Re: [WBWC] Abridged summary of wbwc@googlegroups.com - 2 Messages in 1 Topic

10 views
Skip to first unread message

Phil Hemenway

unread,
Aug 15, 2012, 5:07:27 PM8/15/12
to wb...@googlegroups.com
As usual the discussion revolves around "cyclist and bicycle", what the law is, and not the fact that a human being was seroiuosly and permently injured so a motorist could get somewhere 3 seconds faster? ..and some folks complaining that they have to stop at all?
 
Lots of pent up resentment there against cyclists.  What is the rush?  
I'm starting to feel like every ride is a suicide mission. Carefull out there fellow runners/riders/triathletes.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 10:45 AM, <wb...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Group: http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc/topics

    Bonnie Nolan <bnol...@gmail.com> Aug 14 07:04PM -0400  

    Jeff, thank you so much for replying. I kept checking A2.com for an update, all the way up until 240.
     
    I've thought that crosswalk was a perfect place for a Hawk Crossing if there ever was one ... ...more

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group wbwc.
You can post via email.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an empty message.
For more options, visit this group.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition" group.
To post to this group, send email to wb...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to wbwc+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/wbwc?hl=en.

Ken Freeman

unread,
Aug 16, 2012, 8:00:11 AM8/16/12
to wb...@googlegroups.com
In driving I believe I was taught that it is never acceptable (and simply sees immoral) 
for a moving vehicle to strike a pedestrian or cyclist, and that as a pedestrian I was 
taught not to enter the road to cross it until I know it is clear.  Common sense dictates 
that this latter rule applies whether I am walking, walking a bicyce, riding a bicycle, or 
driving a car.  If cyclists and pedestrians always observe the latter rule when we wish 
to cross the street, such collisions can't happen.  We have a lot more ability to stop 
quickly than do motor vehicles or bikes when at speed.  

It's not reliable that car drivers (yes, including me) will be able to stop in time at 
marked crosswalks if a crosser leaves the curb without looking.  The law requires me
to stop if they are on the curb.  It can be hard to see whether a crosser is approaching 
the curb with intent to cross.  Coincidence of crosswalks with bus stops does not help 
to clarify the situation.  Certainly if the crosser is a fast sidewalk cyclist it can be 
impossible to see the person in time to stop.  Sight lines and infrastructure need to be
considered.

The article doesn't tell us if the cyclist stopped and waited, and was then surprised by 
the fast SUV.  It also doesn't tell us if the vehicle was hard to see in the sun, or about 
other possible visibility issues.  Since the driver has not been questioned we don't 
know if he was confused by the law.  What is clear is that the speed limit in that area, 
and in several other arterial areas, may well be too high for the crosswalks to be 
effective in providing crosser safety.  

My arguments are that the law needs to be clarified in terms of what is required of drivers 
and street-crossers, with equal emphasis and public awareness of both roles, and that 
speed limits should be adjusted downward to address drivers' inability to respond to 
crosswalks when crossers do not stop.  Some vigorous enforcement and perhaps 
witness cams covering the sites add cost, but would aid greatly in giving the public 
the message.

As it is, the message has not gotten through.  The diamond crosswalk markers are 
actually "Caution" traffic control devices, so I'm not sure if failure to respond can be 
ticketed.  Perhaps they should be changed to inverted triangles, signifying "Yield," 
which is a rather positive instruction and can certainly be ticketed.

I think public information also needs to drive home exactly what crossing markings are.  
Caution signs with a walker?  Zebra markings?  Parallel walking path channels?  
Hawk lighting?  Depressed curbs?  Any of the above?  If the intent is that the law 
applies at every crossing that is marked in one of these ways, that needs to be 
emphasized as well.  Compliance only seems good near public elementary schools, 
as far as I can see.

--
Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages