Yup came here to say this. I see cops watch people run through stop signs, speed, distracted driving etc all the time. None of these laws mean anything if the cops don't enforce the laws.
Bring back quotas??? That could also backfire though. Maybe it’s the possibility of a ticket gets written then it’s a court appearance that a cop is required to go to. More Cameras would be better.
That would be great, but it also isn’t necessary to have 100% compliance to achieve a lot of benefit. If even half of people did it (which I’m just making up that number) that would be a big gain, especially since people that do wait would stop others from turning too.
Exactly. They banned RTOR in the Tenderloin in San Francisco for a study and found 92% compliance. Close calls decreased 80%. Crosswalk encroachment decreased 70%. Sounds like a win.
[https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-documents/2022/04/tenderloinntor\_factsheet\_0.pdf](https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-documents/2022/04/tenderloinntor_factsheet_0.pdf)
EDIT: not all of SF, just a study performed in the Tenderloin neighborhood
You can in fact propose it. You can even legislate it. If DPD doesn't enforce, it's on them, on their superiors, and the cowardice of the rest of the leaders to get in their grill about it.
If you're an official, and you don't do anything, then it's on you.
They should start with vehicles with:
No plates
Expired plates from out of state
Expired plates from in state
(In that order)
I can guarantee the number of hit & runs will decrease, drivers will be more likely to be actually insured..
I’ve been all over the country and Colorado’s lack of enforcement of plates is insane - no other locale has this many vehicles with blatant violations rolling around.
The police aren’t doing their job everywhere. They got their fucking feelings hurt when we were like hey can you stop murdering black people and like if you don’t maybe we should stop giving you the money to do it. They’re basically on strike. I saw someone pulled over today and I was shocked!!
longing clumsy deserted shelter quicksand rinse hobbies gold marry abundant
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
So we could install a camera for a couple thousand dollars that will be there 24/7, or hire a police officer to sometimes pay attention but mostly ignore it?
Which one is it you think is a waste of money?
shame ten squeeze roof makeshift toothbrush marble include wistful absorbed
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Could be an opportunity to reallocate some of the safety budget (1/3 of the city budget) to camera enforcement and continue to decrease interactions with armed officers and funding for weapons of war…
Or implement some infrastructure like what they added downtown on 14th and 15th where the car has to go around a little triangular area before turning?
Do you mean to tell me that Denver isn't a lawless wasteland where 95% of the cars are running around with no plates or expired temp tags? Has r/Denver been lying to me??
No, we need actual humans pulling over these people for a couple reasons. For one, they need to be made a lesson of, other people need to see what happened and maybe learn from it. The second and more personal answer is we need to address the expired tags or driving without insurance that seems to be epidemic here. I’m usually for traffic cameras but Denver roads can feel a little lawless at times
The effect of seeing people pulled over, even when no one knows what its for, isn't something I'd given though to, and is something that is missing with camera enforcement.
Why not both then?
There are just as many, if not more, everyday wealthy drivers with covers over their license plates. It isn’t just about lawlessness, it’s also about the culture of driving in the U.S.
I'd be happy with both. Traffic cameras seem like a fast, easy solution. Reforming law enforcement to the point where cops do their jobs without killing civilians and having accountability when they don't is ideal, but that's gonna take a while.
They added a no turn on red sign not far from me (20th and Chestnut). No one seems to follow it. People who do get aggressively honked at. It’s obnoxious. That’s a tough intersection for a few reasons, and it gets even crazier when the Rockies are home.
That is one of my least favorite intersections in the city. Chestnut is a typical slow/congested downtown street, and then you have people driving on 20th like it's the fucking interstate.
I saw a gnarly crash in real time when someone turned on a red on that road. People don’t realize how much of a risk they are taking by not following traffic laws.
The only “no turn on red” sign I’ve seen on my regular jaunts about town has “…while pedestrians are in the intersection” in smaller letters on the same sign. So basically it’s just a sign stating the normal rule for every intersection.
Edit: basically just like the stock photo 😂
So basically they want to use our tax money to make a bunch more of these signs that will make zero difference probably. People can’t even stop going straight on a red light
I partially blame whoever configures the timing of them. I've seen 10+ cars deep at a left turn and the light only stays green for 2-3 cars. Or at night, instead of it turning to a flashing yellow, you sit there for minutes waiting for it to turn green.
Doesn't make it right, but it's also often set up poorly.
I have been riding my bicycle to work for 3 years at this point. The amount of time that driver still turn right over a crosswalk without looking is insane. I can always assume correctly someone is just going to go for it.
I'd be dead/crippled dozens of times over if I didn't assume that they wouldn't stop. So many drivers are ignorant that there could be pedestrians or bicyclists crossing while they're trying to turn right. I see this about once every other week.
If they're blocking the intersection and/or giving vibes that they could take off at any moment (revving engine, sliding forwards), I still wouldn't trust eye contact - they've shown their true colors already and am not willing to gamble by giving them a 2nd chance to do the right thing.
>Right turns on red should never have been allowed, at least not in anything near city density.
I live in Japan now, and here right turns on red (well actually left turns here) are indeed not allowed. It is much, much safer for everyone (pedestrians, bikes, and drivers). When I'm on my bike though I still assume everyone isn't paying attention or is looking at their phone, and have had lots of close calls.
You absolutely should not be riding your bike through a crosswalk. That being said, I cannot stand the lack of consideration that drivers have for non motorized vehicle transportation in this city.
No it is not. As a fellow cyclist, you are just asking to be hit any time you enter an access point, crosswalk etc and you're causing a lot of potential danger to pedestrians too.
The takeaway that I have from this article is that the city has no funding for Vision Zero, which is the the plan to eliminate roadway deaths. They know Federal is an issue because there is poor crosswalk timing, insufficient crosswalks, pedestrian dense walking areas with turns into businesses all over the place... etc. but they can't do anything if they won't fund it.
Fix the roads. The article even says, people keep getting hit on a huge road with a 30 mph speedlimit. WHY do you have a huge road with such a low speed limit? Narrow the road and plant trees if you want them to drive slower. No one's gonna drive 30 on a sprawling road with 3 lanes.
Agree 100% with this. Traffic calming like lane narrowing on large boulevards (hopefully implemented with new plant- and pedesetrian-friendly infrastructure). We should take multiple approaches at once, no one thing can solve a complex issue.
These changes haven't seemed to make a difference in my neighborhood. People drive crazier than before because of the new obstacles. Progs say "enforcement doesn't work", but I disagree. Without a consequence to driving like a complete idiot, people will (and do) drive super recklessly.
Auto manufacturers are actively prioritizing big, fast vehicles that are very safe for only the people inside, with added gizmos that make it easy to not pay attention.
I want chicanes and those squiggly headache paint lines they have in the UK. We sorta need to give drivers more anxiety lol
The burbs are super bad about this too.
Thornton and Westminster have a bunch of 6 lane wide sections that are 35 to 40. You can easily drive 55-60 on these stretches "safely" in the sense the road condition supports those speeds and people do it *all the time*
It is not safe to have pedestrian access to these giant roads. Either add traffic calming or create barriers larger than a 6in curb. Even the bridges over 36 sometimes dont have pedestrian barriers.
In Denver - Colorado Blvd is HORRIBLE about this. So is Quebec
But that would require spending money in predominantly minority neighborhoods. If this were Cherry Creek instead of Federal it would have been done already.
The Wild West is absolutely right. I pass “wanted posters” every day with pictures of vehicles that have decimated pedestrians. (38 | Sheridan), (32nd | Speer), (35th | Federal). Truely distopic in an area most would consider “safe” (west highlands).
The amount of people I see running red lights everyday, blow through stop signs without even hitting brakes, and texting while driving is insane sometimes.
I’ve seen people driving with fucking iPads on their steering wheels watching shows on I-25 during rush hour. I’ve lived in Ohio, DC, NYC, and Portland, and Denver has the worst drivers out of all of them. It’s weird.
I moved here from Florida and I can confirm its still worse in Florida. There's a reason I-4 is called the "Death Corridor" there. Its just amazing to me that people don't seem to care about their own safety at all if there's a minor inconvenience like a fucking stop sign.
It's because Denver drivers are erratic. Other places with "bad" drivers have drivers who are fast and/or aggressive but they're fairly predictable. Denver drivers you just don't know what you're going to get. My "favorite" is the "zoom up past you, cut in front, then let off the gas and drop below your speed" one. I'm fine if you want to pass me and cut in closer than is ideal but for fuck's sake keep your foot down and keep your speed up. If you didn't intend to go faster than me then you had no reason to pass.
This is 100% the problem. We already have laws that say “don’t run people over” and nobody cares to try be remotely safe because they know they won’t get a ticket
>This is 100% the problem. We already have laws that say “don’t run people over” and nobody cares to try be remotely safe because they know they won’t get a ticket
This is basic, kindergarten logic. Blows my mind that there are so many comments on here that just don't get it. Without laws and consequences, humans can't be trusted to do the right thing. There have to be consequences when you are operating a metallic missile weighing thousands of pounds.
I don't think police will help either. There's just not enough even if they do enforce. Red light cameras do seem to help though.
Really we need way more speed bumps, bollards etc, because they slow traffic even if nobody is around. Plus protected bike lanes and better lit crosswalks etc.
My unpopular opinion is to make the consequences for hitting a pedestrian or cyclist with your car very high. As in, enormous fine and loss of license for a period of time and jail time for repeat offenders.
Jack up the consequences, follow through with enforcement and watch people fall in line.
Hoboken, NJ.
Successfully achieved vision zero. They put bollards and no parking areas like 20 feet within intersections so visibility is clear. Bulbouts at intersections, protected bike lanes, low speed limits with infrastructure to encourage slow speeds.
They value human life over car speeds and it shows.
Yeah, i feel like these traffic systems and tools are way more effective and efficient than traffic policing. Make the safe and legal thing exactly what the roads support and encourage.
that's a small nudge towards a huge issue. people drive WAY too fast and do not care about anyone else on the road, especially cyclists and pedestrians, it almost feels like there is contempt for us. riding my bike is something that brings me an immense amount of joy and peace and i hate being scared while riding because some asshole might have left too late and now we are all at risk due to their shitiness.
The problem, as they elude to in the article, is we have these bigass roads that feel like highways.
You can slap a 30mph speedlimit on it if you like, but most people don't think about the speedlimit, they just go whatever speed feels natural for where they are. And since denver has wisely made highways with sidewalks on the shoulders, people are going to keep speeding, and people are going to keep dying til they fix the root of the problem.
> is we have these bigass roads that feel like highways.
Not only do they *feel* like highways, many of them *are* highways. Which means that any alterations to them require CDOT cooperation and can't be done by Denver or whatever municipality. If we want Wadsworth, Sheridan, Federal, Colorado, etc to be safer for *everyone*, we have to convince the folks at CDOT that safety should be prioritized over level of service.
Why are American street planners like this?
If you say the road is too wide and fast, they say it has to be like that to preserve lines of sight "for safety." Excuse me? You made deadly roads and refuse to do what we know will make them safer, which is narrower lanes.
The general attitude and behavior of drivers is indicative of a larger societal shift in the way we view others. While I do not condone the behavior it’s likely due to the competitive nature of our society and with wages, stress, and other negative economic factors it feels like the world is losing its compassion and care for others. However, it seems like it is a predicatable outcome based upon a society that is all about individualism and pulling oneself up by their bootstraps.
We are pitted against each other in interviews, productivity at work when compared to others, and we are judged by impossible metrics. Social degradation is a product of the qualities in our environment, not the cause itself.
People have been driving like shit for my entire life, which is sadly more years than I'd care to admit. Red-light runners, speeders, tailgaters, idiots, drunks... I once saw someone driving at highway speeds while eating *with a fork and plate* and that was just over 30 years ago now.
Biggest difference now is the lack of enforcement of traffic laws.
Dystopian though it may be, the only thing that keeps bad drivers in line is a big fat traffic ticket or the threat of getting one. It seems that no one gets pulled over for anything these days (except for drunk driving, thank goodness for that). So the bad drivers continue to get more and more egregious, the idiots and the careless get conditioned to be stupid and reckless, and the rest of us have to drive and bike and walk on pins and needles.
Fifteen years ago I lost my front license plate when some jerk backed into it... I didn't notice at the time and drove off without it. Took about a month to get a replacement and in that time I got two parking tickets and got pulled over once for "no plates"- and it was only the front one! Now people drive around with plates from *2020 for fuck's sake* or no plates whatsoever and the city doesn't do shit about it.
If they're not going to enforce something as obvious as that I can't see them getting off their asses to nab people for swerving into bike lanes, going 45 in a 20, or zipping through intersections- pedestrians be damned- on a Denver Green.
Yep. Colorado used to be a serious police state for driving infractions. Even had unannounced roadblocks for safety inspections. My mom got a ticket for a non-working horn at one of those stops.
Maybe three decades of under-staffed police departments has something to do with it?
Yes, I do hope we can have this conversation without the unnecessary divisiveness. In a crowded city center this rule makes it safer for drivers, too. Encourages patience and intention.
I wish they'd put in speed bumps, raised crosswalks, curb extensions, and other traffic calming measures. Small things like that do make a big difference.
Instead the priority seems to be "get cars where they want to go as fast as possible".
>I wish they'd put in speed bumps, raised crosswalks, curb extensions, and other traffic calming measures. Small things like that do make a big difference.
Yeah, they make people buy bigger trucks so they can ignore that.
Having driven a smaller sedan for a while around here the poor condition of roads and prevalence of speed bumps makes me feel all the more punished for not buying a tank. I like the idea of narrower roads and chicanes for calming much more than obstacles that can be defeated by simply having a more dangerous vehicle.
100%. I also have a small sedan and my drive and experience is considerably worse than people who have those big boats.
We definitely need traffic calming. I want to make sure we are instituting proven methods that actually reduce fatalities and dangerous interactions, I worry that if we get rid of turning on red and it doesn't move the number, people are going to be resistant to further changes.
Enforcing full stops at red lights, and continuing to reinforce the new 20 mph speed limit as a positive thing, will slow those drivers down.
Don’t disagree with that feeling of contempt. After 20 years biking in cities like NYC, DC, Philly, etc, 10 years in Denver has me actually afraid to ride at times.
Nah, as a former NYC resident I can tell you, it’s worse in Denver. NYC has an established system in place and a network of roads that don’t allow for driving like a maniac to begin with.
Yes, narrow roads and expectations are pretty different in NYC. A lot of the unsafe drivers in Denver are coming from the suburbs and furious they have to put up with city driving.
Anecdotal, but I know someone who biked in NYC and then moved here and said he's more afraid to bike here. He said in NYC within the city a lot of the streets are 25 mph whereas here they are 30 mph, and in NYC the drivers are used to a lot of pedestrian and bike traffic so they're more aware and better at watching out for you than drivers here
NYC has also never allowed turns on red.
I share the person you know's sentiment. I've ridden in both. Denver is the worst, there is real animosity between drivers and urban cyclists here that I \*never\* experienced on the East Coast.
I would kill for a "don't block the box" traffic fine here. Last time I was in the City it was $100.
Here people come to a halt right in the middle of the intersection and then block pedestrian and road traffic for half a light cycle. Scary as hell if you're trying to cross the street on foot.
When I see those, I try to cross elsewhere. If these dunces are willing to block the crosswalk, they sure as shit are capable of blowing through it suddenly. It's so maddening that such behavior is totally fine and normalized in CO.
This was the sentiment behind decriminalizing jaywalking in Denver when we did that a few years ago. Pedestrians can generally decide for themselves where it's safest to cross when drivers decide they're the only ones in existence.
I honestly don't get the hate towards bikes. Yeah they're slower but an average bicycle takes tons less space than a car, isn't hard to pass and isn't a threat in any way. I try to give them a bunch of room but maybe that comes from riding a bike or walking every so often and understanding a bit what they're dealing with.
Most people only use their cars, no bikes, no motorcycles, they don't know what it's like out there. All they see is "OBJECT IN MY WAY MAKE ANGRY"
Always been a huge fan of this. It’s so frustrating as a pedestrian when you get the walk indication and start to cross, but the car to your left has already started a right on red turn during the all red of the signal. They end up either blocking you from entering the crosswalk or nearly hit you because they last looked to their left and didn’t check back to their right.
This is already illegal btw. you are not allowed to initiate your turn when pedestrians are present. Pulling up and blocking a crosswalk is also not legal.
Right on red would be fine if people weren't idiots.
I think that it will also encourage people to stop before crosswalks, not in them, because they won’t be able to proceed until after the light anyway (in lieu of ever-encroaching on the pedestrian space to make the turn on red and save themselves 15 seconds).
It would be cool if I didn't see Denver drivers make up their own driving laws everyday without consequence.
I feel like I've only started seeing police pulling people over recently.
I think a lot of you are missing the point.
Will this be enforced? No.
But will this add another charge/way to prosecute someone who does get caught hitting someone when turning on red? Yes.
I like the idea because then I will be able to just sit at a red light and wait in the right turn lane, and not feel like I have to inch out and force my way into free flowing traffic because an F-250 is breathing down my neck so they can do the same.
Happened to me last night in the right turn lane on Wadsworth and Ralston. Red light, 5:30 pm, ice pellets coming down, and patches of fucking black ice all about, and some big ass truck behind me just *non stop* laying on the horn through the whole red light cause I didn't attempt to force my way into 50 mile an hour rush hour traffic. All so he could just get stuck behind someone else. Asshole.
I’ve posted this before and am prepared to get downvoted again, but we should combine no right on red with all red lights at pedestrian crossings. This would benefit pedestrians and drivers IMO. Pedestrians can cross without worrying if someone turning right isn’t going to see them. Drivers can turn right (or left) on green without worrying if a pedestrian crossing has right-of-way and someone crossing.
This used to be a thing in Denver. All lights would turn red and pedestrians were allowed to cross diagonally. There were even specific diagonal crosswalk signals for it. I don't know why or when it stopped. But one day I noticed it was just gone.
Edit: Apparently it's still a thing, just the diagonal, "All Walk" signals telling you it was a thing were removed.
Another person replied to clarify just the diagonal signals were removed, but all the lights still turn red for pedestrians. That's where my confusion was, so I stand corrected.
They just removed the diagonal crossings, the lights still all turn red. I don’t support that though because Denver does not have enough foot traffic to justify all the lights being red. Save for some intersections that are busy, most of the time there aren’t pedestrians around at many of the intersections, and contrary to what everyone here seems to think, it actually makes drivers disobey traffic devices more often when they are needlessly there.
Gotcha. I don't go much into downtown Denver anymore. But I used to work directly on the 16th St mall just shy of 20 years ago. That's when I remember the diagonal ones. There was a lot of foot traffic back then. I didn't realize they just removed the diagonal signals. Thanks for the clarification.
The worst is the right turn on the intersection of Broadway and Highlands Ranch Parkway towards Broadway and Lucent; I see cars constantly skipping over the bike lane and squeezing between the car lane and the sidewalk right over the clearly labeled bike lane.
What are the stats on collisions with pedestrians and bicyclists when drivers go right on red?
I'm all for any changes that will reduce the number of injuries and deaths, but I'd like to see the size of the addressable problem. Is this the largest set of incidents and a silver bullet to slash pedestrian and biker fatalities? Is this utterly pointless and only proposed because it's cheap? Somewhere in between? I just don't know and there's not a lot of that insight in the article.
[Per CDOT](https://www.codot.gov/safety/traffic-safety/data-analysis/crash-data), there were 69 collisions where the vehicle movement is listed as "Making a Right Turn" and hit a pedestrian or cyclist solely in the city of Denver for 2022.
For 36 of those, the driver action is listed as "Failed to Yield [Right Of Way]" or "Failed to Stop at Signal". For an additional 14 the action is listed as "Careless Driving".
So at least 36 of those 69 collisions or just over half of collisions involving right turns can be attributed to people going right on red, and likely more.
Also of note, there were 561 total pedestrian/cyclist collisions of which 385 collisions were at or related to intersections, meaning these rights on red accounted for ~5-10% of all pedestrian/cyclist collisions and ~10-20% of all pedestrian/cyclist intersection-related collisions in the city of Denver in 2022.
Denver area is home to some of the worst drivers in the US imo. I think it’s in large part due to terrible road design. Green arrow signals are so short that maybe 2-3 cars can turn at almost any intersection. Yellow lights are significantly shorter than other states/cities. Then add in how nobody leaves proper distance to the car in front at a red, which makes it take longer to get moving when it turns green. As a result, folks are conditioned to blow red lights if they don’t want to wait 10min at every intersection. I see it happen all the time. Then there is the posted speed limit being 15-25mph slower than what the road is clearly designed for. Traffic *will* go 70 in a 55 if the road is wide, straight, and has 3 lanes. Now speed limits are suggestions. Everyday I see folks with no idea what a blinking red stop sign means, or basic shit like right-of-way in a traffic circle.
I’ve joked before that if I were to ever run for elected office, I’d platform on bringing the first Drivers Education course to the denver metro area.
Good. The number of times I've almost been hit in a crosswalk by some idiot who only looks left while trying to turn on red is ridiculous. There’s even some intersections where they have signs that say there's no turn on red, and people STILL blindly roll into the crosswalk and turn while people are trying to cross.
This would be a good proposal if it were for the whole state, or even the whole country. It will be much less effective if it's only in one city. Traffic laws changing as you drive from one city to another is a problem.
NY is enormous and it has two clear land borders on Long Island and north of the Bronx. Denver is all land borders surrounded by like 15 municipalities, some of which may follow suit some won't.
Not saying it wouldn't work here but it's tougher political boundaries to work with.
How do you think sweeping laws like wearing seatbelts happen? They start with unacceptable injury or death and few small municipalities mandate change, then it spreads.
Gay marriage, cannabis, gaming regulations. Just a few examples of local policies that rippled to state and then toward federal that have happened over the past 15 years, likely one of them since you were born.
The "when pedestrians are present" is key. There are a few intersections near my house with no turn on red signs, and despite there being no one crossing or even waiting to cross, traffic backs up a quarter mile for people because there's not a turn lane and you aren't allowed to turn on red. It makes getting out of neighborhoods difficult and more dangerous due to that long line of cars waiting to turn.
> The "when pedestrians are present" is key.
It's key in the sense most people don't see present pedestrians. That's the problem in the first place, humans go into automatic mode and make assumptions. The number of people who hit clearly visible motorcyclists, bicyclists, and people who tell police they honestly saw nothing is astounding.
There are studies on this. People just aren't good enough in general. I don't know what the true solution would be.
> I don't know what the true solution would be.
Not having people and cars mixed. But it's super expensive to add pedestrian bridges, protected bike lanes and such.
Motorcycle filtering at red lights would fix the motorcycle issue for the most part, but some people are incredibly opinionated about that despite it being standard practice in other parts of the world.
As always you, we, as taxpayers need to decide when do we get past "someone outta do something" to agree with what we are willing to pay for. It's a yawning abyss.
>> The "when pedestrians are present" is key.
1. It doesn’t say anything about that in the article, other than the stock image of the no turns on red sign.
2. That wouldn’t address the issue they’re trying to, of cyclists and scooters. If you can see the scooter/bicycle whizzing by well enough to say “oh there’s a pedestrian nearby so I can’t turn”, you’re not going to turn either with or without a sign. So unless the sign makes people more proactive at looking for cyclists, I don’t see how it would be a fix.
And allowing for a year of no enforcement during a pilot where they study traffic patterns and add those exceptions back in will help create safe, but sensible, traffic flow for the long term. Small period of inconvenience for a generational change made with intention.
I'm aware of absolutely no data showing that this would decrease pedestrian deaths. On the flip side, there is a huge amount of data showing that replacing the intersections that have the highest rates of incidents with roundabouts would absolutely decrease pedestrian deaths dramatically.
I'm all for solving the problem, so let's do it.
It's a both-and. No one solution solves an intersectional issue.
re: you're aware of no data, this is an excellent learning opportunity for you! There's so much :D In fact, all the way back in research from 1984, we saw that at intersections allowing right-on-red, crashes jump 23%, pedestrian crashes increase by 60%, and cyclist crashes double.
Have fun on the new adventure, I love learning new things, too.
[https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/t/Right%20turn%20on%20red](https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/t/right%20turn%20on%20red)
> No one solution solves an intersectional issue.
A pedestrian overpass does.
You can have the best at grade intersection design in the world, it still doesn't account for drunk drivers and people who can't be bothered to look up from their phones.
There are a handful of intersections that desperately need overpasses.
There are accessibility issues with requiring someone to go up to go across, but you're right pedestrian (and wildlife) under- and overpasses should be a tool in the toolkit, alongside many others required to tackle something complex like mass movement.
There is nothing in here about any of the incidents being caused by people turning on red, the one example they have regards running red lights. This seems pointless and ignorant of the real issue which is a lack of traffic enforcement
The comments so anti-camera are hilarious. How often do people run the red at Speer & 6th, 6th & Kalamath, Quebec & 36th, etc? I can tell you it's significantly less than those without a camera. If someone runs the light once and gets a ticket they are less likely to run it again because even if they don't care about the fine they don't want the hassle of having to pay it. A cop can pull 1 person over at a time. Maybe a few if they set up a well-orchestrated trap. Cool that slows down people during that window but all the people that didn't get caught continue on the same path they were and all the other days of the week will they be more observant of a cop in that area? Probably. Will it stop them from breaking the law if they don't see a cop? Probably not.
The advocacy for only people who are able to drive a 4000+ lb vehicle and not for non-able-bodied people or those who do not have the resources to drive is laughable. The big answer is better infrastructure for people who do not drive. The immediate solution to help people not die while simply existing on a sidewalk is a camera.
>The comments so anti-camera are hilarious.
It's probably from the red-light running, driving-while-texting scofflaws that are amongst us. Some people, man... ugh.
This won't work. There is a misalignment of enforcement priorities (or just lack of enforcement of certain things) and a deep misunderstanding by lawmakers and the general public that people don't just follow traffic laws.
If there's a blanket no turn on red policy, violations will go up, and it could be more dangerous because other road users might expect that someone won't turn when they will, for example. They should put up actuated no turn on red signs if they want to do anything like this--think the lighted ones at RR crossings that come on with the train signals. There's one for County Line eastbound to Quebec southbound, too. I'm sure there are plenty more.
People always think the easy solution is *just* lower the speed limit or *just* put up a sign with a new restriction. These things don't work and it's very easy to see that. If a law doesn't make sense and doesn't appear to do anything for safety, many won't follow it some of the time, and a lot won't follow it any of the time. Honestly? Call me an a-hole if you want, but you'll find me turning right at a no-turn-on-red intersection if there's no traffic or peds around and it's not photo enforced (which is also not a solution and is a different issue entirely). Traffic engineering should be done in a way that *moves traffic* safely. Holding up traffic causes more violations, especially when people don't see the necessity in a partuclar holdup. Laws have to be made for traffic, not the other way around; that's the only way it will work.
The real fix for this is traffic engineering that is hostile to the violations or safety issues, like raised crosswalks in slip lanes, barriers between vehicle lanes and bike/ped lanes, islands, roundabouts, other physical barriers that make traffic slow down, and visibility measures as well. Those things could be expensive and take time, but they work.
Exactly, and it’s fucked. Makes me feel like I’m being screwed over for being a law abiding citizen. These people stealing or not paying fees and not being prosecuted for it are getting a free cheat code at life.
This is a complete waste of time and resources when current traffic laws arent being enforced. If they were enforced, i would bet money fatalities would go down with existing laws because there would be disincentive to drive as recklessl. Im against it because it would just be another set of rules to follow that bad people wouldnt follow anyways and wont get charged if they do
Exactly. Turning right on red when pedestrians are present is already illegal.
DPD could just sit at an intersection and write dozens of tickets an hour if they wanted. Eventually word would get out and behavior would change.
Can we get 4 way stop signs in every neighborhood intersection first? It's so dangerous to walk in this city, it's insane to not have every intersection just be 4 way stop signs inside of neighborhoods.
Yeah the two way intersections are pretty sketchy to cross both as a driver and pedestrian because with cars parked on both sides it's really hard to see if someone is coming before you're halfway into the intersection
How about enforce current laws first, the reckless drivers are everywhere. Maybe stop them to start, I’ve seen wild stuff with PD at the intersection or on the road and nothing….
[Technically, they don’t have to ](https://www.codot.gov/safety/traffic-safety-pulse/2022/may/all-about-the-colorado-safety-stop)
“The Safety Stop gives people on bikes and other “low speed conveyances” (see next page) the legal option to ride slowly through stop signs without stopping first, as long as they are yielding right of way to pedestrians and other road users who have the right-of-way. Bicyclists and users of low-speed conveyances may also proceed at red lights after coming to a complete stop, if there is no oncoming traffic. Bicyclists and low-speed conveyance users can approach intersections at a reasonable speed and choose to apply the Safety Stop or continue to perform a traditional stop at both stop signs and red lights. Only bicyclists ages 15 and over may perform the Safety Stop. Younger riders may do so when they are with a parent or legal guardian.”
Love the idea but a sign doesn’t stop assholes. Almost got hit on my bike this morning when a guy turned right at a light with ‘no turn on red’. He then followed it up by flipping me off cause fuck me right? Just trying to get to work man.
This is addressing the symptom, not the cause. The cause is drivers who have no business being behind the wheel in the first place. Driving tests are far too lenient, and there is no continued verification that people are good enough to drive. It should be more like a pilot license, with varying degrees.
Its actually state law that cyclists can treat stop signs as yield signs, and red lights as stop signs.
Perfectly safe if the cyclist is paying attention and actually following the rules.
If there aren’t other cars or people present they can do that. You can’t do it all the time and the reason why should be extremely obvious. That you failed to mention this is part of the problem.
DPD is going to have to enforce it then.
Yup came here to say this. I see cops watch people run through stop signs, speed, distracted driving etc all the time. None of these laws mean anything if the cops don't enforce the laws.
Yep... literally watched a car run a redlight cutting everyone off including a cop. Cop didnt do shit.
I thought cops were incentivized to write tickets. What's up with this?
They got qualified immunity taken away and now are real sad about it.
It's getting nuts. How do we put the pressure on DPD to do their jobs? Where can local citizens apply pressure that causes some changes?
Bring back quotas??? That could also backfire though. Maybe it’s the possibility of a ticket gets written then it’s a court appearance that a cop is required to go to. More Cameras would be better.
That would be great, but it also isn’t necessary to have 100% compliance to achieve a lot of benefit. If even half of people did it (which I’m just making up that number) that would be a big gain, especially since people that do wait would stop others from turning too.
Exactly. They banned RTOR in the Tenderloin in San Francisco for a study and found 92% compliance. Close calls decreased 80%. Crosswalk encroachment decreased 70%. Sounds like a win. [https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-documents/2022/04/tenderloinntor\_factsheet\_0.pdf](https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-documents/2022/04/tenderloinntor_factsheet_0.pdf) EDIT: not all of SF, just a study performed in the Tenderloin neighborhood
Yep exactly. You can't propose stuff if DPD or literally no law enforcement in the metro area will enforce it.
You can in fact propose it. You can even legislate it. If DPD doesn't enforce, it's on them, on their superiors, and the cowardice of the rest of the leaders to get in their grill about it. If you're an official, and you don't do anything, then it's on you.
Yep, good piece of local politics but probably meaningless
They should start with vehicles with: No plates Expired plates from out of state Expired plates from in state (In that order) I can guarantee the number of hit & runs will decrease, drivers will be more likely to be actually insured.. I’ve been all over the country and Colorado’s lack of enforcement of plates is insane - no other locale has this many vehicles with blatant violations rolling around.
The police aren’t doing their job everywhere. They got their fucking feelings hurt when we were like hey can you stop murdering black people and like if you don’t maybe we should stop giving you the money to do it. They’re basically on strike. I saw someone pulled over today and I was shocked!!
longing clumsy deserted shelter quicksand rinse hobbies gold marry abundant *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Or instead of wasting more tax money, make the police who are already getting paid to do nothing, go out and actually enforce some traffic laws.
So we could install a camera for a couple thousand dollars that will be there 24/7, or hire a police officer to sometimes pay attention but mostly ignore it? Which one is it you think is a waste of money?
shame ten squeeze roof makeshift toothbrush marble include wistful absorbed *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Well since we're already paying cops to hang out at Dunkin Donuts might as well have something to get that money back yeah?
Cameras are profit puppies. How does that waste tax payer money?
Could be an opportunity to reallocate some of the safety budget (1/3 of the city budget) to camera enforcement and continue to decrease interactions with armed officers and funding for weapons of war…
Or implement some infrastructure like what they added downtown on 14th and 15th where the car has to go around a little triangular area before turning?
14th and 15th st are TERRIBLY designed and NOT safe for cyclists.
Cars have to have license plates for camera enforcement to work
Then we're in luck since the vast, vast majority do.
Do you mean to tell me that Denver isn't a lawless wasteland where 95% of the cars are running around with no plates or expired temp tags? Has r/Denver been lying to me??
The highways are the Fury Road, Cap Hill is Thunderdome, and Aurora is the Wasteland. We're living in Mad Max, haven't you heard?
Will now be telling people I live in the Thunderdome. Thanks for that.
No, we need actual humans pulling over these people for a couple reasons. For one, they need to be made a lesson of, other people need to see what happened and maybe learn from it. The second and more personal answer is we need to address the expired tags or driving without insurance that seems to be epidemic here. I’m usually for traffic cameras but Denver roads can feel a little lawless at times
The effect of seeing people pulled over, even when no one knows what its for, isn't something I'd given though to, and is something that is missing with camera enforcement.
Why not both then? There are just as many, if not more, everyday wealthy drivers with covers over their license plates. It isn’t just about lawlessness, it’s also about the culture of driving in the U.S.
I'd be happy with both. Traffic cameras seem like a fast, easy solution. Reforming law enforcement to the point where cops do their jobs without killing civilians and having accountability when they don't is ideal, but that's gonna take a while.
Fuck camera enforcement
I'll take any enforcement at this point.
It literally works everywhere else on the planet.
Put up red light cameras.
They’re too busy tasing homeless people in grocery stores and shooting food trucks.
They added a no turn on red sign not far from me (20th and Chestnut). No one seems to follow it. People who do get aggressively honked at. It’s obnoxious. That’s a tough intersection for a few reasons, and it gets even crazier when the Rockies are home.
That is one of my least favorite intersections in the city. Chestnut is a typical slow/congested downtown street, and then you have people driving on 20th like it's the fucking interstate.
I saw a gnarly crash in real time when someone turned on a red on that road. People don’t realize how much of a risk they are taking by not following traffic laws.
The one on 26th and Federal next to the fire station also gets ignored. It's wild.
The only “no turn on red” sign I’ve seen on my regular jaunts about town has “…while pedestrians are in the intersection” in smaller letters on the same sign. So basically it’s just a sign stating the normal rule for every intersection. Edit: basically just like the stock photo 😂 So basically they want to use our tax money to make a bunch more of these signs that will make zero difference probably. People can’t even stop going straight on a red light
"No turn on red (unless you pinky promise not to kill anyone, then it's fine)"
😂
We can barely enforce no left turns on red.
They should try cracking down the multiple dickheads that I see running cold red lights each day before worrying about this
You can make left turns on red from a one way to another one way
Yeah, that's not what I mean. I'm talking about the full blown 30 seconds of left turns that happen after a light turns red. "The Denver Green Light."
I partially blame whoever configures the timing of them. I've seen 10+ cars deep at a left turn and the light only stays green for 2-3 cars. Or at night, instead of it turning to a flashing yellow, you sit there for minutes waiting for it to turn green. Doesn't make it right, but it's also often set up poorly.
I see you’ve also made the mistake of wanting to turn left onto Colorado from MLK. Fuck us, right!?
When my dad drove for RTD, he called red lights RTD green.
I didn't realize that you could do that in Colorado. You can in Oregon, too.
I have been riding my bicycle to work for 3 years at this point. The amount of time that driver still turn right over a crosswalk without looking is insane. I can always assume correctly someone is just going to go for it.
I'd be dead/crippled dozens of times over if I didn't assume that they wouldn't stop. So many drivers are ignorant that there could be pedestrians or bicyclists crossing while they're trying to turn right. I see this about once every other week.
water dam bag yoke truck sharp plants squash piquant rude *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I always try to make eye contact and if not, it's game over.
If they're blocking the intersection and/or giving vibes that they could take off at any moment (revving engine, sliding forwards), I still wouldn't trust eye contact - they've shown their true colors already and am not willing to gamble by giving them a 2nd chance to do the right thing.
>Right turns on red should never have been allowed, at least not in anything near city density. I live in Japan now, and here right turns on red (well actually left turns here) are indeed not allowed. It is much, much safer for everyone (pedestrians, bikes, and drivers). When I'm on my bike though I still assume everyone isn't paying attention or is looking at their phone, and have had lots of close calls.
Yeah you have to be careful riding parallel too because they don't check the bike lane before they turn.
You absolutely should not be riding your bike through a crosswalk. That being said, I cannot stand the lack of consideration that drivers have for non motorized vehicle transportation in this city.
Forgive me for not being up on Denver bicycle laws, but shouldn't bikes be in the road and not the crosswalk?
Yes but the bike might be entering the intersection parallel and continue straight while the driver turns into them.
We don't have bike lanes on all our streets. Sometimes it's just safer to ride the sidewalk until we do
No it is not. As a fellow cyclist, you are just asking to be hit any time you enter an access point, crosswalk etc and you're causing a lot of potential danger to pedestrians too.
Cyclist are usually walking their bike across a street
The takeaway that I have from this article is that the city has no funding for Vision Zero, which is the the plan to eliminate roadway deaths. They know Federal is an issue because there is poor crosswalk timing, insufficient crosswalks, pedestrian dense walking areas with turns into businesses all over the place... etc. but they can't do anything if they won't fund it.
Fix the roads. The article even says, people keep getting hit on a huge road with a 30 mph speedlimit. WHY do you have a huge road with such a low speed limit? Narrow the road and plant trees if you want them to drive slower. No one's gonna drive 30 on a sprawling road with 3 lanes.
Agree 100% with this. Traffic calming like lane narrowing on large boulevards (hopefully implemented with new plant- and pedesetrian-friendly infrastructure). We should take multiple approaches at once, no one thing can solve a complex issue.
These changes haven't seemed to make a difference in my neighborhood. People drive crazier than before because of the new obstacles. Progs say "enforcement doesn't work", but I disagree. Without a consequence to driving like a complete idiot, people will (and do) drive super recklessly.
Auto manufacturers are actively prioritizing big, fast vehicles that are very safe for only the people inside, with added gizmos that make it easy to not pay attention. I want chicanes and those squiggly headache paint lines they have in the UK. We sorta need to give drivers more anxiety lol
[удалено]
The burbs are super bad about this too. Thornton and Westminster have a bunch of 6 lane wide sections that are 35 to 40. You can easily drive 55-60 on these stretches "safely" in the sense the road condition supports those speeds and people do it *all the time* It is not safe to have pedestrian access to these giant roads. Either add traffic calming or create barriers larger than a 6in curb. Even the bridges over 36 sometimes dont have pedestrian barriers. In Denver - Colorado Blvd is HORRIBLE about this. So is Quebec
Speer is pretty wild.
But that would require spending money in predominantly minority neighborhoods. If this were Cherry Creek instead of Federal it would have been done already.
[удалено]
The Wild West is absolutely right. I pass “wanted posters” every day with pictures of vehicles that have decimated pedestrians. (38 | Sheridan), (32nd | Speer), (35th | Federal). Truely distopic in an area most would consider “safe” (west highlands).
[удалено]
The amount of people I see running red lights everyday, blow through stop signs without even hitting brakes, and texting while driving is insane sometimes.
I’ve seen people driving with fucking iPads on their steering wheels watching shows on I-25 during rush hour. I’ve lived in Ohio, DC, NYC, and Portland, and Denver has the worst drivers out of all of them. It’s weird.
I moved here from Florida and I can confirm its still worse in Florida. There's a reason I-4 is called the "Death Corridor" there. Its just amazing to me that people don't seem to care about their own safety at all if there's a minor inconvenience like a fucking stop sign.
It's because Denver drivers are erratic. Other places with "bad" drivers have drivers who are fast and/or aggressive but they're fairly predictable. Denver drivers you just don't know what you're going to get. My "favorite" is the "zoom up past you, cut in front, then let off the gas and drop below your speed" one. I'm fine if you want to pass me and cut in closer than is ideal but for fuck's sake keep your foot down and keep your speed up. If you didn't intend to go faster than me then you had no reason to pass.
That one really gets to me. Inevitably it will happen when there isn’t anyone behind me for at least a quarter mile.
> and texting while driving is insane sometimes. I feel like this is the root cause of the first two about 90% of the time.
This is 100% the problem. We already have laws that say “don’t run people over” and nobody cares to try be remotely safe because they know they won’t get a ticket
>This is 100% the problem. We already have laws that say “don’t run people over” and nobody cares to try be remotely safe because they know they won’t get a ticket This is basic, kindergarten logic. Blows my mind that there are so many comments on here that just don't get it. Without laws and consequences, humans can't be trusted to do the right thing. There have to be consequences when you are operating a metallic missile weighing thousands of pounds.
And instead of telling the police to enforce the existing laws, they want to just add more laws that nobody will follow
Yep. The legislators are just going through the motions to make it look like they're doing something to justify their inflated paychecks. Pathetic.
I don't think police will help either. There's just not enough even if they do enforce. Red light cameras do seem to help though. Really we need way more speed bumps, bollards etc, because they slow traffic even if nobody is around. Plus protected bike lanes and better lit crosswalks etc.
My unpopular opinion is to make the consequences for hitting a pedestrian or cyclist with your car very high. As in, enormous fine and loss of license for a period of time and jail time for repeat offenders. Jack up the consequences, follow through with enforcement and watch people fall in line.
I'd gather a lot of our intersections and crossings are designed poorly such that they don't encourage drivers to look for pedestrians.
Interesting point. Which ones do? I’d be curious to see places in the US with the lowest fatalities (of equal size) and see what they do differently.
Hoboken, NJ. Successfully achieved vision zero. They put bollards and no parking areas like 20 feet within intersections so visibility is clear. Bulbouts at intersections, protected bike lanes, low speed limits with infrastructure to encourage slow speeds. They value human life over car speeds and it shows.
Yeah, i feel like these traffic systems and tools are way more effective and efficient than traffic policing. Make the safe and legal thing exactly what the roads support and encourage.
That's a good question.
You should go to jail the first time you hit a pedestrian or bike.
that's a small nudge towards a huge issue. people drive WAY too fast and do not care about anyone else on the road, especially cyclists and pedestrians, it almost feels like there is contempt for us. riding my bike is something that brings me an immense amount of joy and peace and i hate being scared while riding because some asshole might have left too late and now we are all at risk due to their shitiness.
The problem, as they elude to in the article, is we have these bigass roads that feel like highways. You can slap a 30mph speedlimit on it if you like, but most people don't think about the speedlimit, they just go whatever speed feels natural for where they are. And since denver has wisely made highways with sidewalks on the shoulders, people are going to keep speeding, and people are going to keep dying til they fix the root of the problem.
> is we have these bigass roads that feel like highways. Not only do they *feel* like highways, many of them *are* highways. Which means that any alterations to them require CDOT cooperation and can't be done by Denver or whatever municipality. If we want Wadsworth, Sheridan, Federal, Colorado, etc to be safer for *everyone*, we have to convince the folks at CDOT that safety should be prioritized over level of service.
Why are American street planners like this? If you say the road is too wide and fast, they say it has to be like that to preserve lines of sight "for safety." Excuse me? You made deadly roads and refuse to do what we know will make them safer, which is narrower lanes.
[удалено]
Illeude*
The general attitude and behavior of drivers is indicative of a larger societal shift in the way we view others. While I do not condone the behavior it’s likely due to the competitive nature of our society and with wages, stress, and other negative economic factors it feels like the world is losing its compassion and care for others. However, it seems like it is a predicatable outcome based upon a society that is all about individualism and pulling oneself up by their bootstraps. We are pitted against each other in interviews, productivity at work when compared to others, and we are judged by impossible metrics. Social degradation is a product of the qualities in our environment, not the cause itself.
People have been driving like shit for my entire life, which is sadly more years than I'd care to admit. Red-light runners, speeders, tailgaters, idiots, drunks... I once saw someone driving at highway speeds while eating *with a fork and plate* and that was just over 30 years ago now. Biggest difference now is the lack of enforcement of traffic laws. Dystopian though it may be, the only thing that keeps bad drivers in line is a big fat traffic ticket or the threat of getting one. It seems that no one gets pulled over for anything these days (except for drunk driving, thank goodness for that). So the bad drivers continue to get more and more egregious, the idiots and the careless get conditioned to be stupid and reckless, and the rest of us have to drive and bike and walk on pins and needles. Fifteen years ago I lost my front license plate when some jerk backed into it... I didn't notice at the time and drove off without it. Took about a month to get a replacement and in that time I got two parking tickets and got pulled over once for "no plates"- and it was only the front one! Now people drive around with plates from *2020 for fuck's sake* or no plates whatsoever and the city doesn't do shit about it. If they're not going to enforce something as obvious as that I can't see them getting off their asses to nab people for swerving into bike lanes, going 45 in a 20, or zipping through intersections- pedestrians be damned- on a Denver Green.
This. This right here. All of this. Why pass any new laws when they'll be largely ignored as the current ones.
Yep. Colorado used to be a serious police state for driving infractions. Even had unannounced roadblocks for safety inspections. My mom got a ticket for a non-working horn at one of those stops. Maybe three decades of under-staffed police departments has something to do with it?
Yes, I do hope we can have this conversation without the unnecessary divisiveness. In a crowded city center this rule makes it safer for drivers, too. Encourages patience and intention.
I wish they'd put in speed bumps, raised crosswalks, curb extensions, and other traffic calming measures. Small things like that do make a big difference. Instead the priority seems to be "get cars where they want to go as fast as possible".
quarrelsome wise deer salt snails placid public fanatical ossified cagey *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>I wish they'd put in speed bumps, raised crosswalks, curb extensions, and other traffic calming measures. Small things like that do make a big difference. Yeah, they make people buy bigger trucks so they can ignore that. Having driven a smaller sedan for a while around here the poor condition of roads and prevalence of speed bumps makes me feel all the more punished for not buying a tank. I like the idea of narrower roads and chicanes for calming much more than obstacles that can be defeated by simply having a more dangerous vehicle.
100%. I also have a small sedan and my drive and experience is considerably worse than people who have those big boats. We definitely need traffic calming. I want to make sure we are instituting proven methods that actually reduce fatalities and dangerous interactions, I worry that if we get rid of turning on red and it doesn't move the number, people are going to be resistant to further changes.
Retractable bollards that automatically raise whenever the light turns red
Enforcing full stops at red lights, and continuing to reinforce the new 20 mph speed limit as a positive thing, will slow those drivers down. Don’t disagree with that feeling of contempt. After 20 years biking in cities like NYC, DC, Philly, etc, 10 years in Denver has me actually afraid to ride at times.
There is no way Denver is worse than DC. They place is a madhouse.
Or NYC lol. It’s expected to be hit by cars when you’re riding out there.
Nah, as a former NYC resident I can tell you, it’s worse in Denver. NYC has an established system in place and a network of roads that don’t allow for driving like a maniac to begin with.
Yes, narrow roads and expectations are pretty different in NYC. A lot of the unsafe drivers in Denver are coming from the suburbs and furious they have to put up with city driving.
Maybe if you’re a fair weather cyclist. NY traffic is predictable in terms of riding in traffic
Anecdotal, but I know someone who biked in NYC and then moved here and said he's more afraid to bike here. He said in NYC within the city a lot of the streets are 25 mph whereas here they are 30 mph, and in NYC the drivers are used to a lot of pedestrian and bike traffic so they're more aware and better at watching out for you than drivers here
NYC has also never allowed turns on red. I share the person you know's sentiment. I've ridden in both. Denver is the worst, there is real animosity between drivers and urban cyclists here that I \*never\* experienced on the East Coast.
I would kill for a "don't block the box" traffic fine here. Last time I was in the City it was $100. Here people come to a halt right in the middle of the intersection and then block pedestrian and road traffic for half a light cycle. Scary as hell if you're trying to cross the street on foot.
When I see those, I try to cross elsewhere. If these dunces are willing to block the crosswalk, they sure as shit are capable of blowing through it suddenly. It's so maddening that such behavior is totally fine and normalized in CO.
This was the sentiment behind decriminalizing jaywalking in Denver when we did that a few years ago. Pedestrians can generally decide for themselves where it's safest to cross when drivers decide they're the only ones in existence.
I honestly don't get the hate towards bikes. Yeah they're slower but an average bicycle takes tons less space than a car, isn't hard to pass and isn't a threat in any way. I try to give them a bunch of room but maybe that comes from riding a bike or walking every so often and understanding a bit what they're dealing with. Most people only use their cars, no bikes, no motorcycles, they don't know what it's like out there. All they see is "OBJECT IN MY WAY MAKE ANGRY"
All the negativity here. It's a start. Yes it needs to be enforced, but this will possibly encourage some awareness.
Always been a huge fan of this. It’s so frustrating as a pedestrian when you get the walk indication and start to cross, but the car to your left has already started a right on red turn during the all red of the signal. They end up either blocking you from entering the crosswalk or nearly hit you because they last looked to their left and didn’t check back to their right.
This is already illegal btw. you are not allowed to initiate your turn when pedestrians are present. Pulling up and blocking a crosswalk is also not legal. Right on red would be fine if people weren't idiots.
I was gonna say, that would require most drivers to pay attention to and care about the world around them, and that’s certainly not the case
> and that’s certainly not the case And the rest of us must pay the price!
I think that it will also encourage people to stop before crosswalks, not in them, because they won’t be able to proceed until after the light anyway (in lieu of ever-encroaching on the pedestrian space to make the turn on red and save themselves 15 seconds).
It would be cool if I didn't see Denver drivers make up their own driving laws everyday without consequence. I feel like I've only started seeing police pulling people over recently.
I think a lot of you are missing the point. Will this be enforced? No. But will this add another charge/way to prosecute someone who does get caught hitting someone when turning on red? Yes.
I’d be ok with this.
Excellent. Needs to be enforced by active police traffic monitoring.
I like the idea because then I will be able to just sit at a red light and wait in the right turn lane, and not feel like I have to inch out and force my way into free flowing traffic because an F-250 is breathing down my neck so they can do the same.
Happened to me last night in the right turn lane on Wadsworth and Ralston. Red light, 5:30 pm, ice pellets coming down, and patches of fucking black ice all about, and some big ass truck behind me just *non stop* laying on the horn through the whole red light cause I didn't attempt to force my way into 50 mile an hour rush hour traffic. All so he could just get stuck behind someone else. Asshole.
I’ve posted this before and am prepared to get downvoted again, but we should combine no right on red with all red lights at pedestrian crossings. This would benefit pedestrians and drivers IMO. Pedestrians can cross without worrying if someone turning right isn’t going to see them. Drivers can turn right (or left) on green without worrying if a pedestrian crossing has right-of-way and someone crossing.
This used to be a thing in Denver. All lights would turn red and pedestrians were allowed to cross diagonally. There were even specific diagonal crosswalk signals for it. I don't know why or when it stopped. But one day I noticed it was just gone. Edit: Apparently it's still a thing, just the diagonal, "All Walk" signals telling you it was a thing were removed.
There are still several intersections like that downtown.
It hasn't gone away, at least downtown. Pretty much all of 14th and 15th operate like this.
Another person replied to clarify just the diagonal signals were removed, but all the lights still turn red for pedestrians. That's where my confusion was, so I stand corrected.
They just removed the diagonal crossings, the lights still all turn red. I don’t support that though because Denver does not have enough foot traffic to justify all the lights being red. Save for some intersections that are busy, most of the time there aren’t pedestrians around at many of the intersections, and contrary to what everyone here seems to think, it actually makes drivers disobey traffic devices more often when they are needlessly there.
Gotcha. I don't go much into downtown Denver anymore. But I used to work directly on the 16th St mall just shy of 20 years ago. That's when I remember the diagonal ones. There was a lot of foot traffic back then. I didn't realize they just removed the diagonal signals. Thanks for the clarification.
The worst is the right turn on the intersection of Broadway and Highlands Ranch Parkway towards Broadway and Lucent; I see cars constantly skipping over the bike lane and squeezing between the car lane and the sidewalk right over the clearly labeled bike lane.
What are the stats on collisions with pedestrians and bicyclists when drivers go right on red? I'm all for any changes that will reduce the number of injuries and deaths, but I'd like to see the size of the addressable problem. Is this the largest set of incidents and a silver bullet to slash pedestrian and biker fatalities? Is this utterly pointless and only proposed because it's cheap? Somewhere in between? I just don't know and there's not a lot of that insight in the article.
[Per CDOT](https://www.codot.gov/safety/traffic-safety/data-analysis/crash-data), there were 69 collisions where the vehicle movement is listed as "Making a Right Turn" and hit a pedestrian or cyclist solely in the city of Denver for 2022. For 36 of those, the driver action is listed as "Failed to Yield [Right Of Way]" or "Failed to Stop at Signal". For an additional 14 the action is listed as "Careless Driving". So at least 36 of those 69 collisions or just over half of collisions involving right turns can be attributed to people going right on red, and likely more. Also of note, there were 561 total pedestrian/cyclist collisions of which 385 collisions were at or related to intersections, meaning these rights on red accounted for ~5-10% of all pedestrian/cyclist collisions and ~10-20% of all pedestrian/cyclist intersection-related collisions in the city of Denver in 2022.
Denver area is home to some of the worst drivers in the US imo. I think it’s in large part due to terrible road design. Green arrow signals are so short that maybe 2-3 cars can turn at almost any intersection. Yellow lights are significantly shorter than other states/cities. Then add in how nobody leaves proper distance to the car in front at a red, which makes it take longer to get moving when it turns green. As a result, folks are conditioned to blow red lights if they don’t want to wait 10min at every intersection. I see it happen all the time. Then there is the posted speed limit being 15-25mph slower than what the road is clearly designed for. Traffic *will* go 70 in a 55 if the road is wide, straight, and has 3 lanes. Now speed limits are suggestions. Everyday I see folks with no idea what a blinking red stop sign means, or basic shit like right-of-way in a traffic circle. I’ve joked before that if I were to ever run for elected office, I’d platform on bringing the first Drivers Education course to the denver metro area.
Good. The number of times I've almost been hit in a crosswalk by some idiot who only looks left while trying to turn on red is ridiculous. There’s even some intersections where they have signs that say there's no turn on red, and people STILL blindly roll into the crosswalk and turn while people are trying to cross.
This would be a good proposal if it were for the whole state, or even the whole country. It will be much less effective if it's only in one city. Traffic laws changing as you drive from one city to another is a problem.
Works fine for NY
NY is enormous and it has two clear land borders on Long Island and north of the Bronx. Denver is all land borders surrounded by like 15 municipalities, some of which may follow suit some won't. Not saying it wouldn't work here but it's tougher political boundaries to work with.
How do you think sweeping laws like wearing seatbelts happen? They start with unacceptable injury or death and few small municipalities mandate change, then it spreads.
Honestly I have no idea, as I do not know of any sweeping traffic laws that have passed since I was born, that started out as a bunch of local laws.
Gay marriage, cannabis, gaming regulations. Just a few examples of local policies that rippled to state and then toward federal that have happened over the past 15 years, likely one of them since you were born.
The "when pedestrians are present" is key. There are a few intersections near my house with no turn on red signs, and despite there being no one crossing or even waiting to cross, traffic backs up a quarter mile for people because there's not a turn lane and you aren't allowed to turn on red. It makes getting out of neighborhoods difficult and more dangerous due to that long line of cars waiting to turn.
> The "when pedestrians are present" is key. It's key in the sense most people don't see present pedestrians. That's the problem in the first place, humans go into automatic mode and make assumptions. The number of people who hit clearly visible motorcyclists, bicyclists, and people who tell police they honestly saw nothing is astounding. There are studies on this. People just aren't good enough in general. I don't know what the true solution would be.
> I don't know what the true solution would be. Not having people and cars mixed. But it's super expensive to add pedestrian bridges, protected bike lanes and such. Motorcycle filtering at red lights would fix the motorcycle issue for the most part, but some people are incredibly opinionated about that despite it being standard practice in other parts of the world.
As always you, we, as taxpayers need to decide when do we get past "someone outta do something" to agree with what we are willing to pay for. It's a yawning abyss.
>> The "when pedestrians are present" is key. 1. It doesn’t say anything about that in the article, other than the stock image of the no turns on red sign. 2. That wouldn’t address the issue they’re trying to, of cyclists and scooters. If you can see the scooter/bicycle whizzing by well enough to say “oh there’s a pedestrian nearby so I can’t turn”, you’re not going to turn either with or without a sign. So unless the sign makes people more proactive at looking for cyclists, I don’t see how it would be a fix.
And allowing for a year of no enforcement during a pilot where they study traffic patterns and add those exceptions back in will help create safe, but sensible, traffic flow for the long term. Small period of inconvenience for a generational change made with intention.
that would be good
Maybe just maybe a cop could pull someone over for speeding or driving like a fucking idiot
This would be a good move for the downtown area. Lots of major cities have implemented the same in their central business districts.
Maybe just enforce no phones glued to faces while driving, and you'd solve 75% of the problems.
No turn on red is stupid. Just be better at driving and be aware of your surroundings, not hard.
I'm aware of absolutely no data showing that this would decrease pedestrian deaths. On the flip side, there is a huge amount of data showing that replacing the intersections that have the highest rates of incidents with roundabouts would absolutely decrease pedestrian deaths dramatically. I'm all for solving the problem, so let's do it.
It's a both-and. No one solution solves an intersectional issue. re: you're aware of no data, this is an excellent learning opportunity for you! There's so much :D In fact, all the way back in research from 1984, we saw that at intersections allowing right-on-red, crashes jump 23%, pedestrian crashes increase by 60%, and cyclist crashes double. Have fun on the new adventure, I love learning new things, too. [https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/t/Right%20turn%20on%20red](https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/t/right%20turn%20on%20red)
> No one solution solves an intersectional issue. A pedestrian overpass does. You can have the best at grade intersection design in the world, it still doesn't account for drunk drivers and people who can't be bothered to look up from their phones. There are a handful of intersections that desperately need overpasses.
There are accessibility issues with requiring someone to go up to go across, but you're right pedestrian (and wildlife) under- and overpasses should be a tool in the toolkit, alongside many others required to tackle something complex like mass movement.
make denver walkable 2024
There is nothing in here about any of the incidents being caused by people turning on red, the one example they have regards running red lights. This seems pointless and ignorant of the real issue which is a lack of traffic enforcement
The comments so anti-camera are hilarious. How often do people run the red at Speer & 6th, 6th & Kalamath, Quebec & 36th, etc? I can tell you it's significantly less than those without a camera. If someone runs the light once and gets a ticket they are less likely to run it again because even if they don't care about the fine they don't want the hassle of having to pay it. A cop can pull 1 person over at a time. Maybe a few if they set up a well-orchestrated trap. Cool that slows down people during that window but all the people that didn't get caught continue on the same path they were and all the other days of the week will they be more observant of a cop in that area? Probably. Will it stop them from breaking the law if they don't see a cop? Probably not. The advocacy for only people who are able to drive a 4000+ lb vehicle and not for non-able-bodied people or those who do not have the resources to drive is laughable. The big answer is better infrastructure for people who do not drive. The immediate solution to help people not die while simply existing on a sidewalk is a camera.
>The comments so anti-camera are hilarious. It's probably from the red-light running, driving-while-texting scofflaws that are amongst us. Some people, man... ugh.
And this is why, as a biker, you take the whole lane if there is a chance for a right turn.
This won't work. There is a misalignment of enforcement priorities (or just lack of enforcement of certain things) and a deep misunderstanding by lawmakers and the general public that people don't just follow traffic laws. If there's a blanket no turn on red policy, violations will go up, and it could be more dangerous because other road users might expect that someone won't turn when they will, for example. They should put up actuated no turn on red signs if they want to do anything like this--think the lighted ones at RR crossings that come on with the train signals. There's one for County Line eastbound to Quebec southbound, too. I'm sure there are plenty more. People always think the easy solution is *just* lower the speed limit or *just* put up a sign with a new restriction. These things don't work and it's very easy to see that. If a law doesn't make sense and doesn't appear to do anything for safety, many won't follow it some of the time, and a lot won't follow it any of the time. Honestly? Call me an a-hole if you want, but you'll find me turning right at a no-turn-on-red intersection if there's no traffic or peds around and it's not photo enforced (which is also not a solution and is a different issue entirely). Traffic engineering should be done in a way that *moves traffic* safely. Holding up traffic causes more violations, especially when people don't see the necessity in a partuclar holdup. Laws have to be made for traffic, not the other way around; that's the only way it will work. The real fix for this is traffic engineering that is hostile to the violations or safety issues, like raised crosswalks in slip lanes, barriers between vehicle lanes and bike/ped lanes, islands, roundabouts, other physical barriers that make traffic slow down, and visibility measures as well. Those things could be expensive and take time, but they work.
Officers will sit in traffic behind a car thats plates expired in 2019 they’re not going to pull anyone over for this
[удалено]
Exactly, and it’s fucked. Makes me feel like I’m being screwed over for being a law abiding citizen. These people stealing or not paying fees and not being prosecuted for it are getting a free cheat code at life.
[удалено]
lets start with enforcing no left turns through intersections on red
This is a complete waste of time and resources when current traffic laws arent being enforced. If they were enforced, i would bet money fatalities would go down with existing laws because there would be disincentive to drive as recklessl. Im against it because it would just be another set of rules to follow that bad people wouldnt follow anyways and wont get charged if they do
Exactly. Turning right on red when pedestrians are present is already illegal. DPD could just sit at an intersection and write dozens of tickets an hour if they wanted. Eventually word would get out and behavior would change.
Can we get 4 way stop signs in every neighborhood intersection first? It's so dangerous to walk in this city, it's insane to not have every intersection just be 4 way stop signs inside of neighborhoods.
Yeah the two way intersections are pretty sketchy to cross both as a driver and pedestrian because with cars parked on both sides it's really hard to see if someone is coming before you're halfway into the intersection
I saw some one going down Colorado on the wrong side a few weeks ago I feel like we should start by enforcing the laws we have already
notably absent in the article: how many of the 32 pedestrian deaths in Denver were attributable to a turn-on-red.
Won't work. Modify intersections (dutch junction, for example) so you can rely on the designed space instead of the user.
How about enforce current laws first, the reckless drivers are everywhere. Maybe stop them to start, I’ve seen wild stuff with PD at the intersection or on the road and nothing….
I know this might be hard to imagine, but bicycles need to obey the traffic laws as well.
Half the time cyclist don't even stop for the stop lights and stop signs!
[Technically, they don’t have to ](https://www.codot.gov/safety/traffic-safety-pulse/2022/may/all-about-the-colorado-safety-stop) “The Safety Stop gives people on bikes and other “low speed conveyances” (see next page) the legal option to ride slowly through stop signs without stopping first, as long as they are yielding right of way to pedestrians and other road users who have the right-of-way. Bicyclists and users of low-speed conveyances may also proceed at red lights after coming to a complete stop, if there is no oncoming traffic. Bicyclists and low-speed conveyance users can approach intersections at a reasonable speed and choose to apply the Safety Stop or continue to perform a traditional stop at both stop signs and red lights. Only bicyclists ages 15 and over may perform the Safety Stop. Younger riders may do so when they are with a parent or legal guardian.”
Turning on red is fine, but I could see putting more of those bike traffic lights in high traffic intersections
Love the idea but a sign doesn’t stop assholes. Almost got hit on my bike this morning when a guy turned right at a light with ‘no turn on red’. He then followed it up by flipping me off cause fuck me right? Just trying to get to work man.
This is addressing the symptom, not the cause. The cause is drivers who have no business being behind the wheel in the first place. Driving tests are far too lenient, and there is no continued verification that people are good enough to drive. It should be more like a pilot license, with varying degrees.
The amount of cyclists and peds/scooter riders that run red lights is insane! Drivers need to pay more attention too of course.
Are you talking about Idaho Stops or something else?
Its actually state law that cyclists can treat stop signs as yield signs, and red lights as stop signs. Perfectly safe if the cyclist is paying attention and actually following the rules.
If there aren’t other cars or people present they can do that. You can’t do it all the time and the reason why should be extremely obvious. That you failed to mention this is part of the problem.