Cyclists cross North Street on Scull Creek Trail Tuesday afternoon in Fayetteville.
Todd Gill, Fayetteville Flyer
Walkers, joggers and bicyclists on Scull Creek Trail will soon be required to stop and activate a traffic signal button before crossing North Street.
Numerous complaints from both drivers and trail users, followed by a non-fatal accident in which a bicyclist was hit by a vehicle, prompted a Street Committee safety review of the crossing in late February.
“If you talk to anybody who uses that intersection very often, it’s pretty clear that nobody – whether in a car or a cyclist – really knows how to act at the intersection,” said Ward 2 Alderman Matthew Petty, who also serves on the committee. “That makes it really unsafe.”
Trails coordinator Matt Mihalevich said the confusion could stem from state laws which treat pedestrians differently than bicyclists.
Traffic stops for a southbound pedestrian and his dog Tuesday afternoon at North Street and Scull Creek Trail.
Todd Gill, Fayetteville Flyer
“State law says a bicycle is treated as a vehicle, so a cyclist does have to stop,” said Mihalevich. “A pedestrian, on the other hand, has the right of way.”
Petty said he wasn’t concerned so much with the differences in legal protection for drivers and cyclists as he was with the immediate safety of the trail users.
“I’m not really looking to change state law right now,” he said, “but I would like to start exploring safety improvements to help clarify which actions are appropriate no matter which side you’re on.”
Currently, the four-lane crossing utilizes a motion-activated radar unit which triggers flashing yellow lights for drivers and flashing red lights for trail users. Signs installed also indicate cyclists must first stop before entering the roadway.
“We feel like we’ve really been enforcing that the trail user must stop,” said Mihalevich. “I don’t know how else to reinforce this.”
After discussing the matter with various department heads, city engineer Chris Brown recommended installing a push-button activated signal which would stop vehicular traffic only when prompted by a trail user.
“I believe it’s the safest alternative,” said Brown.
By utilizing poles and other equipment the city already has in inventory, Brown said overall costs would be minimal (about $2,500), and installation could be completed quickly (about four weeks).
“The push-button is a great idea,” said Petty. “That way, all the drivers know it’s a protected crossing and all the trail users know it’s a protected crossing.”
Other committee members said they realize the decision might not sit well with everyone, particularly trail users who will be required to stop briefly even if there’s no oncoming traffic.
“There’s going to be some people who like it and some people who don’t like it,” said committee chair and Ward 3 Alderman Bobby Ferrell, “but we had a near-miss accident there and we’ve got to do something.”
If all goes according to plan, the new signal will be installed and ready to go by late May.
The trigger button is a great idea, this should line things out for folks so they know what to do. I do go extremely slowly approaching & going over these speed tables/crosswalks & always check to see if a pedestrian or bicyclist is getting ready to enter the roadway – and I stop. But I see a lot of cars FLY over these like they’re not there!
Hopefully this will be a timed light like a normal traffic signal when it stops traffic.
All bicyclists must walk their bike across or recieve a ticket. All vehicles must yeild to pedestrians or recieve a ticket.
Re: mmueller
So you’re proposing that a police officer sit there and write tickets… Fat chance.
re: Mmueller
Is this a proposal or are you stating law? Bikes have some rights as cars. Or are you claiming they have to walk it because it’s a crosswalk? Is it a cross walk or a trail?
Bikes have the same rights as cars when they are on the road way; the trails and crossings are not the roadway. And if I remember correctly, yes legally cyclists are supposed to dismount and walk their bike thru pedestrian crossings.
RE Michael
looking at the crossing sign in the picture… it shows a pedestrian and a bicyclist crossing. The bicyclist is riding their bike not walking it…… Does this mean they can ride through the crossing in this case?
It wouldn’t take that long to get the message across. Most are ignorant to this.
I pucker up every time I cross North Street on my bike.
That small, brick building next to the trail would make a great public restroom. The same for its twin further up the trail.
Bicyclists only have to dismount and walk across if they wish to have the same right-of-way as pedestrians. Riding the bike, you follow the same road rules as a car. You don’t just zoom across the street in your car, so you can’t do it on a bike. Once the rider is on foot, however, they are a pedestrian.
I will say this, however, for your consideration. Although I may be a pedestrian and have the right-of-way if I’m in a crosswalk, it won’t do me much good to be right, if I’m hit by a car. Just because I have the right, I don’t give up my responsibility to use good sense and check for vehicle traffic before crossing the street. Car vs. Pedestrian=FAIL for the pedestrian. Every time.
I think they should have spent the money on the front end and built a bridge, or re-routed the trail some way to make a safer crossing. But I’m sure the trail folks at the City know a whole lot more about this stuff than I do.
jmo
If they do stop traffic bicyclist still must walk their bikes across. Law enforcement has been pregidous, and the city officials know this. They are selective in who is reprimanded. Trails , city project= no ticket. Parking, city income= ticket.
With the a traffic light it seems a bit childish to require cyclists to walk their bikes. And where are all the complaints about car drivers breaking the law? Running a red light and speeding are no less a violation than cyclists who don’t stop at intersections. Try walking across College at a non-controlled intersection – legally cars must yield but instead the drivers try to run you over as they’re screaming obscenities.
Mr. Coody, please share your opinion on this issue. We need to know how you would do it differently.
over budget and years late most likely
I wouldn’t do it differently. I drive through that area and Petty’s quote is right on.
What is also a huge problem at this crossing is that the motion-activated lights only work about half the time.
That intersection is terrifying for cars and bikes/pedestrians. When I ride my bike through there, I get butterflies in my stomach hoping no one runs me over. When I’m driving my car, I’m just hoping the cyclists/pedestrians are paying enough attention. Usually it’s all right, better than driving my car through campus where people just walk across talking on their phones without even looking.
Thanks for commenting everyone. This is an important milestone for the City and, for me, shows that Fayetteville is committed to making cycling a viable form of transportation. During rush hour, this intersection sees about 30 vehicles per minute and about 3 trail users per minute. A few years ago, signalizing this intersection wasn’t necessary, but as our trail system has grown so has the number of people using it, making changes like this necessary.
I wanted to clarify a few things.
First, cyclists are allowed to ride their bikes across the street now, but only if all other traffic is stopped. This makes the first car that stops the “traffic director” for the rest of the cars, and can create some confusing situations. However, even if all traffic is stopped, unless a cyclist is walking his/her bike across, they don’t have the same legal protections that a pedestrian has, so the City always recommends cyclists walk their bikes.
This changes with the signalization of this intersection. Whoever has the green light has the right of way, and whoever has the red light does not. Now, cyclists who wait for a green light to ride their bikes across North St will be protected under the law.
The lights will also be fitted with a countdown timer, so cyclists approaching the intersection will know if they have time to coast through before the light turns red, or if they should slow down and stop.
Finally, I would LOVE to see a bridge there, but bridges are very expensive and Fayetteville just doesn’t have the money for it. We are building the basic network of Fayetteville’s trail system as fast as we can, so as many neighborhoods as possible can access a trail. That’s our first priority. Doing it in this order means many more residents will be able to use the trails sooner, so after that basic network is built we will be able to justify coming back to the centerpieces, like Scull Creek Trail, and making improvements like bridges over our busiest intersections.
A traffic light is an excellent idea. I once had a girl stop to let me cross, I waved to thank her and as I was crossing someone rear-ended her. I felt bad because she was courteous enough to let me through.
It is a gamble crossing that street.
The real problem with these intersections is the fact that trail users don’t treat them like crosswalks. Yes, pedestrians have right of way at crosswalks, but it still wise to slow down and make sure cars are not coming or all of them are stopped. Bicyclists are the worst… they really need to pay attention and not just fly through. This may be a good addition, but if people can’t stop long enough to make sure they aren’t walking into traffic, are they going to stop long enough to hit the button and wait for traffic to stop?
I use that crossing while jogging almost daily and have never had a problem. The concept of the push button doesn’t bother me, and I’ll use it, but I’ve honestly never had a problem crossing North Avenue. Cars get it, the lines of sight are considerable and pedestrians know it’s a heavily traveled street.
On the south end of the trail system, where the Frisco Trail crosses Center Street, however, is a disaster. Cars NEVER stop there, and additionally, because westbound traffic on Center Street is descending at a pretty steep incline, even if they try to mash the brakes I’ve watched cars skid toward pedestrians.
Scary stuff.
This is a good idea. As someone who bikes across this street very often, I feel like something needs to be done to end the confusion with this crosswalk. I have noticed most cars stay on the side of caution when they drive across, but some fly through.
When I am on my bike, I start to come to a stop and what I find is 9 out of 10 cars will wait for me to cross and treat me like a pedestrian despite me being on a bike. This is a little awkward because I am supposed to wai and I try to, but usually ride across as I don’t want to keep them sitting there waiting on me. These lights will add certainty and safety to that risky spot.
I really do believe this post and the above comments all justify the need for educating people on proper laws and relationships between bicycles and vehicles. Some of the misunderstandings in these posts are all easily explained, and the fact that the masses (cars and cyclists alike) have lack of knowledge is the true problem addressed in this article.
When I’m riding my bicycle on roads, many drivers yell, “Get on the sidewalk!” Indeed, 9 out of 10 bicycle to vehicle accidents happen when the cyclist is on the sidewalk (intersections, driveways, and their blind spots, etc.), and I am much safer on the 25 mph to 35 mph roads. When I’m driving a car, I see many cyclists abusing their riding privileges and behaving improperly at intersections, and in turn, they become a danger to themselves and everyone on the road.
What needs to be done is provide information to bicycle riders in order for them to protect themselves and understanding the rules of the road. With that, this information needs to be publicly available to drivers to provide clearer understanding on their responsibilities to bicyclists.
I also believe the same should be said for particular members of our police department. I had a motorcyclist officer give me a stink eye when I drove across that walkway. Long story short, he would have lost the civil argument, but I still would have received a ticket and court date had he pulled me over.
“We are building the basic network of Fayetteville’s trail system as fast as we can, so as many neighborhoods as possible can access a trail. That’s our first priority” This quote from mpetty is exactly the problem with Fayetteville’s trail program. Sacrificing safety by not making it the first priority is irresponsible- safety should always be the first priority in deciding when and how to build crossings. If it takes longer and costs more so be it- that approach is better than injury or death to trail users or drivers. Hopefully not everyone on the council or in the City administration thinks this way.
Please accept my apology for missing this comment when this thread was active…
I do appreciate your position, Mr. Maner. In fact, I think you would find I share your passion. However, with all due respect, I don’t think you understand the constraints many of these decisions must be made under.
Attacking my record on safety for the trails won’t get you very far. I initiated the discussion to make this intersection safer and I recently made sure that the upcoming Van Asche extension, which is now in the design phase, would have a cycle track separated from both vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
If you put a stoplight there, its going to be a bit dangerous, you’ve got another traffic light pretty close to the east, eastbound traffic is coming downhill, and you have train tracks just before the crossing as well. That said as a regular trail user I still think its the best option.
This issue is going to be much worse when they put in the crossing on south school, I drive down there every day, and someone’s going to lose their life over that deal, even if its a full stop. Traffic is just too fast, too heavy, and the road is too wide.
We should take the ridiculous amount of money we’re spending on the un-needed parking deck and use it to build bridges at both locations. Shoot, with that much money, we could probably buy public jetpacks for crossing.
Spent a ton of money tunneling UNDER Garland/Hwy 112, now didn’t you, Mr. Petty? What made that different than North Street? There is a ton of transportation issues in this town that could be addressed that would help more than building still more trails. Why isn’t anything being done for the east side of town? Still wondering where “alternative transportation” is for that part of town. Basically, there’s nothing east of College, except up by Joyce St.; a couple of isolated trail segments, no bus routes, and precious few safe streets to bicycle on. Ever try to bike on Old Wire or Mission? Scary. The greatest “alternative transportation” network could be built in this town, that would serve every neighborhood, access every business district, extend safety and accessibility to everyone. It called “sidewalks”. Make sure they are built along every street and road in this town and you have taken care of transportation, access, safety and recreation all in one. Sure, they’re not as cool as trails, but they will do the job and do it well.
Everyone knows that all the grumpy folks live on the east side, and frankly we don’t want want to make it any easier for them to reach the rest of the city.
lol
i agree that streets should have accompanying sidewalks. it’s the best way to makes streets more pedestrian friendly.
I second that emotion.
Please accept my apology for missing this comment when this thread was active…
As I understand it, tunneling under Garland is significantly different from North for two reasons. 1) there are more utilities running under North that greatly increase construction costs. 2) Tunneling under North wasn’t politically possible when Scull Creek trail was designed.
I understand your point about sidewalks, and I agree that Old Wire and Mission need them. I have biked on both of those streets and it is my preference to avoid doing so. However, your argument that sidewalks are a magic bullet for alternative transportation does not hold water. People will generally only walk a quarter mile to a destination, any farther and people generally elect to drive (or bike or take a bus). Unless we are going to rebuild our city so that every amenity is met within a quarter mile of each of our neighborhoods, we need a comprehensive transportation plan that includes sidewalks, trails, on street bicycle facilities, and public transit.
And before you tell me cyclists can use the new sidewalks, you should know that cycling on sidewalks is the least safe place for a bicycle to be. It causes more bicycle-pedestrian accidents AND more bicycle-vehicle accidents.
U mad, bro? Jesus Christ.
Don’t know about other drivers, but I always stop to let bikers and pedestrians get through on Maple and on North. My husband is a cyclist and I hope other people are courteous to him instead of honking or gunning through the intersection. It takes me a few seconds.