Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Making an intersection unsafe for pedestrians to save seconds for drivers

collegetowns.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 464 posts

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

#311

Post by AlfeG »

munchler wrote: post #11

> I captured two drivers ripping through red lights in that short span Video actually shows two cars entering the intersection on yellow lights, which is legal. The rest of the article seems similarly exaggerated. ---- Edit: For those who disagree, please be aware that the stop lines are out of frame, so both cars are already in the intersection before they're visible on the video. You can get a better picture of wha…

Its only me, who think that 12 seconds of green light is just too small window. That's why every car try its best to pass through.

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

#312

Post by cloverich »

mtalantikite wrote: post #295
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's not allowed here in NYC. I've nearly gotten mowed down by people from the suburbs driving into the city not knowing it's illegal here on a few occasions. They also seem to get pissed and honk at me , as if walking around NYC isn't the default mode of transportation.

To be fair I've seen NYC _pedestrians_ yell at other pedestrians for walking wrong, NYC isn't exactly an outwardly friendly place in that respect.

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

#313

Post by kspacewalk2 »

Spivak wrote: post #261
kspacewalk2 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What difference does it make? The main point is that this design induces drivers to speed up even more than they're already speeding (and, this being North America, they're already speeding), at a dangerous point in time when pedestrians are starting to cross. It literally makes no practical difference whether they're entering on a very late yellow or a red.

Traffic engineers aren't blind to the fact that it's NA custom to (roughly) +5 on residential, +8 on state highways, and +5-15 depending on on the lane on interstates. People get up in arms about it on the internet for some reason while IRL the roads are just designed with this in mind.

I have more of an issue with the idea that you can make a previously dangerously fast street/road safer by mere virtue of reducing the speed limit, but leaving it physically designed as before. You lower the limit by -5, the +5 speeding turns to +10 speeding and absolutely nothing changes save for wasted paint. I wish North American traffic engineers (and municipal politicians) were better educated on the idea that the only reliable way to slow down drivers is to force them to slow down by making it physically intensely uncomfortable to speed, and that sending drivers to body shops after fender-benders with traffic calming features is preferable to sending vulnerable street users to the morgue. Alas, both occupations are still stuck in an outdated car-centric view of urban transportation.

This competency shortfall is present in other transportation- and infrastructure-related fields. See for example how badly North American construction companies and government bureaucracies handle big transit projects. Third-world levels of mediocrity compared to the cost-effective, competent management in, say, Spain or Japan.

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

#314

Post by toast0 »

> With the change, the light always sits green for drivers on Palm, so cars are now always flying through that street when they previously had to stop at a stop sign. Why don’t lights ever sit idle with the pedestrian crossing on and the cars must wait?

Where I live, this doesn't happen because there's not enough pedestrians to justify it. When I drive in Seattle, the lights never idle, but pedestrian cycles are always included.

With a non-scramble intersection, not including pedestrians by default allows for faster cycling, including for pedestrians that want to cross the alternate way. With a scramble intersection, I'd bet if a pedestrian shows up and pushes the button, an idle green will go yellow immediately. Yes, it's a longer wait than crossing immediately as you would at an idle intersection, but now you can cross diagonally, so that may be a win.

It's worth checking with the traffic engineer to see how they would decide to always include a pedestrian cycle, perhaps during times of high pedestrian use like during hours where students are likely to cross the street between classes.

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

#315

Post by cloverich »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #255
mindslight wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Not stopping before the pedestrian area is an instant ticket in my small town. They really promote walkability here. All of the issue listed seem to stem from lack of law enforcement. Our town also has bins at intersections with bright orange flags to increase your visibility as well as flashing 'pedestrian crossing' strobes initiated by button at problem location.

> All of the issue listed seem to stem from lack of law enforcement

When its a few bad apples its an enforcement issue. When its many bad apples its a design issue.

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

#316

Post by estebank »

cogman10 wrote: post #238

Could someone explain why we always put pedestrian crossings at intersections? I've always felt like that is the most unsafe place for a crossing. In my city, there are a few pedestrian crossings with lights recessed from intersections. The lights turn on only when someone bumps the crossing button (which isn't super common) and only 2 ways of traffic need to stop/watch out.

1) it makes the travel of a pedestrian going straight become a zig zag where you have to weave into streets that you don't care about. You end up minimizing distance for cars but maximizing distance for pedestrians. It should be the other way around

2) HAWK signals, which are pedestrian buttons affecting lights on pedestrian crossings away from intersections (usually on stroads) have been shown to be worse than nothing because drivers don't really notice them nor the pedestrians (in drivers heads "intersection" equals "watch out for cross traffic, everywhere else it's "go forward and pay attention to the car in front of you"), and pulls some pedestrians to an unwarranted sense of safety.

3) "which isn't super common" tells me that this a very car dependent place. There's a mid block pedestrian light on mission between 1st and 2nd in SF, and there's always someone waiting on it to change. Part of the reason it's there is because there's a straight pedestrian route that allows you to get from Market Street to the terminal.

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

#317

Post by AlfeG »

soperj wrote: post #24
mungoman2 wrote: post #8

This is an annoying change, but the cars in the video weren't actually running any red lights. Doesn't help the case to exaggerate.

It's a 34 second video. One enters the intersection after the light has turned red (pause the video, you can see it). The other is half way through the intersection before the light turns red, definitely speeds up to make the light, which is what they're talking about.

Green state is very short. 15 seconds is barely enough for 2-3 cars. My guess this force drivers to speedup.

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

#318

Post by mindslight »

_DeadFred_ wrote: post #255
mindslight wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Not stopping before the pedestrian area is an instant ticket in my small town. They really promote walkability here. All of the issue listed seem to stem from lack of law enforcement. Our town also has bins at intersections with bright orange flags to increase your visibility as well as flashing 'pedestrian crossing' strobes initiated by button at problem location.

Do you mean bins where people like, take an orange flag out, cross the street holding the flag, and then put the orange flag back in the bin on the other side? This is the first I'm ever hearing of that, and it sounds immediately ridiculous. But with further consideration I could see this being quite interesting for significantly changing the dynamic.

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

#319

Post by ars »

pta2002 wrote: post #102
jagged-chisel wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OT, but it fired me up a bit - people that enter the intersection on green or orange awaiting a break to turn left. And then don’t clear the intersection on red. Now they’re in everyone’s way. How do you get them to understand they’ve already “run the light” and just need to move?

This is why I always find it weird that in the US (and a lot of other countries) the stoplights are on the end of the intersection, instead of at the entrance. If they're at the entrance, there's no dillema - you can't cross the light if it's red. If it's yellow, you brake if you have time, but if not, it's fine to keep going - the opposing light is going to wait a few seconds before turning green specifically to avo…

The location of the traffic light has no legal meaning, there's a white painted line on the ground, which is the stop line.

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

#320

Post by gowld »

the__alchemist wrote: post #124
chaoskanzlerin wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Austria does that: 4 seconds of the green light flashing in order to announce the yellow light.

With this change to the scenario, being required to stop before yellow makes sense. And blowing through red means you extra screwed up! (?) On this note: In the UK, there is a yellow light prior to green; love it.

The US sometimes has something similar: visibile countdown timers for the pedestrian crossing turning form stop to go, which coincides with the car light turning from red/stop to green/go.

This encourages people to run the light by trying to turn exactly as the countdown timer hits 0, trying to race against pedestrians trying to cross crossing pedestrians.

Post reply on HN