ChelseaBob

Mon, Sep 26, 2011 : 1:44 p.m.

My first question is: Do we need another law? Most of the complaints herein are about speeding drivers and those that ignore pedestrians in crosswalk. Couldn't the council ask for stepped up enforcement of current laws before writing another one? If we aren't enforcing current laws, it would suggest lack of will or resources, so why bother with a new one? KJM pointed out that this law applies only to non-signalized crosswalks, and that state law does not deal with those. Perhaps we should signalize all the non-signalized crosswalks instead. A red light on demand would offer more protection to pedestrians than this, and be much clearer to motorists. Under this ordinance, you have to determine whether a crosswalk is non-signalized, then scan for any pedestrians and determine if they appear to be moving towards crosswalk. Too much.

Dale Petty

Sat, Sep 24, 2011 : 6:20 p.m.

I was hit by a car in the middle of a crosswalk on Geddes a couple years ago. No cars were in sight when I started across. The driver was just going too fast to be able to stop once they saw the cross walk. (and perhaps on her cell phone :>( ) I regularly see children, mothers pushing strollers and the elderly crossing with terror in their eyes, or sometimes running back as a car comes speeding towards them. I hope enforcing this law will help make drivers be more cautious.

Sutro1

Fri, Sep 23, 2011 : 4:41 p.m.

Great idea. HOWEVER... It would be nice if the police would ticket the "pedestrians" who think it is quite ok to cross between the crosswalks, parked cars and where ever else they think they have the "right" to cross!! Most cIties really do have jay-walking laws. Our privilaged U of M students do not own the roads!

James J. Gould

Wed, Sep 21, 2011 : 7:31 p.m.

I think this is a very stupid law. I will not drive into town any more and will take my business to the malls and other cities that are more realistic. This law would mean that nobody will be able to drive through the campus area at all. What kind of pot-head dreamed this up anyway????

grimmk

Wed, Sep 21, 2011 : 1:41 p.m.

I think if you get a ticket you should track down the pedestrian to find out if in fact they WERE going to cross the street. If they said they weren't then the ticket should be thrown out. You'd pull over both cars if they were in an accident, why not get the pedestrians info as well? The ticket involves them just as much as you!

Jack

Wed, Sep 21, 2011 : 3:43 a.m.

We used to go downtown a lot. We never go anymore. The traffic, the bicyclists who know that traffic laws are not for them, the pedestrians who walk right in front of your vehicle, the begging, the cost of parking, let alone finding a space near to where one is going, have all contributed to our lack of interest. While we miss some of the restaurants, it simply is not worth the stress of the nagivation. We do attend some of the theaters, but then go elsewhere to eat. We use the freeways as much as possible to get where we are going. The only solution I can see to the crosswalks on Washtenaw and Plymouth is to travel always at a speed of 25mph. And that is what I intend to do. Expecting drivers to stop when traveling 45 mph in heavy traffic is totally disrespectful to drivers and pedestrians and will result in accidents if executed. Drivers are now expected to pay attention to: traffic signals, stop signs, merge signs, all signs on the side of the road (ever really looked down Stadium or Washtenaw to see all the signs drivers are expected to read?), traffic bumps (most of which now have fading paint), bicyclists (most of whom do not obey traffic laws), vehicles both behind in front of and adjacent to the driver, including buses which stop frequently, crosswalks and pedestrians (a great many of whom will walk in front of one's car without even looking). I would argue that driver's are grossly overloaded with stimuli to which they are expect to pay attention. No one can drive well under these circumstasnces. Everyone is going to make a mistake now and again. It cannot be helped. Pedestrians can be difficult to see, even in the daytime sometimes, particularly if the driver also has to pay attention to other things. I would urge all drivers to steer clear of downtown and campus as much as possible. Take your money elsewhere.

A2centsworth

Wed, Sep 21, 2011 : 3:20 a.m.

yet another reason to avoid downtown ann arbor.

Roll My Eyes

Wed, Sep 21, 2011 : 2:40 a.m.

Perhaps some 'artful installations' of pedestrian operated proper crosswalk lights would clear the air and do away with the local ordinance, thus allowing motorists to go back to what they were taught in drivers Ed. That's what normal cities do. Walk and don't walk signs aided by push button controls Normal cities. There's a concept.

Will Warner

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 11:32 p.m.

Right now I'm in Boulder CO where the pedstrian is king and every street downtown is cut at many places by pedxings. I have been here exactly 24 hours and I have already seen my first read-ending at a crosswalk. I'm not joking. 24 hours.

russellr

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 9:26 p.m.

I can't believe it!! Stop on Washtenaw doing 45 miles an hour no warning with your 5000 lb vehicle. Bumper to Bumper traffic. Whoever made this law should be responsible for whoever gets killed trying to go across Washtenaw and Arlington. I can understand in neighborhoods but come on, the busiest road in Washtenaw county. It might look good on paper but wait till someone is killed.

Robbo

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 8:51 p.m.

Thank God for this law. So many drivers (not all) are so arrogant, they think the road belongs to them and no one else. I say, the bigger your means of transportation, the more you should be willing to yield the right of way.

Carolyn

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 7:06 p.m.

I happen to live in the area where two women died while trying to cross Plymouth Road at night before they installed the crosswalk. Since the installation of that crosswalk and the one further east on Plymouth Road, I believe pedestrians have been able to cross relatively safely. I have no problem with requiring motorists to stop for pedestrians on this particular road (I happen to be both a pedestrian and a motorist). My concern, especially for this particular, multi-lane road is the ambiguity of the intentions of the pedestrian or the motorist in front or behind me. The HAWK system would be very helpful on Plymouth Road.

Ming Bucibei

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 6:57 p.m.

Another example of A2 hostility to cars and driving!! Do Not drive down town!! Ming Bucibei

A2CommonCityFolk

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 6:46 p.m.

Part 2 I also think the fines are high for this violation, specially the 2 points. The city seems to be unwilling to really address concerns raised by many here. I was told this is a city ordinance and therefore it can be repealed by bring it to a vote. I do not know if my information is correct, but am waiting for someone with a good lawyer to force the city to really address this issue in a meaningful way instead of just shifting responsibility.

A2CommonCityFolk

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 6:44 p.m.

While I do agree with pedestrian crosswalks, I do not agree in the way the city has handled it. The city took all the ownership for pedestrian's safety and put that on the driver of a car. I see this as a common problem in the city. So now you have people just jetting into crosswalks without looking. I was always taught to look both ways, not just to start walking and assume that the driver has seen you. I have to agree with many of the people who have commented, that there are pedestrians abusing this privilege. I also have seen what many drivers are complaining about; the irresponsible behavior of many students that just dart cross the streets. I too wish there was an enforced jaywalking ordinance. I also think there are drivers out there that is doing everything but paying attention. I say this only because I was hit by a young driver texting and did not stop at the stop sign at State and S. University. I was already crossing at the stop sign, when I saw him coming with his head buried. I was fortunate to see him coming in time and move out of the way; coming out with torn pants and scraps to the leg. I enjoy walking and rarely do I drive. I have seen and experience the challenges of pedestrians encounter first hand but I still think the safety needs to be shared. It is a mistake to shift all the responsibility of safety to the driver. I also think the city needs to consider where cross walks are. The one at 7th and Williams in unnecessary because pedestrians can walk one block north and cross at a light. On Pauline, in front of the park, they have two cross walks right next to each other. I like the crosswalk on Huron; it has a signal to warn the drives of a pedestrian's intent to cross. The crosswalk on Washtenaw is just unsafe for both pedestrians and drives, and the crosswalk on North University needs a signal to control students that have no concept of taking turns.

A2 Resident

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 6:43 p.m.

I think the City should ticket the UPS and FedEx trucks that park in the street with their flashers on while they are making deliveries. Using the flashers is supposed to be for emergencies. My job would be easier if I could park in the street and avoid paying for parking too, but I don't do that. UPS and FedEx should not be allowed to cu their overhead by breaking the law; they should look for parking like everyone else.

linda

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 6:35 p.m.

I think it is good to protect pedestrians against rude and careless drivers but to ticket them at a yellow light for not stopping or because the pedestrian is APPROACHING an intersection is obsurd. Stopping at a blinking yellow light or when there is no one on the corner is asking for a re-end collision!. The ones who also need help are the j-walkers. Trying to drive in Ann Arbor is already a nightmare with foolish people walking out into traffic between cars - now this?

Kathy Kelley

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 6:21 p.m.

I am at various times both a driver and a pedestrian in Ann Arbor, and I think this law does much more harm than good. Recently, when I tried to stop on Eisenhower to let a pedestrian cross at a marked crosswalk, the guy in the lane next to me blew through the crosswalk like it wasn't there. The guy behind me almost rear-ended me. Fortunately, the pedestrian was canny enough to wait for the traffic to clear before venturing out. I believe that while drivers should defintiely stop for a pedestrian already in the crosswalk, they should not be requried to stop for one who is still considering the prospect. I have myself been hit by a truck while in a crosswalk and with a walk signal. The danger didn't stop just because the law was on my side. This is a case where common sense should prevail - and yet oddly does not.

grimmk

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 5:40 p.m.

Funny, in my car I have to wait for 20 or 30 car to pass so I can make a turn. It's not a hassle. It shouldn't be for a pedestrian too. Waiting 30 seconds to a minute to cross a street should be expected. It didn't hurt anyone before this new ordnance. You were taught to look both ways before crossing the street. Or in Ann Arbor it's ok to Jay walk as long as you run. This won't stop people from jay walking and this won't stop cars from driving through walkways. FIGHT the tickets. As a pedestrian use common sense. If one car stops, don't expect another one too. Wait to cross when there is a break in traffic. Where bright/light colors at night.

hardscrapp

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 5:39 p.m.

I moved here from California in 2003, where this type of law had long been in effect. In my town, I never had to wait to cross because it was so automatic for drivers to stop at crosswalks. I was almost killed when I moved to Ann Arbor and didn't realize that drivers had the right of way. It is going to be hard to get drivers accustomed to slowing down at crosswalks and to be aware of folks waiting to get to the other side, especially because in the car distractions (cell phone usage, texting) have increased 100% since 2003. But, it is the right thing to do .....if you doubt it, watch the video posted in an old Annarbor.com article when this ordinance was under review. A woman with a white cane attempted to cross a busy intersection in Ann Arbor for 30 minutes - during that time, only 2 cars stopped for her! At one point in the video, she risks it all by venturing out into the crosswalk and just forges ahead - cars keep whizzing by in front of and behind her! Completely unacceptable, especially for town that prides itself on it's forward, progressive attitudes and outdoor lifestyle. I do agree with the poster who mentioned the 40+mph crosswalks. I have seen cars nearly kill pedestrians in busy, high speed crosswalks when they pull out to go around a driver stopped for someone at a crosswalk. I would ask the city counsel to review all of the crosswalks in high speed areas in Ann Arbor and try to come up with some ideas to alleviate this situation. Hopefully given enough time, this law will work. Stop complaining. If the most aggressive drivers in civilization (California) made it happen, so can we sensible minded midwesterners.

Lionel Hutz

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 5:12 p.m.

Are they ticketing folks on bicycles that ignore the crosswalk law?

Tru2Blu76

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 5:04 p.m.

Just noticing: with a huge number of comments, there are some which seem to indicate that those posting do not fully understand the wording of this new ordinance. The ordinance effectively makes any and all crosswalks "equal" and that means they must be treated as if they are at points with stop signs or traffic lights. In other words: drivers must reduce speed and be ready to stop "as if" the crosswalk was at a "controlled"intersection. And yes, it's the PRESENCE of a pedestrian which makes the crosswalk a "stop signal" crossing. Some people are expressing quite genuine fear that they'll be rear-ended. That won't happen IF everyone driving motor vehicles is operating their vehicle in a well-understood manner: slow down, don't follow too closely, NEVER pass on the right just to get around a stopped vehicle when your vision is blocked. This ordinance may or may not succeed: whichever, there will still be a need to protect pedestrians (including those with vision impairment and children, etc.) Something else WILL take the place of this ordinance if it fails.

notnecessary

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 5:03 p.m.

I drive up and down Plymouth Rd about 5 to 10, sometimes 20 times in a day. I've seen plenty of near miss accidents as people slam on their brakes. I've also seen bikers just dart out into the crosswalk. Look, its dangerous to cross the street and I know its hard to walk up to the next light so if we really want to protect people in the middle of the street we should install traffic signals that work to stop traffic safely. We can all stop our cars relatively quickly, but what about a 24' delivery truck or semi driver that isn't familiar with our Ann Arbor attitude (look there are cross walks everywhere in the country and nobody stops for them just for "intent" but here...and in other cities pedestrians don't just walk out into non-signal controlled crosswalks like they do here). What happens when he can't stop his truck? It's not BS, trucks are heavy and cannot stop like cars can (physics, momentum) or when a car slams on its brakes for someone to push their stolen kroger cart across the road and doesn't notice the gravel train behind them? It's too late at this point to blame it on the truck driver (maybe you can) but you're already injured and car destroyed.

Scott Silvers

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 4:40 p.m.

As a pedestrian, I'm going to enjoy my new 'GODLIKE' powers to stop traffic at my whim. The tables have finally been turned! Advantage? - Pedestrian!! I hope to station myself near a crosswalk that is being patrolled by one of the unmarked Ann Arbor Police cars [great use of an expensive vehicle!]. Slowly, I'll turn, one foot dangling perilously close to the crosswalk, causing everyday motorists a moment of panic "IS HE GOING TO CROSS? IS HE?!?!" Maybe I plant my foot and feign to cross, maybe I don't, maybe I just dart out into the street before deciding to go back the way I came, for I no longer wish to pedestrianate in that direction - oh, the liberating choices this law provides the capable pedestrian!!!.....you'll know if I meant it, or not, when Ann Arbor's finest launches 380hp of Chrysler Corporation's best towards your bumper sticker equipped Ann Arborite typical granola mobile......fear me, automobile pilots! Ahhhh....what fun I shall have! And, THANK YOU ANN ARBOR CITY COUNCIL, for providing pedestrians an exciting new toy!

63Townie

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 4:11 p.m.

Ok, so now that we have crosswalks for pedestrians, they actually have to USE them. Just Saturday I had to come to almost a complete stop on Stadium for a guy crossing about 20 feet from an island. I can't count how many students dash across Plymouth road anywhere they choose. If the city is going to ticket motorists for not stopping, I think they should also ticket pedestrians for not using the crosswalks.

A Voice of Reason

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 4:10 p.m.

Guess we have too many policeman if this is how they are spending their time. Pedestrians, walk up to a street light or better yet, cheap city of Ann Arbor, if you are really concerned about pedestrian safety, then put the proper traffic light in place--this a weak attempt that is just costing us more money in the long run. It is also setting the public up for foolishly thinking that the cars are going to stop everytime. This town is full of visitors.

Ron Granger

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 3:17 p.m.

There are vast numbers of entitled drivers who already ignore crosswalks, often speeding through them - even when pedestrians are standing in the street, waiting to cross. Traffic enforcement is an important part of keeping our community safe. The police need to keep up this enforcement campaign for as long as it takes until people stop for pedestrians at crosswalks.

CC

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:52 p.m.

Regardless of what you think of the law, why are they using unmarked cars in enforcement? A regular patrol car would increase the cars stopping and, if the enforcement really was to coincide with school starting then high visibility police would increase compliance and save pedestrians the trouble of looking both ways to cross the street. If the city council wants to raise revenue then at least have to guts to ask us for a tax then these nakedly revenue generating laws. I want our police that the city is already reducing to do something helpful to the city like catch that sexual predator that is still loose, that might help the safety of the school children instead of wasting some of each policemen's shift with this law.

jns131

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:45 p.m.

I really hope this also makes Ann Arbor drivers very aware of bus stops when children are loading and unloading. In these areas the police are ticketing these are also hi run bus red lite areas as well. While this is all well and good, this still does not teach anyone driving in Ann Arbor to slow down. They will always been on their phones or doing something distracting and never minding what they are suppose to be doing. As for the 40 MPH? Heck if the signs are flashing? It means slow down. Good luck with this one.

Dave Sullivan

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:28 p.m.

1. How is Ann Arbor communicating this to residents?? This website is not read by everyone. 2. I am colorblind. I cannot tell what color that HAWK thing is flashing or not. I am OK with regular lights because I know their position (red at top, etc.) but the HAWK is a failure for the 8% of males that can't tell the red from the yellow. 3. I'll say it again...EDUCATE people. You have to tell people the law changed. How can you break the law or adhere to it if you never knew it changed?

caetano

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:27 p.m.

The enforcement would be especially welcome around UM campus, as it would hopefully encourage pedestrians there to use the designated crosswalks. At present, many pedestrians treat blocks of State St as jaywalking free-for-all, which means for white-knuckle driving (especially when it's raining or snowing). I guess the enforcement of the crosswalks goes both ways: for drivers, and for pedestrians. From a libertarian perspective, this is good: in sum toto it should lower my insurance premiums (giving me more freedom), as they are more healthy walkers, fewer accidents, and lower use of ER as primary care. It seems that some so-called libertarians aren't seeing the Big Picture. Why do they hate pedestrians and healthy lifestyles so much. It's odd: better health, more walking, means more more life and more freedom TM.

Strider

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:06 p.m.

Many of these crosswalks are co-located with a bus stop. When I see a person standing at a bus stop, are they waiting for a bus, or waiting to cross the street? When I stop for them how long do I have to wait to determine what their intentions are? In other towns they put flags at the crosswalks. A pedestrian can hold the flag to clearly signal their intention for crossing the road. Without such a signal it is impossible for the motorist to read the mind of the pedestrian until they are actually in the street. Streets with speed limits over 30MPH are also a problem. Pedestrians can make sudden moves such as a 90 degree turn from a sidewalk into a crosswalk in a matter of seconds. It takes much longer for a car to stop safely than it does for a pedestrian to start walking into a crosswalk. Seriously, any pedestrian who does that is at the shallow end of the gene pool and deserves a Darwin Award. Just another example of our misguided city council with their heads in the wrong place.

Wolf's Bane

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:58 p.m.

The poster child for these issues is the Seventh/Washington crosswalk. As a motorist, I fear this crosswalk. Not so much for the pedestrians, but for my saftey.

E.J. Westlake

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:46 p.m.

Now they just need to ticket pedestrians who jaywalk! :>)

safeman

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:40 p.m.

Honestly, these Ann Arbor crosswalks are ill designed and they are inviting both pedestrian and auto problems. Go to other cities in Michigan that have installed these type of non-instersection crosswalks and you'll find that they either have large flashing yellow lights at them or they've installed a pedestrian call-light that will change the flashing yellow to flashing red for like 60 seconds. The city of Ann Arbor has tried to do this crosswalk project on the cheap and they are causing frustrations all the way around. Why nobody on the city council or in the mayor's office doesn't see this is beyond me. I will be contesting a ticket if I get one because a pedestrian was "approaching?!" the crosswalk and I didn't see them during peak commuter traffic?! Where's Geoffry Feiger's phone number.

Ben Connor Barrie

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:17 p.m.

My $0.02: Sure there are lots of crosswalks in Ann Arbor, but most of them, especially in downtown are at controlled intersections. There are already rules governing right of way for pedestrians and motorists at controlled intersections. This ordinance really only impacts the crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections. So it's not like this ordinance is dramatically changing the driving environment in downtown. This ordinance really only impacts a few crosswalks in Ann Arbor, a lot of them are place where kids are crossing on the way to school. Also, some signage would be great. <a href="http://www.damnarbor.com/2011/09/much-ado-about-crossing.html" rel='nofollow'>http://www.damnarbor.com/2011/09/much-ado-about-crossing.html</a>

Andre

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:06 p.m.

I've lived downtown for 20 years and walk a lot. I don't see this law as necessary. Also, it has made driving very difficult around the crosswalks. You just don't know when people will turn directions and start walking across the street. Pedestrians abuse this law. I had someone jaywalk diagonally into the crosswalk, and I had to slam on the brakes last week. When are the police going to write tickets to pedestrians and bicyclists who don't follow the laws?

Roll My Eyes

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:55 p.m.

What we need installed is crystal balls on dashboards for assistance in predicting people's movements. This *law* is moronic. Why not have police sitting at stop signs (like the one on liberty &amp; 3d) that people roll thru at best? Or the light at liberty &amp; first, where when crossing a light, the left hand turners take potshots at me. Why not enforce the normal laws? Ann Arbor, stick to the state laws, written by the Big Boys &amp; Girls...you're in *local* government for a reason...and this ordinance proves it.

Fatkitty

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:50 p.m.

AAPD also need to ticket the pedestrians who dare to cross against a traffic signal. I had to slam on the brakes one morning at the Packard-Hill intersection (I had the green light) . A woman boldly stepped in to the crosswalk and proceeded across with her entitled nose in the air.

Meral

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:49 p.m.

I think this was created so AA can collect more funds. We are short of Police officers right? Yesterday on Huron St by AAY, I'd stopped waited for pedestrains cross and blinking lights to stop, all the cars were honking their horns.

tim

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:46 p.m.

How about a new concept--- when the light turns red the cars stop, the walk sign turns green and the walkers cross the street.

Carole

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:40 p.m.

Just another way for the city to make money. If all would become more responsible and respectful of one another maybe then we would not have to worry about the city making up new rules to govern us.

tim

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:37 p.m.

Money maker for the city--- nothing else. Don't go downtown that's the message. 78% of the people taking this poll think this is a bad idea.

David Paris

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:22 p.m.

The driver of a motor vehicle is in control of a lethal weapon, and therefor should bare the greatest responsibility towards safety of others.

aawolve

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:07 p.m.

Outrageous and disgusting, nothing else to add at this point.

KJMClark

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:04 p.m.

Another important point. MCL 257.649(4) talks about what everyone is supposed to do at a &quot;Yield&quot; sign: &quot;The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign, in obedience to the sign, shall slow down to a speed reasonable for the existing conditions and shall yield the right of way to a vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time the driver would be moving across or within the intersection.&quot; So everyone should stop pretending that they don't know what approaching means, since it's the same thing we're all supposed to do at a yield sign. The last time that law was changed was 1979, and it first went in place in 1949. Seems like it's been long enough for people to figure out what it means.

5c0++ H4d13y

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 11:55 a.m.

What happens if a cyclist runs through the crosswalk when a pedestrian enters?

OLDTIMER3

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 11:41 a.m.

The sign isn't worded correctly. Eveyone knows to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk. It should say Stop for WAITING pedestrians. I think this is just to bring in money for poor AA.

Steve Pepple

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 11:38 a.m.

A couple of comments containing inappropriate language have been removed.

TruBlue

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 11:23 a.m.

The signs are wrong they say &quot;stop for peds within the crosswalk&quot; when it should say &quot;stop for peds APPROACHING the crosswalk&quot; according to AA law. Seems like an obvious attempt to trap people so AA can get more money.

FredMax

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 11:18 a.m.

&quot; blinking yellow light ... that a pedestrian was waiting in the rain to cross at the marked crosswalk&quot; A pedestrian button to change the light might be a logical solution.

A2comments

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 11:14 a.m.

The discrepancy between the law and the signs will be in court soon. No law will be enforced when a driver can show a judge that it was unsafe to stop. Don't cyclists have to walk their bikes on a crosswalk? I thought that if a bike lane exists you can't ride on a sidewalk...

Mick

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 10:48 a.m.

I support the enforcement of the cross walks, but it will take a long time to change the culture of the city. Hopefully, the police will be the first to change. I've been at crosswalks dozens of times and had marked police cars (without lights or sirens) ignore the crosswalk.

KJMClark

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 10:04 a.m.

I'm glad they're finally starting to enforce pedestrians' rights to safely cross the road. It's going to be contentious - people who have lived here for a while have learned the SE Michigan version of what crosswalks mean, and are going to be a bit unhappy to learn that they've had it wrong. We're going from 'pedestrians must wait until there's no car/truck traffic' - enforced with intimidation and prejudice - to 'when we say yield to a pedestrian, we really mean it'. That's bound to make 'might is right' motorists upset. It is funny how many motorists feel victimized by traffic right around campus, and seem to feel like that justifies mistreating pedestrians everywhere else.

C. S. Gass

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 8:54 a.m.

This, like most new laws that legislators consider 'must haves' are nothing more than attempts to garner cash from the populace. It will do nothing to make it safer downtown and I agree it will cause many more traffic accidents. We don't need more laws in this city or in this country. We need more freedom. This law goes the other way. Which is what I plan on doing. See you in Ypsi...

Roadman

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 7:10 a.m.

It's these ticket barrages by officers that can make A2 citizens feel some solace over seeing the benefit reductions and wage freeze that the police union received last week. I favor some more &quot;hard line&quot; negotiations with their bargaining unit. Where have you gone Roger Fraser - Tree Town turns its lonely eyes to you whoa, whoa, whoa..............

roadsidedinerlover

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 6:59 a.m.

To the AAPD...PLEASE watch Stadium Blvd esp. at rush hour...I have seen many pedestrians try to get across and they were waiting a long time. I always stop for them and recently I was in the left lane near the crosswalk by the Sunoco station. The car in the other lane didn't stop and then turned into the station. This goes on alot! I would really like the pedestrian bashers to try walking across the streets sometime....I am a car driver and obey the laws!!

tinkerbell

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 4:58 a.m.

I was crossing Ann Street at Main Street, when a police car pulled up over the crosswalk. I guess he thought he was going to turn right by rolling through the red light. He wasn't able to turn like he hoped so instead he just blocked the crosswalk. I asked him if he was going to hit me if I crossed in front of him. He ignored me. I hope he gives himself a ticket.

chucklk

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 4:16 a.m.

I love the hawk at huron and third. Used to be that that the traffic on huron was often so bad that I had to wait a long time to cross from third to chapin. Now thankfully all I have to do is jump out of my car and hit the button, jump back into my car and since the hawk quickly halts the traffic on huron leaving not only the pedestrian crosswalk open but the whole intersection open, I can immediately proceed on my way.

LAEL

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 3:41 a.m.

Pedestrians should be required to come to a stop at the crosswalk, and traffic shouldn't have to stop until they see a ped stopped and clearly facing the road. Just walking toward the crosswalk it isn't enough. They might be walking past it, or even walking to the bus stop next to the crosswalk. There are a few bus stops that are practically on top of some of these crosswalks, and it can be a bit confusing to tell if a person is crossing or going to the bus stop. A stopped pedestrian at the entrance of the crosswalk facing the road would communicate intent and give traffic a bit more time to adjust. Vehicles that are too close would clear the crosswalk instead of slamming on brakes, and the ones farther behind should have enough time to see a stopped ped to stop themselves.

Go Blue

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 3:19 a.m.

Oops I did it again........sorry, they did it again. From let's ticket everyone within our boundaries if they are on the phone, have a GPS, etc., to if you are idling, its a ticket. Its never ending what this governmental group up with and each is truly more amazing than the last idea. So now you have to become a mind reader and stop, no don't stop, yes do stop, if someone is contemplating or NOT contemplating crossing the street. Use the buttons that have worked and quit trying to make a pedestrian crossing where it doesn't belong - like in a zooming area of busy streets OR make the crossings in those areas, if they must have them, so there is no question, no guesswork and MORE safety for the pedestrian as well as the driver. And yes, if the playing field is going to be even, then start zeroing in on pedestrians that wreak havoc crossing willy nilly here and there and then flip you off or those on bikes that do the same. And gee, could we maybe give just as much and MORE effort to the rapist? Crime escalating in town? You know, those things one would expect are a priority? And worthy of 15 officers' efforts every day???????? Are we living in comedy central or what.

townie54

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:58 a.m.

its stupid to have them on stadium.period.There is also a lot of grey area

Roll My Eyes

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:56 a.m.

I've just re-signed my donor card. You see, I ride a motorbike, and this law will most certainly see my demise from being rear ended, because I will comply simply because I cannot afford the 100$ fine and 2 points on my otherwise impeccable 30+ year driving record. Kudos for Ann Arbor, the organ harvester of scooter, moped and motorbike riders - because we don't have enough to watch out for in reckless drivers, now we must mind read someone 'approaching' a corner. (ps, I've already contacted a lawyer friend that will gladly take the case should I be served with a paper reminder of how inanely this town's quasi-leadership thinks.). For the record, I will not be stopping in the middle of traffic, but I am polite to pedestrians, always have been, just as I am polite to drivers and pay attention to my surroundings when crossing. I rather doubt ann arbor wishes to pay my lifetime medical bills because of their ill conceived *law*. Although I have no doubt they would sell my organs to line their pockets.

Joe Kidd

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:52 a.m.

This is the stupidest law I have ever heard of and if I were still riding in a patrol car, I would never write a ticket for it. This law is contrary to state law and is unnecessary. There is no street in Ann Arbor that a pedestrian cannot safely cross with only a very short wait for traffic to clear. I cannot believe any police officer would write a ticket for this. Where is the union? How are they supposed to get public support when amateur wanna be politicians on city council pass laws like this and expect police officers to enforce it. It's the police officers and not the council members who are going to take the brunt of this and if they want public support they need to show some support for the public when their authority is degraded by dumb ordinances like this one. I hope the judges dismiss them on the basis its an arbitrary law that circumvents state law and is too confusing for drivers.

Momma G

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:50 a.m.

I'm sorry but I was always taught to &quot;look both ways&quot; before crossing and not to cross in the middle of the roadway. I will avoid driving in Ann Arbor from now on. Why not put more cops on patrol to catch the drug dealers who are killing our young people by gettng them hooked on their &quot;dirty&quot; drugs and let these students continue to learn what they were taught as little children and take their safety in their hands/feet!

a2why

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:29 a.m.

&quot;Briggs said she's seen a notable shift in motorist behavior as more people become educated about the ordinance.&quot; Okay, so if you're admitting that you've had to educate people (I'm assuming Ann Arborites) about this local ordinance to make this work, what are you going to do for the giant number of infrequent visitors that come to town? You know, the people from afar that come to events such as Art Fair, Football, U of M functions, etc?

a2why

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:24 a.m.

Crosswalks in downtown seem to be a good idea. But the ones on Plymouth road are a joke... way too many lanes of traffic and way too much speed. I stopped for a pedestrian on the right hand lane on Plymouth the other day, nearly got rear ended as the vehicle behind me slammed their brakes. Cars on the left lane continued to speed by, I'm assuming that they just had no idea why I stopped because they couldn't see the waiting pedestrian because of my truck. They really need to install blinking lights or slow the speed limit down, because its just a disaster waiting to happen.

MIKE

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2:11 a.m.

I assume bike riders will have to stop also? That could get interesting, especially if the car behind the bike doesn't see the pedestrian. Oh well, as long as the pedestrian isn't delayed 5 seconds, I suppose it would be worth it.

Ron Granger

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 2 a.m.

But, but, I Can't Stop for pedestrians. Because that means I'll have to Stop!

Rick Neubig

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:53 a.m.

I am very much in favor of requiring stopping for pedestrians but am very concerned that the trigger is a pedestrian &quot;waiting&quot; to cross. The California law is much clearer (and equally enforceable) that anyone IN the crosswalk needs to be stopped for. And that means that even a foot reaching off the curb is enough. This can be taught by education also. I have seen many people standing at the entrance to a crosswalk just talking to someone or waiting for the bus. A minor change in the law would make it much clearer and the pedestrian would only have to reach their foot off the curb to trigger it.

Prometheus

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:50 a.m.

I'm fine with this, but who's the genius who puts the bus stop at the same place as the crosswalk (Plymouth Rd). So I stop (please don't rear end me), and watch the guy waiting for the bus look at me. Are you crossing? I look at you. Hmmm. Ok, I'll move on. Bus stop &amp; pedestrian crossing = really bad planning.

2020

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:42 a.m.

This is the most foolish ordinance I have every seen. I'm so sorry that the police are ordered to enforce such a poorly planned law. Please blame the local politicians and not the police.

Historic District

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:40 a.m.

What a joke. What next? Why don't we ban plastic t-shirt baggies? Why don't we ban idling motor vehicles altogether? Why don't a minority of Council members obstruct a reasonable PUD development in the near downtown area and stick the community with an unattractive by right development? Why don't we spend $800k for a water runoff sculpture in front of the new municipal building while cutting core services each and every budget cycle? Why don't we plant more trees and rationalize the expense as part of the water and sewer fund ('cause, don't ya' know, tree roots soak up runoff water)? Why don't we ticket the victims of graffiti? BTW, is a community &quot;progressive&quot; if all it ever does is copy the best, &quot;progressive&quot; practices of other communities?

Edward R Murrow's Ghost

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:35 a.m.

Guess I won't be going downtown anytime soon. Good Night and Good Luck

MIKE

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 1:23 a.m.

I have an idea. How about we put lights and signs at stratgic location around the city. The lights can change colors, indicating whether or not cars should stop. The signs can be red, with a word on in idicating that cars should come to a stop(maybe the word &quot;stop&quot; would work?). Then cars wouldn't need to stop on a dime because someone stopped to send a text message near a crosswalk, and pedestrians would be able to cross safely. Then we could expand this movement across the country, so no matter where you were, you would know the rules! (I know it's crazy talk, it could never work in A2).

stephen reynolds

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:38 a.m.

theres a ped sign on huron pkway at glazier way on the west side of the street you can barely see it because the overhanging tree branches are blocking it and most of these signs are preety hard to see at 40 mph i hope a city councilman or women doesnt miss this

Craig Lounsbury

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:33 a.m.

&quot;&quot;Our primary focus with this enforcement detail is safety. We want the citizens to be able to cross safely.&quot; If your primary thing was safety rather than a money grab you should trade the unmarked car for a marked car. A marked car would remind folks to stop before a pedestrian gets mowed down. An unmarked car is designed to catch somebody after they have already violated the ordinance and blown through an intersection with a waiting pedestrian. Doesn't sound like safety is #1 in that scenario.

Ross

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:32 a.m.

Just drove home from dinner through the 7th and Washington intersection. Almost completely dark out, the kind of late-dusk conditions that are impossible to see in. As we approach the crosswalk, an old man is standing with two kids, facing AWAY from the street. Of course they are wearing all dark clothing and standing in a shadow. Then as we cautiously slow down and drive through the crosswalk he wheels around abruptly and drags both kids into the street right at the side of our passing car. He did not even look at the road first. Is he operating under a false sense of security from this new law? Could we have gotten $100 fine and 2 points because of pedestrians facing away from the street as we approach? There is just too much gray zone here. Especially at night when it's impossible to see pedestrians anyway. I would imagine the police are enforcing this rule in daytime hours only as a result.

hepcat

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:11 a.m.

This has been the law in California for as long as I can remember and it seems to be working there just fine. Please drive carefully out there. I am legally blind and have difficulty crossing the street.

Jef Porkins

Tue, Sep 20, 2011 : 12:01 a.m.

When will they start ticketing pedestrians who hold up traffic by crossing against the light? When will they ticket pedestrians who hold up traffic by crossing when there is no crosswalk? People in this town seem to think that there is a pedestrian right-of-way law that doesn't exist. These people are a more common problem then the people that actually use the crosswalks.

Matt Cooper

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 11:43 p.m.

I'm wondering what ever happened to &quot;stop, look both ways then proceed when it's safe&quot;. Whatever happened to expecting pedestrians to be responsible for their own safety? Now all the sudden along with all the other things that go on while driving a car we have to pay attention what pedestrians MIGHT do? Are we now mind readers? Another stupid law. Good job Ann Arbor.

huh7891

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 11:40 p.m.

Looks like this stupid law could give &quot;road kill&quot; a whole new meaning.

Tesla

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 11:32 p.m.

Ms Briggs sure must have some &quot;pull&quot; in the city, or she's a major PITA and they conceded to her.

Dave S.

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 11:31 p.m.

How can one differentiate between people waiting at the bus stop and those waiting to cross the road? Drive along Plymouth or Fuller and note that every bus stop is at the end of a crosswalk making it impossible to determine people's intent.

obviouscomment

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 11:18 p.m.

Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that the sign in the photo says: 'Stop for pedestrians when IN crosswalk.&quot; I can't really see that word clearly...does anybody know for sure? If so, I would definitely challenge any ticket given if someone is not in the crosswalk based on their own sign. It seems Ann Arbor is trying to keep visitors out of their city by imposing nit-picking ordinances like this one.

Gorc

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 11:09 p.m.

In would like to see jay walkers get a ticket for violating city ordnance too. Can you image the amount of fines the city could collect on campus.

sanford c bledsoe iii

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 11 p.m.

And for those of you whining about the crosswalks on the 40mph roads, please remember that 40mph is a speed LIMIT not a speed RECOMMENDATION.

Ann English

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:55 p.m.

There's a roundabout at Nixon and Huron Parkway. Nobody's going to go through that intersection at 40 mph. The pedestian island there and the surfacing of the pavement there are both good ideas. No walkers need to cross the street without stopping (because of the island) and motorists won't like the highway-shoulder surface they must go over to clear the intersection. I can see why Platt between I-94 and Packard is a concern, what with the proximity to Scarlett School. It sounds like pedestrians are already crossing Washtenaw at Arlington and Platt to get from a sidewalk on one side of Washtenaw to the sidewalk/footpath on the other side. But since I often turn left from Arlington onto Washtenaw, I'm glad that there are no pedestrian islands there, but a continuous left-turn lane instead, so I can merge safely with eastbound traffic.

sanford c bledsoe iii

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:54 p.m.

&quot;Oh boo hoo hoo, it's SOOOO HARD to be a motorist in Ann Arbor.&quot; Whipping around town in your air conditioned La-Z-Boy is a PRIVILEGE; it comes with RESPONSIBILITY. If you can't drive, then please DON'T.

gretta1

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:48 p.m.

We in NE Ann Arbor desperately need the crosswalks on Green Road to be monitored. Cars fly down that road and seldom stop for pedestrians, many of whom are elementary and middle school children trying to get to school. I wish there were stop signs. Also, the person who said many of these places had 40 mph limits is I think incorrect. At most the limit in these areas is 35. I drive and walk and am fearful of being rear-ended but I would also like to see cars have to stop for pedestrians. It's dangerous to be a walker.

C

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:44 p.m.

Just another stupid government policy...having lived and worked in real urban areas like NYC, Baltimore, DC, Detroit, etc. and having attended the University of Michigan, there is no reason for this law other than to placate a pinheaded fraction of the population and line the government coffers with ticket revenue. Remind me not to visit Ann Arbor anytime soon...or move there to help vote these nitwits out of office...

glacialerratic

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:38 p.m.

Please link to the ordinance--a quick scan of these comments suggests there's confusion about what it requires of pedestrians and motorists.

Wguru

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:34 p.m.

The Seventh/Washington crossing featured in the photo has a lot of signage and is easy to spot going north or south... but apparently not for some people turning left onto southbound Seventh from Washington... the sign has been flattened a number of times (<a href="http://www.annarbor.com/vielmetti/seventh-and-washington-pedestrian-refuge-signs-flattened-10-times-in-4-months/)">http://www.annarbor.com/vielmetti/seventh-and-washington-pedestrian-refuge-signs-flattened-10-times-in-4-months/)</a>. Good thing no pedestrian was there those times. As for pedestrian crossings, everyone had better slow down when crosswalk road markings and signs are snow coated... and it's harder to stop.

hepcat

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:23 p.m.

I am a 60 yr. old Legally blind &quot;Ann Arborigine&quot; taxpayer who walks an average of 70 miles per month ( mostly downtown ). I appreciate the city's attempt to make the streets safer for pedestrians. It has been the law in Ann Arbor that vehicles must stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk for 75 years ! What's new is that now they must stop when a walker is &quot; approaching &quot; a crosswalk.

Left is Right

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:22 p.m.

Like City Council can change the laws of physics. As a pedestrian, I am not changing my behavior, I will continue to be wary of the momentum of two tons of steel at speed. As someone that's walked well over 20K miles in this town, I feel that this law is both largely unnecessary and downright dangerous in that it gives pedestrians a false sense of safety. More ped activated crosswalks like at Huron and Third should be installed. That whole cluster-**** at Washington and Seventh should be rethought as well since there is often a stream of southbound traffic crossing that misaligned intersection at Huron with the crosswalk at Washington a very short block over a hill. Just plain dumb. Maybe that should be Ann Arbor's tagline.

Old Salt

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:10 p.m.

The city of AA should send out a brochure regarding this law to every AA resident..The city will make thousand of dollars from out of town visitors Also Lets start giving tickets to pedestrians who cross streets when it says DO NOT WALK especially the students on campus

notnecessary

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:06 p.m.

I think I may just stand at the corner and pretend like I'm waiting to cross and mess with on coming drivers... this is RIDICULOUS... could the police be using decoys like the I mentioned above?

Smart Logic

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 10:01 p.m.

This is just plain ridiculous. Pedestrians should not have the right to hold up large amounts of traffic. This person for the Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking group should evaluate what the real problem is. What about the college kids that have an utter disregard for vehicles and crosswalks altogether? What about the bicyclists weaving in and out of traffic and shuffling between vehicles and the curb so they can get to the front of the line at the red light? Instead, we'll have drivers hammering their brakes out of fear and out of town drivers violating this Local Law that is only designed as a huge cash grab for the city. Ridiculous.

james

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:22 p.m.

I can't tell you how many times pedestrians cross at major intersections when there is a &quot;do not walk&quot; sign. If the police were really interested in safety and not just giving out tickets, they would ticket these people too. But they won't, because the people making these laws are the same ones not driving downtown and crossing when they aren't supposed to. Jaywalking is illegal, yet rarely enforced. It's just as unsafe.

Marilyn Wilkie

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:15 p.m.

Does this mean that if someone is standing near a crosswalk we are to stop our car? What if they are just standing there not intending to cross? Ann Arbor should have gone along with the state law, as Dexter has. This will be especially dangerous in a college town. I will avoid driving in Ann Arbor as much as possible for fear I may get rear ended or ticketed for being confused about someone's intent. The poll, as usual, does not offer an answer that I would give.

Bob Katz

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:11 p.m.

Once again our pseudo intellectual, pseudo liberal city does something moronic. One more way to clog the courts, waste time of all. If you ask for a hearing, I presume the pedestrian will have to come to court to testify of their intention to cross the street. Otherwise, it is virtually impossible to prove they were not simply standing there for one of many reasons. Do NOT pay these tickets unless the pedestrian is actually within the crosswalk. Even the signs at these crosswalks refer to pedestrians within the crosswalk. Dumb, dumb, dumb. When will it end? Maybe we can build some more empty parks and buy up some more green space to protect us from the outside world.

ArthGuinness

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:10 p.m.

I cross Seventh every day at Washington. It's a terrible intersection and sometimes difficult to cross. Unfortunately, this law makes it even worse. Nobody wants to see a schoolkid get hit, but the traffic design is obviously terrible when motorists have to look in 3 different directions at the same time. Plus they're depending on the cars behind seeing the exact same thing, since they all have to stop or there will be an accident. Why couldn't they just install crosswalk buttons?

Macabre Sunset

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:09 p.m.

Obviously, there is a lot more room to cut in the police budget. Something to remember when the city tries to raise taxes again during the next election.

Tru2Blu76

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:07 p.m.

I agree with fellow drivers that there are concerns we need to see addressed. But I also agree on the need for such an ordinance. My other concern is that I've seen some members of WBWC display an attitude which says: If I don't like it, then there should be a law prohibiting it and penalizing those who violate it. Recently on the WBWC forum, there was discussion of the &quot;issue&quot; of riding bikes on sidewalks. At least one member persisted in saying this activity was wrong, unsafe and should be prohibited. Completely ignored was the fact that, in other countries, people are capable of mass scale &quot;mixed use&quot; of roads and sidewalks. So there is a problem with this new ordinance: but it's not about practicality, it's about encouraging willingness to change attitudes and behaviors to avoid injury and death. I have faith in our ability to change / adapt to anything which helps avoid injuries and deaths. I also hope that we, as pedestrians, develop a sense of responsible use under this new ordinance. Let's try to be generous as well as cautious in exercising our right to use of crosswalks.

a2cents

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:05 p.m.

It sure is going to be harder to use the cell phone, play with the GPS and eat &amp; drink while driving. Darned peds ought to know enough to stay out of the way. There is a lot to deal with while driving (5-10 mph over the limit).

Bones

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:05 p.m.

I just adore how the new orinance seems to supercede state law. This is yet one more reason in a long stream of them to avoid downtown. What happened to good old common sense???

Sparty

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:04 p.m.

Clearly one of the most unpopular laws passed in recent times, with large numbers evidenced here supporting the foolish nature of it. Our Bozo mayor apparently has nothing better to focus his time on then to think of ways to further annoy the citizens of the city, who will hopefully rise up and finally vote him out of office in the upcoming election. Hopefully this law will be challenged in court and the State law will prevail over this travesty.

a2dancelady

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:03 p.m.

I was on Plymouth Rd. last week and spotted a pedestrian in the median, waiting to cross the rest of the road. Traffic was heavy; I was in the right lane with a car close enough behind me that I would have been rear-ended had I stopped. All the cars in the left lane did not stop at all and were going faster than the speed limit. I don't understand why I should risk injury to myself by being rear-ended in a situation like this.

Michael Christie

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9:02 p.m.

I think Erica Briggs needs to spend some time downtown to see all the bikes on the side walk, maybe they should start ticketing bicyclists 'breaking the law'. This is just another stupid law that was passed because some liberal Biking and Walking Coalition wanted steep penalties for running a crosswalk. Seriously, $100 and 2 points, and how many man hours were spent on generating bogus revenue to the city and not searching for THE RAPIST OR POLICING THE STREETS. There should be cross walk enforcement, but the signs should be CLEARLY MARKED. Just go to Boulder, CO and look how they display a crosswalk and I assure you that even the tourists can see there's a crosswalk present. Instead we have probably no less than 8 different identification types for a crosswalk and the interesting thing is the ones on Division aren't on the list. Typical government policy, enforce before clearly defining...

grye

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 9 p.m.

I must say that a flashing yellow is confusing. Normally that means to slow down and proceed with caution. Now it means stop. Need consistent signals throughout the city.

alarictoo

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:59 p.m.

My charge to the city is, if these crosswalks are really necessary, add appropriate buttons and flashing lights to make it obvious that pedestrians have a right of way at that moment to cross. Make it a fair game for both the pedestrians that you are trying to protect, and the drivers. Many, if not all, of these crosswalks have been added between long recognized crosswalks that have appropriate electronics in place to make crossing a safe enterprise. If additional crosswalks were required in these areas, then the city should have made the same investment for critical safety devices at those points. Instead it seems that they are turning it into a form of &quot;russian roulette&quot; for the pedestrian traffic by not providing appropriate safety measures, while concurrently hoping to garner additional revenues (most likely to be channeled to some community art project creating a mural of the mayhem occurring at these new crosswalks) by ticketing motorists who can't figure out how the heck the system is supposed to work (kind of like the motorists we see at traffic circles in the area). We ought to be ticketing the City Council members who came up with this ridiculous system.

msrock1954

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:47 p.m.

Hope the city is ready for major lawsuits when someone stops on Washtenaw Ave., a 40 mph zone, simply because someone is standing on the side of the road and this leads to a major accident!!!! I'm all for safety, but this seems a bit of a stretch.

Peter Baker

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:46 p.m.

&quot;She said she's noticed many semi trucks and even Ann Arbor Transportation Authority buses are now stopping for pedestrians, but drivers of cars are having a harder time following the law.&quot; Seems that professional drivers have no problem following rules and driving safely, it's the amateurs who think their needs trump all that are putting up the resistance.

james

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:45 p.m.

This law should go both ways. If a pedestrian intends on crossing and doesn't and I get rear-ended on a 45 mph road because I'm not able to stop safely, the pedestrian should get the ticket and pay for the damage to my car. How about we also ticket all of the pedestrians who are jay-walking downtown? I can't tell you how many times I've seen students walking between cars and not on the cross-walk. The reason this law is being passed is because the lefties of Ann Arbor don't like cars. They want to make it undesirable to drive downtown. From now on, I'm going to drive 5MPH downtown just so I don't get a ticket. Good luck driving downtown if you get behind me :-). I'm going to convince more people to do this to protest this draconian law.

treetowncartel

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:44 p.m.

A blinking yellow light is a traffic control device. I think the lady in the Toyota Camry can win that one if she fights it.

Jaime Magiera

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:36 p.m.

When I first started hanging out in Ann Arbor many years ago, it was a heavy pedestrian/bicycle town, where cars knew to stop for anyone in a crosswalk (or crossing anywhere actually). It's only in the past 10-15 years that the city has become pedestrian/bicycle unfriendly due to drivers being so self-absorbed as they navigate the city streets. Note that many of the areas targeted for enforcement are heavy pedestrian areas, many of which have had serious accidents (e.g. every year there is a bouquet of flowers left on Stadium and South Industrial where a young child was killed). I've seen drivers completely oblivious to their surroundings as they fly, often above the speed limit, down that stretch. It's about time that the City of Ann Arbor cracked down on this type of behavior and returns our city to a pedestrian/bicycle friendly town.

xmo

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:29 p.m.

Do we REALLY need this Law? Or does this law show that Ann Arbor cares?

treetowncartel

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:28 p.m.

Theoretically,if the individual is past the line of demarcation you would have to stop even if there is a don't walk signal blinking. One more reason to stay out of Ann Arbor and do my shopping elsewhere.

CommonThought

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:27 p.m.

The sign in this picture says &quot;within crosswalk.&quot; The sign says nothing about stopping because someone on the sidewalk may/ may not want to cross the road at a particular time.

a2roots

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:26 p.m.

What happened to the good old days when you walked to the corner, looked both ways, waited for traffic to clear then crossed the street. This new ordinance is asinine.

Woman in Ypsilanti

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:24 p.m.

I still think that although I agree with the spirit of the law, it could have been written better. It isn't always clear that a pedestrian is waiting to cross the street. It would have been better if pedestrians were required to signal to drivers, perhaps by pointing to the other side of the road. If I get a ticket for this, I am taking it to court on the grounds that since I am not a mind reader, I did not know that the pedestrian was wanting to cross the street. I always stop when it is clear that is what is going on but after stopping and then waiting there like an idiot until the pedestrian who didn't actually want to cross apparently waves me on, I just have to say that the flaw here is that pedestrians aren't always obvious. Also, on streets like Washtenaw, it isn't safe to require drivers to monitor the other side of the road just in case a pedestrian might be way over there. I would urge the city council to rewrite this ordinance at the earliest opportunity. Drivers shouldn't be punished because elected officials write laws that are impossible to follow.

Ryan J. Stanton

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:24 p.m.

Here's the applicable city ordinance language: 10:148. - Pedestrians crossing streets. (a) When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop and yield the right-of-way to every pedestrian approaching or within a crosswalk. (b) A pedestrian shall not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into a path of a vehicle that is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield. (c) Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.

Rob

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:16 p.m.

I'm not seeing anything that says whether this applies to crosswalks at corners with traffic lights already in place. Do I need to stop for a pedestrian crossing against his &quot;Don't Walk&quot; signal? Because - hey - it's in a crosswalk! If the cops would ticket the student lemmings flooding across Packard/Stadium against the lights before a football game, they could make a mint.

racerx

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:11 p.m.

Once more a minority group, this case the WB&amp;WC, gets their way while council disregards other questions about this ordinance. For someone who isn't from this area, and now an ordinance that wasn't taught in drivers education class, years ago, will now receive a $100 ticket. This seems very heavy handed by a perception issue more than any thing. What are the stats showing how many pedestrians were hit by cars in the city? And where? Has any of these intersections shown to be problematic? 10-12 officers? Wow! Meanwhile, homes are being broken into daily, sexual predator on the loose, and student parties out of control each football Saturday. Sorry, until the city can provide proof that any of these intersections are prone to have pedestrians being hit by cars, this is such a waste of resources.

Blue

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:10 p.m.

&quot;multiple officers out in patrol cars this morning observing crosswalk behavior&quot; Seriously? Multiple? Why is so much effort being put into this? Oh yes, revenue for the city in the form of tickets! Isn't there still someone attacking women in town? How come we are not hearing about &quot;multiple&quot; officers working on finding this person? I guess between closing down the medical marijuana dispensaries and arresting the people running them - then having to write tickets to the rest of us for this - and the City Council also wants us to not idle or sit in our cars if the are running, they'll soon be trying to ticket us for that too! Can't the Ann Arbor Police find any real crime out there?

Roadman

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:10 p.m.

Wow! I wish the Ann Arbor Police Department could reallocate all these patrolmen from this traffic detail with the AAPD officers assigned to LAWNET that are investigating the medical marijuana dispensaries and have them work on diligently locating suspects in the serial sex assault cases. Perhaps then our streets are safer. Priorities Priorities.

Neighbor

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:04 p.m.

There are some areas that are NOT marked, but are freely determined by pedestrians (in particularly, students) who believe that, because there is a curb cut (i.e., across from Hill Auditorium), they have the right-of-way. These areas need to be either marked as pedestrian areas, or the curb cut and road material needs to be consistent with the rest of the road.

xfdragon

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:04 p.m.

This is the worst law Ann Arbor has ever passed. How is someone to remember all those random crosswalks, and now we can watch for the car in fron of us to make a sudden stop or plow into them, or go around not knowing someone is trying to cross. This just does not make any sense to me at all. I could see it if it was strictly around campus but not all over the city. Stadium is very traveled and busy. Guess I will just stay out of town from now on. Don't want to get a ticket or rearended either. As for bikers, they should be required to wear reflective vest at all times. I have come close to not seeing them when it is dusk or foggy and they are riding in the street with no reflecting sign at all. so foolish and dangerous.

Tom Joad

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8:01 p.m.

When you were issued your driver license you agreed to follow all state and local driving laws. The law is quite clear. If a pedestrian is waiting, entering, or in the crosswalk you must stop. As soon as the pedestrian is present treat that crosswalk as a red stop light. You cannot pick and choose which stop light or sign you wish to ignore. It's not that difficult. The pedestrian of course must be vigilant for another driver in the other lane who may not see them, that's why I tap my brake lights when I am waiting for a pedestrian to cross if I see in my rear view mirror that another car is approaching fast. A driver must control his vehicle at all times and if you rear end someone who is waiting for a pedestrian you will be 100% at fault and your insurance company will ding you when it comes time to renew your policy.

andys

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 8 p.m.

If I was from our of town coming to visit Ann Arbor and got one of these BS tickets, I'd never come back. Who votes for these city council members. Its obvious that education level and common sense do not go hand-in-hand.

Mike

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:59 p.m.

Just another example of how the government passes laws against the will of the people. A complete over reach of their authority because some bicyclists and pedestrians were able to successfully lobby for it. $100 fine and two points on your license so the penalty also includes higher insurance rates. I'd say move to a different city where there don't have laws like this. Next there will be fines for what you eat and whether you recycle or not. By the people, for the people, and of the people - not so much anymore.

john ellis

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:59 p.m.

The article describes the motorist going through a &quot;blinking yellow light.&quot; MDOT describes the use of the HAWK signal as follows: &quot;A HAWK signal provides a protected pedestrian crossing as a way to increase safety. It is used only for pedestrian crossings. It does not control traffic on side streets. When you wish to cross the street, you push a button activating the HAWK signal. A flashing yellow light warns drivers approaching the crosswalk of a pedestrian wishing to cross. The flashing yellow light is followed by a solid yellow light telling drivers to prepare to stop. The signal then changes to a solid red for drivers to stop at the intersection. At this point, you can cross safely. The solid red signal will then convert to a flashing red signal after a predetermined amount of time, telling drivers to proceed through the intersection when it is clear and safe to do so. The HAWK signal will then go dark. Drivers can continue through the intersection without stopping until the button is again activated.&quot; It seems as if the motorist was reacting appropriately according to the described usage from MDOT.

Dave Sullivan

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:58 p.m.

What a money grab! Can't the state overrule this law? This is crazy. Has anyone looked at some of these crosswalks? Like the one on State St just north of the Union? The markings in the road are gone. You can't see anyone because there are cars parked on both sides of the street right up to the walk way. I can't wait to stop on Washtenaw at 45 MPH in front of the rec center. Is anyone going to ticket the bikes for not yielding to pedestrians? Last night I was turning right on to State st going north in front of the union and as I went to turn right a biker came up in the bike lane and blew right past me. I almost smashed him. He didn't stop, slow down or anything. But I'm sure I still would have been at fault. I almost got rear ended on 5th as I waited for 2 people to cross in front of Kerrytown. I honked my horn as I just stood there waiting for them and then they were like oh we don't want to cross...we just want to text! I'll be avoiding downtown for a while...the money grab to fund art in the city hall or new trees is crazy. A sexual predator roams free and I'm being targeted for not letting the UofM student cross the street while they are wasted on a Thursday night. Lame.

gofigure

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:58 p.m.

Sahr said there were &quot;easily 10 to 15 officers&quot; out today. After the two-week campaign is finished, she said patrol officers will continue to observe crosswalks as their shifts allow. 10-15 officers writing tickets. That certainly should fill up the Mayor's Coffer real fast.

L. C. Burgundy

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:57 p.m.

Briggs said she observed traffic at the crosswalk on Plymouth Road on a Friday morning back in April and the stop rate was 1.7 percent. When she conducted the same study again last Friday, she said, about 9.5 percent of vehicles stopped. --- Gee, I like those odds. 1 in 10 vehicles actually stops - and this is the measurement of the person trumpeting the success of the law! And pedestrians are to entrust their safety to this law? As a pedestrian that doesn't have the benefit of being downtown where you can just wander into the street wherever you'd like with nary a worry, I'll stick with waiting for breaks in traffic and signalized intersections, thank you very much. Gotta love those revenue generation prospects though. Most people violate the law, and at $100 a pop! If I were chief of the Ann Arbor Revenue Enhancing Department, I'd have every available revenue unit report to a crosswalk post-haste.

andys

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:54 p.m.

Based on the above comments it very possible that a pedestrian could get injured or killed as a result of this law, and then how will you feel city council?????

Karen Collins

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:53 p.m.

One more question. At a busy crosswalk.--say on State Street by Angell Hall and the Union--does a motorist have to wait for every single pedestrian to cross? This seems like it could create some traffic problems during busy times when there are hundreds of students waiting to cross the street.

Bill

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:52 p.m.

Isn't there a no idling ordinance now as well? While you are idling near a pedistrian walkway where the pedistrians have gathered to talk, you can get a ticket for the idling. Eventually drivers will just stop going into Ann Arbor. Why was it necessary for the city to have a law that was different than the state law on pedistrians?

JMA2Y

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:52 p.m.

This ordinance doesn't apply to just central campus so avoiding downtown won't work. It applies to the entire city, applies if a corner is marked or not, if a crosswalk is marked with a light or not. I hope by APPROACHING they mean a person must be near enough to the corner to know what the intent of the pedestrian is and not just that they are a few feet away, heading in the direction of the corner. I don't mind that there are marked crosswalks but the ordinance should stick to those marked with lights and not apply to all crossings, all corners.

a2roots

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:52 p.m.

Thank the bicycle lobby and the non motorized transportation plan for this absolutely stupid ordinance. It is nearly impossible to see pedestrians on the sidewalks at night let alone if they pop out in front of you assuming you can see them. I nearly got rear ended the other day on Liberty in daylight as I stopped and the person behind me almost didn't stop in time. Then the pedestrian damn near got nailed because a car going the opposite direction did not stop. I guess there will need to be accidents, injuries and hope to hell, not deaths, that occur because of this stupid ordinance. You can do all the education you want and it will not be enough. This ordinance is nuts and needs to be repealed asap.

treetowntenor

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:50 p.m.

Now the city will get to spend huge amounts of money on court challenges, only to have the ordinance overturned. Do we get to have write-in candidates on the next election ballot?

EyeHeartA2

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:50 p.m.

Funny, all the signs they just put up all over town say IN the crosswalk, not approaching the crosswalk. I can't wait for these clowns to ticket a lawyer with too much time on his hands or a burr in his bonnet. Then they can sue the city and get the law tossed.

djm12652

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:46 p.m.

and btw...I'm so glad that our drastically reduced police force is being used as a revenue generating tool...seems right...cuz bunch of tools running the city soon to a grinding halt...

Subroutine

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:46 p.m.

I noticed that the crosswalk on Liberty just west of the I-94 overpass is not on the list. Perhaps it's because people frequently cross Liberty in that area and don't use the crosswalk at all. In fact I have never seen anyone use that crosswalk, despite seeing people crossing the street frequently in order to use the sidewalk on the south side of the street to cross the bridge. Not only that but there is no lighting there at all, and if someone was approaching or even waiting at the edge of the street to cross they likely wouldn't be seen in the dark. Finally, with no lighting and the sign at the crosswalk being so small that you can't read it until you are right on top of it, where is the safety benefit to pedestrians or drivers at this particular crosswalk? Seems to me that it creates a more dangerous situation for both.

Karen Collins

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:46 p.m.

Can somebody post a link to the actual ordinance? I'm terribly confused. Is it only where there is a marked crosswalk (with the white vertical lines) or is it any corner (in which case are the traffic signals meaningless)? If they are going to enforce this law it seems like they have a bit more education to do. Looking at the comments here I don't appear to be the only person confused.

TinyArtist

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:45 p.m.

This ordinance is so counter-intuitive and so idiotic it boggles my alleged mind. Follow the state law, but stopping in fast traffic because someone might be ready to cross a crosswalk is downright foolhardy.

Riin Gill

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:45 p.m.

As a pedestrian who has often stood at a marked crosswalk, waiting for 20 cars to pass so I could cross the street to get to my bus stop, I welcome this ordinance and am glad to see the police enforcing it. Kudos to city council and the AAPD.

Forever27

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:45 p.m.

also, a note to annarbor.com you need to blur the license plate in the photo unless you have permission from the driver or the car is owned by a significant public figure.

C.C. Ingersoll

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:44 p.m.

Yesterday I was traveling towards downtown in the left-hand lane on Fuller Rd. when I saw a student on the center divide trying to cross to the Art &amp; Architecture School building. I stopped to let them across the street and the car behind me blew his horn and shifted to the right lane to pass me, narrowly missing the student as she crossed in front of my car towards the sidewalk. The driver couldn't see the pedestrian that was hidden by my stopped vehicle. For all the driver knew I was simply stopped in the middle of the road for no reason. The student was lucky she wasn't killed. I'm never EVER going to stop on Stadium at these 'crosswalks'. I understand that on roads like Plymouth Rd. there are mile-long stretches where you can't just &quot;walk to the nearest corner to cross&quot; but some of these streets are so dang busy it'd endanger myself AND the pedestrians. Make these 'crosswalks' like the one near the YMCA -- a red LIGHT to stop the traffic when the pedestrian presses a button to cross. Oh, and thank you for the photo of the &quot;unmarked police car&quot; -- now I'll know what to look for!

The Picker

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:44 p.m.

Sorry folks, You repeatedly vote for this nonsense. Your elected officials / social engineers are smarter than you are!

Frank Lee

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:42 p.m.

It seems Ann Arbor has lost sight of the purpose roads are meant to serve. They are meant to move motorized vehicular traffic. It's bad enough motorists have to operate amongst bicyclists who obviously impede the flow of traffic, now motorists have to stop for pedestrians in cross walks too! Vehicles have been lowered to the least prioritized means of travel in this town and traffic does anything but flow! As absurd as this is, the public would better respect and accept this ordinance if the city announced a campaign to ticket J-walkers and bicyclists who don't follow the rules of the road.

leezee

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:41 p.m.

By the way...would it be possible for annarbor.com to insert a link to the ordinance or print it? I think that would be really helpful.

einy

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:40 p.m.

Why not enforce the bike riders who dart in and out of traffic and their own convienence... Last Thursday on Washtenaw near Hill, a biker switched from the bike lane to the left turn lane, only to ride up onto the sidewalk. Any hand signals? No, other than something inappropriate to all the confused drivers around him (I was a couple cars back wondering why all the honking) As for this article, I see more and more people stopping for peds. It's hard to tell where the official crosswalk is- they aren't always marked with white lines (eg North University.) And sometimes I panic and stop in non-designated crosswalks ( eg Geddes/Gallup park crossing) because there are two crossings withing 10 feet, yet one is marked.

observer

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:39 p.m.

How about having the officers check businesses for Breaking and Entering on the midnight shifts.....seems like they get hit too often.......

njoy1

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:39 p.m.

Because this ordinance is different from the state laws and not all of the cross walks have clear signs and lights that indicate the presence of a pedestrian I think this will lead to more accidents. The other day I did a safe but rapid slow-down to stop for a pedestrian on Stadium by Arbor Farms Market/Holiday Restaurant. She looked thoroughly confused as to why I had stopped; and waved me on. She was going to cross after I passed and before the next cars came through. Now we were stuck in this weird stalemate while I watch the cars behind approaching (too) fast. Yikes! I prefer lights and signs that say &quot;PEDESTRIAN CROSSING- STOP WHEN BLINKING&quot;

SurlyCommenter

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:38 p.m.

I'm all for this ordinance, however, sometimes it's really difficult to see the pedestrians waiting, particularly at dusk, until it's too late to stop. Will I get a ticket for that? Sometimes I can't tell if a pedestrian is intending to cross as they &quot;approach the crosswalk&quot;. Will I get a ticket if I assume wrong? I don't want to stop if they aren't actually going to cross, that seems like a waste of time and energy. Shouldn't a pedestrian be obligated to stand and wait momentarily to make his/her intentions clear? This is why I really like the HAWK signal on Huron at 3rd. Pedestrian approaches, makes his intention clear that he wants to cross by pressing the button, all the traffic gets an appropriate amount of lead time to stop safely, pedestrian crosses, then everyone can go. It all takes a really short amount of time. There should be HAWK signals like this on Plymouth Rd where the speed limit is higher. When I can see a pedestrian waiting far enough in advance and the person behind me isn't tailgating, I will stop, and usually the car in the lane next to me will stop as well. One upside to this ordinance is that it will hopefully get drivers to pay more attention to their surroundings (myself included!)

David Muzzatti

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:38 p.m.

I really think we need to go the way of Great Britain.....CCTV cameras on every corner. The world is so much different now. A complete Police State is exactly what our society needs in order to for everyone to behave. We have a home in Italy &amp; they have a policeman at most traffic lights in our village taking random breathalyzers of stopped motorists because it is a zero-tolerance society.

leezee

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:38 p.m.

I am both a driver and a pedestrian (runner). As a driver, I think the number of crosswalks is pretty high - particularly on Plymouth in the North Campus area. I could potentially stop 4 times in less than a mile. As a runner, I have actually found myself avoiding the crosswalks because I feel bad about making people stop their cars. I have enough common sense to figure out how to wait for traffic to clear on one side, get to the median and wait for it to clear on the other side. I was lucky on Saturday to figure out, while I was driving in the left lane on Plymouth, that the driver in the right lane had stopped for a pedestrian that was standing on the side of the street closest to the driver. Honest to God, I wondered what the heck he was doing BECAUSE I COULD NOT SEE THE PEDESTRIAN as the other driver's car was pretty much taller than the pedestrian. Fortunately, my brain thought &quot;maybe a pedestrian?&quot; and I stopped as well.

Tom Joad

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:37 p.m.

It's about time...that pedestrian crossing at 7th and Washington which I use frequently is exceedingly well marked with bright pedestrian crossing signs. You ignore them at your peril. You drive at the behest of your insurance company and two points on your DL is nothing to scoff at. My personal observation at that crossing is 50% compliance rate...I wait, and wait, and wait and then an attentive driver will stop...I salute you. Ticketing drivers will spread the word faster than any public service campaign. In California stopping at crosswalks is almost a given. It's a culture of compliance. Hopefully Ann Arbor will move in that direction.

KeepingItReal

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:37 p.m.

There is a pedestrian cross walk on Plymouth Road between Georgetown Boulevard and Green that is an accident waiting to happen. Traffic along that section of the road is allowed at 40 mph and during the morning and evening rush hour it is very difficult to cross. The sign to yield or stop is so invisible that motorists cannot see them in time to stop for a pedestrian. Many motorists do not know or simply ignore the fact they must yield to a pedestrian and traffic continues as though there is no posted sign. We have many foreigners living on this side town and I have seem them trying to cross Plymouth and have become quiet confused with the approaching traffic showing no signs of slowing down or stopping. Personally, I think the cross walk was ill conceived and misplaced. I'm afraid someone is going to get killed trying to navigate across Plymouth Road. This has been bought to the attention of the City on several occasions but it doesn't seem like anything is being done to remedy it.

B. Jean

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:35 p.m.

If the AAPD were truly concerned about pedestrian safety they would enforce the speed limit on North Main Street between Kingsley and Summit where it is between 30 &amp; 35 mles per hour, not that you would notice from the traffic. Crossing Main Street is extremely dangerous not to mention the constant near-miss incendents for any traffic entering Main on foot or by car. Ask any Main Street resident how difficult it is just to pull out of your driveway, much less cross on foot. If officers need to make a speeding ticket quota, just spend an hour or two on Felch and Main streets.

djm12652

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:34 p.m.

Okay, how about informing pedestrians that they shouldn't stand right at the edge of the crosswalk and text. I had stopped for a young lady on Liberty in front of the church halfway to Stadium and she never looked up or moved. When I beeped my horn, she got irritated and stepped back....and lest we forget those that enter the crosswalk when they have the red light. As a motorist, I have the right to turn on red, they don't have the right to enter the crosswalk, but they think this new law covers them.

gofigure

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:33 p.m.

What is so hard about walking a few feet more to a STOP light or STOP sign to cross the street? re@ deputydawg; &quot;let's also enforce the laws the pedestrians and bicyclists are obligated to observe. Bikes are supposed to stop at stop signs and red lights. Pedestrians are not supposed to jay walk or cross where they feel like it. Let's be actually enforce the laws that apply to all not just a specific group.&quot; I couldn't agree with you more. I have lost count the # of times a biker has pedaled past me, not even slowing down. If there's no traffic coming the opposite direction, they continue on through the intersection. If they want to share the road, then share the rules.

Forever27

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:33 p.m.

I assume they will similarly start ticketing the pedestrians who don't use the designated cross-walks as well. /s While this law is seemingly well-intentioned, anyone who drives around campus while the students cluelessly walk into the street without looking (and with their headphones on taboot) any motorist is put at a disatvantage with this law. As many commenters have stated, this is only going to cause accidents from people slamming on their breaks from fear of a ticket from a police officer sitting there looking for this (as opposed to doing real police work).

Fiddlesticks

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:29 p.m.

Does this apply to crossings where there is a traffic light and, presumably, the pedestrian would have to wait for their crossing signal?

Mike Garrahan

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:28 p.m.

What part of the city code defines &quot;approaching&quot; a crosswalk?

Lewanster

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:27 p.m.

I have been following the law, but when I stop at a crosswalk on Plymouth Road, the cars behind me switch lanes and in a few cases have nearly hit the person I was stopping for. Cars are going too fast on Plymouth to be able to read the pedestrian's mind and determine whether they are walking near the crosswalk, approaching it, or planning to cross. The law is very vague. 10:148 of Chapter 126 of Title X of the Code of the City of Ann Arbor says that I have to stop and yield the right-of-way to every pedestrian approaching or within a crosswalk. How do I know if they are &quot;approaching&quot; the the crosswalk, or just walking to the bus stop that is literally right next to the crosswalk ? When I see someone standing on teh side of the street, I now have to try to guess what they are planning on doing.

RoboLogic

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:26 p.m.

I saw these ped crossings in Boulder Colorado as well. I think Boulder and A2 copy each other on a lot of things. I visited Boulder last week (1st time) and thought I was in the Ann Arbor of Colorado. They even have a Connor O'Neil s too! ...and locals say the service mirrors that of A2's...LOL The drivers in Boulder have no problem obeying their Ped Xing Ordinance. BTW, I have never seen so many people on bicycles in my life as I did in Boulder. Bike lanes everywhere; even outside the city. Magazine reports have said that Colorado is the healthiest state and Boulder is the nerdiest city. My observations concur.

Jeff Renner

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:25 p.m.

The sign in the photo at the top of the story clearly says, &quot;Local Law - Stop for [pedestrians] within crosswalk.&quot; Now that is not what the newest ordinance says, right? If I got a ticket in front of that sign for not stopping for a pedestrian on the side of the street but not within the crosswalk, I'd be pretty steamed. The city needs to change that sign and others like it to reflect what the law is.

larry kramer

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:25 p.m.

how can a whacko ann arbor law trump state law? The city attorney says &quot;state law trumps local law&quot; regarding the pot law. follow the money! money always trumps anything else!

2WheelsGood

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:25 p.m.

Define &quot;approaching a crosswalk&quot; in regards to a pedestrian. 5 feet away? 15 feet away? 100 feet away? There's always someone &quot;approaching&quot; a crosswalk. How is that defined by law?

Mousedeva

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:24 p.m.

I hope this applies to all animals trying to cross the road as well.

PLGreen

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:23 p.m.

Now would be a real good time to start avoiding Ann Arbor. I will be seeking goods and services elsewhere.

Ariel

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:22 p.m.

Then people (*cough*students*cough*) should get ticketed for not using proper crosswalks to cross roads.

deputydwag

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:20 p.m.

let's also enforce the laws the pedestrians and bicyclists are obligated to observe. Bikes are supposed to stop at stop signs and red lights. Pedestrians are not supposed to jay walk or cross where they feel like it. Let's be actually enforce the laws that apply to all not just a specific group. The close calls I have had are with pedestrians who pop out from the middle of cars while texting or talking and bicyclists who blow through THEIR red light into the intersection. Think the signage added to crosswalks have made them more visible.

Arlene

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:20 p.m.

When you STOP, brace yourself for the rear end collision. Won't be YOUR fault but YOU will have to pay the deductiable, be without your car, maybe lose time from work or have whiplash and watch your insurance rates go up but that person waiting to cross the street will be just fine and won't cost them a dime!

jondhall

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:19 p.m.

Just another attempt by Government to control more of our lives by passing laws. There should be something to be said for &quot;common courtesy&quot; if you were not already stopping then shame on you! So how are we doing on catching this &quot;rapist&quot;? In Big Government attempts to control every aspect of our life what have we gained other than more regulation that is normally not enforceable. Go ahead &quot;Big Brother&quot; make some more laws, control is what it really is all about. Not sure how this can be 2 points on a state License, but there must be a law somewhere that indicates that, if not why not pass another one. Will this nonsense ever end?

andys

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:17 p.m.

&quot;People must be reading the paper and the word's getting out there that they need to stop for pedestrians that are approaching or crossing on the crosswalk,&quot; So if a pedestrian has to break stride to cross the street, sounds like some drive is getting a ticket. Now, if you see a pedestrian closing in on a cross walk from behind a bush or fence, make sure you slam on the brakes / lock 'em up, so that you don't get a ticket. Oh, heck, why not just make the speed limit 5 MPH in town.

Mike S

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:16 p.m.

I'm still confused about this ordinance; is it only for crosswalks marked with yellow signs?

Meg

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:15 p.m.

Can we also start ticketing jaywalkers on State St? It's hard to observe a crosswalk when students apparently think their mere presence creates one.

doctrsnoop

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:14 p.m.

I am all for pedestrian safety, but I am very concerned about crosswalks on major roads like Stadium. If I understand this correctly, once a pedestrian turns into the little square on the sidewalk to cross, I am to then - Make a complete stop on Stadium. And as for people who don't understand this behind me, a honked horn at best, possibly a swerve around me, or get rear-ended?

Parrhesia

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:14 p.m.

Many of these crosswalks are on roads with 40 miles per hour signs. The new local law will cause some massive car accidents, endangering the pedestrians as well as drivers. All urban design experts agree on this. The local law should only apply to roads that are 20 mph or less, then all cars will stop safely. I am surprised this local law was passed without any regards to what the research shows overwhelmingly. An ambulance should accompany the police officers now enforcing this misguided and poorly designed law.

keri

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:13 p.m.

How can we get someone to enforce these rules on campus? I waited in the middle of a crosswalk last week for cars to stop in order to finish crossing. Six cars went by before one actually stopped.

andys

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:11 p.m.

I say that anyone needing to drive downtown, should just avoid it all together, and spend their money elsewhere. Let the pedestrians / those within walking distance of downtown support all the restaurants and shops. Sounds like that's what city council is after here. How many BS tickets are going to be written for this ordinance?

DeeDee

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:11 p.m.

How about devoting more energy to ticketing sexual predators who are stopping for female pedestrians in Ann Arbor. Giving way to pedestrians (especially in the rain) is important (and you would think it would be a matter of courtesy and promoting awareness) but not as important as doing something about recent sexual assaults.

5c0++ H4d13y

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:11 p.m.

Get someone over to newport and miller on the weekday mornings.

Jeff Gaynor

Mon, Sep 19, 2011 : 7:10 p.m.

As a member of our school's Safe Routes To Schools committee, I am glad to see this law, and the enforcement that is, alas, necessary for people to take it seriously. It should not be a mortal risk - for either children or adults - to walk across the street at a crosswalk.