Page:Report of the Traffic Signs Committee (1963).pdf/68

 push-button. An alternative arrangement recently introduced at some junctions where pedestrian volume and vehicles flows do not justify or permit a pedestrian phase is to provide that at the beginning of a vehicle phase only straight-ahead traffic is released. This is done by a vertical green arrow so that during this period turning traffic is prevented and pedestrians can use the parallel crossing safely. We recommend that there should be more of these helpful arrangements for pedestrians.

At most crossings, however, pedestrians are at present expected to judge for themselves when it is safe to cross by keeping their eye on the traffic. At the simpler junctions pedestrians are usually able to see at least one signal appropriate to each traffic phase to help them in judging the traffic situation. But where complex methods of control are employed, signals can be confusing or misleading and it is safer to judge mainly by watching the traffic. We consider the situation should continue to be governed by the general injunction that pedestrians should watch the traffic and that turning traffic should give way to pedestrians who are crossing.

We have noted the wide variation which at present exists between different countries in the signals given to pedestrians and in the rights and duties of both pedestrians and drivers in respect of such signals. For example, in this country pedestrian signals are given for guidance and are not mandatory. In some countries, however, it is an offence not to obey their indications. Cross signals or their equivalent mean here that all vehicular traffic over the crossing is stopped. But abroad the pedestrian is sometimes protected from traffic only by virtue of the general requirement that it should give precedence to pedestrians. The actual signals given, even for the same circumstances, vary considerably. This is a problem which is at present under international review. We hope it will be possible to achieve a greater measure of international standardization of signals and their meanings. Whatever signals are eventually adopted inter nationally, however, we think the equivalent of the Cross signal should continue to be given by a white, rather than a green, signal since there is risk that a green signal could be seen by drivers and mistakenly interpreted to refer to them. We also think that whenever this signal appears pedestrians should be protected from vehicular traffic. We have used the word Cross in this paragraph but we recommend that in future its meaning should be conveyed by a symbol.

Where a turning movement is permitted by filter arrow it may be an advantage to provide guard rails in order to prevent pedestrians crossing at the mouth of the road. Where this is not practicable and a special pedestrian phase is not provided, pedestrians can be assisted if the stop line and the signals are moved 20-30 feet back from the pedestrian crossing so that they have this distance in which to see the movement of traffic about to turn. We would like to see more use made of this arrangement in the interests of pedestrians. At certain types of junctions where there is two-phase control, such as T junctions, staggered crossroads and junctions with one-way streets, we think that additional signals should more frequently be installed to ensure that pedestrians can see not only the signals controlling the traffic stream they are about to cross but also those for traffic flowing at right angles.

Where one-way systems have been introduced signal-heads facing the direction in which traffic no longer flows should be retained and their lenses masked to show only a cross so that pedestrians are warned before traffic starts to move again.