[Andy2009]

Just read in the Metro that there are plans to introduce a digital countdown to inform pedestrians how long they have left before the lights change.

Personally, I think this is a turn for the worse.

We already have a good system. If the lights for vehicles are on green and there are no pedestrians then proceed, else wait.

My understanding, and what my driving instructor told me, is that if there is a pedestrian on the road, you wait.

I can't help think that this new proposal will induce a stoical "target" mentality in people:

Pedestrian "of course I could cross, there was time left"
Driver "it counted down to zero so I moved off"

I keep thinking of those schemes in the continent where all road signs / controls are removed, making people think about what they are doing.

The digital readout seems to go completely against this, as people are relying on an external input for instruction rather than making their own judgement calls. But then, the mentality of the OK population seems totally different to that of other countries. On the other hand, other countries, such as the US, also have trialled these things and accidents have reduced, apparently.

What do others think? Are these countdowns a good idea or not?

[smudger]

There is already a Beep signal for blind people using crossings as well as "bumps" on the ground for them to feel.

So if they added another sound warning, that could confuse blind folk?

[Mike Gray]

These are quite common in the US, aren't they? Although they also have a right-on-red rule that makes crossing the road as a pedestrian a particularly dangerous passtime.

[Airbag]

I don't see how this should change anything for the drivers. If you already know that you should wait for pedestrians to cross even if the light is on green, then why should you think you can set off if the countdown has reached zero?

[Snowball]

There will always be an argument regarding whether we should have additional warning signs/lights to guide drivers.
But drivers themselves give clout to the lobbyists for extra signage on several fronts.
For example, we all (or should) know that pedestrians already starting to cross the mouth of a side road we are about to enter have precedence over vehicles. The French seem to think we have need of visual direction; just look at how many of their road junctions have zebra (striped) road markings.
Likewise, how many drivers ignore pedestrians who are about to cross a pavement where a dropped kerb leads to a driveway or commercial entrance?

For pedestrian crossings with traffic signals, it would be better if the driver was given (a) the winking amber and (b) the red-plus-amber sequence were abolished, and the red change directly to green after pedestrians have clearly been given the indication that they should not cross.

In France, the red direct to green sequence seems to work very well, and the application of a 30 kph (about 18mph) is widely used where driver/pedestrian conflict is likely.
Also, STOP really means "stop". Gendarmes frequently stand near to these junctions, and if your wheels don't visually come to a complete standstill you can expect an on-the-spot fine.

[wagolynn]

I think a countdown for pedestrians would alleviate the sense of frustration whilst waiting for the lights to change in their favour, (whilst waiting, time slows by at least a factor of 10 :rolleyes:) it would perhaps, reduce the temptation to assume there is a fault on the lights and make a dash for it.
I don’t see that it changes things from a driver’s point of view, the rules are still the same, pedestrians have the same rights as vehicles to be on the road, and should not be crashed into.

[smudger]

The one that winds me up, is when a pedestrian presses the button, then nips over the road between cars.
Then brings all the traffic to stop when the light changes and no one is on the crossing:rolleyes:

[Rolebama]

Does anybody know why these light-operated crossings were introduced? As we still have zebras, they do seem somewhat pointless. As to timers - just why?

[Snowball]

Originally Posted by Rolebama

Does anybody know why these light-operated crossings were introduced? As we still have zebras, they do seem somewhat pointless. As to timers - just why?

I can only assume it is because the powers-that-be think drivers and pedestrians are of limited mentality, and need step by step guidance in the form of such lights. They then compound their own lack of foresight by having variations in the way the signals work; which increases the necessary level of understanding!

Another feature along the main street of our town centre is the introduction of "humps" with a flat top that roughly equates to a crossing width, and some with centre reservation bollards on each side of the raised surface. These are not designated pedestrian-priority crossings, but many pedestrians seem to think they are. It now only requires two stubborn people to converge; a pedestrian believing he/she has priority, and determined to cross, and an equally determined driver who doesn't intend to stop.

Among the bureaucrats, their are two schools of thought across the UK; those who fervently develop evermore signage and chicanes, etc., and those who favour clearance of all the dross.
In their respective ways, both extremes have their dangers.
How refreshing it would be if authorities and road safety groups could co-operate and, along with extensive questioning of drivers, arrive at an optimum level of signage and "traffic calming"; at the same time maintaining a strict standardisation nationwide.

I don't pretend for one moment to have all the answers, but I do believe that I alone could do better than many of our current decision-makers; a feeling probably shared by most posters on the forum.

[wagolynn]

More lights means higher costs, good for the traffic light makers and a good resolution for a committee. This rule even applies in commerce; if you have two solutions to a problem, a committee will usually choose the most painful/expensive, rather like politicians making ‘tough’ decisions.

[Rolebama]

With regard to Snowball's post about 'humps' in the High Street, some years ago a similar set of 'humps' were set up in Borehamwood, with coloured aggregate used in place of tarmac to cover them. Pedestrians, with no grounds for it, started to use them as 'I obviously have priority' crossings. This included those with young kids on bicycles. Got too much for me, so I haven't been near the place for years.

[smudger]

Aye! they have made some of the speed humps into pedestrian crossings in our town as well.

It works out OK for mothers with prams and push chairs, as the humps are the height as the pavement.;)