Cyclists: Let the Backlash Begin (or Not)
Muni Ticket Agent Arrested After Assaulting Juvenile
So Much For That Plastic Bag Ban
Verizon Droid: Big Deal? Or Just Another Late Arrival Rival?
Feinstein : Will She Or Won't She?
An elderly woman was struck by an outbound N-Judah this evening around 5:45 p.m. at 9th Avenue and Irving Street. Over at N-Judah Chronicles, fittingly enough, Greg Dewar was downing a pint at Blackthorn Tavern when the collision occurred.
While having a pint at the Blackthorn Tavern, awaiting the beginning of pub trivia, Bobby, the owner alerted me to a situation just outside the door. It seems that at 5:41 pm (according to sources on the spot) an outbound N-Judah making the potentially hazardous left turn hit and injured a woman who'd had trouble crossing the street. The combination of slick rails owing to the recent rain, combined with the fact that humans, cars and trains have to share a busy intersection have resulted in a needless tragedy.
Safety at 9th Ave and Irving has been an area of concern for some time. Dewar goes on to point out how now that "someone has been hurt, potentially fatally ... we can expect to pay out another big settlement because Mayor Newsom, the Board of Supervisors and the Esteemed MTA would rather talk and talk than do and do."
The unidentified and "severely injured" woman was rushed to San Francisco General Hospital. We will update you with her condition as find out more.
Image credit goes to Greg Dewar. (Check out his Flickr account for more shots of the accident scene.)
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
thanks for the link!
who would have thought an innocent pint of Guinness would lead to being at a tragedy like this?
very sad, and I sincerely hope the poor woman hit is OK...and that MUNI finally gets the message and does what it should have done a long time ago....this was a totally unecessary tragedy...
talk the talk? what is the "do" in this case and this area to improve saftey?
Unless the Feds suddenly decide to bless cities with lots so transit money for subways people will continue to be hit by buses and trains
Ok... I have to say, this is indeed a tragedy, but this hardly even tops the list of one of the biggest "areas of concern" in this city. As a matter of fact, it doesn't even make the list! Is this a joke?
Caltrain hit another Redwood City-an as well.
zig, it does not cost a zillion dollars to do what MUNI and the MTA have done successfully on Stockton Street in Chinatown (where you have a lot of pedestrians cars and buses) - install a scramble signal to allow peds their chance to cross, then keep them OFF THE ROADS while cars and buses do their thing.
Certainly cheaper than payouts for claims, and everyone wins. Not every transit solution needs the Big Feds to chip in, and if MUNI spent their money better (i.e. the Measure A money) and didn't insist on spending all their money on big pay for executives, well perhaps we'd all win in the long run.
Gotta love it when an unfortunate accident is immediately turned into an attack on the mayor, the supervisors, et al.
IIRC it was the black ones and green ones that made me type badly in school.
Nowadays, the pink ones just put me to sleep, and I type badly all the time.
for the record, I had a pint of Guinness and none of it was pink! :-)
Jas, it's easy to attack the mayor and the supes when the collision is symptomatic of underlying problems that have yet to be addressed.
Irving St. needs pedestrian overpasses like in Hong Kong. While they're at it, make the N Judah a monorail.
I know that scramble signals can be effective at reducing collisions in some circumstances, but this woman was having trouble crossing the street. She still would have been stuck in the middle of the intersection. Sounds like the Muni driver just wasn't aware enough.
Also, the Inner Sunset has the worst drivers in the city. I don't trust them with anything more complex than a stoplight.
Greg,
It's quaint that you'll cut MUNI some slack for "wet tracks". Fact is, eleven years after the fact, they're still working the kinks out of the brakes on those fucking trains. Don't believe me? Check the short range transit plan.
I wholeheartedly support your push for safety reform. I think that red light cameras and aggressive follow-through (even if they're city vehicles) in addition to a scramble signal would be a big boon for safety at 9th and Irving. So would signal priority. Given how infrequently the N runs, giving them priority would give the train operators less incentive to run the light, and not negatively impact drivers and peds too much.
However, don't expect improved signals to solve everything. MUNI operator reform is sorely needed (as is traffic law enforcement). I've seen these reckless drivers bum rush pedestrians crossing legally far too many times to blame someone who's managed to survive for nearly a century. Hell, I've been that pedestrian that's made eye contact with the operator of a stopped train only to have to jump out of the way. Take a look at the St. Francis circle as an example. The LRVs have dedicated signals, and they STILL run red lights.
Also, what about passive safety? Big SUVs often come with bars to ensure that they don't run over smaller vehicles in a wreck. Part of the European NCAP rating is how much damage a car will do to a pedestrian in a wreck. What about the trains and buses?
That said, any idea what action (if any) MUNI is going to take against the drivers that have recently injured or killed pedestrians?
P.S. I know you're not in D4, but are you going to attend Ms. Chu's proposed MUNI community meeting?
Five city "Traffic Signal Shop" work trucks were on that corner as of around 10:45am this morning (1/9), and before I had a chance to ask one of the workers what was up, I overheard someone ask what they were doing.
His answer, verbatim: "Someone was killed here last night and we got a work order to put up pedestrian signals ASAP."
I guess he's not up on current events, unless yet another pedestrian got hit.
So by rush hour tonight there should be some signal improvement there.
Unrelated to this tragic incident ("unrelated" as in: I'm not suggesting the pedestrian was at fault)... while I'm all for pedestrian rights (and right-of-way), I think it's high time that the city flooded our mailboxes, newspapers, and bus shelters with reminders of CA laws 21451.(c), 21451.(d), 21452.(b), 21453.(d), 21456., 21461.5., 21352., 21806.(c), 21950.(b), 21954.(a), and 21955.
Most specifically:
21456. Whenever a pedestrian control signal showing the words "WALK" or "WAIT" or "DONT WALK" or other approved symbol is in place, the signal shall indicate as follows:
(a) "WALK" or approved "Walking Person" symbol. A pedestrian facing the signal may proceed across the roadway in the direction of the signal, but shall yield the right-of-way to vehicles lawfully within the intersection at the time that signal is first shown.
(b) Flashing or steady "DONT WALK" or "WAIT" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol. No pedestrian shall start to cross the roadway in the direction of the signal, but any pedestrian who has partially completed crossing shall proceed to a sidewalk or safety zone or otherwise leave the roadway while the "WAIT" or "DONT WALK" or approved "Upraised Hand" symbol is showing.
Yeah, paragraph b is cute. Too bad DPT... nee... MTA doesn't treat the flashing red hand like that. With some countdowns at seventy plus seconds or some with walk signals of a few seconds... no... the flashing DON'T WALK is the only chance you'll get to start to cross some intersections.
Just rode past the intersection of 9th Ave and Irving. No trucks/visible improvements sighted.