BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING
Senator Jim Beall, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: AB 51 Hearing Date: 6/14/2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Quirk, Lackey |
|----------+------------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |6/1/2015 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Erin Riches |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Vehicles: motorcycles: lane splitting.
DIGEST: This bill authorizes the California Highway Patrol
(CHP) to develop educational guidelines on lane splitting, the
practice whereby motorcycles drive between two rows of stopped
or moving cars in the same lane.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
1)Authorizes the state Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
and local authorities to prohibit or restrict the use of
freeways, expressways, or any portion thereof, in their
respective jurisdictions by pedestrians, bicycles, or other
non-motorized traffic or by any person operating a
motor-driven cycle, motorized bicycle, or motorized scooter.
2)Directs slow-moving vehicles to use the right-hand lane and
authorizes Caltrans to designate a certain lane or lanes for
slow-moving traffic.
3)Generally requires vehicles to drive on the right half of the
roadway and to pass slower traffic on the left.
4)Requires, when a roadway has been divided into two or more
clearly marked lanes for traffic in one direction, that a
vehicle be driven entirely within a single lane to the extent
feasible.
AB 51 (Quirk) Page 2 of ?
This bill:
1)Defines "lane splitting" as driving a motorcycle between rows
of stopped or moving vehicles in the same lane, including both
divided and undivided streets, roads, or highways.
2)Authorizes the CHP to develop educational guidelines on lane
splitting to help ensure the safety of motorcyclists as well
as drivers and passengers of surrounding vehicles.
3)Requires the CHP, in developing the guidelines, to consult
with agencies and organizations with an interest in road
safety and motorcycle behavior, including but not limited to
the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), the Department of
Transportation (Caltrans), the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS),
and a motorcycle organization focused on motorcycle safety.
COMMENTS:
1)Purpose. The author states that existing law is silent on
lane splitting. Although the CHP posted lane-splitting
guidelines on its website in early 2013, it soon had to
withdraw them (see background below). The lack of guidelines
has forced the CHP to curtail education and outreach efforts
on lane splitting and has created confusion for both
motorcyclists and drivers. Because statute does not
specifically prohibit lane splitting, it is allowed with no
restrictions. The author states that there are several
practical reasons for allowing a motorcycle to lane split
under certain conditions: motorcycles have no air bags,
cooling mechanism, or cages, and motorcyclists are at a lower
visibility to other drivers when traveling on highly congested
roads. Although many motorcyclists lane split safely and only
in slow traffic conditions, others do so at unsafe speeds and
with no regard for the safety of others. The author states
that this bill will help provide guidance on lane splitting
and enable the CHP to renew its education and outreach on this
issue.
2)CHP guidelines: background. In recognition of the need for
guidance on lane splitting, the CHP convened a committee of
traffic safety stakeholders and motorcycle safety experts
representing the public, government, private, and academic
communities. The resulting guidelines were posted on the CHP
AB 51 (Quirk) Page 3 of ?
and OTS websites in 2013 and printed in the 2014 DMV
Motorcycle Handbook. However, a complaint was filed with the
Office of Administrative Law (OAL) claiming that the
guidelines were developed without a public process and were
therefore "underground" regulations. The OAL stated that the
CHP had no authority to publish guidelines, so the CHP removed
the guidelines from its website and the DMV and OTS followed
suit.
3)What does the research say? A 2014 study published by UC
Berkeley in collaboration with OTS found that lane splitting
can be done safely when a rider is traveling only slightly
faster than the surrounding traffic, and that lane splitting
motorcyclists are less likely to be rear-ended than car
drivers. A follow-up study published by UC Berkeley in 2015
found that during lane-splitting collisions, head injury
occurrence is low at all motorcycle speeds up to 50 mph and
increases markedly above that speed. According to this study,
many motorcyclists do not understand how lane splitting at
excessive speed creates unnecessary risk. The study also
found that riders who adopt a 10 mph or 15 mph speed
differential practice may reduce their exposure to injury
risk.
4)Opposition arguments. Opponents argue that lane splitting
should not be made legal under any circumstances, for a number
of reasons. For example, lane splitting encourages speeding
because a motorcyclist must be going faster than the speed of
traffic in order to "split" (pass cars). In addition, lane
splitting increases distracted-driving issues because drivers
panic when they are suddenly and unexpectedly passed by a
splitting biker, often at high speeds. Opponents also state
that street and highway lanes are built to be occupied by a
vehicle, not shared by a vehicle and a motorcycle.
5)Amended in Senate. The prior version of this bill, as passed
by the Assembly, authorized a motorcyclist to lane split if
the motorcycle was driven at a speed of not more than 50 miles
per hour and not more than 15 miles per hour faster than the
speed of traffic. After consulting with the CHP about the
now-defunct guidelines from 2013, the author amended this bill
into its current form.
Related Legislation:
AB 51 (Quirk) Page 4 of ?
SB 350 (Beall) of 2013 - would have prohibited, with the
exception of a peace officer, a motorcycle from passing another
vehicle in a portion of a lane occupied by that vehicle unless
certain conditions were met, including that the passing occurs
during traffic congestion and the passing occurs at a safe
speed. This bill was never heard because the author dropped it
pending research findings.
Assembly Votes (prior version):
Floor: 58-14
Appr: 16-1
Trans: 13-1
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on
Wednesday,
June 8, 2016.)
SUPPORT:
ABATE of California
American Motorcyclist Association
Automobile Club of Southern California
Bay Area Riders Forum
CityBike Magazine
Fraternal Order of Police, California State Lodge (prior
version)
Lane Splitting Is Legal
Liberty Mutual Insurance
Los Angeles County Professional Peace Officers Association
(prior version)
Motorcycle Industry Council
Personal Insurance Federation of California
Sacramento County Deputy Sheriffs Association (prior version)
Santa Ana Police Officers Association (prior version)
OPPOSITION:
Stop Lane Splitting (prior version)
4 individuals (prior version)
AB 51 (Quirk) Page 5 of ?
-- END --