Why we need pedestrian advocacy ...

Do you walk around your neighborhood and think to yourself, "Hey, this isn't so bad. I can walk from my house to the store to the bus stop and it's really not so hard ..."? Or does your neighborhood look more like this:



(From There, I Fixed It.)

I want this cop's job

The video in this post makes me so happy. I've been watching it from time to time just to give myself a lift.

Next step: Get some Massachusetts municipalities to do the same. At up to $200 per crosswalk violation, it would more than pay for itself.

Crosswalk confusion

I was walking down Clarendon Street in Boston earlier this week with a friend. It was rush hour, and we were looking forward to having drinks at a new-to-us restaurant near Back Bay Station. Because there was heavy traffic, we did not pull the classic Boston jaywalking maneuver of just crossing when there's a break in traffic, but instead walked up to the crosswalk in front of what used to be the Hard Rock Cafe.

This crosswalk is faded, but clearly visible, but when we stepped into it, the car that was approaching did not slow, initially, and when he finally did, it was in a big huff with a lot of arm waving. My companion and I gave in to the temptation to yell, "It's a crosswalk!" to which the driver stuck his head out the window and said, "That's not a crosswalk!"

Now, I'm not writing this up to say I'm right and he's wrong (even though I'm right and he's wrong), but to point out one of the problems of faded crosswalks and other unclear traffic signs and signals: confusion is bad. When there's a conflict between cars and pedestrians, especially, the pedestrian always loses, no matter what the law says. The driver of this vehicle thought that the faded crosswalk indicated that it was no longer in effect, or at least thought that was a good argument to yell at a couple of pedestrians as they crossed in front of his car. If he was right about that, then we, as pedestrians, have been put at risk due to misleading infrastructure. That's bad for everyone.

So what do you do in a situation like this? Go to WalkBoston's advocacy page and download the "Reporting Form" (or download it directly by clicking here). Fill it out (which will probably involve a call to the relevant city hall to identify the person you should contact, or, if you prefer, a call to WalkBoston where one of us will find out for you) with as much detail as possible, and send it to the city. We'd also love for you to send a copy to us so we can help with followup and tracking.

Let's make walking better!

Where do you think you're going?

We've all heard of the infamous bridge to nowhere (I bet it's been a while since you thought about that, huh?). How's this for the crosswalk to nowhere:

Extreme crosswalk geekery

I am about to get really crosswalk geeky on you:

There are a lot of different patterns used for crosswalks, all of which are intended to give pedestrians a clear, protected zone in which to cross a street. As I'm sure we've all observed, they can be used at intersections and at mid-block crossings. But what's the deal with all the different designs?

Okay, first, in Massachusetts, the "standard" design (and the one the state pays for when cities want to put in or repaint a crosswalk) is this:

There's one of these near my house, actually, I didn't realize until just a few months ago that this was a crosswalk at all -- I always figured that these were simply lines in intersections to tell cars where to stop, and I found them confusing when located mid-block. They're okay, I guess, but they're not very visible. Also, because they run perpendicular to traffic, they get worn and faded quite quickly. D






Even worse is the dashed style:

This one has all the disadvantages of the standard style, plus it's effectively pre-faded. Maybe the fact that it's dashed makes it more visible? I'm not sure. In any case, I don't like it. D-








Another that I don't see particularly frequently is the solid crosswalk:

This one is certainly more visually arresting than either the standard or the dashed. Sometimes I see these painted yellow, or with white borders and yellow fill. Not bad. It uses a lot of paint (or, more often, these days, thermoplastic), though, which is costly, needs a fair amount of maintenance, and might be slippery for both vehicles and pedestrians. C







The continental style is among the most commonly used in and around Boston, I think:

The stripes are attention-getting, and because they're oriented parallel to vehicular travel, they will be more durable over time. Vehicle tires will, at least some of the time, miss the markings, which should decrease skidding in cases where that material is more slippery than the pavement. Pedestrians also won't have to walk on a solid painted or plastic surface. B+







The ladder style has a lot of the same advantages:

The framing bars that run perpendicular don't, to my mind, add much, except a zone requiring more frequent maintenance. On the other hand, the kids I've worked with for Safe Routes to School liked the imagery of "climbing the ladder" as a reminder for them to stay within the crosswalk zone when crossing streets. And since the consequence of worn framing strips is that the ladder will simply look like a Continental style crosswalk, I suppose that's not a big deal. B






Zebra crosswalks have a certain visual appeal:

The problem, as you probably surmised, is that the angle means more wear over time. B-










So those are the most common crosswalk types I've seen out and about. But this post was actually inspired by a couple of new (to me) crosswalk styles that I think are pretty nifty:

First, there's the piano style:

The big win here is that you still have a very visible crosswalk, but by leaving extra room where most vehicle tires will wear, you cut down on any potential skidding and maintenance costs due to the markings getting worn down. Nice. A





In a different vein, you get the double ladder:

Instead of reducing skidding for vehicles, this one leaves an unmarked zones where pedestrians can walk and reduce potential slippage for them. What's not to like? A









Finally, putting those two good ideas together, there's the double piano:

It's visible. It experiences reduced wear and tear. It minimizes potential slipping and skidding for vehicles and pedestrians. This is a great crosswalk. A+