Evening star., 1938-10-26
STUDY Of MEANS
FOR PEDESTRIAN
CONTROL ORDERED
Survey Will Cover Needs
and Difficulties of
Enforcement.
SPECIAL HEARING GETS
LEADERS, APPROVAL,
Seal Favors Specific Provision for
Safety of Persons Caught
in Traffic.

A special study by District officials
on the need for pedestrian control and
any possible legal or practical difficult
ties OF enforcement of such a regula-
ton was ordered today by Engineer
Commissioner David McCoach, jr., as
he proceeded with plans for an ex-
traordinary public hearing on the SUBJ
ject.
Meanwhile, the plan to hold the spe-
clal nearing was meeting with the ap-
proval OF host of residents and civic
and business groups deeply interested
in solving Washington's traffic prob
lens. The immediate and widespread
response forecast huge attendance at
the hearing, scheduled to be held soon.
Scrutiny of all possible angles Of
proposed pedestrian control was
planned by the Commissioners after a
brief conference with Corporation
Counsel Elwood H. Seal, who brought
to his attention decision by the Court
OF Appeals in 1923, which laid down
the principle that pedestrian crossing
the street on proper signal has the
right-of-way over all vehicular move
ments. even though the traffic signal
may be changed before the pedestrian
reaches the opposite curb.
Mr.. Seal announced his approval Of
the objectives of better protection for
pedestrians. Without voicing any per-
sonal view on proposed pedestrian reg
ulation he emphasized that in any
such rule the District must consider
how it shall treat the problem of right
and left hand turns by vehicles cross
ing the path of pedestrians who have
started to make crossing on proper
signal. He said also there should be
some more specific provision for the
protection of the pedestrian who starts
TO cross the street on proper signal
and gets caught by a change of the
trafflc control-particularly if tho
pedestrian is to be subjected to a con.
troll regulation.
Hopes for Considerable Data.
Col. McCoach announced he would
call upon Traffic Director William A.
van Duzer. Police Supt. Ernest ",
Brown, Highway Director E. c. White
hurst, Brig. Gen. Albert L. Cox. who
headed the Special Committee on
Traffic Safety during recent months:
the corporation counsels Office and
possibly others to survey all possible
angles Of the proposed pedestrian reg
ulation.
Col. McCoach said he hoped, by such
a program Of study, to develop consid-
cradle factual data which would be
available for discussion at the forth
coming public hearing. BY this
means, he said, he hoped the hearing
would produce a clear-cut expression
OF public sentiment and helpful sug-
gestlons as to what form the regula-
ton should take if adopted.
| Commissioner Hazen remained at
home again today. nursing a cold.
and the date for the hearing has not
yet been fixed. Col McCoach said
1t was likely the date would be at least
TWO or three weeks in the future. to
allow various civic and other groups to
crystalline their views.
| Mr.. Seal said he cited the Court of
Appeals decision because it raised i'm
portant principles which should be
considered in any traffic control regu-
lation. He added:
L am heartily in favor Of the OBJ
]ective of providing further protection
to pedestrians. 1t may be that some
form OF pedestrian control-plus GER
tain other administrative rules-vill
accomplish this objective.
Problems Difficult.
of course, it is unwise and DAN
gerous for the pedestrian to dash
heedlessly across the middle of the
block In front of heavy traffic flow.
or to blunder into the path of vehicles
moving in accord with traffic signals.
But we must consider how to han.
die the grave problem of the conflict
between the pedestrian who is obeyinp
the rule and the driver of the vehicle
who is making right or left hand
turn. also in keeping with the signal.
These questions have no simple solu.
ton"
The Court of Appeals decision was
given in an opinion by the late Asso-
ciate Justice Josiah A. Van Orsdel.
who said, in part, in decision on the
case of Griffith VS.. Slaybaugh. rem.
dered November S, 1928:
1T will be observed that under the
traffic regulations pedestrians are
given the hight of way at all cross.
walks, except at controlled crossings.
At controlled crossings pedestrians
have the right of way along with other
traf1c moving in observance with the
trafflc signals. Plaintiffs entered the
crossing while the green signal light
was displayed, and. having committed
themselves to the crossing. they had
the right of way until they could
reach the opposite curb.
The condition of traffic in our
crowded streets is such that travel bv
pedestrians is at best difficult and
dangerous. If their absolute right tn
enter upon crossing when the signal
permits 1t Is not sustained. they would
be almost without protection. Enter.
ing under this invitation. they cannot
be charged with contributory negli-
gence If the signal switches when tfley
are in the street. Caught in this posi-
ton. the obligation rests upon the
drivers Of automobiles. not only to OBJ
serve the situation, but to wait until
the crossing is clear Many automo-
bile drivers seem to imagine that with
the shift of the signal they are given
clear right of way against intersect-
ing traffic.
Drivers Duties Defined.
"In this belief they recklessly start
their machines, regardless of persons
who are already rightfully on the in
tersection. 1t is the duty of drivers
of the machines to exercise the great
est vigilance and care under such cir
cumstances, not only to have their
machines under control, but to stop
(see PEDESTRIANS, Page Bed