AB 2509, introduced by Assembly Member Ting, would make a few changes to CVC 21202, the statute that says when bikes do and do not have to ride as far as “practicable” to the right or left side of the roadway.  AB 2509 is intended to complement the Three Feet for Safety Act, which passed in 2013, and to “give further clarity to the interaction of motorists and bicyclist in the shared roadway.”

What Does the Bill Change?

The current version of the bill adds additional exceptions to CVC 21202 to clarify that cyclists need not ride as far to the right (or left) when they are in a bikeway or when riding side-by-side in a situation where one of the other exceptions applies.

In other words — you won’t have to hug the side of the road if you’re in a bikeway and you also won’t have to hug the side of the road if you’re riding alongside or passing a fellow cyclists and one of the other exceptions applies.

The Assembly Committee on Transportation’s Analysis

The bill has been referred to the Assembly Committee on Transportation.  In its first analysis of the bill, committee had concerns with the side-by-side riding provisions. Specifically, the committee noted that:

side-by-side riding may not be able to be accomplished within [designated bikeways], therefore possibly pushing cyclists closer into vehicular lanes and in the path of vehicles. Additionally, cyclists riding side-by-side may be forced into the vehicular lanes to avoid conditions such as fixed objects, like a parked car or a surface hazard. This could impede the motorists’ ability to comply with other rules of the road and the three foot for safety rule.

I think I’ve heard a shorter version of that argument before.  It gets yelled out frequently by drivers who’ve had to deal with the “unbelievable horror” that is getting slowed down momentarily by a group of cyclists riding in a group: “SINGLE FILE!”

I acknowledge the committee’s concern.  A single cyclist riding in a bike lane has a better chance of being able to avoid a road hazard without leaving the bike lane than a pair of cyclists riding side-by-side.  But this is simply impractical in situations where bike lanes get congested with lots of bike traffic (something we should be encouraging!).  Moreover, it’s just not the way people ride when they go on group rides.  I think the law should start to acknowledge that, rather than fight it, sort of like how speed limits will increase if enough drivers refuse to obey them.  Perhaps, instead of restricting cyclists’ freedom within the bike lane, we focus on keeping the bike lanes clear of parked cars and hazards.

Removal of the Word “Safe” from the Bill

I find it interesting that the first version of AB 2509 would have added the word “safe” to the text of CVC 21202.  Current law requires cyclists to ride as close “as practicable” to the curb.  Originally, AB 2509 was going to add the word “safe”, to say that cyclists have to ride as close “as safe or practicable.”

That seems like a straight-forward addition to the law that shouldn’t get much objection out of anyone.  Why would the law ever require you to do something that is not “safe”?  I’ve reached out to Assembly Member Ting for comment and will update if he gets back to me.  I’m hoping the answer is that it’s assumed that “safe” is already contained within the term “practicable” or assumed the law would never require you to do something “unsafe.”

Even if that is the case, I really hope the word “safe” gets reinserted in the bill as that would provide support for the position that cyclists need not ride within the door zone.