Great Lakes - Cyclists and red traffic signals in WI...?

I had heard about this but didn't really believe it.


SUBCHAPTER VI
TRAFFIC SIGNS, SIGNALS AND MARKINGS
346.37 Traffic−control signal legend. (1) Whenever traffic
is controlled by traffic control signals exhibiting different colored
lights successively, or with arrows, the following colors shall
be used and shall indicate and apply to operators of vehicles and
pedestrians as follows:
(a) Green. 1. Vehicular traffic facing a green signal may proceed
straight through or turn right or left unless a sign at such place
prohibits either such turn, but vehicular traffic shall yield the
right−of−way to other vehicles and to pedestrians lawfully within
the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk at the time such signal
is exhibited.
2. Pedestrians, and persons who are riding bicycles or electric
personal assistive mobility devices in a manner which is consistent
with the safe use of the crosswalk by pedestrians, facing the
signal may proceed across the roadway within any marked or
unmarked crosswalk.
(b) Yellow. When shown with or following the green, traffic
facing a yellow signal shall stop before entering the intersection
unless so close to it that a stop may not be made in safety.
(c) Red. 1. Vehicular traffic facing a red signal shall stop
before entering the crosswalk on the near side of an intersection,
or if none, then before entering the intersection or at such other
point as may be indicated by a clearly visible sign or marking and
shall remain standing until green or other signal permitting movement
is shown.
2. No pedestrian, bicyclist, or rider of an electric personal
assistive mobility device facing such signal shall enter the roadway
unless he or she can do so safely and without interfering with
any vehicular traffic.
3. [continued...]

The statute is available at http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0346.pdf and a condensed set of cycling statutes is available at http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/vehicle/bicycle/docs/bikelaws.pdf

I recently had heard that this was tested in court where a cyclist was cited for running a red light yet the charge was dismissed due to the text of 346.37(1)(c) 2. Anyone have experiences with this? I'm a bit surprised this is the text of the statute.

tom.

I haven't seen anything about that here around Eau Claire.

I can't really say I disagree with the law.
There's a lot of lights here that are weight triggered (I think) on some of the main streets and won't change for someone on a bike at nite.

I have a light on my commute that won't trigger. As much as I hate running a traffic signal there are times when it is necessary.

If I were you I'd print out a copy of that and have it laminated so that you can pull it out and show the cops when they eventually stop you....

...or so that you can brighten the coroner's day when he finds it.

I have a light on my commute that won't trigger. As much as I hate running a traffic signal there are times when it is necessary.

If I were you I'd print out a copy of that and have it laminated so that you can pull it out and show the cops when they eventually stop you....

...or so that you can brighten the coroner's day when he finds it.

blah, blah, blah... I simply presented an observation. Not an opinion of appropriate behavior, legal or not... As I stated earlier, the text of the statute surprised me. I've been harassing my cycling buddies for years about running lights. It's strange that they might not have been breaking the law...

Just hope the next person who doors you from a parked car in WI doesn't have their laminated copy to show you're legally at fault... meow.

I was being serious. I would love to have something like that to carry around. We all run lights at times.

Maybe the folks on the advocacy and safety forum have a different interpretation. I've got a hard copy right here (I work in state government) and interestingly, it goes on to say under subdivision 4 that motorcycle, bicycle, moped etc may cross the intersection if they don't think the light will trip.

Subdivision 2 doesn't actually say that they can cross the intersection, just enter the roadway...perhaps it is treating the bicyclist in this section as someone walking their bike across the crosswalk? Bicycles are otherwise considered vehicles.

See what you think of 346.23 (sorry I look at these statutes all day long).

I've wondered about the 'getting doored in a bike lane' issue after it has almost happened to me a few times. Is there another statute about this?

I've wondered about the 'getting doored in a bike lane' issue after it has almost happened to me a few times. Is there another statute about this?

In Wisconsin:


346.80(2)(c) Any person operating a bicycle or electric personal assistive mobility device upon a roadway shall exercise due care when passing a standing or parked vehicle or a vehicle proceeding in the same direction, allowing a minimum of 3 feet between the bicycle or electric personal assistive mobility device and the vehicle, and shall give an audible signal when passing a bicycle or electric personal assistive mobility device rider proceeding in the same direction.

Subdivision 2 doesn't actually say that they can cross the intersection, just enter the roadway...perhaps it is treating the bicyclist in this section as someone walking their bike across the crosswalk? Bicycles are otherwise considered vehicles.


This general text was mentioned to me by a friend's mother, an avid cyclist. The conversation centered around the wording "No ... bicyclist... facing such signal [red light] shall enter the roadway unless he or she can do so safely and without interfering with any vehicular traffic." It was stated that bicyclist who had been cited for entering an intersection against a red had the citation dismissed because they argued they were able to do so safely and without interfering with any vehicular traffic. So far this is only anecdotal and I wanted to find out if anyone had experience with this...



See what you think of 346.23 (sorry I look at these statutes all day long).


Yeah, I had always operated under the assumption that bicycles are vehicles. There seems to be some duality (vehicles or pedestrians) in the statutes. In Madison we have a fairly nice trail system and there's always confusion at the trail crosswalks (most of these crosswalks have stop signs facing trail users). Some drivers will stop, most won't. 346.23 is interesting, "At an intersection or crosswalk ... the operator of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a ... person who is riding a bicycle ... in a manner which is consistent with the safe use of the crosswalk by pedestrians." So it appears in WI you don't have to walk your bike through a crosswalk to be afforded legal "protection". I have no desire to argue I was legally correct from a hospital bed or court room...

I came across this stuff while looking for information on WI DOT road funding sources. I get into the occasional tiff with non-cyclists I know who pull out the "roads are for cars, cyclists don't pay for them" argument. If you have a good information source I would be happy to see it. I came across this document, http://studentbusadvocates.rso.wisc.edu/articles/1kFriendsRoadsFundingMar07.pdf. Looks like WI state highways are funded 100% with user fees (gas tax and registration) yet county and local roads are funded with 32% user fees with the rest coming mostly from property taxes...

Unlike places where I rode in California and a cyclist could easily reach and push a button to change the light, that's not possible anywhere here where I ride. So I find myself always "running red lights" or taking advantage of a left turn arrow for facing traffic. If the city, county, or state are not going to provide a method for me as a cyclist to trip a light, then I'll go when it's safe.

Unlike places where I rode in California and a cyclist could easily reach and push a button to change the light, that's not possible anywhere here where I ride. So I find myself always "running red lights" or taking advantage of a left turn arrow for facing traffic. If the city, county, or state are not going to provide a method for me as a cyclist to trip a light, then I'll go when it's safe.
Still plenty of streets that a rider cannot reach the buttons in S Cal. I guess they expect you to dismount, climb the curb with no ramp, push and then back into the street? That's exciting with cleats.

Looks like WI state highways are funded 100% with user fees (gas tax and registration) yet county and local roads are funded with 32% user fees with the rest coming mostly from property taxes...


The state DOT is funded through segregated fees (as you said, gas tax and registration), but certain state roads, depending on their traffic volume, are given some federal dollars from a transportation improvement fund for capital improvements.

Each region of the country has a Metropolitan Planning Organization/Board which basically applies for and then acts as a clearing house for the federal TIF and TEA (bike path/small project) funds. I believe for Madison it is the Madison Area Transportation Planning Board. You could probably contact a person there to get some good information on road funding.

Anyway, a bit of a thread drift there. There is an attorney on Velonews.com who occasionally writes columns on questions readers post to him on interpretations of local bicycling laws.