Differing Types of Pedestrian Crosswalk Signals

[andrepoiy]

It's interesting that BC uses a "flashing green" to denote this because on the other end of Canada (specifically Quebec), a flashing green means something VERY different...namely a protected left turn.

For this reason, I would not suggest it for a pedestrian signal.

The reason why these flashing greens are useful is because oftentimes they are installed adjoining a side street that faces a stop sign.

Essentially it's telling drivers on the main road not to be alarmed if they see a vehicle turning from a side street when their signal is green.

[andrepoiy]

Here are Ontario's newest kind of pedestrian crossing (put into the Ontario Traffic Manual in I think around 2018? or something)



Here is the traditional way:



RYG crossings also exist.

[Big John]

^^ The MUTCD definition of the pavement triangles is a yield line.  Is that the same in Ontario?  If so, it shouldn't be accompanied with a small stop for pedestrians sign.

[andrepoiy]

^^ The MUTCD definition of the pavement triangles is a yield line.  Is that the same in Ontario?  If so, it shouldn't be accompanied with a small stop for pedestrians sign.

Shark teeth markings are supposed to mean yield, yeah.

The stop for pedestrians sign I believe is supposed to signify that you should stop when you see pedestrians. The sign specifies "within crosswalk".

I don't think I've seen a flexible sign of the same kind with a yield sign as of yet in Ontario.

[mgk920]

flashing green is also a protected left turn (= green and green left turn arrow) in Ontario.

Mike

[kphoger]

Never mind that flashing green is rare as hen's teeth in Eastern Canada these days. BC likely has 99% of flashing green signals in Canada. The few remaining flashing green 'protected left' signals should just be removed.

They were rightly phased out in Ontario over a decade ago.

flashing green is also a protected left turn (= green and green left turn arrow) in Ontario.

Do we need to send this to arbitration?

[algorerhythms]

Never mind that flashing green is rare as hen's teeth in Eastern Canada these days. BC likely has 99% of flashing green signals in Canada. The few remaining flashing green 'protected left' signals should just be removed.

Are you saying there are more flashing greens in Massachusetts than eastern Canada?

I'm slightly exaggerating, but there aren't likely that many flashing green-protected left signals left in Eastern Canada. To my knowledge, they have not been installed for several decades.

Any remaining protected-left flashing-green signals in Eastern Canada should be converted to bimodal flashing green arrow signals. Though to my knowledge, this transition is largely complete already.

Edit: I may be wrong and these are common in Quebec. They were rightly phased out in Ontario over a decade ago. Quebec needs to transition to arrows like all other provinces, so that flashing green means pedestrian crossing. It is the much more logical use, we invented green arrows for a reason.

All of the protected-left arrow signals in Waterloo Region in Ontario use flashing green arrows, and as far as I know they're still being installed here.

[Big John]

I think the confusion arises that a rapidly flashing green ball in Ontario meant a protected left turn while a slower flashing green ball in Vancouver meant a pedestrian crossing. A green arrow in Canada usually flashes to mean a protected movement now.

[jakeroot]

Never mind that flashing green is rare as hen's teeth in Eastern Canada these days. BC likely has 99% of flashing green signals in Canada. The few remaining flashing green 'protected left' signals should just be removed.

They were rightly phased out in Ontario over a decade ago.

flashing green is also a protected left turn (= green and green left turn arrow) in Ontario.

Do we need to send this to arbitration?

I may have been wrong in declaring them non-existent in Ontario...there may be a half dozen examples.

I am perhaps irrationally bothered by how often the protected-left flashing green orb variant (found in Eastern Canada) is brought up on this forum, for as rare as it is. There's probably more remaining examples on YouTube than in real life. Meanwhile, over in British Columbia, the pedestrian-controlled flashing green orb variant is one of the most common traffic control devices out there. I'm not exaggerating when I say there are probably over a thousand flashing green orb signals across BC's Lower Mainland, with many more in other regions of BC (Vancouver Island, Okanagan, etc).

It won't be long until the flashing green orb only means one thing in Canada: pedestrian-controlled crossing. Right now, BC already accounts for almost all examples in Canada anyways.

[andrepoiy]

Never mind that flashing green is rare as hen's teeth in Eastern Canada these days. BC likely has 99% of flashing green signals in Canada. The few remaining flashing green 'protected left' signals should just be removed.

They were rightly phased out in Ontario over a decade ago.

flashing green is also a protected left turn (= green and green left turn arrow) in Ontario.

Do we need to send this to arbitration?

I may have been wrong in declaring them non-existent in Ontario...there may be a half dozen examples.

I am perhaps irrationally bothered by how often the protected-left flashing green orb variant (found in Eastern Canada) is brought up on this forum, for as rare as it is. There's probably more remaining examples on YouTube than in real life. Meanwhile, over in British Columbia, the pedestrian-controlled flashing green orb variant is one of the most common traffic control devices out there. I'm not exaggerating when I say there are probably over a thousand flashing green orb signals across BC's Lower Mainland, with many more in other regions of BC (Vancouver Island, Okanagan, etc).

It won't be long until the flashing green orb only means one thing in Canada: pedestrian-controlled crossing. Right now, BC already accounts for almost all examples in Canada anyways.

Quebec has tons of flashing greens to mean left turn, so I highly doubt the "it won't be long" part.

[Rothman]

I didn't know Canada was so controversial.

[jakeroot]

Quebec has tons of flashing greens to mean left turn, so I highly doubt the "it won't be long" part.

Are they still being installed? I think I've seen a couple new examples, but I've also seen plenty of green arrows in Quebec too.

At any rate, I don't see why they should still be used in Quebec. Ontario mostly has phased them out, and green arrows clearly make more sense.

I didn't know Canada was so controversial.

Canadian provinces seem to have a lot more autonomy than US states. Having two identical indications meaning wildly different things is, sadly, not beyond the realm of possibility.

[mgk920]

I kind of like the characters that Germany uses, apparently adapted from common useage in the former East Germany.

Mike

[andrepoiy]

Quebec has tons of flashing greens to mean left turn, so I highly doubt the "it won't be long" part.

Are they still being installed? I think I've seen a couple new examples, but I've also seen plenty of green arrows in Quebec too.

At any rate, I don't see why they should still be used in Quebec. Ontario mostly has phased them out, and green arrows clearly make more sense.

I didn't know Canada was so controversial.

Canadian provinces seem to have a lot more autonomy than US states. Having two identical indications meaning wildly different things is, sadly, not beyond the realm of possibility.

I would say that in Ontario, individual municipalities have a lot of autonomy as well.

In some municipalities, left-turn green arrows flash, while in other municipalities they don't. They mean the same thing, however.
There are also tons of examples of non-standard signage that is used by municipalities. Only the Ministry of Ontario follows the Ontario Traffic Manual to the line, every other municipality just uses it as a guideline.

Example: there are so many things wrong with this sign, installed fresh in 2023.



This sign too, yikes

[hotdogPi]

Both signs look fine to me.

[Big John]

What is wrong with fresh cut fries?

[jamess]

A little tangent in this crosswalks thread.

Can the MUTCD make up it's mind on the short street-mounted signs at crosswalks?  It seems like it's either STOP to Peds in Crosswalk -- State Law...or YIELD to Peds in Crosswalk -- State Law. 

How does State law determine what crosswalk constitutes a stop and what constitutes a yield?  Especially when the two conflicting signs may appear along the same stretch of roadway.

This has to do with state laws, not the MUTCD.  Some states say you must Stop for Pedestrians in crosswalks; other states say you must Yield.  (Honestly, I'm not sure of the true distinction between the two.  Either way, don't hit the pedestrian.)

Problem is there is a lot of inconsistency in some states like Missouri where it seems like around 50% of the signs say yield, 50% say to stop.

NJ switched the state law from yield to stop about a decade ago because drivers simply dont understand what yield means.

Im sure older signs are still out there