Pedestrian crossing times and age/obesity

[wanderer2575]

From the UK Daily Star, so take that as you will.

Pedestrians are getting longer to cross the road because Brits are getting fatter and older.  Guidelines are being tweaked to allow the little green man 20% longer at crossings to combat a slower, fatter, older population.

Under Department for Transport guidelines, pedestrians have 6.1 seconds to cross both lanes of a normal road at a walking pace of 1.2 metres per second.  But a new recommendation will allow 7.3 seconds to cross at a speed of 1m per second.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/green-men-lights-to-stay-30536077

[jeffandnicole]

Not unheard of. America's guidelines was adjusted years ago for an aging population and to assist slower walkers.

The UK Daily Star probably did a little hyperbole to say that extra time was needed because Brits are getting fatter...although it may have quietly been a reason.

[Max Rockatansky]

When I saw "little green man" I got flashbacks to the knife cart guy outside the Wonka Factory accosting Charlie Bucket.

[Rothman]

Not unheard of. America's guidelines was adjusted years ago for an aging population and to assist slower walkers.

The UK Daily Star probably did a little hyperbole to say that extra time was needed because Brits are getting fatter...although it may have quietly been a reason.

Americans have certainly become fatter and slower over the years.  I know I have.

[Bruce]

Singapore has a clever solution: longer crossing times that are enabled by the tap of a card given to senior citizens and disabled people.

https://twitter.com/stephendziedzic/status/1169887573663043584

[Big John]

Singapore not trusting the average person so you need a card active a longer time.

[Mapmikey]

As part of my stroke rehab, one of the goals was to be able to walk well enough to cross a street with the walk signal set at 1 m/s.

[jeffandnicole]

Singapore has a clever solution: longer crossing times that are enabled by the tap of a card given to senior citizens and disabled people.

https://twitter.com/stephendziedzic/status/1169887573663043584

That would not go over well here in the US.  Too many people are upset that they're 'beg' buttons.  They'll be claiming you now need a license to not get run over.

[hotdogPi]

There's already an option in the MUTCD that's "hold for extra time", but I haven't seen it used anywhere.

[vdeane]

Singapore has a clever solution: longer crossing times that are enabled by the tap of a card given to senior citizens and disabled people.

https://twitter.com/stephendziedzic/status/1169887573663043584

That would not go over well here in the US.  Too many people are upset that they're 'beg' buttons.  They'll be claiming you now need a license to not get run over.

Plus how would that handle tourists etc. who wouldn't have a card?

[Big John]

and Singapore is notorious for having a number of nuisance laws and use of corporal punishment for violations.

[US 89]

Singapore has a clever solution: longer crossing times that are enabled by the tap of a card given to senior citizens and disabled people.

https://twitter.com/stephendziedzic/status/1169887573663043584

It works until Grandpa gives his card to his grandkids...

[Revive 755]

There's already an option in the MUTCD that's "hold for extra time", but I haven't seen it used anywhere.

Kane County, IL has it for the Randall Road - Stearns Road intersection.

[pderocco]

We could just redefine "seconds".

[Mr. Matté]

Singapore has a clever solution: longer crossing times that are enabled by the tap of a card given to senior citizens and disabled people.

https://twitter.com/stephendziedzic/status/1169887573663043584

It works until Grandpa gives his card to his grandkids...

Solution to that (in Singapore) was unintentionally right in the next post:

Kane County, IL has it for the Randall Road - Stearns Road intersection.

[tradephoric]

1.0 meters per second is equal to 3.28 feet per second.  Here is the guideance from the MUTCD that relates to walking speeds for America:

Guidance:
07 Except as provided in Paragraph 8, the pedestrian clearance time should be sufficient to allow a pedestrian crossing in the crosswalk who left the curb or shoulder at the end of the WALKING PERSON (symbolizing WALK) signal indication to travel at a walking speed of 3.5 feet per second to at least the far side of the traveled way or to a median of sufficient width for pedestrians to wait.

Guidance:
10 Where pedestrians who walk slower than 3.5 feet per second, or pedestrians who use wheelchairs, routinely use the crosswalk, a walking speed of less than 3.5 feet per second should be considered in determining the pedestrian clearance time.

Guidance:
14 The total of the walk interval and pedestrian clearance time should be sufficient to allow a pedestrian crossing in the crosswalk who left the pedestrian detector (or, if no pedestrian detector is present, a location 6 feet from the face of the curb or from the edge of the pavement) at the beginning of the WALKING PERSON (symbolizing WALK) signal indication to travel at a walking speed of 3 feet per second to the far side of the traveled way being crossed or to the median if a two-stage pedestrian crossing sequence is used. Any additional time that is required to satisfy the conditions of this paragraph should be added to the walk interval.

There is a pedestrian crossing at Bee Line Hwy & Northlake Blvd in Florida that is 245 feet long.  The pedestrian pushbutton is roughly 10 feet from the crossing.  To satisfy Guidance 14 in the MUTCD Northland Blvd has to run 85 seconds.  Then the crosswalk crossing Northlake Blvd is 200 feet long.  That accounts for another 70 seconds that the peds need to run.  So if both peds run and this signal is satisfying the MUTCD guidelines, the cycle length would need to be at least 155 seconds long (and that doesn't even account for the dedicated left turn phases that need to run).  We wonder why cycle lengths are so long in Florida....

(245+10) / 3 fps = 85 seconds
(200+10) / 3 fps = 70 seconds

[1995hoo]

I was thinking about this issue yesterday because my next-door neighbor's elderly father, who was recently in a crash that totaled his car (insofar as I know, fault has not yet been determined), has decided not to get a new vehicle. He can walk from his condo to the drugstore but has to cross an eight-lane street to do so (three lanes eastbound, five westbound counting turn lanes) and it's questionable whether he's fast enough to make it across or whether he'd have to wait on the median. I was thinking about how a lot of medians in this country are really not adequate if someone has to stop there to wait for the light cycle to finish. They're often extremely narrow and provide no real refuge. The crosswalk he'd be using at least has curb cuts at the median for assistive devices and has a button on the median to call for the walk signal if you get stuck halfway across.

Of course there are places where there have been steps taken to improve the crosswalks and to provide more of a median refuge, but the unfortunate reality is that most of those tend to be on streets that were narrower in the first place (sometimes as part of the controversial "road diet" concept, sometimes not).