Center City Philadelphia---Very few, if any, pedestrian signals?

[sopas ej]

I LOVE Philadelphia. Even though it's been many years since I was there, it still is my favorite northeastern US city. New York City is cool, but I just found Philadelphia to have more charm to it, and the city itself and the people to be less intense than New York, if that makes sense. And before I went there, being that it's an old, colonial city, I was expecting crooked streets and lanes. It wasn't until afterwards I learned that Philadelphia is the US' first city to be purposely laid out in a grid with right angles.

As such, it's still a very walkable city. My assumption is it's because most of the streets aren't very wide, being the street grid was created centuries before cars...

OK, enough of my rambling. When I was there, I noticed that many intersections that have traffic signals, do not have pedestrian signals. Is it because they aren't needed? The street is narrow enough that a pedestrian can easily make it across, and can just cross on the green light. I know of some intersections like this in San Francisco, though I can't think of specific locations. One intersection in my own town of South Pasadena is like this, but it's the only one I can think of specifically in my city.

What do you guys think? Is there a specific reason why many signalized intersections in Philadelphia don't have pedestrian signals?

Example, and this is outside Center City Philadelphia, although I can see that it's 2 narrow one-way intersecting streets: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9936...oASAFQAw%3D%3D

[pj3000]

Green means go, red means stop

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

Green means go, red means stop

lol. Yeah, there are traffic lights pointed in the opposite way of the vehicular traffic, so the purpose of them is presumably for pedestrians.

[Bonsai Tree]

My understanding is that the city will install those lights with pedestrian crossing signals once the poles need replacing. This has generally been the rule of thumb since the ADA act (1990)- but Philly is moving at a glacial pace. It really is a big accessibility issue because color-blind individuals might have problems seeing a visual crossing reference. Philly in general is terrible for any ADA accessibility. Doesn't seem like they take it very seriously.

[Cirrus]

Philadelphia treats all modes moving in the same direction as using the same signals. The same green/red you'd follow while driving a car is what you're supposed to follow as a pedestrian.

It's a bad system, at the very least because it precludes a leading pedestrian interval, but that's how they do it there.

[wcphil]

Perfect timing to post this. This video was just posted in the Philadelphia general development thread. It is about why Philadelphia is the most walkable city and they bring up the lack of pedestrian signals as well as the origination of the street grid. • Video Link

[iheartthed]

^Most walkable city is a bit of a stretch, but it does pretty good. The video doesn't work, btw.

[Londonee]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

^Most walkable city is a bit of a stretch, but it does pretty good. The video doesn't work, btw.

It's up there...

Here's the link directly to that video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qm3sZdZXfg

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Londonee

It's up there...

Here's the link directly to that video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qm3sZdZXfg

Definitely up there, and it has a great core but so do a few other cities. But Philadelphia does have wide roads in some parts of the city that are intimidating for pedestrians.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/6mYGRfcwYAYBhFeu9
https://maps.app.goo.gl/CAA7szWPJ6C4EA856
https://maps.app.goo.gl/tGmCK2ejHcScr1Dz9

I certainly wouldn't put Philly above NYC in terms of walkability, and it'd be hard for me to make a case that it's a clear winner over places like Boston, Chicago, or San Francisco, but I do think it's in the same category as those places. I would say that Boston is the major city with the least of those big pedestrian-intimidating types of roads, but it isn't entirely absent of them either:

https://maps.app.goo.gl/k9BCcH5R1SiQswVb8

[Skintreesnail]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

^Most walkable city is a bit of a stretch, but it does pretty good.

I think the case can be made for most walkable in the us. Many of the neighborhoods just have stop signs at intersections because they don't need signals; the roads are so narrow. Actually i like the lack of signals since cars aren't speeding to get through them in time, though there are plenty of people rolling through stop signs during rush hour. For the most part though pedestrians have the right of way as they should. There are tons of mid-block streets that are great to walk down since they are usually car-free unless someone is getting parking. They kind of seem like unofficial woonerfs. However I agree that the wider/busier streets like market, broad, jfk, the parkway should all be equipped with ada signals with a leading walk signal. I've noticed some of them coming in. Probably should do the same on 2-lane streets, which make of a lot in center city. Personally i would like to see a lot of the streets narrow to one lane and make the other a bike lane, or parking which is what the neighborhoods have. For example 21st north of south street:
301 S 21st St
https://maps.app.goo.gl/aA9rnGVc1VnKuhMd7?g_st=ac

21st south of south:
611 S 21st St
https://maps.app.goo.gl/7aRKrPFjm2Z9i6dt9?g_st=ac

I'd also like to see more traffic calming like raised crosswalks/speed pads and curb bulbouts. It's really walkable and bikable by US standards but really could be European level without too much effort. There are some neighborhood bikeway initiatives underway that i hope get some legs, and some official woonerf designs have been implemented or in the pipeline. I don't expect Philadelphia to be at the level of Utrecht anytime soon, but at least head in that direction.

[badrunner]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

Example, and this is outside Center City Philadelphia, although I can see that it's 2 narrow one-way intersecting streets: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9936...oASAFQAw%3D%3D

That looks like the kind of place where I would never use the crosswalk.

[PhillyRising]

Why do we need pedestrian signals? We know how to cross a street in Philadelphia. Plus most days, we are moving faster down the sidewalk than the cars crawling down the streets in Center City. It's easy to walk in front of something that isn't moving.

[UrbanRevival]

Originally Posted by iheartthed

Definitely up there, and it has a great core but so do a few other cities. But Philadelphia does have wide roads in some parts of the city that are intimidating for pedestrians.

Certainly wide thoroughfares exist in Philly, but the point is they tend to be much less common, even compared to other top US walkable cities. There was a thread several years ago on this forum, and the general consensus agreed with the notion that Philly has the narrowest streets on average amongst all major cities in the US.

As to the thread topic, walking safety "infrastructure" could definitely be much more robust/modernized throughout much of Philly; no arguments there (although I strongly question the value or resourcefulness of putting a timed pedestrian signal at every intersection in Philly, as it has a much higher ratio of intersections than most cities given its much smaller blocks and even mid-block pedestrian-only "alleyways").

But as a far as inherent street layout, I've yet to come across another major US city where the combination of human scale and street widths make the pedestrian mode of travel feel as natural as Philadelphia.