BIY, Bike-It-Yourself: Dems Da Rules

Regular Feature | Sports | Cycling

bikeroutesign031908.JPG

I hate to jinx us all by saying this, but I think that the weather has broken towards spring. Hopefully this means that the number of bicyclists on the roads is going to steadily increase from now until it hits a peak right before the UW lets out for summer.

More bicyclists on the roads means more on-road interactions between bikes, peds, and cars. Unfortunately, I’d guess that a majority of folks in each of those categories has very little idea what the law says with regards being on the road. Even MORE unfortunately, they all THINK that they DO know.

Public service announcement…rules of the road 101:

1. Slower traffic keeps to the right

2. Bicycles and cars drive WITH traffic. Bicycles and cars both are vehicles and have a right to be on the road. Pedestrians, when walking on the road, walk AGAINST traffic. Pedestrians are not vehicles, and should yield to other traffic when moving linearly on the roads.

3. Bicycles should normally ride as far to the right as is practicable, but at least 3 feet from the curb. Traffic passing a bicycle needs to provide at least 3 feet of clearance (if this is not possible, they should not pass). In the case of a one way street, the bicyclists may ride to the far right or far left with traffic.

4. Wisconsin state law says that all vehicles must yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk. Every corner of every street intersection is a pedestrian crosswalk whether it is marked or not. The exception is when there is a traffic light present, then the pedestrians must wait for their light to turn green (traffic light and/or pedestrian signal).

5. When turning right…move to the right most lane. When turning left…move to the left most lane.

6. First come, first served. Whoever is first to arrive at a 4-way stop intersection gets to go first. Then you proceed to the right for the order.

7. [Author's note: #7 was removed because it wasn't clear or particularly useful to the average bicyclist]

8. Riding bicycles two-abreast is legal in Wisconsin, but singling up when a vehicle wishes to pass is courteous. Riding more than two-abreast is not legal.

9. Riding a bicycle on a sidewalk in Wisconsin is illegal unless allowed by local ordinance. A general guideline is that most communities do not allow bicycling on a sidewalk in business districts where the sidewalk directly abuts doors leading into buildings. If you are bicycling on a sidewalk, you should yield to pedestrian traffic and ride at a speed that is consistent with pedestrian travel. Be wary of any driveways or intersections that cross the sidewalk as these are crash danger points.

10. If you are in a crash, report it to the police. You are required to do so if there is a motor vehicle involved and there is an injury or more than $1,000 in damage.
11. At night, bicyclists must use a white front light and a red rear reflector.

12. All road users must follow all laws and obey all signs and signals.

Disclaimer:
It is better to be alive and un-injured than right. Always be prepared for other road users to make errors. Even if you know that you are legally correct, protect yourself. Be a confident road user, but don’t take your life in your hands to prove a point.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Have to quibble with point 7

Wis. Stats 346.18: "GENERAL RULE AT INTERSECTIONS. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this section or in s. 346.19, 346.20 or 346.46 (1), when 2 vehicles approach or enter an intersection at approximately the same time, the operator of the vehicle on the left shall yield the right−of−way to the vehicle on the right. The operator of any vehicle driving at an unlawful speed forfeits any right−of−way which he or she would otherwise have under this subsection."

You must yield to the vehicle on the right unless they are speeding. There is no mention of traffic volume at uncontrolled instesections. (346.46 (1) discusses stop signs, 346.19 is about emergency vehicles and 346.20 is about funeral processions.)

As someone who lives in a neighborhood with at least 4 uncontrolled intersections, I know this quite well. Thanks for the reminder on the remainder.

I think that you

I think that you misunderstand my meaning...and I guess I wrote it wrong now that I think about it. I'm talking about a hierarchy of roads here...not two roads of the same hierarchy. In your neighborhood...both roads are of the same hierarchy. I'll have to think about editing that to make it more clear.

It is entriely possible I'm missing the point.

And there is some language in the statute for designated "through highways", but I find it hard to believe that such highways do not have stop signs in Madison. You cite 2nd Street and E. Washington, and while I do not travel there frequently, the satellite view shows a stop line on 2nd Street, such that drivers who are cutting off bicycles there seem to be just running stop signs and being violators of a LARGER rule (i.e. don't enter an intersection if you have a stop sign and someone else is coming) than an obscure "through highway uncontrolled intersection" law. (Although I'm sure E. Wash as US 151 qualifies as a through highway.)

I guess I cannot fathom any road that intersects E. Wash being an uncontrolled intersection. I can only imagine stop signs or stop lights at every corner. But, hell, I could be wrong and probably am.

I suppose that I just should

I suppose that I just should have left this issue out of the post entirely. What I was getting at is that there are situations where a bike path crosses a street...and that intersection is uncontrolled. Many people assume that the bicyclist is supposed to stop for the car in that situation. There are two reasons why this might not be so: the crosswalk reason and the hierarchy of travel reason. I was trying to give an example that WASN'T a bike path to take that part of the issue away. It is true that these intersections are usually controlled.

I was trying to interject some advocacy into the argument that some people make that there ought to be a stop sign placed at every intersection of bike path and road...and that it is the bikes that should have to stop. In general, there are far too many stop signs placed anyway...and often in situations that do not need them if everyone would just follow the rules of the road. Stop signs are expensive to place and maintain, and the more of them that there are, the more dependent we become on them...so that people assume that they don't have to stop if there isn't a stop sign, which isn't the case.

I guess I executed this combination teaching moment-advocacy argument extremely poorly.

Miscommunication

I think you did a great job with your education and it is very appreciated. I just think there is a disconnect between what you wrote and the way JmSR is digesting it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.