Jaywalking: use your brain so you don't lose it

It won't come as a surprise to anyone to hear that I'm a pretty brazen pedestrian. When I'm in a crosswalk, I don't always wait meekly on the curb for cars to stop as they ought to but often don't; many times, I'll step -- with care -- into the crosswalk and bully drivers into yielding to me as the rules of the road require. I have been known to knock on the windows of cars that have stopped in the middle of crosswalks to point out to the driver that he or she is blocking my way, and once or twice, I have used my newspaper to whack the windshield of a car that ignores the crosswalk in order to save a few seconds. I don't necessarily advocate for others doing the same, but it is important to me that users of all modes share the streets, and when I'm on foot, I consider crosswalks my domain.

Still, though, when I'm out and about in and around Boston, I see a lot of incredibly bad pedestrian behavior. Over the weekend, I was driving along the Riverway in Boston around 9PM, and a couple of young guys crossed in front of me. They were in a crosswalk, at a light ... but crossing against the light. In the dark. On a fast-moving street. After screeching (literally) to a halt on the wet pavement, it was all I could do not to jump out of my car and yell at them. No driver wants to hit a pedestrian, and that moment of a close call is terrifying.

One of my mantras about safety is that everyone is 100% responsible for being safe all the time. Stepping into a crosswalk without looking and attending to oncoming cars makes me 100% responsible for the accident, just as the driver who fails to pay attention and yield is also 100% responsible. In that case, the law is on my side, which would, no doubt, make my stay in the hospital exactly the same as if the law weren't on my side.

I also abhor bad pedestrian behavior because I think it makes other users less respectful of pedestrians in general. I'm not going to tell people not to jaywalk -- there are times when the design of a city or roadway makes it nearly impossible not to, and many more times when the design makes it extremely impractical. But do you really trust strangers to care as much about your life as you do? If you're going to jaywalk, do it with care -- for everyone's sake.

More on jaywalking

Continuing with the questions and answers that came up during my chat on the Boston Globe last month:

One of the participants in the chat (Kelly) commented:

Also I've noticed, there is no uniform pedestrian system in Boston. In cities like New York, the lights always cycle through pedestrian walk signs. At the intersection of Beacon St. and Park where dozens of pedestrians cross every cycle, you have to push the button, the walk sign will not appear unless you do. Many people aren't used to that-they expect the walk signal to cycle through because that happens automatically at many other intersections.

And another commenter (Michael) said:

Some how In Seattle, pedestrians and motorist obey the laws in a very civil manner which tells me that enforcement is the issue here in MA. People in Seattle will wait for the light to change before walking even if there are no cars in site.

These two comments go together very nicely, and here's why: Michael is arguing that enforcement would solve the problem of jaywalking in Boston, and Kelly is pointing out that other cities have uniform systems for pedestrians.

If you've spent much time walking around Boston, you've probably noticed what Kelly did: sometimes there's a button for you to push to get a WALK and sometimes there isn't. Sometimes when you push the button, it works, and sometimes it appears to do nothing. If there's no button, you really have no idea if you just didn't find the button or if you'll get a WALK or what.

All of this says to people on foot that their needs have not been strongly considered in the design and construction of the city. And if their needs aren't being met, why should they obey the law? I don't think jaywalkers are like bank robbers and going out of their way to break the law. They're just people trying to run errands and get things done over the course of the day.

So then if I'm a person who crosses when it says DON'T WALK but I'm walking with the green light, fine, that's jaywalking, even though it's probably pretty reasonable from a traffic flow and safety perspective in most cases (lots of intersections all over the state, country and world are set up with pedestrians getting the WALK along with the parallel green), but it's a small chip in the block of the habit of obeying laws that pertain to walkers.

So, where does that leave all of us? We want the streets to be safe for drivers, for cyclists, and for walkers. AND we want people in cars, on foot, and on bikes to be able to get their errands done. Does simply enforcing existing laws succeed in doing that?

A defense of jaywalking

Monday, Slate published an article by Tom Vanderbilt (of Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do fame) titled A defense of jaywalking. In it, Vanderbilt addresses some of the complexities of data available about pedestrian behavior, the history of street-use paradigms, and biases in crash reporting.

This is a great article, and if you're interested in jaywalking, walking in urban areas, or mode-sharing paradigms, I think you'll find it worth reading. Check it out!

Jaywalking in Boston

As I posted earlier in the month, Boston pedestrians were featured in an article in the Boston Globe a couple of weekends ago. As a followup to that, the Globe asked me to participate in an online chat on the topic the week after the article came out. I did, and the result was a pretty interesting Q&A discussion between me and a variety of Globe readers. For the next few posts here, I'll be adapting some of the questions and answers from that session for us to read here.

First, a bit of introduction. What's the story with jaywalking, anyway?

Jaywalking is kind of a way of life around here. But there's more to it than people just disregarding laws and sometimes their own safety.

When you're in a car, you're pretty much limited to moving along a few limited paths -- streets. But when you're on foot, you have a lot more flexibility, and the way a city is built and designed can encourage you or discourage you from obeying laws that apply to you. And the infrastructure of the city can work well for cars, or for pedestrians, or both (and let's not forget bikes!). When a lot of people are breaking the law, that's a sign that the existing structures aren't working, not merely that people are profligate rule-breakers.

Why would I, as a pedestrian, wait to cross lawfully if it's going to take me 3-5 minutes to cross an intersection that I can see I can cross safely during a break in traffic? It doesn't make sense for me to do that, and it reflects an infrastructure that says in various subtle ways that my needs are not part of the equation, which encourages me to disregard them entirely.

On the other hand, in cities where pedestrians feel like they count, you'll see them waiting at a corner for the WALK light to come, even if there's no oncoming traffic. So, we know it can be done.

Pedestrians in Boston

The front page article on this week's Sunday Globe was Crossing to their own beat: Injuries up, but jaywalking abounds on Hub’s busy streets, which had a few quotes from yours truly. That article also has a link to a video about the traffic monitoring setup at City Hall.

I'm sorry that the article focuses so much on the question of fines and enforcement for jaywalking, when I think that, ultimately, that's just a piece in the puzzle of safe street management. There's talk of increasing fines for jaywalking in Massachusetts (currently a laughable $1), which may make sense as a part of a larger strategy for making better use of our streets for all users, but seems to me the wrong place to start. Fines don't improve the street experience for anyone, after all, and what we'd really like to see is a change in how we think about and use streets, rather than a reentrenchment of the same old, same old.