Impeding Traffic Is…
What is the normal speed of traffic here?
Well, it depends.
A common concern among cyclists and law enforcement is whether or not cyclists are illegally impeding other roadway users (motorists).
Many officers and motorists question a cyclists’ statutory ability to command a lane or drive two-abreast by quoting (or claiming to) the impeding traffic statute.
But some have not read it very carefully.
Here is how it actually reads in Florida statutes:
316.183 Unlawful speed.(5) No person shall drive a motor vehicle at such a slow 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.
Notice that is reads “drive a motor vehicle;” not “drive a vehicle.” And while a bicycle is certainly a vehicle, it is not a motor vehicle, so this statute does not apply to bicyclists. If it did it would be blatantly discriminatory. It would mean that bicyclists would not be able to drive defensively by commanding a lane and must place their safety solely into the hands of motorists. It would also discriminate against horse-drawn wagons and carriages, which are still permitted on roadways. Unlike bicyclists, they cannot share a lane with motor vehicles unless the lane is exceptionally wide.
Where impeding does apply to cyclists is:
316.2065 Bicycle regulations. (6) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway may not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles. Persons riding two abreast may not impede traffic when traveling at less than the normal speed of traffic at the time and place and under the conditions then existing* and shall ride within a single lane.
(* See photo.)
So only cyclists traveling two-(or more) abreast can be guilty of impeding traffic. What constitutes “impeding traffic” in this case? The statutes don’t define “impeding,” so we must resort to common definitions. The two primary definitions are “obstruct” and “hinder.” “Obstruct” means to block, as in stopping in the roadway and not allowing others to pass. Cyclists certainly don’t do that. “Hinder” on the other hand is a fair description of what cyclists do on occasion. But all roadway users hinder other users to some extent, so the real question is “When is hindering or impeding legal and when is it not?”
Since both bicycles and motorcycles are narrow, single-track vehicles they can make for useful comparisons in some scenarios. None of the following scenarios are on Interstates, so there is no minimum speed law that applies.
Scenario 1: A pair of motorcyclists are driving two-abreast on a winding road. They are traveling at the posted speed of 45 mph, but the following motorists wish to pass so they can travel at a higher speed. Are the motorcyclists impeding traffic?
Answer: In the broadest sense of the word they are indeed impeding traffic, but of course the following drivers have no right to pass if they will be traveling above the posted speed. So those motorcyclists are legally impeding traffic.
Scenario 2: The same pair of motorcyclists are driving two-abreast on the same winding road. They are traveling 5 mph below the posted speed of 45 mph, and again the following motorists wish to pass so they can travel at a higher speed. The lane is not wide enough for an automobile to pass a single motorcyclist within the lane. Are the motorcyclists impeding traffic?
Answer: Again, in the broader sense, yes. But legally? There is no minimum speed on roadways except for interstates and other freeways. What if they’re not comfortable traveling at more than 40 mph on that road? Or their motorcycles are low horsepower and they’re climbing and 40 mph is all they can manage? Or they just want to see the scenery and not have it blast by so fast? In some states (such as California) you are required to pull off the road to let other traffic pass if there are five or more vehicles behind you and there is a safe place to pull off and re-enter the roadway, but that is not the case in Florida. 40 mph is not exactly crawling, and eventually there will be a straight section where following vehicles can pass. I say the motorcyclists are legally impeding traffic. What do you think?
Scenario 3: A pair of bicyclists are driving two-abreast on that same winding 45 mph road. They are going 15 mph, which is about as fast as they can manage without going anerobic. The following motorists are better able to pass, though they have to do so one at a time and only when they have a long enough view ahead. Just as with the motorcyclists, the lane is too narrow to share with a solo bicyclist; a smart solo cyclist would be in the center of the lane, so the second cyclist doesn’t make much difference to the situation.
Answer: As above, the cyclists are legally impeding traffic. On a narrow, winding road a cyclist can be seen earlier by being in the middle of the lane, especially on sharp right turns. And even without sharp turns, the solo cyclist can’t be expected to let motorists squeeze by. What does it matter if the cyclist legally in the center of the lane has another cyclist to his right?
Scenario 4: A pair of motorcyclists are driving two-abreast in the right-hand lane of a four-lane road. They are doing 30 mph in a 45 mph zone. Some motorists have to wait as much as 15 seconds to get a gap in which they can change lanes to pass.
Answer: Once again, the motorcyclists are impeding traffic, and once again they are doing it legally. There is no minimum speed. Motorists can continue traveling. They are slowed temporarily, but no more than they would be if they were stopped behind a transit bus.
Scenario 5: A pair of bicyclists are driving two-abreast in the right-hand lane of a four-lane road. They are doing 15 mph in a 45 mph zone. Some motorists have to wait as much as 15 seconds to get a gap in which they can change lanes to pass.
Answer: Getting the point here? And what if the lane is wide enough for a motor vehicle and bicyclist to share if the bicyclists go single-file? Now we have to explain why motorcyclists going 30 mph are permitted to drive two-abreast, while bicyclists going 15 mph may not. Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?
By now you are getting the idea that there are degrees of impeding, and there is no clear line over which legal impeding becomes illegal. Law enforcement officers would serve the cause of safety far better by enforcing obviously illegal bicyclist behaviors such as wrong-way riding, running red lights, blowing through stop signs, and traveling at night without lights, than by making questionable judgement calls about what constitutes “impeding traffic.”
Posted in Safety, Traffic Law
6. May 2009 at 5:21 pm :
Great essay! This is really good stuff!
So, what is “traffic”? Is it the motorist that wants to travel in the road pictured above?
Do traffic lights impede traffic?
6. May 2009 at 8:46 pm :
Impeding traffic is…
an illusion.
7. May 2009 at 8:23 am :
An illusion? Most of the time, yes. In most cases the delay caused by a bicyclist is lost in the other delays, especially from traffic signals. Catching one extra red light on your journey usually adds about a minute or two. In some rare cases I think it’s fair to pull over if motorists are stacked up behind you, can’t pass, and are likely to miss the green light ahead. But then, how often can you really foresee that?
Most people don’t look at the world objectively. Just as a little white lie can smooth over some irrational situations, pulling over can at times act as a bit of social lubricant. But I find those situations to be quite rare.
7. May 2009 at 8:32 am :
Oh, and Florida defines traffic as:
“Pedestrians, ridden or herded animals, and vehicles, streetcars, and other conveyances either singly or together while using any street or highway for purposes of travel.”
17. May 2009 at 8:10 pm :
Where is the picture taken? That’s pretty cool.
What happens when one cyclist is in a much more enhanced hurry than the others?
I’ve seen A LOT of those e-ikes lately. Are those vehicles or bikes?
17. May 2009 at 8:50 pm :
Bicycles are vehicles. Electric-assist bicycles that do not go more than 20 mph under motor power on level ground are defined as bicycles.
The cyclist “in a hurry” in that group simply gives polite warnings as he/she weaves through.
11. August 2009 at 3:04 am :
All slow moving vehicles (bicyclists included) should generally stay to the right side of their lane. If makes passing able to be done more quickly and safely because a passing car does not have to swing completely into the left lane to pass. A quick, partial swing to the left and they are past you MUCH more quickly and safely. If you “take the lane” you force passing to take longer and you risk having someone who unexpectedly must swing back quickly to possibly hit you there in the center of the lane. Why risk that? You should ride to the right to permit passing to take place more quickly and safely. Don’t be a lane “control freak”. Its just plain rude and is actually far less safe in my opinion.
11. August 2009 at 8:49 am :
D., there is of course a major difference between bicyclists and other slow-moving vehicles — they are much narrower. It’s simply not possible in a narrow lane for a motorist to pass a horse-drawn carriage or another automobile within the same lane.
If motorists were reliably conscientious about passing cyclists safely, edge riding might be a reasonable approach. But unsafe passing is a routine here in Florida. I see no reason why bicyclists should not be able to drive defensively, like all other drivers.
The potential risk you describe of a passing motorist having a conflict with an on-coming vehicle may have some minor merit, but I have seen such problems with motorists passing me when I was an edge rider, as well as when they pass me as a motorist.
I had far too many close passes during my 100,000+ miles as an edge rider, and know of quite a few edge riders who’ve been sideswiped. The worst risk is with trailers, where the cyclist gets hit by some sharp edge or the fender because the driver tried to squeeze by and forgot his trailer was wider.
Lane control is only necessary when the lane is too narrow to share or when other potential risks (sightlines, door zones, etc) make it necessary. That is why Florida law — and the laws in all states — specifically allow it.
11. August 2009 at 7:15 pm :
D.Dean, you use the term safely, but in the wrong context, in my opinion. It is certainly not safer for the cyclist to encourage a motorist to pass in such a manner as to endanger the cyclist. You suggest that “it’s just plain rude” but consider the impact on the cyclist if the cyclist is struck by the motor vehicle.
As a former “stripe-rider” and “gutter-bunny”, I’ve had my share of uncomfortably close passes by unskilled motorists. As a current vehicular cyclist, I enjoy a far safer experience. If I am delaying a motorist, it is likely measured in seconds. A thirty second delay for a motorist is on a par with that experienced by a stopped school bus or a red traffic light.
16. September 2009 at 3:39 pm :
I have a couple guidelines I go by. One is that I AM considered a vehicle, and can take up as much of the lane as I need to be visible and to be safe, and make other driver’s move over, as they are required to do. Now if the lane is more than 11 feet and if there is no driveways or intersections I will let them pass within the same lane, again only if its wide enough to share safely. I used to ride towards the curb but kept getting passed too closely and in alot of cases the car driver passes in the face of oncoming traffic, nearly taking out other vehicles. I simply do not allow them to do that any more. Far too risky for me and to other motorists. It does not hurt you to wait behind a cyclist especially when they work hard to go at speeds sometimes. Show respect to me and you’ll get my respect back.
21. November 2009 at 9:40 pm :
[...] clarity I have on traffic dynamics and impedance must be credited to Mighk Wilson, Keri Caffrey and Herman May who have done most of the heavy lifting for [...]
27. February 2010 at 9:22 pm :
here is a question when can i be cited for not riding close enough to the right side of the road? if i am riding 3 abreast can i be cited for not being close enough to the right curb?
27. February 2010 at 10:30 pm :
@ kotcher: Police will generally cite you for impeding traffic if your right in the middle of the road, going really slow, like under 10mph. I am usually over 15mph, and most of the lanes where I live are narrow(under 12ft) so I take the lane almost always, unless conditions make it safe for motorists to pass within the same lane. Don’t expect police to know safer cycling practices, so they can and probably will cite you for impeding traffic, even if your following the laws.
25. August 2011 at 7:21 pm :
Thanks a lot for giving everyone an extremely special chance to read from this site. It can be very superb and stuffed with a good time for me personally and my office colleagues to search your web site really 3 times in 7 days to study the latest items you have. Not to mention, we’re actually amazed with all the astounding information you serve. Some two points on this page are unequivocally the most effective I have ever had.
15. September 2011 at 5:36 am :
Hey I absolutely love this article and it was so educative hence I am going to tweet it. I Have to say the Indepth analysis this article has is greatly exceptional !! No one does that additional research these days? Hats off to You ! Just another suggestion you shouldget any Translator Application for your Global Users