Advocacy & Safety - How long do you wait before running a nonresponsive traffic light? Is it legal?

We've all been sitting there (indefinitely) waiting for a light to turn. Sometimes, it never will until a car comes along to trigger the sensor. And sometimes, when you're out in the boonies, this could be a LONG time.

What is your time limit? Given the above situation, is it legal to run the light after an excessive amount of time?

As soon as there is enough gap in the traffic for me to safely ride across, I do so.

There is a light on my commute that will cycle, but only the turn lanes. I have waited through 3 complete cycles before, and it never gives me a green.
If I ever get stopped, I have called the city on it more than once.

SOME states have that law that will allow you to run it. You realy need to check your local motor vehicle department's website for sure. What state are you in? Maybe someone familiar can tell you.

If it is clear I Run The Red....

We've all been sitting there (indefinitely) waiting for a light to turn. Sometimes, it never will until a car comes along to trigger the sensor. And sometimes, when you're out in the boonies, this could be a LONG time.

What is your time limit? Given the above situation, is it legal to run the light after an excessive amount of time?

Depends on if I know the light or not. If I don't know the light... I wait one light cycle... I wait for the lights to go through a complete set of red and green for all phases.

If I know the light is not going to change (lights I have encountered often along my route) I wait until it is good and clear and then go.

In most states, a cyclist may proceed through a red light that does not change under the premise that the light is malfunctioning.

Oh, if the lights never change phase... like those lights out on lonely country roads... I go when it is safe. Those won't even cycle through phases. Late at night often these turn into flashing lights... and the locals drive through them when it is safe.

Depends on if I know the light or not. If I don't know the light... I wait one light cycle... I wait for the lights to go through a complete set of red and green for all phases.

If the light cycles, you would get a green. No? Well, unless possibly you are in the one lane that is empty. Chicken egg thingy.

One trick I learned in the midwest is that if you ride a metal bike, often getting off and gently laying your bike on the detector loop is enough to actually trigger the detector. But yes, *if* after waiting a complete cycle and the light does not change, one can usually proceed with caution based on the argument that the light is malfunctioning.

There is a light on my commute that will cycle, but only the turn lanes. I have waited through 3 complete cycles before, and it never gives me a green.
If I ever get stopped, I have called the city on it more than once.

I have a similar problem - an extremely busy road/highway (and there is no PED). It makes it almost impossible to get across because almost no one enters the intersection from my particular direction. Drives me crazy. I've been through 5 LONG cycles (green to opposing traffic taking a left) waiting for a window to cross. Normally, at other lights, after a few cycles like this, I would go just as the last opposing car took a left ... but there is always people running the yellow/red, and the people jump the light on the main road. That combined with a WIDE intersection makes it impossible to slip through safely.

One trick I learned in the midwest is that if you ride a metal bike, often getting off and gently laying your bike on the detector loop is enough to actually trigger the detector. But yes, *if* after waiting a complete cycle and the light does not change, one can usually proceed with caution based on the argument that the light is malfunctioning.

That is a great tip ... I've tried doing figure 8's on traffic loops - but never laying the bike down. I will definitely try it next time I'm out.

We've all been sitting there (indefinitely) waiting for a light to turn. Sometimes, it never will until a car comes along to trigger the sensor. And sometimes, when you're out in the boonies, this could be a LONG time.

What is your time limit? Given the above situation, is it legal to run the light after an excessive amount of time?

In most jurisdictions a traffic light is suppsoed to be responsive to ALL roadway users. This includes motor vehicles and bicycle traffic. If it does not respond or change then it is considered to be malfunctioning and needs adjustment or repair. some traffic lights with the the weight and/or magnetic sensors also has a timer to cycle it through. In Iowa if a traffic light will not change after 5 min. a person can proceed through and treat the light as a yield if it is safe and clear.

In suburban Toronto, some of the lights that have crosswalks with push to cross buttons go through a cycle where they show the 'Don't Walk' signal for 10 seconds and then revert to 'Walk' without giving the cross street a green. I use that as my cue to decide that the light isn't going to change for me, and proceed when the way is clear.

Look both ways to see if it's clear, look behind you to check for a watching
police officer, then go. Absence of police doesn't mean you won't get a ticket, and
presence of an officer doesn't always mean you will.

We have 3 minutes for our lights if they don't change.

If it's clear, I'm mashin' Reds.

Wisconsin has the 45 second law, which is only intended for bicycles and motorcycles, because we do not weigh enough to set off the sensors. If there are other people around, generally I do wait the 45 seconds, but if nobody is in sight, I just look both ways and go...

Oklahoma passed a law about stoplight for both bicyclist and motorcylist. IT requires the bicyclist(and motorcyclist) to deal with it as a stop sign..Stop...Look...Then proceed safely.

If the light cycles, you would get a green. No? Well, unless possibly you are in the one lane that is empty. Chicken egg thingy.

No, the sensors trigger for what ever lanes have auto traffic in them, and those sensors may not make the light turn green for me. Happens this way often in dedicated left turn lanes.

If the lights were just on a timer, that would be a different situation.

Someone mentioned the best situation... just treat it as a stop sign and go when it is safe.

In California, CVC 21800(d)(1) (http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21800.htm) says
The driver of any vehicle approaching an intersection which has official traffic control signals that are inoperative shall stop at the intersection, and may proceed with caution when it is safe to do so.There's no mention of how to decide it's inoperative, nor how long to wait while we make that determination. At an unfamiliar light I'll wait through a cycle. At the light into my neighborhood, I stop then go as soon as traffic is clear enough.

Here is some good information (http://cyclistview.com/signaldetection) on the engineering issues of detection.

In suburban Toronto, some of the lights that have crosswalks with push to cross buttons go through a cycle where they show the 'Don't Walk' signal for 10 seconds and then revert to 'Walk' without giving the cross street a green. I use that as my cue to decide that the light isn't going to change for me, and proceed when the way is clear.

I usually push the button, then when I get the walk signal, walk through the cross walk. If there is no traffic at all, I have taken a legal right turn on red, gone down about 100m, then pulled a wide U turn, then made another right turn to continue my trip. I think the real issue though, every time you see a light that does it, report it to the city, don't be surprised if they don't do anything about it though......

The problem with walk buttons is they don't trigger left turns.

The problem with walk buttons is they don't trigger left turns.

True, but at least you can get to the other side of the road, and expect a green on that corner in short order. Not ideal, but it works if you simply can't get across a busy intersection (at any time).

The problem with walk buttons is they don't trigger left turns.

So you "box" the corner, easy to do on a 12-15kg bicycle, much harder to do in a 2,500kg Stupidfying Ugly Vehicle. Essentially when the light turns, you go straight through, pick up your bike turn it 90 degrees and when the light turns back, you go straight through again.

So you "box" the corner, easy to do on a 12-15kg bicycle, much harder to do in a 2,500kg Stupidfying Ugly Vehicle. Essentially when the light turns, you go straight through, pick up your bike turn it 90 degrees and when the light turns back, you go straight through again.

Nice idea, but what if I have already moved to the left turn lane in expectation of being able to trigger the light.

"Boxing the turn" is fine if I am aware of the signal problem, but it is a bad solution if I have already set up for the left turn... somehow, I now have to work my way back to the corner... may as well just treat the light as a stop sign and simply go when it is safe.

Nice idea, but what if I have already moved to the left turn lane in expectation of being able to trigger the light.

To be "legal", get off the bike, get in the crosswalk, and walk it past (in front of) the cars waiting to going straight. Obviously only do this if the light won't change for a while.

Or, if you are going to do the "box" thing anyway, and turning traffic is not heavy, might as well walk the bike the opposite direction on the crosswalk (to your left), and when the PED turns you can walk your bike across the other crosswalk. Saves some time.

It depends on the light. If it is a light that I know is not only run by a sensor, but also will not trigger for a bike, I'll proceed as soon as it is safe to do so, unless a car is coming that will trigger it, in which case I'll wait for him/her.

If it is a light that I don't know...well it might take me a few cycles to figure out that it's defective. ;)

Missouri just changed its red light law for bicycles and motorcycles. It now says that you can run it if it is safe and you have waited an "unreasonable" amount of time. I wish they had defined unreasonable.

Missouri just changed its red light law for bicycles and motorcycles. It now says that you can run it if it is safe and you have waited an "unreasonable" amount of time. I wish they had defined unreasonable.

That would be helpful, wouldn't it? I mean various state statues have defined what a substandard width lane is. So why can't they define what an "unreasonable amount of time" to wait for a light change, is?

If the sensor for a light works for cars, motorcycles, and trucks but not for bicycles does that really mean that the light is "malfunctioning?" Yes, I think that we're all in agreement that all sensors for all lights should detect all forms of vehicles, but the sad truth is that they don't. But that doesn't mean that they are "malfunctioning." It just means that they are "malfunctioning" or miscalibrated for a relativity small segment of the road users.

And we have heard reports here that in a number of area that there are induction coil sensors as well as other types of sensors that are calibrated to successfully detect bicycles and motorcycles. Just as we have had reports of sensors that not calibrated to detect either bicycles or motorcycles. In those cases we need to let our city, county and state planners know that there is a problem with the sensor(s) in question. And that they do not properly detect all forms of traffic using the roads.

Where there are problems, inventors will follow:

"Bike Gadget Turns Red Lights Green"

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/11/a-potential-sol/#more-3240

And, yes, it may solve the problem. But unless you run into these kind of intersections all the time, I don't see how it would sell. And that's assuming he could shrink it down to a reasonable size.

BTW, don't ride by any federal buildings with that setup!! (see bottom pic)

One trick I learned in the midwest is that if you ride a metal bike, often getting off and gently laying your bike on the detector loop is enough to actually trigger the detector. But yes, *if* after waiting a complete cycle and the light does not change, one can usually proceed with caution based on the argument that the light is malfunctioning.

There is no need to dismount and lay your bike on the loop. Look here (http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/port/2945/Traffic/TrafficSensors.htm) and here (http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/port/2945/Traffic/TrafficSensors.htm) for how to do it wheels up. The metal in the rim is more than enough to trigger the sensor...if you are close enough to the most sensitive part of the loop.

The city of Redmond, Wa. has produced a video showing the proper positioning of a bicycle to trigger traffic light sensors. http://rctv.redmond.gov/ondemand/efocus0609rtrip2.wmv

aRoudy1 just posted this over in the general discussion forum.

The guy laying down is funny. Too bad these techniques don't always work.

Where there are problems, inventors will follow:

"Bike Gadget Turns Red Lights Green"

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/11/a-potential-sol/#more-3240

And, yes, it may solve the problem. But unless you run into these kind of intersections all the time, I don't see how it would sell. And that's assuming he could shrink it down to a reasonable size.

BTW, don't ride by any federal buildings with that setup!! (see bottom pic)

How would this device effect the harddrives and memory cards in laptop computers, cell phones, PDA's, etc?

I don't see anything about either picture that would or should cause security at a federal, or any other type of building distress. Making that statement about Red-to-green statement about not riding by a federal building could also be made about riding a bike with a trunk and/or pannier bags past a federal building.

I don't see anything about either picture that would or should cause security at a federal, or any other type of building distress. Making that statement about Red-to-green statement about not riding by a federal building could also be made about riding a bike with a trunk and/or pannier bags past a federal building.

It was a joke. See the black box with the big red button, and wires hanging?

It was a joke. See the black box with the big red button, and wires hanging?

Okay. Yes, I saw it. I also saw that there was a lack of anything that would produce a significant blast. I have a lighting system that has wires "hanging" from it.

One of the people who goes to the same library that I do has a lighting system that he made himself. It has numerous wires running all over the frame of his bicycle, as well as having numerous switches for for turning the various lights on.

It's a nice little system and I wouldn't mind having one similar to it, but I think that the wiring could be done in a better way so as not to have so many exposed wires.

The problem with walk buttons is they don't trigger left turns.

There was a recent report in nyc that showed none of the walk buttons actually work. The buttons aren't wired to anything.

I have taken a legal right turn on red, gone down about 100m, then pulled a wide U turn, then made another right turn to continue my trip. I think the real issue though, every time you see a light that does it, report it to the city, don't be surprised if they don't do anything about it though......

a whole lotta this



Depends on if I know the light or not. If I don't know the light... I wait one light cycle... I wait for the lights to go through a complete set of red and green for all phases.

If I know the light is not going to change (lights I have encountered often along my route) I wait until it is good and clear and then go.

In most states, a cyclist may proceed through a red light that does not change under the premise that the light is malfunctioning.

Oh, if the lights never change phase... like those lights out on lonely country roads... I go when it is safe. Those won't even cycle through phases. Late at night often these turn into flashing lights... and the locals drive through them when it is safe.


Divided streets. I use the left turn lane to get to a left turn lane. (halfway point on a fake left turn) and will turn on now left red arrow.

There was a recent report in nyc that showed none of the walk buttons actually work. The buttons aren't wired to anything.

Nice, I've suspected that of some of the push to walk buttons. And that they were really a "placebo" to keep pedestrians happy.

That said, IF they're not actually wired to anything then why waste the taxpayers money by installing them?

That said, IF they're not actually wired to anything then why waste the taxpayers money by installing them?

You answered your own question. "And that they were really a "placebo" to keep pedestrians happy." That, and some contractor/politician probably pocketed the difference.

It depends on the situation. I think California allows cyclists to proceed through a non responsive light, folowing an obligatory stop, but I should check this. I'll give the lights one cycle if the first does not give me a green light, then consider my options based on the traffic conditions. If it is safe to procees e.g. make a left turn, I'll try and do this when the straight through direction of "my light" has a green, so that cross traffic should be less of a hazard. It helps to be familiar with the intersection and the traffic light sequences.

Ed

Divided streets. I use the left turn lane to get to a left turn lane. (halfway point on a fake left turn) and will turn on now left red arrow.

What?

Nice, I've suspected that of some of the push to walk buttons. And that they were really a "placebo" to keep pedestrians happy.

That said, IF they're not actually wired to anything then why waste the taxpayers money by installing them?

They did work in the 60s & 70s. Here's the NYT article: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/27/nyregion/27BUTT.html?ex=1393218000&en=58284f87fcbbe64d&ei=5007&partner=TECHDIRT

You answered your own question. "And that they were really a "placebo" to keep pedestrians happy." That, and some contractor/politician probably pocketed the difference.

Sadly, in today's world it wouldn't surprise me if one or more politician or contractor is pocketing the difference. What happened to the world that these things aren't surprising rather then be surprising?

I asked a cop and was told that Ca. does not have a waiver for non-responsive lights....he may be wrong, I did not check the vehicle code. My city has actually responded to my requests for sevice on some lights but say they were already performing as well as technology allows. It is really wierd here. Some intersections will work fine on a bike in some directions and not in others.....I have steel and Al frames and cannot see any difference....the light works for bikes or it doesn't.

California Vehicle code is available here:

http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/vc/vc.htm

I had a quick look and cant find anything about proceeding through unresponsive lights. However, there may be something that I've missed in the general traffic light section that could be applied to operation of a vehicle that does not trigger the sensor. That, unfortunately, could involve a fuzzy interpretation of the code...

(perhaps you missed this when I posted it on page 1 of this thread: )

In California, CVC 21800(d)(1) (http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21800.htm) says
The driver of any vehicle approaching an intersection which has official traffic control signals that are inoperative shall stop at the intersection, and may proceed with caution when it is safe to do so.There's no mention of how to decide it's inoperative, nor how long to wait while we make that determination.

At an unfamiliar light I'll wait through a cycle. At a familiar intersection, such as the light into my neighborhood, I stop then go as soon as traffic is clear enough.

Here is some good information (http://cyclistview.com/signaldetection) on the engineering issues of detection.

I asked a cop and was told that Ca. does not have a waiver for non-responsive lights.... he may be wrong, I did not check the vehicle code.He was incorrect - see my posts regarding CVC 21800(d)(1). It's not a waiver, it's normal traffic operation in the case of malfunctioning equipment, and the rules are the same for bicyclists as for any other drivers.


My city has actually responded to my requests for sevice on some lights but say they were already performing as well as technology allows. It is really wierd here. Some intersections will work fine on a bike in some directions and not in others.....The situation will be improved when CVC 21450.5 (from AB1581/2007) is fully implemented, requiring detection of lawful bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway. Note this is technology-neutral, permitting both inductive loops and video, and whatever other sort might be devised in the future that meets the detection sensitivity standard.


I have steel and Al frames and cannot see any difference....the light works for bikes or it doesn't.It's not about the frame, it's primarily about the wheels. See the technology link in my other posts.

Sorry, I am glad the cop was incorrect. It isn't too surprising as the code is a bit much to remember. I am not too hopeful for the technology, myself.

I am not too hopeful for the technology, myself.

The technology, i.e. induction coil loops mounted in the pavement, have been around for decades. They work the same way today as they did back in the 70s. You just have to position your bike over the sensitive part of the loop. Follow my links above or bsut's link. It's not that difficult. And once you know how to do it, the opposite sex will find you irresistable:rolleyes:;)

We have a busy T intersection, where the non-through street goes to the local transit hub. The left turn lane sensor on the through street is designed not to respond to bicycles. They knew it wouldn't when it was built. There is no crosswalk or button at this intersection. You have no choice but to run the red light. It's against the law. The city engineer will talk about fixing it, but won't actually do it. I've been after them for years. It's a frustration, but I've never had a police problem over it.

Most cyclists heading for the hub cross the street at the preceding light and walk their bicycles up the wrong-side sidewalk and around the corner. But I'm not heading for the hub, which is on the left after the left turn in question, so I'd have to recross the street at the next light. Crazy.

Another ordinary intersection which I often use has sketchy sensors. The light often won't turn for me. I've talked to a local police about this one, and he said to just make sure it's clear and go on through.

I think I've made too much of this in the past. It's frustrating to know that the City won't respond to cyclists, but OTOH, it's certainly not dangerous and I doubt I'd ever have a legal problem with it, since by definition a cop car can't be there when I'm running the light.

Run the red. Nobody will notice.

The technology, i.e. induction coil loops mounted in the pavement, have been around for decades. They work the same way today as they did back in the 70s. You just have to position your bike over the sensitive part of the loop. Follow my links above or bsut's link. It's not that difficult. And once you know how to do it, the opposite sex will find you irresistable:rolleyes:;)I've had some long discussions with our City Engineer. It turns out that there are many different types of induction coils. Some are not made to respond to small inputs as from a bicycle. Many times their sensitivity is adjusted down to prevent false positives from traffic in the opposing lane. It takes the engineering department some decent fraction of forever to get them adjusted for bikes, even when it's possible. They have to go out there with a crew and stop traffic. They have to fiddle with a sample bike wheel and the adjuster until they think they have it working. Then they have to drive a sampling of vehicles past in the opposing lane at differing distances from the loops to see if they're getting false positives. And they have to do this for every intersection in the city with loops - hundreds. All to satisfy a minuscule percentage of vehicle operators (us), who can't even demonstrate any harm from the malfunctioning equipment, other than to our egos. So I sympathize with 'em. And I'd rather they spent the money on potholes and cracks, 'cause they do have a demonstrated harm.

BTW, I know how to position my bike. Basically, the long kind never work, and the newer short kind often are not adjusted correctly. And more and more frequently, they are paved over and not remarked.