Advocacy & Safety - 3 Foot Law

Does any one from the Ohio area know if Ohio has any kind of "3 foot away " law? Also I'd like to know how I can start in getting a law like that enacted. Now that I commute kind of regular I see a real need for one and I think it would help others to feel bicycle "empowered" Thanks.

For the interest of any one who may care... I referenced the Ohio Drivers Manual and it states the a "Driver must maintain approximately 3 ft of distance when passing a bicyclist" ...now I have to figure a way to make that known. Most drivers are decent around here , but there are some that like to"buzz ya" ...

Take a 5 foot length of bright colored foam tube ~ the kind that is about 4" diameter and used as a pool toy ~ and strap it to the back of your bike sticking out both sides two foot on the right and three foot on the left side of your bike. If they hit it, it will bend under the impact rather then knock you around but most won't hit it and will pass around it.

I didn't think that was an Ohio law. Cincinnati passed a city law stating this in 2010, but hadn't thought it had gone through on the state level.

Ohio does not have a state wide three foot law.

For the interest of any one who may care... I referenced the Ohio Drivers Manual and it states the a "Driver must maintain approximately 3 ft of distance when passing a bicyclist" ...now I have to figure a way to make that known. Most drivers are decent around here , but there are some that like to"buzz ya" ...
driver's manual ≠ enforceable law

usually they overlap significantly, but they're not always the same.

here in NZ the driver's manual advises motorists to allow 1.5m clearance when passing cyclists, but there's no statute to that effect.

There was something recently passed in Cleveland to make sure that drivers should give cyclists three feet. I think they've been doing well with getting the word out.

Here in CA the governor vetoed the 3 foot passing law, because one of his big supporters is anti-cyclist. I think the cycling advocates need to just keep lobbying and putting out public service announcements.

Here in CA the governor vetoed the 3 foot passing law, because one of his big supporters is anti-cyclist. I think the cycling advocates need to just keep lobbying and putting out public service announcements.

Could you elaborate about why Brown vetoed the law -- who is the supporter you are referring to?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2012/09/gov-brown-vetoes-bill-restricting-how-motorists-pass-bicyclists.html

As far as who the supporter is, I don't know, specifically. Caltrans apparently is worried about lawsuits in the case of a driver who can't wait to pass a cyclist on a narrow road and plows into another car because they are more worried about getting around the cyclist than the vehicle coming in the other direction.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/california-politics/2012/09/gov-brown-vetoes-bill-restricting-how-motorists-pass-bicyclists.html

As far as who the supporter is, I don't know, specifically. Caltrans apparently is worried about lawsuits in the case of a driver who can't wait to pass a cyclist on a narrow road and plows into another car because they are more worried about getting around the cyclist than the vehicle coming in the other direction.


Brown said in his veto message that he applauds Lowenthal’s commitment to improve bicycle safety but he objected to the bill allowing motorists to cross the center line if it is needed to provide the buffer space.
isn't it already legal to cross a solid line "if it's otherwise safe to do so" when passing a slow moving vehicle?

isn't it already legal to cross a solid line "if it's otherwise safe to do so" when passing a slow moving vehicle?
Not in California, although that is the case in some other states - and, AFAIK, there has been no issue with such liability claims in those states. The driver choosing to cross the double yellow line would still have the responsibility to do so only when it is safe to do so and I frankly don't see why the proposed legal change would have any impact on the liability of the state.

Pull it over...this is the grammar police. Do you realize you wrote " 3 foot" where you should have said " 3 feet"? Keep that grammar under control next time. :50:

Sorry grammar officer... I stand corrected and will pay the fine. Thank you for the correction for the sake of anyone who may have been confused about what the heck I was talking about:roflmao2: 3 feet it is !!!

Not in California, although that is the case in some other states - and, AFAIK, there has been no issue with such liability claims in those states. The driver choosing to cross the double yellow line would still have the responsibility to do so only when it is safe to do so and I frankly don't see why the proposed legal change would have any impact on the liability of the state.

I don't get it either. Anytime you are passing, including passing another car, you have to do it safely. Do they expect passing a car or truck with less than three feet of clearance?

I think this blog post is a good read for all advocates of such laws.

http://labikes.blogspot.com/2012/09/labs-vunerable-road-users-law-must-some.html