by Marlene Berlin
DDOT would remove the crosswalk markings at four of the five uncontrolled Connecticut Avenue intersections in ANC 3F under a proposal presented to our ANC at its December meeting last week.
George Branyan, the District Department of Transportation’s pedestrian coordinator, revealed the results of a study of all ten unsignalized marked crosswalks from Appleton to Legation Street. Five of those ten fall within ANC 3F, at Appleton, Chesapeake, Cumberland, Ellicott and Everett. This study was a result of a pedestrian crash on Chevy Chase Parkway in May of 2013 and also coincides with recommendations of Connecticut Avenue Pedestrian Action, a project of Iona Senior Services. The study includes recommendations to improve pedestrian safety at each of these intersections.
DDOT recommends a HAWK signl for this marked, unsignalized crosswalk at Connecticut Ave. and Ellicott St.
And what does DDOT recommend?
Branyan spoke at length about the research on the risks. On heavily traveled streets like Connecticut Avenue, the risk of a crash involving a pedestrian is greater at marked crosswalks than at unmarked crossings. Branyan said traffic engineers think the markings give pedestrians a (sometimes false) sense of security, though he says the research doesn’t give a definitive explanation.
What we do know is that the neighborhoods on each side of our stretch of Connecticut Avenue has a higher than average population of residents aged 65 and older. And DDOT has received complaints, especially from the elderly and advocates, that it is difficult and dangerous to cross Connecticut Avenue at crosswalks without signals.
You can download a PDF of Branyan’s December 16th presentation from ANC 3F’s website and view it below or at Livestream.com. His presentation begins at 25:45.
What is important to remember while reading this report is that all unprotected intersections have crosswalks, whether marked or unmarked. Pedestrians have a legal right to cross at any of these intersections, and motorists have a legal responsibility to stop. Here’s a Crosswalk 101 refresher course for Forest Hills.
Please leave your comments or questions on our site or contact George Branyan directly at george.branyan@dc.gov or 202-671-2561.
Gabe Fineman says
Thank you for this informative article.
Although studies have shown the danger of unguarded crosswalks in general (especially for the inebriated), these studies were almost all done on suburban or rural highways and not in cities with good lighting and slower actual speeds. The only thing that makes crossing safer at unsignalized crossings, is a narrower street by putting in a safety island. This is impractical on Connecticut where we have the reversible lanes.
In my opinion, unmarking sidewalks in a city is always a bad idea. It makes drivers think that the pedestrian is jaywalking and they can do anything short of hitting him/her and certainly have no need to slow down. Study after study shows that pedestrians will not walk another block to find a marked crosswalk. We need to remark the many crosswalks that have been unmarked.
-Gabe Fineman
Van Ness St
David Bardin says
I can’t understand DDOT’s reasons for wishing to remove the bus stops at Cheaspeake and Connecticut — which I began using when I first moved to DC in 1958. Safety? Does DDOT have a real pedestrian safety issue, or is it something else? DDOT slides, linked to the article, do not satisfy. I now live at the corner, use MetroBus, and cross Connecticut on the marked, “zebra” crosswalks which make pedestrians more visible as we cross. Is the message that because DDOT thinks more traffic lights are too costly it comes up with cheap projects — not noticing that they detract from quality of life?
Matthew B. says
In my short time living in DC (since August), cars have failed to yield to me several times despite being in the crosswalk and more than halfway across the street. Especially on a busy street like Connecticut, removing crosswalks doesn’t seem (to me) to be the answer. How about greater enforcement of the law that cars should yield to pedestrians in the crosswalks?
Livia Bardin says
This idea is like that of the librarian who kept the library closed because readers messed it up by taking books off the shelves. It’s logical: if you take the crosswalks away, fewer people will cross and therefore fewer people are at risk. But it makes no sense, especially in a city that is theoretically promoting “walkability.” Tying crosswalks to bus stops is similarly nonsensical, assuming that people cross Connecticut only to use the bus. Not so. People cross to walk to the shops on Wisconsin Ave., to visit friends who live across the street, to go to the playground, to walk on the sunny (or shady) side of the street. Removing bus stops only means people will have to walk farther to use the bus — not good for promoters of convenient public transportation Why can’t the city use cameras — a proven enforcement tool — to enforce pedestrian rights of way at the crosswalks?