New Haven Independent

Posted by: nfjanette | October 16, 2008 5:10 PM

Great idea, I've seen these work well in other locations.

But...

he city has bought 5 of the signs, at a pricetag of $289.15 each. With labor, the cost comes to about $500 each, said city transportation chief Mike Piscitelli.

...$210 each for installation labor? Only a government run operation, with the help of labor unions, could find a way to make it cost that much.

Posted by: James | October 17, 2008 8:13 AM

This only works if you manage to get pedestrians to use crosswalks. Unfortunately people in this town simply cross wherever they like. Hopefully people will pay attention to these signs, yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk, and others will see that the crosswalk is a safe and convenient place to cross. I can't say I'm holding my breath.

Posted by: robn | October 17, 2008 9:24 AM

Thank you Mike Piscitelli and Ben Berkowitz and everybody who supported this idea. Incrementally addressing small quality of life issues will eventually add up to a more civil city.

Posted by: David Streever | October 17, 2008 9:49 AM

They should have let Ben and I "install" them :)! We bid the low low price of free dollars.

Why can't the city hire independent contractors who charge zero?

Posted by: jdavis | October 17, 2008 10:29 AM

Olive and Court street should be next!

Posted by: anon | October 17, 2008 10:46 AM

Great news. These signs should be put in throughout the city beginning this fall, as Elm City Cycling and Yale Medical Campus Traffic Safety Group initially asked. They should also be combined with enforcement "stings" like they have in so many other cities.

The letter requesting these signs was great, and points out a ton of details about where they are used and why they work. Hopefully everyone in the city will read it!

For stories on other "stings", news coverage of the signs and copies of the in-street pedestrian sign request letters:

http://www.newhavensafestreets.org/search/label/In-Street%20Crosswalk%20Signs

Posted by: Kyle | October 17, 2008 2:03 PM

Olive and Court would be a great location for one of these. So would the crosswalk at the very center of the Green, which is ignored by virtually everyone, including city bus drivers.

The Register article reported a 1 in 5 compliance rate when a pedestrian tried stepping out onto the State Street crosswalk. If that's all crosswalks do for you in New Haven, no wonder pedestrians don't bother looking for them.

Posted by: East Rockette | October 17, 2008 2:49 PM

So glad to see these first signs in place. It's a great beginning.

What we really need is a total cultural shift. Visiting Portland, ME recently was a real shock to the system - cars actually slowed down as they approached crosswalks, and if they saw a pedestrian waiting, they stopped. It was so unfamiliar! Took a few days for us to get used to it, and to become confident enough to step out into the crosswalk without nervously hesitating and making elaborate "really??! it's OK?" gestures to the car drivers.

You really got the sense that drivers were aware of the presence of pedestrians at all times; that it was not just pedestrians' responsibility to watch out for cars.

Imagine attaining that level of courtesy and mutual confidence in New Haven. I reckon it will take a lot more than signs, but bring it on!

Posted by: SafeButNowIllegal | October 19, 2008 1:05 PM

ECC has unintentionally made it worse for some of us who have been biking safely for years. Let's face it.. many of the roads were designed for cars not bikes. Anyone who tells me that you are 100% safer biking on the road than the sidewalk "all the time" is just wrong. There are times when the sidewalk can be safely utilized to avoid an oncoming heard of cars from behind on a bad road. There are times when you just want to cruise to the end of your destination on the sidewalk instead of having to dismount your bike in the middle of the road. There are times when going through the red light (when there is no traffic) is actually safer than waiting until the light turns green and you have to struggle to get your position established in front of drivers coming from behind.

In the good old days, cyclists were free to navigate the city the best/safest way possible for them. Now the police are giving out $75 tickets to bikers who are not even jeopardizing the safety of others. I know I got one. What next.. well if ECC keeps going then the city will come up with restrictions on which roads cyclist can use. Like, these roads have been deemed too dangerous for bicycles and so you are not allowed to ride on them.. All in the name of "your safety". Well, no thanks ECC give me back the good old days. New Haven is now the only city in CT where police are looking to give ticket to cyclist.

Posted by: Bruce | October 20, 2008 10:38 AM

SAFEBUTNOWILLEGAL:

The sidewalk safety issue is an ongoing debate in the cycling community. However, we can't make up our own traffic laws based on what we each personally feel is the best choice. Police are simply enforcing traffic laws that have been on the books for decades. Safer streets depend not only on motorists obeying speed limits and rights of way, but bicyclists and pedestrians following the law.

If you don't think the laws adequately protect bicyclists, you really have an obligation to yourself and your community to get them changed. The sidewalk ban is a municipal code, so changing this is not out of the realm of possibility. There are allowances for designated bicycle paths on certain sidewalks, like the Freedom Trail near IKEA. If you have specific sidewalks that you feel are safely bikeable, I would recommend starting with a petition. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would sign on, even within Elm City Cycling.

Posted by: anon | October 20, 2008 11:01 AM

Safebutnowillegal, I think you are mistaken. If you read through the listserv archive, it looks like ECC members have just as many opinions on the sidewalk ticketing issue as the general public at large. ECC seems to be mostly just a group that encourages discussion -- it hasn't come out with "official" positions on anything other than supporting the city's new educational campaign and maybe asking for more bike routes. Perhaps a few of the more vocal ECC members have taken positions on the issue, but that doesn't mean that they represent the entire group in any way, and it's entirely within their right to say whatever they feel like saying. In fact, if you polled the whole "group" I would bet that most people agree with everything you just wrote.

Posted by: William Kurtz | October 20, 2008 11:23 AM

Anyone who has comments, suggestions, criticisms, or questions about what Elm City Cycling does or what it's advocating is welcome to attend public meetings on the second Monday of each month at City Hall--6:00 p.m. The next one will be coming up on November 10th. Everyone is also welcome to join the discussion on the listserv (www.groups.yahoo.com/groups/elmcitycycling).

SAFE, if you're the same person who posted in the "Bikes for Sale" section of craigslist about going over the hood of a car and having a police officer blame you, it might interest you to know that one of the things ECC has been advocating for in conversations with the police is holding drivers accountable when they are clearly in the wrong and injure cyclists or pedestrians.

Posted by: Ben Ross | October 22, 2008 6:18 AM

Home grown democrazy....the judges and prosecutors as well as the police, need updates on driver/bikers
relationship. Strange here in the so called sophisticated east (old new england) the wild west
(yellow lite means speed up) driving which is tolerated.

Posted by: East Rockette | October 22, 2008 10:58 AM

The simultaneous crackdown on cars and cyclists is theoretically admirable in many respects - we share the road, so we should share responsibility for using them safely - but jumps the gun in many other practical ways. And Safebutnowillegal lists a few of them.

For me, biking with a little'un in the bike seat and a bigger little one (who is competent but by no means expert) on a small bike beside me, the roads are bloody scary. I'm happier on the footpath with my little convoy travelling at a snail's pace and ringing our bells like crazy every time we approach a pedestrian.

But if the choice is risking our physical safety or risking a $75 fine every time we go anywhere, I'll be reverting to the car. Or going everywhere on shanks' pony, I guess, which is still healthy and green but not as efficient or, frankly, as fun.

Posted by: SaferSidewalkiddos | October 28, 2008 7:58 PM

EAST ROCKETTE wrote:

..."biking with a little'un in the bike seat and a bigger little one (who is competent but by no means expert) on a small bike beside me, the roads are bloody scary. I'm happier on the footpath with my little convoy travelling at a snail's pace and ringing our bells like crazy every time we approach a pedestrian.

But if the choice is risking our physical safety or risking a $75 fine every time we go anywhere, I'll be reverting to the car."

As posted in the crackdown thread, a NHPD Asst. Chief kindly assured me that they will refocus on the original target which was bicycle shooters / marauders. For some reason Lt. Hassett's project got "off track." The old sidewalk ban ordinance and vehicle laws can still be enforced but perhaps some quarter may be given -- IE, and because many parents are wondering, elementary school age children (who may not be ready for the street) can commute (responsibly) via sidewalk and adult guardian(s) are allowed to escort them on our bikes without being ticketed -- do walk the bikes in congested areas though :)

Many Thanks for the sign folks!