Most signaled intersections are unsafe, here's why

[CreekDog]

Because to be safe for pedestrians, the pedestrian needs to LOOK BEHIND them to be sure no car is coming, even with a walk signal.



The flaw is that pedestrians have the green/walk in the crosswalk while cars have the same, the only thing protecting the pedestrian is if the car sees them in time to stop, or sees them and attempts to stop at all prior to hitting them.

Intersections everywhere need to be updated to give a red signal to cars while pedestrians have a walk signal for the crosswalk. Signals need to segregate car access from pedestrian access.

This can be done through an all red that lets pedestrians cross in any direction all at once and the rest of the time is for cars to access the intersection.

I can also be accomplished through red and green arrows for turning, giving a walk signal with a red turn signal followed by a don't walk signal and a green turn signal for right or left turns through a crosswalk.

As our intersections get busier with more cars and more people, there is an inevitable conflict, the only time for cars to legally make a turn is when pedestrians have a walk signal, which puts pressure on cars to cut between people, or be left blocking the intersection until the red signal is against them.

We can do this. These changes can be made at busy intersections and increasingly applied to areas where there are many pedestrian injuries and deaths.

[arcane1]

1. Like Montgomery St in San Francisco

Which I particularly enjoy because we can cross diagonally

[siligut]

4. So the cars just have to wait?

Is there a time when the cars just have to wait for people to cross at all angles?

[CreekDog]

6. yes, but there are times when pedestrians with a green have to wait for a walk signal to cross

so overall, it doesn't really change the waiting at the intersection, it simply allocates the intersection time for cars and time for people and attempts to keep them separated, whereas the old model puts them at odds by placing both in the crosswalks because the signaling has them crossing at the same time.

[siligut]

11. There are intersections in downtown Seattle where a car cannot make a right turn due to peds

During Lunchtime hours there are so many people in the crosswalks that a car can only make a right on red.

This is especially frustrating when people just straggle along through the crosswalks.

Signs for both cars and peds would be welcome.

[CreekDog]

12. Right, that's the point of segregated signaling for cars and pedestrians

cars go on one kind of light, pedestrians on another.

have the technology encourage separation, not confrontation.

[siligut]

14. I have to agree, make it simple to understand and thus safe

A system where peds don't have to compete with turning cars is safer for all.

As GormyCuss says, if there is a crosswalk, there should be a specific walk only signal. As it is now, you can get a walk signal but there is nothing to keep the cars from turning too.

[CreekDog]

35. my point exactly

[CreekDog]

23. that's one of the good solutions and there are many places in SF like this

Montgomery is one, Howard and Hawthorne is another and 4th Street and Folsom (where Twitter used to be) is another example.

We need more of these designs or other designs that help segregate pedestrians from cars and use signals to do so. the old model/design of intersections just isn't working well now.

[notadmblnd]

2. I don't know? Has there been a run on pedestrians being mowed down by cars recently?

[CreekDog]

3. yes, pedestrians re hit by cars while legally in the crosswalk all the time

often overtaken from behind, because the car doesn't see them, doesn't slow for them or for whatever reason, doesn't stop for them and because the car is behind them, the pedestrian is blind to the threat and unable to avoid being hit.

this is INHERENTLY DANGEROUS. As someone who walks in a big city, looking behind me while walking forward across the street is dangerous for me and difficult to near impossible, yet it's what I have to ATTEMPT to do to cross safely.

i have encounters where i have to avoid cars while i'm legally in the crosswalk multiple times per week and i see close calls all the time.

Both the pedestrians and the driver of the vehicle claimed to have had the right of way at the time of the collision, according to police.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Teacher-who-helped-girls-dies-in-crash-4392878.php

[notadmblnd]

5. maybe the soultion would be to post a traffic cop at the intersection to insure

that motorists follow the law(s) that already exists? I've walked in downtown Detroit and crossed Jefferson Ave and Woodward Ave hundreds of times. During high traffic hours or big events, there are always officers out on the streets. I've never seen anyone get hurt. Unfortunately, I have seen children plowed down on suburban subdivision streets on more than one occasion. So what do you do? "

[CreekDog]

8. why are you being obtuse about this? there is a solution and i told you what it was

it's being implemented in many places already.

the PROBLEM is signals give the right of way to cars AND PEOPLE at the same time but because the cars only have the signal while the pedestrians have a walk signal in some directions, the cars are effectively required to do something dangerous to make a turn, that is cross an intersection safely.

this isn't complicated. the laws should be enforced, but how many police would you have to hire to do this?

signaling can really help this.

[notadmblnd]

15. The signals do not give the car the right of way

Sorry if you think that I am obtuse however the pedestrian always has the right of way. Even if the pedestrian is jay walking, the car is supposed to stop. Traffic cops worked very well for many years. They stood out in intersections and directed traffic both motor vehicles and pedestrians. I'd just rather have my tax dollars spent helping to provide jobs instead of paying some corporation to install some device that will dumb us down even more.

I also think that a grown adult should be able to cross a street on their own. What would a person do if the power went out and there was no signal? Life is full of risks, you spin the wheel and ya take yer chances.

But seriously, if this issue is a problem in your community, then you might want to think about putting your energy into getting a petition going in support of the solutions that you would like to see implemented there?

[CreekDog]

16. wtf? you don't want your tax dollars spent to adjust streetlight timing? they already are.

yes, it's settled, you are being obtuse about this.

and yes, pedestrians need better protection and you don't care because god forbid your money might (like it's all your money anyway, where do you come off saying that?) heaven forbid, get used on something it's already used for and already quite effectively.

jeez.

[notadmblnd]

21. Whatever-

have a nice evening.

[CreekDog]

22. yes, that's exactly why I criticized you

your response to the problem and the solution was 'whatever'.

against changing signal timing? jeez.

[notadmblnd]

25. I never said anything against changing the signal nor did I say anything for it

You sure read a lot into what I wrote. But if that is what you have to do to get your heart pumping, by all means, go for it.

[CreekDog]

26. you said that an adult should be able to cross an intersection on their own

you gave a BS argument and blamed the victim.

you didn't want to spend money on changing signal timing, saying that it somehow was providing some massive windfall to corporations.

you just don't give a crap, that's what it comes down to. i almost get hit multiple times per week and yet almost never at the improved intersections, but apparently I'm just not a big enough boy to cross a street, shame on me.

whatever.

[notadmblnd]

27. I never said any of that. You inserted that into what I wrote and made assumptions

that aren't necessarily true. But I'm not going to give you a lesson in reading comprehension. Personally, I do think there are more important issues to expend my energy on (at least in my community) as there has not been an epidemic of pedestrians being run down by motor vehicles in my area.

As I suggested to you previously- if this issue is a problem in your community, then you might want to think about putting your energy into getting a petition going in support of the solutions that you would like to see implemented there?

On the other hand, maybe it's just easier to criticize someone for not saying what you wanted to hear?

[CreekDog]

29. yes, you said this:"I also think that a grown adult should be able to cross a street on their own."

and even though this isn't a priority for you, if there was a priority issue for you, i wouldn't crap all over it like you did this idea which is not *just* a problem in my community but a problem throughout the country and especially in major cities and urban areas (which is where MOST Americans live).

i don't ask you to make this a personal priority, i ask you not to crap all over it and not make fun of it. that's all.

[notadmblnd]

32. I did say that I think a grown adult should know how to cross the street

But I never made fun of or mocked you. And just because I said something that you didn't want to hear - it does not equal crapping on your post.

The only thing I joked about was how people would know to cross if the signal was out. That does not equal crapping on your post either. I also offered a serious solution to your issue which you totally ignored until I posted it a second time choosing instead to find offense in what I wrote.

I also understand that people may be unable to cross the street in more than one city in this country. However, if we don't/can't/won't initiate change in our own communities how can anyone expect change in every community?

[CreekDog]

33. if the signals are out, it's a four way stop for cars and crossing should be easy actually

as for being able to cross on one's own, i explained the situation and showed how the danger that i was explaining, which is NOT A LOCAL problem, but a widespread one, as I explained, the danger was to people following the laws, being careful and being OVERTAKEN by fast moving cars outside their vision and the only way they can see them is to look backwards while walking forwards --a very unsafe thing to do.

and i know this, because i've done it and there's a need to fix it. and it's not just in my community, as a pedestrian in cities all over the world, it's a problem, less so in some cities than in others, but a problem.

and mind you, there are unsignaled crosswalks that are very dangerous and people get hit all the time.

if it's not your priority, why can't it be mine? if it's a national problem, and it is, why can't i post it here? why are you attempting to decide or declare that this issue is an issue for the geographic area that i work in? that's not your call, i'm telling you it's not.

[notadmblnd]

34. I'm not attempting or deciding anything

I didn't say it could not be your priority. I didn't say that it was not a national problem even though you offered no facts for your assertion. I didn't say you couldn't post about it here.

You wrote about how you feel in regards to a certain issue and I replied in regards to how I feel about it. I thought discussion was what was encouraged here? I wrote of two possible solutions, one half serious the other genuinely serious and when you didn't like either one, you decided to call me obtuse and started in with the WTFs and the Jeezes.

You know, when one posts here they take a risk of other people writing things you my not agree with but it's no reason to take it personal or to become uncivil about.


Good evening.

[pintobean]

36. Maybe these cities should issue

pedestrian licenses. After one passes a written and walking exam, of course.

[CreekDog]

38. so you're saying that someone in a wheelchair needs to pass a walking exam?

and that someone who cannot write needs to pass a written exam?

to walk in the city?

because walking is some sort of privilege.

how nice to see you again.

[pintobean]

42. I'm sure the ADA would require accommodations

for those kinds of situations.

an oral exam

a rolling exam

you know - "to walk in the city"

[CreekDog]

45. you don't support any kind of measures like this so I don't believe you are being sincere

you're simply trying to disrupt my thread.

[Gormy Cuss]

7. Want to cut pedestrian deaths?

1. End right on red at any intersection with painted crosswalks. .
2. Lengthen WALK signals to allow an average walker to go from curb to curb while the WALK light is illuminated. None of this switch to a flashing DON'T WALK after a nanosecond.
2. At fully controlled intersections in heavily congested areas, stop traffic every direction to allow pedestrians to cross. Where feasible allow a diagonal crosswalk too if pedestrian flow warrants it.
3. At other fully controlled intersections, stop traffic for one full second before the WALK light is illuminated.
4. If necessary, change the traffic laws to require motorists to remain at a complete stop whenever pedestrians are crossing in the same lane or adjacent lanes.

With the exception of the diagonal crosswalks, all of the above used to be laws in places where I've lived. Yeah, this will slow down traffic. That's why all of this went by the wayside when car-centric planning became the norm.

[CreekDog]

9. It sounds like it slows traffic but it actually helps traffic ultimately

when intersections get busy with people, cars can't turn when they have a green and pedestrians have a "walk". there's no room or they take chances, dangerous ones.

ALSO, remember, where there's an ALL RED for cars, there's ONE LESS CYCLE for pedestrian crossing. It's genius. It doesn't actually slow anyone down and makes everyone safer.

[Gormy Cuss]

10. Yes, the ALL RED cut down the number of cycles.

It also cut the jaywalking because people knew that when their turn would come up they could cross two sides of the block at once if they were quick about it.

As for cars getting held up by pedestrians, the other side of the coin now is that turning cars may not clear the intersection while the WALK light is lit, leaving pedestrians with the choice of waiting for another cycle or hoping that they can hot foot it across the street before the light changes. It's not a system that works well for anyone.

[CreekDog]

13. yes, the current system falls apart when pressed

so a busy pedestrian crossing under the old style signaling has pedestrians in the crosswalk at the only time when the car has the green in that direction.

as you point out, the car gets stranded in the crosswalk or near it and pedestrians often have to unsafely venture out of the crosswalk to get around it.

it's amazing the old design has persisted as long as it has. about the only thing that keeps it from being more dangerous is that traffic in cities moves slow enough that there is more time for everyone to avoid collision --but even so, it happens all the time.

[One_Life_To_Give]

17. What are these Barcodes on the pavement?

Actually I think you are right on about not asking pedestrians and vehicles to share the same signal once you get over a couple pedestrians per hour avg. for the intersection. Although in my experience most signals would be under that pedestrian threshold.

[CreekDog]

18. most signals where people live don't have fewer than two pedestrians per hour

certainly not in large cities and increasingly dense urbanized/metro areas.

have you seen how extensive the high density areas are not just in Los Angeles, but in many, many adjacent cities? incredible density. same with San Francisco and surrounding areas.

[One_Life_To_Give]

19. I am east coast.

We had traffic light in the middle of the tobacco fields. But fancy things like crosswalks and sidewalks were not to be found. So I get chest pains at more than 20,000sqft of land per family.

[CreekDog]

20. when you say "most" please understand that "most" Americans are urbanites in cities and suburbs

and by that i mean a vast "most", far more than a majority.

[tech3149]

24. I'm not sure how I should evaluate theis discussion

I've lived in both urban and rural settings. In every case I have evaluated the threat from those coming from behind me as well as those approaching me.
I may be anal as far as situational awareness is concerned, but if I don't understand the risks around me, I can expect them to cause me greater harm. I walk on the side of the road that lets me see the most immediate threat, oncoming traffic My ears tell me when I should pay attention to what's approaching from the rear.
As I said, I've lived in widely disparate environments. It might be that my skills and power of observation might be beyond the skills of the average citizen, but it sure doesn't feel that way to me.
I've lived and worked in areas that were considered risky if not dangerous but I think I have survived and prospered because I didn't buy into the fear marketed by mass media. I may have lived in a community that wasn't "the same as me" but in some sense they were just that. They were just as poor and disenfranchised as me. We all had that look of the boot being on our neck. I learned during those times that we were all more the same than different.
I think I can only close with saying that we are more the same than different.

[CreekDog]

30. how is one supposed to hear a car, often a Prius, approaching them from behind in a noisy city?

and there are children, the elderly, etc. should there not be some engineering improvements, and not costly ones, to improve their safety and encourage walking, which is sustainable and environmentally friendly in an era of climate change?

[bhikkhu]

41. That's one thing I worry about as a cyclist

One of the main things that I worry about is getting hit from behind. I can usually maneuvre, stop or turn faster than a car, so if I see a problem ahead or to either side I can avoid it safely. I can also hear traffic coming behind me, judge speed and position and so forth, and ride accordingly. Unless its a Prius.

I wish they were built to make some kind of noise when they are running just on the battery! It would make things safer for all concerned.

[tech3149]

43. I'm not sure what your argument is

Being aware of your surroundings is crucial to staying alive in any environment. You have five documented senses to observe the world around you and most people don't use half of their capacity.
I don't need to look behind me to hear an EV approaching, or any other vehicle. I can hear the tire tread on the road. But I do look behind me as a reinforcement of that first sense.
I'm an old fart and my eyes aren't as good as the were thirty years ago, but I can get around the house in the pitch dark, but hell I've been doing it for a few years.
I used to be one of the "golden ears" with the last company I worked for. If you don't understand the term, that's someone who's hearing is so acute and accurate you couldn't beat it with $1M of hardware.

My primary point in responding is that we all have senses to deal with the world we live in but they are not finite or limited.
I developed and improved my sensory awareness through my desire to enjoy the world around me. It might be that others develop those skills to deal with a hostile environment. Either way, most of us have the capability to observe and deal with the world around us and those with limited skills hone and advance those that are available because they have to to survive.

[One_Life_To_Give]

28. People or intersections with illuminated signals

Since 75% of our roads are in Rural as opposed to Urban area's according to the US Census. http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1089.pdf
I am sure the number of intersections in rural area's is less than 75% of the total. But given that census calls 50,000 inhabitants urban and many of those area's walking is from the Walmart parking lot to the door. I am not sure what the percentage of Intersections and/or Illuminated signal controlled intersections that we might expect to have pedestrian traffic of any consequence.

[CreekDog]

31. where did i say that all rural areas should have these improvements?

are we now down to arguing with what i didn't say or recommend?

is that a good use of time or energy?

[struggle4progress]

37. ALL RED for pedestrians is an excellent idea

[CreekDog]

39. yes, it's not only safer, it's more efficient for drivers and pedestrians

just one cycle of pedestrians, not two.

and cars don't have to dodge people.

[struggle4progress]

40. Thanks for the helpful talking points

[Brigid]

44. I almost got hit twice yesterday at the same intersection.

Going to the drugstore, and again on the way back. Drivers act like they never heard of pedestrians!

[CreekDog]

46. I see these near misses daily --drivers turning through crosswalks need to be slowing down at least

we either have to require a full stop prior to turning through a crosswalk, or give drivers and pedestrians dedicated signals so that a pedestrian with a walk signal is not in the path of a turning car with a green signal himself.