THERE ARE road safety problems that require billions of pesos, complicated engineering and years of construction. Repainting a pedestrian lane is not one of them.
That is precisely why the warning from the Land Transportation Office (LTO) Region 6 about faded and barely visible pedestrian crossings in Iloilo, as reported by this paper yesterday, should embarrass the agencies responsible for maintaining them. Something as basic as paint — perhaps reinforced with reflective markings — can spell the difference between a motorist seeing a crossing in time and a pedestrian being struck.
LTO-6 regional director Atty. Gaudioso Geduspan II has appealed to the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) to repaint worn-out pedestrian lanes, saying their poor visibility compromises road safety.
This should not have required an appeal.
Pedestrian crossings are not decorations painted on asphalt. They are safety infrastructure. They tell motorists where people have the right to cross and warn them to slow down, stop and yield. When these markings fade until drivers can barely recognize them from a distance, an important layer of protection disappears with the paint.
Geduspan specifically cited a faded pedestrian crossing along Diversion Road in Mandurriao, in front of Westwood Subdivision, where a student had died after being struck by an ambulance. He said repainting worn-out crossings could help reduce traffic accidents.
One death should already be more than enough reason for urgency.
Government should not have to wait for another pedestrian to be hit, another grieving family, another viral video or another public outcry before somebody arrives with buckets of paint.
Neither should responsibility be placed entirely on government. Motorists have an unequivocal duty to stop and give way to pedestrians using designated crossings. LTO-6 correctly reminded drivers that basic traffic discipline — stopping at pedestrian lanes and red lights and avoiding reckless driving — prevents accidents and confrontations.
But discipline must be matched by infrastructure. Government cannot relentlessly demand that motorists obey road markings while allowing those very markings to disappear. Drivers must respect pedestrian lanes; road authorities must make sure there are pedestrian lanes clearly visible enough to respect.
More importantly, DPWH and concerned local governments should conduct an immediate audit of pedestrian crossings under their respective jurisdictions. Those near schools, hospitals, markets, subdivisions and other heavily traveled areas should receive priority. Maintenance must then become periodic and preventive, not something undertaken only after the paint has virtually vanished or somebody has been hurt.
Road safety is often discussed after tragedy. That is already too late. A government serious about protecting pedestrians should be searching for hazards before accidents expose them. Faded crossings are among the easiest hazards to identify and among the simplest to correct.
We spend enormous sums building highways, bridges and flyovers in the name of mobility and development. Yet development becomes meaningless when people cannot safely cross the roads we build.
The test of a good transportation system is not merely how quickly vehicles can move. It is also whether a child, an elderly person, a worker or an ordinary commuter can cross a street without gambling with his or her life.
DPWH should heed LTO-6’s appeal immediately. But beyond repainting several faded crossings, authorities must establish a system that ensures they never deteriorate to dangerous levels again. Because when the hazard can be corrected with something as simple as a coat of paint, there is little excuse for waiting.
Paint fades. Government vigilance must not. And no pedestrian’s life should ever become the price of repainting a line that should have been visible in the first place.
