Interesting… I’m curious to know more about the details of that experiment. I could think of a few hypotheses for why that might’ve happened.

My first thought is maybe that particular road’s speed limit was just lower than what it should be? If the road design and location allow for a similar level of safety at a higher speed, the limit itself might just be a bit too conservative.

Or, perhaps the previous cycle timings weren’t as effective at slowing down drivers as first thought? I don’t know the previous circumstances, though.

There’s also the possibility that speed-reducing measures just don’t have much of an impact on overall safe driving behaviors, and that dangerous drivers are going to drive dangerously no matter how fast they’re able to go. I could even see the possibility of a negative feedback loop in which being constantly being slowed down by red light cycles frustrates aggressive drivers into engaging in other dangerous behaviors, i.e. running reds.

If it’s that last case… Yeah, I don’t really know what you do with that one. I would hope that safer driving could be encouraged through positive reinforcement, because the alternatives for negative reinforcement are either a massive ramp-up in police traffic enforcement, or aggressive use of speed cameras and automated ticketing. I do not think that making people have more encounters with US police officers would do anything good for public safety, and while speed cameras could work in principle, they would be massively unpopular, and career suicide for any politician that tries to make a push for it.

Never been a fan of the “we shouldn’t make the smaller, easier improvements because we need to do the bigger, harder things instead” argument…

Yes, we need more and better public transit, but that is going to take a whole lot of time, money, and effort to work towards. Yes, it’s worthwhile, and we shouldn’t STOP working towards it because of this, but I don’t think that’s a reason to balk at a smaller, easier incremental change that encourages safer driving while also simply being more efficient.

Wait, you mean the thing where people who do the speed limit have to stop at 3 straight reds while people doing 15 over are able to squeeze through all of them is the result of an intentional choice? It irritates the hell out of me how often that kind of thing happens in my town, but I always thought it was just some kind of oversight or inefficiency on the part of the engineers who set up the timing cycles, given how how clearly and directly it incentivizes speeding…

If driving the speed limit is the most efficient way to get where you’re trying to go, people will tend to drive the speed limit. Seems like that should be pretty obvious, imo.