Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law. Show all posts

Thursday, April 1, 2010

No Fooling - Motorists Must Stop – And Stay Stopped – For Pedestrians In Crosswalks

spacerspacer


Trenton -- Attorney General Paula T. Dow and Division of Highway Traffic Safety Director Pam Fischer today reminded motorists that effective April 1, they must now stop - and remain stopped -- for pedestrians in the crosswalk. Prior to this legislative change, motorists were required to yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk.

“For years, too many pedestrians have been dying in traffic accidents in New Jersey,” said Attorney General Dow. “With these changes to our law, motorists and pedestrians will no longer have to play a game of chicken when it comes to maneuvering on our roadways. The law brings new clarity that drivers must stop and remain stopped for pedestrians at intersections and crosswalks, and pedestrians, in turn, must use due care and not jaywalk or step into traffic outside of those crossing points.”

Division of Highway Traffic Safety Director Pam Fischer explained that the agency will be working with law enforcement officials to educate both motorists and pedestrians about the change in the law.

“We’re asking law enforcement officials, when interacting with motorists and pedestrians, to educate them about the change to the law, as well their respective duties and responsibilities when walking or driving,” said Director Fischer. “Our goal is to reinforce the importance of pedestrians always using crosswalks, their safety zone, and for motorists to recognize that when approaching crosswalks they must be alert for pedestrians and stop and stay stopped to allow them to cross safely.

“We recognize that we cannot change everyone’s behavior overnight; this will take sustained effort over a long period of time,” Fischer added. “However, through education and enforcement, we can change the culture and improve safety for all roadway users.”

To educate motorists about the new law, the Division has developed an oversized palm card, similar in size to a traffic ticket, that outlines the changes as well as the penalties for failing
to comply. The card will be distributed to all police departments in the state, and made available to high school driver education teachers and defensive driving program providers. The new law will also be detailed in the New Jersey Driver Manual. The public can download it from the Division’s web site, at www.njsaferoads.com.

"This new law complements our ongoing effort to enhance pedestrian safety on New Jersey's busy roadways," said New Jersey Department of Transportation Commissioner Jim Simpson. "Since 2006, NJDOT has completed or funded 205 pedestrian safety initiatives, and just a few months ago we adopted a Complete Streets policy that promotes safe accessibility for all who share our roads."

“Pedestrian safety is a two-way street and it is important that both drivers and those sharing the road take the necessary precautions to prevent injuries and fatalities,” said Motor Vehicle Commission Acting Chief Administrator Raymond P. Martinez. “Continued improvements to engineering, education and enforcement are the keys to enhancing safety throughout our state.”

Motorists violating the new law face a $200 fine, plus court costs, and 2 points on their license. They can also be subject to 15 days of community service and insurance surcharges. Pedestrians may also be cited under state law for failing to use due care when crossing. The law requires them to obey pedestrian signals and use crosswalks at signalized intersections as well as yield the right of way to traffic if they are not crossing within a crosswalk or at an intersection. Failure to comply with the law carries a $54 fine, plus court costs.

Fischer noted that since 2004, approximately 150 pedestrians have been killed annually in traffic-related crashes on New Jersey roadways. In 2009, after a three-year downward trend, the number of pedestrian deaths statewide increased to 157. As of March 26 of this year, 28 pedestrians have been killed in motor vehicle-related crashes statewide, as compared to 48 for the same time period last year. Additionally, since 2004, more than 30,000 pedestrians have been injured in motor-vehicle related crashes statewide.

“While the numbers are once again moving in the right direction, even one life lost is one too many,” Fischer said. “Until we achieve zero fatalities, we must educate both pedestrians and motorists about the importance of remaining alert at all times, and taking personal responsibility for their actions.”

The Division offers the following safe walking tips for pedestrians:

  • Wear bright-colored, reflectorized clothing, especially at night.
  • Walk on sidewalks or paths and always cross at the corner, within marked crosswalks if provided. If there are no sidewalks, walk facing traffic and make eye contact with motorists.
  • Never cross mid-block (unless within a marked crosswalk), between parked cars or by climbing over median barriers. This is not only unsafe, but against the law.
  • Look left, then right and left again before crossing, and always be on the look-out for turning vehicles.
  • Continue to look for vehicles while crossing, even when in marked crosswalks.
  • Learn the proper use of “walk/don’t walk” signals and obey them.
  • Walk and cross with others, when possible.
  • Do not attempt to cross while talking or texting on a cell phone. Pedestrian inattention is a common cause of pedestrian-motor vehicle conflicts.
  • Try not to walk at night or in bad weather, such as rain, snow or ice. (WalkBikeJersey's Advice: If you do need to walk, improve your visibility with a reflective vest and some type of flashing light.)
  • If you drink alcohol, have someone escort you to your front door.

Click Image to Enlarge
spacer
Pictured above from left to right: Joel Feldman, father of Casey Feldman; Attorney General Paul T. Dow and Pam Fischer, Irector of the Division of Highway Traffic Safety. Click image to enlarge photo.
spacerspacer

Monday, February 1, 2010

Interesting Statute of the Month - No Highway Off-ramps Near Schools

UPDATE! (2/2/10) - Zoe at the Tri-State Transportation Campaign commented below that this law is referred to as the "Terrell James' Law." I was curious about that and pulled up what I believe is the final bill language that created the statute below.

According to a NJDOT Press Release from February 7, 2006, the "Terrell James' Law" was (would be) named "in memory of an 8-year-old who was killed in a tragic 1997 accident that occurred on a Newark playground located between two highway ramps."
__________________________________________________________________

I was doing some research again and I came across this interesting little tidbit. The law is only a little more than two years old but it is an interesting bit of legislation particularly for you folks concerned about Safe Routes to School issues. Also, if you follow the link below there is a bit more to this legislation than this one statute.
27:7-44.12 New entry or exit ramp, construction within 1,000 feet of school; prohibited; exceptions.

4. a. A new entry or exit ramp shall not be constructed as part of a highway project if a school is located or is being constructed within 1,000 feet of the proposed location of the entry or exit ramp, unless, during the planning and design of the project, the department determines that the construction is required and that there is no feasible or prudent alternative.

b.Prior to making the determination required pursuant to subsection a. of this section, the department shall, as part of its community outreach efforts to identify a preferred alternative design for the highway project, notify the local board of education in whose district the school is located or being constructed, and in the case of a school being constructed by the New Jersey Economic Development Authority, the authority, or in the case of a nonpublic school, the board thereof, the Department of Education and the members of the Legislature representing the district in which the school is located or being constructed, that the department is considering the construction of an entry or exit ramp within 1,000 feet of the school. The preferred alternative design for the highway project shall not be selected until the members of the Legislature notified pursuant to this subsection have been afforded the opportunity to submit comments to the department. If the department subsequently determines that the construction of the entry or exit ramp is required and that there is no feasible or prudent alternative, pedestrian safety issues shall be included as part of the environmental review undertaken by the department pursuant to State and federal laws, rules and regulations. When the public forum is held as part of the environmental review of the proposed highway project, the department shall present its plan for any entry or exit ramp and the safety measures, consistent with the recommendations of the study required pursuant to section 7 of this act, that are to be included in the highway project.

c.An entry or exit ramp for a highway shall not be reconstructed if a school is located or being constructed within 1,000 feet of the location of the ramp unless the department shall take steps to minimize the public safety hazards of the reconstructed ramp, consistent with the recommendations contained in the study required pursuant to section 7 of this act.

L.2007, c.308, s.4.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Op-Ed: Is this legal? #2

Photo of riders on on Meyersville Road in Chatham Township by Anthony Albanese via the Independent Press. Another photo of legally operating cyclists can be see in the original story here.

Well it depends who you ask and how you interpret NJ Provision - 39:4-14.2. Keeping to right; exceptions; single file.

As cyclist with 20 years adult riding experience and an LCI I will say that I see no illegal actions being perpetrated by these cyclists. None of the cyclists are riding two abreast. The lanes are very narrow, the road turns to the left and goes down a blind hill. From the photo it is clearly evident that the driver of the car can not see far enough up the road to pass even one cyclist safely, even if the cyclists moved all the way to the far right of the lane. According to the League of American Bicyclists Traffic Skills training, any situation where the lane is too narrow and/or sight-lines blocked to allow a driver to see far enough up the road to pass safely, the cyclist should move to the left to take the lane to prevent the overtaking vehicle from passing until the road conditions make it is safe for driver of the vehicle to do so.

Part b of NJ Provision 39:4-14.2 says that cyclists may move left to "avoid ... other hazardous conditions that make it impracticable to ride at the right side of the roadway." I interpret this phase as a catch all. Since it would be hazardous for the cyclist to move to the far right to allow a driver the possibility to pass dangerously, then the cyclist has every right to move left, take the lane and prevent the possibility of a dangerous/"hazardous" pass.

NJ Provision -39:4-14.2. Keeping to right; exceptions; single file

Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction; provided, however, that any person may move to the left under any of the following situations:

(a) to make a left turn from a left-turn lane or pocket;

(b) to avoid debris, drains or other hazardous conditions that make it impracticable to ride at the right side of the roadway;

(c) to pass a slower moving vehicle;

(d) to occupy any available lane when traveling at the same speed as other traffic;

(e) to travel no more than two abreast when traffic is not impeded.

Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway may travel no more than two abreast when traffic is not impeded, but otherwise shall ride in single file except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
Now all that being said, I do feel that it is somewhat rude of cyclists to ride in groups so large that they make it impossible for drivers to pass for extended long stretches of roadway. We in the bicycling community will not win over the hearts and minds of drivers and the general public by forcing others to wait for you at 18mph for a half a mile or more. If you do ride in large groups be prepared to slow down, move over and let motorists pass every so often if need be. Even though we bicyclists have every right to the road there is no reason to abuse that right.

I also interpret the New Jersey law in a way that an overtaking driver has every legal right to pass some of the bicyclists and then move back into the lane, splitting the group in two (but then again there is nothing in Title 39 that says a driver of a vehicle can pass any slower vehicle, motorized or not, in a no passing zone). Bicyclists drafting off one another may consider that to be extremely dangerous and aggressive but then again drafting 6 inches off another rider's wheel is technically tailgating and also illegal.

Also and very importantly, while I as a cyclist and an LCI interpret NJ Provision 39:4-14.2 to give bicyclists the right to move to the left in the above photoed situation, law enforcement and the courts don't always see it that way. Don't be surprised if you are ticketed and found guilty in court even if you are a just a solitary cyclists that moves to take the lane in a similar situation as described above. However, if you are ticketed I do strongly advise that you fight this in court with the hope that you can set a precedent.

This photo is part of a protracted debate going on in the Independent Press (covering the Summit area in Union County) attacking bicyclists' rights to the road. Follow the links below to read the ongoing debate (with some truely ridiculous anti-bicycling arguments) in the Independent Press (all link courtesy of the NJ Bicycle & Pedestrian News Digest).

A danger in spandex, bike riding on Chatham's narrow roads
Independent Press • Friday, December 4, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/yzp252d

A biking tragedy waiting to happen
Independent Press • Friday, December 4, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ylq8dch

Bikes, cars need to share the road
Independent Press • Friday, December 4, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ylaq8xw

Fear the car more than the bike
Independent Press • Friday, December 4, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/yk95xp6

Drivers (and bikers) have rules
Independent Press • Thursday, December 17, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ygog4rz

A little caution goes a long way
Independent Press • Thursday, December 17, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/y8oq384

Patience is key to road safety
Independent Press • Tuesday, December 22, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/yk3zljo

Cyclists, drivers can coexist
Independent Press • Wednesday, December 30, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/yahgmcs

Cycling 'packs' block the road (author is a cyclist)
(Note – Could not find full-page letter author refers to)
Independent Press • Thursday, December 31, 2009
http://tinyurl.com/ykmg2tw

Photos of bike riders on Meyersville Road in Chatham Township proves point
Independent Press • Sunday, January 17, 2010
http://tinyurl.com/y9wj25a

Friday, September 18, 2009

The 9W Bicycle Phenomenon - Part 2

Continuing north on 9W past those annoying "Bicyclists are required by law to ride single file" signs, the road is soon surrounded by the Palisades Interstate Park on both the east and west sides. Here is where the ride begins to get rather scenic and is reminiscent of roads much further away from New York City. This is part of the allure that brings so many New Yorkers over the GWB and onto 9W in the first place. At this point 9W has a nice wide shoulder on both sides that is mostly swept free of debris which provides for relatively relaxing riding.

Things are pretty uneventful along the route until we reach the site of Jessica Purcell's severe crash that Jen Benepe reported about last month. Short before 9W cross into New York State there is a traffic light that allows motorist to make a left to enter the Palisades Interstate Parkway. This light is located at the bottom of a valley and bicyclists easily reach speeds in excess of 35 mph so they can maintain their momentum to help get up the other side. When we passed through the light was green and there were no issues but I can see how a cyclist could get distracted for a moment and not be able to stop if a car stops for the light at this intersection. Unfortunately the right side shoulder was eliminated recently to make for a left turn bay for cars to increase motorist safety but this has left no run-off room for cyclists.


View Larger Map

What I did notice however was that the center yellow gore striping went on for quite a ways on both sides of this intersection. While done to increase motorists' safety by making sure to keep cars separated around the blind curve leading up to that intersection, the nature in which it was done eliminated the shoulder on both sides. As such cyclists have no where else to ride in except the travel lane. While not such a big deal in the north bound direction, the elimination of the shoulder becomes a big deal going south since there is a considerable climb and bicyclists' speeds are sure to be rather slow.

Interestingly enough an older streets view image shows this stretch of 9W prior to the recent restriping.


View Larger Map

What is sad here is that during the reconfiguration of the roadway, the engineers did not seem to take into consideration the needs of the thousands of cyclists that use the roadway, as evident in the design. While undoubtedly safer for motorists, the new design sure did not feel safer to this cyclist. What is somewhat annoying from a cyclist's perspective is that the center gore striping leading up to the intersection pictured at top seems excessively long. It wouldn't be so bad if it were for a 100 or 200 yards but it goes on for nearly half a mile!

Anyway soon after this we enter New York State and took a right turn down to the exquisitly beautiful riverside town of Piermont. Riding north now along quite Piermont Ave cyclists are treated to stunning views of the Hudson River along with beautiful homes. Soon after leaving Piermont the road changes names and turns into River Rd. Along the way there are non-regulation signs posted very high stating that cyclists must ride single file. Now I'm not an expert on NY State law pertaining to cycling so local towns may be able to pass there own ordinances that further restrict how a bicycle may operate. Still Jen told me that the relationship between the local police and cyclists here is also rather confrontational. From these signs, I didn't find that hard to believe.

Still the traffic is very light on this road and the scenary just to stunning to worry about such things. Soon we passed underneath the Tappanzee Bridge and enter Nyack which is also a very beautiful river town. After we made a few turns we entered Nyack's downtown and took a break at a cafe' / bakery. What greets me here is a sight rarely seen in the USA; dozens if not 100 or more bicycles and they were everywhere! There must have been at least 1/2 million dollars worth of bikes there. This cafe' has obviously profited handsomely by catering to these cyclists and bicycle parking was at such a premium that one or two on-street parking spaces were converted over to bicycle parking, something VERY rarely seen, particularly on the East Coast. The picture below only captures a small part of the scene and one of Jen's gregarious friends.


I was amazed by what I had seen. There was no doubt after seeing this velo-spectacle that Route 9W must have the greatest concentration of cyclist anywhere in New Jersey.

Soon Jen and I, along with several of her friends headed back south to Jersey. As we continued south dozens of cyclists kept on coming north. That newly restriped section of 9W proved to be rather uncomfortable as cars passed us as we climbed. Fortunately traffic volumes were still rather light. Further south still, Jen and I parted ways as she needed to get back to her place and I wanted to ride the enchanted (if very bumpy) Henry Hudson Drive that actually enters Palisades Interstate Park and goes below the cliffs. From there I went underneath the GWB and used the new bike path that leads to the bridge so I could ride to Manhattan and do a loop around Central Park. All the while cyclists are still coming and going. Even when I return from my loop and cross back to New Jersey, dozens of cyclists continue to cross the bridge in both directions.

If the sight of hundreds of bicycles at that cafe' in Nyack didn't prove the incredible popularity of the 9W ride, this continued stream of riders over the GWB, over a period that spanned several hours sure did.

Friday, September 11, 2009

The 9W Bicycle Phenomenon - Part 1

Two weekends ago I had the opportunity to investigate what is probably the single most popular bicycle ride in New Jersey. I was invited by the ever so lovely Jen Benepe of Benepe's Bike Blog to do the 9W ride. Jen has been reporting about the New York City competitive bicycle scene for some time with her blog and recently moved to this side of the Hudson. The popularity of riding 9W for New York City cyclists and two recent violent bicycle crashes on 9W in New Jersey (that Jen reported here & here) had me curious to see for myself what was going on.


View Larger Map

For those of you who don't know about what is happening in this northeastern corner of the state let me take a moment. Everyday hundreds and often thousands of athletic New York City cyclists cross the George Washington Bridge to ride up 9W to the towns of Piermont and Nyack just over the boarder in New York State. After doing the ride for myself I can understand why. It was one of the most beautiful rides I've ever done in New Jersey.

Jen and I started out around 9am on a foggy Sunday morning only to find dozens of riders already returning from the north. The first couple miles north of the GWB, 9W is 4 lanes with no shoulder. Jen told me that only recently were the shoulders eliminated in this section to add more travel lanes. Car traffic was light early that Sunday and cyclists were clearly outnumbering the cars however I was told that 9W is a totally different beast on weekday evenings when many NYC cyclists ride the route to train. Jen also told me that the elimination of the shoulders has made things very difficult for cyclists and has caused aggravation between drivers and cyclists. Fortunately that wasn't an issue this morning.

Further along we passed the sight where Camille Savoy was killed last November by, what seemed by all accounts, an incompetent driver (killed by an overtaking driver while riding to the right of the fog line). My observations of the sight found nothing about the area that would indicate a problem with the roadway that could have contributed to the cause of the crash.

Further along I notice signs that said something like this (I'm paraphrasing):
Bicyclists are required by law to ride single file.
Strictly Enforced


To which I say BULLSHIT!

And I quote:
NJ Provision -39:4-14.2. Keeping to right; exceptions; single file

Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction; provided, however, that any person may move to the left under any of the following situations:

(a) to make a left turn from a left-turn lane or pocket;

(b) to avoid debris, drains or other hazardous conditions that make it impracticable to ride at the right side of the roadway;

(c) to pass a slower moving vehicle;

(d) to occupy any available lane when traveling at the same speed as other traffic;

(e) to travel no more than two abreast when traffic is not impeded.

Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway may travel no more than two abreast when traffic is not impeded, but otherwise shall ride in single file except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.

As you can clearly see that sign is obviously wrong and the right for cyclists to travel two abreast when traffic is not impeded is actually mention twice in Provision - 39:4-14.2.

Unfortunately, Jen told me that a cyclist friend of hers was recently ticketed for riding two abreast while both he and his wife were riding in the shoulder. The two of them obviously couldn't be obstructing moving motor vehicle traffic in the shoulder so it would seem that the ticket was totally bogus. Someone needs to educate the local police and take down or at least modify these signs. We happened to bump into this fellow later in the trip and he reassured me that he was going to fight the ticket.

Wow this has gotten long really quickly!

Well then you will just have to stay tuned till I have the time to write Part 2 (there will be no Part 3, I promise). There is much more to this story.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Bike Helmet Laws by State


via Insurance Institute of Highway Safety

Tom Vanderbilt, author of Traffic, pointed out in his blog this map of bicycle helmet laws from the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety. I thought it was interesting because I didn't know that most states have no helmet law whatsoever. You have to wonder how the states came up with the different ages - from 11 in Pennsylvania to 17 in New Mexico and California. Is it based on crash incidence and severity, or, more likely, just a committee of legislators playing pick a number?