3 Foot Rule is Not Cool

Louisiana signage. Photo credit: Biking Bis

Last summer Vermont added a "Safe Passing" law which stipulates (among other things) that "motorists are required to pass cyclists and pedestrians with due care, increasing clearance to pass the vulnerable road users safely". In the past few years 19 other states enacted a law called the "3-Foot Rule" which requires drivers of vehicles allocate at least 3 feet in passing a cyclist.

While these rules sound well and good, intending to protect the cyclist, they've bothered me to a large extent because what seems like common sense had to become a legality for people to suddenly pay attention. Will a driver now pass a cyclist with more care than before just because it's a law? I think not.

Since the law took effect, I haven't noticed any increase in the space allotted from passing motorists. Most do go by with ample room—by ample room I mean 6 feet—but I'm concerned when a motorist is too close. In that frightened moment I am forced to hold the bike as steady as possible or escape onto the shoulder (or heaven forbid into a ditch) until the vehicle goes by. Many times we are unaware that a vehicle is even behind us until it's too late.

Only 3 feet? What if cyclists want more? Photo credit: Velo Village

And for those who think 3 feet is enough room to safely pass a biker, think again. I sit on a bike seat that is nearly 3 feet high with the top of my helmet at about 5.5 feet. If I fall to the left for whatever reason (a pothole, debris, fright from a motorist) just as a vehicle zooms by, clearly three feet is not enough of a buffer. Because of this when I get behind the wheel of a car I allow a pedestrian or cyclist at least 8 feet of breathing room or slow until I can safely get around.

I think drivers come from the mindset that motorized vehicles have the right-of-way. And to be fair these same operators (mostly) are also not regular cyclists. Case in point: I occasionally catch a lift with my boss who exceeds the speed limit by at least 10 m.p.h. This is the same road that I bike commute on. One day we were cresting a hill with a cyclist slowly climbing ahead of us. My boss intended to pass the bicyclist so I spoke up, "What if you meet a vehicle coming over the hill? Your only recourse is to swerve to the right, forcing the cyclist off the road". Or, I thought, hit them. Fortunately he listened and waited. Yes, my boss is not a bike rider and was clearly not thinking from that viewpoint. I encounter similar situations while a passenger in my family's cars.

Yikes, too close! Photo credit: League of American Bicyclists
originally from www.cyclelicio.us

So, I believe, therein lies the problem. If you are not attuned to how a cyclist rides how can you know what constitutes safe passage? Think about it. We can't have separate bike lanes everywhere. It's not practical here in Vermont, nor can we afford it, period.

I think the ultimate solution has to come from a more basic level: education. Teach the youngsters to ride. Teach safety skills. Teach children that cycling can be transportation. As our kids grow, teach awareness, respect, and share-the-road skills even in Drivers Education at the high school level. And teach that driving is not an entitlement but a privilege. While some of us regular cyclists already instill these skills in our youngsters it needs to be addressed in a broader scope, so all children receive this education. After all, children are the caretakers of our future—as drivers and as cyclists.

Education in the schools. Kids must educate their parents and ask to ride to school.
Photo credit: Local Motion

While Vermont's "Safe Passing" law does raise awareness—and I applaud their efforts—it's still a band aid approach to the overall problem. Let's think outside the box of creating rules that are futile to enforce and get to the heart of the situation.

I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this subject.

Click here to see a PDF of the new law.