Regional and Urban Design Committee

 View Only
  • 1.  Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-03-2014 06:41 PM
    This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Committee on the Environment and Regional and Urban Design Committee .
    -------------------------------------------

    The Tyranny of the Red Light


    The impulse for this article came when  I was sitting at a red light one mile outside Winchester VA last Sunday morning at 6am. The location was one of those typical exurban sprawl strips where each shopping center has a light, all operating 24/7, no matter what. I was behind six other cars and the light didn't change although no crossing vehicles where in sight anywhere.  It was after another minute or so when it was clear that the signal malfunctioned when I decided to use the empty left turn lane to go straight through the red light.  Disobeying the automated red tyrant was instilling fear and a sense of liberation at once. There must be better, more flexible ways to control traffic, I thought.

    The traffic light, stop light or "signal" was invented nearly 150 years ago in London based on railroad signal arms and the three colors red, amber and green.  It was gas powered and apparently killed the operating police men when it exploded one day. This is why it took 44 more years before Salt Lake City tried to automate the traffic control warden again, as a two-light electric signal. Eventually Detroit installed in 1920 the first four sided three color electrical traffic control device. (History).
    suburban 4 phase signal
    Historic four sided tri-color signal (Creative commons)


    Since then little has changed except that we now have millions of them, maybe over 50 million signal heads just in the United States. That would be one signal for every 5 Americans! It is estimated that everyone of us spends about six months of our life waiting for a light to change! The estimated value of these "assets" is $82.7 billion. (2012 National Traffic Signal Report Card).

    Maybe it is time to rethink the alternating right of way assignment controlled by the colors red and green? 


    Continue reading the full article

    -------------------------------------------
    Klaus Philipsen FAIA
    Archplan Inc. Philipsen Architects
    Baltimore MD
    -------------------------------------------
    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 2.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-06-2014 06:28 PM
    Indeed, here in busy historic downtown Mystic, Connecticut, we deliberately do NOT have traffic lights, precisely to keep traffic moving.  That is a long standing and intelligent  policy of our local planning and police commissions.  We locals all know to "merge", and we all respect that policy.  Common sense I would say.  That said, we do get choked sometimes when a tourist gets timid at a stop sign, who was perhaps wishing for a stop light instead.  We also have a local law that one must stop for a pedestrian at a cross-walk, and we locals all do.  But then that same tourist from NY or NJ will not stop for a pedestrian at a crosswalk, so there is perhaps some danger in that.  And then when the tourists get out of their cars. they J-walk at mid-block NYC style, expecting us to stop.  Some of us hard core push the bubble with the tourist on that.  Common sense vs. common etiquette...
    -------------------------------------------
    James Hemenway Gibbs
    Architect
    James Gibbs Architect
    Mystic CT
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 3.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-09-2014 08:11 PM
    Remember... "J" walking was a law developed for the convenience of motorists, not pedestrians.

    -------------------------------------------
    Roger Retzlaff AIA
    Green Bay WI
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 4.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-10-2014 05:54 PM
    This is a very interesting discussion.  We cannot just discard our rules and regulations of the road and have total chaos or anarchy on the road.  Imagine how many lives would be saved if people did not j-walk.  How many people would be dead if drivers just shot through red lights.  I believe we should enforce the laws that we do have and try to save more lives.  It seems that every month in the D.C. area someone is hit by a car because they were not in a cross walk.
    The installation of traffic lights and their use is a science and an art that we rely on experts for their installation.  I say there is an art to it because the installation of traffic lights doesn't always work as intended.  An interesting example of this occured on Que Street in Georgetown, Washington DC over the last 10 or so years.  Que Street is a narrow residential street that has a bus route on it, and most of the intersections, except at the main business street Wisconsin Avenue, have only four way stop signs and no traffic lights.  There are two intersections, one at 33rd Street and the other at 34th Street that never had traffic lights until about 9 years ago when the city installed two sets of traffic lights here.   These were intersections of very narrow residential streets and many residents found the traffic lights as a disturbance more than a convenience.  Now cars had to stop and idle their gases in the neighborhood, and many cars tried to beat the yellow lights.  I believe there were more accidents with the red lights than with the original stop lights.  They even had pedestrian lights installed for 24 feet wide roads.  All this electronics was so commercial and placed in a residential neighborhood seemed to be overkill. After three or four years, the city came in and took the traffic lights out and put back the four way stop signs.   Now they seem to be doing the job quite well and peace is back in the neighborhood.  This is a case where traffic consultants could not devise the ideal system to use until they actually tried it out in the field.  I do not know what caused them to put the traffic lights in these two intersections in the first place. 
    There is a place for traffic lights and we should all abide by them.
    -------------------------------------------
    Reade Elliott AIA
    Purcellville VA
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 5.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-14-2014 12:36 AM
    The Georgetown experience with a small intersection return to a 4-way stop sounds like, excuse the pun, a case of less is more.  An even better solution, where it can be done, is the traffic circle or rotary.  Clearly it cannot be retro-fitted into dense existing street grids. There are also issues for pedestrian crossings.  However, most of the time no one is crossing and traffic flows through at a safe pace without the obligatory stop and start. Can the pedestrian crossing be managed with striped crossings?  And what are the implications for bikes in a rotary?  Washington DC does have several large examples.

    -------------------------------------------
    Douglas Lee Frazier AIA

    AllTransit Consultants, LLC
    Kensington CA
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 6.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-15-2014 09:57 PM
    It seems important we check our prejudices when attempting to draw conclusions.  My comment on J-walking has a corollary; traffic lights were designed to control automobile traffic at intersections and pedestrian traffic incidentally, as it is present.  Where a large amount of pedestrian traffic is anticipated, additional signalization is often employed, only occasionally in a beneficial manner for the pedestrian.  A NHTSA report for 1998 - 2003, http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/809-456.pdf, listed behaviors for both drivers and pedestrians in crashes resulting in pedestrian deaths. One of the conclusions of the report was for Pedestrian Fatalities and Location:  Since over three-fourths of the pedestrian fatalities occur at non-intersections, motor vehicle operators and pedestrians should be made aware of the necessity of sharing the public roadways in order to reduce pedestrian fatalities. This is especially necessary on roadways without crosswalks. [Emboldening, mine.]  Complete streets analysis has shown us how most roadway design has only addressed motor vehicles and has generally ignored or provided only minimally adequate facility for non-motorized traffic.  Mostly, we have an overlay of regulation and behavioral prejudice governing non-motorized traffic.  In the same report, 30% of pedestrians killed were assigned a fault of improper crossing of roadway or intersection.  That is a fairly high percentage.  In architectural programming, I'm sure if we found a high number of problems from a particular behavior at a facility, we would be proposing a design solution so it would be possible elect a different behavior or remove the hazard to what might otherwise be normal ways of acting and moving.

    -------------------------------------------
    Roger Retzlaff AIA
    Green Bay WI
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 7.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-06-2014 06:50 PM


    -------------------------------------------
    Patrick Baechle AIA
    Firm Owner/Architect
    Baechle & Associates
    Hollidaysburg PA
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 8.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-06-2014 08:13 PM
    I appreciate the insight into intersection controls, but ask the question: why try to facilitate traffic rather than looking for ways to dimiish the number of automobiles on the road.  To make intersections efficient is to further institutionalize roadbuilding and encourage sprawl.  It is the very inefficiency of individual transit as a system, in economic, functional and environmental terms, that has proven its inefficacy as infrastructure.  Let's reinvent cities rather than propping up a largely discredited transit modality.
    -------------------------------------------
    Gary Collins AIA
    Principal
    Gary R. Collins, AIA
    Jacksonville OR
    -------------------------------------------






    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13


  • 9.  RE:Why traffic signals have many bad outcomes for urbanity

    Posted 01-07-2014 06:08 PM

    Buses have to stop for traffic signals too.  The hourly cost of operating a transit bus (especially if driven by a union operator but even if driven by a non-union operator) is far greater than for automobiles.  Therefore, transit agencies should be in support of the changes proposed by Mr. Philipsen as well -- they can save time, money and fuel, 

    It will also make transit far more attractive to potential riders if buses do not have to stop as much.  Many bus transit agencies prefer to locate their stops on the "far side" of intersections, for safety reasons (avoiding conflicts with pedestrians disembarking from the bus and from autos making right turns in front of the bus).  Currently, buses approaching these "far side" stops often have to make two stops at each intersection -- one for the traffic controls (signal or stop sign) and a second at the bus stop.  Perceived travel time is one of the biggest reasons people in urban areas cite to NOT take the bus, so anything that can speed travel time will help.

    -------------------------------------------
    David Solomon AIA
    Senior Architect
    Sacramento Regional Transit
    Sacramento CA
    -------------------------------------------



    AIA26 San Diego June 10-13