I also have nearly been hit trying to cross Dutton at this intersection. In this case the cars were turning from Dutton onto Market and had failed to stop at the red light before making a right-on-red onto Market.

I walk blocks out of my way to avoid this one--it's absolutely not pedestrian-safe in any way shape or form. In fact, given the traffic flow as correctly described above, this intersection is actually made more dangerous by the way the traffic signals are operating.

Itinalaga ni Kristen Fratus ang isyung ito kay Eric Eby

The traffic signal is working correctly and as designed. This signal operates as most signals in Boston and Cambridge do, with pedestrians crossing at the same time as traffic is moving on the street next to them, and turning vehicles are supposed to yield to the pedestrians. If turning vehicles would yield to pedestrians as they should according to state law, the intersection would be much more pedestrian friendly with less delay for both pedestrians and vehicles, as there is no need for pedestrians to wait for an exclusive pedestrian phase to allow them to cross the street.
The pedestrian timing is adequate and in compliance with the latest federal requirements. There are 5 seconds of green Walk time plus 11 seconds of flashing Dont Walk time. While the 11 seconds of flashing Don't Walk time is not sufficient on its own to cross Dutton Street, there is an additional 5 seconds available to pedestrians after the countdown ends and before traffic starts to move on Dutton Street. These 5 seconds are comprised of the 3 seconds of yellow and 2 seconds of red time for Market Street traffic. While this 5 seconds of additional time has been built in as a safety buffer, I will check to see if the flashing don't walk can be made to extend through the first 2 seconds. This would extend the flashing don't walk to 13 seconds which is sufficient by itself to cross Dutton, but would reduce the safety buffer to 3 seconds.
The bigger problem at this intersection is the failure of turning vehicles to yield to pedestrians who are legally crossing in the crosswalks. While there are signs posted stating Yield To Pedestrians On Turns, many drivers don't pay attention to the signs or are ignorant of this basic rule of the road. This becomes a matter of education and enforcement by police. I will ask the police to take notice of this situation.
There are street lights on both sides of Dutton Street, but on the old Merrimack Rug store side the street lights can not be placed at the intersection due to the overhanging canopy. I will check with our DPW to see if any lights can be added to reduce the darkness at the intersection.

Thank you for the response, explanation and next steps. Probably a police question, but would it be possible to have one of those "yield to pedestrians" signs in the crosswalk or some other very visible sign without interrupting the intersection? I almost got hit again Saturday night.

Eric, I respect the factual correctness of everything you point out about the way things are working, but I think the original post also accurately describes the danger inherent in that "correct" arrangement. The short light cycle (20 seconds) for both cars and pedestrians entering the intersection from Market Street leaves inadequate time for joint use during large parts of the day, (especially in the afternoon), and causes driver impatience and ill-advised pedestrian risk-taking that's in no one's best interest. Observing that it can take most of those 20 seconds for pedestrians to cross, this effectively closes the intersection to any vehicles who choose to adhere to the laws and rules of the road. I also respect the need to keep traffic flowing along Dutton Street to carry the larger volume in and out of downtown, but it's worth noting that each direction on Dutton gets their own cycle, but that the Market Street folks have to share only one. There needs to be some greater accommodation than just "deal with it"--people are at risk here, and the multiple pedestrian accidents of the past few days should express very clearly why this is important.

There are also additional issues for vehicles caused by the fact that a good portion (majority?) of the west-bound Market Street traffic is turning left onto Dutton, while it is impeded (both temporally and visually) by the east-bound Market Street traffic continuing straight through the intersection. My suggestion would be to increase the Market Street cycle time with a dedicated left turn period for the west-bound Market Street traffic, which would both increase the time available for pedestrians, as well as reduce the impatience of vehicles in the intersection who often wait several light cycles for their chance to proceed. In the later afternoons when it is darker and traffic is heaviest, this can be significant.

The in-street Yield To Pedestrian signs cannot be used at signalized intersections. This is a federal restriction. They would be in conflict with the signal indications. Pedestrians are not allowed to use a crosswalk at a signal unless the pedestrian signal head is telling them to. One of these signs could give peds the impression that it is alright to cross when the signal is telling them not to.
The comments regarding the volume of left turns from Market onto Dutton, and the short amount of green time for this movement are well taken. While additional green time may indeed be warranted, it would impact the existing coordination of the signals along Dutton Street during the peak periods. We may be able to increase the green time for Market Street outside of the peak periods, but changes to the peak period timings would also require retiming the other signals along Dutton to keep the coordination in effect. I will look into this and make whatever changes are possible.

Thank ou

Is it possible to learn what may have been done to warrant closing this issue? It was suggested that lengthening cycle times would be investigated. Was this done? Was there an outcome?

Thank you for reporting. This issue has been assigned to the Transportation Engineer for follow-up.