bluefoxicy

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...gnals/1739299/

Because the yellow light indicates the signal will soon change, which gives cars ample time to pass safely, but often not bicycles. Solution: add a signal specific to bicycles to tell bicyclists to stop sooner.

If you're using a vehicle--a car, a bicycle, a hovercraft--you need to know how to drive. It's your responsibility to not go screaming through red lights just because your stupid car doesn't accelerate fast enough to beat the light. It's your responsibility to fix your damn brakes or brake earlier if you're riding crappy cheap tires. It's your responsibility to know your bicycle doesn't stop as quickly as your 4000 pound car.

If you can't get that right, you don't belong on the road. Most cyclists are either going to plow through the red light because, hell, they're on a bicycle so what do they care about traffic signals for cars; or they're going to stop at the signal, and they've already figured out they need to stop earlier instead of being giant d-bags racing out the light. There's not much middle ground; if you're dumb enough to not know how to stop your bicycle before hitting something, you're probably too dumb to figure out it's a bad idea to race through a signal into traffic.

I don't understand why they don't just spend the extra money funding public parks with bike paths (conveniently following or bridging major throughways...), or building elevated bridges to cross roads for pedestrians/cyclists, or paying cops to issue $900 citations to cyclists who fail to obey traffic signs and signals and ride backwards down the street on the wrong side of the road like they have a death wish.

The real solution is education and enforcement, not passively treating people like idiots in the most visible way possible while doing nothing to remedy the problem of actual idiots. Seriously, it's like how we don't take away peoples' licenses for driving 120mph down a side street, we just arrest them and fine them and give them 14 days in jail and 8 points and charge them $900 to get their car out of impound and let them drive again the moment they pay the fine. (Or how we don't bother citing people for not signalling, or making dangerous lane changes, or passing a vehicle that is signalling a lane change which is dangerous as all hell; but we go nuts over anyone traveling above the posted 65mph speed limit on the interstate because it's so evil to go 10mph faster).

The only reason people stop for traffic signals is because we tell them they need to and we ticket them and we don't let them drive anymore if they consistently ignore the rules (though actually losing your license is very hard). We do neither with cyclists; what blinding stupidity leads people to believe if we put in a bicycle light it'll help them determine if they can make the light or not? If they're running the light, they don't friggin' care!

CB HI

Another pointless rant.

By the way, you never did post what the problem was that caused you to crash so often. That might be some useful information for some of the new BF members.

Notso_fastLane

Instead of a separate signal, they could at least do a couple of simple adjustments to the existing lights to allow slightly longer yellows. It would make a difference to those of us who don't run reds, and most drivers would barely notice.

Monster Pete

Actually, the amber light means 'stop if safe to do so' not 'put your foot down, the light's about to change'. The only time you should go through on a yellow light is when you're too close to stop safely- i.e virtually on the junction. I'd wager that you can stop a bike in less distance than a car. As for sailing through red lights, if you can't understand why that's a bad idea then you're clearly too stupid to be on the road anyway.

bluefoxicy

Probably not having ridden a bike in 15 years. I fell off quite a bit for a combination of not knowing how to stay up and not knowing that wet road means the bike slips out from under me (yeah, braking on wet wood bridge...).

These days they put revenue cameras up and shorten yellow. I'm actually in contact with my local representative trying to get him to push for a bill regulating minimum yellow times based on accepted calculations for stopping distance. The basic premise is if the yellow light timing isn't set for, say, 7mph decrease per second plus 1 second for reaction time (Progressive Insurance Co. declares that anything faster than a 7mph drop in speed in 1 second is aggressive braking that shouldn't normally be employed when driving), then all citations for running red at the given signal under all conditions during the period of misadjustment are legally invalid (blatantly running a red light that's not properly, legally configured is legal). That's enforcement teeth against the state: they follow the law or they get nothing, no revenue and a lot of administrative overhead when someone brings a class action using public records and FOIA requests to find out how long the light's been mistimed and who got citations.

It's a good idea. If they can't operate traffic control devices legally, they shouldn't have enforcement rights over traffic violations.

CB HI

Therwe are already standards for minimum yellow times based on the roads speed limit. Most cities and states with cameras have already been force to comply with the timing or they got taken to court. MD is one state that is obnoxious enough that they may be still trying this BS. Time some yellow lights and if they are too short, give the data to AAA.

For cyclist, if you cannot stop in time to be behind the stop line when the yellow comes on, then it is legal for you to proceed through the intersection and cross traffic must legally wait until you are clear of the intersection. No big deal.

gmt13

Seems to me that this just adds to the confusion. I have learned to time the lights and so know when I can make it through a yellow or have to stop. Making it through the intersection when I get the green has never been an issue for me

-G

prathmann

It's 'no big deal' as long as the cross traffic, which now has a green light, actually waits as legally required. But can be a very big deal if someone hits the gas pedal the moment they see the green. Here in California there were guidelines issued by CalTrans a couple years ago for new and upgraded traffic light installations to consider typical bicycle speeds when setting the minimum yellow signal duration. AIRC, there were complaints by traffic planners in various cities that this would cause increased congestion and disrupt motor vehicle traffic flow. One local town is now installing new microwave-based sensors to trigger the lights which can distinguish between traffic types. So the yellow signal will stay on for the longer period only if a bicyclist is actually detected in the intersection.

adamhenry

In CA a vehicle receiving a green signal is required to yield to vehicles and pedestrians already in the intersection. CVC 21451A

prathmann

And I repeat - that's fine "as long as the cross traffic, which now has a green light, actually waits as legally required."

GamblerGORD53

Oh what nonsense.
The cure has been in use for years.
It's called Countdown Timers. I can see them a hundred feet away, car or bike.
In Vietnam they count down and also for the redlight side.
None of this BS like here about waiting for the car in front to move.

+1 There is something fishy with short yellow light timing. Fricking red light cameras are all the rage now. Nuts.

Daves_Not_Here

Call me Pollyanna, but I can see at least two possible benefits to these lights:

1. Reduce cyclist accident and fatality rates at dangerous intersections? Given that these lights have been installed in European cities, it would seem that "before & after" statistics might indicate whether there is an actual reduction in cyclist fatalities at intersections.

2. Promotes motorist awareness that cyclists belong on the road? Seem like these icons clearly communicate the idea that cyclists belong and are expected to be on the road. Of course, some may interpret the separate lights for cars and cyclists as promoting a "separate but unequal" agenda.

Attention, infrastructure, and investment directed towards cyclists -- seems like a good thing to me, but maybe I'm too optimistic to see the downside.

ksisler

I basically agree with your rant... however will add this:

All governments are in a mass, publc funded rush to make sure that their voting victims don't become really dead victims (who will eventually stop voting after 10 years or so in most states) [. It is just the progression of the political environment.

agent pombero

Your solution isn't a solution. It's a recipe for bicycles to stop before the cars do, and what will happen then I wonder?

@ 5 meters before the crosswalk pushing 20mph, you bet I'm going to hammer it out through the yellow to red light.

This is disgusting! NO cyclist should ever be fined $1555 (the article) or $900 (your suggestion) for running stop signs or red lights. That is f***** up. I would move from any city that had laws like that.

Before you said the solution was to add a signal specific to bicycles to tell bicyclists to stop sooner, which we know won't work. How do we go about educating people? Educating these people about what? 50% of the people here in Portland, for example, do not want to be held to the same rules of the roads as cars. People like me want to be able to treat stop signs and red lights like yield signs.

We don't need any more police.

Good. Cyclists shouldn't be fined.

Why do you care so much?

We have several of these bicycle specific lights around Portland, all in areas that have been known to be dangerous for cyclists; and in particular, right hooks which have caused several deaths. The logic behind these lights is simple: Get the cyclists through the intersection BEFORE cars are able to do so.

noisebeam

My commute crosses seven eight lane roads. If the light turns yellow just before I enter (no time/distance to stop) it will have turned red about half way across and cross traffic for the last lane has green by the time I cross that last lane. The yellow should be a bit longer.

Looigi

My suggestion would be take the money spent on infrastructure projects of dubious value like cycling specific traffic lights, and spend it on driver/cyclist education and awareness programs.

unterhausen

Portland has some bike specific lights that turn green early. I think it's a great idea, much like the walk signals that allow pedestrians a head start.

Daves_Not_Here

Shouldn't be fined in general, or in this situation?

agent pombero

Cyclists shouldn't be fined for treating stop signs and red lights like yield signs.

ephin

I love those countdown timers. They make it so much easier to time intersections (ie speed up to make the light or coast earlier if you're not going to be able to make the light). Another benefit of the countdown timers is I get in a few near spontaneous sprints on my commutes (not unlike reacting to a surge on a spirited group ride). There's something quite rewarding about doing the bike equivalent of flooring it to beat a red light.

Keith99

I'm begining to dislike them.

One signal it hits zero and then one second later goes yellow. The next it counts down and then 10 seconds later the light is still green.

agent pombero

A few timers here in Portland will do the countdown and once it reaches 0 it puts the little red hand out saying not to walk. yet the cross traffic is still going through their green light for an additional 10-15 seconds before it changes from yellow to red. It really pisses me off how inaccurate the timers are.

CB HI

Annoying and not helpful if you do not normally ride the route. For my daily commute, I know which ones turn yellow at zero and which ones do not for another 10-20 seconds.

CB HI

From my prospective, it appears that certain intersections are timed to stop pedestrians early so motorist can have freebies on making right turns on red. For those intersections, motorist are clearly more important than pedestrians.

Looigi

No. How does giving motor vehicles an opportunity to turn on red reflect on the relative importance of pedestrians? Didn't the pedestrians just get their turn to cross?