Grand Rapids Goes Bike Safety Crazy. Is it a Good Crazy?

[XLFD]

Sweeping New Changes to Bicycle Traffic Laws in Grand Rapids

The Grand Rapids City Commission passed several new laws affecting bicycles to promote safety on the roads of Grand Rapids.  According to today's headlines:

GRAND RAPIDS, MI – New local bicycle rules won approval Tuesday, prompting a city administrator to forecast motor-vehicle backups in some cases.

Among the new rules, a "safe passing" law requires that motorists keep at least five feet between the right side of their vehicle and a bicycle they are passing. That may be tricky on some roads, forcing motorists to veer into an oncoming lane of traffic to get enough clearance to pass a bicyclist.

"The car is going to have to wait to pass," said Suzanne Schulz, the city's managing director of design and development. "There's not enough room in a travel lane for five feet of clearance and a bike."

An original proposal called for a 3-foot clearance, but Grand Rapids City Commission on Tuesday, Sept. 22, bumped it to five feet at the request of the Greater Grand Rapids Bicycle Coalition.

"We believe that will position Grand Rapids in a very aggressive light" in terms of accommodating bicycles, said Jay Fowler, the coalition's interim director.

Third Ward City Commissioner Senita Lenear cast the lone vote against the new rules, saying any changes should wait until a $610,000 vital streets plan gets completed next year. Adopting new rules now continues the city's "haphazard" implementation of bike policy, she said.

Some other new rules: motorists may not open a door of their vehicle in a manner that obstructs bicycles, and bicycles for night riding must be equipped with a white light on the front and a red reflector or light on the rear. A 10-mile-per-hour speed limit for bike trails was nixed.  [See the proposed list here ]

The 5-foot "safe-passing" rule "provides an extra amount of security" for bicyclists and should reduce the risk of accidents, Second Ward City Commissioner Ruth Kelly said.

"It sends a message," she said. "I think it's fine for cars to slow down."

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2015/09/new_safe_p...

Analysis:  Riding erratically but on course

The preamble to the expanded bicycle section of the GR traffic code says:  "Bicyclists shall be granted all of the rights that motor vehicles have on the road, and shall conform to all of the rules" of the road."  Missing is the necessary caveat found in state law that says effectively the same thing but adds:  "... except for special regulations in this article and except for the provisions of this chapter that by their nature do not apply." 

Obviously, bicyclists don't have the duty to be specially licensed and insured by the state, don't have the right to travel on freeways, and have the special right to ride on bike lanes, most road shoulders and sidewalks, just to scratch the surface of the differences between the two modes of travel.  Blanket statements saying the rights and responsibilities of the two are somehow equal is not right, not responsible and may become contradictory to other sections of law.

Many states have passed so-called "3 foot laws" where a passing vehicle must give a bicyclist 3 feet (or more) of room during the maneuver.  There are arguments both for and against this type of law that both motorists and cyclists may ascribe to (see this good analysis of the subject); I tend to believe that such laws are useless unless they also include 'vulnerable user' provisions that say when a motorist strikes a cyclist from behind while passing, it is prima facie evidence that the law was broken by the driver. 

Grand Rapids does not seem to have such a provision, so at most this is a 'feel good' rule that will have little effect on GR area drivers.  Their expansion of the gap to 5 feet does not change this into becoming anything that's enforceable.  For if a cop witnessed a car pass a bike with 3-4 ft. clearance and winds up stopping the driver, the driver's perception of passing distance may differ and since no harm happened, the ticket would likely never be written.  Meanwhile, the cyclist will catch up to the traffic stop and really have their safety impinged by being forced further into the roadway.

The next new Grand Rapids' law, "Motorists may not open a door of their vehicle in a manner that obstructs bicycles" is just misguided.  This pertains to people who park their car and get out, who often have a tendency to swing their door in the bike lane or the far right portion of the roadway where bicycles travel.  Too many motorists do this, making a law about it won't stop them and only make bicycle riders feel 'safer' when they ride past parked cars, leading them to run into the door more often.

A better idea would have been to put this law's duties onto the bicyclists passing by the parked cars, and give them a five-foot rule to follow themselves.  Such a law might have said:  "Bicyclists passing a parallel parked vehicle must leave at least 5 feet between their bicycle and the parked vehicle."  This would lead to safer riding and be looked at as a fair compromise by most, but the "bike lanes or bust" lobby would be crying foul, even though common sense suggests bike lanes shouldn't be put adjacent to parallel parked cars.

The next new law requiring headlights and rear lights/reflectors for night riding is just a superfluous, redundant and unnecessary rule, just like the three adjectives I just used for 'rule'.  State law, MCL 257.662, has the exact, same, equal and equivalent requirements.  With advancements in LED technology making visibility greater at low cost and weight, this law could be tweaked in the future for safer night riding

The 10 mph limit for bicycles on bike trails was rightly nixed; who rides that slow on a bicycle anyhow, this would only encourage bikes not to use the trails if it was enforceable.  Also nixed was the current rule that required registration of all bicycles, because in reality, nobody registers their bicycles.  Without meaningful 'vulnerable user' provisions in the 5 foot rule, these were the best actions taken by the commission to make bicycling better for those in the GR community.

Creating new rules to make riding bicycles safer is a good start, but they should be well thought out and discussed in detail looking over material from both of the two schools that promote two different philosophies on bike riding safety:  the vehicular cyclist which believes that cycling is safer when they are integrated into the road, and the segregated cyclist who prefer bike paths and lanes for safety.  The wisest course is often located somewhere between the two.