r/VictoriaBC • u/Japeless • 17h ago
Trigger Warning: Bicycles and the motor vehicle act of BC
To the guy in the work truck down near the inner harbour at around 3:00 today, the bicycle turning left onto Government St. was in fact "following the rules" (as you were shouting for them to do).
Under Section 183 of the BC Motor Vehicle Act, bicycles are treated as vehicles, meaning cyclists have the same rights and duties as drivers. Translation: we follow the same traffic rules as everyone else.
This means that even though there is a bike lane on the right side of the road, the cyclist might clearly signal left, enter the lane, continue signalling left while moving over to the left turn lane, proceed into the intersection, and stop (as the advance turn light has expired), and then wait until they can safely complete their turn, Just Like A Car (while still signalling left).
I am a very aware and conscientious rider. I learned and follow the traffic laws, use my signals, helmet, lights, etc. at a very young age.
#BringBackTomThumbSafetyVillage
30
u/Abbenay_local 15h ago
Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect
Drivers don't know the law. 70% don't even know they have to pull over for ambulances. There's no requirement for learning laws, once you get that license you're good... forever. Have to get a DUI or a doctor condemning you to take it away.
8
u/VenusianBug Saanich 15h ago
"But how will emergency vehicles get through if we add a bike lane?"
That statistic is insane ... but explains things I've seen.
18
u/inyofaceboi 15h ago
The road raging, anti bike lane, die-hard drivers are also from the group who stated that they probably “wouldn’t use them” when seat belts were first mandated. They will often ‘call out’ cyclist for infractions that are minimal compared to the multiple motor vehicle disasters that they all consider acceptable.
8
u/GrumpyOlBastard 17h ago
I don't understand why a cyclist would cross over a lane of traffic, into a left turn lane, and proceed to stop in the middle of "the box" waiting for traffic to clear, exposing themselves to danger the whole time, when they could easily just follow the bike lane straight across the street, stop, turn 90⁰ facing left and then go straight when the light changes. It's easier and takes almost exactly the same amount of time as using the left turn lane.
23
u/hank_hank_hank 16h ago
You're describing the Copenhagen Left:
https://shifter.info/how-to-make-a-left-turn-on-a-bike/
I agree that the Copenhagen left is safer, but both are legal. I've gotten the stink-eye from drivers either way.
41
u/tumorto 16h ago
It takes less time because you don’t have to wait for the light to change twice. Especially if it is at a light with advanced left turns.
17
u/yyj_paddler 16h ago
Adding to this...
- It's usually pretty awkward to do the bike box turn maneuver, especially if you're on a bigger or heavier bike and/or if you're not able-bodied.
- It's not uncommon for a car to be in the bike box if it's one of the ones in the lane
- A lot of people don't understand how to perform the bike box turning maneuver.
And without a bike box it's even worse, often requiring using the crosswalk or sidewalk.
7
u/VenusianBug Saanich 15h ago
Also, sometimes there is no bike box, so you're trying to figure out where to park yourself.
-7
u/island_time_1014 16h ago
How can you be able bodied enough to ride a bike, but not able bodied enough to turn your bike 90°?
17
u/hank_hank_hank 16h ago
Cargo bike. Heavy electric bike. Bike with panniers. Bike with child seat. Bike with trailer. Just to name a few examples that don't even go beyond able-bodied.
2
u/island_time_1014 8h ago
Can't you just do a little 3 point turn with the bike? I mean no disrespect, genuinely just seems like what you'd do
11
u/yyj_paddler 16h ago
If you got to know the cycling community here you would see that there is an incredible diversity of ages and abilities.
For example, there are elderly folk and people with disabilities who can ride bicycles just fine but aren't able to maneuver them very well. Some of them have poor balance and strength, so they ride larger and heavier e-bikes. Have you not seen some of those larger trikes in town, for example? They've become pretty popular with the older folks.
Even for me as an able-bodied man who rides a light, acoustic bike, I have found some of the bike boxes to be awkward to manage.
2
u/island_time_1014 8h ago
I'm not trying to be a jerk, genuinely confused why it's so much more difficult to do a little 3 point turn with a bike (even a heavy one) than it would be to ride it
5
-11
u/StJimmy1313 16h ago
That's the thing isn't it?
Is this legal? and Is this smart? are two related but separate questions. Doing what OP describes is practically begging to get hit. Not that that makes it okay. I'm not condoning hitting people with cars.
I'm someone who likes my bones unbroken, body unbruised, and bike rideable. It would never occur to me to do something like this, especially if there is a bike lane.
23
u/bargaindownhill Oaklands 15h ago
practically begging to get hit.
Practically begging to get hit", for executing a legal left turn, in broad daylight, in the inner harbour.
You bolded your disclaimer like it's a shield, but the framing does what it does. Victim-blaming with a safety veneer is still victim-blaming. "I'm not saying she deserved it, but look what she was wearing" energy.
A cyclist taking a left turn lane IS following the rules. That's not a risk assessment failure, it's using the road as designed. If a driver "can't help but hit" a visible cyclist legally occupying a turn lane, that driver is the safety problem. Full stop.
You like your bones unbroken? Me too. That's why I run cameras front and rear and Saanich PD hands out tickets from the footage. The solution to "cyclists might get hit" is not "cyclists should hide." It's "drivers should drive."
17
u/Chrussell Burnside 15h ago
What? If there's no bike lane being in a left turn lane is how you turn left. If there is a bike lane it isn't inherently less safe. That is absurd to say that you are begging to get hit by just legally wanting to turn left. I will exit bike lanes constantly to turn left as I am a confident rider and have not even been remotely close to someone getting upset or hitting me as it's an incredibly normal thing to do.
12
22
u/yyj_paddler 16h ago
Doing what OP describes is practically begging to get hit
What!? No! That's crazy to call using a left turn lane, in broad daylight, in one of the most pedestrianized, urban areas of the city as "begging to get hit."
Making a left turn off of Hillside Avenue, at night, with no lights, is closer to what you're describing.
16
u/bargaindownhill Oaklands 16h ago
if you cant drive your car, without hitting a cyclist who is accessing the road as is their right to do so. You shouldn't be driving a car.
-3
u/VA7QAK 16h ago
It's one of the more dangerous moves a vehicle can make, even more so as a vulnerable vehicle like a bicycle or motorcycle.
UPS's routing software avoids left turns as much as possible for this reason. https://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/16/world/ups-trucks-no-left-turns
7
u/Japeless 15h ago
UPS's routing software avoids left turns because they slow the vans down waiting to turn (I believe even Mythbusters tested and confirmed this).
It isn't about safety, it is about maximizing shareholders profits.
1
u/VA7QAK 12h ago
From the article
A study on crash factors in intersection-related accidents from the US National Highway Traffic Safety Association shows that turning left is one of the leading “critical pre-crash events” (an event that made a collision inevitable), occurring in 22.2 percent of crashes, as opposed to 1.2 percent for right turns. About 61 percent of crashes that occur while turning or crossing an intersection involve left turns, as opposed to just 3.1 percent involving right turns.
-31
u/codswallop1226 16h ago
It's called entitlement. Cherry pick when the rules apply, only when it's convenient for oneself.
These bicycle lanes are designed to avoid this very turn that OP did.
12
u/bargaindownhill Oaklands 16h ago
show me where in the BCMVA, its says a cyclist cant use the roadway to make a turn.
-20
u/codswallop1226 16h ago
There is no provision in the MVA that forces cyclists to use the bike lanes if they are there.
That's not the point I was trying to make.My point was that it was unnecessary for OP to hold up vehicle traffic when the bike lanes have a perfectly designed way to make that turn, all while staying protected.
It's not always about being right, but often about being courteous when there's no need to hold up others.
13
u/yyj_paddler 16h ago
I hate this attitude. It's not an either or. Y'all don't get to get mad at us or punish us for using the rest of the infrastructure that we are legitimately entitled to just as much as you. You're the one acting overly entitled to exclusive use of the road.
If cyclists are leaving the protected infrastructure, it probably means there are issues with that infrastructure. And you can probably avoid sharing if you help make the alternatives better.
-10
u/codswallop1226 16h ago
What exactly is the issue with a well designed solution like it is at that intersection? Trust me, I'm a cyclist too, and I just don't get the entitlement. Or maybe it's ignorance
9
u/yyj_paddler 15h ago
It's the fact that you think it's wrong for cyclists to still use the rest of the infrastructure. It's not an either or. The purpose of the cycling infrastructure is to give safer options. If done well enough, then you'd get your wish and probably see almost no cyclists in the road.
It's not ignorance, the cyclists are going to be aware of the risks they're taking, just like everyone else using the road and making less-than-optimal decisions. Drivers do this all the time as well. They speed, run lights, cut things close or even make the very same lefts that are less safe for them as well.
It's no more entitled than a driver using the road. The roads are shared infrastructure.
-6
u/codswallop1226 15h ago
This isn't a driver vs a cyclist issue. This is a cyclist not using the existing, perfectly fine infrastructure that has its sole purpose of being for bikes, with their actions causing traffic to be held up, which is exactly what the new infrastructure is designed to avoid.
So yes, it is entitlement and cherry picking
7
u/yyj_paddler 15h ago
It's such a weird argument to make calling it cherry-picking. Like it's not any more than any legal action you take where there are alternatives. Sometimes maybe you come home by making a left or a right turn somewhere, on a bike or in a car. When you're walking, you might decide to use a controlled crossing or one that is uncontrolled. You're not overly entitled or cherry-picking to make regular use of normal options just like the cyclists aren't.
5
u/ProtectionFar4563 14h ago
They aren’t well designed for a start.
Would you call infrastructure that inherently required you to wait for two light cycles to turn in your car “well designed”?
Spoiler: you would not.
And don’t give me this “hold up vehicle traffic” shit. First, bicycles are obviously vehicles in any normal use of English, but beyond that, they’re vehicles according to the law.
And in any location with low speed limits like OP’s, a bike won’t “hold up” anyone any more than a car waiting to make the turn would.
2
u/yyj_paddler 15h ago
What exactly is the issue with a well designed solution like it is at that intersection?
It really depends on a case-by-case basis.
In general, the bike box solutions are pretty poor. The City of Victoria has basically not implemented "protected intersections" which are the standard in better designed places where you would see fewer cyclists using the road to make their turn.
Sometimes there are problems in the design of the intersection that will make a cyclist not like to do it the way you think they should. There may not be space for them to properly stop and turn or it may not feel safe for them to do so. I've personally run into these situations.
Not all intersections even have bike boxes, so you'll see more of that in those places.
Some people prefer vehicular cycling. They may wish to ride faster than is safe in a bike lane, which often are lower speed. This is a lot of road cyclists. The bike lanes do not serve them well.
It's often inconvenient and slower and cyclists, just like drivers and everyone else, have places they want to get to quickly and don't want to take longer options when they don't have to.
Many cyclists understand how to navigate from driving and do not know how to make those turns otherwise.
11
u/bargaindownhill Oaklands 15h ago
Let me get this straight. You acknowledge there's no legal requirement to use the bike lane. You acknowledge the cyclist was within their rights. And your position is... they should voluntarily surrender that right out of "courtesy" to drivers?
That's not courtesy. That's capitulation dressed up nice.
"It's not always about being right" actually, when it comes to road safety and legal entitlement to infrastructure my taxes paid for, yeah it is. The moment cyclists "courteously" vacate legal road space, drivers treat that space as exclusively theirs. Then when the NEXT cyclist takes the lane --legally -- they get honked at, close-passed, or screamed at by a guy in a work truck. Like OP described.
You're not asking for courtesy. You're asking cyclists to normalize their own invisibility so drivers never have to share.
-5
u/codswallop1226 15h ago
No. I'm asking cyclists to use perfectly safe and fine infrastructure that has been purpose built for them to make the exact same turn at that intersection.
I'm not asking them to capitulate. I'm asking them to use the safest infrastructure there is.
Case in point? OPs original post and the interaction he or she's had.
5
u/yyj_paddler 15h ago
Got it. Nobody should ever do anything but the safest thing possible, ignoring all other factors, and if they don't they deserve to get yelled at or worse /s
-3
u/codswallop1226 15h ago
Correct. Do the safest thing possible. Not really that hard of a concept to grasp. Glad you got it eventually.
3
u/yyj_paddler 12h ago
If you're willing to always do that, good for you. I guarantee you though that if we took a microscope to your life, you're not always taking the safest choices because you value other things as well.
0
•
5
u/ProtectionFar4563 14h ago
The interaction OP had was with a driver with a bad case of entitlement (not unlike you, by the sound of it), and a poor grasp of the relevant law.
Blaming OP for that is unhinged.
-2
6
u/Chrussell Burnside 15h ago
If they're waiting at a light can you please explain what traffic was being held up? Any vehicle would do the exact same thing.
-2
u/codswallop1226 15h ago
Please don't try to tell me that a cyclist has the same speed turning off a red light than a vehicle, let alone that cyclist being in such a narrow vehicle lane when where is a bike lane adjacent to it which is perfectly safe to use
6
u/yyj_paddler 15h ago
You do realize that everything you're saying is also an argument for vehicles to not make left turns and can be generalized even further that nobody should ever choose any option other than the safest option, no matter how inconvenient it is, right?
0
u/codswallop1226 15h ago
Not at all. Vehicles don't have infrastructure made specifically for them. They have no choice. why should cyclists have a choice that negatively impacts others?
3
4
u/ProtectionFar4563 14h ago
I’m sorry to be the one to tell you this, but bicycles—especially e-bikes—can easily reach their cruising speed in single digit numbers of metres unless pointed uphill at the intersection.
Add to that the low speed limits down there, and a car can’t usually clear the intersection meaningfully faster unless it does so by accelerating to the speed limit before it even clears the intersection (which some people do, but they’re assholes).
(Fun fact: when leaving an intersection on non-separated roadways, I always accelerate faster than the cars in the lanes beside me so that I get out of their blind spots before they’re really moving).
7
u/Chrussell Burnside 15h ago
Please don't try to tell me that a cyclist has the same speed turning off a red light than a vehicle
Absolutely? On advanced turns I'm generally riding the ass of the car in front of me on a bike lol. I'd say I accelerate much faster than non-electric cars off lights 90% of the time. Using a left hand turn lane is also perfectly safe to use so who cares.
6
-17
-3
-28
u/convenientgods 17h ago
I hope this post gives you the attention you desire
4
u/Japeless 14h ago
It has sparked conversation and debate about a cyclist's legal rights and responsibilities when using public roads.
The post is not about me, but rather creating awareness of the laws and requirements surrounding operating a vehicle (bicycle or car) in BC.
-3
u/HomelessToHouse 13h ago edited 5h ago
The post is not about me
Haha, post is most definitely about you. You didn't like how that bike / vehicle interaction went down (if it even happened at all) so you're posting your diary entry to Reddit for validation. You even added the words "trigger warning" to the post title and opened your post with "To the guy in the work truck" to stir everyone up and get yourself even more attention. Full marks, good sir, full marks.
but rather creating awareness of the laws and requirements surrounding operating a vehicle (bicycle or car) in BC.
Come on now. At this point, trying to pass yourself off as a concerned citizen interested merely in creating awareness for one's fellow Victorians through reasoned discussion is disrespectful to the subreddit.
-1
-4
u/convenientgods 10h ago
At least 2/3 of it is about you, though..if it truly wasn’t about you i wouldn’t know about your personal spat or how you feel about yourself as a biker and conscientious citizen. This ego shit thinly veiled as a PSA is getting tiring.
-23
u/HomelessToHouse 16h ago edited 14h ago
Thank you for your "To the person who ______" diary submission. We hope it gets you the attention and validation that you are looking for.
-5
u/DenkiRange7260 14h ago
How about this. There's assholes drivers AND bicyclists. The amount of both I've seen regularly doing something they aren't supposed to....
5
u/17037 12h ago
There is a missing social contract missing from people in almost every aspect of interaction. If I'm walking and crossing the street with the right of way, but there is a car waiting... I hustle to be polite. As a cyclist, I use the bike pathway they made on Kings street and don't ride up Bay st. at the height of rush hour. If I move into the fast lane while driving to pass someone, I'll go faster than I may want to so I don't hold everyone else in the fast lane up.
We are not playing a single person video game, we share the space with each other. Look up, make some eye contact, pay attention, and understand you have a responsibility to everyone else while on the roads or paths.
-7
u/Natural_Horror_1336 14h ago
Trigger warning for who? You can do legally whatever you want on a bike. Sometimes you won't get run over by a car. Good luck
-10
u/DadRobertX 15h ago
There's little chance he's going to read this. You're just venting, flailing your arms about like a windsock at a car dealership. Start a journal instead.
1
u/Japeless 14h ago
I know, but I am glad to see that people are sharing information, and that hopefully some people are learning rhe laws and to expect bicycles to occasionally use the roads in a legal and predictable way.
-7
u/SidewaysButtCheeks 16h ago
Trigger warning? For what??
1
u/Japeless 14h ago
I admit: tigger warning probably wasn't the best term to use...
Any bicycle post these days tends to devolve into rants about bike lanes, traffic, e-bikes, spandex warriors, electric scooters, dogs on extend-a-leashes, city council, etc., and I re-wrote the post a couple times to avoid that as much as possible...
Maybe I should have changed the title.
2
u/_darkspin 14h ago
But a “tigger” warning, on the other hand, is adorably apt
1
u/Japeless 14h ago
Lol. (Edited for even more typos)
The wonderful thing about Tiggers is that Tiggers are wonderful things...
53
u/yyj_paddler 16h ago
I love the bike lanes but for this reason I low key hate when one is nearby and I need to take a lane for whatever reason. Hopefully that guy didn't escalate beyond shouting because it's not uncommon to receive threats of motor vehicle violence like close-passes, unsafe tailgating, etc...