Fisher's suggestion of "continuing the progress and not ignoring Marion Barry" is a contradiction. Ignoring Marion Barry IS progress.

by Rob on Jan 3, 2011 9:09 am • link • report

Correction to your pedestrian fatality entry: the nearest *MARKED* crosswalks are 3/4 mile in each direction. The nearest UNmarked crosswalk would be at Jenna Lee Ave itself. There's also a traffic signal just a 1/4 mile to the north of the incident (at Mt. Vernon Hwy).

That said, pedestrian safety has long been an issue along pretty much all of Route 1 between the Beltway and Ft. Belvoir, and the local Mt. Vernon council (of which I'm part of the transportation committee) has long been clamoring VDOT for Route 1 improvements for all modes.

by Froggie on Jan 3, 2011 9:35 am • link • report

"but police as usual dismiss the incident saying the pedestrian "was not in the crosswalk."

That’s not true. No one is dismissing anything, just a statement of facts, which include the state of the driver and driving behavior. According to the FFX Police News release they are still investigating.

http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/police/news-releases/2010/010211fatalcrash.htm

by RJ on Jan 3, 2011 9:37 am • link • report

The article says "officers do not expect that charges will be filed." Pedestrian not in crosswalk, driver not drunk, didn't leave the scene, so case closed.

by David Alpert on Jan 3, 2011 9:38 am • link • report

There's an interesting discussion brewing at Arlnow.com about the issue of pedestrians crossing without a crosswalk: http://www.arlnow.com/2010/12/30/young-woman-hit-by-car-seriously-injured-near-ballston-metro/#comments

by Max on Jan 3, 2011 9:40 am • link • report

@Froggie: What do you mean by "unmarked crosswalk?" A crosswalk is, literally, a series of painted lines. Without the painted lines, it is not a crosswalk.

Now, I seem to remember growing up in Pennsylvania that any street corner, unless specifically marked as not a pedestrian crossing, was a legal place to cross the street. But I haven't heard of such a law in Virginia. If there is such a law, it seems that this pedestrian was crossing completely legally.

by Tim on Jan 3, 2011 9:42 am • link • report

David: until the case is actually CLOSED by police, you can't just summarily say "case closed" yourself.

by Froggie on Jan 3, 2011 9:43 am • link • report

Tim: most states (including Virginia) legally define crosswalks as what you remember from Pennsylvania.

by Froggie on Jan 3, 2011 9:44 am • link • report

Section 46.2-100 of the Code of Virginia is the relevent section. First part of the "crosswalk" definition.

by Froggie on Jan 3, 2011 9:45 am • link • report

Dave,

That is what the article says; Fairfax Police official release did not mention anything about expected charges. Will it likely be the case, yes, but officially it is an active investigation.

by RJ on Jan 3, 2011 9:46 am • link • report

So I might be missing something here, but why is Metro already looking to replace SmarTrip? I've heard that the technology might be defunct, but does the cost of refurbishing all buses and metro stations really make sense right now? Perhaps WMATA Should look for another producer of the SmarTrip cards?

by John on Jan 3, 2011 9:52 am • link • report

The expansion of SmarTrip seems like a great idea, although I'd want to know what would happen if I tapped my wallet on a reader, given that it contains my current SmarTrip, an RFID-enabled credit card, a HID badge, bikeshare key, and occasionally an RFID-enabled passport. Would I be billed 5 times?

That said, it'd be great if we could have a keyfob-based payment device. The current system seems to invite wallet-snatching.

by andrew on Jan 3, 2011 9:55 am • link • report

@John

I'm pretty sure all of the SmarTrip readers are just fine. They are universal, as far as I know, and not tied to any specific manufacturer. We'd be talking about replacing cards as well as software upgrades.

The biggest attraction for me is the opportunity for universal fare media. I like the idea that I could link my SmarTrip to an account and have that pay for Metro, MARC, VRE, etc.

The model implementation to follow would be that of Hong Kong and their Octopus Card:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octopus_card

You can use it for transit fares, for parking meters, for 7-11 purchases, etc.

by Alex B. on Jan 3, 2011 10:01 am • link • report

It is infuriating what has happened at Georgia and Missouri Aves. I was unaware that the neighborhood killed a great development idea because they did not want more people in the neighborhood.

Bowser is absolutely right that Georgia Ave. needs more density. Clarendon Blvd. in Arlington should serve as the model. They have density along the avenue, but the single-family house neighborhoods are well-preserved and even more vibrant because they are close to the activity of the boulevard.

They are doing the right thing in Petworth. They can do it with the rest of the avenue.

by Steve on Jan 3, 2011 11:14 am • link • report

Please refer to the FHWA research report on pedestrian safety in marked vs. unmarked crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/04100/

by Some Ideas on Jan 3, 2011 11:56 am • link • report

@Dave-
Out of curiosity, what would you have liked to see the article say? At first I thought your point was just that the city/county needed to do something about pedestrian safety in the area, but your post seemed to suggest that you want to go after the driver (or at least see a more thorough investigation into the driver).

Assuming that's true, what would you have the police do?

@Tim-
I don't think the legal vs. illegal crossing is a huge issue here, but it's hard to tell where the pedestrian was crossing the street. The articles say things like "just north" or "near" Janna Lee Avenue, which to me implies it wasn't at the actual intersection.

by Andy R on Jan 3, 2011 12:13 pm • link • report

Andy R: I would like the police to actually investigate the crash and determine if the driver was negligent or not. Now, they almost always just assume the pedestrian was negligent. I'd like them not to tell the press that they don't expect to press charges until they finish investigating.

by David Alpert on Jan 3, 2011 12:17 pm • link • report

There's a big difference in determining what probably happened and determining fault to the degree that you could press charges and win.

It's perfectly plausible that a) the driver was negligent, and b) the police cannot prove this.

The article notes that neither speed nor alcohol were a factor. Presumably, the reporter learned this from the cops that were investigating. If the cops also think that charges are unlikely, that's probably because their preliminary investigation has exhausted all of the legal evidence sources that would be required to convict a driver for negligence behind the wheel. If the police have no evidence, then there is no basis for a charge.

by Alex B. on Jan 3, 2011 12:41 pm • link • report

The nearest UNmarked crosswalk would be at Jenna Lee Ave itself.

Of course, almost no one even knows such a thing exists, they're not enforced, and if a driver runs you over in one, rather than yielding ROW, there will be no penalty whatsoever.

Which means that for all intents and purposes, they don't exist.

by oboe on Jan 3, 2011 12:42 pm • link • report

@Froggie I am not familiar with that intersection at all, but your reading of the code seems to be a bit off:

" means that part of a roadway at an intersection included within the connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks on opposite sides of the highway measured from the curbs or, in the absence of curbs, from the edges of the traversable roadway; or any portion of a roadway at an intersection or elsewhere distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface."

you said you are relaying on the first part, which I read as "part of roadway within connections of the lateral lines of the sidewalks".

there aren't any sidewalks there.

Is that an inconvenience for pedestrians? Absolutely. Was the pedestrian crossing w crossing w/o a sidewalk or potentially in the middle of a block? Yes. Absent alcohol, speeding, or chatting or you cell phone, I'm not sure how the police would prove negligence.

by charlie on Jan 3, 2011 1:16 pm • link • report

@andrew:
It is your responsibility to use the appropriate payment method in that case. If you went to Target and gave the cashier your entire wallet and said "you choose which card to use", would you be mad if she/he used the wrong one?

If you're worried about this scenario happening, then take the card that you wish to use out of your wallet and swipe it.

by Sam on Jan 3, 2011 1:21 pm • link • report

Charlie: Janna Lee Ave has a sidewalk on the northeast side that extends to Route 1 proper (the southwest side sidewalk only goes to the frontage road).

by Froggie on Jan 3, 2011 3:14 pm • link • report

Thanks for the link, but just to nitpick a little: the structures razed likely weren't considered "historic" when they were torn down. Just a reminder that today's "doesn't fit into the neighborhood, destroying our community and inundating us with new traffic" new construction is tomorrow's historic landmark.

by Stephen Smith on Jan 3, 2011 3:49 pm • link • report

A few years ago, WMATA tested out using credit cards as de facto SmarTrip cards. I got one in the mail from my bank with $5 preloaded. I used up the $5 but never felt comfortable with using it for more. The reader couldn't read the card through my wallet or my purse pocket so I'd have to take it out for scanning. That seems to invite loss/theft.

It would seem I wasn't the only who felt that way. My card expired at the end of a year, and the next version did not have a little SmarTrip logo in the corner.

by TJ on Jan 3, 2011 4:01 pm • link • report

I'm hearing that Karina Ricks has left DDOT for a job in the private sector and that Scott Kubly is on his way out as well.

by Fritz on Jan 3, 2011 6:44 pm • link • report

@Froggie; I'd agree the statute could be written better, but my reading of "Sidewalks" means there are sidewalks on both side of street in question. So, by that reading there might be a "crosswalk" on Janna Lee but NOT one on Lee Highway.

Again, that is a powerful argument for the need for more crosswalks. But it is very understandable the legal system treats people who cross elsewhere as assuming a lot of risk.

by charlie on Jan 3, 2011 6:52 pm • link • report

I don't understand how it can be hard to prove that the driver was negligent. Aren't drivers required to yield to pedestrians crossing legally? If the pedestrian was crossing legally, then failure to yield is an offense in itself. Sure, it might have been dark, but driving thousands of pounds of metal around at high speed means you have a high responsibility to be especially observant.

by David desJardins on Jan 4, 2011 1:45 am • link • report

From what I can tell, the pedestrian accident did not occur in Hyattsville, but in an unincorporated area of Prince George's County around 8 miles from the Hyattsville City Hall. Pedestrian conditions are much better in the City of Hyattsville.
It's not necessarily the fault of GGW, but it's an ongoing problem that the media reports events inaccurately as occurring within Hyattsville. The city provides this useful webpage to input an address and check whether it is located in the city or not: http://hyattsville.org/index.aspx?nid=458

by Phil LaCombe on Jan 4, 2011 10:56 am • link • report

I'm intrigued by the mentioned in the article on SmarTrip of my work id (federal) functioning as a SmarTrip card. It certainly would make it easier to seperate my transit benefit useage from my general transit useage. I wonder if that could somehow simplify transit benefit administration.

On the other hand we are also reminded to take our IDs off when we leave the building for nonspecific security reasons.

by Kate on Jan 4, 2011 1:01 pm • link • report

It is not over a mile to a safe place to cross. There are traffic signals and marked crosswalks 0.4 mile in either direction.

by anonymous on Jan 4, 2011 10:50 pm • link • report

anonymous: not quite true on the latter. Yes, the signal at Mt. Vernon Hwy is just a quarter mile away, but the nearest marked crosswalks are 3/4 mile away.

by Froggie on Jan 4, 2011 10:51 pm • link • report

From Janna Lee Ave it is 0.4 mile south to the signal and crosswalk at Russell Rd, or 0.4 mile north to the signal and crosswalk at Ladson St. Both crosswalks are visible on Google street view and Bing bird's eye view.

by anonymous on Jan 5, 2011 7:16 pm • link • report