You lawyers and your overly detailed questions.... Without some sketches, I'm not sure that I follow all of your questions. I am not a lawyer, nor do I know statute as well as you, but based on years of working with folks at the city and WisDOT who have been involved in crafting and interpreting the statutes, my understanding is the following:
- As legal vehicles, bicyclists need to obey all traffic controls wherever they encounter them. This is obvious on streets, but also applies on paths In Madison, paths are considered streets that only allow non-motorized traffic (this addressed your #6). - You and Eric consider different examples: Eric was interested in a path with a stop sign that is in its own right of way (ie. not running parallel to a street). You cite examples where a path is parallel to a street (a side path). - For independent paths in their own right of way, bicyclists must obey traffic controls as they come upon them. If there is no traffic control for the path or the street, this is an uncontrolled intersection and the usual rule of traffic on the left shall yield to traffic on the right applies. - Where a side path exists, bicyclists must obey the traffic controls that are placed on the street. A good example of this is the John Nolan Path at Rimrock, near the Sheraton. The path does not have a traffic control, but the parallel roadway (John Nolan) has a signal. Bicyclists must obey the signal. The same would apply if the parallel roadway had a stop sign (off hand, I can't think of an example of this, but it likely exists). - To further confuse things, if a pedestrian signal is present, bicyclists are supposed to obey that, and not the traffic signal. This doesn't work well because ped signals have shorter cycles than traffic signals. For the most part, Madison has removed ped signals at these locations, or posted signs stating "Bicyclists obey signal." (Which isn't just a reminder to obey the signal, but is actually telling you which signal to obey.) So in short: - If riding on a street, obey all signs and signals that you come upon on the street. - If riding on a path NOT NEXT TO a street, obey all signs and signals that you come upon on the path. - If riding on a path NEXT TO a street, obey all signs and signals BOTH on the path AND on the parallel street. - The easy way to think about this is that any sign or signal facing a bicyclist, even if it is on an adjacent street, applies to the bicyclist. Getting into the statues gets confusing and convoluted, and there are some conflicting points, but if a bicyclist is involved in a crash and they did not stop for a sign or signal facing them, they are likely at fault. Kevin On Sat, Jul 11, 2015 at 9:43 AM, Clayton Griessmeyer < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > > > When you say bicyclists must stop for the stop sign is that because of > Wis. Stat. 346.803 (1) (b): > > > > “every person operating a bicycle upon a bicycle way shall: *obey each > traffic signal or sign facing a roadway which runs parallel and adjacent to > a bicycle way*.”? > > > > Regarding the above: > > > > 1. If a stop sign is on the bike path, wouldn’t the sign be facing > the path/person and not the roadway? > > 2. Does the above refer to signs placed parallel and adjacent to a > bicycle way, or parallel and adjacent to a roadway? The word “runs” makes > me think it means obey a sign facing an adjacent roadway and not the > bicycle way, because a sign doesn’t run but a roadway does. > > 3. Does this mean if a bicycle way is next to a roadway and the > roadway has a sign or signal, that the bicyclist has to obey the same > signal that the cars have (the signal would be facing the roadway in that > scenario plus since the law refers to signal, it seems more likely it > refers to road signals and not path. > > 4. If the above was meant to apply to bicyclists on the path > shouldn’t it read, “obey each traffic signal or sign facing them.” Or > similar language to stop law, “every operator of vehicle approaching an > official stop sign at an intersection shall cause such vehicle to stop > before entering……”? > > 5. What happens when there is a sign on a path such as described > below in the DOT crossing guide but the roadway the cyclist crosses is > perpendicular not adjacent? > > 6. If the above refers to signs and signals on adjacent roadways, > do you know of any law or rule that requires bicyclists to obey the stop or > yield signs placed on the paths? (I do not believe the car stop law applies > on paths because of Wis. Stat. 346.02 (4) (a) stating rules of the road > apply to bicycles riding upon a roadway or shoulder of highway. > > > > Have a nice weekend. Hope you are doing well. > > > > Clay > > > > *From:* Bikies [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Kevin > Luecke > *Sent:* Friday, July 10, 2015 4:05 PM > *To:* Harald Kliems; Eric White; Bikies > *Subject:* Re: [Bikies] Cap City Trail rail crossing in Fitchburg > > > > Eric: > > > > This situation is described on WisDOT's webpage: > > > http://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/safety/education/bike/bike-crossing-guide.pdf > > > > Essentially, you follow the traffic controls as you encounter them: > > > > - Bicyclists must stop for the stop sign (Harald is correct that stop > signs do not apply to pedestrians). > > - Enter the crosswalk in a manner that is consistent with the safe use of > the crosswalk by a pedestrian (you can't jump out in front of approaching > traffic). > > - When (if) a motorist stops or yields for you, proceed across. > > > > That said, I rarely rely on motorists to yield to me, and to be honest, > once I've stopped, I would almost prefer that they just get through the > intersection rather than wait for me to get across. As for some of your > questions... > > > > - If a car has yielded to a pedestrian, they do not have to stay stopped > for an approaching bicyclist if the bicyclist has a stop or yield sign - > the bicyclist must obey the sign, and then proceed to the crosswalk. > > > > - If there are no traffic controls, the usual rule of the vehicle on the > left shall yield to the vehicle on the right applies. As you note, it is > often difficult to know if the other traffic has a stop or yield sign, and > because we have so over-signed our streets people assume that if they > don't have a sign, the cross traffic must. > > > > So in summary: > > > > - Legally, a bicyclist has the right of way as a bicyclist AFTER they have > stopped, and once they move safely into the crosswalk with crossing > vehicles having enough time to stop. > > > > - Practically, you should assume that the cars are not going to stop. > > > > Have a good weekend. > > > > Kevin > > > --- > > Subject: Re: [Bikies] Cap City Trail rail crossing in Fitchburg > > In my opinion that's definitely one of the unclear cases. The stop sign > should not apply to pedestrians, as traffic control devices only apply to > vehicles. What the situation for cyclists is I have no idea. Do you not > have the right-of-way at all? Do you have to come to a stop, but then you > get the right-of-way that a crosswalk confers to you? If a car stopped for > a pedestrian, do they have to remain stopped for an approaching cyclist? > And how does a person driving know whether there is a stop sign on the bike > trail and therefore the normal rules of a crosswalk don't apply? > > > > Harald. > > > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 11:33 AM Eric White <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Thanks Harald. That's informative. My confusion stems from what happens > when there's a stop sign for peds and cyclists at the same location there's > a crosswalk. Do I still have the right of way as a ped / cyclist or am I > stopped by the sign, and therefore cross traffic can flow by unimpeded? > > > > > > -- > > > *Kevin [email protected] <[email protected]>* > -- *Kevin [email protected] <[email protected]>*
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
