No right turn on red (no RTOR) is a standard policy used in most U.S. cities to protect pedestrians walking along the sidewalk who would otherwise be run over and killed by vehicles making turns.

To make things easier for drivers to understand and ensure pedestrian safety, many consultants have pointed out that the city should have a uniform no RTOR policy.

Is the convenience of drivers really worth a few children run over every year?

Hi Mark,

First, your statement that no RTOR is "a standard policy used in most US cities to protect pedestrians," as crafted, is misleading. The rationale (to protect pedestrians) may be correct, but the policy is hardly uniform; quite the contrary. (NYC is a geographically nearby exception, of course.) As for the "consultants" who point out that the city should have a uniform policy, if they are like most consultants they are not are disinterested third parties.

Second, a red light, even with a permissible RTOR requires an obligatory stop before turning, as I'm sure you are aware; you are not, contrary to your implication, allowed simply "to run over and kill." Stop signs are in fact a good analogy here (where, again, "run over and kill" remains prohibited), although I understand they are typically used on lower-volume thoroughfares.

Third--in this particular spot--there is an argument from nothing less than uniformity, albeit in a very local fashion: turning onto Judwin from Fountain in the same direction (SE), RTOR is permitted--after a very dangerous intersection, I might add, for all.

You wonder whether "the convenience of drivers [is] worth a few children run over every year." Such crass terms do not suit your argument or movement. I'm a "safe streets" supporter; I have the sticker on my car and drive accordingly. But I believe the philosophy behind that movement is to *share* the road, and to do so responsibly; cars remain a part of that picture.

There are plenty of cities that don't deploy widespread unnecessary NTOR signs, and there is no corresponding increase in pedestrian fatalities. New York has a uniform NTOR policy, and yet pedestrians are run down at an alarming rate in New York. Why could this be?

This is really about New Haven's misguided policy of trying to fully segregate motorists from pedestrians. It's also evident in the widespread use of separate pedestrian walk signals, instead of having pedestrians cross with the green light -- a particularly bad problem when you come upon an intersection that has no pedestrian signals (Temple and Grove is a major offender).

I don't think this encourages safety at all. I think it trains motorists to stop looking out for pedestrians altogether. The message is "if the light is green, pedestrians aren't supposed to be in the street." This is bad policy and should be changed. Lose the NTOR signs, and lose the pedestrian walk phases. We need to retrain the drivers in this town to recognize that pedestrians belong. It's not just about motorist convenience: as a pedestrian, I really don't feel like having to wait through an entire green light because the sign says "Don't walk"

Right turns on red are banned throughout the entire European Union, perhaps for reasons involving basic principles of equity for all road users:

"Older pedestrians seem to have special difficulty in certain situations: at busy two-way streets; at intersections with heavy traffic, particularly where there is no center refuge; in complex situations, where vehicles can come from several directions; at light-controlled crossings where traffic is allowed to turn across pedestrian routes; and in situations where right turn on red is permitted, so turning traffic can threaten pedestrians unexpectedly."

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/07mar/01.cfm

Steve: While NYC has some pedestrian fatalities, the per capita rate of pedestrian fatalities there is actually lower than most U.S. Cities, according to NHTSA. If you consider pedestrian miles traveled in NY City versus say, Wichita, it is even lower. Let's not overgeneralize.

I would not characterize consultants as disinterested parties. The city does not have a large full-time staff of traffic engineers, so it hires expert traffic engineers who have worked in other cities similar to New Haven in order to recommend a best practice. From what I've seen, they have recommended NTOR signs for several reasons, including:
1. Without the signs, research shows most drivers don't even stop at all when making turns on red.
2. When vehicles turn unexpectedly, pedestrians are at risk - particularly children and the elderly, who make up a large share of New Haven's population.
3. Standardizing intersections, i.e., implementing NTOR signs throughout built up areas of New Haven, makes it easier for everyone to understand the rules.

Y, if I had to cross this intersection several times a day as a pedestrian and vehicles were not stopping at all before making turns, I would probably stop walking altogether. Doesn't the economy and quality of life of our city depend on having people walking? And given the number of hit and runs and child injuries and deaths in our city every single year, if even one child death is prevented by having an easy to understand, widely-adopted traffic convention that all residents can point to as a rule, isn't it worth it?

Comments appreciated. But I doubt that those who fail to stop before turning would obey the signs anyway, given what I have observed about local driving habits.

Your hypothetical decision not to walk at all is not only reactionary but presupposes 1) that drivers never stop (patently false) and 2) that as a walker you are too impatient not to wait for the highly responsive signal at that intersection (not in the spirit of equity you speciously invoke). I feel a more measured response is in order.

And though I am an avid leftist Europhile I regretfully must acknowledge that New Haven is not a member of the EU and that one taille does not fit all.

Y, the Dept of Transportation is investigating and I think they'll come up with the best solution.

There are general principles to consider here, but ultimately our city DOT has to make a call that reduces the potential risks and balances the needs of road users of all ages and abilities.

I just believe they should err on the side of clarity and actual system safety, not ambiguous calls for drivers and pedestrians (including children, seniors walking at night, etc.) to "follow the rules."

Though drivers don't obey the signs in many instances (which is true of any control signal), the NTORs do seem to increase the likelihood that a driver will at least stop before making a turn.

Its funny how you all are talking about the light vs pedestrians because MOST people in the area cross the walk when ever they feel like it and don't adhere to the laws themselves making it completely moot. What makes matters worse is seeing parents doing it with their very young ones in toe without a care in the world which perpetuates the dangerous and deadly cycle. Yet drivers are often the first to be berated if a pedestrian is hit.

I think we need to start enforcing PEDESTRIAN laws and handing out a lot more jaywalking tickets.

Tickets for any illegal behavior could be helpful, but I wouldn't expect the pedestrian behavior to change until residents feel safe crossing whether they have the light or not.

The idea of a signal is somewhat problematic since often it communicates the idea that vehicles should have priority, given the fact that it takes a lot longer to walk somewhere than drive. If you calculate an average pedestrian trip, pedestrians sometimes spend a lot more time waiting at signals than drivers do. Both pedestrians and drivers are frustrated as a result.

Many cities have been eliminating traffic signals on all but the busiest roads, and instead establishing balances between road users by slowing traffic speeds and reducing pedestrian crossing distances to about 10 feet. This helps everyone because it actually makes it faster both to drive (since there are no lights) as well as to walk to your destination. Having short crossing distances also increases eye contact and visibility, so both drivers and pedestrians find it easier to be courteous to one another.