Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public comments back proposed three-foot passing law to protect pedestrians, cyclists
Summary
At a July 15 public hearing, residents and advocates urged Ulster County to adopt a local law requiring motorists to give three feet when passing vulnerable road users; opponents warned of implementation and redundancy with state law.
Ulster County heard a broad array of testimony July 15 on proposed Local Law No. 3 of 2025, a measure described in the hearing as intended to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists and other "vulnerable road users" by specifying passing distance standards.
Rosemary Quinn, a traffic safety educator speaking for the New York Bike Coalition, urged adoption of a clear three-foot passing standard. "The 3-foot passing standard is a standard that has been so incredibly elusive in New York State," she said, adding that the rule "sets a really important clearly defined standard." Quinn said two other New York counties have adopted similar local rules and that Ulster County would follow their lead.
Supporters described local safety problems: Chris Allen, a former county legislator, recounted pedestrian fatalities in his district and urged the Legislature to pass the law; Howard Cohen, co-chair of Complete Streets in Woodstock, described poor sidewalk and intersection conditions and said people with disabilities lack safe routes. Emily Swan Young spoke about the 2023 death of her daughter on Route 9W as a reason the county should adopt the three-foot standard. "This is basic," she said. "This is not weird. This is not some kind of siloed, bizarre... request. We're just talking about walking and our children and human beings."
Opponents questioned the law's drafting and scope. Pat Sheehan and others argued that New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law already governs safe passing and that local language could be "nebulous" or redundant, highlighting narrow, unstriped roads outside urban areas where lane width and sight lines differ.
The public comment period included six speakers and closed after testimony; legislators will consider public input as they move the proposal through committee or to the floor. The hearing record includes both strong personal accounts of roadway danger and concerns about enforceability and overlap with existing state law.
