#ITE (the Institute of Transportation Engineers) began recommending #RTOR (right turn on red) as a fuel saving measure in 1986. ITE rescinded that guidance in September 2019, writing:
"The existing [recommendation] fails to provide a sufficiently robust analysis of the impacts, especially with regards to the potential impacts on the safety of #pedestrians using #crosswalks."
ITE's full statement on rescinding the RTOR recommendation:
https://www.ite.org/pub/?id=B59F0054-B3AE-FD5C-81E5-62E18920B5DC
1/
So, since first recommending the use of right turn on red in urban settings 37 years ago, ITE has determined a) they don't know whether allowing RTOR was safe for pedestrians, b) there was never enough data to support allowing RTOR, and c) it's no longer OK to prioritize traffic flow over safety.
The notion of getting rid of RTOR is becoming increasingly popular, with multiple media outlets arguing for its demise (e.g., https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2022/10/right-turn-on-red-ban-washington-dc-gas-crisis/)
2/
@DrTCombs the main issue I see with this is that people already turn right on red even where it's not legal, and, at least where I live, traffic enforcement is almost non existent already, so adding another traffic crime is unlikely to change people's behavior.
Like, people here have learned you can run red lights with impunity (apart from the occasional t bone collision I suppose) so most people here already reflexively wait a couple seconds after green to go.
@etherdiver I definitely agree re policing of traffic infractions.
re RTOR, much of the problem does, I think, come from the lack of standardization. "Allowed by default except where they're not allowed" is just bad practice. In most of the rest of the world, red means you don't get to go. And it works. I agree it'll take us time to get there, and to make it truly effective we need to change the physical designs of our intersections, but we need to at least start down that path.