BBelow is the new pedestrian right of way ordinance I received from the Mayor. After sharing this with our neighbors it appears we need a new ordinance. If you read the ordinance carefully, the pedestrian doesn't actually have the right of way.
In plain English, vehicles are allowed through a crosswalk while a mother and baby are in the crosswalk as long as the vehicle is not about to hit them. It is also so poorly worded and vague that it would be impossible for a person waiting to enter a crosswalk to understand when they have the right of way.
Furthermore, how would an 8 year old child interpret this?
Like ordinances in many other towns, this should be very simple: Vehicles should be required to yield the complete right of way to a pedestrian attempting to cross the street. In California, drivers are ticketed for failing to stop when a pedestrian is waiting to enter the roadway. It's that simple. Anything less creates a false sense of safety where the pedestrian is forced to hope and pray that the driver will actually yield or stop.
If pedestrians are not sure whether an oncoming vehicle is going to stop, they don't step in front of the car. This creates a negative feedback. The rolling car makes the pedestrian unsure. The pedestrian doesn't step into the crosswalk. The driver continues through the crosswalk. Pedestrians still don't feel safe.
The ordinance must be revised.
-------
TRAFFIC (PEDESTRIAN RIGHT OF WAY IN MARKED CROSSWALKS)
ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 10:148 OF CHAPTER 126 (TRAFFIC) OF TITLE X OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF ANN ARBOR.
The City of Ann Arbor Ordains:
Section 1. That Section 10:148 of Chapter 126 of Title X of the Code of the City of Ann Arbor be amended to read as follows
10:148. Pedestrians crossing streets.
(a) No pedestrian shall cross a street at a location other than at a crosswalk into which vehicle traffic is then restricted by a traffic control device unless such crossing may be done safely and without interfering with motor vehicle and bicycle traffic on that street.
(b) No operator of a motor vehicle or bicycle shall interfere with pedestrian or bicycle traffic in a crosswalk into which vehicle traffic is then restricted by a traffic control device.
(c) When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if need be to so yield, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is on the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger, but a pedestrian shall not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into a path of a vehicle that is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.
Section 2. That this Ordinance shall take effect on the tenth day following legal publication.
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the Council of the City of Ann Arbor, Michigan, adopted the foregoing ordinance at its regular session of May 5, 2008.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
At 40mph You Need 300ft to Avoid Killing a Child
Slowing Down Traffic
Wide high-speed streets can create a barrier to walking to school. This is the type of condition that should not occur along a child’s route to school.
High-speed motor vehicles pose a serious threat to the safety of children who are crossing streets. One of the biggest challenges in providing children with safe walking and bicycling routes to school involves slowing down traffic.
Slower motor vehicle speeds allow drivers to stop in a shorter distance and reduce the chance of injuring a pedestrian or bicyclist. A motor vehicle traveling on a level surface at a rate of 40 mph will need nearly 300 feet between the vehicle and the child to stop in time to avoid a collision. This distance is reduced to approximately 197 feet for a vehicle traveling at 30 mph, 112 feet for a vehicle traveling at 20 mph and 77 feet for a vehicle traveling at 15 mph.
Pedestrian crash severity is also much lower at low motor vehicle speeds. If a pedestrian is struck by a motor vehicle traveling at 40 mph there is an 85 percent likelihood that the pedestrian will be killed. This percentage drops to 45 percent at 30 mph and 5 percent at 20 mph. Thus, slowing motor vehicle speeds not only reduces the chance of a crash due to the shorter stopping distance that is required, but it also reduces the chance of a pedestrian fatality or serious injury.
The relationship between pedestrian injury severity and motor vehicle impact speeds.
Which street has lower speeds? The street on the bottom with trees, on-street parking and a narrower pavement width will naturally result in slower driver speeds.
When slowing or "calming" traffic, the right design invites the right driver response. The guiding principle of traffic calming is to influence driver speeds and behavior through good design whenever possible, rather than by traffic control measures such as traffic signals and STOP signs.
There are many design and engineering tools that can be used to slow down traffic and make it safer for children to walk and bicycle to school including:
* Mini-roundabouts and Narrow Lanes.
* Chokers and Chicanes.
* Speed Humps.
* Raised Pedestrian Crosswalks.
* Neighborhood Traffic Circles.
* Reduced Corner Radii.
* Speed Sensitive Signals.
Wide high-speed streets can create a barrier to walking to school. This is the type of condition that should not occur along a child’s route to school.
High-speed motor vehicles pose a serious threat to the safety of children who are crossing streets. One of the biggest challenges in providing children with safe walking and bicycling routes to school involves slowing down traffic.
Slower motor vehicle speeds allow drivers to stop in a shorter distance and reduce the chance of injuring a pedestrian or bicyclist. A motor vehicle traveling on a level surface at a rate of 40 mph will need nearly 300 feet between the vehicle and the child to stop in time to avoid a collision. This distance is reduced to approximately 197 feet for a vehicle traveling at 30 mph, 112 feet for a vehicle traveling at 20 mph and 77 feet for a vehicle traveling at 15 mph.
Pedestrian crash severity is also much lower at low motor vehicle speeds. If a pedestrian is struck by a motor vehicle traveling at 40 mph there is an 85 percent likelihood that the pedestrian will be killed. This percentage drops to 45 percent at 30 mph and 5 percent at 20 mph. Thus, slowing motor vehicle speeds not only reduces the chance of a crash due to the shorter stopping distance that is required, but it also reduces the chance of a pedestrian fatality or serious injury.
The relationship between pedestrian injury severity and motor vehicle impact speeds.
Which street has lower speeds? The street on the bottom with trees, on-street parking and a narrower pavement width will naturally result in slower driver speeds.
When slowing or "calming" traffic, the right design invites the right driver response. The guiding principle of traffic calming is to influence driver speeds and behavior through good design whenever possible, rather than by traffic control measures such as traffic signals and STOP signs.
There are many design and engineering tools that can be used to slow down traffic and make it safer for children to walk and bicycle to school including:
* Mini-roundabouts and Narrow Lanes.
* Chokers and Chicanes.
* Speed Humps.
* Raised Pedestrian Crosswalks.
* Neighborhood Traffic Circles.
* Reduced Corner Radii.
* Speed Sensitive Signals.
Mayor Offers More Enforcement on 7th . . . It's a start
Email from Mayor Hiefje
I have already asked staff the pertinent questions and requested further enforcement.
I have been an advocate for lower speeds for years but it has been an uphill battle. The position of the State Police is that our limits are too low and based on their data a group of citizens who want to enforce the 80% standard all over town are threatening to sue the city. I will continue to swim upstream on this issue.
In regard to the minimum and maximum speeds allowed in the Traffic Calming Program; I was only attempting to relate the parameters as a place to start because you specifically asked about it. The program does have minimum and maximum limits but that does not mean there may not be a way to attack the problem on 7th outside of the traffic calming program. Still, we should look at the traffic counts and calming program as a place to start.
You have correctly identified two of the main problems we are trying to solve with the non-motorized effort. Commuters are a problem because they are much harder to reach than residents. The driving culture of Michigan is another. Seventy thousand people drive into Ann Arbor each day to work and they bring that culture with them. These drivers are negatively conditioned because in nearly every city in Michigan the pedestrian and cyclist are second class citizens. The city has been working with cycling and pedestrian advocates/activists to come up with a plan to solve these problems. If you have the time, I invite you to join the Alt Transportation Group.
Thank you for bringing the traffic problems on 7th to my attention.
John
I have already asked staff the pertinent questions and requested further enforcement.
I have been an advocate for lower speeds for years but it has been an uphill battle. The position of the State Police is that our limits are too low and based on their data a group of citizens who want to enforce the 80% standard all over town are threatening to sue the city. I will continue to swim upstream on this issue.
In regard to the minimum and maximum speeds allowed in the Traffic Calming Program; I was only attempting to relate the parameters as a place to start because you specifically asked about it. The program does have minimum and maximum limits but that does not mean there may not be a way to attack the problem on 7th outside of the traffic calming program. Still, we should look at the traffic counts and calming program as a place to start.
You have correctly identified two of the main problems we are trying to solve with the non-motorized effort. Commuters are a problem because they are much harder to reach than residents. The driving culture of Michigan is another. Seventy thousand people drive into Ann Arbor each day to work and they bring that culture with them. These drivers are negatively conditioned because in nearly every city in Michigan the pedestrian and cyclist are second class citizens. The city has been working with cycling and pedestrian advocates/activists to come up with a plan to solve these problems. If you have the time, I invite you to join the Alt Transportation Group.
Thank you for bringing the traffic problems on 7th to my attention.
John
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Will we wait for pedestrians to die before we take action?
