ACPD Community Engagement Survey

[bobco85]

I’m coming in a little late on this thread, but in regards to the Van Buren/19th St (minor nitpick: the road is no longer Westmoreland St at that intersection) electric sign: the local neighborhood has long complained to law enforcement about cyclists not stopping at the stop signs there. Thus, law enforcement has set up stings and/or extra signage, and there is no shortage of cyclists willing to cruise through without stopping (I am a proponent of the Idaho Stop but not when I see law enforcement).

This is an example of law enforcement responding to community input. Arguments can be made all day regarding the relative danger in cyclists versus drivers running stop signs, but in the end, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.*

* and if you’re wondering, yes, even at the Intersection of Doom although we’d like it to be fixed rather than seeing temporary increases in police presence

[mstone]

@hozn 142263 wrote:

Perhaps we have had different experiences. How many moving violations have you been issued as a cyclist?

None, but I also haven’t gotten any as a driver in 15+ years (spending way too much time in the car). Maybe my standards for driving are higher across the board?

Side note: I hate the argument drivers provide for why they shouldn’t get a ticket because “nobody was there”. Those are very much exactly the kind of conditions where a pedestrian gets killed because the driver wasn’t expecting anyone to be there and consequently wasn’t paying enough attention. I’m willing to bet that almost none of the cases where a driver rolls over a pedestrian at an intersection happens because the driver sees the pedestrian and then decides to run over them anyway.

[mstone]

@bobco85 142265 wrote:

This is an example of law enforcement responding to community input. … in the end, the squeaky wheel gets the grease

If only law enforcement responded equally to all communities and didn’t decide which were important complaints based on windshield perspective.

[lordofthemark]

@hozn 142252 wrote:

Yeah, but automobiles generally do and cyclists generally do not. I have seen one or two cars not stop there. I have seen thousands of cyclists (well, probably many of the same people) not stop there. I think singling out cyclists there is appropriate under the circumstances.

Whether they should use their sign for higher-value enforcement is a different matter, though.

At the intersection of King Street and Park Center Drive, I see cars proceeding on King Street blow the red light fairly frequently. I have never seen a cyclist blow the red light there. I would not expect the Alexandria Police, if they put in an electronic sign there, to say “motor vehicles must stop at the red light” – they would say “all vehicles”.

That is if they were to even put in such a sign. They have not, and I do not expect they ever will. Because a car or truck, blowing through a red light (across a crosswalk that regularly has pedestrians, BTW) at 35 to 45 MPH (its a 35MPH zone) once in a while is no big deal. Not nearly as big a deal as a place where cyclists are blowing through a stop sign. Because of all the reasons Steve O has said above.

[lordofthemark]

BTW, I probably put in more miles on my car than my bike, even the last two years, and certainly the last 15 years. I too do not think I have gotten a ticket in at least 15 years.

And while I have not gotten a ticket on a bike – I have encountered pushback against bike infrastructure and bike safety initiatives from people repeating scofflaw cyclist memes. The most ironic occasion was at one meeting on the Alexandria Bike Ped Chapter for the Transportation Master Plan, which occurred right after I had joined BPAC in a safety campaign at King and Union, encouraging all (though clearly we were responding to concerns about “scofflaw cyclists”) to come to a full stop. I would suggest that punishment, of the entire cycling community (or at least of those of us who want the benefits of things like the initiatives contained in the Bike Ped Chapter) is as serious, or more, than the occasional ticket.

[lordofthemark]

@bobco85 142265 wrote:

I’m coming in a little late on this thread, but in regards to the Van Buren/19th St (minor nitpick: the road is no longer Westmoreland St at that intersection) electric sign: the local neighborhood has long complained to law enforcement about cyclists not stopping at the stop signs there. Thus, law enforcement has set up stings and/or extra signage, and there is no shortage of cyclists willing to cruise through without stopping (I am a proponent of the Idaho Stop but not when I see law enforcement).

This is an example of law enforcement responding to community input. Arguments can be made all day regarding the relative danger in cyclists versus drivers running stop signs, but in the end, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.*

* and if you’re wondering, yes, even at the Intersection of Doom although we’d like it to be fixed rather than seeing temporary increases in police presence

Yup, and we have talked about this in regards to Alexandria.

Folks seem to be of two minds – some would challenge the notion of LE responding to community complaints about traffic infractions, rather than prioritizing based on data, science etc. The other approach, which I think bears considering, is for bike/ped advocates to make a point of complaining about locations with egregious driver behavior – that will lead either to real improvements, or to the police giving up on things like call/click/connect and similar complaint lines. Unfortunately for me to participate, I would have to spend some time at the corner of King and Park Center (or some of my other favorite locations in NW Alexandria) and monitor enough to feel confident in my complaint. I have not seen my way to spending time that way, thus far.

[americancyclo]

I don’t see any traffic incidents listed at http://www.raidsonline.com/?address=Arlington,VA for this intersection. Maybe ArlCo has more data that is not yet public.

This looks like ‘enforcement theater’ to me. If there haven’t been accidents recently, then there would be no way to judge the signs effectiveness if there continue to be no accidents.

The sign is reinforcing the residents windshield perspective that it isn’t ‘fair’ or safe that the cyclists are breaking a law.

Perhaps the only danger here is to the law that is being broken.

[lordofthemark]

@Tania 142231 wrote:

It’s been there at least a week, maybe a little longer (my sense of passing time is notoriously bad – but I feel confident in “at least a week”).

Considering that is part of a route that has been signed as a SafeTrack alternative, the timing is interesting. I do think it would be nice if the police, before responding to a community complaint in this manner, might consult with the transportation folks.

[baiskeli]

If someone thinks cyclists blowing stop signs isn’t a safety problem, maybe they should lobby to make it legal.

[mstone]

@lordofthemark 142273 wrote:

Unfortunately for me to participate, I would have to spend some time at the corner of King and Park Center (or some of my other favorite locations in NW Alexandria) and monitor enough to feel confident in my complaint.

You’re clearly putting more thought into this than the SCOFFLAW CYCLIST!!>@>!#!!! crowd is. If the only basis for police action is volume of calls without regard to their legitimacy, just make calls.

[lordofthemark]

@baiskeli 142277 wrote:

If someone thinks cyclists blowing stop signs isn’t a safety problem, maybe they should lobby to make it legal.

No one thinks that cyclists blowing through stop signs (which is not the same as the Idaho Stop, which folks have been lobbying for legalizing in DC, though it looks like it will not go through this year – in Va I would think we have more urgent and feasible priorities in Richmond) is not a problem – I think people are questioning why this sign called out cyclists, and did not simply ask all vehicles to stop. What precisely is the loss in asking all vehicles to stop?

[mstone]

@baiskeli 142277 wrote:

If someone thinks cyclists blowing stop signs isn’t a safety problem, maybe they should lobby to make it legal.

Re: lobbying: just take a look at what’s happening with DC’s attempt to align its liability standards with the 90+% of states that don’t have contributory negligence. The all-powerful bike lobby simply isn’t strong enough to make idaho stops legal in the local political climate. (Among other reasons, because the “trained and expert law enforcement professionals” are putting up giant flashing signs advertising how dangerous cyclist behavior is, above and beyond anything that happens in a car, and we have to respect their informed judgment…right?)

[lordofthemark]

@mstone 142279 wrote:

You’re clearly putting more thought into this than the SCOFFLAW CYCLIST!!>@>!#!!! crowd is. If the only basis for police action is volume of calls without regard to their legitimacy, just make calls.

There are multiple levels. Alexandria Police may still defer to OTCA, but it seems clear that T&ES does not (given that they are going ahead with the bike lanes on Cameron and Prince, and are again proposing moving forward with the Royal Street Neighborhood Bikeway). I think there is still advantage in not being seen as like the wilder folks in OTCA.

[ShawnoftheDread]

@americancyclo 142275 wrote:

This looks like ‘enforcement theater’ to me. If there haven’t been accidents recently, then there would be no way to judge the signs effectiveness if there continue to be no accidents.

Tiger-repelling rocks!

[dasgeh]

@Tania 142241 wrote:

There is a busy school bus stop at this intersection. I have zero doubt some a$$hat flying down the hill and through the stop sign has almost crashed into some little kid trying to cross the street. Or some resident just out walking their dog.

I have zero doubt this has happened as well. And that a$$hat was in a car.

This kind of shit would be A-OK in my book IF they ever did this for cars. They don’t. They never, ever do. And cars kill people and mangle their legs.

Police have limited resources and therefore must prioritize their enforcement. I strongly believe they should prioritize in a way that protects people, not based on their own biases. Clearly ACPD has a widespread, top-down bias against cyclists, and we have to call them out on it.

[Author]

Posts