Be careful biking with your family

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The SUV was at fault for not stopping at the crosswalk but they probably had no idea that the car in the left turn lane was stopped for pedestrians/bicyclists. I fault the parents for not walking the kid across the road (the mom actually walked her bike) and waiting to be sure that all traffic was stopped.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who is at fault. A dead child is a much larger punishment for being "right" in this case.

That's why the law requires you to stop when another car is stopped at a crosswalk. The ignorance evident in this thread is frightening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SUV was at fault for not stopping at the crosswalk but they probably had no idea that the car in the left turn lane was stopped for pedestrians/bicyclists. I fault the parents for not walking the kid across the road (the mom actually walked her bike) and waiting to be sure that all traffic was stopped.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who is at fault. A dead child is a much larger punishment for being "right" in this case.

That's why the law requires you to stop when another car is stopped at a crosswalk. The ignorance evident in this thread is frightening.

Anyone that couldn't figure out that they were stopped for a pedestrian should lose their license. The turn lane was long enough that they could have fit into it past the crosswalk. It was obvious they stopped for a pedestrian. The problem here was that all the other lanes of traffic stopped and they thought they could speed by before the woman on the left got to the crosswalk. Clearly they didn't know the child was there and they didn't care about the woman or the fact that they were passing cars stopped at the crosswalk. All the driver cared about was savings 1 minute of driving time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SUV was at fault for not stopping at the crosswalk but they probably had no idea that the car in the left turn lane was stopped for pedestrians/bicyclists. I fault the parents for not walking the kid across the road (the mom actually walked her bike) and waiting to be sure that all traffic was stopped.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who is at fault. A dead child is a much larger punishment for being "right" in this case.

You're right. At the end of the day, the question is: how can we prevent this from happening? And, in decreasing order of effectiveness, the answer is:

1. Good roadway design.
2. Safe and lawful driving.
3. Constant unrelenting vigilance by pedestrians and bicyclist.

Pedestrians and bicyclists - and drivers - are human. Humans do not always pay attention as they should. We know that. So therefore any transportation system that is only safe if people are constantly and unrelentingly vigilant is a transportation system that is not safe. And that's what we've got here.

The problem with that is that safe and lawful driving gets in the way of my need to get places fast - I need to go to Costco to buy dogfood, I need to drop larla at gymnastics and pick up larlo from soccer, and I need to pick up donuts. Try doing all that on your bike and still get home in time to watch the Skins game. Good roadway design would probably slow me down too. Its all a war on cars, doncha know?

So its far easier to expect pedestrians (who can't possibly be in a hurry, or why wouldn't they be driving?) to be hypervigilant. Plus this is DCUM, and shaming people about how they parent is so much more natural than thinking about how to make streets safer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9733831,-77.1012747,3a,75y,326.07h,64.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJHvVropwiBLhxrr9hSM_qA!2e0!5s20170901T000000!7i13312!8i6656

4 lane wide crossing reduced to 2 lane

This is not the same intersection

DP. No, but that's what they should do at this crossing too.

exactly. They fixed that crossing in the link above coz some old geezer got run over in a similar situation. one car stopped and the other didn't. Now they reduced it to one lane so that doesn't happen anymore.

[Anonymous]

The Maryland State Highway Administration is going to post flaggers with stop signs at this trail crossing, until the pedestrian bridge under construction is finished in November.

On the one hand, it's good that they've recognized (after media, public, and political pressure) that their road design is unsafe.

On the other hand, they insisted on an interim trail crossing that was so dangerous that now they have to post flaggers with stop signs at it. That's shameful. They need to do better.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/news/mdsha-posting-flaggers-at-silver-spring-temporary-crossing-where-child-nearly-hit-by-car/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9733831,-77.1012747,3a,75y,326.07h,64.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJHvVropwiBLhxrr9hSM_qA!2e0!5s20170901T000000!7i13312!8i6656

4 lane wide crossing reduced to 2 lane

This is not the same intersection

DP. No, but that's what they should do at this crossing too.

exactly. They fixed that crossing in the link above coz some old geezer got run over in a similar situation. one car stopped and the other didn't. Now they reduced it to one lane so that doesn't happen anymore.

"Some old geezer" was Ned Gaylin, aged 81, a retired University of Maryland professor who frequently rode on the Capital Crescent Trail in his tricycle.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/transportation/site-of-fatal-bethesda-crash-calls-for-a-redesign/

People shouldn't have to die - or almost die - before the authorities are willing to make crossings safe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
When you are biking or scootering on the sidewalk or on a bike path, you MUST slow down extremely, or walk your bike, instead of coming quickly off the sidewalk or bikepath into oncoming traffic. This is because although drivers may be looking for pedestrians, a bike is moving to fast for them to anticipate and stop in time. Apparently there's some disagreement of fact here, but I saw the child going faster than walking pace. Also because she's small, she's even less visible.

Secondly, if you're crossing a lot of traffic, you can't just assume that the cars are going to stop - you have to be watching to make sure they are, be able to see all the cars, and be ready to stop if they don't stop. Most 4 year olds can't do this; thus, they should not cross alone.

https://www.bicycleaccidentprevention.com/

Okay, again. It looks to me like they are going little above walking pace (note, we have runners in our region who cross at crosswalks at running speed - a driver should be looking for movement of up to 6MPH in my opinion, certaily 4MPH. Their speed is not an issue.

The little girl was quite visible, and in any case the dad and the trailer, just ahead, should have clued the driver that someone might be following, PLUS the presence of a stopped vehicle. The girl was NOT invisible.

And the girl DID stop. The problem was not her behavior, which was appropriate, but what the driver did.

I'm sorry, there's no universe where it's prudent to let a 4 year old cross multiple lanes of traffic in an unsignalized, trafficked crosswalk by herself on a bike. No universe.

She was not alone - her parents were a few feet ahead or behind. And again, its not clear to me that she would have been any safer with a parent a few feet closer. And all crosswalks are "trafficked".

Serious question - are you a biker, and have you biked in a city, and with kids? This isn't something you can really understand that well if you haven't spend hours and hours navigating DC and analyzing the ways to stay crash-free. To begin with -- there is a HUGE difference between that particular crosswalk, and a signalized crosswalk in say a residential neighborhood, or even downtown where car traffic knows to look out for pedestrians and bikes. And second, there's a HUGE difference between being right next to your kid (walking or on a bike) and being on the sidewalk while they are in the middle of the intersection.

I'm being annoyingly persistent on this thread because I think it's incumbent on every single biker to understand how to perceive hazards on the road and avoid them. ESPECIALLY WITH KIDS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Ok, I posted many, many links about this, but here goes again.

When you are biking or scootering on the sidewalk or on a bike path, you MUST slow down extremely, or walk your bike, instead of coming quickly off the sidewalk or bikepath into oncoming traffic. This is because although drivers may be looking for pedestrians, a bike is moving to fast for them to anticipate and stop in time. Apparently there's some disagreement of fact here, but I saw the child going faster than walking pace. Also because she's small, she's even less visible.

Secondly, if you're crossing a lot of traffic, you can't just assume that the cars are going to stop - you have to be watching to make sure they are, be able to see all the cars, and be ready to stop if they don't stop. Most 4 year olds can't do this; thus, they should not cross alone.

https://www.bicycleaccidentprevention.com/

None of these links were about walking your bicycle across the crosswalk. I honestly don't understand why somebody would think that guidance that provides a lot of detail and includes advice about not riding on the sidewalk, but does not say a single word about walking your bicycle across the crosswalk, is guidance to walk your bicycle across the crosswalk.

JFC!!! Will you stop with the strawmen! There's no universal rule that you must walk your bike through the crosswalk, and I apologize if I made it sound like that. What those links CLEARLY CLEARLY CLEARLY demonstrate is the hazard of coming off a sidewalk or bike path into traffic, and why you must do so extremely cautiously and SLOWLY. In this case with this particular crosswalk, however, dismounting and walking the bike would absolutely have been the most prudent thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Serious question - are you a biker, and have you biked in a city, and with kids? This isn't something you can really understand that well if you haven't spend hours and hours navigating DC and analyzing the ways to stay crash-free. To begin with -- there is a HUGE difference between that particular crosswalk, and a signalized crosswalk in say a residential neighborhood, or even downtown where car traffic knows to look out for pedestrians and bikes. And second, there's a HUGE difference between being right next to your kid (walking or on a bike) and being on the sidewalk while they are in the middle of the intersection.

I'm being annoyingly persistent on this thread because I think it's incumbent on every single biker to understand how to perceive hazards on the road and avoid them. ESPECIALLY WITH KIDS.

You're basically saying that it's not safe for a kid to cross at that trail crossing.

Well, now MD SHA agrees with you. And they've put in a temporary solution, until the bridge gets built. Good for them. Even better would be if they'd done it right in the first place. Maybe next time they will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Serious question - are you a biker, and have you biked in a city, and with kids? This isn't something you can really understand that well if you haven't spend hours and hours navigating DC and analyzing the ways to stay crash-free. To begin with -- there is a HUGE difference between that particular crosswalk, and a signalized crosswalk in say a residential neighborhood, or even downtown where car traffic knows to look out for pedestrians and bikes. And second, there's a HUGE difference between being right next to your kid (walking or on a bike) and being on the sidewalk while they are in the middle of the intersection.

I'm being annoyingly persistent on this thread because I think it's incumbent on every single biker to understand how to perceive hazards on the road and avoid them. ESPECIALLY WITH KIDS.

You're basically saying that it's not safe for a kid to cross at that trail crossing.

Well, now MD SHA agrees with you. And they've put in a temporary solution, until the bridge gets built. Good for them. Even better would be if they'd done it right in the first place. Maybe next time they will.

Yep, concluding that a certain intersection is not safe for kids (walking or biking) is certainly one thing you can do. When I bike commuted, I carefully mapped out routes to avoid intersections and stretches of road I felt were too dangerous.

Look, I'd like this to be Amsterdam as much as anyone, but it's not. So if you want to enjoy biking yourself and with your kids NOW, and not in some imagined utopia, you have to take safety precautions, which includes not only a helmet, but also being aware of your environment and the "theory" of safe biking, so you can identify & avoid hazards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Maryland State Highway Administration is going to post flaggers with stop signs at this trail crossing, until the pedestrian bridge under construction is finished in November.

On the one hand, it's good that they've recognized (after media, public, and political pressure) that their road design is unsafe.

On the other hand, they insisted on an interim trail crossing that was so dangerous that now they have to post flaggers with stop signs at it. That's shameful. They need to do better.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/news/mdsha-posting-flaggers-at-silver-spring-temporary-crossing-where-child-nearly-hit-by-car/

This is really good. I'm happy to see this happening. Plus they're working Saturday's to finish the work faster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SUV was at fault for not stopping at the crosswalk but they probably had no idea that the car in the left turn lane was stopped for pedestrians/bicyclists. I fault the parents for not walking the kid across the road (the mom actually walked her bike) and waiting to be sure that all traffic was stopped.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who is at fault. A dead child is a much larger punishment for being "right" in this case.

That's why the law requires you to stop when another car is stopped at a crosswalk. The ignorance evident in this thread is frightening.

+1. Why on earth did they think the cars were stopped? I live near Sligo creek and frequently travel on the roads that the bike path crosses. My instinct when approaching crosswalks is to slow down and look in both directions for pedestrians or cyclists, not barrel through. But yeah, I always make DS disembark and hold my hand to walk across because I don’t trust other motorists to do the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
When you are biking or scootering on the sidewalk or on a bike path, you MUST slow down extremely, or walk your bike, instead of coming quickly off the sidewalk or bikepath into oncoming traffic. This is because although drivers may be looking for pedestrians, a bike is moving to fast for them to anticipate and stop in time. Apparently there's some disagreement of fact here, but I saw the child going faster than walking pace. Also because she's small, she's even less visible.

Secondly, if you're crossing a lot of traffic, you can't just assume that the cars are going to stop - you have to be watching to make sure they are, be able to see all the cars, and be ready to stop if they don't stop. Most 4 year olds can't do this; thus, they should not cross alone.

https://www.bicycleaccidentprevention.com/

Okay, again. It looks to me like they are going little above walking pace (note, we have runners in our region who cross at crosswalks at running speed - a driver should be looking for movement of up to 6MPH in my opinion, certaily 4MPH. Their speed is not an issue.

The little girl was quite visible, and in any case the dad and the trailer, just ahead, should have clued the driver that someone might be following, PLUS the presence of a stopped vehicle. The girl was NOT invisible.

And the girl DID stop. The problem was not her behavior, which was appropriate, but what the driver did.

I'm sorry, there's no universe where it's prudent to let a 4 year old cross multiple lanes of traffic in an unsignalized, trafficked crosswalk by herself on a bike. No universe.

She was not alone - her parents were a few feet ahead or behind. And again, its not clear to me that she would have been any safer with a parent a few feet closer. And all crosswalks are "trafficked".

Serious question - are you a biker, and have you biked in a city, and with kids? This isn't something you can really understand that well if you haven't spend hours and hours navigating DC and analyzing the ways to stay crash-free. To begin with -- there is a HUGE difference between that particular crosswalk, and a signalized crosswalk in say a residential neighborhood, or even downtown where car traffic knows to look out for pedestrians and bikes. And second, there's a HUGE difference between being right next to your kid (walking or on a bike) and being on the sidewalk while they are in the middle of the intersection.

I'm being annoyingly persistent on this thread because I think it's incumbent on every single biker to understand how to perceive hazards on the road and avoid them. ESPECIALLY WITH KIDS.

I am the PP you are responding. I bike commute 3 to 4 days a week. I ride in DC and in the suburbs on roads with a range of conditions. No, I don't ride with kids but I have quite a few friends who do.

I am still skeptical that riding close to the kid in this instance would have made any difference. But mostly I agree with the other poster - even if one has to, that is not acceptable. And that what is needed here is less parent shaming, and more shaming of the authorities who allow this to happen.

I don't expect us to be like Amsterdam soon, but I think we can fight the worst infrastructure, and the worst driver behavior.

As the other poster said, the authorities appear to agree, now, that this is unacceptable.

[Anonymous]

And the reason I and others are being annoyingly persistent, is that all across the region, when we push for safety improvements for bikes and peds, and for enforcement against dangerous driver behavior, we are met with one or another form of bike/ped shaming. If you are not aware of that, you have not been following the discussions surround complete streets, Vision Zero, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is one of the most bizarre threads I’ve ever read on a DCUM.

Why?

It's ENTIRELY consistent with the predominant school of thought on DCUM that basically says "I should be able to do anything I want and everyone must accommodate me and lookout for my safety"