Mind_the_gap
Active Member
^ Still three seconds of unnecessary idling...
Do it properly or don't do it at all...
Do it properly or don't do it at all...
|
|
|
Roads: Traffic Signals
- Thread starter reaperexpress
- Start date
reaperexpress
Senior Member
The City's standard LPI duration is actually 5 seconds, so it's even worse than that.
"Unnecessary idling" is a red herring that is only really used as an argument by people who want to shoehorn car traffic into places it doesn't belong. In reality the negligible impact of longer idling times for internal-combustion vehicles without stop/start technology is generally offset by reductions in trip attractiveness (fewer trips). I don't recommend using idling as an argument.
What is an issue, however, is the lack of credibility. Showing a red light while there's no actual conflict is a surefire way to normalize signal non-compliance. Which is a huge safety issue since signals only work if people obey them. On top of vehicles heading straight, current LPI implementations make the Flashing Don't Walk countdown meaningless since you can often start crossing after the countdown has ended and still make it all the way across the street before traffic gets a green.
The City's LPI approach is deeply flawed as Jackson has done an excellent job of documenting. There are many ways of minimizing unnecessary impacts of LPI, such as arranging phases such that the LPI occurs during time that the signal needs to be red regardless, using dedicated signal heads to hold back right turns while allowing thru movements, or using leading thru intervals, the latter two of which are done in Ottawa, but are virtually unheard of in Toronto.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
I live in Ottawa and although I like the leading thru intervals in theory, they don't seem to work in practice. Drivers just turn during the thru arrow just as they would on a green ball.
However in Québec drivers do seem to recognize the thru arrow, and wait for it to end before turning. Maybe it's just a matter of familiarity and Ontario drivers would learn to wait if LTIs were more common.
At the moment, the best solution available in Ottawa seems to be this one, with both an LPI and an LTI. The LPI increases compliance with the no right turn restriction, while the LTI avoids unnecessary delay to thru traffic:
An example in Massachussetts using red arrows and flashing yellow arrows:
afransen
Senior Member
I frequently see people going to turn on a 'no right on red' signal while cycling. I look at them, point at the sign, and they usually just smile, wave, then turn anyway. Unreal.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Which reminds me of another problem: When they put in a bike box, they (correctly) install No Right Turn on Red signs, but they often forget to add "Bicycles Excepted" tabs. So apparently bikes aren't allowed to turn right on red from a bike lane to another bike lane because there might be *checks notes* other bikes in the way ??? Other bikes waiting at the same stop line???
St George & Harbord (a location with lots of bicycle right turns):
After seeing a number of these nonsensical regulations, one's willingness to obey signals and signage is severely eroded.
I encounter even more nonsensical regulations while cycling than while driving.
Last edited:
PL1
Active Member
It's almo
It's almost like enforcement might make a difference
afransen
Senior Member
Oh, as a cyclist, I would ignore that sign too. I was referring to car drivers (I see how my comment was unclear). The purpose of this no right on red was to prevent conflicts with a double left turn lane turning into the same lanes.
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Yeah I ignore it too when cycling, but it's problematic that our roadway designs/operations are training people to disregard traffic laws.
afransen
Senior Member
Oh, I agree. The worst offenders are "cyclists dismount and walk" at every cross-street on a multi-use path. Patently insane if they think anyone is going to comply with that. The kind of careless ass-covering that trains people to break the law.
Towered
Superstar
That one is so dumb - never once have I dismounted at a cross-street or whatever. It's just not going to happen.
PL1
Active Member
It's as likely to be observed as a "drivers: put car in neutral and push car through construction zone"
reaperexpress
Senior Member
Well the nice thing in that case is that the icon is a green circle meaning "permission" as per the MUTCD signage principles that Canada follows.
So it's logically saying "you are permitted to walk your bike", to which my response is "okay cool, I'm not going to do that".
This is confirmed by the Ontario Traffic Manual itself, namely Book 1A:
"A green annular band shall indicate a permissive message" (emphasis added)
Yet Ontario Traffic Manual Book 12 claims that the bikes dismount sign means:
On top of contradicting the fundamental principles of North American traffic sign design, it also contradicts the intent of every other green circle sign in the manual.
For example, this sign means "cycling is permitted", not "you are required to ride a bicycle"
This sign means "trucks permitted", not "you are required to drive a truck"
This sign means "hazardous goods permitted", not "you are required to have hazardous goods"
Per the MUTCD, requirements are to be communicated with a black-and-white sign, not a green circle (with specific exceptions like stop signs, yield signs etc).
Last edited:
artemperederii
Active Member
Just wanted to show new beautiful traffic lights that Moscow is currently testing, this is flat LED panel with an interesting feature - an outline that copies a colour of a signal for better attention
ndawgg
Active Member
Not sure if this is the right place, but I’ve noticed there’s been work happening at the Yonge street intersections just north of College. Today when I walked by Yonge and Wood it looked like possibly traffic light or light post bases had been installed. Does anyone know if they putting traffic lights there?