Is ACPD Victim Blaming?

[rcannon100]

This summer The Kid helped make a film with Document Arlington through AIM on cycling in Arlington. I assume it has aired (I dont have cable). AIM said that they were going to upload it to youtube but have not yet.

Anywho, one of the standard interview questions in making the documentary was about the Intersection of Doom. Document Arlington (a summer project of teenagers) interviewed the county board, Bike Arlington, ACPD and others.

ACPD responded to the Intersection of Doom question at first by saying they did not know what that was. When inform that it was Lee and Lynn, ACPD stated that it was the cyclists fault. The cyclists, according to the ACPD, come down the hill too fast and fly through the Intersection.

The officer (was it a sheriff? I dont know) that was interviewed cited a number of “facts” that I think were dubious. Unfortunately, AIM wanted the documentary to have “conflict”, and therefore featured the ACPD’s views in the film – regardless of whether those views were accurate or were on the same page as Arlco.

Yes, perhaps it is a good point to raise with ACPD – we cant get to solutions if we misunderstand the problem.

[Tim Kelley]

@dasgeh 69884 wrote:

I have been disturbed to see a lighted road sign at the Intersection of Doom (Lee and Lynn) this week that reads something to the effect of “High Night Accident Area: Cross with light”.

SRSLY?!!?!?!?!? I agree that the intersection is dangerous. Especially at night. I like the idea of putting up a sign to address the dangerous behavior.

But the dangerous behavior at that intersection is MOTORISTS NOT YIELDING RIGHT OF WAY when turning right.

What can we do? Who controls these signs?

It’s actually pretty good advice–bikes should cross with the signal.

It is notcomplete advice however, and would probably be more effective if it was targeted at motorists instead.

It’s likely an ACPD sign.

[Tim Kelley]

@rcannon100 69886 wrote:

This summer The Kid helped make a film with Document Arlington through AIM on cycling in Arlington. I assume it has aired (I dont have cable). AIM said that they were going to upload it to youtube but have not yet.

Anywho, one of the standard interview questions in making the documentary was about the Intersection of Doom. Document Arlington (a summer project of teenagers) interviewed the county board, Bike Arlington, ACPD and others.

ACPD responded to the Intersection of Doom question at first by saying they did not know what that was. When inform that it was Lee and Lynn, ACPD stated that it was the cyclists fault. The cyclists, according to the ACPD, come down the hill too fast and fly through the Intersection.

The officer (was it a sheriff? I dont know) that was interviewed cited a number of “facts” that I think were dubious. Unfortunately, AIM wanted the documentary to have “conflict”, and therefore featured the ACPD’s views in the film – regardless of whether those views were accurate or were on the same page as Arlco.

Yes, perhaps it is a good point to raise with ACPD – we cant get to solutions if we misunderstand the problem.

It was actually Douglas Scott, Police Chief who was interviewed. I’ve got a copy on DVD, but I don’t know if it’s been widely released anywhere.

[DismalScientist]

There already is a road sign specifically telling drivers to yield to pedestrians and cyclists in the crosswalk.

https://maps.google.com/?ll=38.898982,-77.070572&spn=0.029308,0.017574&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.898984,-77.070678&panoid=4ogyxtVGEFCOuIsZaudC1w&cbp=12,343.62,,0,2.77

[mstone]

@DismalScientist 69936 wrote:

There already is a road sign specifically telling drivers to yield to pedestrians and cyclists in the crosswalk.

https://maps.google.com/?ll=38.898982,-77.070572&spn=0.029308,0.017574&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.898984,-77.070678&panoid=4ogyxtVGEFCOuIsZaudC1w&cbp=12,343.62,,0,2.77

God only knows how someone could miss that if they’re staring at the light. Maybe if it were a big lighted sign…

[Rootchopper]

For the last three mornings I have watched cars blow through the red light to take a right on Lynn. No attempt to stop whatsoever. On two of those occasions they did so with a ACPD officer looking on. He did nothing. Motorists have every expectation that they can violate the law when police openly ignore enforcement. Caveat Velo!

[TwoWheelsDC]

@rcannon100 69886 wrote:

The cyclists, according to the ACPD, come down the hill too fast and fly through the Intersection.

Too bad the hill ends at Fort Meyer (which somehow ends up being a *relatively* safe intersection, despite those flying cyclists) and the western approach to Lynn is flat…nevermind that the eastern approach is at the TOP of a hill. The times I’ve nearly been hit there in the intersection, and there have been a few, have been from drivers several cars back that don’t see that the lead cars are waiting for peds, so they speed around in the straight lane and cut over…I’ve seen this happen probably half-a-dozen times. I’ve also nearly been hit by people running the red light on Lynn after I’ve entered the crosswalk with the walk signal (a downside of the LPI, it leaves peds exposed).

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Make the right turn onto Lynn a “right on green arrow only” and you basically solve the problem. Add some red light cameras for good measure and call it a day.

[consularrider]

@Rootchopper 69941 wrote:

For the last three mornings I have watched cars blow through the red light to take a right on Lynn. No attempt to stop whatsoever. On two of those occasions they did so with a ACPD officer looking on. He did nothing. Motorists have every expectation that they can violate the law when police openly ignore enforcement. Caveat Velo!

Literally every morning two or three cars will run the red light every light cycle to turn right at Lynn St from the I-66 exit ramp. These are just the ones who are approaching as the light turns yellow. Then a high proportion who arrive on the red will pull through the crosswalk without looking to see if there are pedestrians or cyclist crossing or ready to cross the exit ramp. One of my major irritations with that intersection.

[Tim Kelley]

@TwoWheelsDC 69942 wrote:

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Make the right turn onto Lynn a “right on green arrow only” and you basically solve the problem. Add some red light cameras for good measure and call it a day.

The push back I’ve heard with this suggestion is that there will be too much of a backup on the I-66 exit ramp.

Maybe if more residents complained…

[cyclingfool]

@TwoWheelsDC 69942 wrote:

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Make the right turn onto Lynn a “right on green arrow only” and you basically solve the problem. Add some red light cameras for good measure and call it a day.

And square off/bump out the curb more to really force motorists to slow down for the turn and see what’s in the crosswalk…

[consularrider]

@mstone 69938 wrote:

God only knows how someone could miss that if they’re staring at the light. Maybe if it were a big lighted sign…

The sign needs to be up there between two rightmost traffic lights (there are other intersections in Arlington with that configuration), not on the street level post where it is obstructed until the vehicle gets to the intersection.

[consularrider]

@Tim Kelley 69945 wrote:

The push back I’ve heard with this suggestion is that there will be too much of a backup on the I-66 exit ramp.

Maybe if more residents complained…

Gee, no one seems to get all upset with the “backup” on the GW Parkway to get onto the Roosevelt Bridge or the 14th St Bridge that can be over a mile long on any given day! There are rarely many opportunities to turn right on red anyway during rush hour, but that doesn’t stop some drivers from forcing their way in when traffic is backed up or to rolling through the crosswalk on the off chance. 😡

[TwoWheelsDC]

@Tim Kelley 69945 wrote:

The push back I’ve heard with this suggestion is that there will be too much of a backup on the I-66 exit ramp.

Maybe if more residents complained…

I’ve heard that too…but allowing rights-on-red has zero effect on congestion there because there’s simply no window for cars to make it because of traffic backed up off Key Bridge. Even if 5 cars could turn on every red (most I’ve seen is maybe 2), that’s not going to have a meaningful impact on a backup that’s 1/4 mile long. Giving cars a dedicated arrow probably would increase flow, since there’d be no conflict with peds, who flood the intersection with every green light.

[dasgeh]

@Tim Kelley 69934 wrote:

It’s actually pretty good advice–bikes should cross with the signal.

It is notcomplete advice however, and would probably be more effective if it was targeted at motorists instead.

It’s likely an ACPD sign.

The problem I have with the “it is good advice, so it’s ok to put up the sign” attitude, is that it creates the impression that the advice is targeted at the problem. It is not. I don’t believe ANY of the accidents at this intersection have been caused by a ped or cyclist crossing on the steady hand (I’ll call it jaywalking for shorthand). None. Yet a motorist driving by sees a BIG LIGHTED SIGN that says accidents here – don’t jaywalk. That sign is new, so it’s even more likely to be noticed. So the driver sitting there at the red or waiting for a ped or bike to cross reads the signs and thinks accidents there are our fault. And that is SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

Walk- and BikeArlington should know the best way to get peds’ and cyclists’ attention. If ACPD really is worried about jaywalking, they should talk to WA and BA about outreach. I sincerely hope WA and BA would counsel against this kind of lighted sign, since it sends the wrong message to motorists (while likely being ignored by peds and cyclists, since those signs generally don’t have messages for peds and cyclists).

[RANT]
I am so fed up with ACPD. They say so many things that are simply untrue. I’m beginning to think it’s beyond incompetence and into the realm of flat out dishonesty. We cannot tolerate a dishonest police force.
[/RANT]

That said, I truely believe you catch more flies with honey — you affect change more effectively and quickly by winning others over to your side v. fighting them. I want to write a very mean spirited letter telling ACPD what I really think of their attitude towards cyclist, but know that won’t work. So I plan to write a measured letter geared towards affecting change. Problem is, every time I sit down to do that, I get mad again, and find “measured” difficult. *sigh*

[Tim Kelley]

@dasgeh 69953 wrote:

The problem I have with the “it is good advice, so it’s ok to put up the sign” attitude, is that it creates the impression that the advice is targeted at the problem. It is not. I don’t believe ANY of the accidents at this intersection have been caused by a ped or cyclist crossing on the steady hand (I’ll call it jaywalking for shorthand). None. Yet a motorist driving by sees a BIG LIGHTED SIGN that says accidents here – don’t jaywalk. That sign is new, so it’s even more likely to be noticed. So the driver sitting there at the red or waiting for a ped or bike to cross reads the signs and thinks accidents there are our fault. And that is SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

Walk- and BikeArlington should know the best way to get peds’ and cyclists’ attention. If ACPD really is worried about jaywalking, they should talk to WA and BA about outreach. I sincerely hope WA and BA would counsel against this kind of lighted sign, since it sends the wrong message to motorists (while likely being ignored by peds and cyclists, since those signs generally don’t have messages for peds and cyclists).

[RANT]
I am so fed up with ACPD. They say so many things that are simply untrue. I’m beginning to think it’s beyond incompetence and into the realm of flat out dishonesty. We cannot tolerate a dishonest police force.
[/RANT]

That said, I truely believe you catch more flies with honey — you affect change more effectively and quickly by winning others over to your side v. fighting them. I want to write a very mean spirited letter telling ACPD what I really think of their attitude towards cyclist, but know that won’t work. So I plan to write a measured letter geared towards affecting change. Problem is, every time I sit down to do that, I get mad again, and find “measured” difficult. *sigh*

Agreed. My point was just that is good advice, but that it’s incomplete. I think there is a long ways to go with the enforcement side of things in Arlington.

[Author]

Posts