SCormier assigned this issue to SCormier

Issue acknowledged assigning to Traffic

The lights over the center of the intersection for vehicles also apply to pedestrians. Watch for traffic, cross with the flow. The signal changes regularly regardless of traffic.

Willard & College lack of pedestrian signals
--------------------------------------------
This subject comes up every once in a while. Nearby signals have pedestrian signals, this one does not. Why not? Different characteristics, conditions, and operations.

The characteristics here, or the static items in place, are a pair of four-way signals, suspended diagonally over the roadway. This central, aerial placement makes them highly visible both to drivers and pedestrians. Other typical signal layouts put a pair of signals at the far side of each approach, making the viewing of them sometimes difficult, depending on the relationship to adjacent sidewalks. Such is not the case here.

Conditions, meaning the dynamic happenings here, are predominantly straight through traffic flows north-south, alternating with east-west. There are turning movements. But unlike many other intersections, observed turns here tend to be a small minority of what happens. Most traffic stays on Willard Street or on College Street. Not that there are no turns, just that they are observed to be a minority of the mix, which works well for this location.

Traffic volumes tend to be less than nearby intersections. This is indeed US Route 7, but this portion of Route 7 is bounded on the north and south by two actuated signals at Pearl and Main Streets, respectively, which treat the north/south approaches as side streets, or minor approaches. It would be highly unusual for Willard volumes to rise to the same levels as Pearl and Main, because the major green time there is not for the north/south direction.

There are a fair number of pedestrians here. More than some intersections, less than others. The key question is whether there is any ongoing difficulty in crossing here. Observations made over many years show this is a fairly easy intersection to navigate. It does not jump out as difficult, as can sometimes be the case even at intersections with full, four-way pedestrian signals and moderate turning movements.

The operation here is pre-timed. The signal does not "see" or respond to traffic in any way. It runs a fixed cycle length over and over all throughout the day. The non-actuated, fixed cycle makes sense being between two actuated signals at Pearl and Main. Cars arrive from each direction with a certain regularity, and there is somewhat of a north/south progression along Willard Street. Running a fixed cycle, there is no need for pedestrian buttons. The signal changes every time, whether anyone is there or not.

Putting in pedestrian signals is a huge, expensive undertaking. We would have to install at least 4, and as many as 8 poles to get the proper placement for each ped signal. This requires 3 underground street crossings, to "connect the dots" with electrical conduit where there is none now. Such a project would cost in the neighborhood of say $40,000. If the electric department, telephone and cable companies were to move their equipment from wood poles to underground facilities, we might gain some cost efficiencies by sharing an expensive, open-cut trench. If the surrounding utilities went underground, there might be a desire to move the signal to a post-top design for aesthetic reasons.

To sum up, installing pedestrian signals at Willard & College is not easy or inexpensive. Ultimately, it is a political decision that should be made with awareness of other pressing issues. In the present situation, where we have aerial utilities (wood poles), moderate traffic volume, low turn movements, highly visible signals, and fixed cycle operation, installing ped signals here does not appear to be as warranted as at some other locations.
This issue is closed

Thank-you for sharing your well-articulated, professional analysis of this intersection from many points of view. I appreciate and applaud the effort.

I agree, very well done DPW

Thank you for the response. Just to clarify, your position at this intersection is to prioritize cars over walking or biking?

I don't see the current configuration as prioritizing cars over walking or biking, since all users are essentially cued by the same signal. I use that intersection on an almost daily basis (on bike & sometimes in a car) for portions of the year, and have never had an issue with crossings, usually east or west straight through the intersection on a bike. Not sure how it is as a pedestrian, but it seems safer than either Pearl or Main (which have signals) because of the way the traffic flows. Just my personal observation.