Should Full-Time Flashers at Crosswalks be Banned?

[Brian556]

In the past it was somewhat common to have flashers that flash 24/7 at crosswalks. Now that we have pedestrian-activated warning system, should we ban the old ones that flash 24/7? I say it might be a good idea. Since the pedestrian-activated systems are so common now, it is confusing to drivers to have lights flashing when there are no pedestrians. It is also like crying wolf, and trains drivers to ignore flashing lights.


Example of 24/7 flashers:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1298933,-97.0385947,3a,21.4y,93.93h,90.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXpoKyk5oZTQ1CVVkuwF01Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXpoKyk5oZTQ1CVVkuwF01Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D323.45392%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

In this example, its also really dumd to have a crosswalk at an unsignalized location in such heavy traffic, right where drivers are just turning off the frontage road, and from the gas station driveway. They are just asking for someone to be run over here.

[webny99]

I think the simpler solution would be just to phase out their use and replace over time. Banning them would be kind of like banning old-style flip phones at this point.

[-- US 175 --]

In the past it was somewhat common to have flashers that flash 24/7 at crosswalks. Now that we have pedestrian-activated warning system, should we ban the old ones that flash 24/7? I say it might be a good idea. Since the pedestrian-activated systems are so common now, it is confusing to drivers to have lights flashing when there are no pedestrians. It is also like crying wolf, and trains drivers to ignore flashing lights.


Example of 24/7 flashers:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1298933,-97.0385947,3a,21.4y,93.93h,90.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXpoKyk5oZTQ1CVVkuwF01Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXpoKyk5oZTQ1CVVkuwF01Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D323.45392%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

In this example, its also really dumd to have a crosswalk at an unsignalized location in such heavy traffic, right where drivers are just turning off the frontage road, and from the gas station driveway. They are just asking for someone to be run over here.

Wow, quite a few things going on there.  No need for 2 different EB crossbucks on Swisher there.  If you're going to have 2 ped/bike yellow-diamonds, the one at the crossing point needs to have the downward yellow arrow.  WB has other issues there.  2 Bike Route signs, the first one includes a black-on-white (instead of a white-on-green) "<=>" sign, followed by a BEGIN Bike Route with only a "=>" sign under it.  This, if it were really needed, only should have 1 Bike Route sign.  And, they need to decide if the path is for bikes in both directions or not.  Also, the bike/ped yellow-diamond and the BEGIN Bike Route signs are too far off the street.  Yes, there is a visibility issue due to the DCTA A-Train crossing, and signs really shouldn't be bunched up there in the way of view.

All of this mess could have been avoided if DCTA could have done a DART-like overpass for both the A-Train track and the bike/ped path.  Some city (likely Corinth) would have had fits if DCTA tried to do that.

[Brian556]

In the past it was somewhat common to have flashers that flash 24/7 at crosswalks. Now that we have pedestrian-activated warning system, should we ban the old ones that flash 24/7? I say it might be a good idea. Since the pedestrian-activated systems are so common now, it is confusing to drivers to have lights flashing when there are no pedestrians. It is also like crying wolf, and trains drivers to ignore flashing lights.


Example of 24/7 flashers:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1298933,-97.0385947,3a,21.4y,93.93h,90.88t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sXpoKyk5oZTQ1CVVkuwF01Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DXpoKyk5oZTQ1CVVkuwF01Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D323.45392%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

In this example, its also really dumd to have a crosswalk at an unsignalized location in such heavy traffic, right where drivers are just turning off the frontage road, and from the gas station driveway. They are just asking for someone to be run over here.

Wow, quite a few things going on there.  No need for 2 different EB crossbucks on Swisher there.  If you're going to have 2 ped/bike yellow-diamonds, the one at the crossing point needs to have the downward yellow arrow.  WB has other issues there.  2 Bike Route signs, the first one includes a black-on-white (instead of a white-on-green) "<=>" sign, followed by a BEGIN Bike Route with only a "=>" sign under it.  This, if it were really needed, only should have 1 Bike Route sign.  And, they need to decide if the path is for bikes in both directions or not.  Also, the bike/ped yellow-diamond and the BEGIN Bike Route signs are too far off the street.  Yes, there is a visibility issue due to the DCTA A-Train crossing, and signs really shouldn't be bunched up there in the way of view.

All of this mess could have been avoided if DCTA could have done a DART-like overpass for both the A-Train track and the bike/ped path.  Some city (likely Corinth) would have had fits if DCTA tried to do that.

A grade separation is needed there. The intersection was already congested before, now with the trains pre-empting the signals, it is wasting a lot of time and making things a lot worse.

Also, the A-Train is not getting a lot of riders, so its worth questioning whether it was worth it in the first place

[roadfro]

In the past it was somewhat common to have flashers that flash 24/7 at crosswalks. Now that we have pedestrian-activated warning system, should we ban the old ones that flash 24/7? I say it might be a good idea. Since the pedestrian-activated systems are so common now, it is confusing to drivers to have lights flashing when there are no pedestrians. It is also like crying wolf, and trains drivers to ignore flashing lights.

I think given the more-recent prevalence for newer warning/signalling devices for ped/bike/trail crossings (RRFBs, HAWKs, etc.) as well as non-motor user detection devices (push buttons, sensors, etc.), engineers can give much more beneficial information to drivers than a constantly flashing warning beacon. I don't know about outright banning the 24/7 flashers (there could be some limited utility that I'm not thinking of), but installing dynamic warning systems should be the first consideration over constant beacons moving forward.

[hotdogPi]

I still like the idea of flashing green meaning a traffic signal not at an intersection (which would usually be for pedestrians). The few remaining in Massachusetts are left over from decades ago; no more are being installed. This has the advantage that drivers can be required to stop for pedestrians (anything that can be only yellow or off can't do this), and there's no possibility of someone misinterpreting "traffic light off = 4-way stop".

[MNHighwayMan]

This has the advantage that drivers can be required to stop for pedestrians (anything that can be only yellow or off can't do this)

And a regular traffic light can make drivers stop too. There's no need to complicate things by introducing a new signal meaning.

[In_Correct]

D.C.T.A. is embarrassing. It is better if they upgrade it to grade separation and also double track.