[alexlrobertson]

> Our solution for the short term, while physical traffic signals still coexist with the VTL system, is to provide pedestrians a way to give themselves the right-of-way. Ever since January of this year, our pilot program in Pittsburgh has provided a button to push that actuates a red light—real for the pedestrians, and virtual for the cars—at all four approaches to the intersection. It has worked every time.

This is what is described as a "beg button" by urbanists. Requiring pedestrians to press a button to give them a safe window in which to cross doesn't account for situations where pedestrians may not be able to request to cross due to construction, disability, or other factors.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/03/24/seattle-campaign-to-g...

[adrianmonk]

As a pedestrian, I feel safer if there's a button to push!

Drivers can see the walk signal too. It serves as an extra reminder to look for a pedestrian. If it's on every time, then it conveys no information about whether there's a pedestrian this time.

For example, I'm standing on the northwest corner, facing east and waiting to cross. A car is also facing east and will be making a left turn across my path. Ideally every driver looks all around, so they'll see me 90 degrees off to their left, but in practice drivers tend to look in the direction they're going to be driving. This means their field of vision includes the walk signal but not me.

For that matter, I wouldn't hate the idea of expanding the button's functionality to advertise my presence even more. Like sticking a flashing "PEDESTRIANS PRESENT" light right next to the red/yellow/green light.

[alexlrobertson]

Buttons for pedestrian signals are great for safety. The point I was trying to get across is that in the proposed system, a pedestrian would never get a dedicated window to cross unless they push the button.

[dsfyu404ed]

Everything has trade-offs. Not having vehicles sit idling while nobody crosses the street reduces pollution even if it makes it harder to cross the street in some case.

[stephenr]

Wait. It's describing a pedestrian push-button, to trigger a red-light for traffic, as some kind of new invention?

[IanCal]

No, it's just describing how they fit the new system around current constraints.

[romed]

And it's just demeaning. Any sensible urban transportation system needs to be a pyramid based on most trips being taken on foot. Anything that prioritizes cars over pedestrians in a city is a mistake. Yes, it's a mistake that 99.5% of American cities make, but it's still a mistake.

A far better system for connected vehicles would be pedestrian signals that are always green for pedestrians by default, which will change to permit vehicles to pass when vehicles are present. This is very expensive though. Far better and cheaper to just ban cars.

[icebraining]

No, that would be a terrible system for us pedestrians, who already bear the brunt of air pollution in the cities. Just imagine how terrible it would be with all those cars constantly stopping, idling and starting.

[acranox]

That's what they're doing in the cities now anyhow. It's just a blocks long line of cars everywhere, idling, inching forward, waiting for the car in front of them to move. It's not the traffic lights that are creating all the stopping/idling, it's the traffic jams, due to too many cars.