Los Angeles families took safety into their own hands by painting cross walks. Now, the city is sending crews to remove them.
Work crews remove crosswalks painted by neighbors in West LA
The guy behind this: https://substack.com/home/post/p-169421684
You're viewing a single thread.
Does painting a crosswalk really increase safety? I feel like the type of person not pay attention and run someone over is the type of person to not care if there's a crosswalk, not pay attention, and run someone over.
I don't understand why you would expect it not to increase safety.
It gives a visual cue to drivers that it is more likely someone is intending to cross at this location.
Any time I see an intersection I assume there might be people. Downtown where I’m at there’s rarely crosswalks at intersections unless it’s a major through road.
It's probably incremental but, IMO, a crosswalk does imply a certain amount of pedestrian traffic that might encourage a smidge of extra attention and double checking from some drivers, vs a location that gives the appearance of having very infrequent pedestrian crossingsmay be far less frequent. That not to say that complacency is any kind of excuse. But it is how people are on average.
Yeah. Our brains are conditioned to assume people are more likely to be in a crosswalk. It's also why I drive slowly past long rows of parked cars. I've been conditioned to assume a kid is going to jump out.
Most folks are not conditioned to be thoughtful.
On a large scale I have no idea but it does for me when I’m driving.
A crosswalk at an intersection, especially an unmetered one, serves as a warning that there’s enough regular pedestrian traffic or a risk that dictated it was needed.
Helps me, personally, to be extra aware for crossers.
Checking Wikipedia; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_crossing#Safety
The safety of unsignalled pedestrian or zebra crossings is somewhat contested in traffic engineering circles.
Research undertaken in New Zealand showed that a zebra crossing without other safety features on average increases pedestrian crashes by 28% compared to a location without crossings. However, if combined with (placed on top of) a speed table, zebra crossings were found to reduce pedestrian crashes by 80%.
A five-year U.S. study of 1,000 marked crosswalks and 1,000 unmarked comparison sites found that on most roads, the difference in safety performance of marked and unmarked crossings is not statistically significant, unless additional safety features are used. […] This study only included locations where vehicle traffic was not controlled by a signal or stop sign.
Traffic accidents are reduced when intersections are daylighted, i.e. visibility increased such as by removing adjacent parked cars.
Research undertaken in New Zealand showed that a zebra crossing without other safety features on average increases pedestrian crashes by 28% compared to a location without crossings.
See, that's mostly what I was thinking. "Zebra stripes" make pedestrians feel safe to cross, and have virtually no impact on drivers who can easily just ignore them. But paired with other things they are a good addition, especially since it tells pedestrians where to cross.
I'd like to see the methodology. A zebra crossing also increases foot traffic compared to a location without crossings.
The quoted Wikipedia article has some source references which I chose not to include for conciseness/readability.