NOTE: All timestamps are in the future because WE are in the future. The care takers of Midnight Ridazz.com reserves the right to remove, edit, move or delete anything for any reason. None of the opinions expressed on these boards represent the Midnight Ridazz nor can anyone purport to speak on behalf of Midnight Ridazz.
i was riding my bike yesterday with a friend. we pulled up to a light in the left turn lane and waited for the red arrow to turn green. since this intersection was equipped with a vehicle detection magnet, i was aware that the light would never change unless a car was close enough to activate the magnetic sensor. we waited for two cycles before running the light.
as it happens, state law does not require cities to install sensors that detect cyclists or motorcyclists. i have two questions for you:
1. what should cyclists do if they are stuck at a light that will never change?
2. how fucked up is CVC 21450 (c)?
-----
Traffic-Actuated Signals: Detection of Motorcycles and Bicycles
21450. (a) A traffic-actuated signal is an official traffic control signal, as specified in Section 445, that displays one or more of its indications in response to the presence of traffic detected by mechanical, visual, electrical, or other means.
(b) Upon the first placement of a traffic-actuated signal or replacement of the loop detector of a traffic-actuated signal, the traffic-actuated signal shall, to the extent feasible and in conformance with professional traffic engineering practice, be installed and maintained so as to detect lawful bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway.
(c) Cities, counties, and cities and counties shall not be required to comply with the provisions contained in subdivision (b) until the Department of Transportation, in consultation with these entities, has established uniform standards, specifications, and guidelines for the detection of bicycles and motorcycles by traffic-actuated signals and related signal timing. (d) This section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2018, and as of that date is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2018, deletes or extends that date.
Added and repealed Sec. 2, Ch. 337, Stats. 2007. Effective January 1, 2008. Repeal operative January 1, 2018.
NOTE: The preceding section shall remain in effect only until January 1, 2018, and as of that date is repealed.
personally, I would ride thru the crosswalk going to the corner on my left, then when the traffic light turns green, i would ride thru the crosswalk and into the roadway going left...problem solved.
cyclists can also be less visible when riding in the sidewalk. other times, no crosswalk is available, as with many intersections near LAX and in the valley.
Let's make sure to bump this again next week--my guess is that Sgt. Krumer has not responded because he's tied up with other matters.
Next week is LACM, so LAPD will likely be pushing bike issues slightly up the priority meter--and maybe this will get some attention.
It's a good question that cyclists often face--but something tells me we won't be getting a response that will be wholly satisfactory. Barleye's work-around may be the best option--if you can't bring yourself to running the red light (which of course has it's problems).
I have read that bikes are more likely to trigger the sensor if you ride over the side of the cut-out rather than straight up the middle. I've tried it all ways with very mixed results.
Bikes are traffic. How often do you see traffic using crosswalks to circumvent red lights?
If a bike is truly not going to trigger a traffic control signal to allow it through the intersection legally, treat it as a malfunctioning traffic control signal, which is what it is in that case, because it is not permitting the proper flow of traffic. In other words, treat it as a stop sign.
my guess is sgt krumer agrees with "practice common sense" but cannot endorse such an action as it may be interpreted as a violation of one or more CVC.
I agree, it is a malfunctioning traffic signal, to me.
If it is a desolate intersection and your comfortable with that great.
If not, you could ride strait through and wait at the corner for the cross traffic light. Once there you could possibly press the button.
I've done this in very heavy traffic, when I didn't feel like merging left through multiple lanes of high speed autos; often I feel it is better to NOT be dead-right.
Sure it takes longer. So rarely am I hurrying to work or a ride, though. When on my way home, or an errand, I often go out of my way to enjoy more bike time.
Gern responding to a comment by outerspace
10.22.10 - 2:39 pm
Ask 10 lawyers and you'll get 10 different answers.
Maybe they expect you to lay your bike down in the street (so you don't lose your place in line) and walk over and push the pedestrian crosswalk button (if the intersection has one).
LOL!
Very curious to see even an unofficial response from the law enforcement arm of our society ...
I would love to hear Sgt. Krumers answer to this question.
I've been in the same situation many times and I am curious to see what a veteran patrol officers opinion would be on this problem. I tend to think that you would have a hard time talking your way out of a ticket in this situation and that seems a little unfair.
We are told the law requires us to ride in the street... yet in this situation we are not given the necessary means to do so unless the cyclist does what Barleye suggested.
I agree that the signal is "malfunctioning" since it does not detect the presence of your bike and that you should proceed when it is safe to do so. Whether a cop will see it this way is the question, but that would be my defense.
Even if you had to walk your bike across the crosswalk to the left and walk into the other crosswalk on the green, peds have the right of way so you will be actually making it in your direction even faster than waiting for the green, a car, cycling chess....
There's a section of the CVC that covers defective traffic signals. Essentially, if memory serves, it says that a vehicle coming upon a defective traffic signal (one that won't give the signal to proceed) shall stop behind the limit line and, after checking for cross traffic, proceed with caution. Unfortunately my Google-fu is sucking a big one today so I can't give you the exact CVC number. I *should* know it by heart, because that's exactly what I do in these situations and if I ever get stopped for it it will be my defense both to the cop and (if necessary) to the judge.
CVC 21800
(d) (1) 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.( )
Foldie responding to a comment by PC
10.22.10 - 3:25 pm
**ANOTHER PROBLEM**
On the ride last night, we had about 50 bikes in the left turn lane on a busy van nuys blvd.
By the time all the cars went thru the light it was turning yellow. (of course no left turn arrow). How are we supposed to get all 50 bikes thru the intersection without corking it. Its impossible and waaay unsafe for the bikes and the cars. If you let 4 bikes go at a time we are going to be there all night.
Thanks for that reference to the CVC. That could come in handy if used appropriately.
Note if you intend to rely on 21800: better get that speech ready clarifying that a traffic control signal that fails to detect a bicycle is "inoperative." Will likely fall on deaf ears to a traffic cop, but perhaps not to a judge.
You can actually set some of those off if you put your wheel along the edge of the sensor loop (tangentially, I think). I really hate the lights in Culver City. They think that they are so damn smart. Even cars get screwed by them.
It is sad that legitimate users of the roadway are not accomodated. My best advise would be to move up to the manual trip signal used by pedestrians...as my passanger sometimes has to do when I am stuck at a defective sensor. Either they or I have to get out of the car and push that button. While admittedly if there is no traffic in sight... common sense would dictate simply proceeding with caution...but if law enforcement is around you would have to rely on their common sense...and that is sometimes a mixed bag according to many folks who post on this forum.
Thanks for your reply to this question. I guess this is just an engineering problem which will hopefully be addresed when the people who design the traffic systems notice the increase in cycling traffic..... though I doubt this will happen anytime soon.
Is there someone we could correspond with at the LAPD who might have some more insight into this issue or even a solution?
stillline responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
10.23.10 - 2:34 pm
Thanks for finding that Foldie...21800(d)(1) may apply. Just keep in mind that this section specifically states inoperable...which some may mean to be defective. While I would argue that a signal that fails to trip for a bicycle is defective...others may not agree because technically the sensor does work.
With regards to the 50 cyclists at the turn...sorry, on this one I have to say you simply have to wait.
Remember that most cyclists are angered by motorists that are in such a hurry that they engage in driving behaviors that put everyone at risk for the sake of saving a few minutes.
If its that important to stay together than waiting is the correct option. When my friends are following me to the beach in a car, and I make the light and they do not, I pull over...my friends wait. To suggest that my firend run the light to stay with me is clearly wrong. The same would apply to cyclists.
The LADOT handles the signals and such. If you go on their website there should be a link to report bad signals. If not than hit me up and I will try to find you a contact person.
the LADOT contact most likely would be Michelle Mowery. i talked to her at one the bike plan meetings and she said to email her. Is that the case now, i am not sure.
There is a specific division for repair services. Michelle may have a direct link to them. I am sure she can get the message to the right desk...but if not I will see if I can make a request. If you have Michelle's number than definately give her a buzz.
* "...careful application of the operational theory allows optimization of inductive loop sensing systems for reliable detection of conductive (including aluminum, steel, and titanium) bicycle rims, without false detections caused by adjacent traffic."
* "There is a common misconception that an object must be ferrous (include iron) to activate a traffic signal loop sensor, or that a ferrous object will perform better. This misconception is fed by the observation that steel cars are detected by standard loop detectors but small aluminum bicycles often, but not always, are not. "
* "There is another common misconception that because bicycles are smaller than cars, inductive detector loops cannot be designed to detect bicycles. This is absolutely incorrect; simply making the loop smaller puts the loop on a scale that allows easy detection of bicycles."
* "Detection of a bicycle over a well-designed quadrupole loop requires that the detector circuit be adjusted more sensitive than what is typically required for automobile detection. A bicycle can generate as little as 1% as much change in the loop inductance as an automobile does, especially for a poorly designed loop, because the car covers so much more area of magnetic flux, and has a high net conductivity. However, many commercially available detectors provide adequate sensitivity to accomplish this. According to Jim Magerkurth of US Traffic Corporation, a detector should provide an inductance change sensitivity level down to 0.0025% to reliably detect bicycles."
* "A number of communities in the United States, including Bakersfield, California, Santa Cruz, California and Santa Clara County, California, have adopted policies to design and adjust all traffic signal sensors to detect bicycles."
That said, here's my take on it locally:
* Most of LA's detector loops that I've noticed seem to be the less-bicycle-sensetive "Type A" Dipoles ( looks like a square with cut corners ), or "Type E" ( circle pattern in the road ).
* "Type Q" ( Quadrupole -- looks like a squared-off infinity symbol, like octagonal eyeglasses in the road, only recognized one in LA ) and "Type D" ( Diagonal Quadrupole, best for bike detection, haven't seen any in LA ) detectors work better for bikes than other types and are approved by the State of California DOT ( see http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/oe/project_plans/highway_plans/stdplans_dual_02/viewable_pdf/es-05b.pdf )
* Detector sensitivity is adjustable but isn't always set high enough to detect bikes, and might not be able to do so at all if it's Types A or E and the sensitivity hasn't been calibrated with a real bike when set
* We should plant our bike tires right on the detector sawcuts in the road, not in the center of the circles, for a chance at detection.... if the sensitivity is set high enough.... and the loop isnt wired in series with other loops... and and and...
* Right now our financially broke City of LA is spending lots of money upgrading its traffic signals, interconnecting them, adding left turn signals and inductive detector loops... but no new bike-sensitive-but-still-work-fine-with-cars "Type Q" nor "Type D" inductive loops -- that I've seen. They did, however, run connectivity to a STOP SIGN in my neighborhood (I have pix, it happened!! But OK, thats a cheap shot, it's a busy intersection near a school and it will get a signal some day... but my point is I haven't seen anything in this massive multi-year how-many-hundred-millions-will-it-cost-us project for bikes). And entire signal poles, signals and street lamps on those poles have in some cases have been replaced. That all doesn't come cheap.
* So the State has specified how to make these things work with bikes years ago... the LADOT embarks on a signal upgrade plan, and did our illustrious leaders at LADOT give one red cent's consideration to making signals really work with bikes the way the State says they can? Doesn't look like it, but show me I'm wrong about this, it'd be better it if I were. It's not like I won't be paying for this anyway -- I will, and so will my son, and if he has kids, his too. This kind of thing doesn't happen very often.
Some further reading, from the article:
* "How to Turn Signals Green": http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/signals/green.htm
* "Traffic Signals": http://www.bikeplan.com/signal.html
* Alan Wachtel, "Re-Evaluating Signal Detector Loops": http://www.bikeplan.com/aw-signals.pdf
* John Forester, "Bicycle Transportation", Second Edition, MIT Press, 1994: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0262560798/002-0697425-3760029?vi=glance
* John Allen, "Traffic Signal Actuators: Am I Paranoid": http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/actuator.htm
When I get stuck in a situation where the left turn traffic light doesn't change, I use the crosswalk but get off my bike and walk it across. That way, I'm a pedestrian.
In the city of Santa Barbara, small camera atop traffic lights are used to detect vehicles, including bicycles in the left turn lane. The cameras can be adjusted for sensitivity and darkness. So far, they've been installed in almost all major intersections.
Roadblock has a section on this website on Bicycle Safety, click on it and look at the Street Skills tab
I used to work in carson as a B&W darkroom technician.
Every night that I left work around 10, there was no other traffic than me, for for some reason my 1972 VW bug did not have enough mass to set off the sensor.
I pretty much had to run the light every time.
And this is the approach most of us take on a bike.
If the infrastructure is unaccommodating we make do.
The only time I bother to trip a ped signal is if I think it is going to save me time, I don't feel an obligation to do it because the department of street services has not made accommodations for all the vehicles on the road.
On another note,
Somebody posted a video here a few moths ago about some people who drive scooters who have the same problem, sick small high power magnets on the bottom of their bikes to trip sensors.
My best advise would be to move up to the manual trip signal used by pedestrians...as my passanger sometimes has to do when I am stuck at a defective sensor. Either they or I have to get out of the car and push that button.
i love this stuff... Cops are just so god damn law abiding.
I can't wait for the next moral decision making guide to be:
What Would Rafael Pérez Do?
md2 responding to a comment by Sgt. David Krumer
10.24.10 - 2:43 pm
AB 1581, passed in 2007, requires that all loop detectors be sensitive enough to pick up bicycles.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1551-1600/ab_1581_bill_20070712_amended_sen_v98.html
Loop detection for bicycles is also now part of the CA MUTCD.
LADOT makes adjustments to comply with AB 1581 whenever loop detectors need new maintenance. Additionally, all new intersections or intersection redesigns must include loop detectors adjacent to the limit line (the edge of the intersection) that have a diagonal slash through their loop to better detect bicycles. It's on page 8:
http://www.ladot.lacity.org/pdf/pdf175.pdf
Also, you can report bad loop detectors to your LADOT district office. I've already reported one at 4th & Western.
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
