Negative effects of poor traffic signal synchronization

[milesdriven]

One can drive 8 Mile or Telegraph for miles and not stop at any traffic lights if there isn't too much traffic. Yesterday, while driving down Livernois from Fenkell to Grand River, I had to stop at seven traffic lights in this short 2.5 mile stretch. Unnecessary medians aside, I think this is a major issue for the city. Businesses would get more exposure if the city's roads were more traversable, and less people would be inclined to take side streets, which are much faster in many cases when you factor in traffic light wait times. Who would be responsible for making smooth signal timing a reality?

[Gannon]

A bunch of people who likely own oil company stock and maybe a franchised Auto Brake center on the side...or worse, just don't care enough to do anything about it.

[sirrealone]

This is especially bad in Oakland County, where many intersections are controlled by cameras that adjust the lights according to when traffic appears at the intersection. The problem is that the lights have no method of communicating with each other. If the computer controlling the lights knew, from receiving a signal from the computer at the next intersection, that a whole mess of cars were coming, it could adjust the change accordingly. I can't tell you the number of times I see a light change, stopping fifteen cars, so that one or two cars can get a green light. A system with better integration would be able to reduce these situations, thus increasing flow and reducing wasted time and wasted gas consumption.

[mwilbert]

Yesterday, while driving down Livernois from Fenkell to Grand River, I had to stop at seven traffic lights in this short 2.5 mile stretch.

Were you driving in the expected direction [[inbound/morning or outbound/evening)?
I haven't driven that particular stretch in a while, but usually the lights seem pretty well timed if you are going the right way. I have often made it from McNichols to the Jeffries with maybe 2 stops. I do adjust my speed a bit to optimize it.

[milesdriven]

Were you driving in the expected direction [[inbound/morning or outbound/evening)?
I haven't driven that particular stretch in a while, but usually the lights seem pretty well timed if you are going the right way. I have often made it from McNichols to the Jeffries with maybe 2 stops. I do adjust my speed a bit to optimize it.

I was driving southbound around 11:30 last night.

[mwilbert]

I was driving southbound around 11:30 last night.

I doubt the lights are timed to optimize inbound traffic at 11:30PM; more likely they are still set to favor outbound. It would be interesting to know what the schedule is [[if in fact there is one and this isn't all a product of my imagination). If nothing else it would be useful for route planning.

One thing that they could do is switch more of the lights to flashers by 11:30 at night--a lot of those lights are at intersections that have little or no cross-traffic late at night.

[Hermod]

Back before they built the Chrysler XPWY, they made John R. one-way and Brush the opposite way. The lights were synched extremely well. You could go all the way from 8-mile to downtown and vice versa with being caught on more than one light if you went exactly at the speed limit.

[Don K]

I agree about Telegraph. Before I retired I sometimes used Telegraph as an alternate to Southfield to get from Dearborn to Bloomfield/Birmingham. After turning onto Telegraph at Ford, I'd have to stop at the first light [[Hass), but then could make it to at least McNichols or 7 Mile, and sometimes as far as 9 or 10 Mile before having to stop again, even during rush hour. Then after negotiating the mess that is Northwestern/12 Mile, it would be pretty clear sailing again at least as far as Maple, and sometimes right up to my turnoff at Lone Pine.

Southfield Road, by contrast, is awful [[or at least was the last time I drove it). If you drive south from Birmingham starting at Maple and stick reasonably close to the limit [[say, 40-50 mph once you're in the 45 mph zone south of 14 Mile), you will be stopped by every light all the way to the beginning of the freeway south of 10 Mile, even if there's no traffic. If you're the first car at a light, and are willing to push it up to, mmm, upper 50's, you can just make the tail end of the next light, and then you're fine, but it seems whoever timed those lights wanted to incentivize people to either drive way too fast or too slow.

Interestingly, lots of people on Telegraph in OC haven't gotten the message about the timing of the lights. Every day I'll be cruising along at 55 [[limit is 50) in Bloomfield Township planning to get to the next light about the time it's changing only to have three or four cars blow by me at 60-65. These cars then have to come to a stop at the light, forcing me to slow down behind them while they accelerate. And don't think the Bloomfield Township cops haven't noticed. They know if they want to write a few quick tickets they just have sit on the shoulder on Telegraph and wait a couple of minutes.

[Hamtragedy]

About 5 years the lights on Davison Avenue were re-timed to make traffic flow from the Jeffries to the Davison Freeway. What was once a frustrating drive has now become my major crosstown artery.

As for Livernois, I agree, I get stuck at nearly every single light from Grand River south to Warren without rhyme or reason.

[jbd441]

My favorite is stopping at a light and there is not a single car in sight on the cross street. I work nights sometimes and it happens all the time. Talk about a waste of gas and time.

[izzyindetroit]

It cannot be as bad as E. Jefferson. I was hoping they would change the timing when they were finished updating all the lights. I haven't noticed any differences yet. The most frustrating is this one, here you have a one way coming out at a three way intersection with the light turning red when the only traffic turning onto the one way occurs at the plant shift times.

http://goo.gl/maps/IWPF

[iheartthed]

One can drive 8 Mile or Telegraph for miles and not stop at any traffic lights if there isn't too much traffic. Yesterday, while driving down Livernois from Fenkell to Grand River, I had to stop at seven traffic lights in this short 2.5 mile stretch. Unnecessary medians aside, I think this is a major issue for the city. Businesses would get more exposure if the city's roads were more traversable, and less people would be inclined to take side streets, which are much faster in many cases when you factor in traffic light wait times. Who would be responsible for making smooth signal timing a reality?

I think the lights were timed to purposely have you stop like that. I bet you were more clearly able to see the businesses from having to stop than you would if the lights were timed for you to breeze through. It's also less of a hazard for pedestrians.

It makes sense for 8 Mile and Telegraph to be timed for traffic to move with minimal stopping, since those are both roads that run along the periphery of the city, they have wide lanes, left hand turns are prohibited on both, and probably most importantly, they weren't ever meant to be pedestrian friendly.

[mwilbert]

I'm sure this is a valid point in many cases, but there aren't that many businesses people are going to randomly stop at on Livernois between Fenkell and Grand River, and even fewer at 11:30PM. Nor that many pedestrians--and timing the lights properly helps control the speed because if you stick close to the limit you don't hit many lights.

[iheartthed]

I'm sure this is a valid point in many cases, but there aren't that many businesses people are going to randomly stop at on Livernois between Fenkell and Grand River, and even fewer at 11:30PM. Nor that many pedestrians--and timing the lights properly helps control the speed because if you stick close to the limit you don't hit many lights.

Yeah, but that still doesn't much justify changing the timing, IMO. How many people are driving Livernois at night? I would guess that the ratio of businesses open to vehicular traffic isn't too much different at 11:30P than it is at 11:30A. But even if I'm wrong, his argument was that improving the flow of vehicular traffic would be a boon to business along that thoroughfare.

And whether there aren't as many pedestrians at 11:30P as 11:30A also is irrelevant. It's still a hazard to the pedestrians who do have to cross or walk along Livernois at 11:30P. And it's probably more important to the pedestrian that you put in the proper traffic controls because it is harder to be seen by drivers at that time of night...

[mwilbert]

And whether there aren't as many pedestrians at 11:30P as 11:30A also is irrelevant. It's still a hazard to the pedestrians who do have to cross or walk along Livernois at 11:30P.

This doesn't seem convincing. The density of pedestrians and cars in the middle of the night is well below any threshold where you would install a signal. The signals are only there because of the traffic at other times of day; that doesn't create a compelling argument that they are needed at night.

In my experience, the lights don't do much for pedestrians at low-traffic volume times anyway. Most pedestrians don't wait for the lights to cross at those times, because most people don't have any problem avoiding the occasional car. You could make the lights pedestrian-activated if you wanted to help the less bold and/or less spry ones--for all I know some of them already are.

[iheartthed]

This doesn't seem convincing. The density of pedestrians and cars in the middle of the night is well below any threshold where you would install a signal. The signals are only there because of the traffic at other times of day; that doesn't create a compelling argument that they are needed at night.

In my experience, the lights don't do much for pedestrians at low-traffic volume times anyway. Most pedestrians don't wait for the lights to cross at those times, because most people don't have any problem avoiding the occasional car. You could make the lights pedestrian-activated if you wanted to help the less bold and/or less spry ones--for all I know some of them already are.

It's not about whether a pedestrian waits for a traffic light, or even crosses the street at the intersection. Engineers don't plan solely according to the instructed use of a product. They also plan have to plan for the varying ways that a product can be used, and unfortunately what can go wrong.

A pedestrian who gets hit by a car, whether at a designated crossing or at an poorly lit section of the mid-block, will have a better chance of surviving the accident if the car is going 35 MPH versus 45 MPH. Timing traffic lights to have drivers not stop encourages 1) the driver to drive at the fastest speed that s/he can without being stopped by a traffic light and 2) not be in the mindset to react as quickly to an obstruction in the road as if s/he had to stop/slow at regular intervals. I don't think whatever minimal benefits of changing the timing is worth the potential downside [[and that worst case scenario only has to happen once for it to not be worth it at all). If you want to avoid traffic lights, that's what freeways are for...

[Jimaz]

This looks a bit technical but seems a good resource on the subject: Signal Timing Manual.

The main webpage still says it's scheduled to be completed in 2008 but the copy I downloaded looks complete.

[Russix]

Livernois Ave. product of Kwame cronyism?

Seems like alot of the local businesses and residents didn't want this "improvement".

http://michiganmessenger.com/4190/de...despite-outcry

On the other hand, I like the new pedestrian islands on Davison.

[citylover]

No where is this as bad as here in Ann Arbor.Of course here you have a form of social engineering wherein the automobile is the work of the devil.So any conflict between the auto and pedestrian/bicycle is always gonna be the auto getting the short end of the deal. In fact the city has tried to lower speed limits and embarrassingly lost in court [[that is a rarity) on traffic matters because of it.I am thinking of starting at thread on the curious hatred of cars around here considering that the car industry gave us just about every thing we have.

[iheartthed]

No where is this as bad as here in Ann Arbor.Of course here you have a form of social engineering wherein the automobile is the work of the devil.So any conflict between the auto and pedestrian/bicycle is always gonna be the auto getting the short end of the deal. In fact the city has tried to lower speed limits and embarrassingly lost in court [[that is a rarity) on traffic matters because of it.I am thinking of starting at thread on the curious hatred of cars around here considering that the car industry gave us just about every thing we have.

Yeah, those damn socialists and their being concerned with public safety and all...

Two women were hit by a pickup truck last night and died after
arriving at the University Hospital.

Ann Arbor Police Department Sgt. Brad Hill said the women were
crossing Plymouth Road at 6:20 p.m., apparently on their way home
from the Islamic Center of Ann Arbor after breaking their Ramadan
fast for the day.

The AAPD has not released the names of the women, but members of
the campus Muslim community say the women are Norhananim Zainol and
Teh Nanni Roshema Roslan, two Engineering students. The girls were
both international students and members of the Malaysian Students
Association.

http://www.michigandaily.com/content...-crossing-road

[citylover]

Yeah, those damn socialists and their being concerned with public safety and all...

I remember that sad incident.But that stretch of Plymouth rd has high traffic density along with a curve in the road and the average speed is 40-45 mph it is a wonder more people have not been killed.

A request for a crosswalk with a light was turned down ,instead there is a pedestrian crossing but that only works if people cross with in the pedestrian crossing lines.....often they don't.The solution would be to put in a pedestrian bridge.In fact there was one for a long time at Plymouth and Barton just west of where this accident happened.But then that would be unsightly and acquiescing to the dreaded automobile.... anyhow that is a poor example on your part as there should be either a traffic light or a ped/bridge.

[iheartthed]

I remember that sad incident.But that stretch of Plymouth rd has high traffic density along with a curve in the road and the average speed is 40-45 mph it is a wonder more people have not been killed.

A request for a crosswalk with a light was turned down ,instead there is a pedestrian crossing but that only works if people cross with in the pedestrian crossing lines.....often they don't.The solution would be to put in a pedestrian bridge.In fact there was one for a long time at Plymouth and Barton just west of where this accident happened.But then that would be unsightly and acquiescing to the dreaded automobile.... anyhow that is a poor example on your part as there should be either a traffic light or a ped/bridge.

Actually, if I remember correctly... Wasn't there a traffic light there at one time? And didn't it change to flashing yellow at night? I remember one having been there, but I might be mistaken... I've lived a lot of places. But I feel like there was a useless light there that they removed in order to put in better lighting and pedestrian islands so that people weren't just standing in the middle of the street waiting for traffic to clear.

I remember driving that way on the night the two women were killed. Those two certainly weren't the first people to have been hit and injured while trying to cross that street... and I don't even think they were the only pedestrians to have died trying to cross that street. Plymouth Road through Ann Arbor is probably the best example I can think of for why traffic lights on Livernois shouldn't be synchronized to allow traffic to flow without stopping. It was incredibly dangerous to cross that street after dark because traffic moved so fast through there.

[Gistok]

No where is this as bad as here in Ann Arbor.Of course here you have a form of social engineering wherein the automobile is the work of the devil.So any conflict between the auto and pedestrian/bicycle is always gonna be the auto getting the short end of the deal. In fact the city has tried to lower speed limits and embarrassingly lost in court [[that is a rarity) on traffic matters because of it.I am thinking of starting at thread on the curious hatred of cars around here considering that the car industry gave us just about every thing we have.

Citylover, I commuted to Ann Arbor from St. Clair Shores for 4 years, and most of that time it wasn't a problem.. until you exited I-94 at State Street. One year [[1999?) there was a Sunday rain/ice storm... and most everywhere all cities cleared their slush from the roadway before it was planning on freezing Sunday night....

But not Ann Arbor... I remember it took me 55 minutes to get to the State Street exit [[normal timing)... and another 45 minutes just to get to Hoover Ave. [[a 2 1/2 mile stretch). Ann Arbor had done absolutely NOTHING to remove the slush from the street on Sunday... and it was a frozen skating rink come Monday AM rush hour. Unbelievable....

[Rolfsy]

I am thinking of starting at thread on the curious hatred of cars around here considering that the car industry gave us just about every thing we have.

Most on this board tend to be 'urbanophiles', and the relationship between car and city is pretty binary. Cities stifle cars [[Boston/SF/Chicago), or cars eat cities [[Detroit/LA/St. Louis). Accomodating 2-ton, 6-foot wide wheelchairs would do strange things to an old house.

Double edged sword for sure. I think at this point, infrastructure-wise, the hangover has overwhelmed the good times. There's probably not many places on Earth that have given over to the car the way this region has, and it's arguable if we have much to show for it. Not making a moral stand on it, just wonder what the 'plus' column would have.

The distaste may also be similar to the way the whaling and/or Chinese opium trades are considered shameful today, even though they were staples of the early New England gentry.

[citylover]

Most on this board tend to be 'urbanophiles', and the relationship between car and city is pretty binary. Cities stifle cars [[Boston/SF/Chicago), or cars eat cities [[Detroit/LA/St. Louis). Accomodating 2-ton, 6-foot wide wheelchairs would do strange things to an old house.

Double edged sword for sure. I think at this point, infrastructure-wise, the hangover has overwhelmed the good times. There's probably not many places on Earth that have given over to the car the way this region has, and it's arguable if we have much to show for it. Not making a moral stand on it, just wonder what the 'plus' column would have.

The distaste may also be similar to the way the whaling and/or Chinese opium trades are considered shameful today, even though they were staples of the early New England gentry.

I do hope you are not equating in any way the opium trade with the car industry. Some will call me callow.But until the assembly line and Henry ford the chance for poor and modest people to have any advance in quality of life was slim at best.

So much of the great architecture and culture and history of our area is directly the result of the car industry. How many hundreds of thousands of people in this area have advanced degrees because someone in their family made a good living in the auto industry?

The car did not eat Detroit.It made Detroit the great city it is. The fact is [[nobody will admit ) people want their cars. But my curiosity is more in the hatred of what made this place what it is......the place everyone claims to love.