Contradictory messages from Police regarding 15th ST: how to resolve?

[baiskeli]

I dug around the internet to see if I could find an easy answer. I didn’t. But I did find that there is a list of common errors in enforcement of DC law involving bikes. It appears to be intended for police officers. It’s cool that they even have this, and it could be a useful sheet to carry around on a bike. If and when you get this resolved, perhaps they can add your problem to the sheet.

[chris_s]

This is why I wish they would just install bike signal heads on all of the PBLs in DC. It’s too easy to screw up when what you’re supposed to be paying attention to is always changing. Follow the ped signal, no the traffic signal, no this other traffic signal over here, oh you don’t have to follow that signal but you need to watch for crossing pedestrians.

[jrenaut]

Since absolutely no attempt was made to make the road signals visible to the NB cyclist, I think your interpretation HAS to be correct. Are cyclists really supposed to slow nearly to a stop and check the pedestrian light perpendicular to the cycletrack? No chance. I do the same as you, I stop if there are pedestrians and otherwise continue on. Almost every other cyclist I’ve seen there does the same.

[pge]

@jrenaut 119689 wrote:

Since absolutely no attempt was made to make the road signals visible to the NB cyclist, I think your interpretation HAS to be correct. Are cyclists really supposed to slow nearly to a stop and check the pedestrian light perpendicular to the cycletrack? No chance. I do the same as you, I stop if there are pedestrians and otherwise continue on. Almost every other cyclist I’ve seen there does the same.

Totally agree. I even pointed that out to the first cop (that gave me the ticket) as evidence that the directions I was supposed to follow are the ones on the pavement in the cycle track – the same rules have to apply to both SB and NB cyclists, and NB cyclists don’t have a light next to the cycletrack. He said NB cyclists have to look at the traffic signal on the opposite side of 15th St, which just doesnt seem right. It was a disappointing exchange. Though he was very polite and good natured, he couldnt provide a logically consistent explanation that I had run a red light (yet gave me a ticket anyway). In the course of the conversation, he said that the cycletrack was “not really the roadway” and thus rules that prohibit joggers and Segways on the roadway don’t apply (he can’t ticket them for being in the cycletrack), yet somehow the traffic lights from the main roadway do apply (at least to bikes).

[Brendan von Buckingham]

The more complicated we make our road design, the more confused cops and drivers get.

[jrenaut]

@pge 119691 wrote:

Totally agree. I even pointed that out to the first cop (that gave me the ticket) as evidence that the directions I was supposed to follow are the ones on the pavement in the cycle track – the same rules have to apply to both SB and NB cyclists, and NB cyclists don’t have a light next to the cycletrack. He said NB cyclists have to look at the traffic signal on the opposite side of 15th St, which just doesnt seem right. It was a disappointing exchange. Though he was very polite and good natured, he couldnt provide a logically consistent explanation that I had run a red light (yet gave me a ticket anyway). In the course of the conversation, he said that the cycletrack was “not really the roadway” and thus rules that prohibit joggers and Segways on the roadway don’t apply (he can’t ticket them for being in the cycletrack), yet somehow the traffic lights from the main roadway do apply (at least to bikes).

The cycletrack absolutely is the roadway. That cop just doesn’t know the law.

[baiskeli]

@jrenaut 119824 wrote:

The cycletrack absolutely is the roadway. That cop just doesn’t know the law.

Wait – if the track IS the roadway, wouldn’t that mean the lights DO apply to bikes? After I read this again, it seems the cop is contradicting himself.

[bobco85]

I think figuring out if the 15th Street cycle track (we’re all probably going to call it that forever) is part of the roadway or not is easy once you consider that:

1. All bike lanes are considered part of the roadway
2. All protected bike lanes are bike lanes
3. Therefore, all protected bike lanes are considered part of the roadway
4. Cycle tracks = protected bike lanes
5. Therefore, all cycle tracks are considered part of the roadway

Going from that, cyclists do need to stop when the stoplights are red, though they are difficult to see which should be corrected with an additional bicycle stoplight.

I think that the officer was incorrect when he said that the cycletrack is “not really the roadway” for different reasons. For drivers, the cycle tracks are not part of the usable roadway but are still part of the roadway. Cyclists and segways (see http://ddot.dc.gov/node/155382) but not joggers (see http://ddot.dc.gov/page/ddot-bicycle-and-pedestrian-safety) are allowed to use the cycle tracks.

[chris_s]

@bobco85 119852 wrote:

Going from that, cyclists do need to stop when the stoplights are red, though they are difficult to see which should be corrected with an additional bicycle stoplight.

Additional complication, DC law allows cyclists to follow the pedestrian signal, so if there is a pedestrian signal and it says walk you can go through a red light.

[jrenaut]

DDOT just half-assed it, as usual, and didn’t provide clear instruction. There can be different signals for different lanes – one signal for the bike lane, one for the main traffic lane. It’s just that DDOT didn’t put them in for the bikes, and instead put directions on the pavement that only make sense if bikes are supposed to ignore the lights.

[Bill on Capitol Hill]

On my way to work, I yielded to pedestrians and then got a warning ticket for not continuing to wait out the light, along with a threat that I’d get a real ticket because of my “bad attitude” for pointing out that illegally left-turning car had almost clipped me within his sight 10 seconds earlier but he didn’t seem to care about that.

I totally understand the enforcement blitz in the sense that a lot of cyclists blow right through without even thinking about pedestrians. But the cops need to have the brains to see which cyclists are doing this and which ones are being as courteous as possible to the peds.

The bike cops themselves don’t stop at those lights. And I ride home after 11 p.m. — they really expect me to sit there for two minutes when nobody is around? There’s no way that makes any sense.

[dasgeh]

I’ve been told by MPD officers and DC staff that cyclists don’t have to stop for the lights, just for peds. I asked WABA if there’s something written to that effect, or if they can work on getting something written.

As far as the officers who clearly don’t know the law (e.g. don’t know that cycletrack is roadway or that they should prioritize safety), report ’em. If you have a ticket, you have the officer’s name and district. I’d start at the district office. Possibly ask for the IG or ombudsman.

[Terpfan]

@pge 119660 wrote:

southbound on the 15th St cycle track between Penn Ave and Constitution,

Could you clarify, were they ticketing because you ran the “light” going southbound at Penn? Otherwise, I’m confused because the cycletrack ends there.

I can see all of the various intepretations there. I don’t commute that way anymore save to bocce, but I used to commute that way every day for about three years. I think that intersection is a little different than the rest of those along the cycletrack because there is vehicular traffic emerging from the Elipse, there is cycling traffic coming from the PA Ave Cycletrack, and there are pedestrians. But you’re right it’s very confusing given the “stop for peds” language just a block or two north on the cycletrack” and the general lack of any markings there. It would be nice if they put a cycling type light up on that side of the road if that’s their intention.

[Author]

Posts