Not an exciting post - but feel compelled to jumpstart Ralph’s efforts to maintain this Blog.

Don’t let the title fool you, this isn’t a post to berate idiot pedestrians, I’ll readily acknowledge that I am one myself - oftener than I’d like to admit.  Rather - it’s a simple summary of what I perceive as one of the contributing factors to the dumbing down of pedestrians at designated crossings in faux urban areas - due to the mis-interpretation of rapidly proliferating “In Street Pedestrian Crossing Signs.”  For those who don’t know what I’m referring to, see page two of this 2008 FDOT memorandum:  http://www.pinellascounty.org/mpo/Ped/LawChange.pdf.  Very attactive sign eh!

This topic arose in response to a mildly spirited conversation that occurred with a former co-worker of mine who has a bit of transporation planning experience - we’ll call him JM (and if he sees this, he’ll be offended I didn’t just spell out his name).  While I’ve a fair amount of Planning experience myself, my opinions on such matters typically arise from the fact that I chose to live as close to downtown as possible (within 6 blocks).  JM was returning with my girlfriend and I from the movies in our downtown commuter, an old Series Land Rover (fuel efficient, cheap and fun), when I proceeded through a marked cross walk with the above referenced sign, at which point there had been a pedestrian “approaching” the crosswalk.  JM proceeded to gently chide me for having violated the law by not stopping to allow the pedestrian to continue on his way.  I noted that the pedestrian had yet to enter the crosswalk (he was actually several steps away), and that while I support walking and cycling over vehicle use - both have a need to maintain some semblance of responsibility before they enter a vehicular use area.

JM didn’t buy this at all - suggesting that the mere presence of a pedestrian oriented sign granted the pedestrian the right to the crosswalk, without any liability for making a determination if an approaching vehicle would be able to stop in time.  He further added, that it would be courteous to stop and cede the right of way.  I disagreed with his first premise - simply from a common sense standpoint, which I’ll elaborate on below, but did agree with his courtesy comment - noting that we often do stop to cede to pedestrians when it’s obvious they’ve been waiting a long time, elderly old ladies, or when you’re so stuck in traffic it’s just the thing to do, among many other good reasons.

Now - what about the premise that all cars should cede to pedestrians in a marked crosswalk having one of those great signs.  Simply put - the automobile generally maintains the right of way, unless the pedestrian is already in the crosswalk, more specifically in the crosswalk near to or in the affected vehicle’s traffic lane.  This is stated in F.S. 316.130(7) and (8), but best summarized in the Florida Bicycle Association “Florida Pedestrian Law Enforcement Guide” - see pages 13 and 14. http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/brochures/pdf/Pedestrian%20LEGuide-08.pdf.  Documents like these are great - as it’s always nice to have what might be considered legalese, further explained in simple terms.

Ok - so all this may or may not be controversial to some, and it’s rather quite boring, but as we’ve been spending more and more time of late observing these particular crossings, there are some alarming trends:

PEDESTRIANS

1)  The busier this faux downtown becomes (evenings and holidays), the more brazen pedestrians become at entering these crosswalks with little or no thought that there are cars zooming along.  It can be surmised that while most act due to group mentality (meaning they simply follow or learn from others), many appear to believe that the signage grants them inalienable rights to the crosswalk.  The results are either comical, annoying or downright scary.

2)  This includes numerous children and elderly folks.  I posit that as this trend continues, a child or slow moving person is going to step into a crosswalk without a thought - and promptly get mowed down by an equally distracted driver (the vehicle sightseeing that occurs here is interesting to say the least).

EFFICIENCY

Ignorant pedestrians or poorly designed streets have an adverse impact on the economy - green trends are more effective where you can squeeze savings out of every little detail in life.  It doesn’t just happen.  I hate buying fuel for vehicles, and while I don’t walk or cycle as much as a should - and I do love to travel, I’ve definitely reduced my miles traveled by bundling trips and errands, or by just not driving.  There’s just so much to do where we live - and we don’t have to walk far for most of what we need or do - except work.

Designated crossings and j-walking laws are established for a reason - mostly to protect pedestrians (note it’s pretty well known that j-walking doesn’t significantly count high among traffic fatalities as an overall percentage).

Disorderly pedestrian crossing activities have a detrimental effect to fuel efficiency in a multitude of ways.  Once someone enters a crosswalk, we’ve observed that it establishes a constant stream - someone 20 feet away will also enter before the 1st ped finishes crossing (multiply this at intersections and you’ve got kaos).  Remember - we’re only talking about unsignalized crossings.  The general result is more vehicles standing and idling at crosswalks or intersections, and worse yet - large numbers of vehicles standing and idling when you have a pedestrian created traffic jam - which can affect multiple blocks.  I’ll save my comments on the adverse impacts of valet stand placement.

TOURISTS

This is my favorite - a decent percentage of drivers encountering these signs think that the mini-stop sign symbol within the sign means they have to stop - whether there are pedestrians present or not.  This is actually mildly entertaining - as the drivers frequently stay stopped waiting for pedestrains to magically appear to use the crosswalk.  After a good long pause - they tentatively proceed, uncertain as to whether or not they should (this is somewhat scary, as it suggests that folks just can’t read the signs - henceforth, they might shouldn’t be driving at all).  However, when combined with other factors noted above - it simply serves to reduce the efficiency of almost all modes (peds, cyclists, auto’s and any other users).

CONCLUSION

While there’s no real conclusion here - as much as this was just a vehicle to outline a response for JM, it would be nice to see some simple form of pavement signage or other educational outreach that reminds pedestrians that they still need to look both ways.  It is important to note that after a recent trip to San Francisco where we walked dozens of miles in a 4 day period (not to mention this is my favorite city to bike in, as you have the right-of-way in the roadway), or when visiting other downtowns such as Orlando or Winter Park, I don’t notice any problems with this type of signage.  Folks who live in real cities appear more likely to know how to look out for themselves, and while there’s plenty of scary stories of ignorant motorists - nothing compares to good ole South Florida’s pedestrian safety record.

So, it only seems like when we invite rural folks or suburbanites to a faux downtown ”urban” shopping experience - that they’re lack of understanding or experience makes them a danger to themselves.  Hopefully, for those of us who are planners, we continue to recognize these issues when developing “Complete Street” programs or new urbanist developments.