Safe Speeds Bill Passes House Unanimously

As long as the cyclists can get ticketed for exceeding this limit, I think this is a great step.

Why do some people perseverate on the idea that cars and bicycles should be treated equally? They just don’t have that much in common especially when it comes to posing a danger to pedestrians. I for one plan on riding my bicycle 22mph in the 20mph zones. Catch me if you can.

How is that a rational response to this bill?

How is that a rational response.  Well if they want to slow speeds down to 20 mph that should include bicycles and motorcycles.  I have a 250 cc motor scooter, it will do less damage to a pedestrian than a car or truck but more than a bicycle — and people have been killed by bicycles.  My scooter will have to abide by the 20 mph, a bicycle should too since we are having to slow down because of them.  Or do we establish rules for bicycles that the bicyclists don’t want?

Because we drivers are too stupid to be prudent,  fixies are too cool for brakes, natural selection is imoral, and we have so much spare money,

Do you knw how few bicyclists can pedal 20mph? This is just crazy talk.

Well, to be fair, so long as bicycles are legally treated similarly to motor vehicles – as they should when riding in car lanes – they should be subject to the same traffic laws.  Be that tickets for speeding (which I doubt will ever be an issue), failing to yield to pedestrians, running stoplights, riding while drunk, etc., the rules of the road should damn well apply to cyclists.

Look in your rear view mirror. One-ton dually pickup. Green, biodiesel. “Officer, I didn’t see him!”

And you are illiterate and incapable of spelling simple words.

Commenters on here went wild when Erica first reported on this bill, calling it the epitome of the war on cars, calling all cyclists (but especially Erica) evil harpies.

And now it passed unanimously. Not even a single anti-transit, anti-urbanist Republican could be found to oppose it. This should make you people reconsider your opposition — but no, you’ll just get more strident. See Frequent Poster’s threat to run down cyclists above as an example.

Have you watched cyclists speed down pike, union, 23rd or any other hill in Seattle?  Much Much faster than the posted limit, that’s how it’s rational.  We all share the road, and the law.

I know right?  I want my car to be on the sidewalk or the street just like a cycle just because I feel like it, I totally get what you are getting at there.

Oh get off your high horse. Bicycle riders are actually irrelevant to this discussion. Pedestrians are the ones who need this protection. Everyone is a pedestrian at one time or another. I totally favor this bill.
 

Do you have anything new to say? Go take your meds.

Those are arterials, so the new rule would not apply.

It’s not expensive to do a standard traffic speed study. That’s why you never report how much it costs to set speed limits using engineering methods instead of reactionary moral panic.

Have you seen them driving down 15th NW from 85th on down to the Ballard Bridge and across?  When you do, why don’t you drive along side and note their speed.  I have and some are going at least 30 mph.  I have never seen one have to stop fast and would hate to see what would happen on slick roads.  I have also clocked bicyclists on 17th NW from 65th to Leary at at least 20 mph.  I cannot go anywhere near their speed because of the traffic circles that the cyclists move around easier. 

Yeah, because, you know, those darn cyclists are killing and injuring 40,000 people per year, and causing billions of dollars in damage! The entire police force should be devoted to catching these criminals! OH WAIT, those are motorists doing all of those things. My bad.

Have you seen motorists regularly speed along every single arterial in Seattle, every single day with no punishment whatsoever? Because I certainly have. And yet, no one seems to care enough to do anything about that, but if a cyclist goes even 1 mph over the limit, catch the s.o.b and throw him in the stockade! Stop being such a hypocrite.

I believe fount’s response was to the very first comment on this thread, which mentioned cyclists. Any time a bill favors, even indirectly, cyclists you get a lot of comments about how the poor motorists are being adversely affected. Even when the discussion is mainly about pedestrian safety, the comments usually proceed thusly: someone insults or deprecates people who use bicycles, person who bicycles answers in defense, and so on and so forth.

15th is an arterial; on the down hill what’s wrong with bikes going 30 or even 35 with the traffic? (I’d never go down 15th–horrible traffic, but 8th or 24th work just as well.) 17th is another story, and bikers who go through those uncontrolled intersections below Market too fast are asking for trouble. And how do you “clock” them at all through the stop signs and signal at 57th, 56th, and Market?

All traffic laws apply equally to every vehicle operator.

Cyclists have been subject to all traffic laws since bicycles were invented. And by the way, there is no such thing as a ‘car lane’. The traffic lanes have been for the use of all vehicle operators ever since cyclists lobbied for better roads in the 1890s. These laws of access to the roads were extended to automobiles when they came on the scene. Yeah, they were OUR roads first.

Yes, I always use my turn signal on the sidewalk.

How much time does it take engineers, etc. that they could be using on difficult projects instead of pushing paper? 

In response to anotherneighborhoodactivist regarding the speed of bicyclists on 17th NW — cyclists don’t stop at 56th and 57th, even though there are stop signs.  How do I clock them — I can’t keep up with them and I am traveling about 15-18 mph–slower around the traffic circles.  They are supposed to stop at traffic lights such as Market if there is a red light but very few actually come to a full stop and wait for the light to turn green. 

Cyclistas are self-righteous little bitches who deserve … well, you know what.

Now just watch Mayor McDope redefine what constitutes an arterial so he can cut speed limits on all of the streets.

No, illiterate people need things spelled out for them.(that whoosshh you keep hearing are the things that go over your head)

I am not a hypcrite, I just don’t like the cyclist attitude. 

They do that because the infrastructure isn’t there to support them.  Cyclists obey traffic laws in places like Amsterdam and Kyoto because the roads are built with both cars and them in mind.

We need to vote to change road infrastructure, and that’s how we can change behavior.

Agreed.  It’s just like how everyone has gotten so partisan–you’re either on this or that team.

very few people in Seattle ride fixies.  don’t punish the city for the trends of one neighborhood (ie capitol hill)

Cool. more laws with no enforcement

But it is fine if a bicyclist kills a pedestrian? Obviously since there is nowhere near the number of bikes on the road as cars the number is going to be much lower, but bicyclists kill people too.

I just love the crunch-crunch-crunch of a cyclista under my wheels.

Actually, the need for a traffic study is contained in the federal document – Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices – typically referred to as the MUTCD that was, with a few exceptions, adopted by the state Code Revisor.

If the state, by adopting this new statute, loses federal funds for NOT following the published federal standards – well, that is another issue that can soon emerge.

I’m a regular but not frequent rider on 17th to the post office. I can only speak for myself and what I see: I’ve never seen a bike run either of the two all-stop intersections, and I give the right-of-way to cars “in the right.” By the way; there are no traffic circles at 56th and 57th, only further north. And the couple intersections without traffic circles have stop/yield signs for cross streets

As for Market & 17th, are you kidding? Have you really seen bikes run a red light across a busy four lane arterial? Any that do (except in the dead of night when pedestrians do the same) have no sympathy from me…

Rosie: You’re right, you may not be a hypocrite, but you sure are a judgmental generalizer. We’re all prone to that logical defect. Please try not to lump me, an older, obey-the-rules and rarely speed (I can go with the flow off Capitol Hill!) biker, with young & “immortal” fixies.

What?  Tell me, I want to know!  Is it a cookie?  And please explain what a “cyclista” is.  Those of us who are not conversant in your irrelevant neologisms feel like we can’t be part of your imaginary world.

Piece of cake.  The mayor can have this taken care of before lunch because he has absolute, unchecked power over every legislative decision in this city.  The council are merely antiquated figureheads who are only in office to provide a facade of democracy.

OK, I’ll play: I’ve got a nice heavy u-lock very handy just for assholes like you. You so much as pretend to come at me in your truck, and I’ll have it through your window and wrapped around your stupid geezer neck before you can say “watch out!” Don’t think I’d do it? Try me.

Everyone feel better. Great. Because this law will do nothing. This law is in response to a motorist traveling 45 mph in a 25 mph zone, which always has been illegal. All this does is further confuse drivers on whether the locality has imposed 20 mph or 25 mph limits. Basically it serves as a fund raiser for the police. No wonder Lake Forest Park sponsored it.

I’m just trying to point out that all these rules are a
response to Seattleites not behaving very well(or just being aholes). There
should be no more need to post a 20mph speed limit than requiring brakes on a
bike.  

Crunch-crunch-crunch! I’ll get ya first!

Except for the sandwich delivery boy who died last summer because he sped through a crowded intersection on his fixie, and then could neither evade nor slow down or stop when a left-turning motorist took half the lane.

All of which was followed by piteous, self-righteous cyclista whining.

You know what a cyclista is, and better yet, it bugs the living shit out of you that you know what a cyclista is. It also bugs you to be called a Seattle Smugster. Did I ever tell you just how easy and fun you whackjobs are?

Is it partisan to say that I love the crunch-crunch-crunch of a cyclista beneath the wheels of my 1-ton, green, biodiesel, dually pickup truck? I think it’s something everyone can enjoy, but maybe not?

Great information. Something tells me that this will be another case of the House proposing, and the Senate disposing. Once the adults weigh in, this will be history. Besides, if the Smugsters really want to slow things down, they’d install speed bumps. Why don’t they? Because it would slow the cyclistas down too. Hmm.

A significant portion of the comments that are insulting, deprecating, or threatening cyclists comes from off-his-meds FP. His best skill: Irritating the crap out of people who want a conversation. If you ignore him, the partisanship is much less.

Speed bumps don’t slow cyclists; especially not the one’s that are deft enough to be riding fast.  Bike wheels are much closer together, so they don’t experience the ding that cars do when they speed over speed bumps.

I have a big truck!  Rar!  Poo poo pee pee!  Truck truck truck!

From the Merriam-Webster online dictionary:

Neologism:
1.  a new word, usage, or expression
2.  a meaningless word coined by a psychotic

In this case, I’m going with definition #2.  Here’s the link for proof.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/neologism

That would be “daft enough to be riding fast”

Not true! They don’t slow you down much, but they sure can through stuff off the back that’s not tied down. Learned the hard way…

No, it sure as hell is not fine for a cyclist to kill a pedestrian. But it certainly is not the numbers of motorized vehicles compared to bicycles that result in such a high death toll, it is poor driver education, inadequate walking/cycling infrastructure, and simply the fact that a two ton vehicle will cause infinitely more damage than 190 lbs of flesh and aluminum, in which case the cyclist has as much or greater probability of getting injured/killed, since they are going from 15-20mph to zero in a second. Cyclists have a vested interest in not colliding into anything, since there is no steel and glass cage protecting them.

Do you really ride a fixie?  If so, what is the attraction?

Best response, ever.

I had a boss who noted that most men who went on and on about their big trucks jad large attitudes and small penises. She called them compensation mobiles.

I won’t say I know anything about Frequent Poster’s anatomy, but I can say unequivicolly that there is something wrong with the psychology of someone who needs to threaten to kill cyclsists at least once a day.

Ah, “Seattle Shrugster,” so you’re a psycho, then? Wow, I’m shocked, just shocked.

I have a big truck!  Rar!  Poo poo pee pee!  Truck truck truck

You’ve gotta get your mom to turn off those violent kid shows, Bam-Bam!

They like the near-deathness of it all.

In your own words, from another comment thread, you sum it up nicely:

“Leave it to a faux-linguist to pretend to miss the point.”

You’ve gotta get your mom to turn off those violent kid shows, Bam-Bam!

You’ve gotta back away from the keyboard and go take your meds. If you don’t do it voluntarily, we’ll have to call in Big Nurse.

I won’t say I know anything about Frequent Poster’s anatomy, but I can say unequivicolly that there is something wrong with the psychology of someone who needs to threaten to kill cyclsists at least once a day.

Typical! JN has on more than one occasion admitted to carrying a gun when he rides, and “anotherneighborhoodactivist” has made violent threats. The “progressives” hate regresssive taxes until they love them, and hate violence until they love it. And then there is their retarded nature, but we can save that for later because I don’t want to hurt your feelings.

@repete, haha, touche.

FP–When have I ever made “violent threats” other than once today explicitly in defense against yours? Come on, show me one example, just one! You are a liar and a prick (a small one anyway).

Oh, wait, you must mean “call in Big Nurse.” Sorry, you’re right, that makes plural “threats.”

Exactly. People miss that this is another feel good effort that either cannot be enforced, nor addresses anything real issues on a non-arterial street, especally with the traffic island mania at intersctions over the past 10 years. This is about areas like 17th NW that have been coveted by bicyclsts for years, but have those pesky residental homes in the way.

I will ignore it on my scooter and in my car. I drive for the conditions on non-arterials, and that actually turns out to be around 20-30 mph anyway. Most people will do the same. What are you going to do, install radar speed traps on all residential streets?

Bicyclists need to look out for themsleves too on non-arterials. Putting up speed limit signs and “please slow down” flag jockeys don’t do it. I for one will not tolerate any bike nanny’s who damage my car or threaten me physically, espeically if they using it as an excuse to enforce this BS. They will find themsleves prosecuted under a different law, and may be met with a much more damaging force than they threaten.

Or is it more like stupidly high, ankle breaking heels?  I see a lot of square pedaling fixie riders
carving serpentine lines as the go; they are clearly not seasoned bikers, just
fashion conscious.

I hope the writers of Publicola are enjoying the typhoid-ridden vomity cesspool that is their comment section.

There’s also the hipster fashionista element.

This move is so unnecessary on the face of it that you’d have to be an idiot to not ask what the real purpose is. Myself, I think you’ll soon see McDope and the city council redefining what constitutes an “arterial” so they can further harass motor vehicles. The goal is to make it so hard to drive here that people will take the bus instead, and then demand rail. It won’t work, but that seems to be what they want to do.

I realize honest reporting is way overrated…but here goes anyway. Cindy Ryu certainly has her false spin on this, as does the Cascade Bike Club…

This is how it really went down.

Last year the lower chamber hid this bill as much as possible then sprung it on the House floor where the leadership passed it with no dissenting votes recorded.

It was then sent over to the Senate where it moved along much more visibally. In the Senate Public Hearing it was ripped to shreds because it is a horrible, horrible bill when you really see what it attempts to do. The state DOT wanted no part of it, same for Counties. The Senate Transportation Committee decided it was pure garbage and dumped it. We thought we were through with it.

This year it was re-introduced in the dead of night, went right to 3rd reading, and passed when the House leadership again decided there were no dissenters. That is correct: the House leadership refused to allow any public comment on it and rubber-stamped it “Unanimous.”

What it does, you do not want done in this state, trust me. That is precisely why the House is pushing it along so fast and undercover: they much prefer you not know what it really does.

If you want crap like this stopped, get a handful of e-mails to the Senate leadership and Senate Transportation Committee and tell them nothing has changed: It still is a horrible idea for State residents. This is NOT how we want legislation passed. If you do not voice your opinion of the House’s shenanigans and the Bill itself to the Senate, you’ve just voted this is an Ok way to do business in this state. You really want your vote counted “their” way by default? Like sending a few e-mails is going to kill you…

“pesky residential homes in the way” on 17th? Huh? How does it being a residential street above 57th have anything to do with anything except it should be for slower traffic, including the bikes. I suspect the bikers like it because it’s not 15th which is unpleasant on a bike; that’s why I use it when I go to that area.

“20-30 mph” on a residential non-arterial? Most streets in Seattle are note wide enough for 30 when it’s parked up on both sides. If you think the condition on these narrow streets safely allows 30, you’re one of the people I will scream at to “Slow Down!” when you blow through. With barely a glance at the intersections. Tell you what, you stand out by the curb and I’ll go through at 30 and let’s see how comfortable you feel about it.

And I’m not threatening you physically. Last time this happened (yelled “Slow Down!” at an oblivious speeding driver) the driver stopped and got out to yell back, and started to threaten me when I wrote the plate down. I don’t give a damn what the speed limit is; if you go too fast on my block and I’m outside, you’ll get yelled at. I do not seek out or advance physical confrontations (the opposite), but I will not stand quietly by while people threaten the welfare of the people on our block. (And I will defend myself if FP or his ilk runs at me.)

I like what this legislation does, and I don’t mind the “shenanigans” that you listed.  Explain to me exactly what it “really does”, as you say, and maybe I’ll reconsider.

Otherwise I might actually send a few e-mails *in support* of it.

Championed by cyclists who want the ability to badger cities into
replacing street speeds that have been 35, 40 and 45mph for half a century with
school-zone 20mph speeds on their favored routes, HB 1217 destroys RCW
46.61.415, which stands as a sentinel guarding against slowing speeds to a crawl
without the wisdom of an experienced, professional traffic study. The current
RCW is but codified common sense to ensure quality studies are performed before
such drastic action is taken. Cyclists are on the warpath to get it
overturned.

Cities have egged this bill on, seeing dollar signs by hanging a
20mph sign over the regular speed limit sign in the dead of night for a few days
with no public notice, study, or repercussions, harvesting those “speeders”, then
moving on to victimize drivers along a different stretch of road. Although
morally reprehensible, cities seem boldly eager for fast cash from flash speed
traps. If only they could get the legislature to remove RCW 46.61.415 standing
in their way.

The cyclists (and Cities behind the scene) are feverishly pedaling the notion a high-quality, cheap, easy, fast, reliable, nationally-recognized study is:

1. Expensive (No, they are about $300 everywhere across the state.),

2. Difficult to do (No, over 1,000 technicians are already trained and doing
them daily.),

3. Too esoteric (No, most cities already have one or more underway every
week.),

4. Too time consuming (No, it’s one week of automated on-site data
collection.),

5. Reports are hard to understand (No, data is downloaded into standardized
forms.),

6. Usurps local control (No, cities daily make decisions on these self-oversight
reports they do now.),

7. Slower speeds are safer for bicyclists (This bit of logic is not a call to
action.),

8. Accountability, professional-level studies, and public input are unnecessary
(Wrong on so many levels. RCW 46.61.415 was enacted for just this very reason—to
ensure self-oversight quality studies were performed before changes were
made.)

Four major transportation organizations (ITE, FHWA, AASHTO, and IIHS)
and several major universities have large transportation safety programs that
have collectively spent hundreds of millions of dollars if not over a billion
dollars refining the studies and the process. Kelso, Forks, Selah, Waitsburg,
Evans and 276 other Washington cities are suddenly in desperate need to invent
their own method of studying traffic flow?

Please don’t be fooled by these total in-your-face fabrications.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with the current practice of doing traffic studies using nationally-recognized processes and forms. Please let the Washington State Senate Leadership know we do not go for stuff like this in our state.

You make a lot of assumptions about my post, most of them wrong, Someone else mentioned a bike lock as a weapon. If a steet is wide enough, and all other things being equal, driving for condtions would put it at 30mph. However, I would be exceeding the 20 mph limit if this is applied to that street.

I don’t seek out confrontations either, but I won’t back down from one that cannot be avoided. Some of them happen unnecessarily when people’s knees get jerky…

Nah, still not convinced.  Besides, we’re talking about non-arterial streets here.  It won’t make a big difference to most drivers, especially commuters. 

Thanks for illustrating your point though.

My post above in response to FP is the only “lock” I can find on this page.

Anyway, you’re point is well taken, it’s the implied “if” in your post (“if a street is wide enough”) I did not get. I’m not a traffic engineer to decide what’s “wide enough” to safely allow for 30; I do know that 30 feels too fast on most Seattle streets with cars parked on both sides, and uncontrolled intersections.

Knee unjerked…

If you like what they did, denying public input, forcing all Representatives to indicate approval, and more, you do not have the appropriate skills to comment or vote on legislative matters. Or you are really crooked.

If it is the former, please take a Civics class before choosing to do either. If it is the latter, I doubt a Civics class would correct it.

I’m with ‘soaked’: You haven’t convinced me, and not because I’m a bicyclist. I’ve read the bill and dug through the bill reports and all the stuff (not much) on the Leg.wa.gov site. Yes, the bikers testified for it. But the only opposition from WashDOT was to keep it off state highways. Seems clear only intent is for non-arterials (says “business and residential”, but how many business non-arterials are there? Can you go more than 20 on Q.A. Avenue through Q.A. business district?).

You start out with “replacing street speeds that have been 35, 40 and 45mph for half a century” which is clearly not applicable. Doesn’t lend credibility to the rest of your points. The key fact, totally uncontested by anyone, that cars going 20 are far less like to kill pedestrians than cars going 30, is dismissed as “This bit of logic is not a call to action.” Well, why shouldn’t it be a call to action?

You use lobby-talk (“Please don’t be fooled by these total in-your-face fabrications.”) but you haven’t actually countered the facts that I can see. Why should cities spend a dime lowering speed limits in residential neighborhoods; what’s the point of the billion-dollar process you like so much? So pedestrians can keep getting killed at higher rates without exposing drivers to automatic liability? Where’s the auto insurance industry testimony?

By the way, are you a traffic engineer or do you in any way make money by keeping control of setting limits out of the hands of local governments?

is that what this is all about?

you’re mad because some kids appear to be cooler than you? it’s the playground all over again?

why is it you care what other people wear, and what does it have to do with lowering speed limits again?

1. If we had public input at every stage of decision-making, our gov’t would be even more lugubrious than it already is. 2. the ‘forcing’ part is just not true.

Stop calling me crooked.  We can disagree without charging each other with mustache-twiddling villainy, eh?

yes, that’s right, EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN in the House is in on McDope’s War on Cars.

If only McGinn were as powerful as you routinely claim in your non-sense Beckian conspiracy theories.

I live on 65th and regularly drive 17th NW to Market Street, most often in the mornings around 7:30 a.m..  Most bicyclists I encounter run the stop signs at 57th and 56th Streets and about half of them slow down towards Market but run the light on their way to Leary.  And yes, the traffic circles start at 63rd and continue to 58th.  It is through this area that cyclists travel faster than I do.  I have never had a cyclist stop to give me the right of way at one of the unmarked intersections.

As I said, they get “no sympathy from me” and furthermore, if I see that behavior it pisses me off. Sometimes I even call them on it vocally, but usually I’m still waiting for the light and they’re long gone. If any of you Ballard bikers norge is talking about are reading this, Knock it off!. We’re working hard to get bike routes improved and B-G finished. We don’t need your behavior make us all look like idiots.

Oh fount, you brain-damaged little retard, you.

I hope someone will be cooler than me, especially a kid. To say that there’s a “hipster fashionista element” to something doesn’t mean I’m mad about it. It just means that I think there’s a hipster fashionista element at play.

One of my nieces is a hipster fashionista, and I love her for it. I only get irritated when they give us too much attitude, or do stupid things that get them killed, like when your brother-under-the-skin sandwich delivery boy rode his fixie too fast through heavy traffic and bought the farm because he couldn’t stop for someone who turned halfway into his lane.

So fount, be a hipster fashionista, but don’t be stupid about it. Or be stupid about it if you want, but if you buy the farm don’t expect me to be crying crocodile tears for you.

Sounds like our Smugster cyclista activist is trying to walk back his violent threat.

“NotYourFool,” don’t even try to convince the cyclista Smugsters here. They hate cars, and want to tell everyone else how to live. I think that bill will get a lot more attention in the state Senate.

Everyone else, don’t try to convince the violent drivista here. He hates bikes, and wants to tell everyone else how to live. Your fashion choices, your transportation choices, your politics — agree with him or its nothing but endless, factless, souless threat and insult.

I hope the writers of Publicola are enjoying the typhoid-ridden vomity cesspool that is their comment section

Don’t be so hard on yourself!

The Seattle Smugsters hate regressive taxes except when they love them. The love neighborhoods except when they hate them. And they love democracy except when they hate it. And they hate hypocrisy, except when they practice it, which is pretty much all the time.

On to the state Senate, where this will be killed again.

By the way, NotYourFool, thanks for the information about how the open government-loving “progressives” snuck this one through. I’m shocked, just shocked, that they’d do it again!

FP–this is the most human/humane post you’ve put up in a while. Please let’s see more of this one. And less of the other.

Soaked, Didn’t go near a Civics book, did you? It shows.

A Public Hearing on a bill is for people to comment on the bill. Got it? You cheer them on when they flim-flam the public’s right to comment. Not good. Not good at all.

When every Representative is entered into the record as a Yes vote, especially for something this dishonest, does it really escape you many were forced? Not good. Not good at all.

p.s. Norge said, “It is through this area that cyclists travel faster than I do.” I do that as well, but I never take your right of way and it can be done safely. We do have more agility than a ton of metal, plastic, and rubber. Just imagine how many cars you could get off the road if you had good bike trails to Ballard and downtown.

Which threat are you referring to, FP? I want a direct quote.

You need to produce evidence of your claim that some of the 98 votes in the house were “forced.”

Here’s the majority report signers:

Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass. Signed by 28 members: Representatives Clibborn, Chair; Billig, Vice Chair; Liias, Vice Chair; Armstrong, Ranking Minority Member; Hargrove, Assistant Ranking Minority
Member; Angel, Asay, Eddy, Finn, Fitzgibbon, Jinkins, Johnson, Klippert, Kristiansen, Ladenburg, McCune, Moeller, Morris,

And here’s the roll call in the House:

SHB 1217

Speed limits

House vote on Final Passage

1/30/2012

Yeas: 96  
Nays: 0  
Absent: 0  
Excused: 2

Voting Yea:  Representatives Ahern, Alexander, Anderson, Angel,
Appleton, Armstrong, Asay, Bailey, Billig, Blake, Buys, Carlyle,
Chandler, Clibborn, Cody, Condotta, Crouse, Dahlquist, Dammeier,
Darneille, DeBolt, Dickerson, Dunshee, Eddy, Fagan, Finn, Fitzgibbon,
Goodman, Green, Haigh, Haler, Hansen, Hargrove, Harris, Hasegawa,
Hinkle, Hope, Hudgins, Hunt, Hunter, Hurst, Jinkins, Johnson, Kagi,
Kelley, Kenney, Kirby, Klippert, Kretz, Kristiansen, Ladenburg, Liias,
Lytton, Maxwell, McCoy, McCune, Miloscia, Moeller, Morris, Moscoso,
Nealey, Orcutt, Ormsby, Orwall, Overstreet, Parker, Pearson, Pedersen,
Pettigrew, Pollet, Probst, Reykdal, Rivers, Roberts, Rodne, Ross, Ryu,
Santos, Schmick, Seaquist, Sells, Shea, Smith, Springer, Sullivan,
Takko, Taylor, Tharinger, Upthegrove, Van De Wege, Walsh, Warnick,
Wilcox, Wylie, Zeiger, and Mr. Speaker

Voting Nay:  

Absent:  

Excused:  Representatives Short and Stanford

=======

So, please tell us how these members were “forced.” You think they’re all stupid and/or on the take?

The reasons I ride a fixed-gear road bike, which is different from the “hipster” fixies, having front and rear brakes + fenders, is because it helps even out your “spin”, maintenance is much lower than with a derailleur-equipped bicycle, and you have increased traction. Fixed gear bikes have been around ever since bicycles were invented. Only recently have “hipsters” begun to use them as fashion accessories. And saying that every fixed gear rider is a lawbreaker because you have seen one or more behave badly is just like saying every Mercedes owner is a lawbreaker because you saw them talking on their cell-phone while driving, or running a red light.

He has a soul, but it appears to be… dis-eased.

Reducing speeds to 20mph on side streets will make our neighborhood streets safer for pedestrians and kids. I was in Olympia today talking to members of the Senate Transportation Committee and their staffs. I explained this was not a bicycle bill, to those who asked, and told all this is exactly the kind of legislation that is needed for local governments. When a Leg fields a constituent call about speeders on their street, which ALL of them say they do regularly, passage og SHB 1217 means they can now tell that constituent the voted for a bill that would lower speeds.

I don’t believe any painted bike lane in Seattle is on a non-arterial. While put forth by the bike lobby last year, this really isn’t a biker bill. It is a pedestrian bill. That’s what we told legislators today and how I expect hem to vote when it comes up.

If you don’t like this idea, then lobby your local government to not adopt it. We’ll see who wins — people concerned about speeds on the residential street in front of their house or the naysayers here.

Please, people, cite a study backing up your “facts”.   Yes-Common sense would dictate that bikes disobeying road/traffic/vehicle laws are causing injury/accidents/death/costs all the while disrupting traffic flow of all vehicles.  Common sense would also say if there are 15 million cars to every 15 bikes, then there should be a million times more chances of damage/death/injury from those 3-to-18 wheeled vehicles.  But helmetless bike riders speeding and blowing thru red lights are hardly safe or legal. 
Also,  bikes and motorcyclists tend to injury themselves more than others in an at-fault wreck, but that’s still an INJURY, and too often the general public ends up paying something for (EMT & police response, DOT cleanup, transportation delays, uninsured medical care, etc).  
Mikos: it’s not an “idea” that bikes are vehicles too, it’s actually state law.   Scooters, motorcycles, bikes, cars and doubletrailer semitrucks are all “vehicles” in the RCW.   If you have any sense of neighborly citizenry at all, you’d care – otherwise angry peds like me are going to come after you with offleash dogs, broomhandles in your spokes, and streetcar rails- and we’ll happily ‘catch you’. 

Before handicapped spots, did eldery/injured/handicapped just ram the cars that were parked close the entrances of buildings?  No.   Before motorcycle insurance laws did bikers smash their harleys into things and then run away to make a point?? No.   Did semi truckers run red lights to ‘protest’ a lack of interstates pre-depression? Hells no.   Pre-federal education and capital funds programs, did teachers instruct kids how to misbehave to help ‘change’ the law?  Nope.
   The infrastructure didnt/doesnt support wheelchairs much either, but wheelchair users arent using that as an excuse for widely,blatantly and dangerously breaking the law.   That’s a lazy excuse for ‘justification’ – it’s SLACKtivism at best. Grow up and just follow the damn law.    
Yes, copenhagen is amazing – great.  But, NO,  behavior doesnt get to wait for law nor infrastructure.  Behavior has to lead – (haven’t you heard the phrase “you gotta Earn It” ?*)  True for respect, for rights, , for public works. *
     With all these, regulation comes handinhand with infrastructure:  bicycle riders should (eventually) have operator licensing and vehicle registration- i.e.  increases relative to increases in support/governance/rights.  Eventually when you ride a bike you’ll have to have insurance too, and scaled relative to the REAL risk and damage potential.    …It’s the same inflation-of-regulation process motorcyclists had to deal with over the last 4 decades or so. 
Were it not for a multitude of stupid, mean and lazy people, we could operate our vehicles nice and safe and cooperatively and we wouldn’t need HALF this much regulation/gov.
 
**  Humanity’s core is choice and behavior.  Infrastructure just makes ‘faster’ and ‘easier’ more widely reachable goals.   Frankly – I’d much rather have a city of mostly considerate people that can’t get far fast   than 600,000 flaming assholes who can all brag about “shaving minutes off their commute”.

people keep having kids and car companies keep producing cars – no amount of hyperbole about ‘getting cars off the street’ or ”imagine all the Ballard people on bikes” is going to stop the fact that more and more cars WILL continue to merge onto our streets.  You wanna actually decrease the number of cars??  Build a comprehensive subway system.   That’s the only proven model that can truly lower the number of total cars over a long term.

Yeah, true.   But that mercedes driver stereotype is pretty well earned…

Just how many 25mph speed limit signs are across king county?  and how expensive is each sign including manufacture, lumber, survey, digging, bolting, cones/trucks/flaggers  etc.?  Likely ridiculously high.
    This is a small “jobs” bill for all intents and purposes. - but I’d rather have that public money go into making sidewalks and bike lanes, frankly.   Net savings of life and limb would be be higher, I’d bet.

build trails and seperate cyclists from cars. we are not cars. its a fantasy to think we are. Limiting the majority who use the roads for the lowest common denominator (speed) is supid. seperate.

more and more cars WILL continue to merge onto our streets

Not necessarily. Also…

FrequentRoaster, you still haven’t explained to the class what a cyclista is.  The rhetorical genius of your neologism will continue to be lost on the unwashed masses if you persist in avoiding a definition.  Further evidence of definition #2…

Having brakes on your bike is a good first step toward adding a third digit to your I.,Q. Now if you’d just leave the gun at home.

I am absolutely supportive of separated trails, but those are very limited in where they can be implemented (very difficult to find an existing right of way that can be used, like in rails-to-trails). I am more supportive of separated, protected cycle tracks/lanes on streets where cyclists actually need to visit daily, which will make it possible for many more people to be able to use a bicycle.

Q: How are Seattle Smugsters and whores alike?

A: They both do their business in the middle of the night when they think no one’s looking.

And that is EXACTLY why I do not respond to him anymore. If I can predict every single spittle-soaked, rage coated response someone makes, I don’t care to talk to them anymore. Their rage is always impotent, anyway.

Of course the younger generations are not buying cars at even close to the rate the older generations did. Not needed, not wanted, certainly not cool anymore.

Again, you are talking about ARTERIALS, and this legislation WOULD NOT APPLY TO ARTERIALS.

nah…not really true. We’re talking thousands of dollars per at a minimum; smaller cities that may well want to post limits at 20 often can’t afford that, and/or don’t have the in-house staff and so have to go out to bid. Of course doing so sucks up staff time, as Ronbot mentions below, that could be spent on other things.

Dave,

I’m sorry to see you are driven to splash your suspect
comments across the Senate Transportation Committee Members.

1.  HB1217 is indeed a
bicycle bill. Last year Evergreen Bike Club championed this as hard as they
could but we managed to get logic, reason, engineering, and common sense to
prevail. Now it is the Cascade Bike club behind HB1217 with another major push.
We hope to stop it again with logic, reason, engineering, and common sense.

2.  Cities have come
crying to the Cascade Bike club pleading for help in reducing 35mph speeds to
20mph speeds on bikers favored routes?  Can
I presume you left a list of all cities who have begged you for this help with
all Senate Transportation Committee members? Care to share it?

3.  You try to sell
HB1217 as an impossibly expensive traffic study. Can I presume you left a list
of the costs quoted by a dozen or two of the 281 Washington State cities with
all Senate Transportation Committee members?  Care to share it?  I’ve seen the numbers…

4.  You have this
great bit of physics that injuries are reduced at reduced speeds, like this is
some kind of revelation that must be used to create a better common good. Can I
presume you are also pushing hard to limit all buildings to one story because
kids falling out second story windows have more severe injuries than those
falling out of one story buildings?  You
seem confident you can peddle this diversion past the unthinking.  Inconvenience tens of thousands betting on the
come one may benefit?

5.  Please pull out
your traffic engineering handbook and read up on the topic of “traffic
migration”. Please read the pitfalls twice.

6.  You try to sell
HB1217 as local control. The current traffic study is a self-assessment of the
advisability of cutting street speeds by half or more. That’s “local
control” by any reasonable logic. Cities appear to already have every bit
of “local control” they want and need.

7.  You want to gut
the state code that requires proper due-diligence and replace it with 281
home-brew versions of how to do a traffic study. Four major national, 7 major
international, and dozens of large universities have done extensive testing to
come up with a rock solid, cheap, fast, reliable, tested, scientifically
accepted, court-hardened process for doing a traffic survey.  How have you arrived at your belief all the
above have gotten it so wrong we must have every city in the state inventing
their own traffic study?  Do you grasp
that the “U” in MUTCD stands for “Uniform”? Would safe and
efficient traffic flow be enhanced with 281 different versions of plain and
simple everyday traffic laws? Does this sound more uniform to you? Can I expect
you left your research data supporting your enlightened views with the Senate
Transportation Committee Members? Care to share it?

8.  HB1217 removes all
restraints to properly managing traffic speeds. The State DOT and Counties made
it crystal clear they want no part of HB1217 on roads they are responsible for.
I’d think you’d grasp they know a thing or two about how NOT to do something.

9.  Do you deny HB1217
opens the door to cities hanging a temporary 20mph sign on the top of a 35mph
signs in the dead of night to create fast cash from flash speed traps?

10.  What is the total
cost to Washington State residents for 281 cities putting up all the resources necessary
to invent, test, and implement a better method of doing a traffic study than
the FHWA, ITE, AASHCO, and IIHS, whose methodology is in use worldwide?

11.  At long last, is
not the real intent of HB1217 to allow bikers to badger cities to slash speeds
in half without a proper traffic study?  Is it not true the real problem is the
“proper” studies are too often coming back with the “wrong”
answer so the real desire is to get rid of the “proper” traffic
studies once and for all? In other words, is it not true what the Cascade Bike
Club wants to do is “shoot the messenger” with the wrong answer?  Is not HB1217 tailor-made to do just that and
only that?  Did you share this with our
Honorable Senators?

12.  You fooled the
lower chamber, the House of Representatives, who did a very contemptible job of
passing HB1217 unanimously. We were not fooled. I do not believe an informed
Senator will knowingly vote for something like HB1217 in our state.

I believe I’ve made my point HB1217 is as ill-considered as
it always has been.
 

limit all buildings to one story because kids falling out second story windows have more severe injuries than those falling out of one story buildings

Comparing children falling from windows to pedestrians getting hit by cars? Seriously?

reducing 35mph speeds to 20mph speeds
and 20mph sign on the top of a 35mph
and  cutting street speeds by half or more

Currently the speed limit on the residential streets at issue is 25 MPH by state law. The bill allows cities to lower that to 20 MPH. Putting forth totally inaccurate/inapplicable facts (lies?) does not help your credibility on other points that may have some validity concerning the engineering process to accomplish the lowering of the speed limit.

now just watch Frequent Poseur keep making shit up.

@Johns, you can drive a truck through the definition of an arterial. The Smugster cyclistas will cut speed limits on a whole lot of arterials by calling them side streets. It’s all about hassling drivers.

 Crunch crunch crunch!

JOhns: 17th NW is an arterial?  MAYBE SoMa, but otherwise, no.  Post a pic showing the 30mph speed limit sign please.  Make sure to include all the traffic circles in the background too 

FP: The Smugster cyclistas will cut speed limits on a whole lot of arterials by calling them side streets. It’s all about hassling drivers.

As usual, you are spewing crap. You do realize that the only people who pay any attention to you are those (like me) who are so annoyed by you they can’t resist calling you on it. Yoga, exercise, meds–please do something to reduce your contribution of ignorant & belligerent nonsense.

Really folks, it doesn’t take much to look up “arterials” and to realize that “cyclistas” have no desire or ability to redesignate them to “hassle drivers.” 17th NW is not an arterial.
http://clerk.seattle.gov/~codepics/1118010a1-1.jpg

FrequentPoster, please chew your granola with your mouth closed.

Crunch crunch crunch I run over you in my big truck and unleash ad hominem attacks and am incapable of conducting an intelligent, civil discussion.

There you go, Ronbot, thought I’d save Frequent Poseur the trouble of chiming in again since the content of his posts is predictable.

Carry on.

Really folks, it doesn’t take much to look up “arterials” and to realize that “cyclistas” have no desire or ability to redesignate them to “hassle drivers.” 17th NW is not an arterial.

Big deal. The city has a map of streets is calls arterials. Give them the authority to set 20 mph limits just by waving their hand, and the Smugster cyclistas will just change the map. It’s all about hassling drivers. It’s what you people live to do.

 Nails, kid. Nails.

No, no, no, you pathetic retard! This is my song! And you will sing it, you schweinhund!

Face it, Smugster, you people believe in nothing other than telling other people how to live. You say you’re against regressive taxes, and then you support toll-gouging in SR 520, and a bullshit $60 car tax. You say you’re for neighborhoods, but then you tell Roosevelt to go fuck themselves. You say you’re for democracy and open government, but you celebrate ramming legislation through in the middle of the night without hearings or debate.

And then you sit there and wonder why people call you Smugsters and cyclistas and won’t trust a fucking word out of you? Really?

Yet another repetitive stupid ass comment by FP?! Ignore.

No wonder you’re toothless.

As a commercial driver and a bicyclist, I gotta say cyclists that don’t obey the rules of the road apply to them are retards who shouldn’t be on the road.  And I gotta say motorists that obey the rules of the road are retards who shouldn’t be on the road.  When you’re on the road, you’re in my place of business.  For my sake and the sake of the other 16 million highway workers and professional drivers on America’s highways all day every day, please treat our workplace with respect, obey the rules and operate safely.

You obviously haven’t been reading my comments very carefully. Basically, you don’t know me any more than you can see your own assh*le without a mirror. But everyone else sees you just fine. Too much, in fact.

I didn’t click on your link since it probably will send me to some Estonian website that will download viruses to my computer, so I’m just going to have to guess at what “your song” is.  Off the top of my head:

1.  Loser, by Beck
2.  Creep, by Radiohead
3.  Touch me I’m Sick, by Mudhoney
4.  Portrait of a Charmless Man, by Blur
5.  American Idiot, by Green Day
6.  Even the Losers, by Tom Petty
7.  No Self Esteem, by The Offspring
8.  I’m so Lonesome I Could Cry, by Hank Williams

Did I get it?

(He he, I made Frequent Poseur mad, he called me a retard!)

I didn’t click on your link since it probably will send me to some Estonian website that will download viruses to my computer, so I’m just going to have to guess at what “your song” is.  Off the top of my head:

1.  Loser, by Beck
2.  Creep, by Radiohead
3.  Touch me I’m Sick, by Mudhoney
4.  Portrait of a Charmless Man, by Blur
5.  American Idiot, by Green Day
6.  Even the Losers, by Tom Petty
7.  No Self Esteem, by The Offspring
8.  I’m so Lonesome I Could Cry, by Hank Williams

Did I get it?

(He he, I made Frequent Poseur mad, he called me a retard!)

I do believe you’re turning angry on us. Poor child needs some kumbaya!

More horseshit from JN the gun-toting cyclista, who doesn’t even bother to conceal having pulled that statistic out of his ass. Typical Smugster.

ANA…
I can help with this. Taking a bit of logic and physics (reduced speeds reduce injuries) and attempting to parlay it into into some call to action doesn’t work with a person possessing critical thinking skills. When the exact same logic is applied to the height of buildings you were quick to spot the flaw in this “logic”.

It clicked with you. Good! God is in the heavens and all is well.

Where in the world did you get the Kool-Aid that convinced you HB1217 does not apply to 35, 40, and 45mph speeds?

Please drive an inner-city arterial with a 35mph speed limit at 20mph for THREE blocks. Please come back and post how ZERO drivers will tolerate this.

Half will ignore the speed limit signs and the other half will move to routes we’d all prefer they not be taking. This is called “traffic migration” and it has repercussions that benefit NOBODY. Crack open the AASHTO “Green Book” if this subject interests you.

Didn’t click on the link? But how could you resist the ultimate Smugster-ette, Her Nibs?

From SHB 1217, Section 1, this is the essence of the proposed change:
 ”3)(a) Cities and towns in their respective jurisdictions may
5 establish a maximum speed limit of twenty miles per hour on a
6 nonarterial highway, or part of a nonarterial highway, that is within
7 a residence district or business district.”

I’ve added the emphasis. Please read the bill and related material before you attack my position.

Your sarcasm is well done, but your facts are off. See graph I put together because you didn’t spend the time to research the obvious: People of all ages die much more often as pedestrians than “kids falling out second story windows.” Arguing, even by implication, against this commonly known fact is idiotic on its face.

I’m with you 100% (assuming your forgot the negative–”motorists that don’t obey the rules”).

Discard the “nonarterial” word as it is meaningless. Focus on the word “highway”. Everything NOT designated a “highway” is far game.

HB1217 is full of sleaze like this which is why the State and counties want absolutely nothing to do with it. Nobody with any connection with honest street and road engineering want anything to do with it either.

Only a fool or crook imposes a traffic flow crippling 20mph speed limit without first determining if it is warranted and has a non-draconian consequence. The RCW that mandates a cheap, fast, reliable study is currently protecting us from the fools and crooks who are convinced we are stupid enough to believe HB1217 is a good idea.

I’ve followed HB1217 for nearly a year now. I cannot believe the number of people who have absolutely no clue what HB1217 is attempting yet praise it.

Good point. We need public works (infrastructure) jobs, but I agree it should be done with efficiency and accountability. I favor the maximum jobs per dollar, and bike trails are better than big engineering projects.

You could easily ask your “electeds” to ask the local government agencies to cough up budget info. Tom Rasmussen is still chairing Seattle City Council transportation committee. He’ll be happy to do it if you ask.

Discard the “nonarterial” word as it is meaningless… Everything NOT designated a “highway” is far game.

Are you paranoid, or what? What is your interest in this? Mine is as a residential neighborhood dweller and business community walker/biker who wants a somewhat slower standard for cars driving through where I live.

HB1217 is full of sleaze like this…

Very sound argument, you’ve got there. The entirety of the change is attached; good luck convincing people it means what you say.

http://www.infrastructurist.com/2011/02/14/why-are-americans-driving-less/
There ‘ya go. The younger generations (you know, those who will be the dominant demographic and run the country in another decade or so?) do not have any overwhelming need or desire for cars, and actually PREFER transit, walking, and yes, even cycling to driving a car. Since FP is not of the younger generation, and represents a far older (and more blinkered and ignorant) segment of the population, of course he clings to his truck like the stubborn, delusional fool he really is.

How can I resist?  Let’s see… Exhibit A, I don’t think I’m a smugster, whatever that is, but it’s hard to tell since you refuse to define your imaginary vocabulary.  I’m not even sure that you know what it means.  Another irrelevant, meaningless neologism coined and overused by our resident psychotic.  Second, it’s healthy practice to not click on links from untrustworthy sources, and no commenter on this site has less credibility than Frequent Poseur.  Crunch crunch crunch!

You can lead a Smugster to water …

…but you can’t define what one is.

most idiotic thread ever.  i think Publicola has become the hang out of the insane…

Oh man, guys, he must have found a copy of the Smugster Weekly Newsletter.  He’s sure got us pegged.  He completely understands exactly what we’re all about.  Oh man.  You guys.

1.  I couldn’t care less who is behind it. I’d support
this bill if it was sponsored by the GOP and the NRA. 20mph will be safer for
our neighborhood side streets.

2.  Cities have used the law to block requests for slower speeds from
neighborhood organizations like mine. I couldn’t care less if cities were
crying for it or not.

3.  The traffic study is more expensive. Doesn’t matter how much more, it’s
more expensive. Further, it is difficult to get an accurate traffic study. My
neighbors are on the streets in question 24/7. A traffic engineer visits for a
hour or so one time – maybe 2-3 if we’re lucky. Our data are better, but
because they weren’t collected by the city they don’t count. This way any
neighborhood that can convince a locality of the change can do so and skip this
unnecessary step.

4.  Changing speeds limits from 25 to 20 on side streets in residential
neighborhoods will not “inconvenience tens of thousands” and you have no data
to prove otherwise.

5.  If side streets go to 20 and I grant your (false) premise this is a
huge inconvenience for people, they will “migrate” to arterials. This is where
the traffic plans say they SHOULD be driving in the first place, so there is no
harm. In fact, there is a benefit.

6.  By the letter, but not in practice. See #3 above.

7.  There is nothing in the MUTCD that requires 25 mph for side streets.
The MUTCD is a traffic study manual, not a prescriptive document for what
speeds municipalities should use on their streets. This bill doesn’t affect the
MUTCD whatsoever. It says you can lower speeds to 20mph without needing a
formal study. Perhaps you should read the bill because this comment is typical
of many comments you make that suggest you don’t really know what the bill
does.

8.  See above. This bill removes nothing. It changes
the lower limit allowed on streets to 20mph from 25mph.

9.  Yes, I deny this. Under the current rules a city
could hang a 25mph sign atop a 35 mph sign if they wanted to do “flash traps”.
Besides, there are plenty of common law court decisions covering this.

10.  Once again, this bill does nothing to the current
traffic manuals and studies and etc.

11.  I’m not sure how you get 25 to 20 as “half”, but… Currently, a city
could “slash” speeds from 50 to 25 without a traffic study. This bill doesn’t
change that.

12.  Just out of curiosity, who is “we”?

“I believe I’ve made my point HB1217 is as ill-considered as it always has been.”

I believe all you’ve demonstrated is that you don’t know
half as much as you think you do about the bill or transportation issues.

David Miller

You can lead a psycho to his meds…

Problem is Publicola refuses to moderate unless they are exposed or the poster is really obnoxious. IMO, Frequent Pest qualifies, but whatever.

It’s Smugster Daily. Part of it’s published here at Publicola, and part of it’s published on the Seattle Transit Blog. The Seattle Bike Blog gives it the old college try, and so (occasionally) does The Stranger.

Poor Neighborhoodsmugster! Just can’t stand it when someone’s got yer number!

If you want bike trails, then stop the free riding and pay like everyone else does. Otherwise, we’ll stomp on every levy and tax increase for your toys. Which I suppose will force you to seek some other regressive levy. You Smugsters just looooooove to stick it to poor people!

David,
Can I presume you did not list the cities who, as you allege, have come crying to you to use your powers of Bull to gut RCW 46.61.415 because there is no list of cities crying the blues over RCW 46.61.415?

Can I presume you did not list the costs quoted by a couple dozen of the 281 Washington State cities because you have failed to make even one call before making the allegation? On the very long shot you did, they confirmed about $300 which torpedoes your main argument?

David, I am an engineer, not a social gadfly. Neither are the counties that took one look at HB1217 and and demanded it be re-written to EXCLUDE counties before it ever got out of the House Transportation Committee. Please see the record. The Washington State DOT is also not a social gadfly. If the Senate had not agreed to kill HB1217, the bill would have been amended to also exclude applicability to every state managed street and road. Exactly how long do you think you can throw a blanket over those facts?

Sorry, David.  Me and about 6,000,000 Washington State Residents are not your fools.

David, Drivers respond to what they are perceiving. Speed limit sign values are the reverse-engineering of the 85th percentile speed of what drivers are perceiving. Engineer it for lower speeds, sometimes this is nothing more than lowering the height of the street lights (Please re-read that. I’ve written it correctly.), and speeds have been proven to drop and stay down. But, hell, we’re just dumb-ass engineers.

Not Your Fool

If behavior led the development of infrastructure, there wouldn’t be any cars in the world. Motorists are giant a-holes, to themselves and especially pedestrians and cyclists.

Holy crap, one of FP’s posts finally got removed. Wonder what he said that was so much worse than “I’ll run you over with my corpulent self in my ridiculously inefficient truck, rarrr!”.

You don’t happen to be John Shaw, do you? After listening to him tell people crosswalks are less safe for all pedestrians, the logic sounds familiar.

No he doesn’t.  He ran it over with his truck.

Crunch crunch crunch!  Ha, take that, squashed soulista!

Smugster Daily?  Coined by none other than the founder, editor, publisher, and CEO of Neologista Hourly.  This publication’s motto, derived from the one on the front of the New York Times, is

“All the catchy-sounding, meaningless words I can’t define.”

Poor Frequent Poseur!  Can’t come up with any original thoughts so he has to bandy about his tired, meaningless words that not even he understands.  Just can’t stand making sense!

Thanks for the continual updates from your Reality Distortion Field.