Joe_Citizen

Sat, Aug 24, 2013 : 6:45 a.m.

Stupid is what stupid does!

Stuart Brown

Sat, Aug 24, 2013 : 4:23 a.m.

Nicholas Urfe said, 'Does this "analysis of statistics" normalize the data to account for both the number of cars at each location and the number of pedestrians?' The "Dead Right" crowd is soooo profound! A T-test is designed to show the probability that a change is due to random chance. The data set showing car-pedestrian crashes over the last few years shows a clear increase that has less than a 1% chance of being due to random chance. I strongly disagree with the notion that, unless normalization is done, the statistical significance of the data can be dismissed. When the city spends money or changes laws to improve safety, the number of incidents should decrease in absolute terms, unless there is a large population increase. Oh, but wait, you say the program was never billed as a safety program but was sold as a plan to improve the walkability of Ann Arbor?--I say bad tradeoff.

Greum

Sat, Aug 24, 2013 : 1:26 a.m.

I walk and drive in Ann Arbor. What I see is that both drivers and pedestrians need to pay better attention to what is going on around them. I see walkers just step off the curb and expect a driver to get his/her car to defy the Law of Physics and stop within a space of 2 feet. I, as a walker, have been at one of the new crosswalks and had 10 cars wiz pass before a car stopped to let me cross one lane. Then had to wait until another 6 cars wiz by before I could cross the other lane ( I know how many because I counted).

A Voice of Reason

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 10:53 p.m.

Just one final comment about this issue: the AnnArbor.com commenting community called this right...something was not and will not be right with the crosswalk changes in town. It is very unfortunate that a woman had to loose her life to have this issue readdressed. I have witness 2 near misses on 4 lane roads by a similar situation and a few more seconds would have caused 2 more injuries. This is when you fire the person who implemented the crosswalks on Plymouth Road or fire the local officials that supported this and told us we (AnnArbor.Com commenters) that we were wrong. The commenters had this right all again and hopefully things will change and no more lives will be lost in our "safe town"

Bill

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 8:41 p.m.

i like these a lot better than the standard crosswalk with a constantly flashing yellow light. You see it all the time and just drive on through unless you see someone. The flash only when needed gets my attention much better when driving.

Sue_Z_Q

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 5:37 p.m.

I AM surprised to hear pedestrian / vehicle accidents are up. I live in NE Ann Arbor and have felt the improved cross walks make things safer. I have personally used the Plymouth Rd crossing with the blinking lights. I love how the traffic actually pays attention to them and stops. I also like the 'safe zones' ( the curbed islands) in the middle of the street where a pedestrian can pause in a more or less safe place. Still, I would NEVER cross the street without being 100% certain that traffic sees me and is stopping for me. At the blinking lights, about 20% of traffic ignores them and speeds on. This is better than most crossing (without the blinkers) in town where 90% of traffic speeds on and 10% stops if you are ANYWHERE in the area. Those are terribly dangerous. I think the city council was trying to make things better with their local ordinance but I don't think it has worked. They should make Ann Arbor laws uniform with the rest of the state and ENFORCE them. It's pretty simple really. I've never seen any enforcement activity at any crosswalk despite all the articles and city council actions. They should also continue with improving crossing, creating islands, putting in flashing lights, etc. And, they should cut back vegetation where it obscures sight lines for both vehicles and pedestrians. Like at the Huron High School crossing. I have to step into the road before I can see on-coming traffic - which on Huron Parkway can be going 45+ mph. I'm so sorry for the family and friends of this young woman. It's such a tragedy.

JMA2Y

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 4:14 p.m.

Problem stems from the fact that crosswalks are in the middle of roads. Drivers are used to crosswalks from corner to corner but not in the middle of the road. That's why traffic lights to tell drivers to STOP should be in place. The city should have thought not so much that a crosswalk in the middle of the road would be handy but if it would be safer place for pedestrians to cross. The city hasn't yet found a way to get four lanes of traffic to stop at the same time to allow people to cross. It is impossible to get two lanes of traffic going the same direction to stop at once and then the next two lanes in the opposite direction to stop in order to safely cross. Bikers/pedestrians MUST pay attention to whether cars are stopping or not and many do not and probably those who were hit were not aware of oncoming vehicles not slowing down for them. And bikers/pedestrians MUST be aware that just because one car in a lane stops, it doesn't mean the cars in the other lane are also stopping. LOOK before crossing into the second lane of traffic.

Old Salt

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 3:39 p.m.

The city will change this ordinance when one of our administrators is injured and his /her car damaged when hit from behind at one of these crossimgs

maggieroze

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 1:04 p.m.

For me the main problem about the crosswalk scheme is that it's very easy to miss it when driving. Yes of course you try to be careful when driving but I think it would be a much better idea to install something like a crosswalk signal that would turn a stoplight RED when someone wanted to cross. Drivers would easily see it and I believe safety would be MUCH improved. I have often thought that I would not want to step out onto busy Plymouth Road (for example) thinking that without a doubt drivers would think to stop at those crosswalks. They are dangerous and I believe the increase in accidents (and deaths) shows that.

Nicholas Urfe

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 12:52 p.m.

Does this "analysis of statistics" normalize the data to account for both the number of cars at each location and the number of pedestrians? If not, then it is deeply flawed and very misleading. Where is the detailed information on the methodology?

leezee

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 12:28 p.m.

Yesterday, as I was driving west on Plymouth Road around 4 p.m., the Traverwood light was flashing at that crosswalk. The cars stopped appropriately and the pedestrians crossed, but I could see a young man with a grocery bag out of the corner of my eye approaching behind us on the sidewalk to the right of me. I could see from his face that he thought, "Good the the light is flashing. I can still cross.". I was in the right lane, so I could see him better, but the car in the left lane did not and proceeded to go as the young man entered the street. Good thing I was in the closest lane and that I saw him or this could been another bad situation. I think this is something that many didn't think of (I know I didn't) - people crossing sometime after the flashing light has gone off and some time after the original use(s) of the light have passed. You can be an extremely alert driver and still have something like this happen if you are concentrating on those who pushed the button crossing safely and not thinking about those who may be running up from behind so they can cross while the light is still flashing.

Mackinac Straits

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 11:13 a.m.

The new ordinance is a case of a "solution" looking for a problem. It's confusing to many motorists. The lights, signage, and rules are foreign to many, or most drivers in the area at any given time. Since the rule and physical set up is not uniform with pedestrian rules and crosswalks throughout the State, a significant number of drivers are unaware and/or unsure of how to deal with the crosswalks. It's no surprise accidents are up. I pass through several of these new crosswalks during the week, and each week there is either a close call with a pedestrian, or a near miss collision among vehicles. With this new set up, Pedestrians stroll right into traffic, or motorist who do know the rules hit their brakes to the shock of following traffic.

Mark Witthoff

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 4:03 a.m.

Looking at the bigger picture Ann Arbor has a much larger problem with traffic in general. When are they going to realize that the amount of traffic coming in and out of the city is becoming a real problem? These times fluctuate daily(Hospital shift changes etc. and seasonally with classes starting soon) it is only going to get worse. They need to consider mass transit coming in and out of the city. The amount of accidents fatal and non fatal is overwhelming. Adding a rail system coming into the city from North East South and West would only encourage new technologies, promote new business, increase safety and productivity. This is a problem they are getting to late in the game the problem is already present and with increasing traffic flow from a growing Ann Arbor it will not get any easier or improve. You account for Art Fair, Football games, and all the other events that occur there are endless reasons for a rail system to be installed internal to the city as well as connecting commuter cities. Roads can only handle so much traffic. When will people wake up to see that the bigger problem doesnt lie in a cross walk its much much bigger.

Wolverine92

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 2:45 a.m.

Ann Arborites can not drive to save their lives.

Stuart Brown

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 1:59 a.m.

The dissembling by certain council members as well as city officials trying to cover up the fact a bad decision was made with the pedestrian crossing ordinance is all too apparent. Ann Arbor's population is fairly flat since 2000 and an application of a T-test to the crash data suggests the change in 2011 & 2012 from prior years is statistically significant. The law was supposed to improve safety, not degrade it and the improvement should have shown up in 2011 & 2012.

justcurious

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 12:32 a.m.

So have they interviewed the driver that killed Sharita Williams yet?

Somargie

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 12:30 a.m.

Plymouth Rd. is a cash cow for the city due to the sheer number of cars traveling. With the introduction of these 3 to 4 awkward crosswalks in the most inappropriate places along that road it is now a death trap. Most of the property along that road belongs to UM also, who is not doing anything to advocate & pay for multiple pedestrian bridges to replace those awkward and insane crosswalks. Heck, they could use the money from those ugly DTE solar panel as a start as a symbol of concern for the non-athlete students for a change. I would think UM would jump to have multiple pedestrian bridges with their name and emblem on it ....since they already own most of the city.

mpope

Fri, Aug 23, 2013 : 12:12 a.m.

a lot of arguments have been made against the "blaming the victim." but whether we like it or not, in a pedestrian/ car crash, the outcome always 'blames' the pedestrian more than the driver. it's physics. I've crossed plenty of streets in ann arbor. I never-- that's NEVER-- expect moving cars to stop for me-- and I always cross according to that supposition.

Ann Arbor Parents For Students

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:52 p.m.

Great article. The last article tried published by AnnArbor.com tried to persuade us that crosswalks are safer than not having them without these facts. People have a false sense of security if they use the crosswalk. There should not be crosswalks for 4 lane roads nor road where traffic is greater that 40 miles per hour.

umichmsu

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:41 p.m.

Great Article. I was driving through town and my 5 year old pointed out, "that lady didn't look both ways before she crossed." I had a person cross the street when I had a green light. I honked my horn and got a middle finger. If drivers are held accountable for their actions, pedestrians have an equal responsibility to be safe. Why not issue tickets for jaywalkers? I know Ann Arbor would make a lot of money off pediatricians crossing the street between 2 crosswalks instead of walking an additional 25 yards. Three of the major crosswalks that I am aware of have a speed limit of over 35mph, most cars go at least 40. When you are driving that fast the last thing you are looking for is a pedestrian crossing the road when you are unfamiliar with the area.

Russell J Stambaugh, PhD

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:14 p.m.

This story would have been easier to interpret if pedestrian deaths had been graphed for a ten year period. There is no sense of variation prior to the ordinances changes. Likewise, it is not logical to suggest that the ordinance couldn't be responsible for the first year's increase ' because it wasn't being enforced. The chief flaw in the ordinance is that it changes the psychology of drivers and pedestrians. That started to happen as soon as it wad passed. Hopefully, enforcement increased penetration among drivers. I have never seen enforcement directed at pedestrians-- and precious little on drivers. Finally, why our council would seek to empower pedestrians in a city of 45,000 students, many of whom are none too vigilant in the first place entirely defeats me. To do so in excess of State law is also confounding. All that said, pedestrian crossing on Plymouth was needed, had signals, and the tragic death there probably didn't come from too much pedestrian empowerment. The crossings need to stay, but we should return to the State standard of respecting pedestrians right-of-way once they are in the crosswalk, not merely approaching it.

golfer

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:07 p.m.

they suck!

Think!

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 9:27 p.m.

The only flaw with any cross walk is distracted bad drivers. Don't bother trying to argue that the pedestrian doesn't have the right of way or was wearing dark clothing or didn't look for cars. Drivers have a responsibility to be alert to their surroundings at all times. End of discussion.

lou glorie

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 8:58 p.m.

The Plymouth Rd. corridor is pretty heavily populated. It's understandable that people who live and work in the area would like more crossings. It's a long way between lights--I think an unreasonable distance for walkers. The solution the city chose was a hybrid crossing light system. Problem is that those flashing yellow lights are confusing, meaningless or distracting. I'll admit that for me there was even some unpleasant neurological reactions--those lights seemed to interrupt feedback loops. Sorry to say, it looks like the city made a boo-boo here. Staff seems to like new--never before used--geegaws and this one was a real klinker. Because of the population density in that area, I've started to think that general traffic calming measures might be called for. I can hear the boos from the cloud where all you other posters live, but we also live on planet earth and a five lane road with cars and trucks mostly speeding, acts as a barrier to people on foot. I'd like to see the city put in plain, ordinary cross-walk lights that cycle through yellow, red and green. If these don't work, the city needs to find a way to get a couple actual traffic lights on that road. One little thing in answer to other posters about j-walking and j-biking: Cars are not bikes are not people. Yes, cars must wait at lights, but I see no reason why humans on foot or on bikes should wait at a light when there are no oncoming cars in sight. Insisting that all creatures follow rules set in place for cars doesn't make sense to me--If I'm at Cafe Zola and I want to get to Pac Rim, I'm going to cross in front of Zola, walk down the alley to get to Liberty. If I'm on my bike at Catherine and Fourth about to turn left onto Catherine, I'm not going to stop, get off my bike, then back on and then start up again if there are no cars at that intersection. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." RWE

thinker

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 7:56 p.m.

Crosswalks and ordinances don't save lives-people do. That means driver AND pedestrian!

B. Jean

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 7:37 p.m.

I remember when the mayor said something similar to "this is about global education" like that is possible. In the meantime, people are getting killed. Ann Arbor is a destination for visitors, that will not change. How do you educate visitors to your traffic laws regarding your crosswalks? The simple answer is, it is nearly impossible. Meanwhile people are getting killed. Distracted driving is now the new normal for us all and that alone increases the danger every day. These fatalities are occurring in broad daylight and some not even at peak travel times. Wake up city council, your crosswalks are not working (for pedestrians or drivers) and are causing fatal accidents! Are you egos so enormous you cannot admit this is not working? But take your time recognizing the obvious city council, meanwhile mean-while more people will die.

A A Resident

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 7:33 p.m.

We could put crosswalks on all the freeways too, but it would probably only increase the overall carnage. Hello, a lot of this stuff was worked out many years ago.

Kyle Feldscher

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 7:03 p.m.

I'll respond to Russ here so more people can see the stats. Here's a break down from each year. 2012- 60 crashes: No injuries in 7, 22 possible injuries, 21 nonincapactiating injuries, 8 incompacitating, 2 fatal 2011- 63 crashes – no inj in 5, 23 inj possible, 23 nonincap, 12 incapac, no fatal 2010- 45 – no inj 2, poss 17, non 19, 7 incapac, no fatal 2009- 42 – no inj 3, 22 poss, 16 non, 1 incapac, no fatal 2008- 52 – no inj 3, 17 poss, 26 non, 6 incapac, no fatal 2007- 52 – no inj 1, 29 poss, 15 non, 6 incapac, 1 fatal 2006- 36 – no inj 2, 17 poss, 11 non, 5 incapac, 1 fatal 2005- 45 – no inj 1, 22 poss, 18 non, 4 incapac, 0 fatal 2004- 43 – no inj 3, 18 poss, 15 non, 6 incapac, 1 fatal

Russ Miller

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 6:59 p.m.

Kyle, Is the following the extent of your statistical analysis? If not please share: When the ordinance was first passed in 2010 — and when Ann Arbor adopted the UTC— there were 45 pedestrian-car crashes. A year later, that number shot up to 63 crashes before falling slightly to 60 crashes in 2012. The number of crashes in 2012 and 2011 was markedly higher both years than for any of the years from 2004 until 2009. During those years, as few as 36 vehicle -pedestrian crashes were recorded in 2006. The highest number, 52, was recorded in 2007 and 2008.

Lola

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 6:49 p.m.

While I agree that crosswalks are necessary I feel that if a few changes are made they would be much safer. 1. No crosswalks on roads with speed limits above 35 mph. (Only regular traffic lights) 2. No crosswalks on roads with more than one lane in each direction. (Again, only regular traffic lights) It is almost impossible to safely stop a vehicle that is traveling over 35 mph by the time the pedestrian is seen. A vehicle stopped in the curb lane while allowing a pedestrian to cross creates a blind spot for both the pedestrian and a car that may be traveling in the left lane. 3. All crosswalks should have red flashing lights that are triggered when the pedestrian pushes a button at the curb to cross.

Mike

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 6:43 p.m.

These crosswalks are just plain stupid. They are dangerous for motorists and pedestrians alike. Overhead crosswalks would have been cheaper both in the short and long run. Lives would have been saved. What you now have is a political environment where the government officials can't admit it was a bad idea because of liability.

djacks24

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 6:10 p.m.

Got to crack a few eggs to make an omelet. Right City council...?

rm1

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 5:43 p.m.

I don't think enough is being made of the sharp conflict between the City ordinance and the signs posted at the crosswalks. The ordinance states: "10:148. Pedestrians crossing streets. (a) When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop and yield the right-of-way to every pedestrian APPROACHING OR WITHIN a crosswalk." But the signs say: "STOP for [pedestrians] WITHIN crosswalk." No mention of "approaching". (The sign is pictured at the head of this article, and also in the 2008 City publication linked here by Brad.) That seemingly allows drivers to coast through crosswalks where the pedestrian is only approaching, not yet in the crosswalk, while at the same time the pedestrian is told the motorist is supposed to stop when the pedestrian is approaching. And a motorist might reasonably think the sign's version takes precedence over the ordinance, just as a sign posting a speed limit takes precedence over a general speed limit stated in statute or ordinance. That's a recipe for disaster. I don't know how much this may have contributed to crosswalk accidents, or to Sharita Williams' death, but at least it is a very bad situation. And one wonders if this might expose the City to liability in some cases. How on earth did the Mayor and Council, and the traffic people advising them, miss this terrible situation?

Mick52

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 5:36 p.m.

I will confess that I have crossed streets in Ann Arbor at any and every distance from a corner at all times of day (walking and biking) and never once had an issue or problem getting across any street in regard to how long it took. I had the same training as A Dexter Person, look both ways, wait until traffic clears and proceed. The traffic is just not that bad to make you wait an unreasonable amount of time in this city. I also look down the road for any cars coming at high speed. And I look at the drivers to see if they see me. There is no reason to do ANY enhancements to assist pedestrians. I think if people do believe they need this stuff they are impatient and selfish and desire control. My suspicions are that this interference with traffic is connected to the "green" and alternate energy agenda where proponents will do anything they can to interfere with anything gas powered.

cmayhew

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 5:32 p.m.

I am not surprised to learn that pedestrian-vehicle crashes are up. The new ordinances give pedestrians a false sense of security. Did the designers of these crosswalks not learn in kindergarten that yellow means slow down, not stop?

VillageDweller

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 5:13 p.m.

There's a corollary in the world of boating: sailboats have the right of way over power boats. This includes Great Lakes freighters. But if you really think that a 1000 foot laden ore freighter can stop in time to miss hitting you if you ride the wind into its path, you'll be in trouble. It's physics. And this is why the Michigan law says that pedestrians should not step into the path of a car that is clearly not going to be able to stop. It's common sense. I agree with many others who have commented - drivers need to slow down & focus on their driving; pedestrians need to focus on their walking, be aware and use common sense. I wonder if the university orientation programs have a module on safe walking Ann Arbor.

Scott Floyd

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 5:09 p.m.

Two lanes going in one direction is extremely dangerous, especially when one car stops and a car in the other lane (going same direction) does not stop. If there is heavy traffic and the pedestrian is not walking I am often tempted to keep driving. I feel that my stopping might actually endanger the pedestrian, because so many other drivers do not stop. As for after dark, it's difficult to see if a pedestrian is waiting to cross. I have lived in Oregon, and there is excellent awareness (if not fear) in drivers there, because they ticket heavily for not stopping, just about everyone veers on the side of stopping. But that is a statewide law (I believe). In A2 we have people always coming from elsewhere, so even if a local awareness increases, there is still danger from out-of-town drivers. It really needs to be a statewide initiative.

SEC Fan

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 4:33 p.m.

The question of whether the current ordinance is the "cause" of the increase is irrelevant. An increase of 33% cannot be (fully) attributed to an increase in pedestrian or vehicular traffic (as alluded to by the PM). The one singular fact we do know is the the current ordinance did not make the streets safer for pedestrians. Therefore it most certainly needs to be revisited. pretending there is no problem is not an acceptable course of action (and I group "educating" the public as pretending there is no problem.)

Gownie

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 4:29 p.m.

A comprehensive pedestrian-safety analysis is needed urgently. Such analysis would be based on crash rates: In Ann Arbor before, during, and after the transition In comparison municipalities over the same period At a minimum, rates need comparison on a per-population and a per-vehicle-mile-traveled basis. Where possible they should also be compared on a per-pedestrian-volume basis, though this is difficult because of lack of pedestrian counts. Virtually everybody commenting in this thread is genuinely concerned about pedestrian safety. We need careful analysis to figure out how it's best promoted.

A A Resident

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 4:14 p.m.

Yup, there should be signs at all entrances to Ann Arbor reading, "Warning, entering a no common sense zone". When I spoke to the mayor about how dangerous the new crosswalk law was, he was quite resolute about it being an improvement.

harleygirl

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 3:57 p.m.

When I first read the city was passing the ordinance, I thought to myself this is a disaster waiting to happen... HORRIBLE idea not only false sense of security for the pedestrians also confusing for drivers, new drivers, older drivers and people from out of town. Why not a stop light? Then you know you have to stop.. I was taught Green means GO, Yellow means SLOW and RED means STOP... how hard can that be. I will say it again. These crosswalk flashing yellow are very confusing. I know a lot pedestrians feel they have the right of way. It is apparent when driving downtown and in those cases they are making a choice to put themselves in a bad situation. In this case it is a false sense of security and the result of it is just plan sad a young girl lost her life and a driver has the guilt of that. The people who made this decission are just as guilty in my opinion.

sports nut

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 3:44 p.m.

I am not an Ann Arbor citizen but live outside the city and try my best to avoid Ann Arbor as much as possible especially during Fall and Winter semesters. Students and citizens of Ann Arbor think these crosswalks make them untouchable but this unfortunate accident proves otherwise. I agree with some of the comments as in why have them in the middle of the block or section of road? Why not leave them at the corners? The exercise would not hurt us BUT walking in front of a moving vehicle does whether or not you have the right away. I see to many people looking at their phones and walking at the same time, that's nuts and someone, will get hurt. Also I see many people walk in front of a moving vehicle between parked cars on the side of the street looking and not looking. This is because they think you should stop. These crosswalks are not going to work if the regular corners at traffic lights or stop signs haven't worked yet! Plus how are you going to educate new students every year or semester? Most of them would get a email (if they choose this path) and not read it fully if it didn't pertain information of their class. It is a problem not just in Ann Arbor but needs to be address to everyone not just drivers.

Goober

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 3:34 p.m.

As a trained and educated engineer, we always tried our new processes and methods to make sure they worked. Maybe the same should be done with city traffic engineers, city officials and council members for all existing and new laws inclusive of pedestrian ordinances.

clmcneil

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 3:29 p.m.

It saddens me to know that there was a fatality on the road that I travel on most often. I was hoping the pedestrian walkways would help make the road safer for the students in my neighborhood. I don't see a problem with where they are located on Plymouth Rd. The students need places to get across safely. We all know it's a busy road. Yes, they could walk down to a corner and back track to get to where they need to go. However, why shouldn't the city make businesses and transportation more accessible to students who have no vehicles, or are perhaps trying to help the environment by not adding more pollutants to the air. They have buses to catch, classes to get to, groceries that need buying, etc. We should look out for our neighbors! It took me a while to get used to the cross walks. I used to slam my foot on the brakes when the light came on only to realize that the pedestrian was on the other side of the road and I didn't need to stop yet or they already crossed. Now I slow down enough so that if the light is flashing I have plenty of time to scan the sides of the road for pedestrians to see if and when I need to stop. Pedestrians have the right away not just because it's the law but because it's the right thing to do. It shouldn't be every man/woman for himself, it should be us working together to help make the environment around us safe for everyone! In other words, put the phone down pedestrians and be wary of us drivers. Drivers put your phones down and be alert and ready to stop for pedestrians and bikers, especially on Plymouth Road!!!

Brad

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 3:24 p.m.

Here's a link to the city publication that screamed "Pedestrians Rule!". Is it any wonder we are having the sort of problems that we are? It would be good to know who was behind that and what made them think that was a good idea. My money is on Eli Cooper. http://bit.ly/16QV32d

LiberalNIMBY

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:55 p.m.

Clearly more data is needed to look at what the cause of the fluctuation is. Benchmarking against pedestrian-car crashes nationwide due to distracted driving? Normalizing for increased traffic or changes in pedestrian activity? Calling a "count" a "statistical analysis" is being a little generous. Also determining whether or not pedestrian safety increases with enforcement would be important. (If I knew speeding were not enforced, you can bet I'd drive a little faster around town.) Anyone who doesn't yield to a pedestrian within a crosswalk is breaking state law, not Ann Arbor's.

Jon Wax

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:49 p.m.

this is such a stinking dodge: don't talk to me until you guys start to ticket the jaywalkers downtown. Peace Wax

IjustWorkHere

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:47 p.m.

"The city's pedestrian crosswalk ordinance requires vehicles to stop for pedestrians standing at the curb of a crosswalk. This is slightly different than the Michigan Uniform Traffic Code requirement of yielding the right of way to pedestrians who are within a crosswalk." This is an incorrect statement. The ordinance reads "Section 1. That Section 10:148 of Chapter 126 of Title X of the Code of the City of Ann Arbor be amended to read as follows: 10:148. Pedestrians crossing streets. (a) When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop and yield the right-of-way to every pedestrian approaching or within a crosswalk." And what I have seen is walkers take advantage of the approaching crosswalk. They will start to cross before they are at the corner cutting at an angle into the crosswalk.

Widow Wadman

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:31 p.m.

Eli Cooper, Sabra Briere, and John Hieftje need to be replaced. Traffic engineers need to be consulted before City Council closes down any more traffic lanes to cars or creates any more ridiculous pedestrian/crosswalk ordinances.

Jim Clarkson

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:27 p.m.

What ever happened to "look both ways before crossing the street". Even if I am walking across a one way street I look both ways. And why is it always in the comment section that drivers are always the problem. People walk into the path of my car all the time and most of the time they are not even in a crosswalk, and don't even get me started on the bicyclists who want to "share the road" while they ignore every traffic signal in the world. I am also curious as to why the flashing pedestrian crosswalk lights were made in orange and not in red, am I applying too much common sense to the problem? I would also be curious to know who is responsible for the placement of crosswalks. On miller Ave. there are two crosswalks no more than 100 feet from each other. Not to mention the fact that they are both at bus stops which makes the whole " stopping for people standing at a crosswalk" very confusing. Also on Dexter Ave. when you are heading into town there is a crosswalk 5 feet on the other side of a hill crest which seem's to me to be a fatality waiting to happen because as a driver you would not be able to see anyone in the crosswalk until you crested the hill and by then it would be too late.

Hume

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:25 p.m.

The placement of the crosswalk on Plymouth Rd is a prime example of putting something where it should not be. On the north side of the road there are labs and the mall on the south side north campus. I don't see the urgent need to have a cross walk in the middle of the block at that location. All pedestrians should use the crosswalks at the traverwood dr or nixon rd crosswalks. Did the city put a crosswalk up there because pedestrians were cutting across the road there? I went to another university where they did not have these problems because the police actively patrolled the periphery of the campus looking for people cutting across the street and bike riders breaking the law. They need to remove all mid street crosswalks and they should also consider closing off more streets on campus to create more of a mall area.

Tanzor

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:21 p.m.

Learned it kindergarten, be nice, don't hit and LOOK BOTH WAYS BEFORE CROSSING THE ROAD. I fully understand and respect the fact that pedestrians have the right of way. When I see a pedestrian attempting to cross the road I yield allowing them to cross safely just as I and every other driver should. The problem as I see it is our city government developed a pedestrian ordinance giving pedestrian a false sense of security, per the ordinance all they have do is approach a crosswalk and all traffic will stop. I drive through Ann Arbor every day and nearly every day I see pedestrians blindly crossing the road not bothering to look. The bottom line – don't step into the path of a vehicle assuming it will stop.

justcurious

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:12 p.m.

Some people can never admit when they are wrong. The Ann Arbor officials are a perfect example of that. I myself have noted that pedestrians seem bolder everywhere now, not even within Ann Arbor. I believe they have a perceived right to cross whenever and wherever due to this crosswalk law unique to Ann Arbor. A sense of self preservation seems to have flown out the window. Ms. Filipiak has it right. Plymouth Road needs more traffic lights "They (city officials) would not look at more stop lights there, and that's what it really needs," she said. "Not more pedestrian crossing zones, they need stop lights."

turbovega

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:08 p.m.

I can sure see that the crosswalks on busy multi-lane roads like Plymouth and Eisenhower can have problems with pedestrians not being visible to a driver. On other roads, where there is just one lane going in each direction, the driver has no excuse for not stopping except that they don't want to. The crosswalks are very clear, there is a stop sign and a sign telling the motorist to stop. I see drivers in Ann Arbor pulling sleazy tricks day in and day out to shave a few seconds off their drive time, some of which are illegal so it was a mistake for the city to rely on the honor of drivers. It was a well intentioned ordinance, but unenforceable from day one without a mechanism to catch the people who disregard it. The city should have installed closed-circuit cameras to monitor those crosswalks and a mechanism like mailing someone a citation with a picture of them violating it and harsh fines and threat of escalating punishment if they disregard the citation, if they were really serious about enforcement. Without the fear that someone will get caught and punished, there are people who will disregard the ordinance because there is so little likelihood of getting caught and punished. I have stopped whenever I have seen someone ready to cross at one of those crosswalks (and prayed I wouldn't get rear-ended for doing so). My condolences to Sharita and her family. It is a tragedy whenever someone on foot or on a bike gets hit and killed by a car.

JPLewis

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 2:03 p.m.

Whenever you make a situation about safety more confusing, you usually make it more dangerous. Nice work city council!..

DadooS

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:56 p.m.

Methodical analysis and willingness to make necessary adjustments to optimize pedestrian safety is the better approach to this issue. My daily bike/walk commute along Plymouth Rd. gives me an exceptionally intense perspective on the matter, however, arriving at the best solution requires professional objectivity. Thanks for this article.

anderti

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:55 p.m.

Those little signs are too hard to read when you are going the legal limit or even under the legal limit. People do not read small writing fast enough to understand to stop for the middle of the street random cross walks. Ann Arbor is making it difficult for any visitors to drive in the city. The Crosswalks also are just very random, and impede the flow of traffic. You never know if the cars behind you see you stopping. It makes it for drivers random stops, either hard breaking in bad weather or just bad breaking in general. Also I wonder if those blinking lights might cause seizures. But the deaths are not just the drivers' fault. On Plymouth Rd where there are random crosswalks there are also several stop lights with pedestrian crossing a few more feet to the left or right that the pedestrians can cross. They just have to walk a little more. Instead of the random pedestrian cross walks we need stop lights. Even at cranbrook area people can not seem to use the crosswalk 50 feet away.

Don Duck

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:54 p.m.

When it comes to a pedestrian being struck by a vehicle "in a crosswalk" I fail to see the relevance of comparing the Ann Arbor ordinance to the state law. Are these vehicles driving up onto the curb to hit these pedestrians? Rhetorical question for those attempting to answer in their minds as they read the previous question. No they are not, because the pedestrians are being struck while in the crosswalk, which breaks the state law therefor making the comparison null and void. The local ordinance that is being broken is the failure for motorists to stop their vehicles to allow for the pedestrian to cross instead of them having to risk their lives to scurry into the crosswalk and then hope and pray the motorists stop (State Law). I don't see a problem with this local ordinance. I see a problem with the road commission not properly marking non-intersection crosswalks everywhere in Ann Arbor, proper enforcement at as many crosswalks and as often as possible and an informational awareness campaign. There are many crosswalks with faded paint or not painted stripes at all let alone signage. Drivers plain and simple need to pay more attention and pedestrians need to realize that many drivers do not. In addition neither state law or local ordinance should give any pedestrian the luxury of the feeling of safety. If you have no regard for your life, step out in traffic before every motorist has begun slowing their vehicle or come to a complete stop. When I cross, I watch the traffic on the side I am currently on to prepare myself in case I need to stop, turn back, or run. I seriously doubt removing this local ordinance will have any effect on the personal safety of pedestrians when attempting to cross the street in this town with the state law to back them in their right to do so.

Jrileyhoff

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:51 p.m.

I intentionally try to avoid driving in the Plymouth Rd area because of these crosswalks. It's just too scary to navigate. It's distracting to scan the sidewalks looking for pedestrians, terrifying to stop at the flashing (yellow, not red?) lights hoping others will stop too and not hit me or the walker that I know the driver can't see. I wonder if the businesses there have noticed a dip in sales.

FuriousEmma

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:47 p.m.

Keep the cross walks at the intersections - why we have decided upon these "mid-block" cross walks is a mystery. How lazy have we become that we cannot walk to the corner to cross the street! Whatever happened to issuing jaywalking tickets for those who cross mid-block? Now, despite the dangers, as drivers are used to NOT having to stop in the middle of the street for pedestrians. Have all the flashing lights you like - the pattern of driving that has existed for decades will not be changed because some authority has decided that mid-block cross walks are a great idea. It's not. The accidents and deaths prove this. Remove the mid block cross walks and return to the standard intersection crossings.

Jim Walker

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:45 p.m.

Realities: 1) Posted speed limits set well below the speeds most drivers find safe and comfortable do NOT reduce the upper end of the travel speed range. 2) Giving people a false sense of security as a motorist, cyclist or pedestrian is dangerous. If cars are coming at up to about 45 mph in reality, it is foolish and often dangerous to put up signs that say 35. 3) Rules different than state or national practices require extensive long term education, something which is essentially impossible to achieve in this transient community with so many visitors and temporary residents. Ann Arbor's Project Management group and the city attorneys essentially refuse to accept or educate people to the above realities. This is not wise. James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor

Mike

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:43 p.m.

The problem is obvious. 1. distracted drivers who are NOT paying attention to what is happening on the road ahead, 2. Pedestrians who are not using common sense about when it is safe for them to cross. Pedestrians might be distracted as well by playing with their phones. Pushing a button to make the lights flash does not put up a Star Trek shield around the pedestrian. They have to wait till it makes sense to push the button then wait to confirm that cars that should stop actually do. Regardless of the State or local law everyone out there is playing by the Marquis de Queensbury rule: "Protect yourself at all times."

Jack Fifer

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:42 p.m.

I love the new cross wales but the drivers do need to be aware if they dont live in a2

Brad

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:40 p.m.

From the "Walk Bike Drive" safety page on the city's own website under the "If You're a Driver" section: #5 Stop on red. Yellow lights mean slow down, not speed up. Any wonder there is confusion?

Mike

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:34 p.m.

"The city's pedestrian crosswalk ordinance requires vehicles to stop for pedestrians standing at the curb of a crosswalk. " If a driver waited for a crosswalk to clear of pedestrians in Ann Arbor there would be no need for the streets, the traffic would not move until Ann Arbor went to sleep. Yesterday, at the corner of State and Liberty pedestrians were standing at the curb on both sides of the street discussing where to go get some food. According to the law, no traffic could move during their discussion across State Street. The article is right; we need to educate both drivers and pedestrians. Education is no substitute for common sense and courtesy. These RRFB's that they have been installed at some cross walks, just how do they work? The pedestrians push a button, the light flashes, and the pedestrian walks cautiously across the street? This all takes place in a matter of a second or two. Common sense would tell you that the button is pressed to notify the drivers. The driver is given 3 to 5 seconds to respond to flashing lights, maybe the lights start out at yellow then change to red to insure that the driver has had time to respond. Than a signal flashes and alarm sounds(for site restricted persons) notifying the pedestrian to look both ways and proceed with caution to the other side of the street. Using the system I just explained would be much safer fore everyone, any driver ignoring the red flashing light would also be subject to fines and costs for running a red light while a pedestrian is in walk. "Filipiak said it's time for city leaders to decide if pedestrian safety is more important than a quick drive into downtown Ann Arbor from the east." Really, what kind of statement is that meant to be? When should someone's safety be second to anything? Both pedestrian and driver safety has to be part of this equation. If the traffic must flow at a rapid pace, under road or above road crosswalks are doable. The question there would be would t

Richard Carter

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:30 p.m.

As a pedestrian, I think the quote from the movie "Starman" when the alien was observing driving is appropriate. "Red light: Stop. Green light: Go. Yellow light: Go very fast." I can't for the life of me understand the attitude expressed by some here of "well, people didn't know what those flashing yellow lights meant so they just blew right through them really fast and that makes sense." On the other hand, maybe they should be red lights, either as-is or just plain old traffic signals, just pedestrian-activated. Then at least you'd have the yellow and red cycle that no driver can pretend not to know how to deal with.

Greg

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:29 p.m.

Mayor and his buddies got what they wanted. 1. Yellow flashing lights that look so pretty and sound so much like they might help. 2. We had less police as we were told Art and Green projects just had to have priority to the city funding. 3. As a result we have had less enforcement for several years of little things like stopsigns and stoplights and speed limits. Surprise, more people are ignoring the rules, who would have guessed??? Predictable, yes. But not what our fearless leaders wanted to hear, so of course it was ignored. Only good thing you can say for our mayor and his buddies that have run things - Still looking better than Detroit.

deputydwag

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:23 p.m.

Reading all of the good comments seems to point out that everyone has a responsibility to ensure that everyone can get around Ann Arbor safely- Cars, Peds, Bikes,- just the other night I saw a family of four riding in the bike lane at Division St and Catherine. They stopped for the red light and then with their small children in tow rode through the red light to continue on Catherine. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm I drive defensively, walk defensively, and ride bikes defensively.

Billy

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:22 p.m.

Basically what we have here is shinning example of the "nanny state" mentality FAILING miserably. Imagine that...they still won't admit they were wrong...

matt1027

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:20 p.m.

It's all very simple... -Blinking yellow every else in the world does NOT mean stop. -Don't cross the street without looking both ways and waiting for cars to stop (instead of assuming everyone on the road is: a) a good driver and b) aware of this stupid law. Every preschooler gets taught not to walk in front of moving traffic.

LXIX

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:18 p.m.

Eli Cooper is a Heiftje stooge - not a qualified traffic safety engineer.. He tends to parrot whatever the mayor wants (called job security). How about a comment from each "culpable" City Council member instead? Even those who don't respond or invoke "No Comment" when asked? And the increase in fender benders at crosswalks? Driver distraction? The burden of driver information processing skyrockets on congested streets. Perhaps UM and City density designers need a local law that will fix their agenda flaw. Making UMich pull its grossly overpopulated weight is a start. wouldn't City Council - UM employees agree?. Disbanding the DDA is THE progressive solution. Cell phones are just automated weapon triggers. Use RED lights instead? RED lights are heavily regulated devices under the law. They have to be "justified" by engineers. Installing a stop light requires expensive traffic flow studies, inter-light timing issues, etc. RED lights cannot be justified in overly-congested Ann Arbor. Given how many cars and crosswalks there are in this town, RED is OUT. Mayoral solution - Hey, YELLOW is now the IN color! And no more cars, some bike rentals, and a Big Boomerang to continue to justify all those other RED lights choking traffic around town. Has the CIty paid any "out of court settlement" or secured any "sealed judgement" as a result of their Crosswalk flaw? If the city is going to be sued, crosswalk victim's counselors have 90 days to do it. Stay tuned.

NoPC

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:15 p.m.

This is a stupid ordinance. Putting these crosswalks in the middle of busy traffic is just asking for trouble. Simple solution: Make people cross the streets at major intersection only... just like we used to alway do.

a2cents

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:09 p.m.

Yellow would seem to be a poor color choice in a state where drivers accelerate for yellow signals. Drivers seem to be of the opinion that pedestrians' crossing of streets of 4 or 5 lanes should be forbidden -or- be limited to crossing at infrequent traffic lights only. Distance to/from the crossing point, icy sidewalks, oppressive heat, or driving rain mean nothing to the heated, a/c'd, entertained driver. People of that stripe should be condemned to pedesting for lengthy periods.

Brad

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:04 p.m.

"Cooper said the RRFBs have been working as advertised " You mean they blink? Yes, we get that. But are they SAFE? THAT is the question with the myriad different crosswalk designs. Also notice that no traffic engineers were quoted? Only a "project manager" and the "transportation director". No way they'll let the engineers speak to anyone.

Karen

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:02 p.m.

Seems to me that this is about a lack of personal responsibility. If I am walking, My body is much more fragile than a car & it is MY job to make sure I don't step in front of a car. It is also the drivers responsibility to drive safely--- following the laws, the speed limit & watching for these crosswalks. I agree with what someone posted earlier, looking for these crosswalks makes for more distracted driving--- and to my mind, more accidents between pedestrian & cars correlates to implementation of this law. Cell phones have been a constant--this ordinance is what's new. And Ann Arbor does not have a stable pool of drivers--- every year we have an influx of students & their parents driving unfamiliar streets with an ordinance that doesn't match the rest of the state. Believe me, educating themselves on that isn't even on the list of what they need to learn about A2. I believe this should be repealed & we should go back to the State standard, adding bridges or extra lights at the spots that are particularly problematic. Issue jaywalking tickets & hold everyone accountable! This is a dangerous ordinance.

Meg

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1:02 p.m.

Crono, you seem pretty interested in blaming Michigan for the frustration with pedestrians who cannot seem to follow any traffic rules, and equate "progressive" with "people walking out into traffic wherever". I'm from Seattle. We're pretty progressive there, right? We make you recycle everything or we won't collect your garbage, we require emissions testing on cars, we marry everyone, and we haven't supported a Republican for governor since the Reagan administration. Guess what? We also hand out citations for jaywalking. People wait on corners for the light to change. Pedestrians at the University of Washington appear to recognize that they are not the only commuters trying to get somewhere. Stop trying to equate "politically progressive" with "self-absorbed undergrad in Uggs crossing State without looking", and you might have a valid argument. This isn't about being "progressive", or Michigan's car culture. This is about the very basic truth that cars, pedestrians, and bicycles all have responsibilities and restrictions.

OHHIO

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 1 p.m.

These crosswalks aren't flawed...they're stupid. What ever happened to the idea of crossing at an intersection?

Chase Ingersoll

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:57 p.m.

You should also pull the stats for rear end collisions that have occurred at these walks when someone suddenly realizes they have to stop. I will bet these are up too. Ann Arbor probably never looked into any historical discussion when the state laws were passed or accidents prior to the passage of state traffic laws. The party that is going to suffer the greater damage upon contact is just going to have to be the party with the greatest level of circumspection. It will just always be that way.

jmac

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:57 p.m.

I have seen a different system in other cities. Instead of the flashing light thing it's an actual stop light that flashes green unless a pedestrian pushed a button which makes the light turn red. Cars stop just like it's a red light. Seems like a better system because the pedestrian really does have the green light to cross while cars are actually stopped a red light. Could be a solution to the problem that could utilize existing crosswalks but just changing the type of light activated by the pedestrian.

Nicholas Urfe

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:53 p.m.

The distracted-I-Don't-Care J-walking in front of the Michigan Union is getting worse. Start handing out tickets. And ticket more drivers for ignoring crosswalks. And the A2 practice of *warning* drivers when enforcement will begin is just stupid. Catch them, don't give them the chance to temporarily alter their behavior merely to avoid a ticket.

DJBudSonic

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:52 p.m.

There are many factors at work here, which lead to the current unsafe situation. The city's crosswalk ordinance creates an atmosphere of pedestrian empowerment, and driver confusion. The privatization of driver education has taken away the states uniform teaching materials, which educated kids as both drivers and soon-to-be adult pedestrians. We don't have the police staff to adequately enforce or educate about our new laws. And the era of the distracted pedestrian and driver is upon us. I think that there has been some improvement in the courtesy of drivers since this city program was out in place, but obviously this doesn't translate into safer streets. The first thing I do when approaching a pedestrian in or near the sidewalk is slow down and make eye contact with the person if possible, and the second thing I do is look in my mirror to see if it is safe to stop for them. This has to be taken into account by both parties. I support the efforts of those who are asking the city for an evaluation and possible suspension of the current non-uniform rules.

Nicholas Urfe

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:52 p.m.

Other communities have signs that say "STOP for pedestrian in crosswalk - State Law" Why don't we have those plastered across the town? They are cheap. Why aren't there large signs at the major entrances to the city with that same reminder?

deadpidgeon

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:44 p.m.

I believe that the ordinance is unconstitutional. Local municipalities do not have the authority to override the Michigan Uniform Traffic Code. Think of the chaos that would ensue if each town and suburb was able to pass it's own traffic laws. There is a reason that the MUTC is in place, and the ordinance will probably be struck down when someone takes the matter to court.

nickcarraweigh

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:43 p.m.

Almost everybody who first experiences one of the trendy new Ann Arbor crosswalks is immediately struck by how dangerous they are. The few who don't notice are often hopelessly drunk.

hmsp

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:40 p.m.

I am a pedestrian-friendly driver –– I don't have the angry, anti-Ann Arbor attitude that many posters here have –– but I am constantly amazed by pedestrian behavior. SO many people just step off the curb without breaking stride or looking. Anyone who looks up and makes eye contact with me will get a nod that says that I see them, and will honor their right-of-way. But what if I WAS a distracted driver in possession of a very lethal weapon? It just doesn't make sense to take such risks. And then there is the political-statement crowd, which don't use common sense, and wait for a bit of a break in the traffic. These folks will step right out in front of you just to force you to stop! I had an interesting experience when approaching Liberty on a side street, with a pedestrian walking in the same direction, a bit ahead of me. She continued straight, crossing Liberty, and I turned behind her. But when she heard me proceeding, she actually turned around, and stepped back over the yellow line, glaring at me. Being willing to die for your political beliefs can be a very admirable thing, but is pedestrian rights really a cause to be willing to die for?

Ignatz

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:39 p.m.

Susan Filipiak supports more stop lights as a solution. On the face of it, it sounds like a good solution. However, I see two things that speak against this being a total solution. First, I think drivers are becoming tired of stopping at so many lights. I think that explains, in part, the reason we see so many more lights being ignored. Second, just because there's a stoplight, does not mean that pedestrians will use them. I notice many crossing in the middle if the street not too far at all from a functioning signal.

Katherine Griswold

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:33 p.m.

"But, a city project manager said it's not clear the ordinance itself has had an impact on those numbers, especially since it wasn't enforced during its first two years." The ordinance enforcement is not the issue. The issue is the "Pedestrians Rule!" campaign, initiated when the ordinance was first passed in 2010, which gives pedestrians a false sense of power. The ordinance is not consistent with transportation engineering best practices and defies the laws of physics. The campaign includes distributing bookmarks in our public schools with slogans such as "Pedestrians Rule! In Ann Arbor Crosswalks" and lists all the awards Ann Arbor has won. It ignores the fact that the ordinance conflicts with the teaching of the AAA School Safety Patrol Program, which is focused on pedestrian safety not empowerment. It is time for an evaluation by an independent professional engineer with transportation safety expertise.

Linda Peck

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:31 p.m.

Thank you, Kyle. Now we have the other viewpoint in contrast to Mrs Briere's comments the other day, which did not seem to be accurate to me. The picture does seem to point to certain factors such as the responsibility of City Council in designing these walkways and then the lack of enforcement. I would not like to see the City sued, but on the other hand I think such a suit might be justified.

RunsWithScissors

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:31 p.m.

"However, Cawley said it's difficult for city traffic engineers to know where pedestrian-car crashes take place the most on the city's roadways." Why not? Where did the data for this article come from? I imagine that every pedestrian-car crash is reported to the police and thus city traffic engineers would have access to that information.

brimble

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:28 p.m.

Human beings attempt to calculate risk intuitively, but we're really bad at it. Most people are fairly poor at judging time/speed/distance equations, and so pedestrians step out when they shouldn't and drivers go faster than they should. Additionally, pedestrians have been encouraged to assume that right-of-way in crosswalks mean they won't get hit. Drivers have been encouraged to assume that two tons of steel and exploding pillows mean they won't get injured in a crash. The current ordinance and crosswalk situation enhances the FALSE sense of security (therefore reduces PERCEPTION of risk) for both pedestrians and drivers. Nice try; truly disastrous result. Coordinate red lights to allow traffic to flow at or slightly below the speed limit, rather than make drivers feel penalized by red after red, therefore encouraging them to take greater risk (speed, run yellows, etc.). Put real red lights -- not flashy signals -- at pedestrian crossings, but make those lights coordinate in time with major intersections. It can be a win-win....

Bryan Lareau

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:28 p.m.

I've always thought that these low profile disco crosswalks were a half cooked solution. Most likely chosen for their lower cost then other systems. Other then what I am sure is additional cost, I don't understand why they didn't standardize on the HAWK system. They have one near the YMCA on Huron and it works perfectly. Even a driver who is half asleep, texting, and eating Egg McMuffin would have a difficult time ignoring it's signal.

David Frye

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:27 p.m.

It would be nice if the headline related in some way to the contents of the article.

SonnyDog09

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:25 p.m.

"But, a city project manager said it's not clear the ordinance itself has had an impact on those numbers, especially since it wasn't enforced during its first two years." This cracks me up. We know full well that if the numbers had gone down following the ordinance, the city would be crowing about how the reduction proved the wisdom of the new law.

Skyjockey43

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:24 p.m.

Quelle surprise

Lynn Liston

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:23 p.m.

Thoughtful article, Kyle. I work as a corporate relocator and conduct frequent city tours for transferees, often traveling on Plymouth Road. I always give the traffic lesson about stopping for pedestrians at the crosswalks and relate the sad stories about the girls killed coming home from prayers at the mosque and now, Sharita. If we are lucky, we can practice stopping at the flashing lights and then I can listen my passengers' comments about the cars in the other lane who didn't bother to stop. Two observations: traffic on Plymouth Road has always been lawless. People speed, run reds, cut in and out, tailgate, and text/talk on their cellphones. It's been like this since I lived on the NE side back in the 90's. It's a bad place to drive let alone be a pedestrian. Jackson Road, in Scio, is getting to be just as bad. Second observation: the A2 spin on the pedestrian crossing law has made pedestrians too comfortable and trusting. You still need to stop, look both ways, and cross only when traffic is clear enough for you to cross safely. Flashing lights don't guarantee your safety, only common sense and a clear space in the traffic can do that. The crosswalks lights are not quite like the 'walk' cycle at an intersection. You just can't count on traffic stopping. I think that we need a pedestrian light cycle that mimics the yellow (prepare to stop), red (stop), green (go) sequence. We are conditioned to stop for red lights (most of us). Perhaps we just need to install normal stop lights whose cycle can be activated by the pedestrian. Like most of our existing intersections...

Barzoom

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:15 p.m.

The city statistician isn't going to contradict what our city government wants. You can prove whatever you want with statistics by picking the right data set.

DS

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:11 p.m.

The crosswalks are a really bad idea. I agree with many of the people who have posted, re: giving pedestrians a false sense of security. I too have witnessed a vehicle rear-ended when someone stopped short for a crossing. I hope they either make sure all of them have flashing lights or get rid of them, please!

you can't handle the truth

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:11 p.m.

This headline is the most predictable headline ever.

A Dexter Person

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:06 p.m.

Remember when our mothers taught us to look both ways before we crossed the street? And not to cross between parked cars? And when it was illegal to jay-walk? I drive through A2 and U of M campus frequently. I constantly see pedestrians walk right out into traffic without looking. Many seem color blind as they cross against the walk lights! Some don't even use the cross walk. I've seen students walk diagonally across an intersection! They're texting or looking at their i-pod or got ear buds in. Totally oblivious to what's going on around them. Heck, I've seen pedestrians walk right into a sign, another person or a parked car! I think pedestrians are more distracted than drivers! The responsibility of safety rests on BOTH motorist and pedestrian.

northA2

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 12:01 p.m.

In a state full of aggressive drivers who appear to have a death wish each time they get behind the wheel, none of the comments on these articles are particularly surprising. At what point do we and drivers who see flashing yellow lights as an invitation to speed up through the crosswalk -- just like they do at every intersection in town? "I don't understand what those flashing yellow lights mean" is the most BS excuse out there. If high-intensity flashing lights don't indicate to you that you need to pay attention to SOMETHING then you're probably too stupid to possess a driver's license. Slow down. Stop tailgating. Drive defensively. Value your life and that of everyone else on the road. At what point are we going to wake up and deal with the fact that the aggressive driving culture here leads to increased crashes with other cars, pedestrians and bikers?

Craig Lounsbury

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:58 a.m.

as a pedestrian I find it a bad idea to invoke my entitlement. I may be entitled to be in the road and force cars to stop for me but the ramifications of a car denying me my right of way is too big for me to risk. There is a risk/reward factor. Risk: permanent physical impairment or death. Reward: Get across the street a little faster. Someone would have to toss in some serious money on the reward side for me to consider the risk, however small.

ordmad

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:52 a.m.

This really takes the cake for irresponsible journalism, particularly the headline. The short answer is there is no clear correlation. And, while there is some passing mention of increased traffic, there are no counts. Finally, note how the lowest number from years past is first contrasted to the highest number from the last two years for the most drama. Read the numbers closely and you see am increase of about 8 to 11. Crank the traffic counts in and you'll get a semi responsible number. That, of course, was too much work. Shameful.

Jon Saalberg

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:38 a.m.

Great editorial in the new Car and Driver addresses the number one reason people get hit - driver distraction. With many drivers paying attention to everything but driving, it's no wonder more pedestrians aren't killed. I use the Stimson/Huron signal almost every day, and cars almost always blow through that signal when the "Walk" sign is on. And invariably, I see a person chatting away with a passenger, using a cell phone, or distracted in some way from the real task of driving. The Car & Driver editor calls for making the inside of a car a dead zone, and I am all for that - anything to keep the many, many people who think that they have to send or read a text, or otherwise mess with their phone, rather than focus on the road. Fines are inadequate. It is illegal to text and drive in Michigan, yet every day, I see many drivers texting and driving.

Mike

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:34 a.m.

"But, a city project manager said it's not clear the ordinance itself has had an impact on those numbers, especially since it wasn't enforced during its first two years." Statistics are for those who like to use them to support their arguments. Anyone who has driven the roads with these crosswalks intuitively know it is much more dangerous and adds a false sense of security to those who walk and don't look while increasing the things you have to keep an eye on as a driver. This was predicted and expected by many posters on this forum and many were against this. The government now decides what is best for us and how to protect us. We soon won't even know how to cross the street safely in this country without a light to tell us to go or stop................The good news is they will be narrowing most of the roads in this town creating gridlock so it will be almost impossible to get hit with any force if you are texting and walk in front of a car

KJMClark

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:29 a.m.

Any increase is more likely attributable to more pedestrian traffic than anything else. Besides, they haven't really done any enforcement but a few sting operations a few years ago. You're trying to change an ingrained SE Michigan prejudice that motorists always have right of way and pedestrians are only allowed to cross at lights. It's either going to take a decade or some actual police enforcement to change that. Personally, I hope they drop our crosswalk and bike lane ordinances. Then we'll be using Michigan Uniform Traffic Code (UTC), which we've already adopted, and motorists will *still* have to stop for pedestrians in a crosswalk, since that's what UTC says (which, BTW, is what national Uniform Vehicle Code says). And then it will be a misdemeanor (up to 90 days in jail) for motorists to drive in bike lanes, and maybe the police will actually enforce that ordinance for a change.

Pizzicato

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:28 a.m.

Anecdotally speaking, one could make the argument that pedestrian deaths due to vehicle collisions have gone up inline with the adoption of smartphones.

mw

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:21 a.m.

"However, Cooper said he recognizes that city officials need to make sure the public is educated about crosswalks in Ann Arbor." Aaargghh! If you install crosswalks that require efforts to 'educate the public' the effort is doomed to fail! That's because 'the public' driving on our streets will always include both visitors and new arrivals (who show up by the thousands every year). The idea that we can have crosswalks that are unfamiliar to people not from Ann Arbor and that these crosswalks can be made safe by public education campaigns is just nuts. The 'hawk' crosswalks need to be either A) Removed or B) Turned into standard button-activated traffic lights. And this needs to be done immediately -- before somebody else gets killed.

A2rocks

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:20 a.m.

I drive on Plymouth Rd every day at all hours. Since the last fatal accident I have witness four pedestrians this past 2 weeks alone in the middle of the crosswalk almost run down by drivers not stopping or unaware of the meaning of the flashing lights. I have had drivers pass me while I'm stopped, and have almost been rear ended numerous times. I will never walk in these crosswalks...not with distracted, speeding, misinformed drivers oblivious to what a crosswalk with flashing lights means. Slow down when approaching these crosswalks whether flashing or not. In a few weeks the pedestrian traffic will triple when the students on North Campus are back. Everyone please pay attention.

CPLtownie

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:19 a.m.

Being on both side as a driver and a pedestrian, I can also attest to the faults of this ordinance. Often I'll be at the corner (looking both ways as taught when I was a child) and have one person stop and look up the street to see a car racing with obviously no intention of stopping (bad visibility for them to see me) meanwhile I see another car fast approaching the stopped car. I've taken to hanging back from a corner, and waiting for an opportunity to cross - safely. People complain about distracted drivers - this 'law' is a huge distraction - divers are expected to scan sidewalks and determine if someone is intending to cross. Now ... Flip side - I ride a motorcycle - am I really going to stop when there's no one IN a crosswalk, just standing on a corner, texting, talking on the phone etc, and risk being rear ended? No, because the result would be horrendous for me. Limit crosswalks to intersection WITH PROPER LIGHTS. Plymouth road is dotted every 500 feet with an insane crosswalk with flashing YELLOW lights (last I heard flashing yellow means proceed with caution, not stop). As a pedestrian you would have to be nuts to think that's going to hold up 4 lanes of traffic with a huge amount of distractions (entries/exits to shopping areas,gas stations etc). Stick with a universal law of when someone is IN A CROSSWALK, stop. And do away with the jaywalker crossings - stick with proper intersection and proper traffic control lights.

Gorc

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:18 a.m.

Has the city installed any new cross walks since 2010? I''m not asking about the upgrades to existing crosswalks with signals or other safety measures, but installed new ones.

nicedoggy

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:18 a.m.

Duh!

Eduard Copely

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:13 a.m.

This pedestrian safety ordinance and accompanying rectangular flashing yellow (disco lights) constitute a major change that many drivers (and pedestrians) are simply unfamiliar with; case in point all of the accidents and fatalities thus far. Clearly, not enough has been done to educate the general public about the new ordinance and what was supposed to prevent collisions is now part of the problem. The goofed again and this time it's costing lives. Our condolences to all the families who have lost loved ones due to this safety ordinance.

antikvetch

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:09 a.m.

I guess this proves that the laws of physics just can't be trumped by local ordinance. Who knew?

A2since74

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:08 a.m.

The sense of security with the crosswalks and signials is only provided to the City and not the pedestrian. The city says we did our job, and now it is up to the drivers and pedestrians to follow the law. Trouble is often the drivers do not follow the law, but the pedestrians pay the price. It is like the autobile insurers saying if you forgot to lock your car and it is stolen it is your fault. The culture in most of the country is that drives ignore pedestrian crosswalks.

a2grateful

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 11:02 a.m.

For a high-density pedestrian use, UM certainly got it right with its pedestrian bridge across five lanes of Washtenaw. This walkway, north of Washtenaw and Geddes, connects central campus with multiple dorms and the medical campus. This type of bridge seems expensive only until compared to loss of human life. Condolences to the families of Ms Williams, Ms Filipiak, and the woman hit on Washtenaw (5 lanes, 45 mph, poor visibility) near Platt.

Goober

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 10:58 a.m.

Cars will always be at fault and bear full responsibility for their actions, but AA city leadership have emboldened pedestrians. They now feel invincible. Many do not care if cars are coming fast; they have the right, according to city leadership, to walk out into traffic. Maybe the data is showing city leadership that they have selected the wrong solutions to protect pedestrians. I have said it before and will say it again that I have observed no less than 3 police cars turn a corner when a pedestrian was already in the cross walk. Go figure!

YpsiGirl4Ever

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 10:43 a.m.

These crosswalks are an awful idea. Add STOP lights or overpasses, or go back to the standard everyone was taught in drivers education. Everyone knows pedestrians have the right away when they can be CLEARLY seen walking. To stick a walker out of Plymouth Road in the middle of traffic with the persuasion of blinking light "safety" is wrong. Ms. Williams probably would be alive today without this newly designed crosswalk that a majority of drivers have no idea what the rule would be.

rutrow

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 10:42 a.m.

Not too much of a surprise, sadly. I strongly expected this bad news. This is because when you instill a false sense of security and dangerous presumptions in pedestrians, and all but encourage them to never break their stride or actually look to see if it is safe to cross, you are courting trouble. And to assume it is simply due to speed demons, distracted drivers and other easily-vilified categories is dangerous in itself because you are "rallying the troops", so to speak, without gathering actual facts as to why we are getting the result we are getting, obviating actual safety measures. Additionally, it would further help the situation if the signals were no longer timed to make all drivers stop at each one, thereby racing so as to get to the next signal before it turns red. In fact, here's an idea: time them so that if you go too FAST, you'll catch the end of the red!

Just A Citizen

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 10:39 a.m.

I agree with DiagSquirrel - I've been around these (on both sides) enough to know it's inherently flawed. Good intentions, but when executed it has the opposite effect. The worst situation is when there are crosswalks without the lights. I've had pedestrians step out before looking and when there is poor visibility (e.g., a truck stopped in left hand lane to turn left blocking them). Pedestrians have a false sense of security & they need to be better educated (along with drivers).

DonBee

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 10:37 a.m.

Any time a local government does something that is non-standard, it takes a long time to educate people about it with a campaign to get the word out. It does not matter if it is a leash law for cats, or non-standard crossing rules. The city council passed rules, but did not educate the local population about them. Tens of thousands of people who don't live inside the city limits visit Ann Arbor weekly and a large part of the city population turns over each year. Without a strong and on-going education campaign it will be difficult to make these non-standard rules and crossings work and be safe. Once the school year starts I try to avoid driving near central campus, because so few students seem to follow any traffic rules, the simple rule downtown is "there are more of us, then there are of you (walkers vs drivers) so we rule. Without education of the people coming and going in Ann Arbor, the city is far better off putting in standard signals, and enforcing state law. They would also do well to issue a few hundred jay-walking tickets in the first couple of days of school, to let the students know that laws apply to them too. This is about enforcing safety for everyone.

Jim Mulchay

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 10:22 a.m.

For the various incidents, is there any analysis of why they occurred? Such as distracted driving, impaired driver, bad weather (?), unlicensed / suspended license driver. excessive speed, etc? Also how many incidents resulted in legal action (court, arrest and such).

TheDiagSquirrel

Thu, Aug 22, 2013 : 10:20 a.m.

Excellent article. I have driven through enough of these, and walked through enough of these, to see their inherent flaws firsthand. They sometimes go off or stay on without any pedestrians nearby. They also give some pedestrians a false sense of security, when they need to pay closer attention to the traffic around them.