She was crossing like this guy was doing yesterday:
Click to expand
If this is how pedestrians are going to behave, should there be a crosswalk with a light, you know, so people can get to their cars parked across the street because:
1. the actual parking lot for this particular TJ’s is almost always full during the times most people shop, and
2. the people driving up from areas in the south can’t turn into the parking lot anyway as northbound traffic isn’t allowed to left into the parking lot.
Now realize the current situation is already the second stab at a fix, since the line of idling cars that now queue up in the right lane of Masonic used to line up in the middle lane, leaving just one lane for traffic.
“Of course, everybody needs to be on the lookout for all the Frogger-like jaywalkers carrying their groceries across six lanes of parked and moving cars. (Somebody is going to get hit one of these days.)”
What’s wrong with San Francisco?
Is the problem the NIMBY residents of nearby Ralph Waldo Emerson Street, you know, the people who don’t want their Inner Richmond Way of Life interrupted by food shoppers? I don’t know.
But why can’t TJ’s shoppers park on the roof of the TJ’s? There’s a parking lot up there, of course.
Anyway, I think the people who planned the parking situation are still around and I think that they are to blame.
Are they apologetic for what they’ve created?
I don’t know.
Actually, they’re probably still patting themselves on the back and giving each other awards, as they are wont to do.
This is the first I’ve seen of these things, so here’s a photo of one of the new “bike boxes,” or whatever they’re called:
Click to expand
I wonder, does Strava have a Wiggle segment? You know, so people could keep track of their times and race each other, you know virtually, you know, as Chris Bucchere used to?
Look, Gentle Reader, and see that the ped’s light is green. Do you have enough information?
Click to expand
The answer is no you do not.
The answer is the ped would have been 100% at fault if the cyclist had ended up colliding with her. That’s CA law.
That’s the reason why the Chris Bucchere homicide investigators aren’t dwelling on whether he ran a red light just before killing pedestrian Sutchi Hui.
Look here, you can see the green light, the yellow light, the red light, the delay between the red light and the green WALK sign, and then finally, the green WALK sign:
Hey peds, guess what – you DON”T Always Have The Right Of Way.
People who tell you that you do always have the right of way are lying to you.
(For political reasons, I suppose.)
Now, who’s going to tell the peds of San Francisco to straighten up and fly right?
Boy, the Internet is full of criticism these days over how the SFPD and the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office have been handling the cyclist Chris Bucchere vs. pedestrian Sutchi Hui case.
And yet, what have they done wrong so far? Nothing that I can see.
Wisely, they aren’t trying to prove things that are tough to prove to the very high standard required, so stuff like who used Chris Bucchere’s online accounts to post his post-accident thoughts and what color what traffic light was when – that stuff, isn’t going to matter all that much if a criminal trial comes.
As you can see, there aren’t any stop signs there.
But maybe the captain was talking about Castro Street?
If that’s the case, the question then becomes what would motivate a cyclist to behave in the ways alleged.
But we’ll find out soon enough…
*And the other part of Divisadero up in Pacific Heights far to the north? Wow, that’s probably the last place in the world where you’d want to be blowing stop signs on a bike.
Do you know the rules of being a pedestrian? Most people don’t. Most people think, and not without good reason, that:
“PEDESTRIANS ALWAYS HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.”
But this is a false statement.
Peds, you can’t go across crosswalks:
1. Too Fast (that means no running into a crosswalk);
2. Too Slow (that means you can’t hang out and stand around or do jumping jacks or whathaveyou);
3. Too Early (that means you have to let the intersection clear of cars bikes buses etc EVEN IF YOUR LIGHT JUST TURNED GREEN – I’m srsly, it’s The Law in California); or
4. Too Late (that means when you see the red DON’T WALK signal flashing or you see a yellow light shining, basically)
Here’s a recent example of too late, on Market Street.
Do you see? The cyclist, who stopped properly at his stop line on outbound Market in the Financh, had the time to to wait for his green and make it across the intersection only to be blocked by these sauntering peds. Why? Because they entered their crosswalk too late, that’s why. (Do you think the SFPD officer camera left stopped to hand out citations? No, why would he, it’s not really his job to give out tickets to late-night peds. Also, note where the cyclist’s left hand is, stuck out as a warning.)
Click to expand
This kind of thing is the reason why each San Francisco car vs. ped death so far in 2012 has been the fault of the pedestrian him or herself.
And yet, the only solution San Francisco’s governmental and quasi-governmental organizations have to offer for ped death is infrastructure ”improvement.” It’s the only implement in their toolbox.
I still don’t know if pedestrian Sutchi Hui had the right of way when he stepped out on the crosswalk at Castro near Market on March 29th. (Cyclist Chris Bucchere’s story isn’t adding up so far and he’s got a lawyer already and the police are investigating, so you make the call on that one.)
But if he is found responsible for that death, how does that match up with the deaths caused by car, MUNI bus, shuttle bus, and truck drivers in San Francisco County so far in 2012?
We’ve had at least two jaywalkers (one on Hayes, one of Lombard) violate right of way and die so far in 2012 And there was a young man who fell off a skateboard and got hit by a truck and died. And there was some hit-and-run(?) by a MUNI bus driver but I don’t think the person who was hit died. And then there was an older driver who went around another car (which was waiting for a pedestrian) and hit said pedestrian, but that pedestrian didn’t die.
Now I’m sure San Francisco’s horrible drivers will catch up to cyclists in the pedestrian death responsibility count by the end of 2012, but I don’t think they’ll catch up to the pedestrians themselves. What can we do to educate pedestrians?
Here’s the mantra:
“Pedestrians Always Have the Right of Way.”
This is incorrect for at least two reasons.
1. Jaywalkers don’t have the right of way. That’s why they’re held at fault for their own deaths when they die, with regularity, on the streets of San Francisco. Now, does a driver have the right to aim for jaywalking peds and then say, “Well, he was jaywalking so it’s his fault.” No. Drivers need to be on the lookout for errant peds at all times. But if a pedestrian pops out into the street in the middle of a block and gets hit, the ped has committed a right of way violation and, generally speaking, the ped is at fault.
2. Pedestrians need to wait for intersections to clear even though they have a green light and they are at a crosswalk. Most San Franciscans don’t understand this. If you’re a ped you need to look before you enter a crosswalk, especially if your light has just turned green. (What peds in San Francisco tend to do at certain intersection is to actually jump the light, oh well.)
If you don’t like this situation, you could lobby to have the law changed to give peds the right to jaywalk with impunity and the right to start crossing as soon as their lights turn green. Then, pedestrians would actually “Always Have the Right of Way” in real life.
Would that be good?
I don’t think so.
It certainly would clarify who’s at fault for what, but more peds would die.
Why don’t we change the mantra to this:
You should drive* AS IF Pedestrians Always Have the Right of Way.
And to the peds we should say this:
Pedestrians DON’T Always Have the Right of Way
Is that too complicated?
If you want to prevent pedestrian deaths, your primary solution is getting inside the head of the ped to figure out what’s going wrong. Your primary solution isn’t going to be more bulb-outs and wider sidewalks.
Do you want to punish drivers more when they do bad things? Well, be my guest, but that’s a tough row to hoe…
*Your MUNI bus, your shuttle bus, your big truck, your bike, your private car, whatever
“as a STRAVA user, my first thought when I saw that he was using STRAVA was that he was trying to post the best time on a segment (STRAVA’s social aspect includes public leaderboards, which is actually kind of fun). looks like that stretch of Castro is, indeed, a marked segment, which is absolutely fucking stupid and likely encouraged in some small way his reckless behavior.”
And there’s this:
“I actually think the social media angle — especially the Strava stuff — the the most interesting part of this story. I’m not sure I’m ready to fully demonize Chris Bucchere quite yet — presumably he’s a human being and, thus, a crooked timber like the rest of us.But as someone interested in social media including the effects of the “gamification” movement on our culture, I find Strava’s role fascinating. And a great example of “gamification” being applied to something haphazardly and without thinking through the negative consequences…(Yes, I fucking hate the word “gamification,” but that’s all I can think of.) STRAVA’s probably going to have some liability here.”
And then there’s this:
“Strava removes segments flagged as dangerous for exactly this reason. But a lot of riders (myself included) complained that it wasn’t effective, because people with axes to grind were flagging all segments in certain places, rendering the site effectively useless. I don’t know what their policy is on dangerous segments now.”
“Strava ‘s biggest strength lies within the ingenious “segments” feature. Upload a gpx track of your completed ride, and Strava analyses the data with all the usual stats you’d expect, plus a breakdown of specific segments of the ride, eg hill climbs.
Here’s the clever bit - It knows who else has completed those segments, and ranks everybody according to time. The fastest gets a KOM, King of the mountain achievement. (Yes, girls, you get QOM’s). Most people wouldn’t bother to go to the trouble of timing themselves on individual climbs within their ride. Way too much hassle! Strava does it automatically, and awards you an achievement when you beat your personal best (PB).
Strava app screenshot (Samsung Galaxy S2)
If a section of your route doesn’t already appear as a segment, no problem – simply define it as a new segment and see how you rank. The premium version of the service also allows you to break the table down by age range and weight ranges.
Recently, whilst out on a ride, I was aware that a friend had been the first to log a new segment for a particular climb (there aren’t that many Strava users in North Wales yet!) and had the KOM award. Instead of going at my usual pace, the gaming instinct kicked in, and I found myself visiting a very high heart rate zone, and putting in a lot of effort. Later, when I uploaded my GPS data to Strava it was hugely satisfying to realise that I had beaten his time by almost 2 minutes and claimed the KOM. He also got an email from Strava saying I’d beaten his time. Nice.
Silly and childish? Very, I know. Did it feel good? Hell, yes.. Did I get a better workout? Definitely. Will I work harder on future climbs because this technology will let me know automatically whenever I set a new PB on specific climbs? Very likely.”
And here’s the Strava.Com segment what used to be called the Castro Street Bomb (and then the Castro Street Descent). It’s not too exciting. Rather sedate, actually. But I’m sure if you’re hauling butt to become the latest Strava.Com “KOM” (King of the Mountain) and you may or may not be “Idaho Rolling” through red lights, then it could be very exciting / addicting:
What if I started a Market Street Drag Race website for car drivers? They could make a segment like “Second Street to Sixth Street Drag” or something and people could keep track of their times using the GPS. Would you say that I was encouraging recklessness? Or not?
And here’s part of the “Strava Kills” topic at the MTBR.Com forums:
Sad thing is, even as this story makes it’s way around the cycling community, there are people that pull the same **** — running reds/stop signs/etc. from SF down to SCruz — that won’t connect this situation with possibilities around their own actions.”
And I’d link you to what they’re saying at the SF Fixed.Com boards but I don’t know how to do that. (It’s a bit contentious over there these days, I understand.)
“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….”
What this is saying is that pedestrians in California need to let traffic clear an intersection before walking when the WALK turns on for them.
(Most pedestrians in San Francisco don’t seem to know this….)
