01-04-2017, 11:43 PM
What is the rationale that pedestrian signals should not be closer than 215m (I've often seen this threshold in regional documents)? To maintain traffic flow/keep the green wave? Avoiding visual clutter/overwhelming the driver? In this day in age wouldn't be easy simply tie pedestrian signals that are really close together so that only one of the crossings can be activated within a certain period (e.g. a green wave cycle) relative to the others? The road users don't get overly slowed down by having to stop at potentially more than one pedestrian crossing in a given road section and the pedestrians get a known and safe break in traffic at regular intervals and have more routes across a road.
The example I think of is Bridgeport. There are traffic signals at Weber and Regina, in addition to pedestrian signals at Devitt and Peppler. As it stands the spacing between signals is:
Weber to Devitt = 250m
Devitt to Peppler = 350m
Peppler to Regina = 180m
With the Laurel Trail in between the two pedestrian crossings Bridgeport could really use another signal as well. The lack of a signal at the Laurel Trail at Bridgeport is a huge bottleneck for trail users (I, and many others, often cut over to Peppler because it is faster and safer than waiting for a gap) .
Plus, as it stands the signals at Peppler and Regina are already too close together based on the regional guideline,
At the very least the Peppler signal should be moved to the Laurel Trail then you'd have more even spacing of the crossings:
Weber to Devitt = 250m
Devitt to Laurel Trail = 250m
Laurel Trail to Regina = 290m
Why does Victoria at West/Strange still not have pedestrian crossing cycles by default? Why do you have to push the beg button at such a busy intersection? Especially when the two signal cycles are so disproportionate in length (Victoria east/west seems about 2x as long as West/Strange north/south). It such a pain to get to that intersection half a second too late have to decide to cross "illegally" against the don't walk and take a chance that drivers are going let you cross without whipping SB off of Strange to WB on Victoria or bolting on the green to make a left ahead of oncoming traffic NB on West to WB on Victoria or SB on Strange to EB Victoria, or to have to wait two full cycles to cross "legally" and safely. I don't think I've ever come through that intersection without seeing someone waiting to cross (or at the IHT crossing) and it would be a simple, next to no cost fix, until further improvements can be implemented in that area.
The example I think of is Bridgeport. There are traffic signals at Weber and Regina, in addition to pedestrian signals at Devitt and Peppler. As it stands the spacing between signals is:
Weber to Devitt = 250m
Devitt to Peppler = 350m
Peppler to Regina = 180m
With the Laurel Trail in between the two pedestrian crossings Bridgeport could really use another signal as well. The lack of a signal at the Laurel Trail at Bridgeport is a huge bottleneck for trail users (I, and many others, often cut over to Peppler because it is faster and safer than waiting for a gap) .
Plus, as it stands the signals at Peppler and Regina are already too close together based on the regional guideline,
At the very least the Peppler signal should be moved to the Laurel Trail then you'd have more even spacing of the crossings:
Weber to Devitt = 250m
Devitt to Laurel Trail = 250m
Laurel Trail to Regina = 290m
Why does Victoria at West/Strange still not have pedestrian crossing cycles by default? Why do you have to push the beg button at such a busy intersection? Especially when the two signal cycles are so disproportionate in length (Victoria east/west seems about 2x as long as West/Strange north/south). It such a pain to get to that intersection half a second too late have to decide to cross "illegally" against the don't walk and take a chance that drivers are going let you cross without whipping SB off of Strange to WB on Victoria or bolting on the green to make a left ahead of oncoming traffic NB on West to WB on Victoria or SB on Strange to EB Victoria, or to have to wait two full cycles to cross "legally" and safely. I don't think I've ever come through that intersection without seeing someone waiting to cross (or at the IHT crossing) and it would be a simple, next to no cost fix, until further improvements can be implemented in that area.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.