Good idea ---poor execution
I'd like to see hanging cameras that catch the people who knock those signs down and send them citations. If you can't avoid hitting that kind of thing, you're not paying sufficient attention. If you can avoid them, you might be driving safely enough not to hit pedestrians. Hitting pedestrians is a problem worth solving.
Are signs so expensive that we need to move around a limited supply of signs. Why not permanent signs at crosswalks.?
I disagree. The signs on my street have been very effective and lasted months.
Your post proves why the signs are needed. If cars can't even slow down and/or avoid a stationary sign, then the crossing must be pretty dangerous for pedestrians.
Formerlyjerseyjack said:
pedestrian protection is a worthy idea. However, tho portable pedestrian crossing signs that are supposed to be on the yellow lines of roadways should disappear. They are being hit by cars and are being bent and moved from the yellow lines and onto the travel lanes.
Some have been hit, moved off the yellow lines and turned sideways. They are then, less visible to motorists and become their own road hazard, especially at night.
Get rid of them.
yahooyahoo said:
Your post proves why the signs are needed. If cars can't even slow down and/or avoid a stationary sign, then the crossing must be pretty dangerous for pedestrians.
In that case, the town should put more out and leave the fallen ones in the street. Let them clutter the street and make it an obstacle course. Better than speed bumps.
Compare the traffic hazard signs with the signs at the corner of Parkwood Diner.
P.D. signs light up when a pedestrian pushes the button. And guess what? They are not in the middle of the street.
--- and ain't no one been hit by a car crossing Springfield at Parkwood.
I noticed another pedestrian crossing sign has been knocked off the center lines and into the travel lane. This one is on Ridgewood.
I guess we're finding out that a lot of drivers aren't even capable of the whole "keep to your side of the road" thing.
Took a look at the crosswalk outside the Parkwood with the light up street signs. Not a bad idea. And cars stop for that? What about for crosswalks where there's a sign in one direction, but not the other way?
For example, at Prospect and Courter Avenue, where there's a sign behind the crosswalk saying there's a crosswalk ahead as you drive toward Tuscan, but coming from Tuscan, there's no sign at all. Valley and 5th Street, no signs in either direction. In some places, especially along Prospect, there are signs and no crosswalks. At Hixon and Valley, by the CVS, there are 4 crosswalks, no crosswalk signs, not even a Stop sign between Hixon and Valley.
The inconsistency makes me crazy.
As a pedestrian who frequently walks across busy local streets such as Tuscan Road, Prospect, Valley, Baker, Maplewood Avenue, and Springfield in a marked crosswalk on an almost daily basis, I would rather have a car hit a stop for pedestrian sign than hit me. As a driver-in-training, I have no problem driving past these signs without hitting them. I would expect no less of the more experienced drivers among us. That said, if the signs referred to by the OP are being totaled on a regular basis, this is a warning to motorists of the need to slow down and maintain better control of their vehicle. At very least, think of these signs as the training device they are intended to be.
One of these signs is about a block down the road from us. During a rainy night, it got knocked over, and was hit by many cars as it lay in the road. In the morning, we found the sign next to our driveway.
My spouse picked up the sign and carried it back to its crosswalk location down the road. But first we showed it to our 'tween who crosses that street himself on his way to school. It did help emphasize how careful he needs to be when crossing the busy streets.
ridski said:
The inconsistency makes me crazy.
My impression is that the signs are meant to be rotating reminders, not fixtures. I could be misremembering, but I think I've seen them appear at various crosswalks only to vanish after a while and pop up at crosswalks where I hadn't noticed one before, then disappear and show up elsewhere again.
Seems enforcement would be a potentially effective deterrent. I've never seen anyone pulled over for failure to yield. Start hitting people's wallets and behaviours will change.
I think the signs are a good idea, to remind people - especially on a road like Prospect, which is long and straight, where too many people drive too fast and don't pay attention to crosswalks. When signs are knocked down, that's a driver problem, not a "sign problem". The Stop sign at the end of our street has been knocked down in the past, and I wouldn't say that was a problem with the sign.
DaveSchmidt said:
ridski said:
The inconsistency makes me crazy.
My impression is that the signs are meant to be rotating reminders, not fixtures. I could be misremembering, but I think I've seen them appear at various crosswalks only to vanish after a while and pop up at crosswalks where I hadn't noticed one before, then disappear and show up elsewhere again.
Signs on Prospect are at fixed locations, not rotated. Same is likely true of the others popping up around town. You may be confusing the signs under discussion instructing motorists to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk with the "your speed is ..." signs which appear on busy roads from time to time and are rotated from location to location.
joan_crystal said:
DaveSchmidt said:Signs on Prospect are at fixed locations, not rotated. Same is likely true of the others popping up around town. You may be confusing the signs under discussion instructing motorists to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk with the "your speed is ..." signs which appear on busy roads from time to time and are rotated from location to location.
ridski said:My impression is that the signs are meant to be rotating reminders, not fixtures. I could be misremembering, but I think I've seen them appear at various crosswalks only to vanish after a while and pop up at crosswalks where I hadn't noticed one before, then disappear and show up elsewhere again.
The inconsistency makes me crazy.
I'm referring to the yellow, inverted-arrow shaped pedestrian signs, like the one I spy from my window right now, that are placed in the middle of a crosswalk. As I said, though, my recollection that they have been switched at times from some crosswalks to others could be faulty.
The signs are meant to be long-term at their particular location, and are being added to regularly.
Town has designated the intersections at which those yellow signs are placed.
I wonder if they are in violation of D.O.T. regulations.
About a week ago, I read where towns cannot paint a blue line in between yellow lines as that would be a violation of the integrity of the yellow lines. If so, then dontja think placing objects on the lines would also be a violation since these obstruct the view of the yellow lines?
DaveSchmidt said:
ridski said:
The inconsistency makes me crazy.
My impression is that the signs are meant to be rotating reminders, not fixtures. I could be misremembering, but I think I've seen them appear at various crosswalks only to vanish after a while and pop up at crosswalks where I hadn't noticed one before, then disappear and show up elsewhere again.
I'm not talking about the ones in the road, I'm talking about the ones on poles on the sidewalks which are sometimes next to crosswalks, but not always.
ETA while I understand the topic is about those temporary in-street signs, I was responding in this case to a post about the yellow pole signs outside Parkwood a diner which have a button on them pedestrians can press to make them temporarily flash to show that someone is crossing Springfield.
ridski said:
I'm not talking about the ones in the road, I'm talking about the ones on poles on the sidewalks which are sometimes next to crosswalks, but not always.
ETA while I understand the topic is about those temporary in-street signs, I was responding in this case to a post about the yellow pole signs outside Parkwood a diner which have a button on them pedestrians can press to make them temporarily flash to show that someone is crossing Springfield.
Sorry. I made a hash out of a couple of things in this discussion. Poor idea -- poor execution.
I hate those signs. Because they're single sided, if you approach from the other side you don't see them until you're right on them.
They require an unusually large curve to make the turn - so dangerous
In addition they move - and are placed inconsistently.
Get rid of 'em!
peteglider said:
I hate those signs. Because they're single sided, if you approach from the other side you don't see them until you're right on them.
Single sided? The one near us is double-sided, so it doesn't matter which direction on the road you are approaching from, you will see it. (However, it doesn't face the pedestrians who walk in the crosswalk, which is perpendicular to the sign)
peteglider said:
I hate those signs. Because they're single sided, if you approach from the other side you don't see them until you're right on them.
They require an unusually large curve to make the turn - so dangerous
In addition they move - and are placed inconsistently.
Get rid of 'em!
I've never seen a single sided one.
pedestrian protection is a worthy idea. However, tho portable pedestrian crossing signs that are supposed to be on the yellow lines of roadways should disappear. They are being hit by cars and are being bent and moved from the yellow lines and onto the travel lanes.
Some have been hit, moved off the yellow lines and turned sideways. They are then, less visible to motorists and become their own road hazard, especially at night.
Get rid of them.