CALL 916-777-7777
Youtube Facebook-f X-twitter Linkedin-in

Will California’s Proposed Bicycle Legislation Increase Safety on the Roadways?

Posted on behalf of Arnold Law Firm in
bicycle legislation in californiaOn February 19th, a new bicycle bill was proposed in California that may change the way cyclists travel on the roadways. The bill was introduced by Phil Ting, a Democratic member of the California State Assembly. California has made several changes over the past few years to help keep cyclists safe. The state passed a three-foot bike law five years ago requiring motorists to maintain three feet of space from bicycle riders. Last spring, the city of Sacramento installed protected bike lanes on multiple streets in the Downtown area. These changes are being made in an effort to eliminate accidents and serious injuries to drivers and cyclists. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Sacramento is the fifth-deadliest city for cyclists in the U.S. Assembly Member Ting thinks the new bill can help eliminate any confusion cyclists have when it comes to where they can ride when there are no existing bike lanes. As more people choose to ride bikes as their primary mode of transportation, we can help the state of California remain a healthy and safe place to live and work, Ting stated.

Proposed Legislation: AB 697

Assembly Bill 697 would allow cyclists to ride in the right-hand lane or bicycle lane if one is present. Cyclists in a traffic lane that is wide enough for both cars and bicyclists to safely travel side-by-side would need to ride far enough to the right to allow a car to pass safely. However, there some exceptions to this rule. If road conditions are too hazardous, cyclists do not have to worry about continuing along the right-hand edge of the lane or when approaching a place where a right turn is authorized.

Existing California Bicycle Laws

Current bicycle laws, specifically Section 21202 of the California Vehicle Code, requires cyclists to ride as close as possible to the right-hand curb or edge, except under certain situations. These situations include the following:
  • When trying to overtake or pass another car or bicycle going in the same direction
  • When trying to make a left-hand turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway
  • When it is reasonably necessary to avoid conditions, such as hazardous, fixed or moving objects
  • When traveling on the highway with one-way traffic and two or more marked traffic lanes

Contact an Attorney for a Free Consultation

If you have been involved in a bicycle accident with a car, do not hesitate to contact a Sacramento auto accident attorney at the Arnold Law Firm for legal help. We are well-versed in California bicycle laws and how to apply them to the specifics of your case. Contact us today to schedule a free, no obligation consultation. We can review your case and determine if you have grounds to take legal action to pursue compensation for your injuries. There are no upfront costs for our legal services unless you recover the compensation you deserve.

Call (916) 777-7777 to see how we might be able to help you.

Settlement - $3,767,000

Truck Accident

A 20-year-old man who had been married for just 12 days left home on his way to work. He was driving on Pleasant Grove Road in Sutter County in the early morning when he came upon a slow-moving truck. As he pulled out to pass the truck, the truck driver turned left in front of him. The young man attempted to steer back into his lane but his vehicle struck an un-flagged piece of metal extending from the back of the truck. He died in the resulting crash.

Expert witnesses brought in by the Arnold Law Firm proved that the truck, owned and operated by a hauling firm, should never have been on the highway that morning. Specifically, the rear and side turn signals did not work and the rear-view mirror was in a poor state of adjustment at the time of the collision. As a result, the driver, who had failed to properly inspect the vehicle before setting out that morning, couldn’t see the young man’s vehicle as it attempted to pass.

The poor condition of the truck, its lack of maintenance and the manner in which it was operated were found to be substantial factors in causing the collision that killed the young man. The testimony also established that the man had been making a lawful pass at the lawful speed limit and acted reasonably when he attempted to avoid the collision.

The man’s 20-year-old widow was awarded $3,767,000.77, his parents were awarded $185,131 and the family was reimbursed $11,899 in funeral expenses. Though money is a poor substitute for a young man’s life, this verdict demonstrates that drivers who endanger the lives of others will be held accountable for their actions.