YAA (yet another accident) at Lynn?

[baiskeli]

@ShawnoftheDread 33566 wrote:

15 seconds should be enough for what, for the “walk” signal? Sure, for those standing on the corner at the beginning of the cycle. But the point people are trying to make is that the signal should accomodate more than just those already waiting to cross when the cycle begins.

Why?

If you’re not at the intersection yet, you’re not there yet.

Just like green lights are usually long enough to accomodate more than just the cars that were sitting at the red light.

Some are, some aren’t. It’s not a requirement. It depends on the circumstances. If there’s a long wait on a red, you’d expect most cyclists to have reached the intersection already. Those who still haven’t can wait like the last ones did. So it’s really a function of how long the red is too.

We should probably consider how many people, regardless of their mode of transport, get through on each green and have to wait on each red. I think the cars probably wait longer than we do for a green (though I don’t have alot of sympathy of course).

[dasgeh]

@baiskeli 33571 wrote:

Some are, some aren’t. It’s not a requirement. It depends on the circumstances. If there’s a long wait on a red, you’d expect most cyclists to have reached the intersection already. Those who still haven’t can wait like the last ones did. So it’s really a function of how long the red is too.

But earlier you said that a cyclist that had arrived on red, but that was further back in line, such that by the time she actually got to the curb cut the light was on countdown, that cyclist should wait. That intersection is a scrum when it’s busy — cyclists and peds coming from the MVT heading up the Custis, coming from the Custis headed to the MVT, coming from the MVT to the Bridge, from the Custis to the Bridge, from the Bridge to the Custis, from the Bridge to the MVT, coming from all those directions headed to Rosslyn and from Rosslyn to all those directions — all with a tiny concrete landing inhibited by a telephone pole and junction box. Cyclists generally fight for the small curb cut, while peds just off the curb. Everyone is cutting different directions. Some cars try to push through turning right on red. Then the light for cars turns green and multiple cars try to fight through the scrum. On nice days, I often arrive while the light is red, and don’t get into the intersection until the countdown.

As far as optimal light timing, I’d argue that you want more peds and cyclists to get through than cars, because you want to discourage driving.

Finally, could we put in a bike signal to go alongside the ped hand/walking person like you see at Scott and Quinn at the top of Rosslyn hill? At those streets, the bike signal stays green while the countdown is going, and yellow when the car-light is yellow. At Lynn, you could have the bike signal go yellow when the ped countdown is at, say, 5.

[mstone]

@ShawnoftheDread 33561 wrote:

Whether you think peds and bikes should wait for the next green or not, the fact is that it’s ridiculous to have only 15 seconds of “walk” and 30-45 seconds of “don’t walk” at an intersection that takes only 5-10 seconds to cross. The walk signal should be longer and the don’t walk should be much shorter for each cycle.

The point of the countdown is to let people know whether they have enough time to cross, and the length of the countdown is determined by the width of the road & the average pedestrian pace. (This is why the lack of a update to the law to allow crossing during the countdown, as long as you’re done before the countdown ends, is a bug that has been fixed in many jurisdictions. The feds discussed making the change a mandate but have not yet done so because children might be confused by having more than a binary decision [stop/walk]. I consider this a generally stupid rationale, as we do not typically make children the standard by which we determine what adults should do.)

[mstone]

@baiskeli 33553 wrote:

I know it goes against every urge in every muscle of our bodies to not GO GO GO, but that’s what safety requires sometimes. It’s not that hard to do. My system isn’t perfect, but it takes 2 minutes and adds a very comfortable margin of safety in return. It’s worth my 2 minutes.[/quote]

Why not just not go at all until there are no cars in sight? That would add an even larger measure of safety and wouldn’t be entirely dependent on all these confusing lights. The entire point of the countdown is to let people know whether there is time to cross safely, and ignoring that just to be holier-than-thou makes no sense.

If you really want to see safety improved, abolish the right turn on red. Also have a cop there to enforce the prohibition on cars entering the intersection before they are clear to proceed through. Then you won’t have this “mad scramble” of cars trying to force their way through.

[baiskeli]

@dasgeh 33577 wrote:

But earlier you said that a cyclist that had arrived on red, but that was further back in line, such that by the time she actually got to the curb cut the light was on countdown, that cyclist should wait. That intersection is a scrum when it’s busy — cyclists and peds coming from the MVT heading up the Custis, coming from the Custis headed to the MVT, coming from the MVT to the Bridge, from the Custis to the Bridge, from the Bridge to the Custis, from the Bridge to the MVT, coming from all those directions headed to Rosslyn and from Rosslyn to all those directions — all with a tiny concrete landing inhibited by a telephone pole and junction box. Cyclists generally fight for the small curb cut, while peds just off the curb. Everyone is cutting different directions. Some cars try to push through turning right on red. Then the light for cars turns green and multiple cars try to fight through the scrum. On nice days, I often arrive while the light is red, and don’t get into the intersection until the countdown.

How many cycles do you think you’d have to wait on to get through? It can’t be more than one.

As far as optimal light timing, I’d argue that you want more peds and cyclists to get through than cars, because you want to discourage driving.

Well, WE want that, but getting the traffic engineers to agree is another thing.

Finally, could we put in a bike signal to go alongside the ped hand/walking person like you see at Scott and Quinn at the top of Rosslyn hill? At those streets, the bike signal stays green while the countdown is going, and yellow when the car-light is yellow. At Lynn, you could have the bike signal go yellow when the ped countdown is at, say, 5.

I’d like to see a bike signal a Lynn. What would you think of that? Would you like that better than a pedestrian signal? I guess that won’t work because they can’t do both.

[baiskeli]

@mstone 33580 wrote:

Why not just not go at all until there are no cars in sight? That would add an even larger measure of safety and wouldn’t be entirely dependent on all these confusing lights.

Because I didn’t suggest that. I wouldn’t find that necessary, but if you do, feel free.

The entire point of the countdown is to let people know whether there is time to cross safely, and ignoring that just to be holier-than-thou makes no sense.

No, the entire point of the countdown is to inform pedestrians (not us – we weren’t thought of) how long they have to finish crossing, but NOT to allow them to start to cross.

If you really want to see safety improved, abolish the right turn on red. Also have a cop there to enforce the prohibition on cars entering the intersection before they are clear to proceed through. Then you won’t have this “mad scramble” of cars trying to force their way through.

I completely agree that the biggest problem is the right on red. It should go. A cop can’t stay there all the time though.

Meanwhile, we have right on red. And cars are looking in the intersection for pedestrian and bike traffic. They are probably not going to see, or look for, bikes coming into the intersection from the trail at that point. That’s when waiting makes sense for a bike.

[mstone]

@baiskeli 33583 wrote:

No, the entire point of the countdown is to inform pedestrians (not us – we weren’t thought of) how long they have to finish crossing, but NOT to allow them to start to cross.[/quote]

No, that really wasn’t the case (note: I’m talking about the logic of the system, not the law). The old system had the crossing just start blinking, usually a standard few seconds before the cycle ended, and nobody had any idea how much time was left. Often there wasn’t enough time to finish crossing by the time the signal turned to steady red. The obvious solution was to increase the amount of time that the hand blinked red after the walk signal was illuminated for long enough to cross, but “nobody” wanted to hold the cars up any longer for mere pedestrians. So some brilliant traffic engineer came up with this idea of a countdown. Now they could increase the amount of time that the signal flashed a warning, people would know whether they had enough time to start crossing (different answer for a 20-something running across vs a senior with a walker), and they didn’t have to give any more total time to pedestrians. But make no mistake, the blinking countdown is coming out of the time that used to be the walking white man, not the time that used to be the flashing red hand. At many wide streets you’ll see literally only a few seconds of walk signal before the countdown begins. It is quite common for me to be crossing one of those, look for an approaching car, stare down the guy who wasn’t planning to stop at the line, look back at the signal, and already see it counting down. Literally, like a 35 second countdown for a 40 second cycle on an 8 lane road. I’m simply not going to stand there and wait and hope that next time the cars will really stop within 5 seconds so I can scurry across on my grudgingly given time. And doing so wouldn’t increase my safety, because I’ve already got this guy stared down and stopped, and maybe the next guy will be texting while turning right on red without stopping.

Quote:

Meanwhile, we have right on red. And cars are looking in the intersection for pedestrian and bike traffic. They are probably not going to see, or look for, bikes coming into the intersection from the trail at that point. That’s when waiting makes sense for a bike.

Waiting makes no difference–the turn can happen during the walk signal just as easily as during the countdown. Don’t be an ass and zoom across without slowing and looking, but if the way is clear there’s zero benefit to waiting unnecessarily and zero chance that you’ll be able to cross at the next signal without still having to look around for some asshat who’s not going to stop just because you’re in the crosswalk.

[baiskeli]

@mstone 33587 wrote:

No, that really wasn’t the case (note: I’m talking about the logic of the system, not the law). The old system had the crossing just start blinking, usually a standard few seconds before the cycle ended, and nobody had any idea how much time was left. Often there wasn’t enough time to finish crossing by the time the signal turned to steady red. The obvious solution was to increase the amount of time that the hand blinked red after the walk signal was illuminated for long enough to cross, but “nobody” wanted to hold the cars up any longer for mere pedestrians. So some brilliant traffic engineer came up with this idea of a countdown. Now they could increase the amount of time that the signal flashed a warning, people would know whether they had enough time to start crossing (different answer for a 20-something running across vs a senior with a walker), and they didn’t have to give any more total time to pedestrians. But make no mistake, the blinking countdown is coming out of the time that used to be the walking white man, not the time that used to be the flashing red hand.

That may be true, but it’s still illegal to begin the cross once the hand is red, as I understand it.

At many wide streets you’ll see literally only a few seconds of walk signal before the countdown begins.

Yes – because it only takes a few seconds to BEGIN to cross. Once in the crosswalk, it’s fine to continue crossing during the red/countdown.

It is quite common for me to be crossing one of those, look for an approaching car, stare down the guy who wasn’t planning to stop at the line, look back at the signal, and already see it counting down. Literally, like a 35 second countdown for a 40 second cycle on an 8 lane road. I’m simply not going to stand there and wait and hope that next time the cars will really stop within 5 seconds so I can scurry across on my grudgingly given time. And doing so wouldn’t increase my safety, because I’ve already got this guy stared down and stopped, and maybe the next guy will be texting while turning right on red without stopping.

You should do what’s safe, of course. I have never run into a situation where I didn’t have plenty of time to begin to cross safely at a green crosswalk before it turned red. Certainly not at this intersection. There’s plenty of time to cross safely on the green.

The red countdown is the rough equivalent of a yellow for a car. In fact, it replaced the flashing green walk and/or red hand that had the same function. At some intersections and situations, a yellow light means speed up. And sometimes it means slow down and stop. At this particular intersection, I think it’s wise on a bike to choose the stop option.

Waiting makes no difference–the turn can happen during the walk signal just as easily as during the countdown.

But the difference is the view of the driver. A driver can easily see you in front of him in the crosswalk, and your intentions are perfectly clear. But when you are riding toward the street, still on the trail, he may not see you (he’s looking at the ones in front of him) and he may not know what your intentions are. Being really fast, on a bike you can be right in front of him in a split second, with him not having time to react. That’s a bad place to be.

Don’t be an ass and zoom across without slowing and looking, but if the way is clear there’s zero benefit to waiting unnecessarily and zero chance that you’ll be able to cross at the next signal without still having to look around for some asshat who’s not going to stop just because you’re in the crosswalk.

Well, sure, if there’s just no traffic, go ahead and cross on the countdown. How often do you see that situation at rush hour on Lynn though, especially when people are coming from both Lynn and the right turn on red from the south? Pretty much every crossing there during peak time involves going right in front of a car.

The proof is in the pudding – what’s going on at this intersection that is causing so many cyclists to get hurt? Yes, we should fix it – but in the meantime, it’s not worth me getting injured just for a few seconds extra.

[dasgeh]

@baiskeli 33606 wrote:

The proof is in the pudding – what’s going on at this intersection that is causing so many cyclists to get hurt?

I completely agree that we should focus on what’s going on that’s leading to so many accidents (peds/cyclists/cars). I don’t think the question of whether to start a crossing during the countdown is the cause of the problem.

I do think a bike signal alongside the ped signal would help some. You wrote earlier that “they can’t do both” — what do you mean? They have both all along the Rosslyn hill (Scott, Quinn, Oak, Nash).

I do think “No Turn On Red” is important, though I admit that we may have to settle for limited hours, because in the middle of the day/night, that’s really a ramp from a highway to Georgetown, and there’s not a lot of traffic on Lynn, so it makes sense to let people turn while Lynn has green but no one is there.

[baiskeli]

@dasgeh 33608 wrote:

I completely agree that we should focus on what’s going on that’s leading to so many accidents (peds/cyclists/cars). I don’t think the question of whether to start a crossing during the countdown is the cause of the problem.

The reason I suspect that it is part (not all) of the problem is that, as I recall, the green for traffic coming onto Lee from the south comes at the same time as the don’t walk. So people have gone from right on red there to right on green. They are less likely to be looking for bikes coming into the crossing. And by the letter of the law, as I understand it, is that bikes aren’t supposed to enter the crosswalk at that time. Even if one doesn’t car about the letter of the law, it may cost you in court.

I do think a bike signal alongside the ped signal would help some. You wrote earlier that “they can’t do both” — what do you mean? They have both all along the Rosslyn hill (Scott, Quinn, Oak, Nash).

Seems to me that bikes would just proceed on the red countdown like they do now, ignoring the bike signal.

I don’t think there are any pedestrian countdown signs on Scott, Quinn, etc. In fact, I don’t remember any pedestrian signals there, just bike ones.

I do think “No Turn On Red” is important, though I admit that we may have to settle for limited hours, because in the middle of the day/night, that’s really a ramp from a highway to Georgetown, and there’s not a lot of traffic on Lynn, so it makes sense to let people turn while Lynn has green but no one is there.

Yes, it’s really a ramp. It’s a bad place for a crossing. My preferred solution to this is to move the crossing down toward the bridge. That way, cars would have already turned right before they encounter it, and bikes/peds wouldn’t be in the blind spot behind drivers’ right shoulders. Also, it would make right of way less complicated.

[TwoWheelsDC]

The close calls that I’ve seen at this intersection (including my own close call, where my tire actually made contact with a car) have involved drivers turning from the center lane. I think getting rid of the center turn lane would be the single easiest first step toward a solution, as it would basically involve repainting the lines and little else. I think the best compromise solution, however, is the make the right turn “on green only” with a dedicated right turn light. Peds would then get a walk signal when the center through lane gets a green, which should largely solve the problem. Of course, I’m not a traffic engineer, so what do I know.

[Tim Kelley]

@TwoWheelsDC 33613 wrote:

The close calls that I’ve seen at this intersection (including my own close call, where my tire actually made contact with a car) have involved drivers turning from the center lane. I think getting rid of the center turn lane would be the single easiest first step toward a solution, as it would basically involve repainting the lines and little else. I think the best compromise solution, however, is the make the right turn “on green only” with a dedicated right turn light. Peds would then get a walk signal when the center through lane gets a green, which should largely solve the problem. Of course, I’m not a traffic engineer, so what do I know.

You don’t need to convince Arlington County, you need to convince VDOT. Their models suggest that making any changes to that intersection, in it’s current form, would back up an inordinate amount of traffic on the I-66 ramp so they are hesitant to do anything.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@Tim Kelley 33614 wrote:

You don’t need to convince Arlington County, you need to convince VDOT. Their models suggest that making any changes to that intersection, in it’s current form, would back up an inordinate amount of traffic on the I-66 ramp so they are hesitant to do anything.

Well then…

http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/mexico-city-cyclists-paint-5-km-guerilla-bike-lanes-front-congress.html

[Tim Kelley]

@TwoWheelsDC 33617 wrote:

Well then…

http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/mexico-city-cyclists-paint-5-km-guerilla-bike-lanes-front-congress.html

Less typing, more doing. Make it happen.

[dasgeh]

@baiskeli 33612 wrote:

The reason I suspect that it is part (not all) of the problem is that, as I recall, the green for traffic coming onto Lee from the south comes at the same time as the don’t walk.
[…]
I don’t think there are any pedestrian countdown signs on Scott, Quinn, etc. In fact, I don’t remember any pedestrian signals there, just bike ones.

I think you’re incorrect on both points here. The peds get a “walking person” first, while cars from the ramp still have red, but the walking person continues for a few seconds after the cars get green. Then there are a few seconds while the cars have green and the peds get a countdown. Then lots of seconds while the peds have hand and the cars have green.

At least at Scott, there’s a countdown and a bike signal.

I go through both of these every day.

[Author]

Posts