Pedestrian Buttons. Which direction should they be facing?

[talllguy]

Should the button be parallel to the crossing, or perpendicular (facing)? I always thought it was parallel, so that if a ped is waiting facing the street they want to cross, the button would be right next to their right hand.

This one confused me.





EDIT clarify title

[getemngo]

You'd be right. The MUTCD says:

If pedestrian pushbuttons are used, they should be capable of easy activation and conveniently located near each end of the crosswalks. Except as provided in Paragraphs 5 and 6, pedestrian pushbuttons should be located to meet all of the following criteria (see Figure 4E-3):

A. Unobstructed and adjacent to a level all-weather surface to provide access from a wheelchair;
B. Where there is an all-weather surface, a wheelchair accessible route from the pushbutton to the ramp;
C. Between the edge of the crosswalk line (extended) farthest from the center of the intersection and the side of a curb ramp (if present), but not greater than 5 feet from said crosswalk line;
D. Between 1.5 and 6 feet from the edge of the curb, shoulder, or pavement;
E. With the face of the pushbutton parallel to the crosswalk to be used; and
F. At a mounting height of approximately 3.5 feet, but no more than 4 feet, above the sidewalk

But note that this is "should" and not "shall." It's not too much of a problem as long as there's a sign indicating which crosswalk the button is for.

Also, the current R10-3 sign, which I've never seen before:

[roadfro]

Also, the current R10-3 sign, which I've never seen before:

This was a new addition in the 2009 MUTCD, in the push to add more symbols to common signage. I have yet to see this sign either.

[talllguy]

I've not seen that sign either. Thanks for the follow up! Locally, they're installing those vibrating buttons that exclaim, "WAIT!" when you press them, but the face doesn't look like that above, I don't think. I've also never seen the ones that are like, 'Push button for green'.

[Zmapper]

What does the Americans with Disabilities act recommend/require with regards to the orientation of push-buttons? A visually impaired pedestrian may use the wrong push button if it isn't oriented perpendicularly, leading to a potential for an incident.

[roadfro]

What does the Americans with Disabilities act recommend/require with regards to the orientation of push-buttons? A visually impaired pedestrian may use the wrong push button if it isn't oriented perpendicularly, leading to a potential for an incident.

The MUTCD guidelines for positioning of pedestrian push buttons references the ADA regarding reach ranges, and the guidelines take this into account with button placement. The examples in the MUTCD show all button faces parallel with the adjacent crosswalk, and separate pole mounting locations for two adjacent crosswalks on a corner.

[realjd]

I've always been a fan of the way Australia signs pedestrian push buttons:




There's a tactile arrow inside the big painted arrow for the seeing impaired and they all make a uniform crossing noise when the walk sign is on.

[Scott5114]

We have some signal buttons that look just like that, except that they are yellow and silver, and the big arrow is raised.

Also, note that the 'should' warning implies 'you should always do it this way, except when you have a really good reason not to.'

[Revive 755]

I've not seen that sign either. Thanks for the follow up! Locally, they're installing those vibrating buttons that exclaim, "WAIT!" when you press them, but the face doesn't look like that above, I don't think. I've also never seen the ones that are like, 'Push button for green'.

There are some at the intersection of Grass Lake Road with Deep Lake Road in Lake Villa, IL:  Streetview of one sign

I think there may be a couple of those signs somewhere in the southern half of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

[jeffandnicole]

I've not seen that sign either. Thanks for the follow up! Locally, they're installing those vibrating buttons that exclaim, "WAIT!" when you press them, but the face doesn't look like that above, I don't think. I've also never seen the ones that are like, 'Push button for green'.

There are some at the intersection of Grass Lake Road with Deep Lake Road in Lake Villa, IL:  Streetview of one sign

I think there may be a couple of those signs somewhere in the southern half of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.

More or less, this is an old-style sign where there weren't pedestrian signals, so to activate the light without traffic the button could be pressed anyway.

Maybe on some streets somewhere, they would still set up a light like this.  But any traffic light I've seen installed lately has crosswalks with pedestrian signals.

[mrsman]

I believe that the push button should be positioned as close to the point where the crosswalk meets the curb as practical.

Los Angeles does a pretty good job of this.  Here's 9th and La Brea:  http://goo.gl/maps/wGLst


On another note, Streetsblog and similar web sites call these buttons "beg buttons" and basically, their attitude is that it's wrong for pedestrians to have to push a button to "beg" for permission to cross the street.  They would prefer that the pedestrian phase come on at every signal change.  In other words, whenever the light turns green for the minor street, the pedestrian light should also come on.  This is a really wrong view.  The purpose of the button is to allow a phase that is long enough for pedestrians to cross only when warranted .  It is warranted when pedestrians are present, but it is not warranted if pedestrians aren't there and it is wrong to delay so many drivers on the main street for pedestrians who aren't even present.

I believe that if there is a long stream of cars on the minor street, and the minor street would be green long enough to also cover the minimum pedestrian clearance time, then the pedestrian light should come on automatically, even without pushing the button.  But not if there are only one or two cars that can quickly be dispatched without invoking the pedestrian signal.

[Big John]

^^ An issue is that the sensors for many side streets only detect the front vehicle or two (then gives a green for as long as vehicles are detected up to a preset maximum time) and can't tell how long the line is beyond that, so auto-giving a pedestrian phase for long vehicle lines won't work there.

[JMoses24]

I believe that the push button should be positioned as close to the point where the crosswalk meets the curb as practical.

Los Angeles does a pretty good job of this.  Here's 9th and La Brea:  http://goo.gl/maps/wGLst

Okay, now I'm going to rant. Before I continue, let me quickly say that this rant comes from the POV of someone who needs a wheelchair in daily life, and has to frequently deal with less than ideal situations.

First off: I believe that the buttons for the crosswalk should be positioned so as to be parallel to the intended direction of travel. But they should also be placed in a spot that is accessible to ALL individuals wishing to use them, including those in wheelchairs.

Case in point: Burlington Pike at Ridge Road/Greenview Road, Florence, KY. I will endeavor to get photos of this location tomorrow. For now, take a look at the Streetview: http://goo.gl/maps/02fVu

Notice something? Yes, the pedestrian button is set back from the road, and look especially on the westbound side. Never mind that there's no actual sidewalk -- it's a marked crosswalk just the same. I tried to hit the button one time last week and was legitimately afraid I was going to roll to a spot where I might no longer get back up the hill.

This one's been fixed since the GSV van was there, but take a look up the street: http://goo.gl/maps/z9N82 This was even worse before the state stepped in to fix it, and there is now a button much closer to the crossing and accessible.

These situations should not happen. If you're going to install a crosswalk there, put the buttons where ANYONE can reach, especially the wheelchair bound who may not have the upper body strength I do! Believe me, when I get photos of this tomorrow, I'm going to send them to the city, county and state officials. If the button is going to be in a spot that puts someone in danger, why even have the thing at all?

End rant.

[jeffandnicole]

It's a good and valid rant.  Seemingly, something is lacking in the design department that permitted that ped button placement to be so far away from a paved surface.  Just wondering...how old is that intersection?  Most newer intersections would never allow for such a design. 

I know in my area, they have built ADA appropriate ramps by intersections, even when there isn't a connecting sidewalk to anything else - like this intersection: http://goo.gl/maps/eZoRa . You can see the few feet of sidewalk and the red blind visually-impared mat at the curb cut. 

[tradephoric]

On another note, Streetsblog and similar web sites call these buttons "beg buttons" and basically, their attitude is that it's wrong for pedestrians to have to push a button to "beg" for permission to cross the street.  They would prefer that the pedestrian phase come on at every signal change.  In other words, whenever the light turns green for the minor street, the pedestrian light should also come on.  This is a really wrong view.  The purpose of the button is to allow a phase that is long enough for pedestrians to cross only when warranted .  It is warranted when pedestrians are present, but it is not warranted if pedestrians aren't there and it is wrong to delay so many drivers on the main street for pedestrians who aren't even present.

Then drivers shouldn't be forced to "beg" to cross a bridge by throwing quarters into a bin.  I hate toll booths as much as pedestrians hate pushbuttons apparently!  Of course these same streetblog wackos love the idea of drivers paying up the nose to cross a bridge into the city.  They want the tolls to be so exorbitant that it discourages driving altogether.

I have little pity on pedestrian advocates who wine about pedestrians having to push a button to cross the street.  I read a study where the pedestrian non-compliance rate at pushbutton intersections was some 80%.  Do 80% of drivers blow through red lights because they don't feel like waiting?  Just press the damn button already.

[tradephoric]

That was my rant of the day!

[jeffandnicole]

On another note, Streetsblog and similar web sites call these buttons "beg buttons" and basically, their attitude is that it's wrong for pedestrians to have to push a button to "beg" for permission to cross the street.  They would prefer that the pedestrian phase come on at every signal change.  In other words, whenever the light turns green for the minor street, the pedestrian light should also come on.  This is a really wrong view.  The purpose of the button is to allow a phase that is long enough for pedestrians to cross only when warranted .  It is warranted when pedestrians are present, but it is not warranted if pedestrians aren't there and it is wrong to delay so many drivers on the main street for pedestrians who aren't even present.

Then drivers shouldn't be forced to "beg" to cross a bridge by throwing quarters into a bin.  I hate toll booths as much as pedestrians hate pushbuttons apparently!  Of course these same streetblog wackos love the idea of drivers paying up the nose to cross a bridge into the city.  They want the tolls to be so exorbitant that it discourages driving altogether.

I have little pity on pedestrian advocates who wine about pedestrians having to push a button to cross the street.  I read a study where the pedestrian non-compliance rate at pushbutton intersections was some 80%.  Do 80% of drivers blow through red lights because they don't feel like waiting?  Just press the damn button already.

I'm going to guess that many of those that don't press the button also had to drive or take the bus to get to their destination. 

If a traffic light was set to cycle each time for a pedestrian phase, it would probably take most of those people way, way longer to get to their destination because they'll be stuck in traffic at each traffic light.

And after all of that, it won't save them any time whatosever when walking across the street...because they ignored the walk signal previously anyway.

[tradephoric]

The question I have is how should the main-street pedestrians operate at a signal that is allowed to rest on main-street?    Here are a few options:

Option #1:  Main-street has pushbuttons.  The walk will stay on for a minimum 7 seconds and then start to countdown and will then rest in solid Don't Walk.

Advantages:   At intersections with long pedestrian clearances, a main-street pedestrian phase won't always fit into a main-street split, especially during off peak hours at lower cycles.  In these instances, a pushbutton prevents the main-street from overrunning.  Pushbuttons can also be useful if a leading pedestrian interval is desired where you want to start the pedestrian phase early to minimize pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. 

Disadvantages:  If the main-street is resting in green, a solid Don't Walk will be displayed to pedestrians.  If a main-street pedestrian pushes the pushbutton, the signal would need to cycle to the side-street before returning to the main-street to service the pedestrian. 

Option #2:  Rest in green with rewalk.  The walk will extend until it reaches the yield point, at which point the pedestrian clearance will begin to count down in case there is a demand for the side-street during the pedestrian clearance.  If no demand for the side-street occurs, the walk will come back up (rewalk) at the beginning of where the main street would have started had the side-street actually cycled.

Advantages:  Leads to snappy operation.  A side-street demand late in the main-phase doesn't cause the signal to overrun (since the pedestrian countdown has already began counting down).

Disadvantages:  It looks odd.  The pedestrian counts down even when there is no vehicle demand on the side street, and an approaching driver may assume the traffic signal is about to change to red.

Option #3: Rest in green with no re-walk.  In this operation the walk will hold in green until there is an actual demand for the side-street, at which point it will start to clear down its pedestrian clearance interval.

Advantages:  This operation maximizes the walk time for pedestrians.  The pedestrian will only count down if the signal is actually going to be servicing a side-street demand.  It looks clean.

Disadvantages:  A side-street vehicle demand late in the main-street phase will cause the main-street phase to overrun, leading to out-of-step issues (since the pedestrian clearance still needs to time down). 

[mrsman]

The question I have is how should the main-street pedestrians operate at a signal that is allowed to rest on main-street?   

Option #3: Rest in green with no re-walk.  In this operation the walk will hold in green until there is an actual demand for the side-street, at which point it will start to clear down its pedestrian clearance interval.

Advantages:  This operation maximizes the walk time for pedestrians.  The pedestrian will only count down if the signal is actually going to be servicing a side-street demand.  It looks clean.

Disadvantages:  A side-street vehicle demand late in the main-street phase will cause the main-street phase to overrun, leading to out-of-step issues (since the pedestrian clearance still needs to time down).

This sounds like the best option, as it very naturally maximizes the green time of the main street. 

I'm not sure what you mean by out-of-step issues. If the main street signals are synchronizes in some fashion, then there should be a set time within the cycle that this intersection's light should favor the cross street, so as to minimize delay for the main street.  In other words, the main street light should be red only when both conditions occur: (a) the right time of the cycle for red, (b) demand on the side street for a driver or pedestrian to cross. 

[tradephoric]

Imagine a signal running a 100 second cycle length with a 50/50 split.  Assume the side-street pedestrian crossing is 150 ft long, leading to a 43 second pedestrian clearance time (150/3.5 ft/sec). 

With Option #3 , how would you service a side-street vehicle demand very late in the main-street phase?  I see two options:

A).  Allow for the late demand, and begin counting down the pedestrian clearance to service the side-street demand.  The result is the side-street driver experiences 43 seconds of delay (time it takes to clear down the main-street ped) and in addition the signal gets out of step (side-street started 43 seconds later than it should have).

B).  Don't service the late demand, and wait till the next cycle to service the side-street driver.   In that case, the side-street driver experiences over 100 seconds of delay but at least the main-street remains in step. 

With Option #2, since the pedestrian countdown has already begun counting down, the late side-street driver can be serviced almost instantaneously.  The side-street driver experience nearly zero delay and the main-street remains in step.  Option #2 doesn't look pretty (the walk constantly rewalks even as the main-street rests in green), but operationally it is much snappier.

[tradephoric]

One more point.  Assume the side-street driver pulls up with 42 seconds remaining in main-street.  Is that now considered a late demand since it takes 43 seconds for the ped to clear down?  In that case, the side-street driver would experience a 142 second delay just because they got there 1 second too late.  If that driver pulled up one second earlier, that driver would only experience 43 seconds delay as opposed to 142 seconds.  All that said, if Option #3 is being used i'd rather have the side-street driver be delayed in most instances and keep the main corridor in step.   

[mrsman]

One more point.  Assume the side-street driver pulls up with 42 seconds remaining in main-street.  Is that now considered a late demand since it takes 43 seconds for the ped to clear down?  In that case, the side-street driver would experience a 142 second delay just because they got there 1 second too late.  If that driver pulled up one second earlier, that driver would only experience 43 seconds delay as opposed to 142 seconds.  All that said, if Option #3 is being used i'd rather have the side-street driver be delayed in most instances and keep the main corridor in step.   

Yes, the side street should be delayed over getting the corridor out of sequence.

Also think for a moment about the pedestrians.  Should there be a push button for pedestrians crossing parallel to the main street?  For Options 1 and 2, I'd say it's a necessity, but it would be optional for Option 3.

[tradephoric]

^A signal near me has push buttons on all 4-corners of the intersection and runs a 140 second cycle throughout the day.  It's a simple 2-phase signal with 110 seconds dedicated to the main street and 30 seconds dedicated to the side-street (the side-street services a bank on one side, and a strip mall on the other side... neither drive generates much traffic and the crossings are roughly 50 feet long).  If a pedestrian pushes the push button to cross the side-street 1 second into the main street green, they have to wait 139 seconds for the WALK to come up. 

The disadvantages of having main-street push buttons in this scenario:

1.  Pedestrians experience lengthy delay to cross the minor side-street (assuming they even comply to the Walk/Don't Walk).

2.  It encourages pedestrian non-compliance (probably 90% of the pedestrians in this scenario are going to disregard the Solid Don't Walk and just cross when they judge that it's safe to do so).

3.  Cost to install and maintain push buttons.

[talllguy]

One more point.  Assume the side-street driver pulls up with 42 seconds remaining in main-street.  Is that now considered a late demand since it takes 43 seconds for the ped to clear down?  In that case, the side-street driver would experience a 142 second delay just because they got there 1 second too late.  If that driver pulled up one second earlier, that driver would only experience 43 seconds delay as opposed to 142 seconds.  All that said, if Option #3 is being used i'd rather have the side-street driver be delayed in most instances and keep the main corridor in step.   

Yes, the side street should be delayed over getting the corridor out of sequence.

Also think for a moment about the pedestrians.  Should there be a push button for pedestrians crossing parallel to the main street?  For Options 1 and 2, I'd say it's a necessity, but it would be optional for Option 3.

I like the point about the corridor not getting out of sequence. Could the entire corridor be set up so that any button press would start the stop sequence early along the entire corridor?

Also here is a new (to me) style of ped button, that uses capacitive touch. I made a quick demo. Listen for the sound. No pressing physically is required, so no moving parts.

[roadfro]

Also here is a new (to me) style of ped button, that uses capacitive touch. I made a quick demo. Listen for the sound. No pressing physically is required, so no moving parts.

These are pretty much standard for new installations in the Reno/Sparks, NV area for the last several years--perhaps also throughout Nevada. They also seem to be used frequently in replacing old buttons (but I've also seen older, large-diameter buttons replace a few capacitive touch buttons that have failed).

The ones in Nevada also have a little red LED light that flashes when the button makes the sound, to serve as a visible cue to hard of hearing folks that the button has been successfully pushed.