I support this...
I have seen several situations where people waiting for the light sit on top of the tracks! One place I recall very well is near Surprise, Arizona along the BNSF tracks (No idea of the subdivision).
I don't mind people who drive aggressively when conditions allow but when I'm driving around pedestrians I slow down and take my time. Where are we going that maiming or killing strangers would seem reasonable on the way? Telling people to "be safe" is not a practical solution and many college students have barely left their childhood home at that point. I'd rather give up a bit of road to keep students safe from angry drivers with a victim complex.
That’s my point...driver’s may respect a standard solid red traffic light, over the traditional flashing red crossing lights.We were just thinking to do that to a crossing near one of our workshops! It may look more familiar (as a place where you are likely to get ticketed...?)
.
Better yet: have it tied to an intrusion detector.
I respectfully but firmly disagree that they're the same thing. A street in town is not a rural road or an open highway. They all carry vehicles, but a street isn't just intended to carry vehicle traffic, and a street is not just the vehicular roadway portion. While I don't think pedestrians should just cross the street willy-nilly, they are proper users of the street as a whole, and it isn't just people "staring at their electronic devices and/or crossing anywhere they please without even looking at the traffic" who end up getting fatally hit by fast unimpeded vehicle traffic. I'd bet a "road" bordering a college with a lot of students walking outside (not a suburban community college) is really a street.
Some interesting and good points. Not only have I seen "both sides now", but I have also seen 3 sides now as a driver, pedestrian, and bicyclist.I respectfully but firmly disagree that they're the same thing. A street in town is not a rural road or an open highway. They all carry vehicles, but a street isn't just intended to carry vehicle traffic, and a street is not just the vehicular roadway portion. While I don't think pedestrians should just cross the street willy-nilly, they are proper users of the street as a whole, and it isn't just people "staring at their electronic devices and/or crossing anywhere they please without even looking at the traffic" who end up getting fatally hit by fast unimpeded vehicle traffic. I'd bet a "road" bordering a college with a lot of students walking outside (not a suburban community college) is really a street.
While I don't cross the street without looking for traffic, I have frequently (after confirming no vehicle is coming towards me) crossed streets in the middle of the block and/or against the traffic signal. Well-populated areas of towns and cities, where people actually walk sometimes to get around, are full of people doing the same. It ain't the jays (old slang similar to hicks) who jaywalk.
Nonetheless, too many places value above all not "impairing the travel of the cars" to any significant degree. Bike lines, bus lanes, stop signs, mid-block crosswalks with signs and flashing yellow lights, lower speed limits; all are unacceptable to the motoring public, which to many officials is the only public that counts. All duties to the pedestrian, all rights to the motorist, though the latter is the one who by license is in control of a ton or more propelled at 30, or 40, or 50 mph. And when some towns or cities do decide to address the matter, they run into criticism that echoes your post: the solutions being proposed are unfairly aimed at the motorists instead of just telling the pedestrians to watch where they're going.
Sorry for the hijack on a thread concerning rail crossings, but I feel strongly about the issue of more parity between pedestrians and motorists.
"Rather than phrase it correctly let's butcher the wording so an illiterate reader will not misapply blame."
Why just warning letters? We have red light cameras all over our city, and I presume that driver who get caught on camera running a red light get a nice fat traffic ticket.
That solution is disliked by a lot of people because of its Big Brother feeling and in many places, it has been voted down or prohibited by law because of that resistance. So I hesitate to suggest tickets as a first solution and leave that for scofflaws. But more importantly, it shows where a problem exists and it might take more signage, crossing gates instead of signs or a police car at random hours to give out a ticket (since no radar is required in the police car).
The other issue with speed cameras was that some municipalities reduced the yellow light time. I believe that yellow lights nowadays stay on much linger than they used to and there is also a delay between when one light turns red and the other one turns green and I believe this time has increased from years past when it was zero. Supposedly, some municipalities have reduced these times for red light camera signals only which confuses drivers.
That's an alternative for a FEW of the many crossings - the ones with gates. It is also EXPENSIVE. For those with just signals or just crossbucks, it is not a reasonable alternative to a simple solar-powered battery camera and a warning sign.
And everywhere else, AFAIK...because the camera image is not good enough to positively identify the driver thru facial recognition, the image is designed to capture the license plate, and then cite the registered owner of the vehicle, which may be or not be, the same as the violating driver. Hence, no points assessed.
