HAWK signal on GW Parkway on 11/18?

[PotomacCyclist]

I hope this helps to improve safety, for everyone, at that location. I also hope it helps with planning a permanent solution to that dangerous crossing. In the meantime, I’ll continue to avoid that route. Fortunately I rarely have reason to use that crossing, but others may not have convenient alternatives.

[jhr]

This is at least a step in the right direction. Unfortunately I assume this won’t include the crossing from the Washington Blvd path which is still across two lanes of car traffic and therefore now already more in need of improvement.

[KLizotte]

“The purpose is to improve safety and increase awareness by slowing down traffic when pedestrians and bicyclists intend to cross the Parkway. Trail users can activate the flashing beacon and notify motorists of their intention to cross the Parkway. Trail users need to be aware that the flashing beacon is a warning, not a stop signal.”.

And why not make the cars stop – especially given that it is activated by a live, human being?!? If it is too dangerous to have the cars stop then doesn’t it stand to reason that it is too dangerous for people to walk/bike across?!

Gonna go find a wall for my head to hit….

[cyclingfool]

@KLizotte 69305 wrote:

And why not make the cars stop – especially given that it is activated by a live, human being?!? If it is too dangerous to have the cars stop then doesn’t it stand to reason that it is too dangerous for people to walk/bike across?!

Kind of what I was thinking. And, isn’t a human in a crosswalk a good enough reason to stop? So if the light flashes on, activated by a human, and there’s someone crossing the road at a crosswalk, shouldn’t they be stopping anyway, in essence making this a stop signal?!?!?!?! 😡

(referencing this: Trail users need to be aware that the flashing beacon is a warning, not a stop signal.)

[jhr]

At least when cars are nice enough to disobey the NPS and stop this will help warn drivers behind them that they’re stopped for a reason. This was worse before they moved the crossing but I was still almost killed one day by a motorcycle that tried to cut around a car that had stopped for me.

[mstone]

The same idiotic design is used at Belmont on the wod. It really pisses me off that they so indefensibly favor cars over human life.

[dbb]

When the signal goes in, we should take the time to actually use it and cross the GWMP in the crosswalk. After you have experienced the effects of the signal, please share your real-life observations with the NPS. I’d expect a statement that begins with “I used the warning signal while crossing the GWMP and found …….” would carry more weight than just an opinion.

[mstone]

@dbb 69363 wrote:

When the signal goes in, we should take the time to actually use it and cross the GWMP in the crosswalk. After you have experienced the effects of the signal, please share your real-life observations with the NPS. I’d expect a statement that begins with “I used the warning signal while crossing the GWMP and found …….” would carry more weight than just an opinion.

Well, I guess we’ll see if they care more than vdot does. Cynical me would guess it’s a nifty way to shift blame. (“Oh, you didn’t push the button that means nothing to motorists? Your fault for getting hit, then. Oh, you did push the button? Well, you must have crossed like you had a signal. Your fault for getting hit, then.”)

[JimF22003]

They recently put one of these in on Gallows Rd in front of the Woodburn School. It’s useless as far as I can see. I was driving on Gallows the other morning and the light was flashing and the poor pedestrian was just waiting there as cars just blew on through in both directions. I (slowly) pulled to a stop in front of the crossing, and cars continued to blow past me on the left and from the oncoming lanes. I was lucky I wasn’t rear-ended. Finally a few drivers got the clue and stopped also, and the pedestrian was able to cross. There would need to be actual consequences for disobeying the signal (for example like blowing past a school bus with the flashing lights on) before people might start paying attention.

[peterw_diy]

Maybe there’s hope for a pedestrian bridge after all. If NPS is willing to install hideous flashing lights, how could they object to a simple bridge that’s smaller than the existing automotive overpasses?

[dbb]

@mstone 69368 wrote:

Well, I guess we’ll see if they care more than vdot does. Cynical me would guess it’s a nifty way to shift blame. (“Oh, you didn’t push the button that means nothing to motorists? Your fault for getting hit, then. Oh, you did push the button? Well, you must have crossed like you had a signal. Your fault for getting hit, then.”)

Given the processes the government uses for information collection, public engagement and decision making (particularly under NEPA), comments count more than opinions offered outside the process. I’d love to be able to say that NPS, VDOT and Arlington listens to us and always does what cyclists want, I can’t.

I can say that we have gotten more with engagement than sniping and I encourage everybody to engage with their government agencies. Hell, I think we have a great relationship with Arlington County staff (they listen, understand and act) and even at that, they are unable to keep us happy all the time. That is the reality of their responsibility to balance all their missions with our needs. Pretty much the same problem our parents faced when they didn’t give us what we wanted. We’ve gotten similar response from our engagement with NPS along the MVT as well.

I’d hazard a guess that the NPS staff are going to get a raft of crap from roadway users that complain about roadway congestion, delays and inconvenience as a result of balancing the needs for cyclist and ped safety. We need to provide a balance to that through our comments.

What we often don’t recognize is the heavy lifting the staff from all the government agencies do behind the scenes. These folks make decisions every day and they often include cycling improvements in projects that never rise to the level of public awareness. Engagement keeps cycling in our government partner’s consciousness.

[Justin Antos]

If I could hit “Like” more than once on what dbb just wrote, I would. Well said!

[lordofthemark]

I guess I’m a glass half full kind of person. I was pleased the FCDOT responded to my email and installed signs with a ped icon on my part of Hummer. I’d be more please to get a light like this there – thougha a proper Hawklight would be even better.

Should the drivers have already been stopping for peds in xwalks? Yes. And a few did. Do most ignore the new signs? Yes. Do a few more go slowly than before? I think so.

[Tim Kelley]

@mstone 69368 wrote:

Well, I guess we’ll see if they care more than vdot does. Cynical me would guess it’s a nifty way to shift blame. (“Oh, you didn’t push the button that means nothing to motorists? Your fault for getting hit, then. Oh, you did push the button? Well, you must have crossed like you had a signal. Your fault for getting hit, then.”)

Yeah, you’re just being cynical. I’ve met the Park Planner who is involved in this and I think he gets it and genuinely wants to do as much as he can within the confines of the larger NPS structure.

[mstone]

@Tim Kelley 69445 wrote:

Yeah, you’re just being cynical. I’ve met the Park Planner who is involved in this and I think he gets it and genuinely wants to do as much as he can within the confines of the larger NPS structure.

It’s a pedestrian safety issue, not elementary school–I don’t give out bonus points for effort. For convenience facilities I’m much more patient and understanding. I consider these stupid pushbutton blinky lights to be flat-out counterproductive. Whether they intend for this liability scenario or not, that’s how it will play out.

We already know what a crosswalk does, but NPS doesn’t feel like enforcing that. We know what a red light does, but NPS doesn’t feel like implementing that. We know how overpasses work, still no go. We know how stop signs work. Nope. So they invent a new signal which pedestrians have to take extra action for, and which has no meaning. What, exactly, do they think is the expected result? Will the park police stop harassing drivers for stopping for pedestrians if the yellow light is blinking or is that still considered obstructing traffic? If NPS park police still encourage people to speed through pedestrian crossings, what did spending this money accomplish, other than costing the opportunity to spend the money on an actual safety enhancement?

[Author]

Posts