Thank you Grant. This and the truck driver citation post are two more examples of brilliantly presented common sense from you.
I'm with you, Chuck and others on the beeping. I want to keep an open mind to the possibility that there's a safety benefit, but I don't experience that and I don't see any proof of that being shown. Meanwhile, the negatives are real. Peter On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:55 AM, Grant Foster <[email protected]> wrote: > FYI > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Grant Foster <[email protected]> > Date: Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 11:35 AM > Subject: Metro Audible Alert System > To: [email protected], [email protected], "Ahrens, David" < > [email protected]>, Rebecca Kemble < > [email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], > [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], > [email protected] > > > Transit & Parking Commission: > > I wanted to provide my thoughts on the review of Metro’s audible turn > signal program and have organized them in terms of costs vs benefits. I > appreciate your thoughtful deliberation on this issue. > *Benefits:* > > I have not seen any data that suggests that the implementation and use of > this audible alert system decreases the number or severity of collisions. I > don’t believe there was any data available at the time the system was > implemented and I don’t believe there is any data that suggests we have > seen any such decrease since implementation. If there is no data that > suggests that this is an effective tool, I honestly cannot understand the > benefit other than that of public image management (i.e. we care about > bike/ped safety and we’re doing something to improve things). If this is > really the main driver of the implementation and continued use, I find it > disconcerting and potentially dangerous if it doesn’t actually bring about > the increased safety it promises. > > *Costs:* > > · Financial: I haven’t seen the numbers related to the purchase and > installation of this system and those are obviously sunk costs at this > point. But I would expect there to be annual operating costs for > maintenance and repair of the system as well as life cycle replacement > costs for the product. Undoubtedly, the manufacturer is working on a bigger > and better version that could entice us to upgrade at some point down the > road. > > · Quality of life: You’ll likely hear from many folks who are > bothered to one degree or another by the alerts. It’s reasonable to > understand that those who live or work in very close proximity to turning > buses (bus stops and key intersections) have the greatest exposure and may > be the most bothered. I live very close to a bus stop and can hear the > alerts through my bedroom window, but am not terribly bothered by them. If > I were one or two houses closer to the bus stop, I have a feeling the > impact would be much greater. I also work an 8-5 job and don’t have to > block out the noise while I sleep. Others who work a 2nd or 3rd shift job > likely have a different impact as well. I am annoyed by the sounds in other > areas of the city. State St. is a great example of a place where this > additional noise impacts everyone around. Just yesterday I was sitting at > the tables at the Wilson St. side of the Monona Terrace approach and was > consistently bothered by the beeping of buses turning onto and off of MLK > at Wilson. I know I’m more sensitive to noise pollution than some, but I’m > not that extreme. The noise is unpleasant and doesn’t support my use and > enjoyment of our outside spaces. > > · Safety: I think this is the biggest cost and one that I hope gets > some attention. As a transportation cyclist, I spend 1-2 hours a day on our > city streets on my bike. I can tell you that this alert system has never > helped me negotiate our streets nor my interactions with buses and is just > one more distraction as I try and do so. A great example is coming down > Jenifer St. after dropping my boys off at Marquette Elementary school. Most > mornings I’m riding in front of or behind 3 buses from Baldwin St. to > Williamson St. With the alerts, these buses are beeping at least 80% of > the time in this stretch (right signal as they approach a stop, signal on > while they’re loading, left signal as they leave the stop). This beeping > gives me no useful information and is distracting. When a bus is behind me > and beeping, I don’t know if it’s planning on pulling into a stop behind me > or attempting to pass. And even if I did know, that information isn’t > useful and doesn’t change how I need to ride to keep myself safe. > > And that’s what I find particularly dangerous about this system. I haven’t > seen any clear articulation of the use case for when this will help prevent > a collision. I’ve heard that this was implemented at least in part as a > response to the tragic death of a pedestrian by a Metro bus several years > ago. In this case, a pedestrian was crossing in a marked and signalized > crosswalk appropriately and a Metro bus operator failed to follow protocol > to effective check a blind spot and ultimately failed to yield the right of > way to this pedestrian. Is there really a belief that this would have been > avoided if the bus had an audible alert system at the time? Would the > presence of the beeping have alerted the pedestrian to the bus driver’s > inattention and provided an opportunity for the pedestrian to dive out of > the way? Do we expect pedestrians crossing at marked and signalized > crosswalks today to dive out of the way any time they hear the beeping? In > this same situation, if the bus pulls partially into the intersection with > their signal (and beep) on appropriately waiting for the pedestrian to > cross before completing the turn, do we expect that the pedestrian should > now double back and retreat from crossing because they hear the beeping? > > I also watched the Safe Streets press conference from November of last > year (http://www.cityofmadison.com/metro/safestreets/) including the > surveillance video compilation that was presented: > http://media.cityofmadison.com/Mediasite/Play/0643247b29a24605a8e47fcacb04248f1d > > I was struck by a few things: 1) there was some very dangerous and bad > behavior by people on foot, on bike and on skateboard 2) there was some > great driving by Metro drivers to avoid injury in many of these cases 3) > the montage didn’t include bad behaviors by other motorists 4) the montage > didn’t include bad behaviors by Metro drivers. It may not have been > intentional, but I think presenting such a compilation as part of a Safe > Streets initiative paints a picture that the main problem is with people on > foot, bike, or board behaving badly. I don’t think that’s an accurate > picture of the reality and feel like this sort of misrepresentation can > lead us away from clearly understanding the problems and coming up with > appropriate solutions. I appreciate the attention around ped/bike > collisions and think it’s appropriate given that 6 out of 7 traffic > fatalities in 2013 involved a person on foot or on bike. But as cited in > the press conference, only 42% and 32% respectively involved an at fault > pedestrian or cyclist. This means that well over half the crashes on our > roadways involving a pedestrian or cyclist involves an at fault motor > vehicle operator. The numbers may be slightly different for Metro involved > collisions, but a focus on changing ped/bike behavior is probably not the > highest leverage opportunity. And while I would support efforts to raise > awareness and provide supports for people on foot and on bike to minimize > collisions and injury, this specific initiative seems to really miss the > mark. Take a look at the video and ask yourself in each of the 12 examples > shown if the audible alert system would have helped. In my opinion, it > would have helped in 0 out of the 12 incidents. > > It really seems like this implementation is an answer in search of a > question and I would hope that we have the courage to pull the plug and > focus our efforts on things that will actually improve safety for our > community. Things like changing the style/position of our side mirrors, > continued education for Metro drivers on challenging locations, video > footage review, etc. all seem like strong strategies to minimize dangerous > conflicts and should receive the commitment of dollars and time that is > currently being spent on this system that seems to have very little value > and a fair amount of negative impact. > Thanks for the time and energy you spend on the commission and on > deliberation of this issue. > > Grant Foster > > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
