Dangerous Pedestrian Crossing

At http://www.seeclickfix.com/issues/12441 one user writes, "I propose a sign for traffic exiting the highway. "Residential and school zone. Speed limit 15 mph.""

Combined with more physical traffic calming, like curb extensions (temporary if funding does not allow a permanent one), would this be another good solution for improving pedestrian safety?

From http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/010931.html

"I think we need to recognize that the idea we can "balance" cars and sidewalk life is a dangerous illusion. The only way to make pedestrians and bikers safe and welcome is to slow cars down, to make it clear that the place through which they're driving is one in which they need to pay attention, and, whenever possible, to get those cars off the streets and out of way of trains, bus, bikes and strollers."

"Assert the primacy of people enjoying the act of walking, and density begins to become community, transit begins to become an essential amenity rather than a safety net, and life begins to orient around experiences and access rather than accumulation and convenience. The act of walking is, I think more and more, at the very foundation of every other bright green possibility."

I saw that in-road pedestrian signs have been placed all around Southern Connecticut State University. I saw several there this past weekend.

What's taking these so long for these?

These are the reasons I have heard people cite when requesting two signs:

1. Vehicles don't always see the sign if there are cars blocking the view, e.g., during rush hour (which is the time of day that pedestrians are likely to be injured, particularly after the daylight savings shift) or if they are making a turn. Two signs would address this issue.

2. Generally speaking, two signs provide greater visibility than one.

3. More objects in the road = greater chance of drivers traveling at a reasonable speed. Reflective signs designed to warn drivers before speeding through the intersection at rush hour are particularly effective at this.

4. Best practices. Two signs are often used in other towns, at similar crossings -- probably for the reasons cited above.

How would two signs work any better than 1?

Can we get two signs here?

need two pedestrian crossing signs here - one for each of the two crosswalks on each side of the Lincoln St intersection. I almost got mowed down this a.m. by a car that was barreling towards Orange St. that barely stopped while I was in the crosswalk and in his lane.

I like Ben's idea. A bold sign saying "Kill Your Speed, Not a Child" also would work.

I cross here every day to get to and from work. Drivers coming in both directions are much more deferential to pedestrians when the sign is there. I love the sign!

I've heard positive feedback from residents about the new sign. However, ultimately a raised crosswalk is probably needed because drivers blow through Trumbull Street after coming off I91 and still don't always yield.

Here's a cool idea from Needham Mass:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/11/06/a_kinder_gentler_approach_on_traffic_signs/

How do they keep the snow plow drivers from running them over?

I hope they are installed soon.

Will it just be the five rolled out in October/November, or the complete set for each intersection in the city?

It's also worth pointing out that these signs are used year-round in and around Boston, which gets 2X the snow of New Haven. Next winter, they should really be kept up all year, at least at the highest-volume crossings.

I heard a rumor that signs would be coming out this week...looking forward to those little guys,

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick,
Did this just happen recently, or were you referring to last fall? If they haven't already, I hope the city puts the signs back out soon. I imagine the last of the heavy snowfall is behind us and thus snow plows should no longer be an issue (knock on wood).
Thanks!
Brian Tang