For DC, I don't think eliminating right-on-red would be too big of a deal. There are ways to deal with it:
* more all-way walks (aka, Barnes Dance): moving pedestrians to their own exclusive phase can be pretty annoying for pedestrians, as it makes progression harder (more waiting), but it can really improve capacity for turning traffic during the green phase.
* more double right turns: these could be installed in-tandem with all-way walk intersections. DC already has quite a few of these, but I think you could add more if pedestrians were removed from that specific phase, with the only real danger being traffic not staying in lane when turning.
* more right-turn filter signals (green arrows): any intersection that doesn't presently have one, really should have a right-turn green arrow. In situations where the intersection does not operate with an all-way walk, pedestrian walk times can be reduced and the remaining time afforded to a green arrow. If there is an oncoming permissive left turn (where a right on green arrow would technically conflict, per MUTCD rules), the right turn green arrow can simply be lit when the corresponding left turn is active from the cross street.
At the very least, if NTOR is implemented city-wide, more of an effort has to be made by drivers to pull as far into the intersection when turning as possible, to allow for at least a couple or more cars to turn at the end of the cycle.
The problem with the boldfaced is that nobody trusts DC's red-light cameras not to ticket you in that situation. There are enough demonstrated problems with some of DC's traffic cameras (especially one of the stop sign cameras) that I can't blame them.
If you're beyond the limit line (in the crosswalk or beyond it), you shouldn't get a ticket. The limit line is normally where the activation for the cameras would be.
Regarding the stop-sign signals, I can't believe locals haven't taken a bat to them yet.
The other points you make are valid insofar as they go, but they rely on the assumption that the pedestrians will obey the signals and that DC would also implement the Barnes Dance properly. Right now, they banned all turns at the Barnes Dance intersection because they decided not to restrict pedestrian crossing time only to the all-way crossing phase (this because they concluded, almost certainly correctly, that pedestrians would refuse to wait for the all-way phase). As I noted earlier, I seriously question whether "removing" pedestrians from a specific phase will work. Let me offer 18th & L NW as an example. Do you see the sign in the Street View that says to turn right only when the green arrow is on? The problem is that the green arrow is lagging—it comes on at the end of the cycle. Pedestrians flat-out refuse to stop crossing despite turning traffic getting the green arrow. If a driver takes the right of way to which he is entitled and forces the issue, people get aggressive; I've seen people pound on cars, kick the side of cars, jump in front of cars to make them stop, etc. Never mind that the driver has the green light. Sometimes pedestrians are certainly correct to get angry at drivers who force their way through against the "Walk" signal or who run red lights, but when the drivers have the right of way, the pedestrians need to get out of the way. I strongly believe banning turns on red will just increase the potential for conflict, especially since a lot of intersections don't have dedicated turn phases and instead rely on the idea that when the red hand is flashing, you're not supposed to start crossing.
If I understand what you're saying correctly, what difference would it really make whether there is right-on-red or not? If pedestrians in DC really, truly, don't care (which has not been my experience -- most obey the signals), you're going to conflict with pedestrians whether you're turning right on red (pedestrians crossing in front of you) or turning right on green (pedestrians crossing to your right). Eliminating right-on-red would reduce the potential amount of time you could turn, but from your synopsis, that's not really much time anyways. And on the flip-side, eliminating right-on-red may jumpstart serious signal improvements across the city that otherwise have not been implemented because of right-on-red being legal (lack of dedicated turning lanes, turning signals, etc).
In other world cities (largely none of which permit turns-on-red, apart from some areas of Sydney), the issues you're describing are already reality: drivers basically forcing their way through pedestrians, lots of honking, shouting, etc. It's just how it is when drivers are limited to turning on green and yellow only. Whether it's a better overall setup than what we have here, I don't know.
I think we all understand that NTOR is generally safer for pedestrians, since the turn on red move usually means that drivers have to do two things at once, watch for a gap in car traffic and make sure there are no pedestrians in the path. Given the added difficulty, it is usually prohibited in areas of heavy pedestrian traffic, including mamy intersections in downtown DC. The turn on green has some pedestrian conflict too, but drivers only have to worry about a pedestrian gap, since right turn on green would have priority over any possibly conflicting auto traffic.
My own observations in walking around town over the last couple of months is that there is generally less pedestrian traffic than pre-pandemic. I'll wait to see if it picks up again after Labor Day, but very likely with many offices going to full-time or part-time WFH, it means that on any given day, you'll probably only see about 40-50% of the pedestrinas that you used to see. My office building definitely feels emptier, and I am now only going in twice a week (I went in four times a week pre-pandemic.) All that being said, is with lower pedestrian volumes, it may be easier to make turns. And while I can't speak for 18th and L specifically, I can say that at more and more locations, there are fewer pedestrians who are crossing on red in front of turning cars.
A few blocks away, there is a good implementation of both LPI and lagging left. LPI is basically a default DC prioritive - they are basically adding a leading pedestrian interval at every signalized intersection, and it is implemented in the most basic way, allowing walk to come on a few seconds before red orb changes to green. As a way to help cars turn, a leading left was added, but cars are allowed to turn green (while yielding to pedestrians) for most of the green phase. They do not have to wait for the arrow, the arrow is meant to help clear the intersection because there are a lot of pedestrians here (in Downtown and near a Metro entrance).
17th and I:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9013207,-77.0393633,3a,15y,259.61h,89.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slHWm7WySqWl0MsV2LeMNBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192The left from I to 17th is quite busy and it gets the assistance of a lagging left. Since I is one way, the only conflict on green ball is pedestrians.
Author
Topic: District of Columbia (Read 373794 times)