Local Entrepreneurial News
From ConsiderBiking.org:
3-Foot Passing Bill Introduced
By Jeff StephensOhio is on its way to to joining 15 other states that have a three-foot passing law. Senator Teresa Fedor of Toledo introduced Ohio Senate Bill 174 on Monday, September 28. It looks like we’ve found a much-needed champion for cycling-specific causes in the Statehouse. Hurray!
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio’s business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus. Click here to visit TheMetropreneur.com.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Maybe a biker can comment on this, but this kind of law doesn’t seem practical without bike lanes on heavily-traveled roads. How about we introduce legislation to remind bikers that they’re subject to the same laws as automobiles, which means signaling for turns and NOT blowing through stop signs. And as much as I’d like to do it myself, I’m also not allowed to drive my car on the sidewalk.
Also, maybe some statutes on human decency regarding overweight bikers stuffed into bike shorts and tops. See: Arlington, Upper.
+1 on the proposed decency standards.
As a biker who has to ride down 3rd Ave from Grandview to get on the Olentangy trail, this 3 foot rule would certainly be a relief. As a driver who has to drive down 3rd Ave to get to just about anywhere, it would be a pain. There’s barely enough room under that railroad overpass for 2 cars, let alone 2 cars, 1 bike, & 3 feet of additional space. I guess this is one case where I look forward to a road being widened (with GV Yard) Normally, a biker would take a side road to avoid the traffic, but when there are physical obstructions like railroads that reduce the route options, sometimes a biker needs to use a major road.
Summary: widened roads and/or bike lanes seem like an OK compromise for both bikers and drivers when there really are no other “safe” options to avoid backing up traffic. 3ft rules seem impractical in some instances.
Shibb,
what we need is enforcement on all laws regarding all vehicles. Your adherence to one law is not dependent on some one else’s adherence to the law which is why I get tired of the discussion on every law that is designed to make the road safer for the entire community devolving into finger pointing.
I don’t think this is impractical at all. The operator of a vehicle who is passing is responsible under current laws to only pass when it is safe. If this passes and you can’t give 3 feet, you wait.
Ultimately I like that there is greater attention focused on safer road use, I just issues like this as largely feel good. A driver should, out of common courtesy and respect for life, give a cyclist adequete space when passing. There should be no need for a law. And even more than new laws, we need greater enforcement-on all parties-of exisiting traffic laws.
Shibb, HogRoaster – I dunno… this doesn’t sound as restrictive as you both are making it sound. I would hope that most cars are passing bikers further than 36 inches away already. If you’re driving close enough to a biker for them to be able to reach out with their arm and touch your car, that’s a little too close.
On most roads in the city, this will be easy enough to adhere to. The only narrow roads I see it being a problem with are some one-way streets in German Village. But you probably shouldn’t be looking to zoom past anyone on those streets anyway.
I’m down with making cars give three feet to a bike on a roadway, but I’d also expect cyclists to stay three feet from a car.
This includes squeezing between lanes and riding alongside parallel-parked cars, such as in the Short North. Having a three-foot buffer zone would all but eliminate any possibility of cyclists moving to the front of the line at a stoplight. That’s fine with me so long as it’s enforced equally on both sides, which has proven to be a problem with current bike laws. Sidewalk riders and against-traffic riders are two of the ugliest, most common examples.
This is great news – Thanks to Jeff et al for making this happen! The full text of the legislation is here: http://ohiobikelawyer.com/
Hogroaster – I’m more a proponent for lessening the width of the travel lanes rather than widen the roads. Most local streets can easily be reduced to 10′ or 11′ travel lanes which could potentially add enough room for bike lanes without having to spend extra money buying the property to install them.
Widenening local roads also tends to encourage speeding. As soon as speeds exceed more than 35mph the % of fatal crashes between bikers/peds and drivers rises dramatically.
I just got back from Portland (I know, I know) whose fatal crash rates for vehicles have been steadily declining and the engineers attribute this to more peds and bike riders being on the streets. The more walkers and bikers we have on the streets with the drivers, the more drivers are slowing down and paying attention to their surroundings. The intersections that have seen high fatality rates in the past have been reduced because the drivers are are not speeding as much anymore.
OK, why is the woman standing with a little girl, both looking like they are standing up for the pledge of allagence?
I believe the photo is of Senator Teresa Fedor of Toledo. Not sure about the pose. Probably the first available photo of her that Jeff Stephens could find?
That’s the pose, a favorite of small-time politicians, to convey “Bravely looking into the future, full of dreams and inspiration and also America.”
The problem is that too many cyclists value motorists’ impatience over their own lives. Better to ride in the door lane and be in motorists’ blind spot on the right, than to take cycling, or your own life, seriously. Bikes are vehicles, period. Don’t like it? Move out of Ohio. If you take cycling seriously then you’ll be in the middle of the lane so that drivers will pass you with at least three feet, no law required. Your body language dictates how drivers will treat you.
[rant]And let’s not stsrt this shit about how cyclists blow through stop signs/lights. Everyday I see several cars blowing through stop lights, treating stop signs as yield signs, and speeding. Why is it OK for motorists to engage in this behavior, yet pretend that they’re on a higher moral ground than cyclists?
This weekend was one of the worst. Aside from the usual illegal actions of motorists, a dumb bitch on Town ran a red light well after it turned red, meaning if I had been approaching the light vs already being stoped, I would have been knocked off my bike several feet and seriously injured at best. Needless to say I flicked her off. Then on the way back that same night (Sat) I’m heading up High and a car had driven off the road and nto the sidewalk, knocking over a light pole. Then yesterday on my way back from Kroger I get the green light to proceed onto King and a car turns right in front of me just as I was starting to move forward. I follow them into the parking lot (there’s an officer nearby) and just wanted to make sure the driver saw me. She did and the passengers said the car was overheating so they just had to pull over ASAP. It was nice to get such honesty, since they were basically saying nearly hitting me with a car was preferable to waiting at the light or taking a right turn to pull over to the curb. And where other drivers were present not a one honked or yelled at these drivers who were putting others at risk, not just cyclists like myself.[/rant]
“That’s the pose, a favorite of small-time politicians, to convey “Bravely looking into the future, full of dreams and inspiration and also America.â€Â
The kid looks rented.
“Hello, St. Theresa’s orphanage, I’d like to rent a child. No. No. not adopt. Just rent for an hour or two so I can look like I care about minorities and children.”
How does one enforce this?
mstimple Says: How does one enforce this?
The same way that other traffic laws are enforced?
Meaning rarely, if ever. Policing is largely reactionary. Most things that should/could be enforced can’t because of this. It requires the presence of the officer to see a violation and act according to the law.
Columbusite, I agree with your statement that cyclists need to stand up for themselves and assert their right to ride in a lane.
But who in the thread said it was okay for motorists to speed, roll through stop signs or disregard red lights? The city has ways to deal with these scofflaws, including cameras up all over the place to catch drivers who disregard red lights. I’d be fine if those cameras were also fine-tuned enough to go off when I bike rolled through an intersection, but what would the camera see? Good luck tracking down and fining “some dude with one pantleg rolled up on a green – no, wait, gray – bike.” You’d need the bicycle equivalent of a license plate, some unique registration that cameras could see.
Ultimately, that’s the problem with enforcing laws on cyclists: No easy way to identify a bike or biker from a distance. Make everyone fasten a small plate (like motorcycles) under the seat or over the back wheel and it’s a start.
Instant income for the city: License fees, fines/impounding for people who don’t comply, and easier citations. In a place where they’re cutting programs left and right, why wouldn’t they want a new revenue stream? Bikes ARE vehicles, period. They should be held to the same standards as everything else on the road.
This is all great but it wont be followed by drivers and it won’t be enforced. Didn’t we just pass a law about cars having headlights on while it is raining. Cause this morning on the way to work I saw (barely saw them in the rain) plenty of cars without their lights on…