bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

Sully wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Actually, I have been to many places where pedestrians signals are slightly delayed to allow for traffic (cars) to be able to make turns. If pedestrians signals were to turn at the same time as the green light, cars will have a hard time making turns, which can lead to gridlock. Given that the city has already altered the timing of some traffic signals (possibly to prevent cars from being able to speed throughout the city) it would make sense that they would want cars to be able to turn when lights do change.

At many big intersections in Manhattan, the opposite is now true: pedestrians get the Walk signal a few seconds before traffic in the same direction gets the green light (so for a few seconds, car traffic in all directions has a red light). I've seen this specifically on 6th Avenue, at the intersections with 14th St and 23rd St... and noticed it at other intersections where an aveune crosses one of the big 2-way streets.

It is one more thing that boils down to a simple question: Is it more important to move cars around quickly, or keep pedestrians safe?

It is not that simple. The intersections you point out (6th Ave at 14th and 23rd Streets) are particularly tricky, because there is not only regular pedestrian traffic, but you also have both PATH and subway stations, so there is a lot of foot traffic, and additional people trying to navigate those intersections. You HAVE to favor pedestrians at those intersections because you would otherwise have a mass of people overflowing onto the streets.

Indeed, sometimes you must favor pedestrians, but sometimes you must favor vehicular traffic. It all comes down to the specifics of each intersection being evaluated. For the reasons I explained before (traffic signals have been altered to prevent motorists from being able to speed through some downtown areas) it is now necessary to alter the way pedestrians signals are timed. If they don't do that, downtown would quickly devolve into a vehicular mess, which wouldn't be good for anyone.

I should also point out that, based on my observations of other places and cities, most places where traffic and pedestrians lights are not mutually synched, an effort is made to point this out with a sign (e.g., "Delayed green"). I don't believe I have seen those around here in JC. Perhaps, once patterns and solutions are analyzed and made permanent, those will be implemented.

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
Quote:

daisyduke wrote:
I say ticket the jaywalkers crossing against signals. There is no excuse for it. It causes traffic confusion, endangers motorists and pedestrians and teaches our children (and theirs - always kills me to see stroller moms crossing Columbus on "Don't Walk"!) to ignore the signals!

I am both a pedestrian and a driver and it is a rare exception when I see a pedestrian obey the signals.

More driver than pedestrian, I would hazard. I am a pedestrian 100% of the time, and it is a rare exception when I see a driver obey the traffic laws.

I guess I too am one of those rare pedestrians. but just this afternoon, I waited *gasp!* for a walk signal on Columbus.

as I was midway across, a driver idling at the red light decided he needed to be going in the other direction, so he ran the light and made a U-turn - from the right lane, for added awesomeness - barreling through my "it's safe to cross" crosswalk twice.

so yeah. we should totally be ticketing jaywalkers. they're the worst.

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
Quote:

daisyduke wrote:
I say ticket the jaywalkers crossing against signals. There is no excuse for it. It causes traffic confusion, endangers motorists and pedestrians and teaches our children (and theirs - always kills me to see stroller moms crossing Columbus on "Don't Walk"!) to ignore the signals!

I am both a pedestrian and a driver and it is a rare exception when I see a pedestrian obey the signals.

More driver than pedestrian, I would hazard. I am a pedestrian 100% of the time, and it is a rare exception when I see a driver obey the traffic laws.

Wishful_Thinking wrote:
Quote:

daisyduke wrote:
I say ticket the jaywalkers crossing against signals. There is no excuse for it. It causes traffic confusion, endangers motorists and pedestrians and teaches our children (and theirs - always kills me to see stroller moms crossing Columbus on "Don't Walk"!) to ignore the signals!

I am both a pedestrian and a driver and it is a rare exception when I see a pedestrian obey the signals.

More driver than pedestrian, I would hazard. I am a pedestrian 100% of the time, and it is a rare exception when I see a driver obey the traffic laws.

daisyduke wrote:
I say ticket the jaywalkers crossing against signals. There is no excuse for it. It causes traffic confusion, endangers motorists and pedestrians and teaches our children (and theirs - always kills me to see stroller moms crossing Columbus on "Don't Walk"!) to ignore the signals!

I am both a pedestrian and a driver and it is a rare exception when I see a pedestrian obey the signals.

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
Are there any Urban Planners on JCList? I would love to hear what the industry has to say about conventions and practices for crosswalk protocol. For instance is there an accepted formula for the timing of a Walk sign? I hope there is. I picture an equation that takes into account the traffic density (both vehicular AND pedestrian) and the width of the intersection and turning lanes adjusted for the average speed of the slowest walkers. Whoever set the timing of the Walk signals at Journal Square must have been using the speed of the most fit and speedy young healthy walkers since from the moment the Walk sign illuminates there is just barely enough time to skip across to safety if you hoof it at top speed. Sucks to be you if you are mobility impaired in any way. Apparently your basic safety needs were deemed secondary to the needs of the automobile owners.

moobycow wrote:
Quote:

daisyduke wrote:
There are signs at Grove/Columbus alerting pedestrians to wait for walk signal and that there is a delay.

Let's say you are at an intersection that requires pushing the button, and you didn't realize it. Just push it the next cycle! Those few minutes are a small price to pay. Cars cannot just decide not to obey a signal, and those on foot should not be able to either. If the light really seems messed up, go to another corner to safely cross.

I don't understand why people can't follow the signals.

Much like in every other instance in life, when the the laws or rules don't make sense or are not appropriate for the situation they get ignored. This is not necessarily right, but it is simply human nature and it is why it is important to have the signals be correct, because poor signals make the situation worse.

Examples of things drivers routinely ignore if poorly implemented:

Bike lanes
Speed limit
Yield signs
Stop Signs
No turn on red
Solid lines indicating no passing
Yellow lights
No parking


The idea is to have traffic control that is reasonable and appropriate for the intersection. When it is not it is something worth pointing out and looking to have it fixed.

Should everyone be safe and obey the strange signals at Columbus and Grove? Yes. Will they? No, because they signals as they are currently designed are counter-intuitive and have the wrong set of priorities.

daisyduke wrote:
There are signs at Grove/Columbus alerting pedestrians to wait for walk signal and that there is a delay.

Let's say you are at an intersection that requires pushing the button, and you didn't realize it. Just push it the next cycle! Those few minutes are a small price to pay. Cars cannot just decide not to obey a signal, and those on foot should not be able to either. If the light really seems messed up, go to another corner to safely cross.

I don't understand why people can't follow the signals.

daisyduke wrote:
There are signs at Grove/Columbus alerting pedestrians to wait for walk signal and that there is a delay.

Let's say you are at an intersection that requires pushing the button, and you didn't realize it. Just push it the next cycle! Those few minutes are a small price to pay. Cars cannot just decide not to obey a signal, and those on foot should not be able to either. If the light really seems messed up, go to another corner to safely cross.

I don't understand why people can't follow the signals.

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

moobycow wrote:
People are calling out pedestrians for going against the signal, but when you have a mismash of signs, some of which don't activate unless you press a button you're left with pedestrians who don't know whether or not they are not supposed to cross or the button simply wasn't pressed.

This, I think, is the heart of the problem, especially along Columbus Avenue.

moobycow wrote:
People are calling out pedestrians for going against the signal, but when you have a mismash of signs, some of which don't activate unless you press a button you're left with pedestrians who don't know whether or not they are not supposed to cross or the button simply wasn't pressed.

jc_dweller wrote:
Quote:

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
Are there any Urban Planners on JCList? I would love to hear what the industry has to say about conventions and practices for crosswalk protocol. For instance is there an accepted formula for the timing of a Walk sign? I hope there is. I picture an equation that takes into account the traffic density (both vehicular AND pedestrian) and the width of the intersection and turning lanes adjusted for the average speed of the slowest walkers. Whoever set the timing of the Walk signals at Journal Square must have been using the speed of the most fit and speedy young healthy walkers since from the moment the Walk sign illuminates there is just barely enough time to skip across to safety if you hoof it at top speed. Sucks to be you if you are mobility impaired in any way. Apparently your basic safety needs were deemed secondary to the needs of the automobile owners.

Some other thread, I forget which, taught us that it's the city engineers, not planners, who deal with this.

So, any Engineers on here?

Sully wrote:
Quote:

bodhipooh wrote:
Actually, I have been to many places where pedestrians signals are slightly delayed to allow for traffic (cars) to be able to make turns. If pedestrians signals were to turn at the same time as the green light, cars will have a hard time making turns, which can lead to gridlock. Given that the city has already altered the timing of some traffic signals (possibly to prevent cars from being able to speed throughout the city) it would make sense that they would want cars to be able to turn when lights do change.

At many big intersections in Manhattan, the opposite is now true: pedestrians get the Walk signal a few seconds before traffic in the same direction gets the green light (so for a few seconds, car traffic in all directions has a red light). I've seen this specifically on 6th Avenue, at the intersections with 14th St and 23rd St... and noticed it at other intersections where an aveune crosses one of the big 2-way streets.

It is one more thing that boils down to a simple question: Is it more important to move cars around quickly, or keep pedestrians safe?

bodhipooh wrote:
Actually, I have been to many places where pedestrians signals are slightly delayed to allow for traffic (cars) to be able to make turns. If pedestrians signals were to turn at the same time as the green light, cars will have a hard time making turns, which can lead to gridlock. Given that the city has already altered the timing of some traffic signals (possibly to prevent cars from being able to speed throughout the city) it would make sense that they would want cars to be able to turn when lights do change.

JerseyCityFrankie wrote:
Are there any Urban Planners on JCList? I would love to hear what the industry has to say about conventions and practices for crosswalk protocol. For instance is there an accepted formula for the timing of a Walk sign? I hope there is. I picture an equation that takes into account the traffic density (both vehicular AND pedestrian) and the width of the intersection and turning lanes adjusted for the average speed of the slowest walkers. Whoever set the timing of the Walk signals at Journal Square must have been using the speed of the most fit and speedy young healthy walkers since from the moment the Walk sign illuminates there is just barely enough time to skip across to safety if you hoof it at top speed. Sucks to be you if you are mobility impaired in any way. Apparently your basic safety needs were deemed secondary to the needs of the automobile owners.