BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 910
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 910 (Alan Lowenthal)
As Amended June 22, 2011
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :27-9
TRANSPORTATION 8-5 APPROPRIATIONS 11-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Bonnie Lowenthal, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Blumenfield, Bonilla, | |Bradford, Charles |
| |Buchanan, Eng, Furutani, | |Calderon, Campos, Gatto, |
| |Galgiani, Solorio | |Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Jeffries, Achadjian, |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, |
| |Logue, Miller, Norby | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Sets requirements for safe passing of bicyclists by motor
vehicles and establishes fines and penalties for failure to abide by
these requirements. Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes, on a substandard width lane, a driver to drive on the
left side of double parallel solid lines or double parallel lines,
one of which is broken, to pass a bicyclist or pedicab traveling
in the same direction.
2)Defines a "substandard width lane" as a lane that is too narrow
for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within
the lane.
3)Requires the driver of a motor vehicle, passing a bicycle
traveling in the same direction, to pass at a safe distance with
reasonable consideration of the size and speed of the motor
vehicle and roadway conditions.
4)Prohibits a driver of a motor vehicle from overtaking or passing a
bicycle, proceeding in the same direction, at a distance of less
than three feet.
5)When it is not possible to provide three feet of clearance,
authorizes a motor vehicle to pass a bicycle with less than three
feet of clearance provided that the vehicle's passing speed is not
SB 910
Page 2
greater than 15 miles per hour (mph).
6)Establishes a base fine of $35 for failing to provide a distance
of three feet between the motor vehicle and the bicyclist.
7)Establishes a fine of $220 if a collision occurs between the
vehicle and bicyclist if the bicyclist suffers bodily injury and
the motor vehicle driver is found at fault for failing to provide
the three-foot passing distance or speed reduction, as specified.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Requires a driver to pass to the left of a vehicle or bicycle at a
safe distance without interfering with the safe operation of the
overtaken vehicle or bicycle.
2)Establishes a base fine of $35 for failing to pass to the left of
a vehicle or bicycle at a safe distance without interfering with
the safe operation of the overtaken vehicle or bicycle.
3)Establishes a base fine of $35 for driving on the left side of the
center of the roadway in overtaking and passing another vehicle
proceeding in the same direction unless the left side is clearly
visible and free of oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance to
complete the passing maneuver.
4)Prohibits driving to the left of double parallel solid lines
unless one of the lines is broken and a driver to the right of the
broken line is completing a passing maneuver, when turning left at
any intersection or into or out of a driveway or private rode, or
making a U-turn under specified circumstances.
5)Establishes a base fine of $70 for an improper turn over a double
yellow line.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee,
this bill would result in negligible state costs and a potentially
minor increase in revenue.
COMMENTS : In years past, streets were designed primarily for the
ease and movement of motor vehicles, with little regard of other
modes of transportation such as pedestrians and bicyclists. In
2008, the Legislature passed the California Complete Streets Act
that, in part, required roadways to be designed to safely
SB 910
Page 3
accommodate all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit
riders, children, older people, and disabled people, as well as
motorists.
By introducing this legislation, the author intends to make streets
safer and more user-friendly for bicyclists by removing ambiguity in
current law regarding a motor vehicle's responsibility when passing
a bicycle. The author notes bicyclists often face dangerous
conditions on California's streets and roads due to motorists
passing too closely. When this happens, even the slightest movement
by the motorist or bicyclist can result in accidents wherein the
bicyclist often suffers catastrophic injuries or death.
To reduce accidents that result from motor vehicles passing
bicyclists too closely, this bill would require motorists to pass
bicyclists with three feet or more of space between the vehicle and
the bicyclist. Motorists would be authorized to pass with less than
three feet of clearance as long as the motorist slows to a speed of
15 mph while completing the passing maneuver. According to the
author, 17 states now have a three-foot bicycle passing law
including Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida,
Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota,
Mississippi, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Utah, and
Wisconsin.
Writing in support of this bill, the co-sponsor, the Office of City
of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, notes that the bill would
increase roadway safety, bring clarity to existing law, and make
bicyclists feel safer. By accomplishing this, the bill would make
the City of Los Angeles a safer place to ride a bicycle. Also
arguing in support of the bill, Better Bike Beverly Hills notes that
improving bicyclist safety would help to get people out of their
cars and onto bikes which would be good for the environment and
people's health.
Also writing in support, the California Bicycle Coalition (CBC), a
co-sponsor of this bill, states that current law is ambiguous
regarding safe passing distance and, therefore, a disservice to law
enforcement and motor vehicles alike. It is the CBC's contention
that this bill will help to promote safe cycling and provide
motorists, law enforcement, and the courts a more easily understood
measure of what constitutes a "safe" passing distance.
This bill poses a number of policy questions including whether or
SB 910
Page 4
not existing law, which allows a driver to use his or her judgment
in executing a safe passing maneuver, is sufficient or whether
specific parameters relative to passing of bicyclists should be
codified; whether or not existing and proposed passing laws can be
adequately enforced; and, whether or not establishing set parameters
for passing maneuvers will ultimately improve or diminish bicycle
safety.
A three-foot passing distance, as well as a prescribed passing
speed, could be difficult to enforce. To enforce the passing
distance, a law enforcement officer would need to be in a position
to be able to accurately judge the space between the vehicle and the
bicyclist. Judging this distance could require an appropriate
vantage point, taking into account movement of both the vehicle and
bicyclist in a live traffic situation. It could be reasoned that
the need for this bill would be diminished if existing laws, that do
not rely on specific passing distances and speed but rather on
officer's judgment of relative safety, were enforced with greater
frequency.
Logic dictates that if a driver is passing a bicyclist at a high
rate of speed, more distance should be provided between the vehicle
and the bicyclist. It also stands to reason that if a driver is
unable to provide a suitable distance, they should slow down while
completing the passing maneuver. This bill, however, sets a maximum
speed (15 mph) at which the driver may pass. It could be argued
that if a vehicle is passing a bicyclist with under three feet of
clearance, they would naturally reduce their speed; however, it is
also possible that a sudden drop in speed to a required speed of 15
mph could increase the likelihood for rear end collisions or
swerving that could further endanger the bicyclist and other roadway
users.
This view is shared by the Automobile Club of Southern California
and California State Automobile Association (Auto Clubs). Writing
in opposition to this bill, the Auto Clubs note that the requirement
that motor vehicles slow to 15 mph or less when passing a bicyclist
could cause vehicles to brake suddenly resulting in accidents that
could endanger the bicyclist as well as pedestrians. Also arguing
in opposition, the California Teamsters Public Affairs Council argue
that the bill is a one size fits all approach that fails to consider
differing circumstances and road conditions, particularly the
difficulties of commercial drivers will have in many circumstances
meeting the requirements set forth in this bill.
SB 910
Page 5
Recent legislation: AB 60 (Nava) of 2008, would have required
drivers to pass bicyclists with a minimum clearance of three feet, a
violation of which would have been an infraction punishable by a
$250 fine. In addition, AB 60 would have made it a misdemeanor or
felony if the person operating the motor vehicle in violation of the
above requirement caused great bodily harm to the bicycle operator.
That bill died in the Assembly Transportation Committee.
AB 1941 (Nava) of 2006, would have prohibited a vehicle from driving
in a designated two-way left-turn lane, for purposes of overtaking
and passing a bicycle or merging into adjacent lanes of travel. In
addition, AB 1941 would have required motor vehicle drivers to leave
a minimum three foot clearance when passing a bicyclist with
violations assessed with base fine of $250. In addition, AB 1941
would have made it a felony or a misdemeanor, upon conviction, for a
person driving a motor vehicle to cause great bodily injury or death
to the bicyclist. That bill failed passage in the Assembly
Transportation Committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916) 319- 2093
FN: 0001519