Falls Church Enforcement on the W&OD

[baiskeli]

@mstone 34166 wrote:

They’re enforcing it because a vocal minority complained and/or because a particular cop has a grudge. If it was about safety they’d be enforcing the speed limit instead.

Do you have particular knowledge that a “vocal minority” complained (pretty much everyone who complains about anything is a vocal minority, but whatever) or that a cop has a grudge?

Do you think the speed limit is routinely violated at these crossings?

Do you think that cyclists never do anything dangerous at these crossings?

[RESTONTODC]

I got nothing against these officers and thankful that they’re on the trails. I know they are just doing their jobs to keep everyone safe but they should educate the cyclists are blowing through the crossings and other crazy unsafe stuff without giving tickets, threats, or verbal warnings. Most of cyclists didn’t go to a formal training or test before they ride their bikes.

It’s unreasonable to ask us putting our feet on the ground at the stop sign. I can stop for 5 seconds without my feet on the ground.

When I was riding in Portland, OR, I saw police officers stopped unsafe riders, explain the safety issue and hand out their safety brochure similar to PAL without giving them the tough guy talk. They also stopped cyclists without tail lights and hand out the lights for them.

[DaveK]

@RESTONTODC 34191 wrote:

When I was riding in Portland, OR, I saw police officers stopped unsafe riders, explain the safety issue and hand out their safety brochure similar to PAL without giving them the tough guy talk. They also stopped cyclists without tail lights and hand out the lights for them.

Portland is a national leader in cooperation between police, transportation officials, and cyclists. They train their officers to respond to dangerous behavior and not to check boxes on form. See below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKmwKP5ZRtQ

Virginia isn’t there yet.

[dasgeh]

@DaveK 34197 wrote:

Portland is a national leader in cooperation between police, transportation officials, and cyclists. They train their officers to respond to dangerous behavior and not to check boxes on form. See below:

A few years ago, the Charlotte City Council (including my mom) went to Portland on one of those official city visits. They learned a lot. Any hope of getting some Arlington-Portland cooperation?

[ShawnoftheDread]

It’s amusing that in the bad “right hook” example the car used a signal, but in the proper example (waiting for the cyclist) there was no signal.

[baiskeli]

Update:

W&OD STOP sign ticket dismissed
The cyclist who was cited by Falls Church police for failure to stop at one of the STOP signs along the W&OD Trail at Great Falls St. contested his ticket in court. The ticket was dismissed on the recommendation of the Commonwealth Attorney.

http://fabb-bikes.blogspot.com/2012/11/w-stop-sign-ticket-dismissed.html

[sjclaeys]

@baiskeli 35968 wrote:

Update:

W&OD STOP sign ticket dismissed
The cyclist who was cited by Falls Church police for failure to stop at one of the STOP signs along the W&OD Trail at Great Falls St. contested his ticket in court. The ticket was dismissed on the recommendation of the Commonwealth Attorney.

http://fabb-bikes.blogspot.com/2012/11/w-stop-sign-ticket-dismissed.html

The question is how does this get communicated to Falls Church and Arlington police.

[mstone]

@sjclaeys 35989 wrote:

The question is how does this get communicated to Falls Church and Arlington police.

everyone who gets one needs to fight it and not just pay the fine. they’ll get the message, because they get dragged to court for each one. (whereas if you just eat it, they’ve got no incentive to change.)

edit to add: and yes, this is a PITA for everyone getting a ticket. consider it your civic duty for the month.

[DaveK]

@mstone 35991 wrote:

everyone who gets one needs to fight it and not just pay the fine. they’ll get the message, because they get dragged to court for each one. (whereas if you just eat it, they’ve got no incentive to change.)

edit to add: and yes, this is a PITA for everyone getting a ticket. consider it your civic duty for the month.

There’s a flip side to this – if the message gets out that the signs are not enforced and people think they’re entitled to blow through the signs, what then? How does an officer assign fault to between a cyclist who runs an unenforceable stop sign and a vehicle that is required to yield to cyclists in a crosswalk?

Count me in the fold that the signs are valid and should be enforced, but should be enforced realistically (slow rolls shouldn’t earn you a ticket). There should be some traffic controls at these intersections – trail and driver behaviors aren’t to the point where we can trust both to manage the crossings without guidance.

[baiskeli]

@sjclaeys 35989 wrote:

The question is how does this get communicated to Falls Church and Arlington police.

What though? It wasn’t clear to me what was going on from that article. Nobody seems to have said the signs aren’t legal and binding.

[DismalScientist]

@baiskeli 36000 wrote:

What though? It wasn’t clear to me what was going on from that article. Nobody seems to have said the signs aren’t legal and binding.

I think the judge was getting at is that the trail is not a roadway under Virginia law and bicyclists therefore have only the rights and responsibilities of pedestrians on the trail and in the crosswalk. Stop signs don’t mean anything to pedestrians and are therefore unenforceable in this situation. I would advocate that the law be changed so that bicyclists on trails have the rights and responsibility of vehicles.

[mstone]

@DaveK 35996 wrote:

There’s a flip side to this – if the message gets out that the signs are not enforced and people think they’re entitled to blow through the signs, what then? How does an officer assign fault to between a cyclist who runs an unenforceable stop sign and a vehicle that is required to yield to cyclists in a crosswalk?

Count me in the fold that the signs are valid and should be enforced, but should be enforced realistically (slow rolls shouldn’t earn you a ticket). There should be some traffic controls at these intersections – trail and driver behaviors aren’t to the point where we can trust both to manage the crossings without guidance.

We’ve been over this ad nauseam. What should happen is what the law requires: cars yield to vulnerable road users in a marked crosswalk unless there is a traffic control signal. Nobody should ever suggest otherwise and no signage should confuse this very simple concept. Pedestrians don’t have much going for them in this car-centric society, they should at least get deference within their lousy little white-painted ghetto.

What happens if a driver hits someone in a crosswalk? Simple–he should be cited for hitting someone in a crosswalk. If he thinks that the crash was unavoidable (that is, he attempted to avoid the crash, but it was physically impossible to do so–not that he was texting and didn’t look until he felt a bump) he can go to court and make his case. This is why we have a court system; police officers are not the ones responsible for determining negligence.

What should be done to mark the intersections? Put up big signs in the street indicating that there is a crosswalk. Drivers should know that means that people will be crossing there and should therefore proceed with caution (in practice, this means they should slow down as they are probably speeding). A sign can be placed on the trail notifying cyclists that there is a crossing of a high speed street where drivers often fail in their responsibility to proceed with caution, so that trail users know to cross with increased vigilance.

What if we don’t want cars to slow down or stop? (I know, why would we?) Options:
1) Grade separate the crossing
2) Install a (legal) signal which would indicate that pedestrians should stop until vehicular traffic is stopped, at which point the pedestrians can proceed. (This would be a HAWK or other crossing device.)
3) Remove the crosswalk markings to make it clear that the commonwealth expects pedestrians to scurry from cover to cover with no more safety or legal rights than a mammal in the age of dinosaurs.

This isn’t rocket science.

[americancyclo]

@DaveK 35996 wrote:

There’s a flip side to this – if the message gets out that the signs are not enforced and people think they’re entitled to blow through the signs, what then?

Then nothing changes. The intersection operates exactly the way it does the other 360 days of the year that the FCPD are not waiting there monitoring ‘rogue’ cyclists and accusing them of being in the TdF.

The only thing that changes is the harassment of cyclists stops. Hopefully.

[Tim Kelley]

@sjclaeys 35989 wrote:

The question is how does this get communicated to Falls Church and Arlington police.

Luckily Arlington doesn’t have too many unsignalized crossings!

[baiskeli]

@DismalScientist 36005 wrote:

I think the judge was getting at is that the trail is not a roadway under Virginia law and bicyclists therefore have only the rights and responsibilities of pedestrians on the trail and in the crosswalk. Stop signs don’t mean anything to pedestrians and are therefore unenforceable in this situation. I would advocate that the law be changed so that bicyclists on trails have the rights and responsibility of vehicles.

Yes, except for the part where the judge says afterward that what the cyclist did was wrong. That threw me.

It seems that if a cyclist wants to get out from under these stop signs, he or she will need to go to court and get that judge.

[Author]

Posts