Heightsite Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 How difficult do you think it would be to get the city to make all intersections that the hike & bike trail crosses four way stops or at least switch the streets the sign are on right now? It seems to me that nearly every intersection that the trail crosses currently has a stop sign that allows autos to cross the path without stopping. How crazy is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverJK Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 although inconveinent, it is probably safer to have the responsibility for the bicycle to stop at intersections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 The City is very weird about the hike and bike crossings. They will not put in any sort of traffic control device until traffic on the hike and bike crossings reach a certain threshold. They do not care about the volume of traffic on the street that you are trying to cross. That is why there is no signal or stop at Yale and 11th st., even though a lot of people have been asking for one for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TGM Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 It seems to me that nearly every intersection that the trail crosses currently has a stop sign that allows autos to cross the path without stopping. How crazy is that?I have yet to encounter a cyclist who voluntarily stops when not forced to by two tons of rolling steel.The reality is that drivers would be expected to stop, cyclists would feel entitled not to.Accidents only happen when one party feels that the rules don't apply to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heightsite Posted February 20, 2013 Author Share Posted February 20, 2013 In Tampa every trail has yellow lights and a pedestrian crosswalk at every street crossing. If you've lived here long you know Houston is not a very pedestrian friendly city. Case in point, have you ever seen a motorist yield to pedestrians crossing in the crosswalk on Post Oak in the Galleria? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pleak Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 In Tampa every trail has yellow lights and a pedestrian crosswalk at every street crossing. If you've lived here long you know Houston is not a very pedestrian friendly city. Case in point, have you ever seen a motorist yield to pedestrians crossing in the crosswalk on Post Oak in the Galleria? Yes. Every day if you mean the crosswalk from Neimanns to Dillards. I daily watch people press the button for the light to change, decide they can't wait the couple of minutes and then decide to run/walk/stroll for it even though Post Oak traffic has a green light (and the sole purpose of that particular light is to stop Post Oak traffic periodically so there is a safe crossing for pedestrians). Then the cars have to slam on the brakes to avoid hitting the pedestrians who are crossing against their light. Usually they honk, (I would too) and quite often the pedestrian beats on the hood and then runs away. It's actually quite entertaining to watch while waiting for my bus. But it's almost always the pedestrian thinking they don't have to pay attention to the traffic signal that says don't walk. Maybe they are legally in the right, and a car has to slam on its brakes even when it has a green light - I don't know. But even if they are, one day these idiots will be dead right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesw Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I was wondering why the city doesn't do anything about those crossings at Yale and/or 11th. Trying to get across there w/ my 4 year old on his bike is a nightmare.How does it work - does someone, or more than one person have to be killed before they will implement anything?James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted February 20, 2013 Share Posted February 20, 2013 I was wondering why the city doesn't do anything about those crossings at Yale and/or 11th. Trying to get across there w/ my 4 year old on his bike is a nightmare.How does it work - does someone, or more than one person have to be killed before they will implement anything?JamesIt doesn't matter how many bodies are piled up at the intersection. The City requires a certain volume of pedestrian/cycle traffic before they will put in a signal to protect a crossing. My understanding is that the ped/cycle traffic on the bike path at 11th/Yale doesn't meet that standard. So, the City won't do anything. A rational municipality would give themselves some discretion to install traffic signals when public safety mandated putting them in. But, this is what happens when you put engineers in charge of this kind of thing. They put in place some metric and won't budge until you meet the metric. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crunchtastic Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 we wanted to gawk at fancy heights backyards and made the mistake of turning onto the Nicholson st path this Sunday, with a few hundred other people. Promptly got back on the streets. I don't want to begrudge anyone their strollers, running program, kid trailers, walking grandmas, etc, but it was flat out dangerous with all the peds and cyclists not knowing basic trail rules, on top of stops each block. Here in the east end on the Harrisburg path we don't have quite the congestion issue, go figure. But come early if you want to collect cans. The path from Jensen/Navigtion across to Stude Park is totally awesome though, and I can't wait to spend quality time visiting my heights friends and having weekend day drinkies without having to drive, or bike busy streets. And they can easily ride over for Ninfas/Tiempo or Moontower beer and sausages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted February 21, 2013 Share Posted February 21, 2013 The trail goes right by Lucky's! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I've looked and looked, but still can't find the bike trail at 11th and Yale. 11th and Nicholson, yes, bike lane at 11th and Heights, yes, bike trail at Yale and 7th, yes, but not at 11th and Yale. So, I guess this is a non-issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I've looked and looked, but still can't find the bike trail at 11th and Yale. 11th and Nicholson, yes, bike lane at 11th and Heights, yes, bike trail at Yale and 7th, yes, but not at 11th and Yale. So, I guess this is a non-issue. Wow. So, we are going to go the route of grammar police. A new low for this message board. I don't think anyone had any trouble understanding that the reference was to two separate bike crossings, one across 11th and the other across Yale. But, if you really and honestly cannot get that, then, the issue discussed previously had a slight ambiguity which I will clarify. There are two separate and distinct crossings that many in the community believe need some sort of traffic control device. The first is the crossing of the hike and bike path that was constructed across the rail easement for the old MKT railway that crosses over 11th street where it intersects with Nicholson. At that intersection, the trail runs along Nicholson, not 11th. The second of the two distinct intersections is where the trail crosses Yale St. This intersection is between 6th Street to the south and 8th street to the north. If you continue eastbound along the trail, it will eventually follow 7th st. Most everyone in the Heights who uses the trail are very aware of the crossings at 11th and Yale St. and do not have any trouble understanding the reference. But, just in case it is too difficult to understand, I have thoroughly clarified the issue so that it will no longer be a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marksmu Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I use the trail consistently and just thought you mis-spoke when you said 11th and yale.... I did not read the initial response to mean the two crossings at both 11th and another at yale. I was not reading it as grammar police or anything else - just that you meant 11th and Nicholson.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 It doesn't matter how many bodies are piled up at the intersection. The City requires a certain volume of pedestrian/cycle traffic before they will put in a signal to protect a crossing. My understanding is that the ped/cycle traffic on the bike path at 11th/Yale doesn't meet that standard. So, the City won't do anything. A rational municipality would give themselves some discretion to install traffic signals when public safety mandated putting them in. But, this is what happens when you put engineers in charge of this kind of thing. They put in place some metric and won't budge until you meet the metric. You were the one that claimed there's a bike path at 11th and Yale. How else would that sentence above be interpreted? I've never seen enough pedestrians/bikes to justify a signal at any of the crossings. And since CoH can't get signals on real streets coordinated correctly, lights at bike paths would be a pain for traffic, since the red would appear whether there are any bikes/pedestrians or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted February 22, 2013 Share Posted February 22, 2013 I agree. I thought you were completely wrong, too. I spent several minutes trying to picture what trail was at Yale and 11th, too. I rarely see anyone waiting to cross at 7th and Yale. I agree with the city engineers. For all the moaning about Walmart and proposed apartments causing gridlock, I'm stunned to see anyone recommending a stoplight for a few cyclists. I use that trail, and I don't think it needs a light. Nicholson at 11th is busier, but not enough to justify a light, either. Again, I am with the engineers on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TGM Posted February 23, 2013 Share Posted February 23, 2013 The last thing we need is another signal light pre-programmed at specific intervals regardless of time of day or traffic conditions. Let's not make the traffic management any dumber than it already is.I'm convinced that if you placed 3 code-monkeys in a room for an hour with an Arduino kit, webcam, and 4g data card you could a superior system than what exists now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJxvi Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 I understood. He said "crossings" and then a couple sentences later said "there is no signal at Yale and 11th" which I knew referred to the "crossings" He should have had another "at" in there I guess if you really want everypne to type crystal clear. "at Yale and at 11th" or whatever. Lets all find some English papers to grade! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJxvi Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 Yale seems more often difficult to cross, I have to stop and wait there almost every time, but I am almost always the only one waiting, and I rarely have to wait more than a minute. At certain times of day it is almost impossible to get a gap to cross 11th, though, and there is almost always someone either waiting at or just getting there at all times of day. If its not rush hour, theres a good chance you only have to stop for a few seconds though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heightsite Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 Wow. So, we are going to go the route of grammar police. A new low for this message board. I don't think anyone had any trouble understanding that the reference was to two separate bike crossings, one across 11th and the other across Yale. But, if you really and honestly cannot get that, then, the issue discussed previously had a slight ambiguity which I will clarify. There are two separate and distinct crossings that many in the community believe need some sort of traffic control device. The first is the crossing of the hike and bike path that was constructed across the rail easement for the old MKT railway that crosses over 11th street where it intersects with Nicholson. At that intersection, the trail runs along Nicholson, not 11th. The second of the two distinct intersections is where the trail crosses Yale St. This intersection is between 6th Street to the south and 8th street to the north. If you continue eastbound along the trail, it will eventually follow 7th st. Most everyone in the Heights who uses the trail are very aware of the crossings at 11th and Yale St. and do not have any trouble understanding the reference. But, just in case it is too difficult to understand, I have thoroughly clarified the issue so that it will no longer be a problem.Yes. Every day if you mean the crosswalk from Neimanns to Dillards. I daily watch people press the button for the light to change, decide they can't wait the couple of minutes and then decide to run/walk/stroll for it even though Post Oak traffic has a green light (and the sole purpose of that particular light is to stop Post Oak traffic periodically so there is a safe crossing for pedestrians). Then the cars have to slam on the brakes to avoid hitting the pedestrians who are crossing against their light. Usually they honk, (I would too) and quite often the pedestrian beats on the hood and then runs away. It's actually quite entertaining to watch while waiting for my bus.But it's almost always the pedestrian thinking they don't have to pay attention to the traffic signal that says don't walk. Maybe they are legally in the right, and a car has to slam on its brakes even when it has a green light - I don't know. But even if they are, one day these idiots will be dead right.Yes. Every day if you mean the crosswalk from Neimanns to Dillards. I daily watch people press the button for the light to change, decide they can't wait the couple of minutes and then decide to run/walk/stroll for it even though Post Oak traffic has a green light (and the sole purpose of that particular light is to stop Post Oak traffic periodically so there is a safe crossing for pedestrians). Then the cars have to slam on the brakes to avoid hitting the pedestrians who are crossing against their light. Usually they honk, (I would too) and quite often the pedestrian beats on the hood and then runs away. It's actually quite entertaining to watch while waiting for my bus.But it's almost always the pedestrian thinking they don't have to pay attention to the traffic signal that says don't walk. Maybe they are legally in the right, and a car has to slam on its brakes even when it has a green light - I don't know. But even if they are, one day these idiots will be dead right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heightsite Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 Oops...I obviously haven't used the quote option lately. In response to Pleak, that's a great example of what I mean. I was referring to the crosswalk north of Westheimer on Post Oak where there is NO caution light. There's several crosswalks there and I hardly ever see anyone slow down let alone stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylejack Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 although inconveinent, it is probably safer to have the responsibility for the bicycle to stop at intersections. Why is it either/or? Why not have a stop sign for both bikes and cars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted February 25, 2013 Share Posted February 25, 2013 I was at this crossing yesterday, and given the weather and the weekend, there were 3 others waiting to cross. We waited about 30-45 seconds for a gap in traffic. I don't find this to be too long a wait. As a driver and a cyclist, I'd rather not have a signal there, especially since I wouldn't trust the drivers to stop anyway. As for a stop sign on Yale...umm...no. There are other battles for cyclists to fight. This one ain't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heightsite Posted February 25, 2013 Author Share Posted February 25, 2013 My original question was in concern for public safety and believe making the crossings extremely noticeable would benefit both cyclists and drivers. I still think switching stop sign streets where the path intersects would be a great start, after all, someone's suppose to stop either the N/S bound or E/W bound driver. Does it really matter which one it is? I've witnessed too many motorists on cell phones, etc.(Usually realtors or young drivers) paying little attention to other motorists let alone pedestrians & cyclists.Fluorescent paint, caution signs and/or lights can't hurt can it? If you think so say why. Keep in mind I never mentioned stop lights. I did throw out for way stops on intersections the pathway crosses and don't think it's a bad idea either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pleak Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Oops...I obviously haven't used the quote option lately. In response to Pleak, that's a great example of what I mean. I was referring to the crosswalk north of Westheimer on Post Oak where there is NO caution light. There's several crosswalks there and I hardly ever see anyone slow down let alone stop. Ahh - you made me get up from my desk and go look to confirm. I can see 4 crosswalks on Post Oak north of Westheimer to San Felipe. (Not counting the crosswalks AT Westheimer and the one at San Felipe.) Every one of them has a light. So of course no vehicles are going to slow down if they have a green light. And a person would have to be an idiot to cross in front of a car that has a green light. I'm not saying you haven't seen it happen because I see it just about every day. But it doesn't mean the driver is wrong. If the person/bicyclist really wants to play a live-action version of Frogger, well, there is a reason the Darwin Awards are put out every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
callisthenes Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 There are “bike route” signs on 11th coming up to the Nicholson trail. Given Houston driving culture, I don’t think making them neon or putting warning lights on them will slow traffic down, and since some drivers like to stop when they don’t have to and wave bikes through intersections, it might create a more dangerous situation. Given the volume of traffic on 11th compared to that on the Nicholson trail, stop lights or signs aren’t justified. Waiting to cross major thoroughfares is just part of the urban cycling experience. Welcome to the streets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 There are “bike route” signs on 11th coming up to the Nicholson trail. Given Houston driving culture, I don’t think making them neon or putting warning lights on them will slow traffic down, and since some drivers like to stop when they don’t have to and wave bikes through intersections, it might create a more dangerous situation. Given the volume of traffic on 11th compared to that on the Nicholson trail, stop lights or signs aren’t justified. Waiting to cross major thoroughfares is just part of the urban cycling experience. Welcome to the streets. Bingo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 There are “bike route” signs on 11th coming up to the Nicholson trail. Given Houston driving culture, I don’t think making them neon or putting warning lights on them will slow traffic down, and since some drivers like to stop when they don’t have to and wave bikes through intersections, it might create a more dangerous situation. Given the volume of traffic on 11th compared to that on the Nicholson trail, stop lights or signs aren’t justified. Waiting to cross major thoroughfares is just part of the urban cycling experience. Welcome to the streets. People have been asking for an actual traffic signal for 11th/Nicholson and bikepath/Yale. A stop sign would not make sense as it would force everyone to stop. A traffic signal that was activated by users of the trail would be a great idea to make the crossing safe for everyone, not just cyclist. People do go for walks with family. People on the west side of Yale take the bike path to go to Donovan Park with their kids. Crossing Yale St. with little kids is a major challenge and it does not have to be that way. Waiting for pedestrians and cyclists to cross a major thoroughfare is just part of the urban driving experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedScare Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Just because some people ask for a light doesn't mean it should be installed. Seems to me that a traffic analysis should be done before they consider it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 People have been asking for an actual traffic signal for 11th/Nicholson and bikepath/Yale. A stop sign would not make sense as it would force everyone to stop. A traffic signal that was activated by users of the trail would be a great idea to make the crossing safe for everyone, not just cyclist. People do go for walks with family. People on the west side of Yale take the bike path to go to Donovan Park with their kids. Crossing Yale St. with little kids is a major challenge and it does not have to be that way. Waiting for pedestrians and cyclists to cross a major thoroughfare is just part of the urban driving experience. If those are specifically bike paths, then pedestrians should not be walking on a bike path (period). If those paths are marked as hike/bike trails, then the city needs to update their signage where it crosses streets to alert drivers that there are pedestrians crossing, and not just a bike path ahead, and at least have the markings for a crosswalk on the street, and appropriate signs prior to intersect. If you spend enough time on sidewalks riding your bike, you're going to get hit as someone leaves or enters a parking lot (oddly, the laws on cycling on sidewalks specifically reference that you cannot ride on the sidewalk within x feet of a retail/commercial site, and probably for this very reason). If people spend enough time walking on a bike path, they are going to get run into by a cyclist, or they are going to get run over trying to cross the street. Same thing with walking in a street when there's a sidewalk. the pedestrian walking in the street will probably get hit by a car. These things are completely avoidable, and the safety issue is only an issue because people don't follow the laws that are in place to keep them safe. Families with children should be especially heightened to protecting their children and before expecting others to bend to their will to provide safety for them and their family, they should do everything in their power to be safe, this starts with following the rules set forth by our government which are in place to help make things safe for them! Talking about it not being safe for families to walk on a bike path is like saying the sky is blue. "no duh" is my response. Maybe those families should walk over one block west to Lawrence Street where there is a sidewalk that runs for the same distance and parallel to the bike path. If you want to help make a difference, let people know they're putting themselves and their families in harms way, hell, call CPS for child endangerment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylejack Posted February 26, 2013 Share Posted February 26, 2013 Bikes should be riding in the lane designated for them and not the median path. Just a bad dangerous idea to ride the median one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.