What no one said was “Surprised.”
Chuck Leayman - quiet, literate, gently smiling |
That’s because Lancastrians know all too well that crossing
any intersection of a major thoroughfare in this city is part a game of chicken
and part Russian roulette.
This is a moment for outrage. Not only because the victim was a beloved friend
and neighbor of so many -- a quiet, literate soul who wanted no more than to
live among his books and gently smile at his many acquaintances. The loss of one such as Chuck only makes the
tragedy that much more painful and, one hopes, consequential.
Chuck was killed by more than a random act of criminally reckless driving. He is dead because
there is a fundamental failure of vehicular law enforcement by the City of
Lancaster.
Just to review, under Title 75, Sec. 3542 (a) of the
Pennsylvania Code, vehicles must yield to pedestrians crossing in an
intersection. The intersection does NOT
have to be marked by a pedestrian crosswalk (though the one in which Chuck
Leayman was killed was marked); nor must it display a “Yield to Pedestrians
Crossing” sign.
Failure to yield is punishable by a $50 fine and a two-point
license penalty; admittedly, not great
in deterrence value, but with the force of the law behind it, nonetheless.
Yet what use is a law that routinely goes unenforced? Many will say that law or not, this is
Lancaster and speedway driving is a part of a culture that can’t be fixed, so
pedestrians beware.
Wrong.
The data are overwhelming that well-planned, well-publicized
and consistently applied enforcement changes driver behavior almost completely
in a very short time.
The proof is everywhere.
·
In 2006 in North Jersey, where aggressive
driving is a blood-sport worthy of Olympic status, the town of Montclair initiated several months of
publicity and issuance of warnings to drivers pushing through crosswalks with
pedestrians in them. They followed with
intensive enforcement including plain-clothes decoy pedestrians. Driver adherence became almost complete in
Montclair in a matter of weeks after full enforcement commenced. (New Jersey law requires a full stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk, and backs it up with two license points, $200 in fine, and 15-days of community service.)
·
In Lisbon, Portugal, a country which embraces
roadway anarchy as enthusiastically as any Southern European society, your
correspondent during a visit earlier this month watched in awe as motorists
from every direction stopped promptly and politely at the first sign of a
pedestrian entering a marked crossing.
·
In New York City, the world’s jaywalking
capital, nearly half of all pedestrian injuries occur to those lawfully within
the crosswalks. NYC Transportation
Commissioner Polly Trottenberg describes pedestrian safety as a public health
issue of “epidemic” scope. Lately NYPD
Commissioner Bill Bratton has the force cracking down on failure-to-yield
violations in some of the most dangerous intersections and corridors, such as
Sunset Park in Brooklyn.
·
In nearby Bethlehem, the police got the memo
last summer, instituting a program of decoy pedestrians and formal warnings to
motorists failing to yield.
·
The Federal Highway Administration’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center website has links to program reports of
successful enforcement initiatives and changes in motorist behavior in Amherst,
Massachusetts, San Jose, Gainesville, Florida, and elsewhere throughout the
county.
Yes, it can be done and Lancaster must begin to do it. The city’s vaunted “Walkability” study may be
a spearhead for progress, although at a recent public session, Jeff Speck, the
planning consultant in charge of the study, was peculiarly dismissive of
pedestrian crosswalk law as an effective tool to promote walkability.
Rather, Speck’s declared focus is to revert one-way
“drag-strip” corridors to two-way traffic in the expectation that two single
opposing lanes will promote more attentive motoring.
Speck’s strategy may work, but it wouldn’t have helped poor
Chuck Leayman, who was killed by a car barreling through the intersection of a
two-way thoroughfare.
A deadly corner |
Chuck’s death was a crime, to be sure, and we can only hope
and demand that justice be done. But let
there be justice not solely for the perpetrator, because this is a crime that also lands at the doorstep of the city.
Justice for Chuck Leayman – and the most fitting memorial –
would be a full-out enforcement campaign to change driver habits so they begin
to obey the law of Pennsylvania and observe the right of pedestrians to cross
the street in safety.