Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers • Hacker News Board

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#241

Post by sumeno » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

tanewishly wrote: post #215

afhsrtjwrtj wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is right-on-red always cited as the biggest problem with turns? My anecdotal experience is that drivers turning on green are way more likely to hit me when I have a walk signal on the cross-street than drivers who turn right on red.

Are you saying that a right-turn can be green simultaneous with the pedestrian's crossing light being green? Because where I'm from, traffic lights are not allowed to be set up like that. No simultaneous green for crossing traffic flows, unless otherwise indicated (eg, an extra warning light+sign under the turn's traffic light flashing when it's green and off otherwise).

> Are you saying that a right-turn can be green simultaneous with the pedestrian's crossing light being green?

I can't think of many places that I drive where this isn't the case.

The pedestrian crossing lights are in sync with the traffic lights, if traffic going N/S is green then the pedestrian lights going N/S will also be green even if cars are turning E/W

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#242

Post by estebank » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #187

throwawayffffas wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having almost been hit a few times by drivers making a right turn on red, I can tell you the drivers never wait even if you have the right of way. You'll be lucky if they even look for you. Right on red should not really be allowed. It's a real hazard.

IMO the problem isn't right on red itself, but rather that vehicles have to be in (and often completely over) the pedestrian crossing area to see oncoming vehicle traffic they have to yield to (at the distance required due to higher oncoming vehicle speeds). This encourages the behavior where drivers plan to have a single stop in that area, where they wait for an opening in vehicles to go - completely failing to take…

If there is no way of configuring the intersection so that right on red is safe for pedestrians, then the problem is the right on red.

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#243

Post by david-gpu » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

itishappy wrote: post #138

potato3732842 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That's... not true? With light traffic a 4 way stop should have no cars at all at it most of the time, leaving pedestrians with the right of way, whereas with a traffic light there will always be a road with priority until a pedestrian hits the button. Requiring cars to pay attention to the condition of the intersection is the explicit design goal. >This was laid out very clearly in the article we just read. This is…

> ... the situational awareness of every driver who's about to get their turn is mostly absorbed in monitoring who's turn it is and who's going where. Right, that's the intent. Drivers paying attention to their surroundings is the goal. > So if you're a pedestrian and you don't time it right you could find yourself starting to cross right before someone wants to drive where you're crossing. Usually this is because yo…

> Drivers paying attention to their surroundings is the goal.

In the real world, drivers don't pay attention to their surroundings; instead, they look for other cars to avoid being hit. Further down the list is avoiding static obstacles like street lights or bollards. Lastly, they may think of looking for pedestrians. In other words, they care about their safety, not their neighbor's.

Cyclists, if even noticed in the first place, are seen as nothing but a nuisance that should be overtaken at all cost, even when they are about to reach a stop light and there's no room to pass safely.

> You have the right of way!

A non insignificant number of drivers believe that "might is right" and will knowingly play chicken with you if they perceive that they are safer in the event of a collision. As a vulnerable road user, you don't know whether the driver you are interacting with will be one of the 95% of reasonable people or one of the 5% of insecure bullies.

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#244

Post by zer0x4d » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

CalRobert wrote: post #54

1970-01-01 wrote: post #14

>The story focuses on a redesign of one intersection in this town. The case highlights how we’ve elevated the value of moving cars quickly at the expense of everything else, even in highly walkable areas. We should all expect this kind of regressing in walking. Pedestrians and cyclists don't seem to understand how this always will be a car-by-default country due to lifestyle. Yes, there are several cities bucking the…

I'm literally just trying to stop drivers from killing my kids when they bike to school. Some "lifestyle".

The way you make your kids safe bikers:

1. NEVER RIDE ON THE SIDEWALK. Cars on the street cannot see you due to other parked cars and WILL make right or left turn on you. Additionaly, cars coming out of parking lots won't see you on the sidewalk.

2. NEVER RIDE ON OPPOSITE SIDE. Ride on the same direction as cars, make yourself visible.

3. INDICATE ALL TURNS WITH HAND SIGNALS. Be predictable. Don't just turn or otherwise behave unpredictably. Indicate turns, make eye contact and then turn.

4. (Obvious) ACT LIKE A CAR AND DON'T RUN LIGHTS.

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#245

Post by michaelleslie » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

jonpurdy wrote: post #173

Ensorceled wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just not true. In Toronto for instance, the majority of pedestrian deaths are caused by impaired/distracted drivers with a significant portion of failure to yield by left turning drivers at major, light controlled intersections. There isn't even a category for "four way stop" pedestrian fatalities.

Speed is nearly everything and controlling (ie. reducing) speed should be the primary way to influence fatality rates. Having lived in both Toronto and SF, both cities with 4-way stop and controlled lights intersections. I'll take 4-way stop any day since speeds are lower. Much better to get hit by a car at near zero speed than a right or left turning car at higher speed. Which is probably why Toronto doesn't have a…

> (The worst are SF's 2-way stops at intersections between equally-sized roads that show up randomly throughout Sunset. Worst of both worlds.)

As a cyclist, I've been yelled at by drivers for not stopping at that type of intersection, where they have a stop sign and I don't. People are working off of their personal version of the rules of the road, where they are always right.

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#246

Post by avgDev » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

doctorpangloss wrote: post #198

avgDev wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is another line before. We don't really see the entire intersection.

The author is pissed off about the design of the intersection. If you have to litigate bullshit like this, surely you see, well, the intersection is poorly designed. You are also litigating whether or not it's legal. A lot of traditions of California driving are legal and really dangerous. My dude, CVC doesn't even apply in a private parking lot for example, so you can accidentally kill somebody in one and legally fa…

My problem is that author doesn't seem to understand the traffic laws and wrongly says cars ran a red light. I'm not interested in his opinion after that.

If you are going to put something on the internet about bad design you should make sure you understand it first.

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#247

Post by danenania » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #188

SoftTalker wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's how I handle right on red: When I have the walk signal, I look to my left for cars that might be turning right. If there are any, I look at whether the driver sees me. Try to make eye contact. If they are moving and apparently don't see me or are going to turn anyway, I wait. I may have the right of way, but I'm not going to win that battle.

I make it clear with body language and eye contact that yes I see them and no I'm not meekly yielding my right of way. However, I leave just enough space to avoid being hit, for those situations when the True Assholes knowingly cut me off anyway. Or maybe they're not assholes by intent, but instead in the 90th percentile for inattentiveness and bad driving habits, which may even be the same thing. I don't know, I'm n…

I think a pretty large percentage of drivers don’t actually know that they’re supposed to yield to pedestrians when turning at lights.

I’ve had multiple close calls where the driver looks at me angrily, I point at the white ‘walk’ symbol, and then their anger turns to confusion. They had no idea that they’re supposed to wait.

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#248

Post by 1970-01-01 » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

dvdkon wrote: post #218

1970-01-01 wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fully disagree. Road infra is engineered to move goods quickly, and never to public opinion unless that public opinion brings loads of cash to help. Again, there are major exceptions to this default. Complaining about it helps, but does not bring cash to the table when it's time to build or rebuild road infra. As municipalities change over time, a city will always regress to car-first. Cars are simply the easiest p…

If road infrastructure is designed solely to move goods quickly, it's only because people made a choice to prioritise that. Not The People, but indivial bureaucrats. At least here in the Czech Republic, moving goods isn't on anyone's radar when designing municipal infrastructure. Delivery vehicles need to physically fit, sure, but any economic benefit they bring will only be felt as a very slight n-th order effect by…

>If road infrastructure is designed solely to move goods quickly, it's only because people made a choice to prioritise that.

This argument simply does not work for the majortiy of USA.

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#249

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #171

throwawayffffas wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having almost been hit a few times by drivers making a right turn on red, I can tell you the drivers never wait even if you have the right of way. You'll be lucky if they even look for you. Right on red should not really be allowed. It's a real hazard.

It isn't in much of Europe.

[deleted]

Re: Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

#250

Post by jollyllama » Tue, Jan 14, 2025, 5:08 PM UTC

I think the real reason this happened is staring the author in the face. He noted the necessary engineering and construction work, and some of the price tags for that and the maintenance. I think this has less to do with any car-friendly ideology, conscious or unconscious, and it's just a boondoggle for engineering, construction, and maintenance firms.