On 12/21/2013 8:49 AM, Grant Foster wrote:
Has anyone else noticed the new signage on the Cap City path at Jackson?
There are now mini-Yield signs for path users at the crossing.
Previously, there was a Stop sign for westbound path traffic and no sign
for eastbound. I think I saw the mini-Yields at another crossing in this
stretch (maybe Corry?)
...
I've not seen the sign in question, but I approve. I've argued that
until we get the "Idaho stop" law (bicyclists treat stop signs as yield
signs) in WI, we should
1. Use yield signs wherever appropriate (low volumes and good sight
distances) instead of stop signs, and
2. Use mini-yield signs instead of mini-stop signs wherever multi-use
paths cross roads, except where there are active signals.
This policy gives the same effect as the Idaho stop for bicyclists in
those situations, maintaining human-powered momentum, and for case 2,
makes regular motorist behavior (rolling through intersections) legal
where it's safe, saving time, fuel, and pollution.
This policy has been adopted in Fitchburg, but we only have one yield
intersection for motorists so far. I've argued that when we need stop
signs for new intersections, we buy yield signs and swap them for
existing stop signs at low volume intersections, e.g., within
subdivisions, but we haven't done that yet.
When the DNR put new signage along the Badger State Trail this fall
(e.g., "trail crossing ahead"), the mini-yield signs at Marketplace Dr
were replaced by mini-stop signs. I went over Fitchburg's reasons for
the policy above with the official who directed the change, and the DNR
converted the mini-stop signs back to mini-yield signs at that location.
(I also argued for mini-yields at Adams Rd, and for keeping stop signs
at the busier crossings at M, Lacy, and PD/McKee, for obvious reasons.)
<opinion lawyer="no" checkedwithDOT="no">
To your point about crossing behavior, bicyclists only have pedestrian
rights at crosswalks when operating at ped speeds, but by default, bikes
are operated at substantially higher speeds. So it is correct (but
potentially confusing, I agree) to have yield signs facing *both* the
motorists and the bicyclists where a path crosses a road. This means:
1. If there is a gap, bikes may proceed with caution, otherwise
bicyclists must stop.
2. If bicyclists stop, then proceed at pedestrian speeds, motorists
must yield to them.
Bicyclists who blow through such crossings at normal bicycle speeds and
crash with motor vehicles should appropriately be cited for failure to
yield, as bicycles are legal vehicles.
</opinion>
Now, I agree that the preceding paragraph is way beyond the capability
and/or interest of most motorists and bicyclists to understand or care
(You should not have to be a programmer or lawyer to safely negotiate an
intersection), but the key directive that we all need to be reinforcing
is much simpler: Motorists must yield to crosswalk users!
My view is that the most effective way to get this message across is to
invite all the local TV stations to the Badger State Trail crossing at
McKee, and some other busy crossings, for some well-publicized path
crossing enforcement stings. Next April would be a good month for that,
to prepare motorists for May, national Bicycle Month.
--
Steve Arnold, Fitchburg Alder, District 4, Seat 7
2530 Targhee Street, Fitchburg, Wisconsin 53711-5491
Telephone +1 608 278 7700 · Facsimile +1 608 278 7701
[email protected] · http://Arnold.US
Become a supporter: like http://facebook.com/ArnoldforAlder.
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
