "reasonable" and "normal" that the sometimes requirement to pull over exists

(I was reading that just the other day, researching for a reply in one of the other driving threads, so I knew where to look for it..)

[CaptainPittsburgh]

Originally Posted by Perryview22

I have observed that most cyclists are very inconsiderate. They behave as if they are in their own little worlds, totally oblivious to everything going on around them. There could be a line of cars stretched out for a mile behind them, and they just keep on pedaling and obstructing - on roads that do not have a bike lane, as if the roadway is their own sovereign domain.

As Groar mentioned, you seem to be, ironically, "completely oblivious" to the state law. Cyclists have a legal right to use the road. In fact, bike lanes only exist to promote awareness of this fact.

I do agree that there are a lot of inconsiderate cyclists. There are also a lot of inconsiderate motorists. Simply by virtue of the disproportionately larger number of motorists, though, I'm confident suggesting that at any given time there are more inconsiderate motorists on the road than cyclists. I wish we didn't have to deal with any of them.

Originally Posted by ditchdigger

Probably this one:

Because, like yours said, all the rules of the road apply equally to bicycles, plus the rules specific to them. And it's probably in the interpretation of words like "reasonable" and "normal" that the sometimes requirement to pull over exists

You're incorrect. The first three items in 3364 are referring to motor vehicles. This is why the language used in all three is "drive" and "driver." You will notice the language used in these laws for bicycles is always "operate" and "ride," never "drive." This is also why the last item in 3364 specifically refers to pedacycles.

As far as the "reasonable" and "normal" speed part, you're also basically wrong. Not about those terms being subjective, but about a cyclist being required to pull over because of them. I just mentioned that the part of 3364 talking about pulling over is referring to motor vehicles, not bikes; however, there is also some additional information for pedacycles that isn't in 3364.

Section 3505:

Originally Posted by PA State Law

(c) Slower than prevailing speeds.-- A pedalcycle operated at slower than prevailing speed shall be operated in accordance with the provisions of Section 3301(b), unless it is unsafe to do so.

[3301(b). Vehicle proceeding at less than normal speed.
Upon all roadways, any vehicles proceeding at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place under the conditions than existing shall 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, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into an alley, private road or driveway. This subsection does not apply to a driver who must necessarily drive in a lane other than the right-hand lane to continue on his intended route.
Comment: Taken together, 3505 (c) and 3301 (b) state that slower vehicles should keep to the right, which is the normal expectation of all road users, while permitting bicyclists to make movements consistent with their intended route.

As you can see here, a bicycle proceeding at less than normal speed just has to be in the right-hand lane or as close as practicable to the curb. A bicycle certainly does not have to pull over and get off the road.

PENNDOT actually has a little section of their website devoted to bike laws. Here's the link:

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/bike/web/bikelaws.htm (broken link)

[gg]

Originally Posted by ditchdigger

Ok, let me get this straight...

You're in an alley, and a guy apparently wants to pass you in a pickup truck. You cross through several intersections at least, but instead of taking the opportunity to pause momentarily in the ample space afforded by one of those intersections, and allow him to pass, you accelerate, and run stop signs to stay in front of him.

Serious question--what were you trying to prove?

No cars/trucks drive blocks and blocks in that pothole filled alley with trucks unloading and much of the time you can't even get through the whole thing. I wasn't proving anything other than I just figured the idiot driving way too fast for conditions was going to turn onto another street. I have never seen anyone run that many blocks in that alley, but this punk wasn't running on all cylinders. Oh, if I am going fast enough for conditions, I have the right to take the lane and believe me in that alley there is only one lane. So I was riding my bike lawfully. Hope you aren't anymore.

[gg]

Originally Posted by Perryview22

I have observed that most cyclists are very inconsiderate. They behave as if they are in their own little worlds, totally oblivious to everything going on around them. There could be a line of cars stretched out for a mile behind them, and they just keep on pedaling and obstructing - on roads that do not have a bike lane, as if the roadway is their own sovereign domain.

Most? Really? We must live in different areas. Yes, some cyclists are a pain in the butt and trying to prove some point. Most ride without impeding traffic as so many are in a rush to get nowhere.

[Impala26]

Like someone on the Bike Pittsburgh forum said, I'm counting down the days until a police cruiser or van passes within four feet of me when I'm out riding...

[UKyank]

And for a new twist on things - bad cyclist: Cyclist accident makes waves on the Web | The Upshot - Yahoo! News

[gg]

Originally Posted by UKyank

And for a new twist on things - bad cyclist: Cyclist accident makes waves on the Web | The Upshot - Yahoo! News

A cyclist can hit a pedestrian just like a car can. No sure why it is some new twist? There are bad cyclists, car drivers and to be honest, very bad walkers. I see people J-walk on Penn Ave. all the time talking on cell phones and cars actually have to stop or swerve around them. The person walking seems not to care at all. That media story is silly. Of course cyclists can hit a walker. Cyclists also can run into the side of a car or whatever. Things like that happen. Cyclists are hated enough as it is for some reason and that stupid story won't help us ride safely to work or where ever we are going. Ah, well the media got hold of it and will hype it up for a week or two. No doubt more people will aim for me on the side of the road because of it.

[SteelCityRising]

There's a new article in today's Post-Gazette profiling some of the challenges cyclists are continuing to face navigating our city's streets despite the new law being enacted.

Sharing the road - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Of particular note I'm ashamed of some of our city's denizens who choose to hurl anti-gay slurs at cyclists who are clad in spandex. It's a much better idea to wear spandex and other tight-fitting clothing when you're riding a bike than loose-fitting clothing that can become entangled within your bike's chain, causing a disastrous collision. Even if Mr. Stein was indeed a homosexual (we receive no indication of that in the article) I fail to see why scapegoating homosexuals for your frustrations over having to "share the road" is prudent. Pittsburgh is now the "in" city in America, yet when I read stories like this I see we stilll have a lot of work to do to eradicate the socially regressive types who are still around and kicking, apparently.

[BrianTH]

At least we are having the conversation, even if there are some less-than-stellar representatives of the local population involved.

[gg]

1. I get a kick out of motorists saying, cyclists break the law ALL the time. Many cyclists do roll through stop signs and even run red lights, but cars roll through stop signs and Pittsburgh left anyone? Are you kidding me? Many times it is a safer situation to run through a light. If I have a chance to get ahead of a string of cars on Butler at a red light and make a right turn before that string can catch up to me, should I not proceed to that right turn, so the 10 cars sitting there don't have to deal with me at all? I would much rather be out of their way. Common sense.

2. I feel the style of a cyclist from Pittsburgh Pro would get in more situations than many commuters. They are usually fast cyclists and would take the road more often, due to their speed. Many of them race and they can keep up with cars on the flats or close to the speed limit. Commuters like myself that ride a bike for hauling are a different story. Utility bikes are slower, heavier and have big tires to handle load. We haul lots of groceries and materials on our bikes. I have a couple of racing bikes as well and they are way faster, but not nearly as durable. Anyway, a Pittsburgh Pro rider is probably going to have a more elitist feel due to their $4K bike or even more and the fact they ride up in the 20++mph range all the time. Yes, they can ride over 30mph for distances as well, but not up hills.

I am happy about the new law and also very happy Pittsburgh is getting on bicycles more often. I would like to see Pittsburgh climb in their ranking for commuters. Climb... get it?