A pedestrian was struck and killed this morning near the Bus station on Union. Some commenters have it right - I too am not surprised. The walk/don't walk signals might as well not be there.
http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2010-10-29/story/fatal-wreck-snarls-traffic-downtown
this was bound to happen sooner or later as people are always playing frogger on union and state
T-U story seems to focus on the problem this death caused to traffic flow. Traffic snarls are so important in this town that even the horrible random shooting of the mom on Blanding Blvd. was reported as a traffic pile-up to avoid.
Even if the driver is at fault, we all know that he/she will not be charged!
With proximity to the bus station in mind, it was probably perceived to be a bum that was hit and therefore, no real loss. This city really needs to establish some pedestrian rights.
AS OF NOW, THERE ARE NONE!
As I said just the other day on this website, watch the news for a month. You'll see exactly what I'm talking about. "Pedestrian hit and killed, driver was not charged". That's the usual headline.
If we start to hold these bad drivers accountable, (keep in mind, not always the driver's fault) but most don't pay attention and many more are just simply bad people as well as bad drivers. Remember Memorial Day, those bike riders that were clipped by that redneck piece of s@^t's pickup truck. He didn't get charged with attempted murder, like he should've. All because bicyclists are considered to be pedestrians too.
Let's go beyond simply the thought of punishing these monsters, imagine the revenue the city can collect on tickets for moving violations, (I see people running red lights everyday) let's fine the hell out them! When some one gets hit and the driver's at fault, take away their licence for good. That will increase ridership with JTA!
See, cracking down on bad driving would have a positive ripple effect!
Union Street is designed for one purpose - to move lots of cars quickly through downtown and out the other side. No one planned on a pedestrian crossing those lanes.
better ped crossings are needed. I do not think however, that would stop people from darting in and out of traffic at mid block. Leaving Springfield this morning, turned onto State St, traffic was at a standstill. People were going all over the place. Even 1st St was gridlocked!
I thought there are state laws here in FL that always give the pedestrians the right-of-way.
-Josh
Quote from: urbaknight on October 29, 2010, 03:08:22 PM
Even if the driver is at fault, we all know that he/she will not be charged!
With proximity to the bus station in mind, it was probably perceived to be a bum that was hit and therefore, no real loss. This city really needs to establish some pedestrian rights.
AS OF NOW, THERE ARE NONE!
As I said just the other day on this website, watch the news for a month. You'll see exactly what I'm talking about. "Pedestrian hit and killed, driver was not charged". That's the usual headline.
If we start to hold these bad drivers accountable, (keep in mind, not always the driver's fault) but most don't pay attention and many more are just simply bad people as well as bad drivers. Remember Memorial Day, those bike riders that were clipped by that redneck piece of s@^t's pickup truck. He didn't get charged with attempted murder, like he should've. All because bicyclists are considered to be pedestrians too.
Let's go beyond simply the thought of punishing these monsters, imagine the revenue the city can collect on tickets for moving violations, (I see people running red lights everyday) let's fine the hell out them! When some one gets hit and the driver's at fault, take away their licence for good. That will increase ridership with JTA!
See, cracking down on bad driving would have a positive ripple effect!
Do you drive through downtown much?
People dart out right in front of you, and oftentimes they ARE homeless folks who are clearly drunk or high. Half the time they don't look at all to see if there is oncoming traffic, and the other half the time they give you this "f$ck you!" look and then walk right out in front of your vehicle, taking visible pleasure in forcing you to screeching halt. They virtually never use the crosswalks as the law requires, so its not like you can even predict when or where it's going to happen.
With all due respect, this isn't a bad driver problem, it's a bad pedestrian problem downtown.
Had the city finished the Skyway according to the original plan this victim would probably still be alive. It would have/be a piece of cake to throw the track across the highways and a pedestrian walk alongside. The FSCJ station would actually be just northeast of FSCJ's main buildings... what a novel thought.
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 29, 2010, 06:16:16 PM
Quote from: urbaknight on October 29, 2010, 03:08:22 PM
Even if the driver is at fault, we all know that he/she will not be charged!
With proximity to the bus station in mind, it was probably perceived to be a bum that was hit and therefore, no real loss. This city really needs to establish some pedestrian rights.
AS OF NOW, THERE ARE NONE!
As I said just the other day on this website, watch the news for a month. You'll see exactly what I'm talking about. "Pedestrian hit and killed, driver was not charged". That's the usual headline.
If we start to hold these bad drivers accountable, (keep in mind, not always the driver's fault) but most don't pay attention and many more are just simply bad people as well as bad drivers. Remember Memorial Day, those bike riders that were clipped by that redneck piece of s@^t's pickup truck. He didn't get charged with attempted murder, like he should've. All because bicyclists are considered to be pedestrians too.
Let's go beyond simply the thought of punishing these monsters, imagine the revenue the city can collect on tickets for moving violations, (I see people running red lights everyday) let's fine the hell out them! When some one gets hit and the driver's at fault, take away their licence for good. That will increase ridership with JTA!
See, cracking down on bad driving would have a positive ripple effect!
Do you drive through downtown much?
People dart out right in front of you, and oftentimes they ARE homeless folks who are clearly drunk or high. Half the time they don't look at all to see if there is oncoming traffic, and the other half the time they give you this "f$ck you!" look and then walk right out in front of your vehicle, taking visible pleasure in forcing you to screeching halt. They virtually never use the crosswalks as the law requires, so its not like you can even predict when or where it's going to happen.
With all due respect, this isn't a bad driver problem, it's a bad pedestrian problem downtown.
I can't see well enough to drive, so I have no choice but to be a pedestrian. And many people don't pay attention, on both sides. But cars are much bigger and faster than those on foot, therefore, they need to yield to pedestrians when they have the right of way instead of trying to make that turn before the pedestrian makes it into the street, as if it were a race across the street. It happens to me all the time. (especially in the burbs) They can wait a few seconds for a person to cross the street, after all, cars are much faster they need to respect their privilege and their privilege should be revoked if they can't be respectfull behind the wheel.
Quote from: wsansewjs on October 29, 2010, 04:24:52 PM
I thought there are state laws here in FL that always give the pedestrians the right-of-way.
-Josh
The laws aren't enforced.
The pedestrian environment in Jacksonville as a whole is dismal, but I have to question the pedestrian involved if he/she was hit anywhere near downtown. I know Union is different and perhaps the driver ran a red light, but as has been mentioned there are ped crossings, lights, sidewalks, laws (how do you not enforce ped laws/ROW Urbaknight?...the signal either says walk or don't walk and either the ped is jaywalking or the driver is running his light). In any downtown the "bums" not to confuse them with the homeless as has already been resolved do just cross and not even bother to look. They will take their damn time and if they acknowledge you as you are patiently waiting for them to cross then they let you know that you are the bad guy.
Peds/bicyclists getting mowed over on Southside or Blanding is one thing (one reason I would never live in those areas...no protection), but even on Union there are basic ped protections and both parties need to be accountable and cautious (driver AND ped). Even with the most draconian regulatory laws protecting one side more than the other you are still going to get crazy drivers who will plow through any intersection regardless and you will still get unaware or irresponsible pedestrians who believe they can simply walk wherever they please and however they please whenever they please.
Still the story is sad and it's almost equally sad that every one of these stories is presented as a traffic back up rather than a death. I think particularly on Union and State there need to JSO officers directing traffic. Their presence will have an inhibitory effect on bums crossing from between parked cars whenever they please, will have an inhibitory effect on speeding cars, and will overall improve the area's curb appeal and traffic flow. Other cities use officers at almost every major intersection at least during rush hours.
Quote from: wsansewjs on October 29, 2010, 04:24:52 PM
I thought there are state laws here in FL that always give the pedestrians the right-of-way.
-Josh
Not true, the duty is with the pedestrian and the driver
QuoteCrossing a roadway mid-block, not in a crosswalk(Section 316.130(7), (10), (11) and (12), F.S.)
A pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than a (marked or unmarked) intersection crosswalk or a marked mid-block crosswalk shall yield to all vehicles on the roadway.
A pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
Comment: Since, at mid-block locations without crosswalks, a crossing pedestrian's duty to yield is already established by the provision paraphrased above this one, the only effect of this provision is at intersection crossings where a pedestrian tunnel or overpass has been provided.
A pedestrian may not cross between adjacent signalized intersections.
Comment: Adjacent signalized intersections are generally found in central business districts, less commonly in suburban areas.
Except in a marked crosswalk, a crossing pedestrian must cross at right angles to the edge of the roadway, or by the shortest route to the opposite side.
Crossing a roadway in an unsignalized crosswalk (marked or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, or crosswalk marked mid-block)(Section 316.130(7), (8), (9) and (14), F.S.)
The driver of a vehicle at any crosswalk where a sign so indicates shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross a roadway when the pedestrian is in the crosswalk or steps into the crosswalk and is upon the half of the roadway upon 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.
When traffic control signals are not in place or in operation and no sign indicates otherwise, the driver of a vehicle shall yield, slowing down or stopping if need be to so yield, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the roadway upon 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.
No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path or a vehicle which is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.
Comment: A pedestrian who sets foot in a (marked or unmarked) crosswalk where traffic signals are not in place, or are in place but not operating, obliges an approaching driver to yield the right of way, so long as it is feasible for the driver to do so. The driver's duty to yield applies regardless of whether the crossing location is controlled by any signs (Stop or Yield). Yielding may take the form of slowing or stopping; safe yielding requires stopping (and waiting) if the crossing pedestrian is in the driver's lane, in the lane into which the driver is turning, or in an adjoining lane.
When a vehicle is stopped at a crosswalk to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass such stopped vehicle.
Comment: When one driver stops to let a pedestrian cross, the stopped vehicles may screen the pedestrian from the view of an approaching driver, and also screen the approaching vehicle from the pedestrian's view. The law therefore requires a driver approaching a vehicle stopped at a crosswalk from the rear to assume that a pedestrian may be crossing, even when none can be seen at the moment. A violation of this rule can cause serious injury because the overtaking driver is traveling at speed. To reduce this risk, seasoned pedestrians pause to scan the next traffic lane before advancing beyond the outside edge of any "screen".
A pedestrian may not cross an intersection diagonally except where and when crossing is authorized by official traffic control devices.
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/laws/ped_bike_pedLaws.shtm (http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/laws/ped_bike_pedLaws.shtm)
Quote from: simms3 on November 01, 2010, 02:40:09 PM
The pedestrian environment in Jacksonville as a whole is dismal, but I have to question the pedestrian involved if he/she was hit anywhere near downtown. I know Union is different and perhaps the driver ran a red light, but as has been mentioned there are ped crossings, lights, sidewalks, laws (how do you not enforce ped laws/ROW Urbaknight?...the signal either says walk or don't walk and either the ped is jaywalking or the driver is running his light). In any downtown the "bums" not to confuse them with the homeless as has already been resolved do just cross and not even bother to look. They will take their damn time and if they acknowledge you as you are patiently waiting for them to cross then they let you know that you are the bad guy.
Peds/bicyclists getting mowed over on Southside or Blanding is one thing (one reason I would never live in those areas...no protection), but even on Union there are basic ped protections and both parties need to be accountable and cautious (driver AND ped). Even with the most draconian regulatory laws protecting one side more than the other you are still going to get crazy drivers who will plow through any intersection regardless and you will still get unaware or irresponsible pedestrians who believe they can simply walk wherever they please and however they please whenever they please.
Still the story is sad and it's almost equally sad that every one of these stories is presented as a traffic back up rather than a death. I think particularly on Union and State there need to JSO officers directing traffic. Their presence will have an inhibitory effect on bums crossing from between parked cars whenever they please, will have an inhibitory effect on speeding cars, and will overall improve the area's curb appeal and traffic flow. Other cities use officers at almost every major intersection at least during rush hours.
I do agree that both sides need to be responsible both for themselves and for others around them.
But, remember last Christmas, when a mother and her two children were crossing a therefore on the southside,. The driver was looking at the traffic light, rather than the road! Well, the driver hit the mother and one of her children. The six year old little girl died! Just because that asshole couldn't spare a few seconds, apparently, If you or anyone saw the story on the news, the driver was clearly looking at the traffic light instead of the road!
DRIVER NOT CHARGED!!!
That driver should've been watching the road! Not just the light!
Not much later, an elderly woman tried to cross a street with a walker, (again on the southside) same scenario, the driver just saw the traffic light.
Maybe the traffic lights on the southside are not time effective for pedestrians. But that's not supposed to be their concern. Non drivers pay taxes too, and if they can't even cross a street effectively, That alone should prove that, there's a bias for drivers vs pediatricians. (clearly favoring the drivers)
Why am I (being visually impaired) the only one, that can see that there's a problem with a lack of pestering rights!!! Isn't it ironic, don't ya think!
Quote from: urbaknightI do agree that both sides need to be responsible both for themselves and for others around them.
But, remember last Christmas, when a mother and her two children were crossing a therefore on the southside,. The driver was looking at the traffic light, rather than the road! Well, the driver hit the mother and one of her children. The six year old little girl died! Just because that asshole couldn't spare a few seconds, apparently, If you or anyone saw the story on the news, the driver was clearly looking at the traffic light instead of the road!
DRIVER NOT CHARGED!!!
That driver should've been watching the road! Not just the light!
Not much later, an elderly woman tried to cross a street with a walker, (again on the southside) same scenario, the driver just saw the traffic light.
Maybe the traffic lights on the southside are not time effective for pedestrians. But that's not supposed to be their concern. Non drivers pay taxes too, and if they can't even cross a street effectively, That alone should prove that, there's a bias for drivers vs pediatricians. (clearly favoring the drivers)
Why am I (being visually impaired) the only one, that can see that there's a problem with a lack of pestering rights!!! Isn't it ironic, don't ya think!
I do remember that accident, felt that the driver most certainly should've been charged...
QuoteThe driver of a vehicle at any crosswalk where a sign so indicates shall stop and remain stopped to allow a pedestrian to cross a roadway when the pedestrian is in the crosswalk or steps into the crosswalk and is upon the half of the roadway upon 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.
I also agree with you about the timing on many of the intersections, many barely give you time to run across the street, let alone actually walk for a healthy person, and if you have children or you're elderly, forget it; the light changes before you're halfway across the street.
We were continually surprised while visiting London to find most of the "zebra" crossings in the middle of the block, not at the corners. (They pronounce it zehbra, not zeebra as we do. And zebra, because they are white stripes on black pavement)
To our complete amazement, when we stood on the curb waiting for a gap in the traffic, all cars in both directions immediately stopped to let us cross without a signal.
Maybe they are on to something. Drivers are not distracted by looking at a traffic signal or for oncoming cars as they turn. How many time have you had the pedestrian signal, but had to dodge cars that were turning right or left across the walkway?
mid-block crossings have gained in popularity in this country....many people feel they are far safer for the pedestrian as there are no turning vehicles.
Drove down State today and no less than four different people were playing chicken dodge ball with cars and trucks going 35-40 MPH . There were also two bicyclists who tried to cross state against a red light- I mean really WTH???!!!