REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum

Graeme S · 12-03-2009, 08:04 PM

So today I had one of the most unpleasant driving experiences since I've had my license. I was downtown today, driving along Robson street (for those who don't know DT vancouver, it's a street that has one lane for travel in each direction, as well as curbside parking both ways).

At around 7:30 PM tonight, I was third in line at a red light (Bute) and was waiting to get past the parked cars in the right lane so that I could turn right; the two cars ahead of me had stopped just so that there was no room for me to get by with the way cars were parked on the side. As the light turned green, the two cars ahead of me moved up, and as I turned right into the lane, I heard/felt a heavy THUMP on my passenger window. It wasn't until a split second later that I saw a darkly-clad bicyclist tearing up ahead into the intersection.

Now, annoyances all aside, I was shaken on account of several things. First, the startling surprise of what had been a clear and easy change to the right lane and suddenly hearing something right next to me. Second, the idea that I very nearly ended someone's life. Neither of those are particularly fun thoughts for me.

I'll be honest: in that kind of situation I rarely if ever check my rear view mirror to look for cyclists coming up from behind me, because as far as I can recall, his maneuver was not only (demonstratedly) unsafe, but also illegal. Had I hit him, what would the (other than physical) consequences would have been? Would I have been judged at fault on the basis of "you're bigger than him so it's your responsibility to not kill him", or would he have, on the basis of "Well you kind of hit the side of his car when he was changing lanes".

Is it even legal for bicyclists to travel between parked cars and moving traffic? I was under the impression that they had to essentially act as cars do, and stay within traffic lanes when not being guided by a bus lane.

As I drove the rest of the way back to my friend's place, I muttered to myself the mantra:

As a driver, I had pedestrians. As a pedestrian, I hate drivers. But no matter how I travel, I always hate bicyclists.

SkinnyPupp · 12-03-2009, 08:05 PM

Learn to shoulder check

Soundy · 12-03-2009, 08:19 PM

Fact is, cyclists have the same rights and responsibilities on the roads as any motor vehicles. If he's performing an illegal move, that almost always places him squarely at fault. In this case, it's no different than if a car or motorcycle was trying to pass on the right, a decidedly illegal action. The fact that it's winter and dark, and he was wearing all dark clothing, doesn't help his case.

MR_BIGGS · 12-03-2009, 08:49 PM

As others have mentioned. You have to shoulder check on those right turns. On a street like Robson, there are many bike couriers working that strip. Other streets not so much, but that one it's a must. I can see where you're coming from though.

Graeme S · 12-03-2009, 09:00 PM

edited in it was 7.30 this evening after work and shopping at PC.

CRS · 12-03-2009, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graeme S

So today I had one of the most unpleasant driving experiences since I've had my license. I was downtown today, driving along Robson street (for those who don't know DT vancouver, it's a street that has one lane for travel in each direction, as well as curbside parking both ways).

At around 7:30 PM tonight, I was third in line at a red light (Bute) and was waiting to get past the parked cars in the right lane so that I could turn right; the two cars ahead of me had stopped just so that there was no room for me to get by with the way cars were parked on the side. As the light turned green, the two cars ahead of me moved up, and as I turned right into the lane, I heard/felt a heavy THUMP on my passenger window. It wasn't until a split second later that I saw a darkly-clad bicyclist tearing up ahead into the intersection.

Now, annoyances all aside, I was shaken on account of several things. First, the startling surprise of what had been a clear and easy change to the right lane and suddenly hearing something right next to me. Second, the idea that I very nearly ended someone's life. Neither of those are particularly fun thoughts for me.

I'll be honest: in that kind of situation I rarely if ever check my rear view mirror to look for cyclists coming up from behind me, because as far as I can recall, his maneuver was not only (demonstratedly) unsafe, but also illegal. Had I hit him, what would the (other than physical) consequences would have been? Would I have been judged at fault on the basis of "you're bigger than him so it's your responsibility to not kill him", or would he have, on the basis of "Well you kind of hit the side of his car when he was changing lanes".

Is it even legal for bicyclists to travel between parked cars and moving traffic? I was under the impression that they had to essentially act as cars do, and stay within traffic lanes when not being guided by a bus lane.

As I drove the rest of the way back to my friend's place, I muttered to myself the mantra:

As a driver, I had pedestrians. As a pedestrian, I hate drivers. But no matter how I travel, I always hate bicyclists.

I'll let you reread the sentence you have bolded.

Rich Sandor · 12-03-2009, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

Learn to shoulder check

You shouldn't have to freakin' shoulder check if there is no lane beside you. A cyclist should not be cruising in your 'blind spot' when they can be crushed/killed by your car if you have to make an evasive maneuverer.

When I'm on a bike I don't weave between parked cars and moving cars at mach 3. Just because some retarded harcore cyclists do it, doesn't mean it's legal!!!

SkinnyPupp · 12-03-2009, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

You shouldn't have to freakin' shoulder check if there is no lane beside you. A cyclist should not be cruising in your 'blind spot' when they can be crushed/killed by your car if you have to make an evasive maneuverer.

When I'm on a bike I don't weave between parked cars and moving cars at mach 3. Just because some retarded harcore cyclists do it, doesn't mean it's legal!!!

Where did you learn to drive?

You always have to shoulder check. Not because you think there may or may not be a cyclist/pedestrian/car/whatever. Always.

Rich Sandor · 12-03-2009, 10:46 PM

Guaranteed at some point you have or will have changed lanes without looking because you know there is no one there.

SkinnyPupp · 12-03-2009, 10:51 PM

I can't recall any time that I didn't shoulder check, but you may be right. But I drive with the assumption that everyone else on the road is not paying attention, and could crash into me at any given time. So I always shoulder check.

But if I didn't shoulder check, and hit someone, it would still be my fault for not shoulder checking.

xpl0sive · 12-04-2009, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

You shouldn't have to freakin' shoulder check if there is no lane beside you. A cyclist should not be cruising in your 'blind spot' when they can be crushed/killed by your car if you have to make an evasive maneuverer.

When I'm on a bike I don't weave between parked cars and moving cars at mach 3. Just because some retarded harcore cyclists do it, doesn't mean it's legal!!!

lol i failed my class 5 driving test for turning right without a shoulder check about a year ago. there was no bike lane there either, but the instructor said that it doesnt matter, there still could be a cyclist there lol

zulutango · 12-04-2009, 07:39 AM

As a matter of interest, a know of an on duty Cop who had been stopped at a stop sign waiting to make a right turn, with his right turn signal on. A cyclist came up behind him on the right side of the PC and hit the side of the now turning PC. To do this he had to make an illegal pass on the right on a car that was not signaling a left turn and he was riding on the shoulder of the highway (also illegal) and had to disobey the stop sign that he ran. He laid a complaint against the Cop and the Police force paid the cyclist out for his minor injuries just to make it go away. You think YOU got problems with the system.

wing_woo · 12-04-2009, 08:47 AM

Cyclists are scary. I try to always shoulder check when turning. I do appreciate the cyclists that go on my left side when I am signalling right though. However, I've seen some where it's a red light and the cross traffic is clear, but the cyclists puts his bike right in front of my car so I can't do the right turn. I hate it when they do that.

SkinnyPupp · 12-04-2009, 08:54 AM

As a cyclist, I always stay clear of cars. Knowing that most drivers don't know I am there, there's no way I would ever consider passing cars on the right. If I am waiting at a red light going straight, I stand way back from the intersection so motorists can turn right without having to worry about me. If I cam riding and a car is turning right, I either slow down, or go around them on their left (after should checking of course

). I always try to make eye contact with drivers, and use hand gestures to let them know what I intend to do (either letting them go around me to turn right at a light, or that I will be turning, etc)

Bottom line is: ASSUME EVERYONE IS AN IDIOT. Whether they are drivers, cyclists, or pedestrians. Remember that at ALL TIMES, whether you are driving, riding, or walking. You will live a longer life that way.

wing_woo · 12-04-2009, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

As a cyclist, I always stay clear of cars. Knowing that most drivers don't know I am there, there's no way I would ever consider passing cars on the right. If I am waiting at a red light going straight, I stand way back from the intersection so motorists can turn right without having to worry about me. If I cam riding and a car is turning right, I either slow down, or go around them on their left (after should checking of course

). I always try to make eye contact with drivers, and use hand gestures to let them know what I intend to do (either letting them go around me to turn right at a light, or that I will be turning, etc)

If only more cyclists ride like you describe, then it would be less stressful driving with cyclists around.

Dragon-88 · 12-04-2009, 01:26 PM

When driving in BC I assume everyone is from Richmond... Helps alot.. LOL

Rogue951 · 12-04-2009, 02:29 PM

Cyclists should have licencing and insurance, maybe above a certain age so kids can keep being kids.
and ESPECIALLY Courier riders.

Extra money for the system, and Liability against stupid cyclists. I see it as win TO ME both ways.
won't be that way for others, just my opinion.
Mind you I'm a driver by trade so I see a lot more road than you guys. (a couple hundred KM a day.)

underscore · 12-04-2009, 03:20 PM

^ give them plates too so they can be reported. Might remove some of the "holier than thou" attitude that some have.

skidmark · 12-05-2009, 07:56 AM

Interesting.

I would contend that in some cases a cyclist is compelled to ride on the shoulder by:

183(c) must, subject to paragraph (a), ride as near as practicable to the right side of the highway

as the shoulder is part of the highway and is on the right side.

That said, the pass on the right is still illegal as described here.

CorneringArtist · 12-05-2009, 09:52 AM

When I went for my N test a couple of months ago, near the end of it there was a cyclist riding basically in the middle of the street on a double solid yellow line road, when there was pretty much a CLEAR PATH for him on the right side. I had NEVER encountered this during my driving lessons so I had to creep up on him slightly to pass him. I passed the test even though I did that, but the evaluator told me that if I had to deal with it again, he said to cross the double solid anyways. I understood it was unsafe for the cyclist at the time, but I'd be going 15km/h in a 50 zone until he turned off, but then again, why the hell are you riding as if you're a car on the road?.

zulutango · 12-06-2009, 06:21 AM

So your driver examiner told you to break the law? Somebody driving 15 in a 50 is breaking the law if he is holding up traffic...it's called slow driving and I gave out tickets for it. You should have honked your horn to let the cyclist know that he should move over & let you go by. It is legal to cross a double solid to go around an obstruction but a slow moving bike is not an obstruction, it''s a slow moving vehicle..

Slow driving
145 (1) A person must not drive a motor vehicle at so slow a speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.

(2) If the driver of a motor vehicle is driving at so slow a speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, a peace officer may require the driver to increase his or her speed, or to remove the motor vehicle from the roadway to the nearest suitable place and to refrain from causing or allowing the motor vehicle to move from that place until directed to do so by a peace officer.

Highway lines
155 (1) Despite anything in this Part, if a highway is marked with

(a) a solid double line, the driver of a vehicle must drive it to the right of the line only,

(b) a double line consisting of a broken line and a solid line,

(i) the driver of a vehicle proceeding along the highway on the side of the broken line must drive the vehicle to the right of the double line, except when passing an overtaken vehicle, and

(ii) the driver of a vehicle proceeding along the highway on the side of the solid line must drive the vehicle to the right of the double line, except only when finishing the passing of an overtaken vehicle, and

(c) one single line, broken or solid, the driver of a vehicle must drive the vehicle to the right of the line, except only when passing an overtaken vehicle.

(2) Subsection (1) (b) (i) and (c) do not apply if a driver is avoiding an obstruction on the highway and first ascertains that the movement can be made with safety and without affecting the travel of any other vehicle.

skidmark · 12-06-2009, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorneringArtist

but the evaluator told me that if I had to deal with it again, he said to cross the double solid anyways.

Wrong. Bad advice.

E=mc² · 12-06-2009, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zulutango

It is legal to cross a double solid to go around an obstruction but a slow moving bike is not an obstruction, it''s a slow moving vehicle..

Highway lines
155 (1) Despite anything in this Part, if a highway is marked with

(a) a solid double line, the driver of a vehicle must drive it to the right of the line only,

(b) a double line consisting of a broken line and a solid line,

(i) the driver of a vehicle proceeding along the highway on the side of the broken line must drive the vehicle to the right of the double line, except when passing an overtaken vehicle, and

(ii) the driver of a vehicle proceeding along the highway on the side of the solid line must drive the vehicle to the right of the double line, except only when finishing the passing of an overtaken vehicle, and

(c) one single line, broken or solid, the driver of a vehicle must drive the vehicle to the right of the line, except only when passing an overtaken vehicle.

(2) Subsection (1) (b) (i) and (c) do not apply if a driver is avoiding an obstruction on the highway and first ascertains that the movement can be made with safety and without affecting the travel of any other vehicle.

actually, the subsection only applies to b and c so for a double solid line, the law says you can't cross it even if the road is blocked by a broken down car or whatever obstruction.

btw
I know the cyclist's an idiot but

The only reason the cyclist's action was illegal was because 1) he passed while there were still parked cars (so the lane wasn't technically unoccupied) and 2) it wasn't safe because the OP had signaled his intention to change lanes?

let's say the OP did not signal his intention to change lanes, and the cyclist just passed on the right. If he did so right where the parked cars end (near the intersection) THEN it would be legal right? Since there is an unoccupied lane on the right to use.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sour...08.97,,0,29.94

see the street view.

Mugen EvOlutioN · 12-07-2009, 11:50 AM

i frekaing hate cyclists to the guts, they never...yes NEVER obey the law.

At least not the ones in DT

skidmark · 12-07-2009, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by E=mc²

let's say the OP did not signal his intention to change lanes, and the cyclist just passed on the right. If he did so right where the parked cars end (near the intersection) THEN it would be legal right? Since there is an unoccupied lane on the right to use.

Sounds right to me.