Transit
Talking buses another example of WMATA "safety theater"
Pedestrians across the region may soon find Metrobuses talking to them. Although WMATA will position these buses as a safety innovation, implementing system-wide talking buses would be a poor use of resources and would do little to improve safety.
Photo by el swifterino on Flickr.
Supporters of talking buses argue that audible warnings make our streets safer. But the whole scheme feels like a knee-jerk reaction by a transit agency struggling with an image that it doesn't take safety to heart.
The ultimate question with regard to safety is whether there is compelling evidence that these warnings could have prevented a past collision between a bus and a pedestrian. I've yet to see analysis that concludes that talking buses would address the cause of these incidents.
One thing is certain about talking buses: they're annoying.
Both for those on the street and riders on the bus, listening to the same safety message on repeat for an extended period of time is enough to drive most people at least a little crazy. This is true whether downtown, where lines of buses could broadcast for blocks, or in residential neighborhoods, where early-morning and late-night disruptions are rarely appreciated.
Worse, talking buses bully pedestrians into accepting responsibility for an incident that might occur. After all, if someone is unfortunately struck, shouldn't they have seen it coming? It's logic designed to distract attention away from the incident itself, and prematurely assign responsibility.
Washington isn't the first city to experiment with audible warnings on its buses. I lived in Cleveland, Ohio at the time the city's RTA rolled out buses that beeped whenever a bus driver engaged the turn signal. When drivers avoided using their turn signal to circumvent the noise, the transit agency wired the audio system into the steering column and replaced the high-pitched beeping with a female voice.
Cleveland's RTA implemented audible buses after several notable incidents that involved collisions between pedestrians and left-turning buses. Much like the situation developing in Washington, Clevelanders questioned how spending money and resources on audio equipment addressed the root safety issue.
Talking buses have proven incredibly unpopular in Cleveland. A former colleague wrote me to describe the current sentiment. "It's still incredibly obnoxious. I'm embarrassed that visitors to the city have to hear it," he writes. "But like any repetitive sound it gets tuned out most of the time."
This is a serious concern. After a while, talking buses lose any effectiveness they once had. The audible warnings merely become noise pollution in the urban landscape; and we're left with annoying warnings that don't do much good. Small-scale improvements to transit and pedestrian safety is a noble goal; but talking buses are unlikely to accomplish much. Resources would be better spent elsewhere.
 | Rob Pitingolo moved to the DC area in mid-2010 and currently resides on Capitol Hill. He also writes about issues of urbanism, economics, transportation and politics at his blog, Extraordinary Observations.   |
Comments
- Bikeshare is a gateway to private biking, not competition
- Short-term Washingtonians deserve a voice, too
- Judge denies injunction against closing schools
- DC Council makes major policy changes overnight
- Public land deals have both benefits and pitfalls
- Long-term closures: A solution to single-tracking?
- PG planners propose bold new smart growth future
by SJE on Nov 10, 2010 10:53 am • link • report
Please don't stand in the rear doorwell.
Please don't stand in the rear doorwell.
Please don't stand in the rear doorwell.
Please don't stand in the rear doorwell.
by engrish_major on Nov 10, 2010 10:54 am • link • report
by Ben Ross on Nov 10, 2010 11:00 am • link • report
I'm with the crowds here, in saying that the automated messages are *really* annoying. The announcement of the stops is mildly tolerable, if only because it makes the buses more accessible to the visually-impaired.
by andrew on Nov 10, 2010 11:08 am • link • report
On another note. Does anyone notice that drivers in DC honk far more than in other cities? Can we enact honking fines in residential areas? I think part of the continued journey towards making cities more appealing to live in should be quieting them down a bit. I know honking is sometimes necessary. But I would wager a guess that 90 percent of the time it is not. Having lived on a busy street in NYC, I think the driver culture there understands that people maybe sleeping or nursing babies in the apartments that line the street. Here not so much.
by John on Nov 10, 2010 11:11 am • link • report
I've seen people step off the curb without looking away from their phone just because somebody next to them took advantage of a short break in traffic. I guess they figure that since one person moved, the light must have changed for them. It's a sheep mentality, and kind of frightening to watch.
by Lou on Nov 10, 2010 11:16 am • link • report
by Adam L on Nov 10, 2010 11:25 am • link • report
They sent buses out to tell the public about it. It's part of their new communications strategy.
by Matt Johnson on Nov 10, 2010 11:29 am • link • report
LOL! Love it.
by Adam L on Nov 10, 2010 11:31 am • link • report
I do not care for this paragraph though:
"Worse, talking buses bully pedestrians into accepting responsibility for an incident that might occur. After all, if someone is unfortunately struck, shouldn't they have seen it coming? It's logic designed to distract attention away from the incident itself, and prematurely assign responsibility."
I don't agree with your assertion that it bullies anybody into anything. Further, how about acknowledging that pedestrians really do need to take responsibility for their own safety? Every single day of my life, I see pedestrians disregarding crossing signals, jaywalking, and failing to yield the right of way; if cars disregarded driving laws on the same scale it would be absolute chaos on the streets.
The fact is that we all have to share the same space to some extent, no matter how we travel. This repeated implication that one group (pedestrians) somehow bears less responsibility for doing so safely is really counterproductive, in my opinion.
But back on topic, yes, the talking bus is really quite a silly idea.
by GDopplerXT on Nov 10, 2010 11:31 am • link • report
Whenever I'm in motion, it constantly broadcasts, "HEY, I'M WALKING HEAH!"
This is to make sure that drivers notice me and give me the right-of-way, even if it's not my turn.
by Matt Johnson on Nov 10, 2010 11:34 am • link • report
After watching that video I'm a little worried. That looks really annoying.
I know Metro buses have hit a few people, but they are slower and generally driven much more safely than the average vehicle. Plus they are already loud, big and they are hard for a pedestrian to miss. I'll bet per mile driven buses have hit fewer peds than other vehicles. If we wanted to add noise makers to the vehicles that posed the most risk to pedestrians (and bikers) buses would be near the bottom of my list. At the top I would put vehicles driven by 16-24 year old males and police patrol cars.
by Michael on Nov 10, 2010 11:38 am • link • report
by Simon on Nov 10, 2010 11:38 am • link • report
by Brian on Nov 10, 2010 11:40 am • link • report
I was just in Manhattan this weekend and horn-honking was about 1,000 times more prevalent, and more obnoxious, than it is here. Drivers, especially cab drivers, lean on the horn if you don't move through an intersection the split-second the light changes. This despite signs everywhere saying honking is not allowed.
by Anon on Nov 10, 2010 11:49 am • link • report
by Allison on Nov 10, 2010 11:53 am • link • report
"One thing is certain about talking buses: they're annoying."
Metro already has way, way too many voice announcements throughout the bus* and rail systems. We need fewer of them, not more.
This is another one of those notions that probably look great to folks sitting around a conference table but doesn't work out there on the street. Another example is the rear mounted aircraft strobe lights on Montgomery County school buses, which end up being far more of a distraction than an actual safety improvement (for the full effect try getting behind a string of 'em entering or leaving a school or a bus depot).
-----
* my nomination for the best-of-the-worst: the audio loop blathering on in English and Spanish about Metrobus service adjustments that took effect last December.
by intermodal commuter on Nov 10, 2010 11:53 am • link • report
And I assume that the setup is something like the steering column activation because it goes off at Union Station while the bus is just sitting there.
by Thaps on Nov 10, 2010 11:54 am • link • report
The main problem I have with it is that the announcement goes off if the drivers turns the steering wheel even a little bit. That meant everytime he changed lanes or had to go around a parked car we heard the announcement, usually twice in a row, once to go around and once to get back in the travel lane. Also, every time he pulled over for a stop, it would go off. And it sounds even louder in the bus, though i like the notification to the driver to look both ways.
by natalie on Nov 10, 2010 11:58 am • link • report
Safety theatre? No. I think it is WMATA giving its opinion of what it thinks of bus riders.
As the DC-NYC buses have shown, it doesn't take much to turn buses into preferred transport for middle class folks. WMATA just doesn't want to take the effort to really upgrade.
by charlie on Nov 10, 2010 11:59 am • link • report
And the reason people honk is because it always solves the problem, no matter what the problem is. Pure magic!
by Stanton Park on Nov 10, 2010 12:16 pm • link • report
While I know this is not the main thrust of your comment, I am contractually obligated to point out that drivers (though not "cars") do in fact disregard driving laws on the same--possibly greater--scale.
This is something everyone here agreed on (to paraphrase Lance).
by oboe on Nov 10, 2010 12:25 pm • link • report
If you've heard it you know what I'm talking about.
by Michael Perkins on Nov 10, 2010 1:00 pm • link • report
by Buddy R on Nov 10, 2010 1:16 pm • link • report
If you are including cyclists as drivers then absolutely I concede your point (by drivers I was thinking motor vehicles, cars, trucks, buses, etc.)
If you do just mean drivers of cars, trucks and buses, I don't agree but maybe we're not thinking in the same terms.
But I do feel like pedestrians too often get a pass around here when it comes to their responsibility in sharing the roads. (Just to specify a bit, I live and work in DC, so that is my main reference point. I did grow up in the 'burbs though, so I know that's a different pedestrian/driver dynamic.)
by GDopplerXT on Nov 10, 2010 1:17 pm • link • report
by Bill on Nov 10, 2010 1:18 pm • link • report
by jcm on Nov 10, 2010 1:21 pm • link • report
What if the backup alarm went off the entire time the vehicle was turned on? Even when moving forward or being stationary. Would it be effective?
"PEDESTRIANS: THE BUS IS TURNING" is irritatingly loud and it does nothing, nothing to solve the problems WMATA has had with bus/pedestrian collisions.
If I'm a pedestrian with the right-of-way about to cross the street, and I hear the bus message, what does that mean? That I should cede the ROW? I think not.
After a high-profile collision where a left-turning bus killed to pedestrians at 7th and Pennsylvania NW, Metro outfitted their buses with yellow light bars. This was meant to increase their visibility so that, among others, pedestrians could see the buses coming.
Except that in the aforementioned collision, the pedestrians had the right-of-way. They were in the crosswalk with the walk signal, and the bus turned left without seeing them. See? The bus was perfectly visible, the driver just wasn't paying attention. The driver. Not the pedestrians.
As far as I know, there are no recent instances of unaware pedestrians being hit by buses (turning or otherwise). In all the recent cases of which I am aware, the bus driver failed to yield to the pedestrian(s).
So really, what Metro should do is put a feature on the bus driver console that says to the bus driver, "DRIVER: PEDESTRIANS ARE PRESENT!"
by Matt Johnson on Nov 10, 2010 1:44 pm • link • report
by Matt Johnson on Nov 10, 2010 1:44 pm • link • report
by tom veil on Nov 10, 2010 1:44 pm • link • report
by Jennifer on Nov 10, 2010 1:53 pm • link • report
Truck backup alarms are irritating as all get out, but they work. If these alarms are effective then I could learn to live with them. You claim that in the accident on Penn, "The bus was perfectly visible, the driver just wasn't paying attention. The driver. Not the pedestrians.", but I don't know of any evidence that the pedestrians did see the bus, and tried to get out of the way. If they'd have heard the bus, would they have been able to dodge?
Obviously, I'd prefer that bus (and other) drivers drive better, and not have to worry about them doing stupid things while I cross the street. But until someone invents a perfect bus driver, I'd just as soon have as much warning as possible.
by jcm on Nov 10, 2010 1:57 pm • link • report
Left turns being common and seldom especially hazardous (most bus left turns, after all, are done in pulling away from the curb after a passenger stop), alerting people to every one is unproductive and indeed "cry wolf" self-defeating: nothing but theatre.
by davidj on Nov 10, 2010 2:01 pm • link • report
They work because trucks backing up are relatively infrequent. Buses making turns happen almost nonstop, especially when you're near downtown.
by Rob on Nov 10, 2010 2:05 pm • link • report
Okay, let's put you in the situation.
You're walking northbound on 7th toward the Archives Metro stop. While you cross Pennsylvania Avenue, you have a walk sign. As you cross the westbound lanes, you hear "PEDESTRIANS: THIS BUS IS TURNING".
You're not too worried, since you have the right-of-way. Besides, you've heard that phrase 7 times already, since the bus has been waiting for several seconds for southbound traffic to clear (with its signal on).
How are you supposed to know that this time the bus actually is turning? How do you know it isn't still planning to yield to you?
If you haven't had a chance, go look at the video on Unsuck (linked in the article). The entire time the bus is in frame, it's looping that phrase, and as far as I can tell, it's not crossing any pedestrians' paths.
Nothing about the bus announcement is alarming enough that I would jump out of the way. Remember, the bus has been saying that since before I entered the crosswalk.
Even fire trucks with lights and sirens slow or stop before entering an intersection against a red light. The least we can ask Metro now that their buses have sirens is that they try and not hit pedestrians.
by Matt Johnson on Nov 10, 2010 2:07 pm • link • report
Right, clearly the drivers of cars don't jaywalk, but they do speed with impunity, take right-turns on red without stopping, treat stop-signs as yield signs. They do this almost universally. It's so common that it doesn't even register until you make an effort to look for it. But we just consider that "normative" driving behavior. And pedestrians know enough to look for it, and compensate.
When you look at pedestrian "scofflaw behavior" (say jaywalking) again what you see is near universal behavior, but quite predictable in general. It's only the relatively rare outlier that makes us slam on the brakes and think, "God, pedestrians are crazy!" For example, the distracted (or drunk) person wearing headphones who in a moment of carelessness steps off the curb into the path of a bus.
Again, drivers do this too: take a right-turn on red without slowing and seeing a pedestrian at the last second. Of course, pedestrians know enough to look for this behavior, checking to see there's no traffic even though they have the light. Of course, for many pro-car types, this behavior is ultimately dismissed with a casual reference to Newton's Second Law of Motion.
I do feel like pedestrians too often get a pass around here when it comes to their responsibility in sharing the roads.
I agree, but I think those distinctions are too stark: all drivers leave their cars at some point. They're inevitably pedestrians. And they behave in just the way you describe--that is, as "scofflaw pedestrians". That's why referring to it mostly as "pedestrians vs drivers" obscures rather than reveals.
It's not a question of drivers versus pedestrians, but why is it that folks behave in the way they do depending on what mode they're operating in.
[Cripes, that was wordy. Sorry.]
by oboe on Nov 10, 2010 2:14 pm • link • report
Bus drivers in this region are horrible. Better drivers ed can teach drivers not only simple things like following the law, but also to not pump the breaks, wait until people sit and not crash into cars, bikers and pedestrians.
by Jasper on Nov 10, 2010 2:26 pm • link • report
Also, don't punch "McGruff the Crime Dog".
by Matt Johnson on Nov 10, 2010 2:27 pm • link • report
by Mike on Nov 10, 2010 2:34 pm • link • report
by Josh S on Nov 10, 2010 2:35 pm • link • report
And Matt, "You're not too worried, since you have the right-of-way " never, ever describes my thought process. I spend way to much time on my feet or bike surrounded by fast moving multi-ton vehicles. That's the kind of mindset that gets bicyclists and peds killed. It obviously doesn't excuse drivers from negligent behavior, but physics is physics. I don't have a problem with asking drivers to not hit pedestrians (obviously), and I'm not some car-nut blame-the-pedestrian person.
by jcm on Nov 10, 2010 2:36 pm • link • report
Matt Johnson is right, nobody is going to pay any attention to this "warning" if you hear it seven times in a row while the bus is waiting to turn. PLUS in several of the recent bus-pedestrian fatalities that I can think of the pedestrian had the right of way, or this announcement wouldn't have helped at all.
by MLD on Nov 10, 2010 2:36 pm • link • report
by anon on Nov 10, 2010 3:14 pm • link • report
by John on Nov 10, 2010 3:47 pm • link • report
I suggest you go into the Washington Post archives and see the video loop of the pedestrians who were killed crossing Pennsylvania ave. They were in the middle of the crosswalk (legally I might add) when the bus hit them. They would have had no time to jump back or dodge the bus if it had been blaring that stupid warning at them. The bus was going very fast.
The onus should be on the bus drivers and WMATA.
by lou on Nov 10, 2010 4:14 pm • link • report
by Anon on Nov 10, 2010 4:58 pm • link • report
Than where is the written announcement for the deaf ?
If you are going to build a system for whatever you need to also account for the disabled blind, deaf and whatever else.
by kk on Nov 10, 2010 5:51 pm • link • report
I think this system is a great idea. I think this will help keep accident rates down and pedestrians from being injured.
by Roger Smith on Nov 10, 2010 6:58 pm • link • report
Might as well give them a siren thats on 24/7
by JJJJ on Nov 10, 2010 8:47 pm • link • report
by waiting for the next safety poster contest on Nov 11, 2010 12:23 am • link • report
by eck on Nov 11, 2010 8:48 am • link • report
After losing a couple of close friends to related accidents of this type several years ago, I did a little research to find out what could help mitigate these and other similar types of accidents.
First a few facts related to buses and turning:
Turning accidents from Buses at cross walks is a national problem (a few examples).
www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/05/left-turn_accidents_like_fatal.html
www.kgw.com/news/local/Friends-honor-victims-of-TriMet-bus-accident-92183454.html
www.transitblogger.com/death/man-dragged-to-death-by-mta-nyct-bus.php
www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/os-lynx-bus-hits-kids-one-dead-20101104,0,1028945.story
Research shows that these types of accidents can be almost eliminated with the use of passive voice technology (The type of system WMATA is installing) TCRP A-28 report 2007, NTSB January 2008.
Example:
Greater Cleveland installed the first pilot three years ago and installed the “Safe Turn Alert” system wide over a year ago.
Results: GCRTA went from an average of 36 accidents (several deaths) per year from Turning Buses at intersections to just 3 (zero pedestrianÂ’s).
We all know what saving one life is worth (priceless) but if you prevent one of these accidents or deaths you also save the city $10 million which is the average lawsuit settlement.
It's reported that the system only cost Cleveland a little over $500,000.00 installed on their whole fleet.
Several other agencies have reported similar findings with mitigating voice alerts.
Just think, smoke alarms, CO2 Alarms, Side Impact alarms, back-up alarms, Stop Lights, Crossing signals, Vehicle Horns, etcÂ…. The reasons we have these types of warnings more and more is because studies show they work. Also, we are becoming more and more distracted as a society.
One writer mentioned his concern for those who are vision impaired and does this also help them. I'm told that vision impaired are a main featured as part of this system.
A final note. The “Safe Turn Alert” does two things. It has an inside speaker to remind the driver to “look both ways” and pedestrians that the “bus is turning”.
Hope this helps
Thanks and I'm sorry for the long message.
by Carolyn on Nov 11, 2010 10:21 pm • link • report
Good ideas can have bad implementations: it might make some sense for there to be some sort of audible alert, but a recorded loop in some number of languages is not necessarily the best way to go about it.
Consider for instance the electric BRT overlay service in downtown Denver. For years those electric bus units have used a bell, like the ones on the cable cars in San Francisco. It gets attention without being as annoying as voice announcements.
Metro already has too many, way too many sound loops. It's bad enough in the rail system (a 15-20 minute late night wait for a subway train gives one an acute distaste for this form of noise pollution) but this step goes on to inflict it not just on passengers and operators, but also anybody within earshot of a bus line. If this step is inevitable is it not at least possible to find a less obnoxious way in which to take it?
by intermodal commuter on Nov 12, 2010 4:40 pm • link • report
Add a Comment