Posts Tagged ‘CROSSWALKS’

Driver and Writer CW Nevius Goes on a “Rant” Against the “Militant” Pedestrians of SF – Do They Have the Right to Jaywalk?

Friday, January 31st, 2014

Here’s the latest effort from CW Nevius, who’s taking a break from being spokesman for San Francisco’s right-side-of-the-aisle  political faction to go on a “bit of a rant” against local pedestrians. But what’s up with this?  

“Even when they are in the right, I worry about them. When the traffic light countdown gets to five or six, they step confidently into the crosswalk — which is their right…”

But pedestrians don’t have “the right” to do so. It’s agin CA law – check out V C Section 21456,* which is dealt with by Rule #3 of the Five Rules for Pedestrians.

Don’t you have an editor, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have an editor, and plus, editors cost money, that’s right.

But don’t you have a fact checker, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, you’re too old and experienced to have a fact checker, and plus, fact checkers cost money, that’s right.

But don’t you have a photographer, Nevius? Oh, that’s right, photographers cost money. So all your observations, we’ll just have to take your word about them. OK fine. BTW, [sarcasmmode ON] nice stock photo you’ve got there, Neve. “Cause a stock photo taken in the People’s Republic of China, you know, from more than a thousand li away, well, that really illustrates how “militant” and “freaking nuts” San Francisco peds are, huh? [sarcasmmode OFF]

And oh, BTW Neve, the peds of SF aren’t militant, not at all. Try to find a different word for what you mean.

Of course you’re new in town, I get that. Sure, welcome to San Francisco, Neve.

But you’re doing a half-assed job doing your half-time gig.

You need to try harder.

*”Walk, Wait, or Don t Walk

21456. Whenever a pedestrian control signal showing the words “WALK” or “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or other approved symbol is in place, the signal shall indicate as follows:

(a) “WALK” or approved “Walking Person” symbol. A pedestrian facing the signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal, but shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal is first shown.

(b) Flashing or steady “DON’T WALK” or “WAIT” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol. No pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed crossing shall proceed to a sidewalk or safety zone or otherwise leave the roadway while the “WAIT” or “DON’T WALK” or approved “Upraised Hand” symbol is showing.

Amended Ch. 413, Stats. 1981. Effective January 1, 1982.”

The Five Rules for Pedestrians and Crosswalks in California – Or, How to Make Sure You Win Your Lawsuit Against That Uber Driver

Tuesday, January 28th, 2014

1. YOU NEED TO BE IN THE CROSSWALK WHEN YOU GET HIT. This one’s pretty basic. And actually, it’s pretty flexible IRL. So let’s say you’re over the line a bit, your foot was 18 inches away from the white paint, well that could be OK. This rule becomes important if you’re halfway between blocks and you start jaywalking – a top cause of death of peds in SF. There’ve been many cases of this on the streets of San Francisco lately, like Hayes, Lombard, Masonic, Market, I could go on and on.

2. YOU CAN’T START TOO EARLY. This is called jumping the light. So of course, you’ve got to wait for the green light (or green WALK signal), you already know that. BUT THAT”S NOT ALL. You’ve also got to wait for traffic legally in the intersection to clear the intersection. So, GREEN DOES NOT MEAN “GO.” Green means you need to look for traffic clearing the intersection. And if that traffic isn’t over the speed limit and if that traffic entered the intersection on a yellow (which is totally OK under CA law, generally) and you step off and get hit, then, surprise, you’re the one at fault. So yes, you were in the crosswalk, but the collision is your fault, sorry.

3. YOU CAN’T START TOO LATE. This means that DON’T WALK means don’t walk. Now, in many places about town, you don’t have a ped-only signal telling you what to do. So, you’re allowed to start crossing on a green all the way until a yellow light appears. Effectively, the yellow light is your DON’T WALK signal. Of course this means that you might still be in the crosswalk when the light turns green for cross traffic. But now the law is in your favor, ped. The law says that cross traffic needs to wait for you to clear the intersection.

4. YOU CAN’T GO TOO SLOW. This one’s easy – it means you’re not supposed to stop during your trip across the street as best I can figure. (Leaving aside the law, there are standards for how long peds should have to cross an intersection, but they get thrown out the window when SF deals with 100-foot-plus wide monsters like horrible, horrible Octavia Boulevard, oh well.)

5. YOU CAN’T GO TOO FAST. Ooh, joggers. Your California Vehicle Code was written without concern for joggers, pretty much. So if you’re sprinting into an intersection and get hit by a MUNI, look for the SFPD to put the blame on you, yes, even though you were in the crosswalk.

Click to expand

So that’s reality.

But if you’d prefer a distorted, rose-colored view of reality, feel free to surf on over StreetsBlog SF (Straight Outta Park Slope!), or the SFBC (declining membership these days, despite being sponsored by SFGov SFMTA MUNI DPT) or Walk SF (sponsored by let’s-build-high-near-the-Waterfront real estate interests).

Your choice.

A Rare Sight in the Western Addition: No White Zebra Stripes on This Crosswalk

Thursday, November 14th, 2013

I thought they’d all look like this by now.

Click to expand

Anyway, the zebra people just did Fulton and Masonic the past few days.

Zebra stripes, zebra stripes everywhere soon, looks like.

Zebra Stripes Come to the Crosswalks of Fell Street

Thursday, October 10th, 2013

This is new:

Click to expand

Now is this the kind of small project that the aides of District Five Supervisor London Breed would dismissively call a “chop shop project,” the likes of which SFGov purportedly doesn’t do anymore?

It sure looks that way to me.

Sorry, San Francisco Bicycle Coalition – The Average Cyclist Doesn’t Care What You Say – Here’s Proof

Thursday, July 26th, 2012

[UPDATE: Attention nerdy white engineering types / transit activists who have some connection with Strava, Inc / Chris Bucherre / Kim Flynt. It’s too bad that your NVIDIA co-worker / cycling buddy /KOM competitor / team $pon$or killed somebody / got killed / got sued but I don’t really have anything to do with that. Feel free to call me a “dumbass” for revealing that people (paralegals? associates? concerned investors?) at the O’Melveny(sp?) law firm Google such search terms like “STRAVA lawsuit” and “STRAVA vicarious liability” and whatnot – that’s your right as Americans. Feel free to band together on the Twitter and rap about how you white engineering types / transit activists are getting effed, somehow, yet again. But dudes, you gots ta chill. Take the emotion down a bit, why not? And think, maybe after Strava is gone, whenever that is, your cycling teams can get funding from somebody else, right? I said that Strava might get sued and you all pooh poohed that. And of course Strava got sued (you know, for wrongful death, right on sked, right before the statute, IN ADDITION to other stuff, like IP patent stuff from before). And I said that Chris Bucchere, the man what made some Mission Cycling members ashamed of their jerseys, might do hard time for the death of Sutchi Hui and you all pooh poohed that as well. And of course Chris Bucchere just might do hard time. But look above and see that this post is directed to the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition, not to you macho white engineering types / transit activists, you dig? The SFBC feels that it has some power over cyclists. The SFBC feels that cyclists have already cleaned up their acts in response to the recent cyclist-caused ped deaths. The SFBC hectors people about stopping before you hit the start of the crosswalk and/or the stop line. And I’m showing them how maybe they’re not 100% always right about everything they say. That’s all.]

Just one problem with Market Street’s excessively-wide crosswalks is that people need to stop far away from intersections, sometimes even behind stop lines.

Like this, for instance.

So what cyclists tend to do at red lights on Market is to weasel past the stop line and through the crosswalk so as to be ready for the green.

As here, on Market at Third Street:

Click to expand

Now this kind of behavior is contrary to the party line of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition.

To wit:

On a daily basis, be a bicycle ambassador by being a great representative of San Francisco’s amazing, diverse and growing community of people who bicycle. Stop behind the crosswalk, give pedestrians the right-of-way and others will follow.”

The cyclists probably aware of this but they just don’t care. (It’s like did Nancy Reagan’s hectoring about Just Say No To Drugs have any effect the past three decades? Think about it.)

And this is in the post-Bucchere, high-enforcement world of 2012.

You talk about safety for all but then tell pedestrians absolutely false statements about how they Always Have The Right Of Way – is that responsible behavior?

And you think that The Media is your problem, SFBC? Sure seems that way, based upon what you say.

Maybe The Media isn’t your problem.

CW Nevius vs. The Wiggle Bicycle Route, 2012

Monday, February 27th, 2012

The San Francisco Chronicle’s worst writer takes on The Wiggle here.

(As usual, his reliance upon quotes from rich, white, older homeowners leads him astray.)

Leave us begin:

Local residents sometimes sit at the corner of Waller and Steiner streets and place bets on the bicyclists as they approach the stop sign.

FALSE.

Worse, when she yelps, “Watch out!” when riders nearly hit her, the response is often, “F- you. Mind your own business.”

FALSE.

“Our message is that pedestrians always have the right of way.”

FALSE. THAT MIGHT BE YOUR MESSAGE, BUT IT’S NOT CORRECT. NOT IN CALIFORNIA, WHERE PEDS ARE ROUTINELY HELD AT FAULT FOR THEIR OWN DEATHS…

“You literally have to play peek-a-boo,” said Marshall.

FALSE. YOU DON’T LITERALLY HAVE TO PLAY PEEK-A-BOO, ONE-PERCENTER. WHY DOES THE MSM ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BE CRYBABIES?

 The most likely solution is to create “bulb-out” corners for pedestrians.

ASSUMING FACTS NOT IN EVIDENCE, ASSUMING THAT BULB-OUTS WILL “SOLVE” THE ISSUE YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT, NEVIUS.

“Bulb-outs reduce the length of the crossing and also forces the bicyclists to slow down because they make the corner sharper,” Hodge said. “And (police) enforcement is increasingly important. We want to work with the police to identify space and behavior that are dangerous.”

UH, IS THE SAN FRANCISCO BICYCLE COALITION TELLING PEOPLE TO STOP AT STOP SIGNS? IF SO, THAT’S NEWS TO ME.

While those sound like good ideas, there is a school of thought that says the more accommodations the city makes for bikes the more entitled the riders become.

OH, IS THERE ALSO A SCHOOL OF THOUGHT THAT SAYS THE MORE ACCOMMODATIONS THE CITY MAKES FOR REPUBLICANS, SUCH AS CW NEVIUS, THE MORE ENTITLED THOSE REPUBLICANS BECOME?

“I’m no angry motorist. I don’t even own a car,” Marshall said. “But once they completed the bike lanes and made it a complete route, in the minds of cyclists it has just given them the license to just go.”

UH NEVIUS, JUST BECAUSE SOMEBODY SAYS SOMETHING AND BELIEVES IT, THAT DOESN’T MAKE IT TRUE. IMO, THE POPULARITY OF FIXIES HAS HAD A GREATER EFFECT. AND OF COURSE, THE WIGGLE HAS BEEN A “COMPLETE ROUTE” SINCE THE 1800′s.

Bike advocates would probably disagree, but Beckstead suggested a simple test.

WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU SAYING, NEVIUS? WHAT THE FUCK DOES THIS MEAN? THE WORLD WONDERS. BIKE ADVOCATES DISAGREE THAT BECKSTEAD SUGGESTED A SIMPLE TEST?

USE YOUR WORDS, NEVIUS.