Comments

1
Bus riders used to wait no longer than 45 seconds to turn left at Elliott and Mercer on their way from Ballard to downtown.

Now they can wait as long as 4.5 minutes.

Because SDOT did some "engineering".
2
Bus bulbs, "traffic calming"', turning 3 lane roads into 2, indeed Charles.
3
I think a better approach would be to get the traffic engineers on our side. As long as we have streets, we're going to have traffic engineers. Pretty hard to run traffic lights without them. But someday the traffic engineers will START by thinking of multiple modes, not just shoehorning peds and bikes into a car world.

@1, is there a city number you can call for this, like there is for potholes? I know a few lights that are ridiculously timed too. And the lights on Aurora, which were synced with great fanfare some time back (Nickels? Schell?) are reverse-synced now, meaning it is impossible to drive down the street without hitting red on every single one of them, unless you're going 75 mph.
4
I'm curious, what is this "city that we want" supposed to look like? For starters, it won't be taller than 3-4 stories without engineering. Bridges probably won't work out that well either.
5
Oh, traffic engineers, poor reading comprehension got the best of me.

Anyway good luck with that.
6
Charles, re you and Jane Jacobs:

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.

Mega-epic troll, Charles. And good Friday morning to you too. Good goddamn, that is some stupid stuff in that passage you quote. I guess it's just easier to criticize something without ever bothering to understand how it works or take any time to learn how it works.

For what it's worth Charles (and everyone else) within the last decade traffic engineers HAVE been working to learn, understand, model, and improve all modes of transportation- cars, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, light (and heavy) rail, and others.

For example, the models for traffic used to consider only vehicle delay as the standard measure for congestion. Now all delay- whether single-occupant vehicle, multi-occupant vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian- are being considered.

And- as in any other field, there exist differing opinions among all the engineers. There is no one best answer, and no one concrete interpretation of any certain principle when it comes to putting in the pavement. It is a science, but like all the other sciences the variables are so numerous in its application that it is not and never will be applied perfectly to the satisfaction of everyone.

Next consider the body politic. The epic bullshit quote from that bullshit Jane Jacobs passage is "...traffic engineers have been trusted to do as they please."

Did I mention, Charles, that that is bullshit? You are stupid for believing it, Charles. Stupid.

Nothing a traffic engineer does is without scrutiny from the body politic in some way. Nothing. And you want to talk about a body that does not have any scientific training, nor any engineering training, nor, more importantly, an understanding of the principles of traffic engineering? It's the body politic, the body that, often as not, re-directs, re-designs, dumbs down, or outright rejects the plans of the traffic engineers.

Traffic engineers have not abandoned science. You are stupid for repeating that, Charles. Stupid. Traffic engineering is an ever-evolving and growing science. As I noted above, it is learning to consider, plan for, and design to things that were not often considered a generation ago.

But good trollery this morning, Charles. You got me all worked up via that bullshit you posted. Good work.
7
The pedestrian countdown timers on the Burke Gilman Trail in Lake Forest Park have a ridiculously long countdown on them - longer than the 'walk' phase and far longer than it actually takes cyclists and runners who most frequently use that trail to clear the intersection.

What happens is very few users of the BKT actually follow the law and stop when the countdow phase begins - it's illegal to enter a crosswalk during the countdown phase - and the local cops then hassle trail users for not following an arbitrily-set rule that does nothing to enhance safety.

One has to wonder the degree to which traffic engineers are complicit by ignoring science (using empirical evidence about how long it takes the average trail user to cross 20 feet of roadway) and instead simply setting the timers to whatever interval the cops or city council wants.
9
@3, talking sense to SDOT has been tried, to no avail. Someone there is convinced that the world will end if outbound Elliott isn't treated as an freeway from 2pm to 8pm. Even though the bottlenecks have simply relocated further up the road.
10
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
11
I would bet that many of the timing issues that you folks are complaining about are the result of political decisions, rather than implementing recommendations based upon the findings of the traffic engineers. I have no proof, but the final decisions are typically made by the appointees who head traffic departments.
12
@7 The pedestrian phase (the total time of the WALK and the Flashing-Don't-Walk/Countdown) is set for the slowest pedestrian, which is normally an elderly person walking at or under 3.5 feet-per-second. That's why the walk phase seems so short- you do not ever want a person walking that slow to run out of time to clear an intersection.

It is against the law (for the traffic engineer), and can be fatal (for the pedestrian).

That's not to say that the timing can not be adjusted to improve things. Newer signal controllers have a whole raft of options and settings not available in older digital (or mechanical) controllers.

But the traffic engineers are not setting the timings just so the cops can hassle people. The cops in LFP are just dicks (and always have been).
13
Peter Koonz from Portland gave a couple talks in Seattle recently called 'Confessions of a Traffic Engineer':

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVLBXFN1G…

He pointed out that a 'traffic failure' means that a vehicle waits at an intersection for more than 80 seconds, but that pedestrians and bicycles are simply not taken into any kind of account.

I agree with Matt above: it's a political decision not to care as much about transit, bikes, and peds.
14
@13, the light cycle at 50th and Stone varies during the day but is never less than 180 seconds (2.5 minutes). For a long time the ped crossing of 50th heading north on the east side of Stone/Green Lake Way would skip one or sometimes two turns, leading to a SEVEN AND A HALF MINUTE WAIT. It's a truly mind-bending experience to see the cars go, and then go again, and then go again. Like something out of Samuel Beckett.
15
Yeah, good point, Charles, we should just streets and cities grow undirected and organically. Because that would clearly be better, wouldn't it?

Or maybe, just maybe, as #6 so eloquently put it, you simply change the requirements that the traffic engineers are working to. Because guess what? Engineers don't just do whatever they please, they work to fulfill a specification.
16
Christ, why is there such a huge anti-intellectual bent to this post? You realize that traffic engineers are strictly limited by political funding decisions, right?

"OH GAWD, TRAFFIC SUCKS" *complains about any new plan to fix traffic or where those locations might be* *votes against new funding sources*
"OH GAWD THOSE STUPID ENGINEERS"
17
One more thing, "Dumb device"??

How in the hell is someone supposed to improve something if they have no tools to measure it's current state or the state it's in after changes have been made? That's kindergarten level science there.
18

Traffic Engineers do what their job title implies...they create Traffic.

If there were no Traffic, then everything would flow freely.

People would take cars to work.

Traffic Engineers must create the traffic that causes the problems that we tax ourselves to fix. And never do.

Salute the Traffic Engineer. Who gives your life purpose!
19
i rest my case with @17. ideology in a state of perfection.
20
Charles, serious question: are you interested in an actual discussion here or should we just exchange snide remarks?
21
Everything is ideology. And?
22
How does Metro know what bus people use before determining which ones to cut? Paper survey mostly, sometimes is card with a serial number for an online survey. Yup, they'll have people wearing smocks handing these out on the bus, because this is the only way they know who takes the bus.
23
All the intersections around here are triggered by cars ONLY. If I'm on my bike and I come up to a red light with no cars going in my direction, I could probably sit there for thirty minutes while cross-traffic stays perpetually green. I don't know what the trigger is, but it's not a camera or infrared sensor, or my presence would trigger it. I suspect it's a plate under the pavement that's triggered by a heavy object. I also notice those counting devices (in the photo) don't count bikes (I don't hear the "click" when I ride over the hose, compared to the audible click made by a car).

Fnarf, you expressed it perfectly:

"It's a truly mind-bending experience to see the cars go, and then go again, and then go again. Like something out of Samuel Beckett."
24
Long story short: as a bicyclist I either have to break the law or get off my bike and use the pedestrian WALK button to get across many intersections thoughout my day.
25
Heh. Replace every occurrence of "Traffic Engineer" in Charles' post with "Marxist".

It makes the same sense- none. But it's funnier to read.
26
@23, 24. By law, an actuated traffic signal must detect all legal vehicles. Including bicycles.

Have you tried calling the City to request a signal technician adjust the loop detectors (they are electric wire loops, not "plates actuated by heavy vehicles")?

Loop detectors are tunable. And often drift out of tune at the expense of detecting smaller vehicles. Or break as the pavement heaves and crumbles over winter.

Also, pneumatic tube counters do count all vehicles, including bicycles. The better counters can break down the vehicle stream by vehicle type, number of axles, speed, direction, and so on. It's really amazing the information one can get from a couple day's worth of tube counts.

Anyway. Not getting service at the signals in your neighborhood? Please call the public works department and request a signal technician look into it.
27
Thanks, @26!
28
Fnarf, 180 seconds = three minutes.
29
@27, I believe that the small (six-inch) "T" painted in white at the stop line of most intersections is the location of the loop detector. Unless I'm crazy (always a possibility). Position your front wheel over the T and it should detect you.

I know that the left-turn lane at 45th and Stone seems to detect my bike but takes much, much longer to actually give me a signal than my car, but that's anecdotal.
30
@28, DAG NAB IT. I swear I'm getting senile. Substitute "whole buncha" for "180", please.

Here is proof that the white Ts actually exist:

http://sdotblog.seattle.gov/2010/08/25/t…
31
@fnarf: It might be less "mind-bending" if you consider that any car traveling west on 50th will have been waiting in a line stretching several blocks east for at least 3 traffic cycles before it finally gets to cross that intersection.
32
@31, no, the cars get to go. I pass through that intersection at least twice a day, sometimes three or four or five times. I know the cycle well. West on 50th gets to go every turn, as does every car lane in sequence. It's slow, because it's five ways, but everyone gets a go.

What's different about the pedestrian crossing is (a) on the west side of the street you have two crosswalks, poorly synced; and (b) on the east side it was once true that the walk signal didn't go when the car light went green. It's fixed now. Now the only thing you have to watch out for is assholes in pickup trucks cutting right through the vet's parking lot at high speed.
33
Chuck,
Kinda early in the day to be hitting the crack pipe that hard. Don't ya think?
34
@26 and 29, or I could just wear my cast-iron boots.
(That's some bad joke about metal triggering the circuit). Again, thanks. I had no idea. Apparently, I've been positioning myself at the wrong place in your typical intersection.
35
@30, no "T's" in Northern Virginian intersections, but I've noticed narrow grooves in the pavement where the wires are no doubt installed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?titl…
36
I'd like to know which idiot is responsible for the light cycle under the Ballard Bridge. You have one main street going through and two one-ways on each side. As a pedestrian, trying to cross 15th, I'm given plenty of time to get across one of the one-ways, but the hand stops flashing before I can cross the second. In the meantime, the cross traffic on the second one-way is stopped by a red light for even longer than it would take me to cross. There is no reason why peds can't cross there (and I always do, against the light, because I'm not waiting several minutes to walk 10 feet), except that SDOT hates pedestrians.

And then there's that intersection at NW 54th and 32nd, where drivers pull in to the Locks. There's a fucking *bike and pedestrian* path there, but SDOT, in its infinite wisdom, requires all peds and bikes to press the walk button before you can get a signal to cross legally.
37
@ 30, they have those in Boulder, and they're marked by a little bicycle painted on the pavement. You roll you're front tire between the painted wheels.
38
Er, "your." I really need to learn to patiently proofread before I hit the Post button.
39
It's purely political. While the science is slowly evolving, it's just as easy to ignore an engineer who gives you a report someone doesn't like as to hire engineers who will be yes men.

Case-in-point: I requested a traffic study at a nearby intersection, pointing out a few obvious changes that were needed. It took a few months, but they finally told me the study was complete and that they had "improved" the intersection. "Improvement" consisted of moving one sign. So, I requested the engineer's report. Through some political wrangling (turns out politicians under threat of prosecution are REALLY responsive to their constituents), I got it, and, well, let's just say that it was completely ignored. The intersection was described by the engineer(s) as "dangerous an inefficient for all road users," "confusing," "unnavigable," and all kinds of other things I could have told you for free. The list of recommended changes was LONG, and, honestly, most of them were cheap-to-free to implement. Re-timing lights & crosswalk signals, installing new signage, re-striping crosswalks, re-striping the lanes to reduce vehicle lanes (they recommended narrowing the road, but indicated that simply reducing vehicle lanes with paint was "feasible"), and clearly marking turn/straight lanes with pavement paint.

Buried in the back was a "letter of interest" from a nearby shopping center indicating that any changes that would slow down vehicle throughput would be "devastating" to their business. Of course this is utter bullshit. People are not going to drive to the next grocery store (several miles away), hardware store (even further), or discount clothing store (downtown with no off-street parking or FAR out into the 'burbs) because it takes them a few more seconds to get through the intersection...particularly if that slight slowdown eliminates or greatly reduces the near-daily accidents at the intersection (which, of course, tie up traffic something wicked and put everyone at risk). To boot, there's ANOTHER entrance to that shopping center away from this intersection, so if someone were really annoyed by sitting at the intersection for a few more seconds, they could easily choose to use the other entrance.

The engineer was correct. The politically-appointed leaders of the the DOT chose to ignore them. Which is pretty ballsy, given that the study was conducted based on a petition I conducted with 500 signatures of local residents. While our elected leaders got a real earful about this at the next meeting (I'm not going to describe DC's confusing local governance system, but suffice it to say a few Councilmembers were there...and, of course, I had shared the results of the study with the neighbors), they clearly don't care. One of these days, someone will be killed there, and that might get them to do something. I'm not holding my breath because I really don't want someone to have to die to get simple, cheap improvements to an intersection.
40
FYI cyclists: sometimes the sensor for bikes at lights is a circle in the road as well as the T, or T in a box.

As far as Charle's post goes, I'm sympathetic. If the traffic engineers don't hate cyclists and want them dead they are incredibly incompetent. I'm sure politics thwarts well meaning attempts frequently, but it can't possibly explain everything we have to contend with.

I'll give the traffic engineers one other out. I suspect that the people who paint the sharrows and bike lanes on the road are road raging assholes who want cyclists dead too. It's quite possible it is they are who are often thwarting the will of the engineers.
41
Always ask traffic engineers about the details of their calculations.

For example, the MUTCD has thresholds (traffic volume, number of fatalities) that traffic engineers use to explain why they are not installing a traffic signal at a given location. Question: How where those thresholds developed? Who developed them? My guess is that most traffic engineers have no idea.

Another example, you will hear them say that the 85th percentile speed that drivers are moving at a given location is a "safe speed". What do they mean by "safe"?

Thanks.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.