Great implementation. Let's see more of this!

If you're going to go the trouble of this, why not just install a traffic light that turns red only when pedestrians press the button? Of course, put a timer on it, so it's not always red.

Is this flashing red light at an intersection, or is it midblock?

I have not driven over to Brentwood Road (and with gas now over $4.00 a gallon I may not do so!). I'm wondering, does this crosswalk include flashing lights embedded in the pavement? Dr. Gridlock's description says that the button "sets amber lights flashing on either side of the crossing." This suggests to me that the lights are on poles on either side of the road and that there are no lights in the street itself. If that's the case, then I can understand to some degree why the truck driver Dr. Gridlock describes may not have seen the flashing light (presumably the bus blocked it).

There's an intersection in Alexandria that has a similar crosswalk, striped like a zebra crossing, with yellow lights embedded in the pavement down either side of the crosswalk (similar, I suppose, to lane reflectors on the Interstate). When the pedestrian hits the button, the yellow lights flash all the way across the road. It's especially effective at night in making you see the crosswalk, even if you don't see the pedestrian. The crosswalk in question is on the east side of the three-way intersection of Stevenson Avenue and Yoakum Parkway, about half a mile or so from Landmark Mall in an area with a lot of high-rise condo and apartment complexes. To me, the lights in the pavement would make the crosswalk a lot more visible than a light located to the side of the road.

Kudos to DDOT for doing this! Driver behavior in this city is atrocious, with complete disregard for posted speed limits. DDOT's recently completed transportation & streetscape study of South Dakota Avenue, NE through my neighborhood, Michigan Park, indicates the following rush-hour speeds (at Taylor Street):
-average speeds of 46 to 49 mph (25 mph is the posted speed limit!)
-highest speeds of 66 to 70 mph!
-85% of the vehicles travel btn. 50 & 54 mph!

Metrobuses are among the worst offenders, and my neighbors are terrified to cross our own street. I have doggedly pushed DDOT & MPD for immediate and permanent speed enforcement measures for over two years now, including fixed/stationery speed radar cameras, red light cameras, and speed sensors that trip traffic signals red if vehicle speeds exceed the limit.

This is a public safety issue, pure and simple, and one worthy of greater publicity. Unfortunately, several e-mails to the Post's transportation reporter, Eric Weiss, have been ignored.

From Dr. Gridlock: The flashing lights are amber. They are on poles on the sides of Brentwood Road. There are no lights embedded in the crosswalk.

Look up at the first picture to see the location of the lights, just below the words "in CROSSWALKS." (They're not flashing in my picture.)

Yes, this is an intersection. It's a bit complicated, like a K. Difficult spot to add a standard traffic signal on busy Brentwood. But I do think it's a good spot to test something innovative like this.

My fear is that the setup will lull pedestrians into a false sense of security. So that's why I said in the entry that you've really got to pay attention to the directions on the sign and wait for the vehicles to stop.

In defense of drivers, DC does put uncontrolled cross walks on major roads. Although it has been recently changed, Connecticut Avenue at Chevy Chase circle is probably one of the most glaring examples. Missouri Avenue is another. You should not expect a driver to stop for a pedestrian at an uncontrolled crosswalk on a major route, this is very dangerous for the pedestrian and the driver. Also I have noticed that bus stops are at some crosswalks so how do you know if the would be pedestrian is crossing or just waiting for the bus to arrive? What about the confusion with feds doing the opposite? On parkways pedestrians are supposed to yield to cars. I do my best to yield to pedestrians but a lot of times its too much guess work. Its better to follow mom's advice and wait for traffic. Unfortunately I believe this is politically driven in trying to give DC an image of being a walkable city, but DC is also a congested city and the two don't go together.

When crossing the street pedestrians should wait for a gap in traffic

Stepping in front of a moving vehicle in a crosswalk might be technically legal but its pretty stupid.

I no need crosswalk

A crosswalk is a crosswalk, light or no light. Drivers are supposed to yield to people in the crosswalk. I understand that in some areas it is difficult to tell whether a person is waiting for traffic to stop or for something else. As soon as they put a foot into the crosswalk, traffic should slow to a stop and yield to the pedestrian.

Steve -- In theory, communism works.

I hope that increased enforcement of traffic laws and installation of flashing lights will help the problem. I don't think adding more traffic signals will ease congestion, but maybe that is the only solution.

"When crossing the street pedestrians should wait for a gap in traffic"

How is this any different from jaywalking? If the cars aren't going to stop anyway, why shouldn't people just be allowed to cross wherever, since their safety is in their hands.

It's stupid to walk out in front of a moving vehicle, but EVERY SINGLE CAR that crosses a crosswalk where a pedestrian is trying to cross should be stopped and ticketed.

"I don't think adding more traffic signals will ease congestion, but maybe that is the only solution."

When I was out running some errands this weekend I found myself cursing VDOT's misguided belief that the solution to every traffic problem is to throw up a traffic light with a fixed cycle. I wonder how much fuel is wasted in this country by people sitting at unnecessary traffic lights or stopping at unnecessary stop signs. It's frustrating how our transportation system is premised on the notion that drivers cannot be trusted to determine for themselves whether it is safe to go or whether they must stop, so therefore we must make them stop at every intersection. I think all the unnecessary stopping actually contributes to speeding, crosswalk violations, people speeding up to "beat the light," etc., because people are frustrated at all the unnecessary stop signs and red lights.

"... EVERY SINGLE CAR that crosses a crosswalk where a pedestrian is trying to cross should be stopped and ticketed."

I assume this means drivers who actually impede the pedestrian's progress. That is to say, if there's one pedestrian and he's crossing from your right to your left, and he's already past the double-yellow line (i.e., off your side of the road), I don't see any reason why the people on your side of the road can't go ahead on their way. Does the DC law require people on both sides of the road to wait until the pedestrian has fully cleared the crosswalk? (That's a real question--I don't know the answer and thought someone here might.)

Tom from Michigan Park, how about putting in speed bumps or speed tables instead of hoping for the enforcement that will never come? Drivers slow down for those way more than they have to.

I know the Federal Highway Administration's intent is to not allow the use of traffic signals or stop signs where they are not needed. For the very reason Rich cites...people become complacent. They see 5 stop signs where an all-way stop is not needed, and do rolling stops. The 6th one is needed, and they do a rolling stop right into oncoming traffic. Do local jurisdictions obey the prohibition on using stop signs as speed control devices? Many blatently violate it. There are even a few places where signals are deliberately placed to cause annoyance to drivers, thereby discouraging the use of certain streets by cut through traffic. I won't point fingers, but I know of at least 2 signals in one local jurisdiction installed for that very reason.

Section 21-502 of Maryland Vehicle Law specifically says that cars must only stop when a pedestrian is in the same half of the crosswalk as the car. In otherwords, if a ped is crossing west to east, southbound cars may resume travel when the pedestrian clears the yellow line. I don't have DC or VA's laws in front of me, so I don't know if the rules are the same. In New York State both halves of the roadway must stop for pedestrians until the pedestrian is out of the crosswalk. I know they made a big deal about "we are the only ones with this rediculous law" when they passed it a couple years ago.

Just wonderful of you to take a picture of a whitey obeying the law and a couple of brown people breaking it.

How do we let someone know of a bad crosswalk? The one in front of the WWII memorial stops the cars but the don't walk signal does not change to a walk signal. So people wait a while, then walk against the light, and then the light for auto traffic changes and people honk while others nearly get run over. Someone should fix it.

I agree with the second comment (copied below) to put in a conventional stop light that is triggered by the pedestrian push button. Stop lights are a familiar control device, so people know what is expected and will more likely do what is required. Using a control device that is not familiar leads to confusion and poor compliance.

"If you're going to go the trouble of this, why not just install a traffic light that turns red only when pedestrians press the button? Of course, put a timer on it, so it's not always red.

Posted by: ah | May 19, 2008 10:29 AM"

I have to agree with Greg and the second poster -- why not a conventional red light. I can't help but have a nagging doubt that DDOT has trouble accepting that pedestrians really truly might have right of way.

And for the poster who wrote that pedestrians have to yield at crosswalks on federal parkways: WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
Here's what the applicable law says. First, 36 CFR 4.2 says:

"State law applicable.
(a) Unless specifically addressed by regulations in this chapter, traffic and the use of vehicles within a park area are governed by State law. "

Second, 36 CFR 4.20 says,
"Right of way.
An operator of a motor vehicle shall yield the right of way to pedestrians, saddle and pack animals and vehicles drawn by animals. Failure to yield the right of way is prohibited."

NPS regulations say that traffic obeys the laws of the surrounding state.

Another problem with these special-purpose signals is that a conventional signal with a walk/don't walk light is the only signal that pedestrians are required to obey under DC law. You can put up all the signs you want, but unless the law is changed pedestrians have no legal obligation to obey them.

I thought of this crosswalk today as I drove down Virginia Avenue NW through the 23d Street underpass. I stopped for a pedestrian at the crosswalk to the east of the underpass and found myself thinking that lights positioned like the ones shown in the pictures Dr. Gridlock posted would be unhelpful to traffic on eastbound Virginia Avenue (i.e., going from the Watergate towards Constitution Avenue). The reason is that the wall on the right side of the road blocks the view of any light. So I hope DC doesn't regard the design of the Brentwood Road crosswalk as the final template for other locations in the city. It needs to be adapted to the circumstances of a particular location.

I no obey no stinkin' signs

Well the NPS is not following the US code because pedestrians must stop for traffic on the Rock Creek Parkway in DC. The miniature stop signs are quite clear. Such is the confusion. As far as policy is concerned, if it is an uncontrolled crosswalk, vehicles should have the right of way. It just makes more sense. As a previous poster stated, if the city really agreed that pedestrians had the right of way they would make the crossing light turn red instead of flashing yellow. Connecticut Avenue and Morrison Street is the only place I know of where that is the case.

As a recent grad of AU which is slowly expanding, we need these all over the city.

Very often I would cross on the north side of Ward Circle in the crosswalk and no one ever stops or even slows down. As a native New Yorker, I just walk and hope they stop.

I have mentioned to numerous officers this problem and they said it is not worth tying up traffic to write a ticket. Well---does someone have to get hit first?

These lights are great, similar to the flashing lights in London---and should be put in citywide.

Sivad: The stop sign simply means the peds and bikes have to stop before crossing (makes sense, you don't want bikes plowing into that crosswalk at 20+ MPH without looking). But once that bike wheel or foot steps into the crosswalk, make no mistake about it, they have the right of way over cars.

The signal at Connecticut and Morrison is great. It brings all car traffic to a stop and allows peds in all direction to cross upon pedestrian call.

It is too bad that self-interested ANC Commissioners can't help support a great innovation for the city and continue to demand that DDOT convert the signal to a red-yellow-green.

All interested in this innovative light should let the Mayor and DDOT know to support it and to place others around town.

Portland, Seattle and other progressive jurisdictions seem to have residents with no issues about these developments in bike/ped safety.

Sivad: The light at Morrison and Connecticut is a great development for pedestrian safety in the city. It brings all traffic to a stop on pedestrian call.

It is too bad that a few self-interested ANC Commissioners continue to call for its conversion to a red-yellow-green light, because it is just this kind of progressive thinking that will help change the driver culture in the city.

Anyone interested in seeing this kind of deployment across the District should let the Mayor and DDOT know that there is widespread support for this kind of signal across the city.

Seattle, Portland and other progressive jurisdictions take bike and ped safety seriously, and their residents seem to have no problems with this kind of solution. We should be demanding no less of our leadership.

Just got back from Los Angeles, CA where the peds walk anywhere they want without looking and take their time about it too. In my book I now call them "mobile hood ornaments" since that's what they will be one day.

"The stop sign simply means the peds and bikes have to stop before crossing (makes sense, you don't want bikes plowing into that crosswalk at 20+ MPH without looking)."

The funny thing is that near Memorial Bridge, those stop signs exist for the same reason and the cyclists routinely run them and expect traffic to part. I saw a cyclist ride right in front of a taxi one day. I was a few cars behind the cab and saw that the cyclist wasn't looking at the traffic and the taxi clearly didn't have adequate time to stop. The cyclist jumped off his bike and started pounding on the cab screaming profanities. Led to a huge horn-honking mess and an argument that resulted in one of the cops at the Lincoln Memorial coming over. Wish I had seen how it turned out. The cyclist was clearly in the wrong.

Too bad the cyclist didn't get run over and die. We need some of that.

Cyclists have no legal obligation to stop before entering a crosswalk. The only obligation that pedestrians or cyclists have is to make sure the vehicle is able to yield. Since the cab didn't hit him, the cyclist was in the right.

"Cyclists have no legal obligation to stop before entering a crosswalk. The only obligation that pedestrians or cyclists have is to make sure the vehicle is able to yield. Since the cab didn't hit him, the cyclist was in the right."

They do if they have a stop sign. (I don't know why I respond to obvious trolls....)

"They do if they have a stop sign."

Not true. When using a sidewalk or crosswalk, cyclists have the rights and duties of pedestrians. Pedestrians have no obligation to stop for a stop sign. The only signal that a pedestrian -- or a cyclist using a crosswalk -- is obligated to obey is a Walk/Don't Walk signal.

The rules governing placement of stop signs are clear, they are only supposed to be placed on roadways. A trail is not a roadway. Stop signs placed where trails cross roads are improper -- unless they're on the road.

more dead bikers would make for a better world

"The rules governing placement of stop signs are clear, they are only supposed to be placed on roadways. A trail is not a roadway. Stop signs placed where trails cross roads are improper -- unless they're on the road."

Maybe so, but if the sign is there, you have to obey it. Try ignoring a stop sign when you're driving and then telling the cop (and the judge) that the sign was placed in violation of the MUTCD. You'll be found guilty and you'll have to pay the ticket. If the sign is incorrectly placed, the way to deal with it is to complain to the people who put up the signs.

Besides, if you're on a bike and you blow through a stop sign in front of a car that would not have time to stop for you, you're going to lose if you sue the driver (not to mention, is it really worth being injured just to try to make a point?).

Signs on trails don't mean anything? Awesome.