Nashville Bits and Pieces

[volsfanwill]

Tonight was a crap show on Broadway. I didn't even say anything and more than one friend said "why isn't this street closed to traffic" 

Also,  we need more bars

[titanhog]

Division is nuts from 19th over to 21st where Winners, Losers and Rebar are located.  I tried to drive through there tonight and it was like no one even realized cars were on the road.  They were all just walking around oblivious.

[Neigeville2]

How are those pedestrian areas working out for Memphis? Fresno? Denver's 69th Street?

Over a 90% failure in the U.S.

Yup... Dead. Trying like crazy to get cars back on the streets. Pedestrian isn't the answer. Complete streets are the answer.

 

16th avenue in Denver is thriving and has been since 1982.  There's no one answer, but pedestrians should not always have to yield the majority of every public space to cars.  It's always amazed me these little streets in Manhattan where you see scores of people jostling each other on the sidewalks while a dozen people in cars are allotted 80-90% of the space. 

[Guest]

16th avenue in Denver is thriving and has been since 1982. There's no one answer, but pedestrians should not always have to yield the majority of every public space to cars. It's always amazed me these little streets in Manhattan where you see scores of people jostling each other on the sidewalks while a dozen people in cars are allotted 80-90% of the space.

You are right, 16th street. It is a success. One of the few. Bad example.

I studied this quite a bit in my decade in Memphis. On Main Street there even has a public transit trolley system and 25,000 residents in the core and they still can't get anything to survive mid block.

Walking is one thing, but I am not a fan of pedestrian only sections of actual streets. What is there to walk by if it is just a bunch of empty storefronts?

Broadway is the only street in this city that may have a chance, but I still prefer a complete solution to allow for flexibility. One thing is for sure we need less vehicle lanes and much wider sidewalks. We also need more dedicated safe bike lanes. And for gods sake lets get some green... trees please.

[rookzie]

16th avenue in Denver is thriving and has been since 1982.  There's no one answer, but pedestrians should not always have to yield the majority of every public space to cars.  It's always amazed me these little streets in Manhattan where you see scores of people jostling each other on the sidewalks while a dozen people in cars are allotted 80-90% of the space. 

 

I tend to agree that, in many but not all cases, peds should not be allowed to just run and roam the streets unchecked, and that a more disciplined use of the roadways and crossings should be enforced, in order to prevent 75 percent of those backups, which end up ensnaring the entire set of contiguously connected streets.  I'm afraid that this means a change in ordinances and the requirements for businesses to share the costs of traffic management personnel.  The staff itself always would need to be trained and constantly briefed on mitigation practices and flow plans for specific events and even in areas of routine entertainment venues in the typically congested parts of town.

 

The city as a whole never had decent enforcement of jay-walking rules to start (if it ever had any), and never adequately addressed the need to manually manage traffic flow at points of needed attention beyond sticking a portly cop or two to prevent turns at block-offs. Then what can drivers do other than proceed in the directed path deeper into the quagmire ahead?  As a pedestrian, you won't be just crossing the road at will in some California towns without flack from the cops ─ I guarantee that.  Traffic-control lights alone cannot be expected to handle such overcapacity situations, where many such pedestrians are swarming the pavement.

-==-

Edited April 19, 2015 by rookzie

[PruneTracy]

Pedestrian isn't the answer. Complete streets are the answer.

 

It's always amazed me these little streets in Manhattan where you see scores of people jostling each other on the sidewalks while a dozen people in cars are allotted 80-90% of the space. 

 

I can't find any traffic volume counts for lower Broadway, but between 6th and 7th Avenues TDOT reports 15,000 vehicles per day, down from 27,000 vehicles per day in the mid-90s (dang strip clubs). This is borderline four-lane volumes, not six with parking, and I'd bet it's even less closer to the river.

 

I'm envisioning two travel lanes in each direction, bike lanes, back-in angle parking, a median serving as a pedestrian refuge, maybe even a tree here and there... at about 88 feet curb-to-curb there's plenty of room to play with. Could even use decorative pavement as suggested above to reinforce the notion of a special area.

[Nathan_in_DC]

How are those pedestrian areas working out for Memphis? Fresno? Denver's 69th Street?

Over a 90% failure in the U.S.

Yup... Dead. Trying like crazy to get cars back on the streets. Pedestrian isn't the answer. Complete streets are the answer.

 

I think there are a lot of problems facing Memphis and Fresno, having closed off pedestrian plazas isn't necessarily the cause of those problems.

 

Closing off every street is certainly not an end-all answer. However, making certain blocks pedestrian zones, and thoughtfully planning on how to manage traffic around it, could be good for everyone.

That being said, I do think that a comprehensive street plan is the solution here, as you mentioned. One that includes blocked off plazas, well timed and managed traffic lights, appropriately signed routes, and updated codes (with enforcement to go along).

[Neigeville2]

I tend to agree that, in many but not all cases, peds should not be allowed to just run and roam the streets unchecked, and that a more disciplined use of the roadways and crossings should be enforced...

 

The city as a whole never had decent enforcement of jay-walking rules to start (if it ever had any), and never adequately addressed the need to manually manage traffic flow at points of needed attention....

-==-

 

This touches on a peeve of mine, the idea that if people are being hit by cars, it's the victims fault.  Most people hit by cars are hit by turning vehicles because they are crossing at corners, where the law requires, which is the most dangerous place you can cross.  Enforcing jaywalking rules puts pedestrians at greater risk for the convenience of drivers.  We've also been habituated to the idea that cars should travel inches away from pedestrians at speeds that make it literally impossible to take in their surroundings in a visually complex urban environment.

 

Nothing feeds an entitled ego like being behind the wheel of a car (except perhaps riding a bicycle, which seems to confer on a minority the sense of total immunity from laws of both man and physics, not to mention etiquette); people seem to feel being slowed down by a few seconds merely for the safety of pedestrians and other drivers represents a terrible injustice.  A rethinking of the streets needs to prioritize safety over the perceived convenience of drivers, and to recognize not only that there are more pedestrians around but that the environment has become more complex perceptually.

 

I think part of the problem in Nashville is also that we use the Interstate so much to get around town.  It is designed to minimize the need for drivers to pay attention, and drivers come off still in a kind of trance, speeding and ignoring their environment; it takes them a few blocks to wake up.  We really need something at the end of the ramp to slap them awake.

[drewbert]

Neigeville2, I was just about to post a similar article. Sometimes I "jaywalk" precisely because I don't trust drivers to actually notice or obey the pedestrian crossing signals at intersections. Darn near got run over trying out the new signal at 8th at Kirkwood a couple weeks ago.

[volsfanwill]

when memphis was mentioned I was thinking Beal street not main st. because it like broadway is a tourist area lined with bars and tourist junk stores. 

 

after getting tired of being bumped by people at the stage, my friends and I went to midtown instead, it was also a crap show, but we went to a new bar that wasnt very crowded.  

 

I mentioned we need more bars because the lines for everything on broadway were 2 buildings long, in some cases over lapping each other.  

[rookzie]

This touches on a peeve of mine, the idea that if people are being hit by cars, it's the victims fault.  Most people hit by cars are hit by turning vehicles because they are crossing at corners, where the law requires, which is the most dangerous place you can cross.  Enforcing jaywalking rules puts pedestrians at greater risk for the convenience of drivers.  We've also been habituated to the idea that cars should travel inches away from pedestrians at speeds that make it literally impossible to take in their surroundings in a visually complex urban environment.

 

Nothing feeds an entitled ego like being behind the wheel of a car (except perhaps riding a bicycle, which seems to confer on a minority the sense of total immunity from laws of both man and physics, not to mention etiquette); people seem to feel being slowed down by a few seconds merely for the safety of pedestrians and other drivers represents a terrible injustice.  A rethinking of the streets needs to prioritize safety over the perceived convenience of drivers, and to recognize not only that there are more pedestrians around but that the environment has become more complex perceptually.

 

I think part of the problem in Nashville is also that we use the Interstate so much to get around town.  It is designed to minimize the need for drivers to pay attention, and drivers come off still in a kind of trance, speeding and ignoring their environment; it takes them a few blocks to wake up.  We really need something at the end of the ramp to slap them awake.

 

 

Neigeville2, I was just about to post a similar article. Sometimes I "jaywalk" precisely because I don't trust drivers to actually notice or obey the pedestrian crossing signals at intersections. Darn near got run over trying out the new signal at 8th at Kirkwood a couple weeks ago.

 

Believe it or not, I do the same thine, basically playing a "card game" of "Mad Max" every time I head from work late afternoons to the city bus at 5th and Charlotte.  Nearly all the 4 or 5 fatalities which have occurred at 4th or 5th and Charlotte (a single example) have happened since around 2008, as buses and cars were turning at one of those two corners.  Like that bus that literally tried to run me over a few years back (on my birthday of all times) because the lard-butt driver got irritated with the straggling stream of us pedestrians in the crosswalk, as he had been intending to turn.  (that's why I now always keep in hand a 4-D-Cell Mag-light, while I'm dealing with those buses -- that is. with the butt-end of the light, in case I need to make a last-minute point)  Making 5th 2-way only compounded the issue.  Like that tractor-trailer that did run over that Hume-Fogg girl, at 8th and Church during late 2013, as the driver was turning.   I jaywalk because I can get away with it in this town, and because the enforcement doesn't seem to give a damn anyway, and I know that sounds hypocritical, but I don't hold my actions as virtue by any means.

 

I mentioned in the distant past how pedestrians inside the MTA MCCentral are allowed by design to cross at the 8 designated painted walks (4 on each boarding level) Buses have to stop at each of these walks whether pedestrians are present or not, and that's a good safety default.  The fact that the design even allows and requires pedestrian crossings for access was NOT a good design IMO, but that's irrelevant here and is another story.  But pedestrians almost always criss-cross by breaching the designated walks and instead walk diagonally (and any "which way") to get to their bus loading bays.  Now I've found myself doing just that also, not to be spiteful, but again, because no one else seems to care, and I can get away with, with the assumption that I hold myself accountable for not paying attention.  This lack of enforcement of crosswalk use frequently causes traffic back-ups of buses waiting behind each other to turn into MCCentral, in turn domino-ing the traffic passing through the nearby signaled intersections (particularly at 5th and Charlotte and at 4th / Jas. Rob split.  This also "influences" pedestrians outside the terminal to walk through the confusion in front of and behind any "hole" they can find.

 

I don't necessary limit the term "J-walking" to mean crossing in the middle of a block, but I also generically label any act of crossing at unsignaled locations other than at a corner and at signaled corners when the signal aspect (color) is restrictive for pedestrians and bears a "don't walk" signal, or a standard traffic red.  The way I look at it, I can rubber-neck my way across a street between intersections with far more resolve and safety (and save time), than I can with most of these poorly-ass timed lights can safely allow, with those delayed greens on one side or the other.  Along with Charlotte Ave. and Union St., Jas. Rob Pkwy is one of the worst offenders by the very signals themselves, as far as pedestrian safety is concerned, since the lights are set to maximize the motor traffic to or from those bridges in the east.  Again, as I mentioned above, this town is crap about not having personnel at the worst intersections, and while we were discussing only event and entertainment hot-spots in general, they also need to be staffed during transit operating hours constantly at that terminal and at other downtown points where incident risk assessment can be measured as high.  Again that's a matter of enforcement, and enforcement of pedestrian safety, even if it must become a budgeted and fundable service, has never been a noticeable priority in Nashville ─ at least it never seems to have been.

 

So I'm with you, brother, with that pet peeve, but I'm also for some "two-way" enforcement in this town.

-==-

[MidTenn1]

Oddly enough, one of the counter intuitive realities you learn as a traffic engineer is that there are studies to support the idea that crosswalks are less safe for pedestrians than unmarked and unsignalized mid block crossings. I do remember researching and reading the the results of the original study, many years ago. The primary reason was thought to be that pedestrians have a false sense of security while crossing in a crosswalk and do relax their guard somewhat.

 

However, people are going to cross at the corner at the light anyway, so maximizing the signage and delineating the pavement markings to alert the motorist while providing better pedestrian signalization is of a high priority.

 

I would rather cross mid-block myself as it is less complicated and demanding on the observational and decision making capabilities of the driver.

[RonCamp]

Neigeville2, I was just about to post a similar article. Sometimes I "jaywalk" precisely because I don't trust drivers to actually notice or obey the pedestrian crossing signals at intersections. Darn near got run over trying out the new signal at 8th at Kirkwood a couple weeks ago.

 

On a related note I have noticed that many crosswalks in downtown / midtown / the Gulch do not automatically go green for pedestrians - you still have to press the "walk request" button on the pole near the crosswalk.  If Nashville truly wants to encourage pedestrian-friendly streets, crosswalk signals for all lights inside the downtown loop and in the Midtown / Vandy / West End should be reprogrammed ASAP.  

[Vrtigo]

I have always presumed that there is some unwritten rule passed down from Metro government banning the issuance of citations for jaywalking. It seems like given the safety issues expounded upon above, as well as the general need in Nashville to get more people walking to begin with, that it would be silly to do anything that might disincentivize a person from walking the streets in whatever way they see fit.

[rookzie]

I have always presumed that there is some unwritten rule passed down from Metro government banning the issuance of citations for jaywalking. It seems like given the safety issues expounded upon above, as well as the general need in Nashville to get more people walking to begin with, that it would be silly to do anything that might disincentivize a person from walking the streets in whatever way they see fit.

 

That's a good vantage point, out-of-the-box rationalization.  I wonder what they do in Taiwan ROC and China, with all those bikers cyclists and people (I'm sure someone here knows).

-==-

Edited April 20, 2015 by rookzie

[MidTenn1]

On a related note I have noticed that many crosswalks in downtown / midtown / the Gulch do not automatically go green for pedestrians - you still have to press the "walk request" button on the pole near the crosswalk.  If Nashville truly wants to encourage pedestrian-friendly streets, crosswalk signals for all lights inside the downtown loop and in the Midtown / Vandy / West End should be reprogrammed ASAP.  

 

Pedestrians walk intervals chew up a lot of time and a high percentage of the green time in the typical 90 second +/- cycle of a traffic signal. On an approach where vehicles only need 15 to 20 seconds of green, the pedestrian signal may require 30+ seconds, and you may waste 15 seconds or more when there are no pedestrians. That time could be more efficiently allocated to another approach where there is greater vehicular demand. Therefore, signals should always provide push button activation.

 

More war stories.....Many years ago, I was charged with doing a comprehensive computer analysis of the traffic congestion in the Green Hills shopping district. We loaded in all the physical data, traffic volumes and signal timings and ran the analysis and not to our surprise the entire area failed from a traffic efficiency standpoint. However, we discovered one signal that had no push button was automatically providing maximum pedestrian crossing time on every cycle at a low volume ped crossing.This was taking away valuable green time from other approaches that needed more green time than they were getting. Once we installed a button to activate the pedestrian signal, the overall efficiency improved significantly, although it still was and always will be at failure levels.

 

Downtown areas will automatically provide ample green time for peds since there are more of them and most of the traffic signals pre-timed as they are not actuated by vehicle calls.

[rookzie]

Pedestrians walk intervals chew up a lot of time and a high percentage of the green time in the typical 90 second +/- cycle of a traffic signal. On an approach where vehicles only need 15 to 20 seconds of green, the pedestrian signal may require 30+ seconds, and you may waste 15 seconds or more when there are no pedestrians. That time could be more efficiently allocated to another approach where there is greater vehicular demand. Therefore, signals should always provide push button activation.

 

More war stories.....Many years ago, I was charged with doing a comprehensive computer analysis of the traffic congestion in the Green Hills shopping district. We loaded in all the physical data, traffic volumes and signal timings and ran the analysis and not to our surprise the entire area failed from a traffic efficiency standpoint. However, we discovered one signal that had no push button was automatically providing maximum pedestrian crossing time on every cycle at a low volume ped crossing.This was taking away valuable green time from other approaches that needed more green time than they were getting. Once we installed a button to activate the pedestrian signal, the overall efficiency improved significantly, although it still was and always will be at failure levels.

 

Downtown areas will automatically provide ample green time for peds since there are more of them and most of the traffic signals pre-timed as they are not actuated by vehicle calls.

 

I needed someone to tell me that, since obviously I'm not a professional analyst; I was hoping that you would come through.

 

i guess with Green Hills formed the way it was, becoming the way it is, and with decades of deferrals to handle foreseeable need for mitigation measures, factors such as T-bone and dog-leg intersections, along with controlled turning lanes, make it a trade-off in traffic movement and walkability.

 

I guess then that's the reason that the proposed and costly Transp. plan of G-H might take a generation to actually implement fully, or so it might seem.  And even with that ever happening (or not), planning for some point in the future will be like launching toward a moving target orbiting in space (in this case, "inner", instead of "outer").

-==-

Edited April 20, 2015 by rookzie

[CenterHill]

Pedestrians walk intervals chew up a lot of time and a high percentage of the green time in the typical 90 second +/- cycle of a traffic signal. On an approach where vehicles only need 15 to 20 seconds of green, the pedestrian signal may require 30+ seconds, and you may waste 15 seconds or more when there are no pedestrians. That time could be more efficiently allocated to another approach where there is greater vehicular demand. Therefore, signals should always provide push button activation.

 

 

 

I didn't know this, either.  That's interesting.    I will say I've pushed a lot of these crosswalk buttons in Nashville and I've never been able to tell that they actually do anything.    The signal seems to remain on its pre-programmed timer.  

 

Walking around Hong Kong last fall, I was delighted at how responsive the cross walk pushbuttons were.    You push the button and the signal immediately reacts (w/i a couple seconds) to stop cross traffic.    Gives one a sense of, I don't know, power.    

 

Another thing I noticed was that there was no pedestrian crossing at many of the street corners in central Kowloon.    The corners would be railed off and pedestrians would be directed (herded) to marked and signaled crossings mid-block (with signal buttons).    Being set in my American ways of crossing at corners, this took a little getting used to, but it actually works pretty well.   And you do feel safer than navigating a corner crossing with turning traffic.   

[titanhog]

It's tough on drivers, as well, when it comes to turning.  It's hard to always see if someone is coming from the right if you're turning right.  It would be better mid-block because you would have a "head-on" view of everything with no surprises.

[PruneTracy]

I will say I've pushed a lot of these crosswalk buttons in Nashville and I've never been able to tell that they actually do anything.    The signal seems to remain on its pre-programmed timer.  

 

Walking around Hong Kong last fall, I was delighted at how responsive the cross walk pushbuttons were.    You push the button and the signal immediately reacts (w/i a couple seconds) to stop cross traffic.    Gives one a sense of, I don't know, power.  

 

Most intersections that would warrant a signal have too much volume to interrupt the sequence for pedestrians; you'd degrade the capacity either by hitting a critical mass of pedestrian traffic or from people like me who would hit the button as soon as a green interval started just for funsies.

 

What the button typically does is signal the controller to extend the green time of the corresponding approaches to give pedestrians significant time to cross and/or hold turning traffic so no one gets splattered in the process. Depending on the timing and actuation of the signal it may not even be necessary to modify the sequence and so an intersection with pedestrian signal heads and no button is not necessarily a flaw of omission.

 

Around here usually the only time the button directly ends the green time of an approach is late at night or other off-peak hours. That being said, there are some new devices for midblock crossings (such as PHBs or HAWK beacons) that directly stop traffic for pedestrians.

[rookzie]

Most intersections that would warrant a signal have too much volume to interrupt the sequence for pedestrians; you'd degrade the capacity either by hitting a critical mass of pedestrian traffic or from people like me who would hit the button as soon as a green interval started just for funsies.

 

What the button typically does is signal the controller to extend the green time of the corresponding approaches to give pedestrians significant time to cross and/or hold turning traffic so no one gets splattered in the process. Depending on the timing and actuation of the signal it may not even be necessary to modify the sequence and so an intersection with pedestrian signal heads and no button is not necessarily a flaw of omission.

 

Around here usually the only time the button directly ends the green time of an approach is late at night or other off-peak hours. That being said, there are some new devices for midblock crossings (such as PHBs or HAWK beacons) that directly stop traffic for pedestrians.

 

Then, perhaps current technology for intelligent transportation systems can be refocused to incorporate modulation with some real-time, volumetrically and dynamically detected and monitored pedestrian presence and movements within congested segments, these segments in turn being coordinated among some 2-dimensional range of contiguous, successive points of conflicts.  That is, expanding and contracting "colonies" of intersections grouped linearly and laterally for 4-way (or multi-way) mediation, using "volatile" parametrics reflecting continuously changing states.  Just a wild-haired thought (obviously).

 

Based on what some have suggested and experienced with mid-block crossings, it would seem that the increased use of traffic circles and true roundabouts would make mid-block crossings more amenable to handling pedestrian volumes than crosswalks at the circles themselves.  Also I think that these high-intensity beacons might had been tried where 23th Ave tees into Blakemore Ave., on the south border of VU campus.  During the last 2 years, this set-up was replaced with a standard push-button traffic signal, since the intersection handles frequent but not necessarily large volumes of pedestrians (clinical staff, students, and patients) and some medical transport vehicles along secondary 23rd.  With the beacon set-up, it was not considered mid-block, of course, but in effect it was, given the high volume of traffic on Blakemore, which already had traffic lights at 21st, 24th, 25th and Natchez.  I don't know how well it had worked, but I always saw drivers in all 4 lanes of Blakemore plow to a halt with the beacon activated.  Maybe it was the stopped-school-bus effect with that beacon that "startled" the attention of drivers ─ I don't know.

-==-

Edited April 21, 2015 by rookzie

[PruneTracy]

Then, perhaps current technology for intelligent transportation systems can be refocused to incorporate modulation with some real-time, volumetrically and dynamically detected and monitored pedestrian presence and movements within congested segments, these segments in turn being coordinated among some 2-dimensional range of contiguous, successive points of conflicts.  That is, expanding and contracting "colonies" of intersections grouped linearly and laterally for 4-way (or multi-way) mediation, using "volatile" parametrics reflecting continuously changing states.

 

It's a lot harder to detect pedestrians reliably than vehicles as they are (hopefully) smaller, less standardized in appearance, and (again hopefully) not ferrous and therefore magnetic. Not saying it can't be done. I went to a seminar a while back where a guy was showing off a fully-integrated corridor management system of his invention that used various sensors to pick up vehicles, cyclists, and pedestrians well in advance of intersections and dynamically adjust all of the signals to minimize delays for all. It appeared to work very well (he'd sold it to some cities in Texas) but it was very expensive.

 

Based on what some have suggested and experienced with mid-block crossings, it would seem that the increased use of traffic circles and true roundabouts would make mid-block crossings more amenable to handling pedestrian volumes than crosswalks at the circles themselves.

 

I'm all for roundabouts and they are actually very safe for pedestrians due to the median refuge and the inherent design (you can only ever be splattered from one direction). Not to mention the reduction in vehicular crashes, lack of need for electricity and signal infrastructure, convienent location for naked statues and light-up sticks, etc. They are superior to signals and four-way stops in most all scenarios, excepting limited right-of-way availability and extremely high volumes. Tell your councilman, we need more roundabouts (and you know strangers on the Internet who design them for reasonable fees).

 

Also I think that these high-intensity beacons might had been tried where 23th Ave tees into Blakemore Ave., on the south border of VU campus.  During the last 2 years, this set-up was replaced with a standard push-button traffic signal, since the intersection handles frequent but not necessarily large volumes of pedestrians (clinical staff, students, and patients) and some medical transport vehicles along secondary 23rd.  With the beacon set-up, it was not considered mid-block, of course, but in effect it was, given the high volume of traffic on Blakemore, which already had traffic lights at 21st, 24th, 25th and Natchez.  I don't know how well it had worked, but I always saw drivers in all 4 lanes of Blakemore plow to a halt with the beacon activated.  Maybe it was the stopped-school-bus effect with that beacon that "startled" the attention of drivers ─ I don't know.

-==-

 

The devices on Blakemore are takeoffs of rapid rectangular flashing beacons (RRFBs) which have interim approval from the MUTCD (the signs on Blakemore themselves are specifically not MUTCD-compliant). I'm not fond of them for various reasons but I don't argue with things that work. But I do think there's a novelty factor that would reduce their effectiveness with time, particularly where municipalities or states go crazy with installing them at every location. Pedestrians also seem to get a little complacement with the "protection" they provide, particularly the ones who jog or bike across without slowing down.

Edited April 21, 2015 by PruneTracy

[MidTenn1]

 

 

...I'm not fond of them for various reasons but I don't argue with things that work. But I do think there's a novelty factor that would reduce their effectiveness with time, particularly where municipalities or states go crazy with installing them at every location. .....

 

They were a fad when I as put in charge of the State's Traffic Design Office some years ago. I developed a policy practice of discouraging them whenever requested. The most compelling, non-safety related issue being that they were not maintained well by the local government. If the 'strobe' quits working and an accident occurs, some serious liability could result.

 

Although, you shouldn't make a decision based solely on potential liability, that point usually convinced some agencies to consider other means of addressing problems.

Edited April 21, 2015 by PHofKS

[rookzie]

 

.... Tell your councilman, we need more roundabouts (and you know strangers on the Internet who design them for reasonable fees).

...

...

 

Oh..., OK.

[RonCamp]

<snip>

 

Downtown areas will automatically provide ample green time for peds since there are more of them and most of the traffic signals pre-timed as they are not actuated by vehicle calls.

 

What's the threshold for this?  

 

I ask because your rationale above makes sense for many areas that may not have the higher levels of pedestrian traffic, or have exceptionally wide streets to cross.  For example, perhaps something like 21st and West End.

 

On the flipside, I think of the intersection of 11th and 12th Ave S in the heart of the Gulch.  This is probably the most highly-trafficked, signalized intersection in the Gulch from a pedestrian perspective.  And the streets are relatively narrow, which would necessitate relatively shorter pedestrian crossing times.  Yet it's not an automatic "walk" signal.

 

Would be great to know what the actual rule is.  Any slight change that would make areas like the Gulch and the downtown core more pedestrian-friendly would, in my mind, be a welcome change.  Small modifications that are pro-pedestrian can have large effects in terms of activating neighborhoods and streetscapes.