Seattle neighborhoods allowed to design custom crosswalk art

[jakeroot]

I've never heard of this type of thing before, but I think it will be quite cool. Looking forward to seeing what horrible things people will come up with.

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/Custom-crosswalks-coming-to-Seattle-327488321.html

Seattle Department of Neighborhoods and the Seattle Department of Transportation jointly announced the launch of the Community Crosswalks program on Monday.

They say it's a way for people to help secure the crosswalks in their neighborhoods.

"This is about celebrating and enhancing community identities," said Seattle Mayor Ed Murray in a press release announcing the plan. "The iconic rainbow crosswalks on Capitol Hill started a broader conversation on how we can incorporate neighborhood character in the built environment across Seattle. I'm excited to see more history, culture, and community on display for residents and visitors to enjoy."

People can submit their own designs, but the design must include two white horizontal stripes. It also cannot include text or symbols. Designs will only be considered for locations that already have a marked crosswalk in place.

[Bruce]

The city's page for it (including one of my pictures): http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/community-crosswalks

I'm all for more of these, with the guidelines presented here. Have some nice red crossings in Chinatown (color of good fortune in most Asian cultures), Norwegian/Nordic theme in Ballard, maybe a Soviet theme near the Statue of Lenin in Fremont, purple ones in the U District, Sounders/Seahawks/Mariners colors in the Stadium District...so many possibilities.

[jakeroot]

The city's page for it (including one of my pictures): http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/community-crosswalks

I've noticed your images used more than a few times by various news and government websites. A testament to their quality? I think so.

I'm all for more of these, with the guidelines presented here. Have some nice red crossings in Chinatown (color of good fortune in most Asian cultures), Norwegian/Nordic theme in Ballard, maybe a Soviet theme near the Statue of Lenin in Fremont, purple ones in the U District, Sounders/Seahawks/Mariners colors in the Stadium District...so many possibilities.

I just hope the approval process isn't as slow as the Seattle Process. I mean, you can't just approve every design that comes through the door, obviously, but hopefully they'll come up with a procedure that's efficient.

[Bruce]

I've noticed your images used more than a few times by various news and government websites. A testament to their quality? I think so.

Perhaps. It might also be because I license them freely and try to spread them around as much as I can with good tagging (for search engine result optimization).

I just hope the approval process isn't as slow as the Seattle Process. I mean, you can't just approve every design that comes through the door, obviously, but hopefully they'll come up with a procedure that's efficient.

It will be slow, especially with the initial barrage of requests the department will get now.

[Bruce]

Ames, IA installed a few LGBT crosswalks and the FHWA asked for them to be removed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/us/crosswalks-ames-iowa-safety.html

Seattle now has 40 designs, apparently, but I haven't been able to catalog them all. Here's a recent-ish one at Westlake & Lenora:

[jakeroot]

Bit of government over-reach, for sure. Good thing cities like Ames and Seattle take almost no federal money for their streets.

Pedestrian safety is paramount, for sure, but I'd be stunned if these detract in any way.

[JoePCool14]

Two things for me.

1. It's a road, not a blank canvas to spew extra paint and beliefs on the road. I can't even really see the benefit, considering how paint on a road degrades fairly fast over time.

2. Also,

What the hell happened here with the bike lane crosswalk?!

[DaBigE]

Two things for me.

1. It's a road, not a blank canvas to spew extra paint and beliefs on the road. I can't even really see the benefit, considering how paint on a road degrades fairly fast over time.

2. Also,

What the hell happened here with the bike lane crosswalk?!

It's designed to guide bikes to cross the tracks as near to 90-degrees as possible to avoid tires being caught in the flangeway

[roadman]

It's a road, not a blank canvas to spew extra paint and beliefs on the road. I can't even really see the benefit, considering how paint on a road degrades fairly fast over time.

^^^^^ This times ten thousand.

[jamess]

Ames, IA installed a few LGBT crosswalks and the FHWA asked for them to be removed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/07/us/crosswalks-ames-iowa-safety.html

A really dumb request.

They say that crosswalks should be just the white lines. But hold on, haven't bright red (fake brick) patterns been allowed for decades?

[jakeroot]

It's a road, not a blank canvas to spew extra paint and beliefs on the road. I can't even really see the benefit, considering how paint on a road degrades fairly fast over time.

Roads are spaces for people: those driving, those cycling, those scootering, and especially those walking. If it does not detract from safety, but serves to liven up an otherwise boring intersection, what's the harm? If the city wants to take on the maintenance of repainting these complex crosswalks, that's theirs and the neighborhoods decision. Judging by how many of these community crosswalks exist around the country, there's no lack of support.

[jeffandnicole]

Of the crosswalks shown...

I'm fine with the ped crosswalks at the top, right side and bottom, as so long as the black wavy lines don't cause any visibility issues for those that may have depth perception issues.

In combination with those crosswalks, I don't care for the one of the left, because compared to the other 3 mentioned above it lacks visibility.

Likewise, the crosswalk thru the middle of the intersection should be blue throughout the entire crosswalk. The star is fine.

The yellow blindness mats should be a little wider as well, or the crosswalks a little more narrow, depending on the curb cuts for those crosswalks.

The bicycle path on the right side is stupid - no bicyclist would ever follow that.  It would also cause confusion among motorists and peds alike trying to figure out if a bicyclist is actually following the path or if they're gonna veer into their path of travel.

Shouldn't there also be markings on the sidewalk between the two 'slow' markings showing where a bicyclist should travel?

[Mr. Matté]

https://i.imgur.com/xAr9LD9.jpg

The bicycle path on the right side is stupid - no bicyclist would ever follow that.

An experienced cyclist will closely follow the green ladder- maybe not because of the markings, but because they know not to cross RR tracks at shallow angles.

[deathtopumpkins]

The bicycle path on the right side is stupid - no bicyclist would ever follow that.  It would also cause confusion among motorists and peds alike trying to figure out if a bicyclist is actually following the path or if they're gonna veer into their path of travel.

Cyclist here. I would definitely follow that approximate path. When crossing tracks at anything less than a ~60-degree angle there's a real danger of your wheel catching in the flangeway. It's very common nationwide for bike lanes at skewed crossings to veer off such that they cross at as close to a 90-degree angle as possible. It's been the preferred treatment for years now.

Some examples from around the country:
MA https://goo.gl/maps/88fansq5ALmJQvUD9
FL https://goo.gl/maps/vs7brKhaPL7BxGTJA
NC https://goo.gl/maps/7DXpd3MhbDTwbreCA
WI https://goo.gl/maps/Y5pSscwGWTFW4S4t5
AZ https://goo.gl/maps/aD8VidAxW7anAZKX9
OR https://goo.gl/maps/5q8dppVMMjgZ1xd19

It may look stupid to you, but it looks safe to me.

[US 89]

If you don't follow that path, you might find yourself acting out this sign...

[Bruce]

The intersection pictured uses an all-crossing scramble, which the cyclists are expected to use to traverse the tracks. A lot less stressful than having to look over the shoulder for cars that turn blindly into the crosswalk.

[jamess]

I don't care for the one of the left, because compared to the other 3 mentioned above it lacks visibility.

Likewise, the crosswalk thru the middle of the intersection should be blue throughout the entire crosswalk. The star is fine.

Do the feds send sternly worded letters when a crosswalk is poorly visible because the lines have faded due to traffic?

It's odd to argue that the blue isn't visible enough when it's ok to have a crosswalk that trucks and plows have basically wiped out of existence

[jakeroot]

The intersection pictured uses an all-crossing scramble, which the cyclists are expected to use to traverse the tracks. A lot less stressful than having to look over the shoulder for cars that turn blindly into the crosswalk.

It does also use crossing phases during the through-traffic phase, at least for Westlake. Results in some yellow trap for traffic turning from Westlake onto 7th, where the ped-signal stays on even after the red light comes up, making it awkward for drivers who were waiting to turn but weren't able to find a gap.

I don't care for the one of the left, because compared to the other 3 mentioned above it lacks visibility.

Likewise, the crosswalk thru the middle of the intersection should be blue throughout the entire crosswalk. The star is fine.

Do the feds send sternly worded letters when a crosswalk is poorly visible because the lines have faded due to traffic?

It's odd to argue that the blue isn't visible enough when it's ok to have a crosswalk that trucks and plows have basically wiped out of existence

Agreed. And it's not like the white lines aren't still there. All these are, are standard crosswalks with designs in the middle.

[Scott5114]

If you asked FHWA, I'd imagine their concern would be with drivers being able to identify these as crosswalks and not as decorations with no inherent meaning. It's one thing when one intersection or neighborhood is decorated a certain way, but when every intersection or neighborhood has unique markings is when lack of driver recognition becomes a bigger concern.

FHWA most likely also has the concern that these designs are being considered on their aesthetic merits, rather than being tested on engineering merits such as visibility and driver recognition.

That map-themed crosswalk looks very nice, but I'm not sure that as a driver I would recognize it as a crosswalk in a timely manner, since here in Oklahoma we don't use the bare parallel lines to designate crosswalks (we use the alternating white/black blocks with no transverse lines). Thus, the parallel white lines that give the crosswalk legal meaning would simply read as part of the design to me.

[ErmineNotyours]

The Wallingford Ladybug, September 2006:



Though faded a bit on some Streetviews, the bug is painted every year to look like new.  Maybe it's supposed to look like a small intersection circle from a distance to get drivers to slow down, so that they'll speed up at the next real circle.

[vdeane]

Not to mention that colors can decrease the visibility of even the white line.  Take the red, white, and blue centerline in Bristol, RI.  It's a LOT less visible than a traditional double-yellow line would be, or even the while lines used for the parking spaces.

[jakeroot]

If you asked FHWA, I'd imagine their concern would be with drivers being able to identify these as crosswalks and not as decorations with no inherent meaning. It's one thing when one intersection or neighborhood is decorated a certain way, but when every intersection or neighborhood has unique markings is when lack of driver recognition becomes a bigger concern.

FHWA most likely also has the concern that these designs are being considered on their aesthetic merits, rather than being tested on engineering merits such as visibility and driver recognition.

That map-themed crosswalk looks very nice, but I'm not sure that as a driver I would recognize it as a crosswalk in a timely manner, since here in Oklahoma we don't use the bare parallel lines to designate crosswalks (we use the alternating white/black blocks with no transverse lines). Thus, the parallel white lines that give the crosswalk legal meaning would simply read as part of the design to me.

According to this news article (emphasis mine):

* Seattle received a similar letter [to Ames, Iowa] in 2015, but contends [that city] data from three years before and after crosswalks were painted have shown vastly-improved pedestrian safety at those intersections.
* "We're seeing a reduction in pedestrian collisions to the point that they're not really happening...[w]e would not have installed these (had they not been safe). They are very vibrant; they are loved by the community and people see them." (quote from Dongho Chang, a Seattle traffic engineer))

The FHWA has their opinion on the matter, but last I checked, the FHWA doesn't study these types of crosswalks either. They're just stating their opinions because the crosswalks don't conform to traditional standards developed way back whenever. If cities want to conduct their own safety studies, as many have done, they are certainly welcome to. Seattle has done so, and not found any safety issues. Case. Closed.

For the record, there is absolutely aesthetic merit behind the designs. That much is obvious if you just look at them. The point is to add something to what is otherwise a boring intersection (to most people). Marked crosswalks are not required, but in the cases where they're used, there's no reason to not consider designs that accompany the neighborhood's aesthetic if it can be done safely.

The standard crosswalk design in Seattle is the piano-bar crossings, which replaced transverse lines in the late 90s or early 2000s. If data from Seattle (above) is to be believed, drivers are not failing to recognize these as crossings. Which may be surprising to you, as only a few cities in WA use transverse markings (Bellevue, Tukwila, and Olympia); "two parallel lines" is not something most WA drivers see on a daily basis. "Seattle-only" drivers have only started to see them recently as part of this program.

Not to mention that colors can decrease the visibility of even the white line.  Take the red, white, and blue centerline in Bristol, RI.  It's a LOT less visible than a traditional double-yellow line would be, or even the while lines used for the parking spaces.

If anything, the dark red and dark blue are amplifying how bright the white stripe is. I fundamentally disagree that the effectiveness of the white stripe is even remotely diminished by the dark colors. I find your statement baffling, to be honest.

[roadfro]

They say that crosswalks should be just the white lines. But hold on, haven't bright red (fake brick) patterns been allowed for decades?

FHWA has previously determined, perhaps in the same official interpretation ruling, that these are ok. IIRC, the distinction was that when such crosswalks are constructed of different contrasting materials (bricks, pavers, PCC concrete when the street is asphalt, etc) and not painted, it doesn't constitute a traffic control device. Such crosswalks also must have the typical white lines outlining the the contrasting pavement material to make it a legal marked crosswalk.

[jamess]

If you asked FHWA, I'd imagine their concern would be with drivers being able to identify these as crosswalks and not as decorations with no inherent meaning.

In most (all?) states, unmarked crosswalks have the same legal standing as a marked one.

Does FHWA think that drivers are able to identify unmarked crosswalks? In my experience, 99% of drivers do not.

Why does FHWA allow cities to host unmarked crosswalks, which are clearly dangerous, but throw a fit at painted crosswalks that have data showing they're safe?

[roadman]

If you asked FHWA, I'd imagine their concern would be with drivers being able to identify these as crosswalks and not as decorations with no inherent meaning.

In most (all?) states, unmarked crosswalks have the same legal standing as a marked one.

Does FHWA think that drivers are able to identify unmarked crosswalks? In my experience, 99% of drivers do not.

Why does FHWA allow cities to host unmarked crosswalks, which are clearly dangerous, but throw a fit at painted crosswalks that have data showing they're safe?

Unmarked crosswalks should be abolished.  All they do is encourage pedestrians to cross the street anywhere they feel like.