Bicycle right-of-way question

[KennyPratt42]

I'm mainly asking for bicyclists' opinions. Here is the situation:

Car is traveling north on a two lane street with bike lane markings on the right edge of the street (I'd call it more of a bike route marking than a dedicated bike lane). A small group of bicyclists is also traveling north on the sidewalk at a reasonable rate of speed, but slower than vehicles. The car goes past the bicycles and needs to make a right hand turn into a parking lot of a grocery store. The car will get to the entrance/crosswalk first, but the bicyclists would likely need to slow down (yield to the car). Who has the right of way, should the car stop on the road and wait for the bikes to pass or should the bicyclists slow down to yield when they see the car's turn signal from behind?

(For anyone wondering I was an observer of the above situation while outside the grocery store. The car started to turn, but then stopped just prior to the crosswalk when the saw the bicyclists still approaching at the same rate of speed. The bicyclists then stopped and everyone was aggrieved.)

 

[bellzisu]

Was it a sidewalk bike path? If so they usually have stop signs that us cyclist should follow. A lot don't (they are idiots). But if it is a bike lane on the road then there are not stop signs and they have the right of way as I understand it.

 

[Remo Gaggi]

Car needs to stop and yield, however it’s not worth dying to make a point. Let the car go, it’s probably a dumb Hok who doesn’t know better and has spent their last dollar on another Hayden Fry tattoo on their leg, so it won’t be worth it to sue if you get run over.

 

[3TrueFans]

The car should have waited, just like if people were walking on the sidewalk you wouldn't turn your car into them.

 

[BCClone]

I'm mainly asking for bicyclists' opinions. Here is the situation:

Car is traveling north on a two lane street with bike lane markings on the right edge of the street (I'd call it more of a bike route marking than a dedicated bike lane). A small group of bicyclists is also traveling north on the sidewalk at a reasonable rate of speed, but slower than vehicles. The car goes past the bicycles and needs to make a right hand turn into a parking lot of a grocery store. The car will get to the entrance/crosswalk first, but the bicyclists would likely need to slow down (yield to the car). Who has the right of way, should the car stop on the road and wait for the bikes to pass or should the bicyclists slow down to yield when they see the car's turn signal from behind?

(For anyone wondering I was an observer of the above situation while outside the grocery store. The car started to turn, but then stopped just prior to the crosswalk when the saw the bicyclists still approaching at the same rate of speed. The bicyclists then stopped and everyone was aggrieved.)

What I learned from a DOT during a scho permit driving test, it is illegal for a car to stop in a road unless there is a stop sign or making a cross traffic turn or the such. In this case, the bike is considered traffic behind and should stop.

 

[clonerules]

Bikes should have been in the bike lane. It's the car that has to yield regardless.

 

[isutrevman]

I'm guessing legally the car has to yield to anyone on the sidewalk, or if they had been in the bike lane. Basically treat it like another lane of traffic where you can't turn right to go through another lane if you are going to cut off another vehicle in that lane. It's not different than a car turning while a pedestrian is approaching an intersection. If I see the pedestrian is going to have to stop and wait for my car, I typically stop and waive them through, or sometimes they waive me through first.

However, as a pedestrian or bicyclist, I yield to cares unless I know FOR SURE that they see me and are going to wait for me to cross. A driver getting in trouble for not yielding doesn't help me if I'm dead.

 

[3TrueFans]

What I learned from a DOT during a scho permit driving test, it is illegal for a car to stop in a road unless there is a stop sign or making a cross traffic turn or the such. In this case, the bike is considered traffic behind and should stop.

lol that doesn't make sense, imagine a guy walking on the sidewalk that crosses the entrance, guy in car barrels through yelling "I CAN'T STOP, IT'S ILLEGAL!!"

 

[CloneJD]

Bikes probably have right away but as a practical matter I’m stopping my bike unless i’m waved forward by the driver. I’m not going to win that battle.

 

[isufbcurt]

I was always taught pedestrians have the right of way (and that includes bikes).

But while at ISU I got pulled over riding my bike by a bike cop on Welch for not stopping at a stop sign. The convo went like this:

Cop: i need to see your drivers license.

Me: You're joking right, I'm on a bike and don't have it with me.

Cop: No I'm not joking you didn't stop at that stop sign back there.

Me: I didn't know I needed to there were no cars around.

Cop: Yes you needed to stop.

Me: Then just give me a ticket so I can get to class.

Cop: I'll let you go this time but you need to stop at stop signs, register your bike with the City of Ames and don't ride on the sidewalk.

Me: Ok

 

[cyclonespiker33]

Bicycles aren't supposed to be on a sidewalk. If it is a rec trail that is a different story. Regardless, I would have allowed the bicycles to pass if I was driving, mostly because I don't want them running into my car and causing damage.

 

[BCClone]

I was always taught pedestrians have the right of way (and that includes bikes).

But while at ISU I got pulled over riding my bike by a bike cop on Welch for not stopping at a stop sign. The convo went like this:

Cop: i need to see your drivers license.

Me: You're joking right, I'm on a bike and don't have it with me.

Cop: No I'm not joking you didn't stop at that stop sign back there.

Me: I didn't know I needed to there were no cars around.

Cop: Yes you needed to stop.

Me: Then just give me a ticket so I can get to class.

Cop: I'll let you go this time but you need to stop at stop signs and register your bike with the City of Ames.

Me: Ok

The incident that I had with my school permit was a herd of HS kids crossing the road that impeded traffic (non cross walk, non intersection) I slowed and basically stopped so I wouldn’t hit them and the DOT lady told me the rule then.

 

[KennyPratt42]

For further clarity, the bikes were on a sidewalk that isn't a bike path and not in a bike lane or on the roadway.

For me it's pretty straightforward, if they are on the road. They are treated like a vehicle and are either traveling in the same lane so they are in front or behind the car or have their own separate lane and need to be yielded to like any other vehicle traveling in a lane next to you. Its the sidewalk part that is causing me uncertainty.

 

[3TrueFans]

Bicycles aren't supposed to be on a sidewalk.

Depends on where you are. In Ames for example there are just certain areas you can't ride on the sidewalk, mostly main street and campustown areas.

 

[3TrueFans]

Regardless of the law, if you're the one on the bike you should wait so you don't get hit, but if you're in the car you should probably assume they won't stop so that you don't kill someone if the worst case scenario happens.

 

[hurdleisu24]

I was under the assumption bicycles follow the rules of the road. Therefore, the car was ahead of them, car should proceed and bicycles yield.

As a runner, I see so many bicyclists and runners that dont follow proper right of way. They just take it and expect motor vehicles to stop all the time. Also, so many drivers don’t pay attention to anything other than cars and trucks on the road. I can’t count the number of times I’ve had to jump on hoods of cars bc they don’t stop completely and look both ways.

 

[ARCYCLONE]

Bikes on streets are treated the same as vehicles, not as pedestrians. As an ISU student I was given a ticket for riding my bike through a stop sign by Ames police. It was out by the towers with no traffic around. I tried to fight it and lost. The judge looked at me and said "you're guilty" and then looked at the cop and said "don't ever bring something like this into my court again."

 

[madguy30]

The car should have waited, just like if people were walking on the sidewalk you wouldn't turn your car into them.

And state pending, cars are to enter the bike lane prior to the turn, after waiting for bikes to pass if adjacent.

I got bitched out last year by a bicyclist after entering the bike lane with them well behind me at a red light, as they ran the red light.

 

[simply1]

I was always taught pedestrians have the right of way (and that includes bikes).

But while at ISU I got pulled over riding my bike by a bike cop on Welch for not stopping at a stop sign. The convo went like this:

Cop: i need to see your drivers license.

Me: You're joking right, I'm on a bike and don't have it with me.

Cop: No I'm not joking you didn't stop at that stop sign back there.

Me: I didn't know I needed to there were no cars around.

Cop: Yes you needed to stop.

Me: Then just give me a ticket so I can get to class.

Cop: I'll let you go this time but you need to stop at stop signs, register your bike with the City of Ames and don't ride on the sidewalk.

Me: Ok

Idaho stop laws are great for this situation, however a lot of bikes do blow stop signs when cars are around.
Here you can ride in the bike lane or ride on the sidewalk. Crosswalks take precedent over the cars, so the car was in the right there. The cyclists I don’t blame for stopping to see what the car was going to do, but then should have continued and not been aggrieved.

 

[simply1]

Bikes on streets are treated the same as vehicles, not as pedestrians. As an ISU student I was given a ticket for riding my bike through a stop sign by Ames police. It was out by the towers with no traffic around. I tried to fight it and lost. The judge looked at me and said "you're guilty" and then looked at the cop and said "don't ever bring something like this into my court again."

Also State specific

Idaho stop - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org