.
Feedback

Should it Be Law That Cars Have to Give Cyclists 3 Feet of Passing Room?

A bill has passed the State Senate requiring automobiles to pass no closer than three feet to bicyclists. If signed into law, could this prevent more cyclist/vehicle accidents? Take our poll and tell us in the comments.

 

In the wake of several vehicle collisions that have left bicyclists dead or injured on the Peninsula recently, legislators have proposed SB 1464.

Last year, a 64-year-old man died from injuries when a moving vehicle on the Bayfront Expressway (Highway 84) at Chilco Street.

Just this week, , and died.

Especially in this area, the co-existence of cyclists and motorists , as San Mateo Patch columnist Denise Nelson has discussed on many an occasion.

The proposed state law would make it a legal requirement for automobiles to give bicyclists a minimum clearance of three feet when passing.

The Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition has made this announcement supporting the bill, which was authored by Sen. Alan Lowenthal of Long Beach and co-sponsored by the California Bicycle Coalition and the City of Los Angeles.

SB 1464 has passed the state Senate and is up for a vote by the Assembly Friday.

PATCH WANTS TO KNOW - How would you vote if it were up to you?

Vote in our poll below, and share your thoughts in the comments.

 

Want to stay on top of potential new laws that could have an effect on San Mateo residents? Follow us! And don't forget to sign up for our daily e-newsletter, delivered straight to your inbox each morning.

Sign up for the San Mateo Patch daily newsletter Follow San Mateo Patch on Twitter | Like San Mateo Patch on Facebook  | Blog for San Mateo Patch


Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Mateo Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Troy August 22, 2012 at 12:16 pm
I've always felt that roads should be designed to accommodate both cars and cyclists.
Concerned Citizen August 22, 2012 at 12:53 pm
Some bicyclists think they own the road. Traffic safety is the responsibility of all who use the road. Many bicycle collisions are the fault of the cyclist, yet most riders blame drivers.
karen farnesi August 22, 2012 at 03:31 pm
Many roads are not wide enough for both cars and autos. Try passing on Crystal Springs road. Since the road over the dam is closed there has been al lot of bikes on the bypass on Polhemus. I never know if the bikers are going to stop at the sign at Polhemus and De anza or run it. So both the bikes and the car drivers need to obey and pay attention to each other.
DanC August 22, 2012 at 03:57 pm
If passed, rogue bicyclists (about 90% of 'em) would simply ride out in the middle of the street leaving no alternative to the driver except to follow them at 10 mph.
Bren August 22, 2012 at 04:15 pm
Oh, HELL NO! Where do these lawmakers think this extra three feet is going to come from? In many cases, you don't have an extra three feet of leeway, unless you're willing to cross into the oncoming traffic lane. What are we supposed to to then, just plod along at 10 mph behind every damned bicyclist who is selfishly taking up an entire lane?
Ben Toy August 22, 2012 at 09:46 pm
No, won't work. Out of context, though the intent is a very good one
I am a serious bicyclist since the 60's and ride whenever/where ever possible. Have been doored 4 times and the last time seriously. Destroyed her drivers door and was tossed out in front of a school buss that stopped 4'-5' short of killing me. Lucky to be alive both from being run over by the buss and that the door edge did not cut my chest open with it's sharp metal edge As stated by others, there is no room for a 3 foot separation in most roads. The real problem is the lack of knowledge of the existing laws and the metrics of bicycling in the midst of automobiles. I do take the whole lane when there is not enough room for auto's to pass me. That is the only way to keep them from running into me. Only when I can keep pace with the traffic. If traffic is moving faster than I can pedal, then I either ride on the sidewalk (illegal for anyone over 12), or take another route (many times just over one block to a lesser traveled street). There are already too many laws on the books that do not work. Over loaded with laws and think we should sunset all of our laws. Those good should be renewed with a short sunset date. That would then force our legislatures to actually work and together on keeping the good ones and drafting only those which will endure
Ben Toy August 22, 2012 at 09:59 pm
Education for both bicyclists and drivers.
The lady who doored me jumped out yelling: "it is your fault !" as I laying on the ground with the bus bumper a few feet from killing me She continued yelling that when I got up thinking: "Lady, just pay for my medial and fix my bicycle", but she continued to yelling. So called 911. She then yelled at the EMT's, ambulance driver and the two policemen. The motorcycle cop had it and told me to stand over there... He then wrote her a ticket to have he yell even louder. It is illegal to open your door when there is on coming traffic. If you door a semi, bus, car, pickup, motorcycle, bicycle, jogger, pedestrian, etc...it is the drivers fault. That is the law I think getting doored saved that ladies life, as she would have been hit by that bus. If she had been holding her door tight, it might have pulled her out into the bus side and then possibly get run over I've encountered cyclists riding the wrong way and a headon if I continued. They thought I was going the wrong way, as they cite the recommendation of walking against traffic Education for both cyclists and drivers is the solution. Or redo the roads by widening them (not possible) In our society, only after the fact will something be done (reactionary). Being proactive is something foreign to our society, generally speaking that is
Spammer August 22, 2012 at 10:45 pm
Cyclists should be protected because they are more vulnerable to fatal accidents on the roads.
Spammer August 22, 2012 at 10:47 pm
There are good cyclists and drivers and also bad drivers and cyclists on the roads.
gc August 23, 2012 at 04:08 am
When passing a car, I easily give 3 feet. Mostly because I'd feel at risk if I didn't. Why wouldn't someone passing a bicyclist give at least 3 feet? If that cyclist swerves around a pot hole or moves just a little bit, they could easily die. It seems like common sense and good defensive driving. I'm not sure we need a law for it, or do we?
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 06:58 am
The problem is, unless cyclists can be sure that motorists are going to give them three feet when passing, it's never safe to move to the right.
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 07:00 am
Some motorists think they own the road. Traffic safety is the responsibility of all who use the road. Many bicycle collisions are the fault of the motorist, yet most drivers blame cyclists.
Fixed.
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 07:10 am
It is not 'rogue' behavior to take the lane. This is codified into law right now. If a cyclist is in front of a line of traffic, he has the right of way and cars behind must wait until it's safe to pass. Then they should change lanes to pass, just as they do with other cars. Cyclists are expected to use the middle of the lane if the lane is too narrow to share. 'V C Section 21202 Operation on Roadway' states:
"Any person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at that time shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway except under any of the following situations: (1) When overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. (2) When preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway. (3) When reasonably necessary to avoid conditions (including, but not limited to, fixed or moving objects, vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or SUBSTANDARD WIDTH LANES) that make it unsafe to continue along the right-hand curb or edge, subject to the provisions of Section 21656. For purposes of this section, A "SUBSTANDARD WIDTH LANE" IS A LANE THAT IS TOO NARROW FOR A BICYCLE AND A VEHICLE TO TRAVEL SAFELY SIDE BY SIDE WITHIN THE LANE."
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 07:19 am
Cyclists take the lane because it's safest to do so. Yes, cyclists can be selfish, with their 'not wanting to be killed' attitude. It's terrible! They should all be willing to die for your desire to travel at 40mph.
Perhaps if motorists didn't kill a million people per year worldwide, cyclists would be more willing to let them pass within the lane (which every cyclist knows can be scary and deadly). And yes, if a cyclist is taking the lane, you are indeed required by law to plod along at 10mph behind them until it is safe to pass. There is no right to a certain speed on the road, and if the vehicle in front of you cannot go at your desired speed, you are required by law to wait for a safe opportunity to pass. It's incredible to me that so many motorists are completely unaware of their responsibilities on the road. The Vehicle Code is available online ( http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vc.htm ), as is the Driver Handbook ( http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/driver_handbook_toc.htm ) - I suggest some of the motorists posting so arrogantly and ignorantly about cyclists read it.
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 07:32 am
As a cyclist who, 15 years ago, used to always ride close to the curb, I was often passed closer than 12 inches (!) from my handlebar by motorists who were trying to pass within the lane (i.e. without waiting for a gap in traffic in the lane to their left). I recently tested cycling close to the curb again, to see if motorists had become any better about passing at a safe distance. They have not. Out of about ten cars that passed me, two passed within two feet of my handlebar, which is well within my danger zone, as a bicycle has a certain amount of space that has to be regarded as 'wobble room'.
As soon as I was able, I moved back into a position where I could control the lane. I have never attempted it again - it's just too dangerous. Looking back on it, it was stupid of me to attempt it. I see other cyclists doing it (many do it thinking it's safer) and I fear for their lives. Until all motorists act like you do when passing, more and more cyclists will begin controlling the lane. It's legal, and it's the safest place to cycle. It's also what the League of American Bicyclists teaches, because it saves cyclists' lives.
Bren August 24, 2012 at 02:52 pm
Ian Brett Cooper, I could not live with myself if I knew I was forcing a whole line of cars to plod along behind me at 10 mph. I would be ashamed of myself for impeding progress and making it so difficult for people to get where they're going.
Why don't bicyclists similarly feel an appropriate level of shame when they do this to people? And why doesn't that shame translate into them not doing it?
Bren August 24, 2012 at 02:53 pm
Just because something is legal, that does not make it right.
Ben Toy August 24, 2012 at 03:08 pm
Knowledge, understanding and then the potential tolerance that comes with that knowledge...
Also, one size fits all, does NOT work in most things...even socks. I call that kind of thinking absolutism...one place doesn't work, there fore in all cases it shall not work, or the other side of that coin Take cycling along Crystal Springs. The 'bike lane' is about 10 inches wide and there are rocks most of the time. In order to bicycle there, one MUST be in the lane. I do NOT ride there anymore, as the cars are too impatient. The 14 year old does with his buddies and no amount of lecturing gets him off of it. Or over at Polhemus Road near Cyrstal Springs Road. Another ditto for rocks and have to ride in the lane. I sometimes get up to +40 MPH there, but only during my 5am rides when no cars are out there. When I drive, I give to cyclists because I know about cycling. There are jerks out there cycling too, as there are drivers... Knowledge, understanding and tolerance for both drivers and cyclists is the solution...until the cities can widen the roads, which is unlikely without eminent domain of lots and lots of properties....which is highly unlikely
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 05:56 pm
Everyone who uses the road sometimes goes slower than others want to. But cyclists can't go any faster than 10 or 20mph and cyclists take the lane to be safe. Surely you're not seriously suggesting that cyclists should risk their lives just so you can go fast.
If you have a beef about not being able to go as fast as you like, maybe you should take it up with the state. Maybe they will give you special access to the road and priority over everyone else. Would that satisfy you?
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 05:59 pm
I agree. Sadly, the law allows motorists to go over 20mph, which is far too dangerous in my opinion. The law also allows people to use cars on the paved roads that cyclists built over 100 years ago - that's also a shame, because motorists tend not to have any respect for the people who paved the way (literally) for their chosen transportation choice.
Bren August 24, 2012 at 06:15 pm
Really, Ian? You think it should be illegal to drive faster than 20mph?
Ian Brett Cooper August 24, 2012 at 08:18 pm
Sure I do. Fatalities rise exponentially in collisions above that speed. I am all for a blanket 20 mph limit on non-freeway roads. The UK's '20 is Plenty' campaign is based on this premise. Something is needed to stop the carnage on our roads - a million killed a year worldwide. They tried licensing motorists in the 20th Century - clearly that didn't work.
Bren August 24, 2012 at 08:56 pm
It's fairly easy to retrofit an electric or gasoline motor to your bicycle. There are numerous very affordable kits on the market that will allow you to do so. Why don't you go that route so you don't have so much trouble keeping up with the flow of traffic?
Ben Toy August 25, 2012 at 12:14 am
That, electric powered bicycle, defeats the whole bicycling thing for most of us cyclists...there are good reasons for motorized bicycles, but not for all situations
No different than asking...expecting an automotive driver to convert their vehicle to pedal power Folks who don't cycle will never understand.
billdsd August 25, 2012 at 03:32 am
Ian is right. Riding to the far right is not safe when the lane is narrow and encourages motorists to pass close.
billdsd August 25, 2012 at 03:35 am
"Extra 3 feet" vs ZERO? Do you really think that it's OK to pass within zero distance of a bicyclist?
Yes, you are expected to slow down and wait behind the bicyclist until a safe and legal place to pass presents itself. The good news here is that this bill will allow you to legally cross a solid double yellow when it's safe to do so in order to leave 3 feet of space. What do you do when there's a loaded 18 wheeler going slow in front of you? A bicyclist is no different.
billdsd August 25, 2012 at 03:38 am
I don't risk getting doored. I maintain at least 5' from parked cars at all times. Yes, that means that I'm usually taking up the whole lane when I'm riding near parked cars.
CVC 21202(a)(3) exempts bicyclists from the requirement to keep far right for ANY condition which makes it unsafe to keep far right.
billdsd August 25, 2012 at 03:39 am
Motorists don't pass each other within 3 feet, but for some reason some feel that it's OK to pass within a foot of a bicyclist. I've never understood this.
billdsd August 25, 2012 at 03:43 am
@Bren: I have a few questions for you:
1. Do you seriously only drive on roads that have only a single lane in each direction with no passing possible? 2. Have you never had to slow down or move over for a bus or a garbage truck or a loaded 18 wheeler or an RV or a delivery truck or someone slowing to turn or someone slowing and stopping to park? 3. Is there really no possibility of you slowing down for a few seconds until there's a safe place to pass? In reality it is almost always easy to just move over to pass a bicyclist with plenty of clearance. I've driven well over a half million miles in the last 33 years and I can count on one hand the number of times I've been stuck behind a bicyclist for more than 10 seconds.
billdsd August 25, 2012 at 03:44 am
Just because you think that you know what's right, it does not mean that you do.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Pearl June 13, 2013 at 02:15 pm
This is a compete outrage!!! A 12.7% salary increase?!? A 100% increase in his car allowance?!?Read More I say get rid of Grasseli, Olbert, Collins and Clapper. Shame, shame, shame on them!!! They have sold the residents of San Carlos down the river!!! Remember this, San Carlos voters, the next time you go to the polls!!!
Paul Burnette and Grant Wood prepare to cut the ribbon with Deputy Mayor Ross
Kimberly Jennings May 29, 2013 at 10:14 am
How exciting to have some of the best orthotic specialists in the WORLD right here in our ownRead More backyard, and with such a commitment to patient care as their top priority! So glad to read this.
Marc Gottlieb June 2, 2013 at 03:53 pm
PS: Ideally, everybody will be able to sign up at the college website. But I have to acknowledgeRead More that some of the language may not be perfectly as clear as we'd like, especially if this is your first enrollment. So, if you need any assistance (or maybe aren't computer-savvy) the very nice Registrar Office people can assist you on 650/574-6165. Just tell them you want to sign up for Summer semester, Real Estate Practice 110 class, Course Reference number 54642 and that you'd like to complete the enrollment today. You'll like the class once we get you in! Thank you!
Marc Gottlieb June 2, 2013 at 06:25 pm
PS: Ideally, everybody will be able to sign up at the college website. But I have to acknowledgeRead More that some of the language may not be perfectly as clear as we'd like, especially if this is your first enrollment. So, if you need any assistance (or maybe aren't computer-savvy) the very nice Registrar Office people can assist you on 650/574-6165. Just tell them you want to sign up for Summer semester, Real Estate Practice 110 class, Course Reference number 54642 and that you'd like to complete the enrollment today. You'll like the class... and CSM... once we get you in! ALL WELCOME! Thank you!
Peter Radsliff May 27, 2013 at 08:56 pm
We have left the dog with the Peninsula Humane Society at 12 Airport Blvd. at Peninsula Ave.
imollyq May 30, 2013 at 09:55 pm
Among all the supporters isn't there one competent attorney who can get an injunction to keep theRead More rink from being destroyed and who can sue SPI Holding, and if necessary the City, to enforce the Master Plan Agreement? A toilet and an astro turf field are useless to ice skaters. I smell something rotten in the Mayor and the City Council's excuses. At least one skater must have a parent or family member who is an attorney with some sense of decency to do the work pro bono.
Claire Mack June 2, 2013 at 09:21 am
To close the ice rink is a crime. I had this conversation years ago with Peter Pau, the man whoRead More built it. We need places for children to recreate. When we send them to juvenile hall, we wring our hands and wonder why! No skate board parks in convenient places and now the skating rink. Why are our children the ones to sacrafice?