PLEASE DISREGARD THE MESSAGE I JUST SENT. I SENT IT BEFORE I FINISHED IT.
Dear Bicycle Board Members,
I'm thinking of changing my advocacy for a 3-foot passing law to advocacy for a law that would require motorists to change lanes when passing bicycles. I would like your thoughts and guidance.
Attached is a report, "The 3 ft. Law: Lessons Learned from a National Analysis of State Policies and Expert Interviews" by Rutgers University Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy.
My reading of the report leads me to the following: The greatest benefit of the 3-foot law is educational by increasing motorist awareness of bicyclists but the educational benefit may be short-lived. The 3-foot law is hardly enforced if enforced at all in 20 states that have adopted it and it might be practically unenforceable. 3-feet is insufficient when motor vehicles are passing while traveling more than 25 mph faster than bicyclists. Motorists must change lanes when passing slower moving motor vehicles so changing lanes when passing bicyclists shouldn't be any more difficult or inconvenient. In WV, there are hardly any travel lanes wide enough that a motorist can pass without encroaching into the adjacent lane. While motorists and police officers may not be able to accurately judge 3-feet, they can all accurately judge which lane they're in or whether they're straddling two lanes. Since crossing the double yellow center line is common practice, the law should be modified to recognize such, particularly to permit crossing the center line when it is safe to do so. The WV Connecting Communities Legislative Agenda that we recommended includes a recommendation for a 4-foot rule. I think WVCC is trying to get legislation introduced in the session that is happening now. So, this would probably not be a good time to say, "Hey, wait. We changed our mind." However, quite commonly, legislation gets recycled through multiple sessions before it finally passes.
The legislative process of getting a 3-foot law passed can have undesirable consequences such as requiring cyclists to ride on shoulders and banning bicycles from roadways that don't have shoulders.
Hi Frank,
#7 is tricky. The law is pretty specific about the purpose of a double lines. Do you have any examples of states that have passed laws requiring vehicles to pass bicycles in the same manner in which they pass other types of vehicles? What are the passing laws in relationship to motorcycles?
-Jonathan
On 02/27/2013 01:15 PM, Frank Gmeindl wrote:
PLEASE DISREGARD THE MESSAGE I JUST SENT. I SENT IT BEFORE I FINISHED IT.
Dear Bicycle Board Members,
I'm thinking of changing my advocacy for a 3-foot passing law to advocacy for a law that would require motorists to change lanes when passing bicycles. I would like your thoughts and guidance.
Attached is a report, "The 3 ft. Law: Lessons Learned from a National Analysis of State Policies and Expert Interviews" by Rutgers University Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy.
My reading of the report leads me to the following:
- The greatest benefit of the 3-foot law is educational by increasing motorist awareness of bicyclists but the educational benefit may be short-lived.
- The 3-foot law is hardly enforced if enforced at all in 20 states that have adopted it and it might be practically unenforceable.
- 3-feet is insufficient when motor vehicles are passing while traveling more than 25 mph faster than bicyclists.
- Motorists must change lanes when passing slower moving motor vehicles so changing lanes when passing bicyclists shouldn't be any more difficult or inconvenient.
- In WV, there are hardly any travel lanes wide enough that a motorist can pass without encroaching into the adjacent lane.
- While motorists and police officers may not be able to accurately judge 3-feet, they can all accurately judge which lane they're in or whether they're straddling two lanes.
- Since crossing the double yellow center line is common practice, the law should be modified to recognize such, particularly to permit crossing the center line when it is safe to do so.
The WV Connecting Communities Legislative Agenda that we recommended includes a recommendation for a 4-foot rule. I think WVCC is trying to get legislation introduced in the session that is happening now. So, this would probably not be a good time to say, "Hey, wait. We changed our mind." However, quite commonly, legislation gets recycled through multiple sessions before it finally passes.
- The legislative process of getting a 3-foot law passed can have undesirable consequences such as requiring cyclists to ride on shoulders and banning bicycles from roadways that don't have shoulders.
Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@bikemorgantown.com http://wvcompletestreets.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
#7 does seem hard to overcome, however, consider PA's 4' passing law, which explicitly allowed going over the yellow line (the only thing the law actually changed). Had that not been provided, a lane would have to be 14' wide to legally pass provided the bike was 2' from the edge + 2' wide + 4' passing + 6' wide car.
In all practical passing, the overtaking vehicle MUST cross the yellow line. To require full use of the oncoming lane is pretty minor after that.
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Jonathan Rosenbaum < jr@wvcompletestreets.org> wrote:
Hi Frank,
#7 is tricky. The law is pretty specific about the purpose of a double lines. Do you have any examples of states that have passed laws requiring vehicles to pass bicycles in the same manner in which they pass other types of vehicles? What are the passing laws in relationship to motorcycles?
-Jonathan
On 02/27/2013 01:15 PM, Frank Gmeindl wrote:
PLEASE DISREGARD THE MESSAGE I JUST SENT. I SENT IT BEFORE I FINISHED IT.
Dear Bicycle Board Members,
I'm thinking of changing my advocacy for a 3-foot passing law to advocacy for a law that would require motorists to change lanes when passing bicycles. I would like your thoughts and guidance.
Attached is a report, "The 3 ft. Law: Lessons Learned from a National Analysis of State Policies and Expert Interviews" by Rutgers University Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy.
My reading of the report leads me to the following:
- The greatest benefit of the 3-foot law is educational by increasing
motorist awareness of bicyclists but the educational benefit may be short-lived. 2. The 3-foot law is hardly enforced if enforced at all in 20 states that have adopted it and it might be practically unenforceable. 3. 3-feet is insufficient when motor vehicles are passing while traveling more than 25 mph faster than bicyclists. 4. Motorists must change lanes when passing slower moving motor vehicles so changing lanes when passing bicyclists shouldn't be any more difficult or inconvenient. 5. In WV, there are hardly any travel lanes wide enough that a motorist can pass without encroaching into the adjacent lane. 6. While motorists and police officers may not be able to accurately judge 3-feet, they can all accurately judge which lane they're in or whether they're straddling two lanes. 7. Since crossing the double yellow center line is common practice, the law should be modified to recognize such, particularly to permit crossing the center line when it is safe to do so.
The WV Connecting Communities Legislative Agenda that we recommended includes a recommendation for a 4-foot rule. I think WVCC is trying to get legislation introduced in the session that is happening now. So, this would probably not be a good time to say, "Hey, wait. We changed our mind." However, quite commonly, legislation gets recycled through multiple sessions before it finally passes.
- The legislative process of getting a 3-foot law passed can have
undesirable consequences such as requiring cyclists to ride on shoulders and banning bicycles from roadways that don't have shoulders. 2.
Bikeboard mailing listBikeboard@bikemorgantown.comhttp://wvcompletestreets.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@bikemorgantown.com http://wvcompletestreets.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
-
Frank Gmeindl -
Jonathan Rosenbaum -
Ryan Post