Saturday, August 6, 2011

Single File in Traffic, it's the Law?

If you've been out riding with a friend recently, you've probably heard the words shouted from a passing car: "SINGLE FILE." It's far from unreasonable to assume that this sudden unity towards less generic inflammatory remarks is due to car occupants being emboldened by the billboards that have been popping up around town, proclaiming "Single File in Traffic, it's the Law." As cyclists, one of the innumerable benefits we enjoy is a strongly diminished exposure to billboards; it is thus strange that a message unmistakably for cyclists would be delivered from a means of conveyance with an audience limited almost exclusively to motorists (it is with similarly questionable logic that one of the few downtown billboards proffers a weak attempt towards balance: "3 Feet, It's the Law"). If only the failure of this message were as simple as reaching the wrong audience. In fact, "single file in traffic" is not the law, but a sloppy attempt to compress nearly 300 words of legalese into a pithy maxim.

I am not a lawyer, but I am literate and I know how to google. As such, I know that there exists a public document called Utah Code, Title 41, Chapter 6a, Section 1105, better known as The Law which is implicitly referenced. The irony is that I can use the same section literally as a succinct edict that might elicit a practically opposite interpretation: "a person riding two abreast with another person may not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic and shall ride within a single lane." In reality, this section of the law is quite a bit more complicated, and as always, the letter of the law is distinct from its interpretation and application in court.

That said, there are several other obvious ways to interpret taking a lane as legally condoned; personally, it seems to dictate that I should take a lane any time I deem it necessary to ride safely, which is to say, in accordance with the notion of vehicular cycling, Always.

At best, these billboards are wrong. At worst, they are an indication of the sad state of our governance--is it really acceptable to substitute enforcement with inaccurate, passive advertisement? If it is, why don't we see more billboards describing all the other ignored laws? Consider this gem (section 907): "Vehicles emerging from alleys, buildings, private roads, or driveways must stop prior to sidewalk area or street."

The best way to battle ignorance is to learn for yourself and to teach others. To this end, look at some of the other bicycle relevant laws after the jump. Despite what we may come to know as the truth, it seems that until those billboards are torn down and their message fades from memory, the best we can do is lament the greater than usual amount of ignorance spewing from car windows.

As found in the Utah Code, Title 41, Chapter 6a
41-6a-706.5    Operation of motor vehicle near bicycle prohibited.
41-6a-1102    Bicycle and device propelled by human power and moped riders subject to chapter -- Exception. Highlight: "A person operating a nonmotorized bicycle or a vehicle or device propelled by human power is not subject to the penalties related to operator licenses under alcohol and drug-related traffic offenses."
41-6a-1103    Carrying more persons than design permits prohibited -- Exception.
41-6a-1104    Persons on bicycles, mopeds, skates, and sleds not to attach to moving vehicles -- Exception.
41-6a-1105    Operation of bicycle or moped on and use of roadway -- Duties, prohibitions.
41-6a-1106    Bicycles and human powered vehicle or device to yield right-of-way to pedestrians on sidewalks, paths, or trails -- Uses prohibited -- Negligent collision prohibited -- Speed restrictions -- Rights and duties same as pedestrians.
41-6a-1107    Bicycles -- Parking on sidewalk, roadway -- Prohibitions.
41-6a-1108    Bicycles and mopeds -- Turns -- Designated lanes.
41-6a-1109    Bicycles and mopeds -- Turn signals -- Exceptions.
41-6a-1110    Bicycle and moped inspections -- At request of officer.
41-6a-1111    Bicycle racing -- When approved -- Prohibitions -- Exceptions -- Authorized exemptions from traffic laws.
41-6a-1112    Bicycles and mopeds -- Carrying bundle -- One hand on handlebars.
41-6a-1113    Bicycle -- Prohibited equipment -- Brakes required.
41-6a-1114    Bicycles -- Lamps and reflective material required.

For Salt Lake City, bicycle specific laws (very similar to those of the state) are found in chapter 12.80.
A printable summary of these laws can be found in a .PDF provided by the city here.

Rules for the University of Utah campus can be found in the Utah Administrative Code:
Rule R805-1. Operating Regulations for Bicycles, Skateboards and Scooters.

3 comments:

  1. I agree with your interpretation of the bike law about riding to abreast (yes, cyclists may take the lane when it is necessary, and in that case I think its much safer to ride two abreast, perhaps to increase visibility?)

    However, I think your criticism against the Road Respect campaign is unfair. They have billboards up now about the three feet law (Operation of motor vehicle near bicycle prohibited 41-6a-706.5). The whole point of the campaign is that motorists and cyclists need to share the road, and be less ignorant of each other. Both cyclists and drivers act like jerks occasionally, but I think the campaign is a good first step. I think the website is actually pretty progressive, and a good first step to educating the public (http://roadrespect.utah.gov/index.php).

    ReplyDelete
  2. In P-Town, the laws are similar, a discussion on the matter westward:

    http://bikeportland.org/2011/06/07/bike-law-101-riding-two-abreast-54334

    -zed

    ReplyDelete

What are your thoughts?