Alexandria PD Ticketing Cyclists

[dasgeh]

@lordofthemark 124892 wrote:

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.

On 2 – bikes don’t kill pedestrians. Cars kill pedestrians. We’re on the same side here. That said, if the campaign were something like “yield to pedestrians” and aimed at both bikes and cars, it wouldn’t be so ridiculous.
On 3 – at least 2 paid WABA staffers were involved. Given the amount of things WABA doesn’t do because they don’t have enough staff to get it done, that’s not nothing.

[lordofthemark]

@dasgeh 124907 wrote:

On 2 – bikes don’t kill pedestrians. Cars kill pedestrians. We’re on the same side here. That said, if the campaign were something like “yield to pedestrians” and aimed at both bikes and cars, it wouldn’t be so ridiculous.
On 3 – at least 2 paid WABA staffers were involved. Given the amount of things WABA doesn’t do because they don’t have enough staff to get it done, that’s not nothing.

Sigh. That is simply not the optics or political situation in Old Town, AFAICT. Not many pedestrians are being killed in Old Town by cars (and none by bikes) And no cyclists being killed by cars there either, AFAIK. The vision zero issues in Alexandria are on the stroads outside Old Town, mostly in West Alexandria. Places like the Landmark area, where we have the kinds of suburban conditions (mostly poor people who walk, badly placed, often unsignaled crosswalks, high speeds, etc) that are bad for ped safety. People are aware of that, as the master plan meetings indicate.

Meanwhile though, the wealthiest, most vocal, and most organized citizens in the City live in Old Town. Most of them frequent walkers, and many of them older. Cyclists do not kill them (thank G-d) but we do sometimes intimidate and inconvenience them. Now, we are not going to win over the hard core bike haters, but if we can make it easier for relatively bike friendly Council members to do things like restoring CaBi funding, or pushing for infra improvements, that is something (and I assume Jim et al have spoken to some Council members on this) . I also assume Jim et all have suggested to Greg what the best Alexandria uses are for the few hours of staff time they can allocate to help BPAC.

I mean suppose, just suppose, one of the Freds coming down Union Street really did kill a pedestrian (heaven forbid) Even if it were a pedestrian doing something wrong themselves. Imagine how that would set us back. How much harder it would make everything in the City (even things that had nothing to do with it, or that made safety better for pedestrians) The haters are just waiting for something like that to happen, IMO. Preventing it is worth a lot, I think. And if it cannot be prevented, having a WABA/BPAC safety campaign to point to if it does happen, would also help.

[peterw_diy]

Dasgeh for President!

Does anyone have tangible evidence that shows BPAC and WABA are not just reinforcing the scofflaw meme with the Old Town ambassador program?

Note: BPAC is short on volunteers this week. I wonder why. Could it be because even those of us who participated last year haven’t seen any tangible gains, but instead now see OTCA successfully redirecting police resources away from ticketing infractions that are routinely associated with actual, rather than hypothetical, injury?

[Terpfan]

@lordofthemark 124908 wrote:

Sigh. That is simply not the optics or political situation in Old Town, AFAICT. Not many pedestrians are being killed in Old Town by cars (and none by bikes) And no cyclists being killed by cars there either, AFAIK. The vision zero issues in Alexandria are on the stroads outside Old Town, mostly in West Alexandria. Places like the Landmark area, where we have the kinds of suburban conditions (mostly poor people who walk, badly placed, often unsignaled crosswalks, high speeds, etc) that are bad for ped safety. People are aware of that, as the master plan meetings indicate.

Without delving deeper into this discussion, I would point out a pedestrian was killed by a vehicle in the eastern part of Del Ray earlier this month: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/woman-identified-in-fatal-hit-and-run-in-alexandrias-del-ray-neighborhood/2015/09/04/05159bba-5323-11e5-933e-7d06c647a395_story.html .

[dasgeh]

@lordofthemark 124908 wrote:

Meanwhile though, the wealthiest, most vocal, and most organized citizens in the City live in Old Town. Most of them frequent walkers, and many of them older. Cyclists do not kill them (thank G-d) but we do sometimes intimidate and inconvenience them. Now, we are not going to win over the hard core bike haters, but if we can make it easier for relatively bike friendly Council members to do things like restoring CaBi funding, or pushing for infra improvements, that is something (and I assume Jim et al have spoken to some Council members on this) . I also assume Jim et all have suggested to Greg what the best Alexandria uses are for the few hours of staff time they can allocate to help BPAC.

The sad thing is that cars intimidate and inconvenience pedestrians all the time, to the point where people don’t even notice or complain. If you have a few minutes, stop at watch at basically any intersection with a fair amount of pedestrians, or, better yet, any unsignalized crosswalk. Watch how many times cars cut off pedestrians and pedestrians act like that was the right behavior. Watch how many pedestrians will wait at a crosswalk until the road is completely empty — not that the nearest car is in easy stopping distance away, but completely clear. Watch how many pedestrians get “caught” in the median when a crosswalk crosses a divided road, and how many cars will whizz by, without even slowing, like that is how the design is supposed to work. Even when the people caught are kids. Or in a wheel chair.

We have to point this out. I honestly think that the most vulnerable users – pedestrians – need to be better protected and to assert their rights. And I get that bikes are relatively new, and peds are not used to them. But we have to point out that, as much as it might be scary for a bike to pass by, that’s not what’s really posing the danger. If we don’t challenge this assertion, we lose.

@lordofthemark 124908 wrote:

I mean suppose, just suppose, one of the Freds coming down Union Street really did kill a pedestrian (heaven forbid) Even if it were a pedestrian doing something wrong themselves. Imagine how that would set us back. How much harder it would make everything in the City (even things that had nothing to do with it, or that made safety better for pedestrians) The haters are just waiting for something like that to happen, IMO. Preventing it is worth a lot, I think. And if it cannot be prevented, having a WABA/BPAC safety campaign to point to if it does happen, would also help.

It would be very, very, very unlikely, even if a pedestrian were hit by a cyclist, that the pedestrian would die. The likelihood of death goes up with force, i.e. speed and mass of the hitting object. I believe I’ve heard of 2 deaths ever of pedestrians hit by cyclists (and in one the collision was pretty clearly the pedestrian’s fault, the fact that she died an unlikely occurrence, in that she hit her head just so).

[Anonymous]

@lordofthemark 124908 wrote:

Meanwhile though, the wealthiest, most vocal, and most organized citizens in the City live in Old Town. Most of them frequent walkers, and many of them older. Cyclists do not kill them (thank G-d) but we do sometimes intimidate and inconvenience them.

And they don’t want people riding bikes to put a foot down at stop signs. They want cyclists (preferably) out of Old Town or (at the very least) off of Union Street. If every person riding a bike through Old Town suddenly started to have 100% compliance with full and complete stops at every stop sign, they would start to complain about some other minor infraction and agitate for Alexandria PD to ticket for that. The goal is not to encourage compliance with the stop sign laws. The goal is to make riding on Union Street unpleasant enough that it drives people to give up our bikes or ride them elsewhere.

@lordofthemark 124880 wrote:

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,

If this is what were being done, I would have no problem with it either. Increased police presence to manage traffic during a street festival, or ticketing of unsafe riding behavior in the general context of overall traffic enforcement (including cars!) is perfectly fine and in my opinion good neighborhood policing. Yay city.

But this

Police spokeswoman Crystal Nosal said assorted complaints and comments at civic associations meetings have driven an increase in enforcement of traffic laws for cyclists

– deliberately targeting cyclists for enforcement by setting up stop sign stings at places like Union and Franklin, Union and Queen, Union and Prince, (incredibly non dangerous intersections) etc is not that. And increasing the percentage of people on bikes who come to full, complete stops at stop signs in Old Town is not going to change the optics or the politics of the situation.

[lordofthemark]

I know all that about cars. The thing is, AFAICT I can tell the Old Town NIMBY’s don’t much care about cars intimidating pedestrians on Braddock, upper King, Edsall, etc, etc. They care about Old Town. Where cars go relatively slowly and relatively predictably. And in any case, most of them drive and understand cars and sympathize with motorists (to some degree – they do I think want some ped improvements vis a vis cars as well) But with cyclists you have several issues A. Whereas this is a part of the world where cars are more well behaved than average, I think (because of the traffic calming effect of the 18th century urban form, and the critical mass of pedestrians), it is one where cyclists are less well behaved (because of the unfortunate fact that Union Street is the link between to the two pieces of the MVT) than average B. You have culture war conditions in full – the OTCA it seems to me is heavily affluent older people who live medium to large (if very old) houses, and most have been there a long time. There is a resentment against all the changes in the City, and issues of generation.

I fully agree you at the mile high level about the real problems for pedestrians. I mean completely agree. But I am not sure that plays well with the folks in OT. Or at any rate, it would play better in combination with “we hear you, and we are doing something”.

As for the cyclist ped deaths – A. There have only been two in the region in the last 10 years I think, but several elsewhere in the USA B. Even a collision with major injury to a ped would be very bad for us C. It does not matter if it is the pedestrian’s fault. To a lot of people it will simply be a matter of “if the cyclists were not around, this would not have happened”. Its not fair. Its not just. But I do not think that will matter to people who still can’t see why we are there at all, and wish we weren’t.

Meanwhle I think we agree, that change will come when our numbers increase – the number of cyclists who live in OT is growing, AFAIK, and someday they will command a big role in the OTCA. The question is how do we get there. I am open minded on tactics but more inclined to defer to people who know the politics here.

[DismalScientist]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dr-gridlock/wp/2015/09/21/no-more-whizzing-through-stop-signs-for-bicyclists-in-alexandria-police-step-up-enforcement/

There were 24 tickets issued and over 300 warnings. Furthermore, the person cited in the article said he deserved the ticket, but was complaining about price. It sounds to me that cyclists engaging in Idaho behavior were not being ticketed, although maybe they were warned.

[lordofthemark]

@Amalitza 124934 wrote:

And they don’t want people riding bikes to put a foot down at stop signs. They want cyclists (preferably) out of Old Town or (at the very least) off of Union Street. If every person riding a bike through Old Town suddenly started to have 100% compliance with full and complete stops at every stop sign, they would start to complain about some other minor infraction and agitate for Alexandria PD to ticket for that. The goal is not to encourage compliance with the stop sign laws. The goal is to make riding on Union Street unpleasant enough that it drives people to give up our bikes or ride them elsewhere.

but they cannot ask for bikes to be removed from OT (if they did Council would laugh at them) and there really aren’t many cyclist violations as common as Idahos. So while they can complain, we can try to give friendly Council members cover where they need it most.

If this is what were being done, I would have no problem with it either. Increased police presence to manage traffic during a street festival, or ticketing of unsafe riding behavior in the general context of overall traffic enforcement (including cars!) is perfectly fine and in my opinion good neighborhood policing. Yay city.

I am not sure. I want to see the pattern. That should certainly effect the biking community’s strategy going forward.

But this – deliberately targeting cyclists for enforcement by setting up stop sign stings at places like Union and Franklin, Union and Queen, Union and Prince, (incredibly non dangerous intersections) etc is not that. And increasing the percentage of people on bikes who come to full, complete stops at stop signs in Old Town is not going to change the optics or the politics of the situation.

I do not for a minute agree with what OTCA has done, and I am not sure ACPD responded in the best possible way (I would prefer enforcement that is balanced among modes, and for cyclists, focused only on those doing really egregious things, not people doing proper Idahos) I am merely suggesting that for the moment BPAC has to consider a bigger picture, where Council has done some good things for us, where there are several conflicts coming up where we need them on our side, that they are under pressure from old bid.. – oops, excuse me, the concerned homeowners of Old Town – and that there is some reason to keep doing the WABA/BPAC safety campaign.

[Anonymous]

Fair enough.

@Amalitza 124934 wrote:

If this is what were being done, I would have no problem with it either. Increased police presence to manage traffic during a street festival, or ticketing of unsafe riding behavior in the general context of overall traffic enforcement (including cars!) is perfectly fine and in my opinion good neighborhood policing. Yay city.

What I should have said is “If this is ALL that were being done, I would have no problem with it.” I don’t object to increased traffic enforcement for the Art Festival and similar events. But it is also true that (as per worktheweb’s post) there are ALSO periodic but regular deliberate targeting of cyclists, specifically on Union Street, for Idaho-ing. That’s not exactly new, or a secret, or something the city denies doing. It’s also not a secret that there is a contingent of Old Town residents that would like to divert MVT cyclists from Union Street. And, coincidentally enough, Union Street is where the enforcement always seems to occur.

(for example, from last year)
https://www.facebook.com/alexandriaBPAC/posts/678500392226949

Riding Royal Street might be a better option!!

huh. Can’t *imagine* where I might have got the idea that the real goal is to make riding on Union Street unpleasant enough that cyclists go elsewhere.

[lordofthemark]

I doubt OTCA really wants cyclists on Royal Street. If they do, they should support this http://www.connectionnewspapers.com/news/2014/mar/06/should-royal-street-become-bicycle-boulevard/
instead of opposing it.

I am not holding my breath.

[GovernorSilver]

@Amalitza 124940 wrote:

Fair enough.

What I should have said is “If this is ALL that were being done, I would have no problem with it.” I don’t object to increased traffic enforcement for the Art Festival and similar events. But it is also true that (as per worktheweb’s post) there are ALSO periodic but regular deliberate targeting of cyclists, specifically on Union Street, for Idaho-ing. That’s not exactly new, or a secret, or something the city denies doing. It’s also not a secret that there is a contingent of Old Town residents that would like to divert MVT cyclists from Union Street. And, coincidentally enough, Union Street is where the enforcement always seems to occur.

(for example, from last year)
https://www.facebook.com/alexandriaBPAC/posts/678500392226949

huh. Can’t *imagine* where I might have got the idea that the real goal is to make riding on Union Street unpleasant enough that cyclists go elsewhere.

I could see where complaints about cyclists knifing through crowded foot traffic and blowing stop signs to disrupt the motorist traffic – all in the area of Union St. and King St. – are coming from. That intersection can be busy as hell with both peds and cars on weekends, especially when the weather is nice (or even hot and summery).

Seems like a waste of police resources though to go after the bike commuters Idaho-ing on Union St. on weekday mornings, when all traffic (foot, motorist, bike) is so light..

Union St. isn’t a good route to commute on right now anyway, with the heavy construction vehicles (tractors, etc.) blocking Union St. just south of King. I’m giving up riding there to take a street with more stoplights than stop signs, yet slower traffic than Washington St., to get to Abingdon and its entrance to MVT.

[worktheweb]

@DismalScientist 124936 wrote:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/dr-gridlock/wp/2015/09/21/no-more-whizzing-through-stop-signs-for-bicyclists-in-alexandria-police-step-up-enforcement/

There were 24 tickets issued and over 300 warnings. Furthermore, the person cited in the article said he deserved the ticket, but was complaining about price. It sounds to me that cyclists engaging in Idaho behavior were not being ticketed, although maybe they were warned.

I know for a fact that last Fall’s enforcement wave targeted people who were doing Idaho stops when there was no other traffic (bike, car, or pedestrian) present. Maybe they’re easing up, or maybe it depends on the officer you get that day. As Amalitza said, the real problem is that they’re actively targeting a single class of road user, cyclists.

If Steve O’s article’s stats are correct and motorists roll through stops 80% of the time and we do it 15% more than that (92% of the time) and we’re generous and say that in Alexandria cyclists are 2% of mode share and motorists would be say 90%, you would expect that there were would be 939 tickets in the same period (since there would be 45x more cars with the percentage adjustment) given to drivers in the same area. Clearly that’s not happening, not even 1/10th of that is happening. I would think it would be safe to bet that no tickets were issued to cars in the same period for failing to stop. It is disproportional, discriminatory, and an utter failure to give equal protection under law.

[mstone]

If someone is more interested in an “optics” campaign that scolds cyclists for something that doesn’t actually matter than in a campaign that focuses on our collective responsibility to take care of each other and which promotes safe behavior (ACTUAL safe behavior, like yielding in crosswalks, not BS safe behavior like putting a foot down at a stop sign) then I don’t think we can reach that person, and shouldn’t really care what they think because they aren’t interested in rational discourse.

[dasgeh]

@lordofthemark 124935 wrote:

I know all that about cars. The thing is, AFAICT I can tell the Old Town NIMBY’s don’t much care about cars intimidating pedestrians on Braddock, upper King, Edsall, etc, etc. They care about Old Town. Where cars go relatively slowly and relatively predictably. And in any case, most of them drive and understand cars and sympathize with motorists (to some degree – they do I think want some ped improvements vis a vis cars as well) But with cyclists you have several issues A. Whereas this is a part of the world where cars are more well behaved than average, I think (because of the traffic calming effect of the 18th century urban form, and the critical mass of pedestrians), it is one where cyclists are less well behaved (because of the unfortunate fact that Union Street is the link between to the two pieces of the MVT) than average B. You have culture war conditions in full – the OTCA it seems to me is heavily affluent older people who live medium to large (if very old) houses, and most have been there a long time. There is a resentment against all the changes in the City, and issues of generation.

I fully agree you at the mile high level about the real problems for pedestrians. I mean completely agree. But I am not sure that plays well with the folks in OT. Or at any rate, it would play better in combination with “we hear you, and we are doing something”.

I think we agree about substance. The thing that really makes me mad is that WABA is in a position to shift others’ thinking here, to make the argument that what we need is, along the lines of what amalitza and worktheweb are suggesting (I think), a big campaign to increase pedestrian safety. A great big stop/yield to pedestrians campaign in Old Town. A campaign that targets the real danger — or at least targets both cars and bikes. But instead of making that argument, they’re using limited resources to focus on stop shaming cyclists. Ugh.

@lordofthemark 124935 wrote:

As for the cyclist ped deaths – A. There have only been two in the region in the last 10 years I think, but several elsewhere in the USA B. Even a collision with major injury to a ped would be very bad for us C. It does not matter if it is the pedestrian’s fault. To a lot of people it will simply be a matter of “if the cyclists were not around, this would not have happened”. Its not fair. Its not just. But I do not think that will matter to people who still can’t see why we are there at all, and wish we weren’t.

I only know about 2 nationally – the one on FMR and one in San Fransisco (that, AFAIK, was totally the cyclist’s fault).

[Author]

Posts