Bicycles, Traffic Signals, Loop Detectors -- rules where you ride?

Quoted message said:

Different jurisdictions seem to have very different attitudes towards
whether their traffic signals are supposed to detect bicyclists.

Some local cities say they definitely should detect bicycles, they mark
the location of the sensor loops and they'll adjust a signal's
sensitivity after just one complaint. Others say bicycles should be
using the pedestrian buttons to trigger the light. (Personally, I've
never seen a pedestrian button that triggers the left-turn lane....)

I thought it might be intersting to know what the rules are elsewhere in
the U.S. these days.

Do your local traffic light sensors reliably detect bicycles?

No, but there's a law on the books for motorbikes, which aren't
detected as well that lets you treat it as a stop sign after a cycle
or reasonable amount of time. I stretch that to cover bikes as well. :-
P

every state has searchable bicycle laws. the major cycling groups have
legal advice on cycling laws. For example, see sheldon brown books as
there's a primer on new england cycle law, right?
somehting to remember: if cycling and not in compliance with the laws
and you get sqaushed by an SUV, you [censored] away your rights by illegal
cycling
tho the SUV may be at fault, the SUV may not be legally responsible
for causing your damages.
an excellent example: riding on sidewalks is illegal in Florida. The
law is not enforced except in areas of "village commerce" such as
street fair type commercial areas where old folk ($$$) are not to be
intimidated by cyclists.
Florida did provide extensive shoulder bike lanes but convience and
real time safety often brings me to ride on empty sidewalks.
however, if I come down the wrong side of the street on a sidewalk,
and I do that every day caws i ride upwind of the smog, and surprise
an SUV at a side street intersection and get squished, i assume I lose
a large percentage of my legal rights from sidewlak riding going the
wrong way.

What can be really aggravating are intersections programmed to give an
extended left turn phase for opposing traffic while keeping your side
red if the sensor doesn't detect you. As far as waiting is concerned,
in New York bicycles and motorcycles are required to wait two minutes
before proceding through an intersection on red. One intersection I
frequent is a 4-way with high volumes of traffic on three of the legs
but very little on the fourth leg which is the one I usually approach
the intersection from. I usually run the aforementioned red light on
the extended left turn phase because the cross traffic will always get
a green phase before two minutes is up and it is pointless to wait an
eternity for a car to show up on a low traffic volume road. Even if a
car does turn up behind you at these intersections you can still be
screwed if they are turning left in a turning lane and the lights are
programmed to only give the left turn arrow when through traffic is
undetected.

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Different jurisdictions seem to have very different attitudes towards
whether their traffic signals are supposed to detect bicyclists.

Some local cities say they definitely should detect bicycles, they mark
the location of the sensor loops and they'll adjust a signal's
sensitivity after just one complaint. Others say bicycles should be
using the pedestrian buttons to trigger the light. (Personally, I've
never seen a pedestrian button that triggers the left-turn lane....)

I thought it might be intersting to know what the rules are elsewhere in
the U.S. these days.

Do your local traffic light sensors reliably detect bicycles?

Does your local transportation department mark traffic light sensor
loops for bicycles and motorcycles?

Will your local transportation department adjust the sensitivity of
signals if they don't detect bicycles?

The loops here are fun. Some intersections have a
second loop for bicycles. I ride up onto the bicycle
loop. Wait. The cross traffic light gets an amber. I
move off the loop. The cross traffic gets a red. My
light is still red . Then the cross traffic gets a
green an I still have a red. I am supposed to stay on
the loop until I get a green. To hell with that. I have
plenty of time. I keep cycling the signal; giving the
cross traffic an amber then a red for a few seconds,
then to green again; until a car comes up on the loop,
or a pedestrian pushes a button.
--
Michael Press

Quoted message said:

Different jurisdictions seem to have very different attitudes towards
whether their traffic signals are supposed to detect bicyclists.

Some local cities say they definitely should detect bicycles, they mark
the location of the sensor loops and they'll adjust a signal's
sensitivity after just one complaint. Others say bicycles should be
using the pedestrian buttons to trigger the light. (Personally, I've
never seen a pedestrian button that triggers the left-turn lane....)

I thought it might be intersting to know what the rules are elsewhere in
the U.S. these days.

Do your local traffic light sensors reliably detect bicycles?

Does your local transportation department mark traffic light sensor
loops for bicycles and motorcycles?

Will your local transportation department adjust the sensitivity of
signals if they don't detect bicycles?

CDOT (Colorado Dep't of Tranportation) has consistently readjusted
sensor loops after one phone call, IME. Almost all the traffic light
sensors around here work for bicycles.

mark

Quoted message said:

an excellent example: riding on sidewalks is illegal in Florida.

This is a myth, specific to Florida, that keeps getting perpetuated. It is
*legal* to ride on the sidewalk in Florida:
From http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/laws/ped_bike_bikeLaws1.htm
---------------------------
Sidewalk riding
(Section 316.2065(10) and (11), F.S.)
When riding on a sidewalk or crosswalk, a bicyclist has all the rights
and duties applicable to a pedestrian.

Comment: Sidewalks are not designed for bicycle speeds, but bicycle use is
allowed except where prohibited by local ordinance (e.g. in the central
business districts of many cities). Although a cyclist riding on a sidewalk
has the rights and duties of a pedestrian, he is still a "bicycle rider" and
his bicycle is still a "bicycle". Consequently, laws that pertain to
required equipment and to carriage of passengers (see above) are still
applicable.

Since a cyclist riding on a sidewalk does not have the duties (or rights) of
a driver, he may ride in either direction. (However, it is safer to ride in
the direction of traffic, since drivers do not expect cyclists to come from
the other direction at driveways and crosswalks. Crash risk is 3 to 4 times
as great for sidewalk riders who ride facing roadway traffic as for sidewalk
riders who ride in the direction of traffic.)

At a signalized intersection, a sidewalk rider must obey the instructions of
any applicable pedestrian control signal. That is, he may start to cross a
roadway in a crosswalk only during a steady Walk phase, if one is displayed.
If no pedestrian signal is provided, the cyclist may proceed in accordance
with the signal indications for the parallel roadway traffic flow (Section
316.075, F.S.).

A person propelling a bicycle upon and along a sidewalk, or across a
roadway upon and along a crosswalk, shall yield the right-of-way to any
pedestrian and shall give an audible signal before overtaking and passing
such pedestrian.
----------------

--
Phil

mark said:

Quoted message said:

Different jurisdictions seem to have very different attitudes towards
whether their traffic signals are supposed to detect bicyclists.

Quoted message said:

Some local cities say they definitely should detect bicycles, they mark
the location of the sensor loops and they'll adjust a signal's
sensitivity after just one complaint. Others say bicycles should be
using the pedestrian buttons to trigger the light. (Personally, I've
never seen a pedestrian button that triggers the left-turn lane....)

Quoted message said:

I thought it might be intersting to know what the rules are elsewhere in
the U.S. these days.

Quoted message said:

Do your local traffic light sensors reliably detect bicycles?

Quoted message said:

Does your local transportation department mark traffic light sensor
loops for bicycles and motorcycles?

Quoted message said:

Will your local transportation department adjust the sensitivity of
signals if they don't detect bicycles?

CDOT (Colorado Dep't of Tranportation) has consistently readjusted
sensor loops after one phone call, IME. Almost all the traffic light
sensors around here work for bicycles.

mark

Where in CO are you? They sure don't around Boulder. Mostly small side
streets that cross bigger streets, like most of the cross streets of
north 28th...by my house, a good example.

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

mark said:

Quoted message said:

Different jurisdictions seem to have very different attitudes towards
whether their traffic signals are supposed to detect bicyclists.

Some local cities say they definitely should detect bicycles, they mark
the location of the sensor loops and they'll adjust a signal's
sensitivity after just one complaint. Others say bicycles should be
using the pedestrian buttons to trigger the light. (Personally, I've
never seen a pedestrian button that triggers the left-turn lane....)

I thought it might be intersting to know what the rules are elsewhere in
the U.S. these days.

Do your local traffic light sensors reliably detect bicycles?

Does your local transportation department mark traffic light sensor
loops for bicycles and motorcycles?

Will your local transportation department adjust the sensitivity of
signals if they don't detect bicycles?

CDOT (Colorado Dep't of Tranportation) has consistently readjusted
sensor loops after one phone call, IME. Almost all the traffic light
sensors around here work for bicycles.

mark

Where in CO are you? They sure don't around Boulder. Mostly small side
streets that cross bigger streets, like most of the cross streets of
north 28th...by my house, a good example.

Summit County. Most of the lights I pass through are on CO Rte 9 or US 6
(come to think of it, most of the lights in Summit County are on those
two roads), so quick call to CDOT gets them readjusted if needed.
Summit County has a much lower population than Boulder, which probably
helps.

well, that's good to know! its legal but...
consult the local laws. as ghandi said, "there are signs everywhere"
it was the information i had that the cyclist was legal as a
"pedestrian" only when not riding the bike that is all references to
cyclists under the category pedestrain did not apply to cyclists
riding a bike but walking a bike along the sidewalk or specifically in
the crosswalk, the litigious area, "even though" it would "appear" the
law spoke of legal cycle activity. In other words, and this is
endless, once the word "pedestrian" appears references to cyclists are
to be thought of as people walking bicycles not riding bicycles.
that was the common law interpretation of the law by a lawyer in other
words when brought to court that was what you could hear.
as noticed nationally and then internationally, florida is not an area
where laws are equally applied. the attactive young woman riding a
bright yellow goldwing down the sidewalk at 75 mph can be legal when
the following canadian riding a singer is ticketed after the local
gendarme consult the canadian's bankroll.
it is entirely possible the state of florida will tell you that
cycling is cycling and pedestrainism is pedestrianism when in fact
that concept is completely false down here at ground level. ??
Also, there's a law against aprking your H-D on the sidewalk enforced
at Walmort but off course not at the dewdrop. Let me say that one of
those signs stands on a signpost 6-7' up off the sidewalk.
balancing the squid's information and what I read is probably some of
what you should consider as reality in bicycle law that is in other
words the law sez this but in reality the law doesn't say that which
is the concept the squid refered to...
further, yes there's more!! riding a bicycle among pedestrians
involves the risk taking in a concept called "negligence" where you
consciously ( and viciously depending on your speed and the endangered
pedestrains perception of your viciouc and negligent speed) decide to
endanger pedestrians when the state and county gave you a bike lane to
ride on.
Is this the probelm in river city Iowa? I dunno. If you live there
that's your problem. but when I get there, I'm a gonna make a complete
stop at every intersection.

http://www.public.iastate.edu/~jwcwolf/ClassSyllabi/hunger.jpg

http://www.hazzardonline.com/images/characters/boss_x.gif

Quoted message said:

Different jurisdictions seem to have very different attitudes towards
whether their traffic signals are supposed to detect bicyclists.

Some local cities say they definitely should detect bicycles, they mark
the location of the sensor loops and they'll adjust a signal's
sensitivity after just one complaint. Others say bicycles should be
using the pedestrian buttons to trigger the light. (Personally, I've
never seen a pedestrian button that triggers the left-turn lane....)

I thought it might be intersting to know what the rules are elsewhere in
the U.S. these days.

Do your local traffic light sensors reliably detect bicycles?

Does your local transportation department mark traffic light sensor
loops for bicycles and motorcycles?

Will your local transportation department adjust the sensitivity of
signals if they don't detect bicycles?

It is a hodgepodge. I live in Sunnyvale, CA, and the city is very
responsive. Loop detectors are marked for cyclists, for the most
part, and if you complain about a particular detector they send out a
maintenance guy with a bicycle to test and adjust. About the only
problems in the town is that some intersections have CCD (optical)
detectors and cyclists not familiar with them do not know how to
trigger them; but the city seems to be doing away with those and
reverting back to inductive loops. A few other nearby towns/cities
are equally responsive: Palo Alto, Mountain View, Cupertino, and even
Los Altos is becoming more enlightened. Santa Clara is a mess and you
never know what to expect these days. The 500 lb gorilla is San Jose,
which is a decidely bicycle unfriendly city; the official policy on SJ
is that detectors will not be adjusted to detect bicycles. As you go
around the SF bay area you will see this mix play out; some very
bicycle friendly, some OK, some decidely bicycle unfriendly.

- rick

On Mar 18, 12:17 am, "Phil, Non-Squid" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

an excellent example: riding on sidewalks is illegal in Florida.

This is a myth, specific to Florida, that keeps getting perpetuated. It is
*legal* to ride on the sidewalk in Florida:
Fromhttp://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/laws/ped_bike_bikeLaws1.htm
---------------------------
Sidewalk riding
(Section 316.2065(10) and (11), F.S.)
When riding on a sidewalk or crosswalk, a bicyclist has all the rights
and duties applicable to a pedestrian.

Is there anything else about sidewalks and bicycles? I do not know
Florida law, but as a comparison California has similar verbage but in
other sections leaves it to local jurisdictions to regulate whether or
not riding a bicycle on a sidewalk is permitted. The verbage you
quote from the Florida code just specifies what happens when a
bicyclist rides on a sidewalk, it does not specify when/where/if such
riding is permitted so what else is specified is important.

- rick

more gorilla:
doing the dishes, 3 factors resurfaced
the problem in reading statutes is the uninitiated believes reading a
statute is reading the law.
not.
what you need to think about are the evidence requirements to satsify
a "judgement" that someone has "broken" that is "violated" a statute.
off course,you will find that there are several degrees of ahhh
watchucallur "evidence requirements"
and that off course leads back to "negligence" and god help you
"comparative negligence" see images preceeding.

the legal concepts thus stated lead the police, who are generally busy
doing other things, to ignore the fact that the SUV just squashed you
after running a red light, did nothing wrong, goes unticketed, and if
you can afford a lawyer, you can take the SUV to court and "prove" the
suv ran the light and squasehd you when if fact you cycled in front of
the suv and its your fault.

then there's an unresolved issue. you've read the signs down at the
strip mall?
"no spitting, no urinating, no oral sex, no skateboarding, no
unicycling, no gokarting
ON THE SIDEWALK"
and in small print the sign reads 'local ord. 109"
i don't know what "local ord. 109" means? do you?

the squid, i've herd, lives in a college town where not only can one
ride a goldwing down the sidewalk at 75 but you can also
do.........while riding. try that in Gilchrist! Elmore Leonard wrote
"Maximum Bob" around that reality.

in the local law library down at the courthouse or maybe the main
county library or university fersure there's maroon volumes from
westlaw. westlaw is on the internet.
westlaw has as 6' of legal work applying law in florida and possibly
other planets and clearly explaining the law as its practiced. westlaw
also offers how to books. a subject search in amazon.com is also
rewarding but westlaw's florida (or your state) jurisprudence is
excellent once you orient yourself to the table of contents. read
negligence. and statutes evidence

Quoted message said:

Do your local traffic light sensors reliably detect bicycles?

Mine don't detect rather large motorcycles. I go through them on both
bikes and bicycles after carefully checking for police.

-paul

Rick said:

On Mar 18, 12:17 am, "Phil, Non-Squid" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

an excellent example: riding on sidewalks is illegal in Florida.

This is a myth, specific to Florida, that keeps getting perpetuated.
It is *legal* to ride on the sidewalk in Florida:
Fromhttp://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/laws/ped_bike_bikeLaws1.htm
---------------------------
Sidewalk riding
(Section 316.2065(10) and (11), F.S.)
When riding on a sidewalk or crosswalk, a bicyclist has all the
rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian.

Is there anything else about sidewalks and bicycles? I do not know
Florida law, but as a comparison California has similar verbage but in
other sections leaves it to local jurisdictions to regulate whether or
not riding a bicycle on a sidewalk is permitted. The verbage you
quote from the Florida code just specifies what happens when a
bicyclist rides on a sidewalk, it does not specify when/where/if such
riding is permitted so what else is specified is important.

- rick

Good point. I have no idea then.
--
Phil

flip the lights off
then yawl see the other car ahcomin.
the foundational ideas behind my blahblahblah
is the subjective nature of bike v law.
subjective until you get squashed or flatten an old woman whose son is
a yale law grad.
the cycle's low speed low mass presents low total damage to the
general welfare or to the economy when thrown against an suv.
so the gendarme let yawl cruise thru stop signs, across lawns, ignore
traffic laws, and generally let yawl bumble along. and so yawl get to
believe that the law doesn't apply to cycles
but it does and it would behoove yawl to take a look at local ord.
there's a national county ord. collection site on the internet. those
folk and no they're not you know what right? have the key to each
county's ords. from a hyperlink list. a key the county may not give up
so easily.
ahh route 6. getmuh motah runnin' yeah!!

neither do I. I do have considerable direct experience from both ends
of the stick. you know lady justice? one pan holds boss hog and the
other the constitution while lady J. has one hand out.
you know the naples story right? the peloton went thru the formerly
$800K and up nab on the thru route and thru a stop sign or two irking
the duponts no end. warning ignored and lo! one day they got busted
$250 a piece for nnot stopping.
i have the paperwork for that legal advice!

right. that happens here.
there's a ped logo in white flashes in a box across the street. the
peds signal to run out in the street and get crushed by an oncoming
triax.
?