City Council green lights red light waiver for cyclists
01-24-09 | 12:41 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,101
Likes: 17
From: Minneapolis
City Council green lights red light waiver for cyclists
I was excited when I saw this in the Minneapolis paper but all it means is that the city won't stand in the way of proposed state legislation making it legal for cyclists to proceed through red lights after stopping first. The same legislation would allow cyclists to treat stop signs as yields.
Maybe it will happen. I don't care so much about stop lights really. Being able to roll through stop signs would be nice.
Maybe it will happen. I don't care so much about stop lights really. Being able to roll through stop signs would be nice.
01-24-09 | 01:42 PM
#4
I think it's great for cyclists (as long as we're careful).
But I think the real reason for it is to clear the bikes out of the intersections, so the cagers can get through faster when the light changes.
But I think the real reason for it is to clear the bikes out of the intersections, so the cagers can get through faster when the light changes.
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
01-24-09 | 02:28 PM
#5
You gonna eat that?
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 14,917
Likes: 543
From: Fort Worth, Texas Church of Hopeful Uncertainty
Bikes: 1966 Raleigh DL-1 Tourist, 1973 Schwinn Varsity, 1983 Raleigh Marathon, 1994 Nishiki Sport XRS
It doesn't matter what the motivation is, does it?
Frankly, though, that's the defense I intend to use if I ever get stopped for running a light- I figured just going when there was no traffic anyway was less disruptive to traffic than pushing the Walk button, waiting, maybe have cars stacking up behind me and/or stopping traffic for no good reason on the cross street.
Frankly, though, that's the defense I intend to use if I ever get stopped for running a light- I figured just going when there was no traffic anyway was less disruptive to traffic than pushing the Walk button, waiting, maybe have cars stacking up behind me and/or stopping traffic for no good reason on the cross street.
__________________
I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.
Originally Posted by bragi 
"However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."
I stop for people / whose right of way I honor / but not for no one.
Originally Posted by bragi "However, it's never a good idea to overgeneralize."
01-24-09 | 03:20 PM
#7
on your left.
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,802
Likes: 0
From: Blacksburg, VA
Bikes: Scott SUB 30, Backtrax MTB
We want to be treated like vehicles on the road, but now it's great we can run stop signs and lights? Sorry, I don't follow.
All the rights in the world are great, right until that speeding escalade plows into you.
All the rights in the world are great, right until that speeding escalade plows into you.
01-24-09 | 04:28 PM
#8
ride for a change
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,221
Likes: 2
From: Minneapolis, MN
Bikes: Surly Cross-check & Moonlander, Pivot Mach 429, Ted Wojcik Sof-Trac, Ridley Orion. Santa Cruz Stigmata
I was excited when I saw this in the Minneapolis paper but all it means is that the city won't stand in the way of proposed state legislation making it legal for cyclists to proceed through red lights after stopping first. The same legislation would allow cyclists to treat stop signs as yields.
Maybe it will happen. I don't care so much about stop lights really. Being able to roll through stop signs would be nice.
Maybe it will happen. I don't care so much about stop lights really. Being able to roll through stop signs would be nice.
01-24-09 | 05:24 PM
#9
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 0
From: Crystal MN
This is implying we want to be treated like motor-vehicles.
I want to be treated as a cyclist, pedestrian, horse rider, rollerblader road user specific to my use. . It is also the same reason on MUP's I have no stop signs only yield signs where other MUPs cross my path.
We have to by law share the wide lane, yet other vehicles don't have to?
If what you say is true by being a vehicle on the road I shouldn't have to share a lane or use a bike lane.
You should never have to stop at stop signs and here is why. You can slow down well before you get to the stop so that cross traffic crosses and then surprise you go when it is your turn. If another cars come speeding up to the sign you simply wave them through and surprise its your turn again.
Last edited by wheel; 01-24-09 at 05:35 PM.
01-24-09 | 05:26 PM
#10
free mallocs
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
From: melbourne, australia
No-one said cyclists have to run reds now, just they may now do so if it's safe. So it's basically exactly no different to before, except now you don't have to also check for cops while you're checking for traffic.
01-24-09 | 05:27 PM
#11
L T X B O M P F A N S R
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,334
Likes: 5
From: Malden, MA
Bikes: Bianchi Volpe, Bianchi San Jose, Redline 925
01-24-09 | 06:47 PM
#12
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 2
From: Bellevue, WA
off-topic, but i thought it was interesting how in Idaho, it's legal for cagers to turn left onto a one way road from a two way road, on red.
As for the legislation, i won't be holding my breath here (in ohio) until it's actually passed in minnesota or any other state.
As for the legislation, i won't be holding my breath here (in ohio) until it's actually passed in minnesota or any other state.
01-24-09 | 07:40 PM
#13
Interesting that you mention Idaho. The law that the OP is talking about has been in effect in Idaho for some time now:
Originally Posted by Idaho Statute
TITLE 49
MOTOR VEHICLES
CHAPTER 7
PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES
49-720. STOPPING -- TURN AND STOP SIGNALS. (1) A person operating aMOTOR VEHICLES
CHAPTER 7
PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES
bicycle or human-powered vehicle approaching a stop sign shall slow down and,
if required for safety, stop before entering the intersection. After slowing
to a reasonable speed or stopping, the person shall yield the right-of-way to
any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely
as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time the person is moving
across or within the intersection or junction of highways, except that a
person after slowing to a reasonable speed and yielding the right-of-way if
required, may cautiously make a turn or proceed through the intersection
without stopping.
(2) A person operating a bicycle or human-powered vehicle approaching a
steady red traffic control light shall stop before entering the intersection
and shall yield to all other traffic. Once the person has yielded, he may
proceed through the steady red light with caution. Provided however, that a
person after slowing to a reasonable speed and yielding the right-of-way if
required, may cautiously make a right-hand turn. A left-hand turn onto a
one-way highway may be made on a red light after stopping and yielding to
other traffic.
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
01-24-09 | 07:52 PM
#14
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 2
From: Bellevue, WA
Making a left-turn on red from a two-way street is legal in only five states: Alaska, Idaho, Michigan, Oregon, and Washington.
01-24-09 | 08:44 PM
#16
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,606
Likes: 2
From: Bellevue, WA
01-25-09 | 01:22 AM
#17
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,101
Likes: 17
From: Minneapolis
I'm not sure what influence the Minneapolis City Council has over the state legislature anyway. I suppose if the liberal, cycling happy City of Minneapolis thought it was a bad idea the bill would die that much more quickly.
As far as passing it goes, I don't think luke warm support from the city has much value so I'm doubtful this will make it through. The council vote was 7 to 6 in favor. I can't imagine suburban and rural legislators liking the idea. I doubt they see the need and would rather error on the side of safety.
Would be nice though.
As far as passing it goes, I don't think luke warm support from the city has much value so I'm doubtful this will make it through. The council vote was 7 to 6 in favor. I can't imagine suburban and rural legislators liking the idea. I doubt they see the need and would rather error on the side of safety.
Would be nice though.
01-25-09 | 01:29 AM
#18
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,101
Likes: 17
From: Minneapolis
Not surprised you can't find it 
It was part of one of Steve Brandt's columns last week. "The City Council Green Lights..." verbiage appears in the print version but not in the online version.
Here's the article. The legislation is discussed about 2/3 of the way down.
It was part of one of Steve Brandt's columns last week. "The City Council Green Lights..." verbiage appears in the print version but not in the online version.Here's the article. The legislation is discussed about 2/3 of the way down.
01-25-09 | 01:41 AM
#19
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,101
Likes: 17
From: Minneapolis
I don't want to be harassed and most of all I want riding to be safe. Being able to roll through stops doesn't necessarily help either of those. It may however, start to send the message that cars are no longer the rulers of the street and that we are serious about encouraging other types of transportation.
01-25-09 | 09:48 AM
#21
No, I was just wondering where you found information comparing traffic laws of the various states. It's easy finding the laws of a single state, but comaprative data is rarer. Which wikipedia article was it?
__________________
"Think Outside the Cage"
