But the law being understood, and followed, does matter. That is the point. Laws are written, ostensibly anyway, to create order. But forget it, it's a lost cause in here, I'm afraid. Some things are beyond some people, and that is just the way it is.

Sadly, I don't think this issue will ever be resolved. Too many hard headed people that will always believe their way is the right way. I mean, regardless of the outcome, do you really expect to walk out in front of a vehicle moving 40 mph and not get hit at some point? If you do, then you are just as responsible for your outcome aas the person in the vehicle. Bottom line, if you enjoy the trail and you enjoy life on earth, the take care of yourself. BOTH drivers and pedestrians should look out for each other. If this can happen, it won't really matter what the law dictates or a silly sign reads.

Is it just me, or does anyone else lose hope for humanity after reading these ridiculous ramblings? Dear Lord, seriously. You people need to grow up and get over yourselves. There's more to life than driving your truck down the road and expecting the world to facilitate your every move.

Close that part of the walk. Plain and simple. It's at the end of the route anyway. Let people figure their own way out like they did before to get across the road. No reason why the city should condone this spot by continuing to keep it open. Save the city money overall and also the litigation that is sure to come. Just put a freakin bar rail to cover the trail and close the dang thing off at Stockbauer!!

Seems some are making comments that do not have to use JS on a regular basis. Drive down during rush hour, or when school lets out, or when the mall closes. It is not the stopping most are worried about--its the being given time to stop. If I am going 30mph (10 below posted around the curve heading north) with no ped. in sight and 20 feet prior to the crosswalk, someone hits the lights and darts into the road, by physics I will not be able to stop in time plus I am now at risk of being rear ended. Who should take the blame? It will be interesting to see how some comments change.

For those of you saying John Stockbauer is not a major road well you must not travel that side of town too often. That is a very busy road and its a road were many people have died on that road in accidents. People speed on that road and putting in a new speed limit will not fix this problem. People still speed on that road and its a fact. This is a problem Victoria created for itself and as the pedestrians are hit one by one and the city is sued over its unsafe and confusing condition. Then I bet the city will dig deep in their pocket and put up the overpass and for the person who said people would not use it they would have no choice a fencing would prevent them from entering the road. and it would not be straight it would have a ramp.

Well said Wisp...well said.

RUKIDDINGME, they can't stop in time, huh? Can you stop in time to yield at a yield sign when a car will be crossing your path with the right of way? Can you stop in time to stop at a red light? Can you stop in time for a stop sign? Can you stop in time to turn into the driveway at your house?

RUKIDDINGME, you can stop in time for anything you want to stop for. You are transparent. You simply don't think you should have to stop for a little ol' person on foot when you are in your truck or car. It's as simple as that. No need to insult anyone's intelligence with the pretense of a case.

Correction: I meant to say Houston Highway, not a highway in Houston.

Maybe the rumble strips were not intended for the drivers. Perhaps it's to help warn off pedestrians that they've only got few seconds before they are struck by a car...or maybe the city council will instruct all of Victoria to place some type of whistles on there bumpers like manufacturers make for wild game. Just a guess???

Man, what do you people consider a major thoroughfare? John Stockbauer is not one. Comparing it to a highway in Houston is ridiculous.

And cost is the very reason the city council said the other night that they will not be putting in overpasses. And underpasses, contrary to the prophecy of Salazaa, is not an option because of, among other things, the particular way drainage flows under the road. The crosswalk will not be rerouted to a nearby intersection because the easements are not big enough to run the trail parallel with the street (it has to be 8' wide for a dual purpose hike/bike trail.) You people better get comfortable with your legal obligation to yield to pedestrians, because the crosswalks are here to stay.

Instead of rumble strips at the John Stockbauer location, or any of the crosswalk intersections, why not put those really thin strips of what looks like sandpaper across the road to warn drivers? I don't know what those are called, but they make the driver aware that something is there, without the noise.... and I would think it would be cheaper than gouging out the existing pavement, and having to repair it quite so often from those potholes we seem to breed here in Victoria.

WispofTow
I am a prophet, there will be walkway under the road.

Sweetie, I don’t have a problem and this is not a legislative issue.

Wisp, Are you a fictional character?

Salazaa, it's a good thing you are not a prophet, because you would eventually be stoned; the likelihood of there ever being an underpass (or overpass) where the crosswalks are is nil.

People using different means of transportation intersect every day. Crosswalks are a fact of life, and work fine where drivers know the law and obey it. But then I think you know that, don't you?

As for the silly comments about accidents still happening, please spare us all the sophistry. Accidents occur everywhere and anywhere that people cross paths. It will never be otherwise, but it can be more or less likely depending on (among other things) people being aware of the law and aware of their surroundings.

The bottom line is this: there are too many "good ol' boy" types around here who don't think they should be asked to stop for someone walking. But the law says otherwise. If you have a problem with it talk to your legislators.

I Agree with VISD MOM the kids are the same way on the bike trail will not look before they cross and just walk in front of the cars i seen this allready 7 times there at the john stockbauer the rumbal strips is not going to do much if anything that location the cars have to go around a curve on one side of john stockbauer maybe the city needs to put up crossing guards like the rail road kind

Good You Tube video, reminds me of all the idiots that make u turns on Navarro in front of the mall every day!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJdISA...

I just pray that do something quick...the last thing Victoria needs is another accident or death from all this confusion.

The city will spend money on all these little useless fixes only to build an over/under pass in the end. Maybe they could apply for some stimulus money.

Also the John Stockbauer Crosswalk has a very hindered view due to the privacy fences and you do not see the trail until its too late. Last night I was going home from work and went that way and omg I could not see the people until I was up on them. Thats dangerous. This trail should have been put in the park. Just wait until school starts those kids are going to use it to walk to school just watch and see.

The best solution would be the caged in walking overpass. Like all the big cities have. Why hinder the flow of traffic for people who do not know that a car can kill them! You do not walk out into a busy street! Why waste all this money on crap that wont work? Hello people its a recession.

Anyone who thinks speed bumps, strips, reduced speed limits, or extra lights will work does not use JS on an every day basis. This is not a little country road anymore, it's a major street with major traffic. I can't see how this problem was not foreseen by the city. All of us who live off JS saw it coming. Now how long will the city drag its feet finding a solution--til there is a major accident? Either close the crosswalk or reroute. If nothing else close it until the problem is worked out before there is a tragedy.

Any person who uses the trail should stop and wait until traffic is clear both ways before proceeding into a cross walk. This is common sense. There are a lot of people who use this trail and for this reason the trail crosswalk is effecting the flow of traffic. The trail or anything should not be able to hinder the flow of traffic. I agree with everyone, many users of the trail have a false since of security and believe they have more rights than a vehicle and a vehicle has to yield so that their walk or ride isn't effected. Remove the push to cross button immediately!

MARK MY WORDS: The pedestrian walk will end up under the road.

Automobile and Pedestrian intersections don’t work. Stopping traffic on the open road is dangerously stupid and pedestrians who think traffic will yield to them are stupid.

Wasted tax dollars and auto/pedestrian crashes will put this walkway under the road.

Common Sense, wow, imagine that, seems todays youth (& some adults) don't have much of that. The State of Texas should add traffic laws and the Penal Code to the School curriculum.

Mkh0626, I agree with you 100%. Some individuals on this posting claim to have witnessed that night’s event. However, it is very dark out there. The only sufficient lighting there is, comes from the cross walk flashers. I understand that the push button lights are not sufficient in regards to timing. Just as well, the lighting is not that great…doesn’t it look like deer crossing? From what I gather, yesterday’s meeting was a working progress, but I strongly feel that it will be a matter of time for another incident before this project take effect.

I don't see much changing. As for the people who think it is simply the pedestrians have the right of way, well, you haven't seen the last accident. Try walking across the freeway in Houston and see how far you get with having the right of way.

visdmom...I agree w/you....using common sense & courtesy is too much to ask for...just wait til school starts.....I will avoid those areas like the plague!!

Just remember that the walk/bike trail is not an outdoor daycare, there are many kids out there alone.Please go out with your child and teach him/her about safety when crossing the street.

Another thing the city might some how consider. Im not sure Victoria has it or not but I learned other city and towns do have it. And its called citizen patrol. Where citizens are trained to do certian things in order to help local law enforcement. And it works in other towns and citys. To crack down on traffic violators and what ever else they have the right to do. After taking certian courses with law enforcement. Since the city of Victoria wants to say they always have a small budget. This is a volunteer job you have to be cleared by law enforcement do. As well wouldnt hurt to have some of the Victoria county law cadets to do some work going out into the city to help better certian areas as this. So they dont have to pull officers oiff the street from beats that need them.

Onestar, you have done a great job of missing the point.

I think it will be a great idea that the city does install the rumble strips. My point of view is for the safety of the pedestrians on the roadways. It may cause alot of complaints but realy who cares. It is for a reason for the rumble strips. This is for the safety of all pedestrians. Another thing as I mentioned befor, the lighting issue needs to be fixed soon. Not only at intersections, but as well along the hike and bike trail. Some areas along the trail is dark at night, and that always seems to be attractive towards criminal activity. As we all know Victoria county has plenty of it. What it might take is for the entire city to go out to the trail several times and look into the matter at night and see how things do function. Not just a few mins but spend some time along the trail at night and see how things are, your never going to know how the dangers are untill you get hands on the area. yes it takes money to do anything but this should have been a factor when this was approved. All this thats been going on is for the safety of anyone. So wake up city council and realize that this is a ticking time bomb if safety isnt meet.

Why spend a $1,000.00 we we can spend $30,000.00. For Pete's sake just put big signs on the pedistrian walk ways saying "WARNING TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP"

Council member Rangel should try to get pedestrian education in general taught in the schools, not just about this trail. And as far as Texas law for yielding to pedestrians? It is not just that "pedestrians have the right of way." Not true at all. Read below:

552.003. PEDESTRIAN RIGHT-OF-WAY AT CROSSWALK. (a) The operator of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing a roadway in a crosswalk if:
(1) no traffic control signal is in place or in
operation; and

(2) the pedestrian is:
(A) on the half of the roadway in which the
vehicle is traveling; or

(B) approaching so closely from the opposite half
of the roadway as to be in danger.

(b) Notwithstanding Subsection (a), a pedestrian may not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and proceed into a crosswalk in the path of a ehicle so close that it is impossible for the vehicle operator to yield.

c) The operator of a vehicle approaching from the rear of a vehicle that is stopped at a crosswalk to permit a pedestrian to cross a roadway may not pass the stopped vehicle.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, effective. Sept. 1, 1995.

552.005. CROSSING AT POINT OTHER THAN CROSSWALK. (a) A
pedestrian shall yield the right-of-way to a vehicle on the highway if crossing a roadway at a place:
(1) other than in a marked crosswalk or in an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection; or

(2) where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian
crossing has been provided.

(b) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic control signals are in operation, a pedestrian may cross only in a marked crosswalk.

(c) A pedestrian may cross a roadway intersection
diagonally only if and in the manner authorized by a traffic control device.

In other words, pedestrians DO NOT have unrestricted right of way. Automobiles have to stop for someone IN a crosswalk (meaning they are already in the street on the vehicle's side of the road), not if the pedestrian is APPROACHING the crosswalk (unless it is at a controlled intersection with a stop light). A regular road/street (like John Stockbauer or Airline or Miori Lane), no the car does not have to stop for someone approaching a crosswalk. Section 552.003 above specifically deals with this.

Kids have been taught, however, that pedestrians always have the right of way. This is evidenced by the way the students at Stroman and MHS will leave school at the end of the day and simply, without turning their heads one way or the other, simply step off the curb into traffic, expecting the driver to stop on a dime and then the student will resort to yelling, flipping off the driver, and other acts of rudeness if the driver honks the horn.

Except for the extreme ridiculousness of the signs at the trail, the City probably thought everyone would actually use common sense when attempting to cross busy streets, but apparently that was too much to ask.

I would file for some green. Was the city not negligent in that the signs tend to say vehicles have the right of way? Lessons need to be learned,our childrens safety should have been first on their mind.

Put in railroad crossing arms that come down when a walker wants to cross the street.
Also Stockbauer was originally built to be a by-pass type highway around the city. Not so much anymore.

OUTSTANDING !!!----SIMPLY OUTSTANDING !!!!!!

Even though it took an INJURY for the changes, I'm glad it didn't take a DEATH. I really wish it didn't have to take that for it to happen

Just the other day I witnessed two ladies approach the crossing at Stockbauer. One pressed the light button without breaking stride and they both walked right out into traffic with no thought of looking either direction for oncoming traffic. What were they thinking??????????????

7Angels, I can't say for sure, but after tonight's council meeting (from what I've heard about it) I do believe that things are going to get straightened out. By that, I mean that the city, as well as the police department, recognize now that Victoria drivers must be informed - without mixed signals aimed at placating them - that they are required to yield to pedestrians crossing in crosswalks, such as the four crosswalks on the hike/bike path. I am convinced that both the city and PD know that they have sent the wrong message for too long.

Correction, August 13. Wisp, I agree that the signs send the wrong message...it is only a matter of time before they are taken down.

They'll be removing those signs soon. They send the wrong message. That is, they suggest drivers have the right-of-way, which they do not.

A friend of mine was at the council meeting tonight. And if what he reports is true, I would expect to see the old bogus information claiming vehicles have the right of way at crosswalks to be corrected soon. Pedestrians have the right of way at crosswalks. The city knows it. One council member in particular stated it clearly and unmistakably. And a police officer agreed with him.

I expect to see a lot of clarification made about the matter in the days and weeks to come.