Alexandria PD Ticketing Cyclists

[Crickey7]

Yes, I’m the fun police because I don’t . . . equate the right to run stop signs to the battle against Nazism and great civil rights struggles? I don’t care if you want to obey the law or not. If you make the judgment that your very safety depends on running stop signs, I might scratch my head at that claim (and suspect its veracity), but I’m not going to castigate you. If, though, anyone makes the claim that the cyclists have suddenly become deputized to pick and choose which laws to obey, or that cyclists as a matter of course, or of right, are entitled to break laws they find inconvenient, I am going to throw my BS card. Or my fun police badge.

[DismalScientist]

@rcannon100 124833 wrote:

Absolute obedience to things written in books is idiotic. We dont obey the law because some idiot some point wrote it down. We obey the law because it is just and creates a better society.

As a lawyer at a regulatory agency, I don’t think you want to say this.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@Crickey7 124837 wrote:

Yes, I’m the fun police because I don’t . . . equate the right to run stop signs to the battle against Nazism and great civil rights struggles? I don’t care if you want to obey the law or not. If you make the judgment that your very safety depends on running stop signs, I might scratch my head at that claim (and suspect its veracity), but I’m not going to castigate you. If, though, anyone makes the claim that the cyclists have suddenly become deputized to pick and choose which laws to obey, or that cyclists as a matter of course, or of right, are entitled to break laws they find inconvenient, I am going to throw my BS card. Or my fun police badge.

Yeah, the hyperbole in previous posts is a bit much. I stand by my original comment about safety>legality, but you’re right that there are very few instances where lawbreaking is safer or necessary. I will say that slowly rolling through stop signs is illegal–although not egregiously illegal–but can be safer, since it can allow a rider to maintain momentum and not interfere with vehicle traffic to the same extent it would if the cyclist put a foot down at every stop sign. I’d also say there are probably situations where lane-splitting goes from legal to potentially illegal, but riding alongside cars might be safer than trying to take the lane and force cars to wait (left-turns at stoplights with lots of backed-up traffic is what I’m thinking).

So yes, I would say to strive for legality, but given the inherent disparity between bikes and cars, the laws that make driving safer for drivers, don’t necessarily make riding safer for riders…although the two match up the majority of the time. So putting safety first essentially means putting legality first, but they don’t always line up.

[GovernorSilver]

@Terpfan 124834 wrote:

There are no parked cars in the morning commute. But it is a significant challenge to speed as fast as possible on the bike since you know folks are right on your tail. I’ve done it a few times. Part of what makes me nervous is knowing it’s the HOV lane. Those drivers want to go fast and have gone out of their way to have other people in the car to do it. So they sometimes seem more annoyed. It’s why I somtimes will just do Columbus or Alfred.

I agree with the sentiement though and maybe we should jokingly have an informal day assigned to taking Washington Street to make a point to our friends in blue about safety.

I’ll have to ask my coworker how his morning commute is like, because he loves riding on Washington St so much morning and evening. The evening ride there was more pleasant than expected because we simply rode between parked cars and moving cars slowed by traffic volume. In the morning he leaves his place around 9 AM and rides about 19-21 mph on Washington – I assure you I rode nowhere close to that speed when I rode with him, because he let me set the pace and took it easy, drafting behind me. I might just ride on the sidewalk along Washington St a bit, just to see what the morning traffic is like.

I did think about Old Town Alexandria when I read about the Wiggle protest in San Francisco (every cyclist stopped at every stop sign on The Wiggle). The casual cycling group I’ve ridden with in Alexandria has everybody ride in single file on the streets, so that cars can pass us easily. So a bunch of us queued up and stopping at every stop sign is only going to annoy motorists who want to make a right turn – oh wait…

[bobco85]

@TwoWheelsDC 124817 wrote:

**cough**Gainesville**cough**

@baiskeli 124832 wrote:

True, but a healthy share of people out there have no problem with that. Heck, Donald Trump exists.

That’s why I put:

@bobco85 124814 wrote:

…but we would need to respond appropriately and quickly if it should.

We can’t stop people from being illogical and deceitful, but we can and need to respond in these types of situations.

[lordofthemark]

@dasgeh 124811 wrote:

THIS. I even called WABA out on the stop sign campaign (or more accurately, suggested there were better efforts to spend their limited resources on) and was personally attacked BY WABA STAFF. It was very disheartening. WABA does a lot for cycling in the region, but as long as their staff is dominantly one type of cyclist…

WABA did it in cooperation with BPAC.

The reasons, IIUC

1. This is not just about proper Idahos. There are lots of people riding improperly – failing to yield to pedestrians, etc. Even on that great getting up morning when Idaho stops are legalized in Virginia, there will still be a need to deal with behavior that will still be illegal, dangerous, and very bad for the optics of cycling
2. In addition to 1, the campaign was also to some degree about optics. The new bike ped master plan is being moved through, there are multiple issues in the air from Old Town (cameron street bike lane, royal bike blvd) to major decisions on west end stroads. We have won a couple of recent battles (King Street lanes, CaBi expansion) and helping our friends on the Council, who are under pressure from the Old Town Civic Association, probably helps. Note there is an election campaign underway, the seats are being contested, and the challengers tend to be friendlier to the OTCA and other NIMBY interests than the incumbents.

To the extent that the ticketing is either A. Of people who are doing something worse than an Idaho stop or B. Is confined to occasions like the Arts Festival weekend, when, IIUC (I have not gone) there are a lot of pedestrians, I can’t see BPAC going to war over it, or even letting up on the twice a year WABA safety campaign.

If they really are going to ticket proper Idahoers regularly, then some strategy would be called for. I like Bobco’s of getting video footage of the negative reactions from motorists when cyclists Idaho. In combination, video footage of motorist (and maybe also ped?) violations.

If worst came to worst, a SF style “bike to rule” protest might be possible, but I think we are a long way from that. I also look forward to DC passing the Mary Cheh Vision Zero proposal, which would legalize Colorado stops (Idaho at stop signs only) in DC. That would give us in Va something to point to.

[lordofthemark]

@DismalScientist 124842 wrote:

As a lawyer at a regulatory agency, I don’t think you want to say this.

I would hope lawyers and others at regulatory agencies would have a realistic view of when laws and regulations will be followed, and when and how they will be violated. If not, they will make naive decisions that will not be benefit cost positive.

[dasgeh]

@lordofthemark 124880 wrote:

WABA did it in cooperation with BPAC.

The reasons, IIUC

1. This is not just about proper Idahos. There are lots of people riding improperly – failing to yield to pedestrians, etc. Even on that great getting up morning when Idaho stops are legalized in Virginia, there will still be a need to deal with behavior that will still be illegal, dangerous, and very bad for the optics of cycling
2. In addition to 1, the campaign was also to some degree about optics. The new bike ped master plan is being moved through, there are multiple issues in the air from Old Town (cameron street bike lane, royal bike blvd) to major decisions on west end stroads. We have won a couple of recent battles (King Street lanes, CaBi expansion) and helping our friends on the Council, who are under pressure from the Old Town Civic Association, probably helps. Note there is an election campaign underway, the seats are being contested, and the challengers tend to be friendlier to the OTCA and other NIMBY interests than the incumbents.

The problem I have with it is that WABA has very limited resources. By doing this, they aren’t doing other things that are undisputed in their impact.

As far as the dispute here, it’s not clear that by setting up and encouraging stopping at stop signs we are actually helping. We are feeding those who complain about cyclists by giving them the line “See, even WABA thinks it’s a problem”. We are drawing attention to something that I actually think most people don’t broadly notice. We are implying that not stopping at stop signs is what’s putting cyclists in danger – it’s not, and implying so let’s drivers off the hook. We need drivers to take seriously the responsibility of piloting a multi-ton hunk of metal with a powerful motor. We don’t need them thinking “if only the cyclists would stop running stop signs, they’d be safe” before they go back to looking at their phones.

WABA needs to stand up, show people the data, and argue for good policy here.

[Steve O]

This discussion reminds me somewhat of this article, which you should read if you have not:

Why Bikes Make Smart People Say Dumb Things

[lordofthemark]

@dasgeh 124886 wrote:

The problem I have with it is that WABA has very limited resources. By doing this, they aren’t doing other things that are undisputed in their impact.

As far as the dispute here, it’s not clear that by setting up and encouraging stopping at stop signs we are actually helping. We are feeding those who complain about cyclists by giving them the line “See, even WABA thinks it’s a problem”. We are drawing attention to something that I actually think most people don’t broadly notice. We are implying that not stopping at stop signs is what’s putting cyclists in danger – it’s not, and implying so let’s drivers off the hook. We need drivers to take seriously the responsibility of piloting a multi-ton hunk of metal with a powerful motor. We don’t need them thinking “if only the cyclists would stop running stop signs, they’d be safe” before they go back to looking at their phones.

WABA needs to stand up, show people the data, and argue for good policy here.

1. I have not attended enough BPAC meetings or been close enough to the issue to be sure, but I suspect that A. It was already quite broadly noticed B. I do not get the impression that anyone has said “Well even WABA thinks it is a problem” Instead I think it has actually bought some good will.
2. It is not about what keeps bikes safe from cars so much, as what keeps pedestrians safe from bikes. While arguably the real risk to pedestrians there is not from Idahos, but from other behavior – failure to stop WHEN there is a pedestrian entering the crosswalk, or just going too fast for conditions, it would be very difficult to launch a campaign saying “stop please, except when it is safe to Idaho” That is a disadvantage of Idaho being illegal, you cannot distinguish the behaviors easily in a campaign
3. Certainly WABA must allocate resources. This was, IIUC (I missed the chance to participate myself) mostly staffed by Alexandria volunteers, plus Dirt – I am not sure how much there was in the way of resources that could be programmed to something else. In particular to something else Alexandria focused.

[dasgeh]

I think it would be better and easier to refer to the focus on cyclists stopping on stop signs, at the expense of safety education that addresses the main dangers, encouragement that would get more butts on bikes or advocacy that would make the policies, enforcement or infrastructure safer and better for bikes, as “stop shaming”. I think WABA and others should end the “stop shaming”.

[lordofthemark]

@dasgeh 124893 wrote:

I think it would be better and easier to refer to the focus on cyclists stopping on stop signs, at the expense of safety education that addresses the main dangers, encouragement that would get more butts on bikes or advocacy that would make the policies, enforcement or infrastructure safer and better for bikes, as “stop shaming”. I think WABA and others should end the “stop shaming”.

WABA is already doing those things. Again, I am not sure how many fungible WABA resources were involved. And to the extent this impacts optics/politics in a favorable way, it helps all those things – getting better infra and programmatic resources in the City, requires building alliances. Lots of city residents (OTCA nimbys, but also people from all over the City) encounter bikes directly on the streets of Old Town more than anywhere else I imagine. If we are both biking more safely and more lawfully, and bike advocates are seen to be encouraging that, it could help with the other initiatives. I cannot say for sure but I trust the BPAC to have a better idea of the political reality than I do.

[dasgeh]

@lordofthemark 124895 wrote:

WABA is already doing those things.

Some, but not enough. They have limited resources, which is understandable. It’s just that this has the potential to turn negative, as I noted above.

[Terpfan]

@GovernorSilver 124846 wrote:

I’ll have to ask my coworker how his morning commute is like, because he loves riding on Washington St so much morning and evening. The evening ride there was more pleasant than expected because we simply rode between parked cars and moving cars slowed by traffic volume. In the morning he leaves his place around 9 AM and rides about 19-21 mph on Washington – I assure you I rode nowhere close to that speed when I rode with him, because he let me set the pace and took it easy, drafting behind me. I might just ride on the sidewalk along Washington St a bit, just to see what the morning traffic is like.

I did think about Old Town Alexandria when I read about the Wiggle protest in San Francisco (every cyclist stopped at every stop sign on The Wiggle). The casual cycling group I’ve ridden with in Alexandria has everybody ride in single file on the streets, so that cars can pass us easily. So a bunch of us queued up and stopping at every stop sign is only going to annoy motorists who want to make a right turn – oh wait…

I decided to do it in the heart of rush hour last night around 6:15/6:30pm. It actually wasn’t too bad, albeit traffic is really light because of the Pope. But I think I’m going to do it a few more times. Maybe I’ll even through Rt 1 into the mix one morning. And, fwiw, I crossed OT much faster on Washington St. I basically hit every light green until I got stuck behind the bus for two blocks at King St.

[GovernorSilver]

I rode Washington St. northward this morning. Initially I was on the sidewalk, then switched to road at some point north of King St, due to pedestrians walking 2- and 3-abreast. Traffic had gotten lighter for some reason, even though it was still rush hour (around 8:15 AM), so I had no issue taking the rightmost lane all the way to Abingdon.

[Author]

Posts