41 replies to this topic

[http]

The only time that an advance green would go red is if it is a dedicated turn lane. If it is a combination turn/thru lane, there is no red after the advance green.

If you allowed people to turn left on a red from a dedicated turn lane, you'd have people turning while the thru lanes was also red, meaning they'd be turning when crossing traffic had green.

I disagree. If the dedicated turn lane is red, It does not follow that the croosing road has green.

[LJ]

The only time that an advance green would go red is if it is a dedicated turn lane. If it is a combination turn/thru lane, there is no red after the advance green.

If you allowed people to turn left on a red from a dedicated turn lane, you'd have people turning while the thru lanes was also red, meaning they'd be turning when crossing traffic had green.

I can give you an example that demonstrates the fallacy of that statement.

On Millstream road heading southbound there is a dedicated left turn lane onto Treanor Ave. When the left green arrow ends the light goes red. ( I often turn anyway cof cof). Further south on Millstream there is a dedicated left turn lane to proceed on to the on ramp to the TCH. When the left green arrow ends you get a green light. In neither of these instances does crossing traffic have a green light.

Just sayin.

[Mike K.]

^same at Douglas and Hillside/Gorge. Douglas traffic turning east onto Hillside and west onto Gorge has an advanced turn then cross traffic gets the green. Not sure if its like that 24hours a day but definitely during peak times.

[Rob Randall]

Here's a fascinating concept made possible by new LED technology--hourglass traffic lights:

http://www.yankodesi...-traffic-times/

[Baro]

We already sort of have that with the count-down on walk signals. I love them!

[Hotel Mike]

We already sort of have that with the count-down on walk signals. I love them!

I agree Baro. It seems to have been brought in quietly but those count-down signals are really valuable to pedestrians and motorists.

[sebberry]

Here's a fascinating concept made possible by new LED technology--hourglass traffic lights:

http://www.yankodesi...-traffic-times/

Great, now everyone can stare up to see how fast the "sand" is flowing instead of the cross-road

They won't work, especially at intersections where the lights are triggered by vehicles.

We already sort of have that with the count-down on walk signals. I love them!

I like those, but then you get some dumbo slamming on the brakes when the countdown hits 3 or 2. They're not always timed with the lights either, so at some intersections 0 on the countdown still means a green light for the drivers.

[James Bay walker]

I think traffic signal timings ought to intelligently respond to people's needs in a green fashion, and not mere vehicle activity levels.

a) That is, if there are more people in the cars travelling north-south than those travelling east-west, then north-south signal lights become favoured (have a longer duration).

b) And, if there are lots of pedestrians waiting to cross, then the green light period they're waiting for gets shortened. If none, it gets lengthened.

c) If there are no cars and no pedestrians waiting, then the north-south lights remain green, indefinitely (could even be for hours). Similarly for the east-west lights.

The impact of a, b & c, is to: reward having multiple people per car (leading to more efficient car use, speeding traffic through reducing the number of vehicles on the road), rewarding pedestrian activity (leading to fewer car users, speeding traffic through reducing the number of vehicles on the roads, and further speeding traffic by acknowledging the common sense of not activating a red light when there's no actual need to do so.

jbw

ps. By "speeding traffic", I certainly do not mean the reckless practice of increasing the speed limit but merely the minimization of slowing down and stopping intervals which lowers the average speed of travel.

[HB]

There are a lot of "if's" in your suggestions.

Lights are not timed on "if" scenarios

[sebberry]

I don't see how you can time traffic signals based on the number of occupants in a car, nor do I see how that would have an overall positive impact on trip times. You'd just end up with single occupant vehicles spending even more time on the road.

[James Bay walker]

There are a lot of "if's" in your suggestions.

Lights are not timed on "if" scenarios

But, they could be timed on "if" scenarios (which is my point), through computer controlled surveillance cameras (as if each traffic signal had a common sense person overseeing what was happening and manually activating the lights in an optimal fashion).

jbw

[Baro]

It would be cool if we got to the point where intersections all behaved like there was a human standing in the road directing traffic, along with perfect knowledge of all other intersections in the city to perfectly optimize traffic flow.

How many of us have sat at an intersection for a whole light cycle while the opposing road had 0 cars on it. How often does an advance last way too long or way too short? So many little inefficiencies that could be solved with some sort of intersection-ai

[sebberry]

How many of us have sat at an intersection for a whole light cycle while the opposing road had 0 cars on it. How often does an advance last way too long or way too short? So many little inefficiencies that could be solved with some sort of intersection-ai

This almost seems to be getting worse in this city. It would be easy and affordable to correct as most intersections already use sensors.

[James Bay walker]

This almost seems to be getting worse in this city. It would be easy and affordable to correct as most intersections already use sensors.

I see the sensors as merely a crude start (better than nothing, but not much better) at affecting how signals ought to behave. They react to vehicles (& if marked, bicycles on top of them) arriving at the intersection but make no allowance for pedestrians' arrival (or approaching) or the number of passengers in the cars or the number of cars in the overall pattern heading towards the same intersection within a couple of blocks' distance.

More travellers (regardless of the number of vehicles involved) ought to be favoured with longer green lights and faster switching to green lights. To merely do as the under pavement sensors do and sense the arrival of 'a' metal vehicle to trigger a green light as soon as possible, weights the system towards encouraging single occupant vehicles (by putting those on an equal footing with multiple occupant vehicles).

jbw

ps. I think the underlying program controlling the system should reflect: optimal speed and convenience for the greatest number of people.

[sebberry]

And who is going to pay for a building full of signal operators to watch CCTV screens to count the number of occupants in cars and press buttons to switch lights for every intersection in the city?

On the list of priorities the region needs to focus on, this should be at the very bottom of the last page in fine print.

[Dimitrios]

ps. I think the underlying program controlling the system should reflect: optimal speed and convenience for the greatest number of people.

A friend of mine is a traffic engineer with the city of Calgary. She told me (in, like, 2010 or so) that city policy had recently changed (after much vigorous debate) so that traffic was designed for just that: maximize the flow of people through the city. It had previously been to maximize the flow of vehicles through the city.

I have no idea how the CRD policies and bylaws are worded in this respect.

[James Bay walker]

And who is going to pay for a building full of signal operators to watch CCTV screens to count the number of occupants in cars and press buttons to switch lights for every intersection in the city?

On the list of priorities the region needs to focus on, this should be at the very bottom of the last page in fine print.

'signal operators'? You mean, gasp!, people? No need for people to watch CCTV screens for something of this character these days. There's not even facial recognition involved. btw, Facial and body movement recognition is being added in areas with intensive CCTV surveillance so that very few operators are needed to monitor the display screens.

I think intelligent, responsive traffic control should be readily managed once there's enough cameras detecting gross movement patterns and vehicle occupancy levels to be analyzed by a computer surveillance system. I wonder how far Calgary has gotten with their system?

jbw

ps. Perhaps like B.C. Ferries 'priority' boarding, priority electronic passes could be sold so we can over ride whatever the system is and have green lights (or pedestrian walk signals) in our favour more of the time. Of course, just like it appeared that system was heading with B.C. Ferries, the popularity of saving time will lead to so many using such passes that everyone will end up needing to buy them just to achieve the old level of service (but at an appreciably higher price).

[Mike K.]

I wish we had right turn priority lights at busy intersections. Pedestrians in this city so regularly walk onto the crosswalk seconds before the light turns red meanwhile traffic waiting to turn hasn't budged an inch.

I think intelligent, responsive traffic control should be readily managed once there's enough cameras detecting gross movement patterns and vehicle occupancy levels to be analyzed by a computer surveillance system.

Please tell me you're just trying to be funny. Please?

[Holden West]

And who is going to pay for a building full of signal operators to watch CCTV screens to count the number of occupants in cars and press buttons to switch lights for every intersection in the city?

On the list of priorities the region needs to focus on, this should be at the very bottom of the last page in fine print.

He seems to say this would be an automated task. If Google can produce self-driving cars and Customs knows what your car is, that can't be far off, The problem I see would be people seeing conspiracies in the automated timing--always assuming the "other guy" is getting preferential priority.

[Bingo]

What you need is more four way stop at intersections, and then an auto body repair shop on each corner with a cherry-picking thingy that picks up the wrecks and drops them right into the compound.