Requiring a front light is good because most crashes in urban areas
involve motorists facing bicyclists .  But crashes involving motorists
overtaking bicyclists are more common in unlit rural areas (e.g. the one
involving the cyclist on Femrite about a year ago).  Given the
shortcomings of reflectors has there been  any discussion of requiring
rear lights, not justs allowing them?

________________________________

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Rewey
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 7:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Bikies] Bicycle Legislation: SB470


All three components of SB 470 originated at WisDOT.  BFW has been
involved with them over past few years. 


BFW supports parts 1) and 2). 


BFW does not support part 3) as written. (which deletes the last
sentence of:) 



347.489 (1) No person may operate a bicycle, motor bicycle, or electric
personal assistive mobility device upon a highway, sidewalk, bicycle
lane, or bicycle way during hours of darkness unless the bicycle, motor
bicycle, or electric personal assistive mobility device is equipped with
or, with respect to a bicycle or motor bicycle, the operator is wearing,
a lamp emitting a white light visible from a distance of at least 500
feet to the front of the bicycle, motor bicycle, or electric personal
assistive mobility device. A bicycle, motor bicycle, or electric
personal assistive mobility device shall also be equipped with a red
reflector that has a diameter of at least 2 inches of surface area or,
with respect to an electric personal assistive mobility device, that is
a strip of reflective tape that has at least 2 square inches of surface
area, on the rear so mounted and maintained as to be visible from all
distances from 50 to 500 feet to the rear when directly in front of
lawful upper beams of headlamps on a motor vehicle. A lamp emitting a
red or flashing amber light visible from a distance of 500 feet to the
rear may be used in addition to but not in lieu of the red reflector. 




BFW wants the  last sentence modified to read:  A lamp emitting a red
light visible from a distance of 500 feet to the rear may be used lieu
of the red reflector. 

This is of the sake all of those who solely rely on a red redlight to be
legal.   Currently no rear light is legal without unless there is also a
reflector.  Ironically those who solely rely on a rear reflector are
legal, but not as safe as a user of a red light.  Dealers will still be
required to sell all bikes with a red reflector, but the user/owner can
change it out to a red light. 

I hope I was clear on the issue. 

Mike Rewey 

*************************** 

On 18 Feb 2008 at 16:45, Ross, Arthur wrote: 


Matt Logan asked <I just ran across this Bill in the Senate, introduced 
last week, . . . Does anybody know the story behind this bill?> 


My understanding is that this bill is basically a clean-up bill for some

items that have come up over the years but remain unaddressed or 
confusing in the statutes. 


1)  Including hand cycles in the definition of the bicycle has come up 
as there are more people using these vehicles.  Are they bicycles or a 
different type of wheelchair?  The answer determines where they can be 
operated.  The bill clarifies that hand cycles should be considered 
bicycles and are legal on the street. 


2)  When the bicycle bill  passed in 1995 was drafted (a few years 
earlier), there was a large, somewhat heavy, flashing yellow rear light 
for bicycles called the Belt Beacon on the market (I have one if anyone 
unfamiliar with it wants to see this historic relic).  The current 
statute language was written to make that light legal by allowing the 
use of an amber flashing light on the rear of a bicycle.  About the time

the bill was passed, the red LED flashers came out and they are now 
extremely common.  It is unclear if these popular lights are actually 
legal in Wisconsin.  The bill clears this up by allowing rear lights to 
be any color . 


3)  This was included in the early drafts of the bicycle bill that 
passed in 1995, as Tim remembered, but was taken out to gain the support

of a legislator who, to be polite, didn't get it.  The right-arm 
right-turn signal has been included in the Uniform Vehicle Code for 
years, and it is the easiest thing to teach (point in the direction you 
want to turn), especially for those of us with directional dyslexia. 




Arthur Ross, Pedestrian-Bicycle Coordinator 
City of Madison Traffic Engineering Division 
215 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd, Suite 100 
PO Box 2986 
Madison, WI  53701-2986 
608/266-6225 
_______________________________________________ 
Bikies mailing list 
[email protected] 
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies 
Michael W. Rewey 
5522 Comanche Way 
Madison, WI 543704-1026 
            cell:     608.698.6673 
            home:  608.249.6673 
            email:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]      
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies

Reply via email to