Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, September 21, 2011
City A Simple Thing the City of Seattle Could Do in Response to the Death of Cyclist Robert Townsend
Posted by Eli Sanders on Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 6:00 AM
- E.S.
- Bellevue Avenue and East Pine Street
Hang a sign similar to this at the intersection of University Way Northeast and Northeast Campus Parkway.
1
Unless that sign is actually going to come down and physically slap traffic law violators in the face, I don't think it would do much good.
2
I found it instructive to visit that intersection in Google Street View, both from the driver's perspective (northbound turning west) and the cyclist's perspective southbound.
I think an unfamiliar graphic posted high and slightly to the right (the light pole controlling the northbound driver extends from the right side only above the northbound lane) is going to do nothing but distract. (The sign shown emphasizes bicycle cross-traffic rather than oncoming, but you said "similar," so OK.)
I think an unfamiliar graphic posted high and slightly to the right (the light pole controlling the northbound driver extends from the right side only above the northbound lane) is going to do nothing but distract. (The sign shown emphasizes bicycle cross-traffic rather than oncoming, but you said "similar," so OK.)
3
Also, someone posted this link in comments recently, and it's well worth reading for anyone who missed it:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/prin…
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/prin…
4
I agree with #1. Penalties for traffic "accidents" are ridiculously lenient. Until we start treating serious collisions with adequate penalties nothing will happen. People will start looking twice when hitting and hurting a pedestrian/cyclist is good for 4 weeks in jail and no driving for 5 years. I doubt this will ever happen though, even multiple DWI (the most egregious traffic violation?) is treated with a slap on the wrist unless it's a high profile case. What hope is there prosecuting someone who didn't see a cyclist because they were not paying attention; you can't mess with the USA's car culture
5
Does that sign mean, yield to bicycles on red light? It took me a minute to even get that far, the green light in the photo was confusing the hell out of me....at first I was thinking, if the light is green, why wouldn't the traffic seeing it have right-of-way. And I bike far more often than I drive, so......maybe a clearer sign is in order. Though, as at @1 said, it's not going to stop the people that already break traffic laws anyway.
7
Thanks a million for that, rob! I remember having the "I just didn't see him" response when Slog posted the gorilla-suit video. It baffled me, and it goes a long way to explain the trouble with overreliance on signage Prof. Staddon discusses.
9
I missed the damn gorilla too, gus, trying to count the ball tosses. I wouldn't have thought it possible, being forewarned and all.
Something else I haven't seen mentioned: University Way is one lane in each direction there, with parallel parking. Is it possible that Mr. Townsend, in the course of his speedy deliveries in a very familiar neighborhood, was southbound on the sidewalk to avoid getting doored? If so, he would have been shaded by the trees at the northwest corner there, and possibly screened from view of the driver turning left by any parked cars.
Something else I haven't seen mentioned: University Way is one lane in each direction there, with parallel parking. Is it possible that Mr. Townsend, in the course of his speedy deliveries in a very familiar neighborhood, was southbound on the sidewalk to avoid getting doored? If so, he would have been shaded by the trees at the northwest corner there, and possibly screened from view of the driver turning left by any parked cars.
10
WTF does that sign mean? Road signs work best when they're giant, a recognized symbol, and say things like STOP. You shouldn't need a goddamn map legend to translate them.
11
Any driver should be able to easily read the sign -
Yield to cyclists in the green bike lane.
And while it's true that this won't stop every driver from being a douche, this is a small piece that may very well get the attention of a few more drivers, reminding them that there is a bike lane in front of them, and to watch WTF they are doing.
Yield to cyclists in the green bike lane.
And while it's true that this won't stop every driver from being a douche, this is a small piece that may very well get the attention of a few more drivers, reminding them that there is a bike lane in front of them, and to watch WTF they are doing.
12
@11 Right...but there's a light. Do you obey the green light or the yield sign?
I'm thinking 6 may have it right - yield when making a turn on red - but the sign is confusing.
I'm thinking 6 may have it right - yield when making a turn on red - but the sign is confusing.
13
Leaving aside all the issues raised in the excellent article rob! posted, wasn't Mr. Townsend hit by an oncoming car and not a right hook, as this sign apparently is designed to try to prevent?
14
@9: It would be odd for him to use the sidewalk there. Most riders on 9th Ave who want to avoid being doored just ride closer to the center of the lane. The sidewalks are usually filled with peds.
15
uh, from a distance of more than 10ft away most human eyes won't see that bike symbol. they'll see the yield, but not the bike. classic case of poor sign design. signs need to be readable from far away!!!!!
16
@12 - What's more important - slowing for a split second to make sure you don't hit some asshole on a fixie, or right of way?
And the "on red" would be correct, I'm sure. Bikes aren't supposed to barrel through red lights. But car v. bike, car always wins.
And the "on red" would be correct, I'm sure. Bikes aren't supposed to barrel through red lights. But car v. bike, car always wins.
17
What the hell DOES that sign mean? "Ignore the green light and yield to bicyclists when veering off course to drive through the Mud Bay store window"?
Speaking of signage, 5th Ave at Pine is chock full of "no right turn" signage (five different indicators, I think one officer said) -- but motorists don't see 'em. Drivers are too busy tracking signals, pedestrians, and lane-changers emerging from the lane-divided Monorail extent of 5th. SPD can (and do) camp out there and rack up unlimited citations for illegal right turns.
Incidentally, Google street-view shows a cyclist weaving in and out of the marked bike lane westbound on Pine approaching Bellevue.
Speaking of signage, 5th Ave at Pine is chock full of "no right turn" signage (five different indicators, I think one officer said) -- but motorists don't see 'em. Drivers are too busy tracking signals, pedestrians, and lane-changers emerging from the lane-divided Monorail extent of 5th. SPD can (and do) camp out there and rack up unlimited citations for illegal right turns.
Incidentally, Google street-view shows a cyclist weaving in and out of the marked bike lane westbound on Pine approaching Bellevue.
18
That's brilliant. More signs! They should put up signs everywhere. Something for when you're supposed to stop. Another for left turn only. Think of it! Traffic could be safe at last if only we used more signs.
Except what about scofflaws? We'd need a new law saying absolutely no ignoring the signs. If that doesn't work, put up some more signs saying MIND THE SIGNS!
Oh, and one saying "This means you!" This means you always does the trick.
Except what about scofflaws? We'd need a new law saying absolutely no ignoring the signs. If that doesn't work, put up some more signs saying MIND THE SIGNS!
Oh, and one saying "This means you!" This means you always does the trick.
19
@15 +1. The sign is too complicated. If it takes more than a second of pondering, the opportunity is lost.
20
Yes, because as we all know, drivers on Capitol Hill LOVE reading and paying attention to stop signs.
22
The real Seattle response would be to put up TWENTY signs, several of them newly-designed (like this one), so that drivers have more visual information to process than they can possibly grasp in the time they have. Signs like this one are especially good because they're in a language no one understands. That way, drivers will be so befuddled by the signs, and so busy looking around at the plethora of them, that they will see neither bikes nor cars, and accidents will go up, not down.
They did this at an intersection near my house -- I counted nineteen signs, though I think two of them have since been removed. As a result the intersection is now a parade of people slamming on brakes, stopping in the middle of turns, backing up, turning left or right with no warning, honking piteously, and similarly behaving like confused people. Meanwhile, the one traditional sign -- a plain ol' stop sign -- gets blown past by three out of four cars that pass it. Nothing makes sense. Nothing is understandable. Everyone is confused.
More like that!
They did this at an intersection near my house -- I counted nineteen signs, though I think two of them have since been removed. As a result the intersection is now a parade of people slamming on brakes, stopping in the middle of turns, backing up, turning left or right with no warning, honking piteously, and similarly behaving like confused people. Meanwhile, the one traditional sign -- a plain ol' stop sign -- gets blown past by three out of four cars that pass it. Nothing makes sense. Nothing is understandable. Everyone is confused.
More like that!
23
@4: People should be jailed for accidents?
What if I accidentally close the door on someone's finger? Do I get charged with assault, or even child abuse if it happens to be my kid? Or the pregnant woman who accidentally falls down the stairs - jail time for killing her fetus? Should we jail the woman who falls asleep with a cigarette in her hand for arson, too?
Jail! Grunt grunt. Punish! Grunt grunt.
What if I accidentally close the door on someone's finger? Do I get charged with assault, or even child abuse if it happens to be my kid? Or the pregnant woman who accidentally falls down the stairs - jail time for killing her fetus? Should we jail the woman who falls asleep with a cigarette in her hand for arson, too?
Jail! Grunt grunt. Punish! Grunt grunt.
24
@22
You're more right than you know. SDOT's actual policy is to put up another sign whenever somebody dies in an intersection. Our traffic engineers have read the science that says it doesn't work, but it does make the angry calls and letters stop so they can get on with their work.
Public policy in this town is one sop to public hysteria after another.
You're more right than you know. SDOT's actual policy is to put up another sign whenever somebody dies in an intersection. Our traffic engineers have read the science that says it doesn't work, but it does make the angry calls and letters stop so they can get on with their work.
Public policy in this town is one sop to public hysteria after another.
25
How about a simpler "no right on red" sign? If it's a dangerous intersection, take away one of the most dangerous activities and be done with it. Enforce it with a camera if needed.
The sign in the photo is just too confusing -- yield to bicyclists blowing through the red light? Try to veer out of the way of cyclists? Sit and ponder this sign for a while and then hope for the best?
The sign in the photo is just too confusing -- yield to bicyclists blowing through the red light? Try to veer out of the way of cyclists? Sit and ponder this sign for a while and then hope for the best?
28
While I agree with the idea of adding signage to raise awareness of bicycle lanes, this sign, for the most part, does not convey any real meaning to a driver in terms of what actions they are supposed to take. This, like the bike lanes, are the result of poor user experience design. The city needs to take a fresh approach at designing the entire bike/car interaction using the same methods that are widely used in other critical human interactions and even software design. We can easily, and readily understand process flow and symbolic meaning in a silly app like Foursquare, but we have meaningless lanes and signage in critical municipal areas like streets. Needs to be more work here to make it better.
30
And here I was thinking the city couldn't do worse than that asinine "yield to pedestrian" sign they've started putting up at crosswalks. It shows a pedestrian with a tiny stop sign in the upper right hand corner, which nine out of ten drivers interpret to mean "stop at all times even when there isn't a pedestrian within 100 yards of this intersection".
It's super fantastic where 46th turns into 45th in Wallingford. The few cars waiting at the stop sign on 45th don't understand why cars are stopping. The drivers that are stopping think they have to wait for the cars at the stop sign. And so everyone sits there for five minutes until someone takes the initiative. I'm waiting for an LA Story scenario where all the drivers decide to go at once and crash into each other.
It's super fantastic where 46th turns into 45th in Wallingford. The few cars waiting at the stop sign on 45th don't understand why cars are stopping. The drivers that are stopping think they have to wait for the cars at the stop sign. And so everyone sits there for five minutes until someone takes the initiative. I'm waiting for an LA Story scenario where all the drivers decide to go at once and crash into each other.
31
Of course, the real fix is to separate bicycles from cars, ala the Netherlands. As long as they share space there will be "accidents".
32
@30 - Aye. Nearly got rear-ended the first time I encountered the stop-ish signage at 45/46th & Wfrd.
33
Why is it that people think that just putting up a sign is going to protect a cyclist from being hit? If vehicle drivers are not paying attention it's of no use.
34
@6: The problem with right on red is that many people don't treat right on red as an option _if it's safe to do so_ they treat it as if they're _always_ allowed to turn right on red. Wouldn't want to be held up for ten seconds now would we?
35
@34,
Those of us who treat rights on red correctly are going to lose that privilege thanks to those who abuse it. This is why we can't have nice things.
Those of us who treat rights on red correctly are going to lose that privilege thanks to those who abuse it. This is why we can't have nice things.
36
That sign is not lit, not much use at night or when visibility is poor, when these type of accidents tend to happen.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
The Sunday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (36) RSS