Re: For Erica Briggs re House Bill 4265 (safe passing distance)
Erica
The Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition (WBWC) was asked to provide feedback on HB 4265 based on the revisions made in Committee. It is our understanding that this bill may return for second reading today. WBWC had previously enthusiastically supported the original language which provided for a 5-foot safe passing distance, but WBWC is opposed to the legislation as currently written.
Current Language:
(2 EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS SUBSECTION, THE DRIVER OF A VEHICLE OVERTAKING A BICYCLE PROCEEDING IN THE SAME DIRECTION SHALL PASS AT A DISTANCE OF 3 FEET TO THE LEFT OF THAT BICYCLE OR, IF IT IS IMPRACTICABLE TO PASS THE BICYCLE AT A DISTANCE OF 3 FEET TO THE LEFT, AT A SAFE DISTANCE TO THE LEFT OF THAT BICYCLE AT A SAFE SPEED, AND WHEN SAFELY CLEAR OF THE OVERTAKEN BICYCLE SHALL TAKE UP A POSITION AS NEAR THE RIGHT-HAND EDGE OF THE MAIN TRAVELED PORTION OF THE HIGHWAY AS IS PRACTICABLE. THE DRIVER OF A VEHICLE OVERTAKING A BICYCLE PROCEEDING IN THE SAME DIRECTION MAY DRIVE TO THE LEFT OF THE CENTER OF THE HIGHWAY TO PASS THE BICYCLE IF IT IS SAFE TO DO SO, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE VEHICLE IS TRAVELING IN A NO-PASSING ZONE DESCRIBED IN SECTION 640.
(3) THE DRIVER OF A VEHICLE OVERTAKING A BICYCLE PROCEEDING IN THE SAME DIRECTION SHALL, WHEN OTHERWISE PERMITTED BY THIS SECTION, PASS AT A DISTANCE OF 3 FEET TO THE RIGHT OF THAT BICYCLE OR, IF IT IS IMPRACTICABLE TO PASS THE BICYCLE AT A DISTANCE OF 3 FEET TO THE RIGHT, AT A SAFE DISTANCE TO THE RIGHT OF THAT BICYCLE AT A SAFE SPEED.
WBWC strongly recommends that the dangerous and unnecessary language we have highlighted above in red be stripped from HB4265: (i.e."or, if it is impracticable to pass the bicycle at a distance of 3 feet…. at a safe distance… of that bicycle at a safe speed”). This language appears to be intentionally vague and creates numerous challenges for consistent judicial interpretation, enforcement, and education. Furthermore, it suggests that passing a cyclist at less than three feet could be safe. We strongly disagree.
We ask you to approach this legislation from a common-sense perspective. Would you feel safe if you were biking and passed by a motorist at a distance of less than three feet? (As a point of reference, at less than three feet you could likely reach out and touch the car passing you.) Would you feel safe knowing that a motorist could pass a child (perhaps your child) biking to school at a distance of less than three feet. Under what conditions, we ask, is this exception needed? Is it really too high of a burden to require a driver to slow down momentarily and allow oncoming traffic to pass before passing at a distance of at least three feet? Fleet vehicle drivers will be trained and held to these standards. Imagine a bus driver passing a cyclist at less than 3-feet. The results could be tragic.
With the removal of the above language, WBWC would be neutral about the HB 4265. Three feet is the minimum standard that could be considered a safe passing distance.
We would be supportive of the bill if it created a passing distance of “a minimum of 3 feet” and greatly prefer the adoption the originally proposed bill language that provided a truly safe passing distance of 5 feet. The 5-foot passing distance was recommended by the League of Michigan Bicyclists and strongly supported by bicyclists and bicycling organizations across the state. Nine cities in Michigan, including Ann Arbor, Grand Rapids and Kalamazoo, have already adopted a five-foot safe passing distance.
Sincerely,
Dear Ms. Briggs,
I am a legislative analyst with the House Fiscal Agency. We are working on an analysis for House Bill 4265 (the safe passing distance bill), which was reported out of Transportation committee and is now on the floor of the House. We include in our analyses the positions of organizations on bills, and will generally ask whether those positions have changed if the bill in question has changed.
I’m writing to ask Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition’s current position, if any, on this legislation (HB 4265). You indicated support for the bill in October. In a nutshell, the bill as reported from committee requires a 3-foot passing distance (and allows cars to cross the center line when passing); as introduced, the bill had required a 5-foot passing distance.
Thank you,
Richard Yuille
Legislative Analysis, House Fiscal Agency
Michigan House of Representatives