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
Quote
Seattle Department of Neighborhoods and the Seattle Department of Transportation jointly announced the launch of the Community Crosswalks program on Monday.
Quote
They say it's a way for people to help secure the crosswalks in their neighborhoods.
Quote
"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."
Quote
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.
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.
Quote from: Bruce on September 14, 2015, 10:53:00 PM
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. :D A testament to their quality? I think so.
Quote from: Bruce on September 14, 2015, 10:53:00 PM
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.
Quote from: jakeroot on September 15, 2015, 12:49:09 AM
I've noticed your images used more than a few times by various news and government websites. :D 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).
Quote from: jakeroot on September 15, 2015, 12:49:09 AM
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.
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:
(https://i.imgur.com/xAr9LD9.jpg)
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.
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,
Quote from: Bruce on October 07, 2019, 10:49:21 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/xAr9LD9.jpg)
What the hell happened here with the bike lane crosswalk?!
Quote from: JoePCool14 on October 08, 2019, 10:40:02 AM
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,
Quote from: Bruce on October 07, 2019, 10:49:21 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/xAr9LD9.jpg)
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
Quote from: JoePCool14 on October 08, 2019, 10:40:02 AM
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.
Quote from: Bruce on October 07, 2019, 10:49:21 PM
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?
Quote from: JoePCool14 on October 08, 2019, 10:40:02 AM
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.
Quote from: Bruce on October 07, 2019, 10:49:21 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/xAr9LD9.jpg)
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?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
Quote from: Bruce on October 07, 2019, 10:49:21 PM
https://i.imgur.com/xAr9LD9.jpg (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.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
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.
If you don't follow that path, you might find yourself acting out this sign (https://goo.gl/maps/1ZtWCz9XVAJ2)...
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.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
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
Quote from: Bruce on October 08, 2019, 04:08:24 PM
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.
Quote from: jamess on October 08, 2019, 05:40:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
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.
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.
The Wallingford Ladybug, September 2006:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48867934792_a064afb69b_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hshWtS)
Though faded a bit on some Streetviews (https://goo.gl/maps/eEkW1r5Ab7Pw428n9), 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.
Not to mention that colors can decrease the visibility of even the white line. Take the red, white, and blue centerline (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6724538,-71.2773116,3a,75y,174.21h,86.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D28.26878%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) 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.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 08, 2019, 06:41:42 PM
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 (https://komonews.com/news/local/government-claims-rainbow-crosswalks-a-safety-hazard-seattle-says-not-here) (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 (https://goo.gl/maps/NRbKmwCkboD8WfsD7), 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.
Quote from: vdeane on October 08, 2019, 08:57:59 PM
Not to mention that colors can decrease the visibility of even the white line. Take the red, white, and blue centerline (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6724538,-71.2773116,3a,75y,174.21h,86.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D28.26878%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) 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.
Quote from: jamess on October 08, 2019, 12:05:00 PM
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.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 08, 2019, 06:41:42 PM
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?
Quote from: jamess on October 09, 2019, 10:16:42 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 08, 2019, 06:41:42 PM
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.
Big picture: you know all the "I am not a robot" checks where you have to identify buses, traffic lights, or plain crosswalks? Fancy crosswalks is how we'll defeat the robot uprising
Quote from: jakeroot on October 07, 2019, 11:37:17 PM
Bit of government over-reach, for sure. Good thing cities like Ames and Seattle take almost no federal money for their streets.
Doesn't matter. The MUTCD applies to all public highways, be they state or locally maintained, regardless of funding.
Nifty--I would suggest, however, a standard that the artwork stays at least 3-4" from the white lines delineating the crosswalk, to make sure those white lines are clearly visible. Also, if this artwork takes a long time to install, that will lead to extended periods of shutdown for that roadway affecting both vehicle and pedestrian traffic. So I'm guessing these artistic crosswalks wouldn't be applied to the busiest streets--at least, they ought not to be.
Quote from: roadman on October 09, 2019, 11:28:27 AM
Unmarked crosswalks should be abolished. All they do is encourage pedestrians to cross the street anywhere they feel like.
Like at street corners where they're legally allowed to? Not sure what you mean. I park across the street from my apartment, which is on the corner of an intersection without any marked crossings. I would literally need to walk four blocks out of my way to get to a marked crossing. For the record, virtually no one ever stops to allow me to cross.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 09, 2019, 11:44:06 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 07, 2019, 11:37:17 PM
Bit of government over-reach, for sure. Good thing cities like Ames and Seattle take almost no federal money for their streets.
Doesn't matter. The MUTCD applies to all public highways, be they state or locally maintained, regardless of funding.
You of all people don't agree with me on this? You really think the government should have a say in crosswalk designs?
Also, I believe that cities are allowed to basically do whatever they want, but they risk losing federal dollars for their projects. And they risk being sued for non-conforming markings and signs that lead to any collisions, so there's plenty of self-enforcement. In the case of these crosswalks, they have not been found to be dangerous, so there's no issue there. Besides, the crosswalks are legal marked crossings as they have transverse lines on either side. Even if this isn't the standard crosswalk design in whatever area these are installed in, they're still legal markings.
Quote from: jamess on October 08, 2019, 05:40:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
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
It's all about consistency at intersections like this. Just like most intersections won't have crosswalks with different stripe patterns, an intersection that is unconventional should be consistent where possible. 80% of the crosswalk painted blue and 20% unpainted isn't consistent.
We can argue all day long about issues found at a small sample of intersections, but they shouldn't be compared to properly marked intersections.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 09, 2019, 11:59:00 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 09, 2019, 11:28:27 AM
Unmarked crosswalks should be abolished. All they do is encourage pedestrians to cross the street anywhere they feel like.
Like at street corners where they're legally allowed to? Not sure what you mean. I park across the street from my apartment, which is on the corner of an intersection without any marked crossings. I would literally need to walk four blocks out of my way to get to a marked crossing. For the record, virtually no one ever stops to allow me to cross.
I would think, what he meant, was that true crosswalks should be marked at all times. When someone believes in unmarked crosswalks, they tend to exaggerate what an unmarked crosswalk is. One should walk in a straight line from curb to curb, near the intersection. I'd bet most people will walk in a line between 2 "whatever points are easiest", and are probably 20 or more feet away from the actual intersection.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 09, 2019, 11:59:00 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 09, 2019, 11:44:06 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 07, 2019, 11:37:17 PM
Bit of government over-reach, for sure. Good thing cities like Ames and Seattle take almost no federal money for their streets.
Doesn't matter. The MUTCD applies to all public highways, be they state or locally maintained, regardless of funding.
You of all people don't agree with me on this? You really think the government should have a say in crosswalk designs?
Also, I believe that cities are allowed to basically do whatever they want, but they risk losing federal dollars for their projects. And they risk being sued for non-conforming markings and signs that lead to any collisions, so there's plenty of self-enforcement. In the case of these crosswalks, they have not been found to be dangerous, so there's no issue there. Besides, the crosswalks are legal marked crossings as they have transverse lines on either side. Even if this isn't the standard crosswalk design in whatever area these are installed in, they're still legal markings.
Such like the above, many people don't think the government should have any say in certain things...until they don't like said certain things when they will utilize the government's constitutional rights to have their say in said certain things to force the government to conform to the rules and regulations created and authorized by the government.
So, thus, yes, the government should have a say in crosswalk designs. Without it, motorists would be permitted to plow thru pedestrians crossing without any regulation in place. And yes, a pedestrian in a crosswalk does have more rights than a pedestrian jaywalking. A motorist will be in more legal trouble hitting a pedestrian in a crosswalk than hitting one who is jaywalking. Without a proper crosswalk, chances are the motorist will be convicted of a much less serious traffic violation because of a bad or unauthorized crosswalk design.
At the risk of being censored and/or sanctioned...
I just put this out there, taking no stand whatsoever on the politics of it:
https://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/story/news/local/2019/10/04/michigan-heartbeat-coalition-anti-abortion-heatbeat-bill-battle-creek-crosswalks/3841829002/
Quote from: jakeroot on October 08, 2019, 11:09:16 PM
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.
I had a hard time even seeing the dark red and blue when I drove that section of RI 114 each year. It might be more visible in the street view than it was then. Granted, I've never been there on a sunny day.
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=ri114&state=RI&file=101_9908.JPG
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 09, 2019, 11:53:32 AM
Nifty--I would suggest, however, a standard that the artwork stays at least 3-4" from the white lines delineating the crosswalk, to make sure those white lines are clearly visible. Also, if this artwork takes a long time to install, that will lead to extended periods of shutdown for that roadway affecting both vehicle and pedestrian traffic. So I'm guessing these artistic crosswalks wouldn't be applied to the busiest streets--at least, they ought not to be.
In my experience, they take under 6 hours to finish. IE, less time than regular utility work from your friends at Verizon or the power company.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 08, 2019, 11:09:16 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 08, 2019, 08:57:59 PM
Not to mention that colors can decrease the visibility of even the white line. Take the red, white, and blue centerline (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6724538,-71.2773116,3a,75y,174.21h,86.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D28.26878%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) 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.
But that's a center line, which should be yellow as it separates opposing traffic. As an unfamiliar tourist, if I were driving on that road, I would give serious thought to it being a one-way street.
In general, I oppose any sort of art or decoration on public roadway surfaces. Road markings are standardized for a reason, and the average driver may treat unusual or nonstandard markings differently than they would treat the standard equivalent. There's also the very real chance that the unusual crosswalk or road designs linked in this thread could be distracting for unfamiliar drivers seeing them for the first time.
Quote from: US 89 on October 09, 2019, 03:03:52 PM
There's also the very real chance that the unusual crosswalk or road designs linked in this thread could be distracting for unfamiliar drivers seeing them for the first time.
Like all the tourists who stop for photos?
Quote from: US 89 on October 09, 2019, 03:03:52 PM
There's also the very real chance that the unusual crosswalk or road designs linked in this thread could be distracting for unfamiliar drivers seeing them for the first time.
Isn't real world data more important than an online hypothesis?
Quote from: jamess on October 09, 2019, 03:20:11 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 09, 2019, 03:03:52 PM
There's also the very real chance that the unusual crosswalk or road designs linked in this thread could be distracting for unfamiliar drivers seeing them for the first time.
Isn't real world data more important than an online hypothesis?
The engineer in me agrees, but try explaining that to the family of someone who gets killed.
Quote from: jamess on October 09, 2019, 03:20:11 PM
Quote from: US 89 on October 09, 2019, 03:03:52 PM
There's also the very real chance that the unusual crosswalk or road designs linked in this thread could be distracting for unfamiliar drivers seeing them for the first time.
Isn't real world data more important than an online hypothesis?
Yep. And in the real world, people find the most interesting and unusual things to take pictures of. Objects like stars in the road and such are just asking for Kodak moments. To use Philly for an example, Broad Street south of City Hall has a raised, curbed 6' median in the middle. It's meant to deter traffic from making left turns out of garages and driveways and u-turns in the middle of Broad Street. There's also vents for the subway below. But any given day, and especially on the weekends, people crowd these medians to take wonderful pictures of City Hall.
Quote from: jamess on October 09, 2019, 02:29:59 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on October 09, 2019, 11:53:32 AM
Nifty--I would suggest, however, a standard that the artwork stays at least 3-4" from the white lines delineating the crosswalk, to make sure those white lines are clearly visible. Also, if this artwork takes a long time to install, that will lead to extended periods of shutdown for that roadway affecting both vehicle and pedestrian traffic. So I'm guessing these artistic crosswalks wouldn't be applied to the busiest streets--at least, they ought not to be.
In my experience, they take under 6 hours to finish. IE, less time than regular utility work from your friends at Verizon or the power company.
Absolutely impossible, unless you're not including any time for setup and removal of lane closure signage, lane closure setup, drying time, etc. They wouldn't be able to close more than one or two lanes any given day. A project like this would have a timeline more like a week or so.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 09, 2019, 11:59:00 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 09, 2019, 11:44:06 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 07, 2019, 11:37:17 PM
Bit of government over-reach, for sure. Good thing cities like Ames and Seattle take almost no federal money for their streets.
Doesn't matter. The MUTCD applies to all public highways, be they state or locally maintained, regardless of funding.
You of all people don't agree with me on this? You really think the government should have a say in crosswalk designs?
Also, I believe that cities are allowed to basically do whatever they want, but they risk losing federal dollars for their projects. And they risk being sued for non-conforming markings and signs that lead to any collisions, so there's plenty of self-enforcement. In the case of these crosswalks, they have not been found to be dangerous, so there's no issue there. Besides, the crosswalks are legal marked crossings as they have transverse lines on either side. Even if this isn't the standard crosswalk design in whatever area these are installed in, they're still legal markings.
Not necessarily saying I agree, just pointing out that the MUTCD does indeed apply. Someone mentioned the Des Moines crosswalks. They tried that in Lexington and FHWA sent them a "cease and desist" letter. I'm not sure how that got resolved, or even if it was resolved.
While I don't think the MUTCD should get bogged down in things like what fonts are appropriate, or what case wording should be in, there's a place for standardized markings and colors. But beyond that, there are appropriate places for social activism and public art. I don't necessarily think street/road surfaces are the best place for that. If someone wants to paint funky art or LGBT rainbows on private buildings at busy intersections, go for it. I'd rather see stark functionality in things meant to safely move vehicles and pedestrians.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on October 08, 2019, 10:40:02 AM
It's a road, not a blank canvas to spew extra paint and beliefs on the road.
+2
I grow weary of "statements" being made on streets infrastructure.
Quote from: roadfro on October 09, 2019, 12:50:57 AM
Quote from: jamess on October 08, 2019, 12:05:00 PM
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.
Which is to say, if you removed the white lines from these decorative crosswalk designs, then they would have no legal standing as a marked crosswalk–even with the rest of the paint still there. An unmarked crosswalk, yes, but many states have slightly different laws when it comes to those. For example, at a mid-block location between two stoplights, a pedestrian in many states is legally obligated to walk to
either the nearest controlled intersection
or the nearest
marked crosswalk. A fancy crosswalk design that fails to meet the basic defined criteria of a marked crosswalk runs the risk of inadvertently running pedestrians afoul of the law.
Quote from: roadman on October 09, 2019, 11:28:27 AM
Unmarked crosswalks should be abolished. All they do is encourage pedestrians to cross the street anywhere they feel like.
With the exception of the scenario I pointed out above, pedestrians
are allowed to cross the street anywhere they feel like. Outside of a marked or unmarked crosswalk, they need to yield to vehicles first but, so long as they do that, they're perfectly legal in crossing the street there.
Quote from: US 89 on October 09, 2019, 03:03:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 08, 2019, 11:09:16 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 08, 2019, 08:57:59 PM
Not to mention that colors can decrease the visibility of even the white line. Take the red, white, and blue centerline (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6724538,-71.2773116,3a,75y,174.21h,86.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DWwFOXhwaoVAa2BaWDlFDxg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D28.26878%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) 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.
But that's a center line, which should be yellow as it separates opposing traffic. As an unfamiliar tourist, if I were driving on that road, I would give serious thought to it being a one-way street.
To me, it actually looks most like a track that I should follow, not a boundary I should not cross. For example,
a red and white solid stripe down a road I've actually driven multiple times (https://goo.gl/maps/CTo4um3ZWiwJtWXP7) specifically means that (it's the path a runaway truck should follow to the ramp). Once I had determined that it was, in fact, a lane stripe, I would also determine that it was intended to divide same-way traffic. And because a single solid white line does not prohibit changing lanes, I'd assume I could legally change lanes into the left lane and keep driving the same direction as before.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 09, 2019, 04:40:40 PM
there are appropriate places for social activism and public art. I don't necessarily think street/road surfaces are the best place for that. If someone wants to paint funky art or LGBT rainbows on private buildings at busy intersections, go for it. I'd rather see stark functionality in things meant to safely move vehicles and pedestrians.
+1
While this art doesn't seem like it would likely cause any issues, how autonomous vehicles will react also needs to be a consideration as to what (if any) art should be ultimately approved. Will it confuse certain patterns for lane lines? Will the vehicle come to a complete stop because it doesn't know how to interpret what it's sensing?
Quote from: jakeroot on October 08, 2019, 11:09:16 PM
According to this news article (https://komonews.com/news/local/government-claims-rainbow-crosswalks-a-safety-hazard-seattle-says-not-here) (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.
Has the data been independently checked? What were all the 'before' conditions?
As for FHWA's previous rulings on the matter:
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/3_09_8.htm (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/3_09_8.htm)
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/3_09_24.htm (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interpretations/3_09_24.htm)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 12:01:57 PM
Quote from: jamess on October 08, 2019, 05:40:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
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
It's all about consistency at intersections like this. Just like most intersections won't have crosswalks with different stripe patterns, an intersection that is unconventional should be consistent where possible. 80% of the crosswalk painted blue and 20% unpainted isn't consistent.
We can argue all day long about issues found at a small sample of intersections, but they shouldn't be compared to properly marked intersections.
But crosswalks already have several different designs. My understanding is locally a "standard" low-use crosswalk just gets two parallel lines. If visibility is a concern, they will use the stripe pattern instead. If its high traffic as well, you'll get both marking applications done on the same crosswalk, with the full ladder design. And I've seen them use these variations at the same intersection
Quote from: UCFKnights on October 10, 2019, 09:58:46 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 12:01:57 PM
Quote from: jamess on October 08, 2019, 05:40:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
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
It's all about consistency at intersections like this. Just like most intersections won't have crosswalks with different stripe patterns, an intersection that is unconventional should be consistent where possible. 80% of the crosswalk painted blue and 20% unpainted isn't consistent.
We can argue all day long about issues found at a small sample of intersections, but they shouldn't be compared to properly marked intersections.
But crosswalks already have several different designs. My understanding is locally a "standard" low-use crosswalk just gets two parallel lines. If visibility is a concern, they will use the stripe pattern instead. If its high traffic as well, you'll get both marking applications done on the same crosswalk, with the full ladder design. And I've seen them use these variations at the same intersection
Again, I'm referring to one location. Yes, there's a difference. Refer to engineering schools and studies for more info. Or, refer to posts within these forums when people ask why there's different traffic lights at an intersection, different sized signs, etc. Consistently is preferred.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 03:33:27 PM
Absolutely impossible, unless you're not including any time for setup and removal of lane closure signage, lane closure setup, drying time, etc. They wouldn't be able to close more than one or two lanes any given day. A project like this would have a timeline more like a week or so.
Im speaking as someone who has participated in 2 of these projects in New Jersey. One literally a month ago.
The entire intersection was completed and open to traffic in 6 hours.
https://www.trentonian.com/news/trenton-health-team-to-paint-street-designs-to-slow-traffic/article_ba54bb4c-b9ee-11e9-9384-b3857965cc37.html
(https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/trentonian.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/4/69/46917cca-bbb7-11e9-be27-1b8b204b4979/5d4f3978d8c8d.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C900)
Quote from: jamess on October 10, 2019, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 03:33:27 PM
Absolutely impossible, unless you're not including any time for setup and removal of lane closure signage, lane closure setup, drying time, etc. They wouldn't be able to close more than one or two lanes any given day. A project like this would have a timeline more like a week or so.
Im speaking as someone who has participated in 2 of these projects in New Jersey. One literally a month ago.
The entire intersection was completed and open to traffic in 6 hours.
https://www.trentonian.com/news/trenton-health-team-to-paint-street-designs-to-slow-traffic/article_ba54bb4c-b9ee-11e9-9384-b3857965cc37.html
Made possible due to the entire intersection being closed, and on a Saturday. Not always possible in all areas.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2019, 12:52:18 PM
Quote from: jamess on October 10, 2019, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 03:33:27 PM
Absolutely impossible, unless you're not including any time for setup and removal of lane closure signage, lane closure setup, drying time, etc. They wouldn't be able to close more than one or two lanes any given day. A project like this would have a timeline more like a week or so.
Im speaking as someone who has participated in 2 of these projects in New Jersey. One literally a month ago.
The entire intersection was completed and open to traffic in 6 hours.
https://www.trentonian.com/news/trenton-health-team-to-paint-street-designs-to-slow-traffic/article_ba54bb4c-b9ee-11e9-9384-b3857965cc37.html
Made possible due to the entire intersection being closed, and on a Saturday. Not always possible in all areas.
It's not possible to choose off peak hours to do this...?
As a reminder, you started by saying it was absolutely impossible to do this.
Additionally, it's pretty common to close half the road, work, and then switch sides.
Quote from: jamess on October 10, 2019, 02:18:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2019, 12:52:18 PM
Quote from: jamess on October 10, 2019, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 03:33:27 PM
Absolutely impossible, unless you're not including any time for setup and removal of lane closure signage, lane closure setup, drying time, etc. They wouldn't be able to close more than one or two lanes any given day. A project like this would have a timeline more like a week or so.
Im speaking as someone who has participated in 2 of these projects in New Jersey. One literally a month ago.
The entire intersection was completed and open to traffic in 6 hours.
https://www.trentonian.com/news/trenton-health-team-to-paint-street-designs-to-slow-traffic/article_ba54bb4c-b9ee-11e9-9384-b3857965cc37.html
Made possible due to the entire intersection being closed, and on a Saturday. Not always possible in all areas.
It's not possible to choose off peak hours to do this...?
As a reminder, you started by saying it was absolutely impossible to do this.
Additionally, it's pretty common to close half the road, work, and then switch sides.
Thru an intersection, especially major intersections, it's not common. You can close a quarter of it, and that's it. And you still need to put up the proper signage, road blockage stuff, etc.
Of course, if you just put up a few cones saying road closed, that's not exactly the proper way to close a road. Or if the road was closed at, say, 7am and reopened at 6pm for painting that was done from 9-12 and 1-4, that's not 6 hours, that's 11 hours. I find it very doubtful that a road was closed at the exact minute the project started, and reopened at the exact moment the painting was done. In fact, even using your example above, the cones are still blocking the intersection and no one is around. Does that mean that the painting was done so early that this pic was taken before 4pm?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2019, 02:37:40 PM
Quote from: jamess on October 10, 2019, 02:18:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2019, 12:52:18 PM
Quote from: jamess on October 10, 2019, 11:55:03 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 03:33:27 PM
Absolutely impossible, unless you're not including any time for setup and removal of lane closure signage, lane closure setup, drying time, etc. They wouldn't be able to close more than one or two lanes any given day. A project like this would have a timeline more like a week or so.
Im speaking as someone who has participated in 2 of these projects in New Jersey. One literally a month ago.
The entire intersection was completed and open to traffic in 6 hours.
https://www.trentonian.com/news/trenton-health-team-to-paint-street-designs-to-slow-traffic/article_ba54bb4c-b9ee-11e9-9384-b3857965cc37.html
Made possible due to the entire intersection being closed, and on a Saturday. Not always possible in all areas.
It's not possible to choose off peak hours to do this...?
As a reminder, you started by saying it was absolutely impossible to do this.
Additionally, it's pretty common to close half the road, work, and then switch sides.
Thru an intersection, especially major intersections, it's not common. You can close a quarter of it, and that's it. And you still need to put up the proper signage, road blockage stuff, etc.
Of course, if you just put up a few cones saying road closed, that's not exactly the proper way to close a road. Or if the road was closed at, say, 7am and reopened at 6pm for painting that was done from 9-12 and 1-4, that's not 6 hours, that's 11 hours. I find it very doubtful that a road was closed at the exact minute the project started, and reopened at the exact moment the painting was done. In fact, even using your example above, the cones are still blocking the intersection and no one is around. Does that mean that the painting was done so early that this pic was taken before 4pm?
Once again youre shifting the goal posts. You said it would take a week. Now you're nit picking if the cones were removed at 4pm on the dot.
You can close a quarter of it, and that's it. And you still need to put up the proper signage, road blockage stuff, etc.Says who? Last week I saw them repainting the brick crosswalks in downtown Newark. Very, very busy street. The crew put up 5 cones about 30 feet before the crosswalk to close the lane. Once done, they picked them up, and put them down on the other lane to paint that half.
I find it very doubtful that a road was closed at the exact minute the project started, and reopened at the exact moment the painting was done. You find it doubtful, but I was there, and thats how it was done. The project team knew what they were doing. They received a permit to close the street for the time needed, and nothing longer.
As you can see from the picture, the cones directed drivers through a gas station as a detour.
In fact, even using your example above, the cones are still blocking the intersection and no one is around.Bottom left and top left are the 30 or so folks who did the work. Theyre in the shade. It was a hot day.
I find it incredible that you are so certain about how this was done when you were not there and I was!
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 09, 2019, 06:26:36 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 08, 2019, 11:09:16 PM
According to this news article (https://komonews.com/news/local/government-claims-rainbow-crosswalks-a-safety-hazard-seattle-says-not-here) (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.
Has the data been independently checked? What were all the 'before' conditions?
I'm doing some research on the matter as we speak, using GIS data. Doesn't seem as conclusive as SDOT would make it out to be, but there's not a lot of data to go off.
I'll post again once I've compiled more info.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 10, 2019, 10:21:36 AM
Quote from: UCFKnights on October 10, 2019, 09:58:46 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 09, 2019, 12:01:57 PM
Quote from: jamess on October 08, 2019, 05:40:43 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 08, 2019, 02:06:00 PM
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
It's all about consistency at intersections like this. Just like most intersections won't have crosswalks with different stripe patterns, an intersection that is unconventional should be consistent where possible. 80% of the crosswalk painted blue and 20% unpainted isn't consistent.
We can argue all day long about issues found at a small sample of intersections, but they shouldn't be compared to properly marked intersections.
But crosswalks already have several different designs. My understanding is locally a "standard" low-use crosswalk just gets two parallel lines. If visibility is a concern, they will use the stripe pattern instead. If its high traffic as well, you'll get both marking applications done on the same crosswalk, with the full ladder design. And I've seen them use these variations at the same intersection
Again, I'm referring to one location. Yes, there's a difference. Refer to engineering schools and studies for more info. Or, refer to posts within these forums when people ask why there's different traffic lights at an intersection, different sized signs, etc. Consistently is preferred.
Can you explain further or link me to something as I'm not understanding.
MUTCD seems to have at least 4 options for crosswalk markings, and the FAQ seems to allow a few more. And as I've said, I've seen them mixed and matched at the same intersection, that seems to be done all the time, so what do you mean by referring to one location?
Also they added a brick pattern to a major intersection that is 9 lanes across, including turn lanes, near me. They did a full setup of arrowboard/lane closures, and did it overnight hours only, I believe it took them 8 days, no closures of roads. When they repaint the normal white lines or replace the thermoplastic stripes, it doesn't take as long, but does involve lots of lane closures as well. Sometimes they just do it with cones or flaggers like others are saying here.
I wish that instead of doing the fake brick pattern for crosswalks they'd use real brick. It looks better and will actually stay there without needing to be reapplied. Of course, the brick needs to be kept fairly level to keep pedestrians from tripping over it. Which is why I suspect they use the fake stuff...
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 18, 2019, 01:25:00 AM
I wish that instead of doing the fake brick pattern for crosswalks they'd use real brick. It looks better and will actually stay there without needing to be reapplied. Of course, the brick needs to be kept fairly level to keep pedestrians from tripping over it. Which is why I suspect they use the fake stuff...
In my area "Northeast" they use real brick for crosswalks & still install them. Shit we have cobblestone roads still, in some areas.
What I've noticed is newer areas will build newer buildings & decorate in a newer age. Older areas will upgrade what has to be upgraded & also change every so & so years. Which is a good & bad thing.
iPhone
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 18, 2019, 01:25:00 AM
I wish that instead of doing the fake brick pattern for crosswalks they'd use real brick. It looks better and will actually stay there without needing to be reapplied. Of course, the brick needs to be kept fairly level to keep pedestrians from tripping over it. Which is why I suspect they use the fake stuff...
Yes the issue is that with the freeze/thaw cycle, the bricks lift up and become a hazard no no longer ADA compliant.
In Boston, there are a few crosswalks where the crosswalk is asphalt while everything around it is brick.
https://goo.gl/maps/emFy3MvhSxk66MXn6
That keeps the ADA path even.
Quote from: jamess on October 18, 2019, 11:17:15 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 18, 2019, 01:25:00 AM
I wish that instead of doing the fake brick pattern for crosswalks they'd use real brick. It looks better and will actually stay there without needing to be reapplied. Of course, the brick needs to be kept fairly level to keep pedestrians from tripping over it. Which is why I suspect they use the fake stuff...
Yes the issue is that with the freeze/thaw cycle, the bricks lift up and become a hazard no no longer ADA compliant.
In Boston, there are a few crosswalks where the crosswalk is asphalt while everything around it is brick.
https://goo.gl/maps/emFy3MvhSxk66MXn6
That keeps the ADA path even.
Practical AND stylish. Love it!
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 21, 2019, 01:02:31 AM
Quote from: jamess on October 18, 2019, 11:17:15 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 18, 2019, 01:25:00 AM
I wish that instead of doing the fake brick pattern for crosswalks they'd use real brick. It looks better and will actually stay there without needing to be reapplied. Of course, the brick needs to be kept fairly level to keep pedestrians from tripping over it. Which is why I suspect they use the fake stuff...
Yes the issue is that with the freeze/thaw cycle, the bricks lift up and become a hazard no no longer ADA compliant.
In Boston, there are a few crosswalks where the crosswalk is asphalt while everything around it is brick.
https://goo.gl/maps/emFy3MvhSxk66MXn6
That keeps the ADA path even.
Practical AND stylish. Love it!
Its help up well too. Was finished in 2008, and a decade later looks great aside from one square where a utility company ripped it up and illegally replaced the pavers with sphalt.
https://www.wired.com/story/pedestrian-deaths-feds-crosswalks/
A more extreme version:
(https://i.redd.it/ry0luby3jf451.jpg)
Quote from: Bruce on June 12, 2020, 04:20:09 AM
A more extreme version:
https://i.redd.it/ry0luby3jf451.jpg
Is this within the remaining 1.5-block stretch of the CHAZ/CHOP?
Quote from: jakeroot on June 16, 2020, 04:03:32 PM
Quote from: Bruce on June 12, 2020, 04:20:09 AM
A more extreme version:
Is this within the remaining 1.5-block stretch of the CHAZ/CHOP?
Yes, this is Pine Street between Nagle and 11th. SDOT has put up new barriers to allow for limited vehicle access (one-way loops) around the mural.