Timing Isn’t Right for New Traffic Signal

Dear Street Smart:

During my commute to work, I head south on Euclid Street and turn left onto Talbert Avenue in Fountain Valley. But since the installation of a new signal just down Talbert at Newhope Street, my commute time has doubled.

My concern is the timing of the two signals. While making a left onto Talbert from Euclid, traffic is continuously stopped in the middle of the intersection because of a red light at Newhope, creating a hazard.

It appears that the timing of the Euclid and Newhope lights are not in sync. Why is this? It seems that in order to keep traffic flowing safely, the timing of the signals needs to be changed.

David M. Faris

Fountain Valley

There has indeed been some trouble with those signals. Jeff Sinn, Fountain Valley city engineer, said the pedestrian button at the Newhope signal has been malfunctioning, triggering the light to respond as if someone were trying to cross the street. The result is a longer red for folks headed eastbound on Talbert Avenue.

Sinn said that problem is being rectified. The city is also installing a master computer to control signal lights throughout the city, which will allow traffic engineers at City Hall to fine-tune the signal timing as the day progresses, better customizing it to the vagaries of traffic.

Even then, he cautioned, life will be far from peachy for people turning left from Euclid onto Talbert. The priority on Talbert is to keep the signals synchronized for traffic headed eastbound. Unless they time it just right, left turners may end up hitting an occasional red light at Newhope, he said.

“You have to get a compromise as best you can,” Sinn noted, adding that the city will try to give additional weight in the mornings to left turners so they have a better chance of getting a green light through Newhope.

Dear Street Smart:

I’m really disappointed in your piece about window tinting (April 30). You’re so busy trying to look into other cars it’s lucky you’re alive. Keep your eyes on the road, buddy!

I agree that dark window tint should be prohibited on driver’s and passenger’s windows. But there is nothing wrong with having a light to medium tint. From personal experience, I think it’s safe and fantastic.

I was in a car accident. My head hit the side window, which was tinted. I think the tinting helped keep the glass from flying and cutting my face and my child. The glass shattered, but stayed intact. Also, if someone tries to break into your car, there is no way they can get through the tinting film to get anything.

I think your article was ridiculous and a waste of time. I love window tint in my home and car. It preserves, protects and it’s safe.

Brenda Smyth

Santa Ana

Preserves, protects and is safe, eh? Sounds like a nice commercial endorsement.

Yours was one of several letters and phone calls spawned by the April 30 column that dealt with window tinting. Seems there are lots of folks out there who love the stuff. That’s fine, gang. I was just trying to quote the law as recited by the California Highway Patrol.

Several people said the Highway Patrol has something of a vendetta against tinted windows simply because of a fear that the blackened sheets of glass can hide an occupant with a gun, putting an approaching officer in danger.

Others felt I should have more forcefully stated that windows can legally be tinted after a car has left the showroom floor as long as the windshield and front side windows are left untouched and mirrors are installed on both sides.

One man called to note that the law allows people with medical conditions such as skin cancer to tint all their windows. Makes sense to me.

Another caller disputed a Highway Patrol spokeswoman’s claim that the darkened windows are more dangerous at night because they create visibility problems. He said there was no scientific proof. I won’t hold my breath for that.

But let me make one thing perfectly clear: I do not spend all my time looking into other people’s cars. I have enough trouble keeping my own jalopy pointed in a straight line.

Dear Street Smart:

Referring to the new diamond lane on the San Diego Freeway: On the freeways in Hawaii they have signs posted that tell what the fine is for violating the car-pool lane.

Maybe if Caltrans would post some signs along there, some of these turkeys would give a second thought about getting into there.

Les Beauchamp

San Clemente

Funny you should mention this. Signs reading, “Carpool Violation $246 Minimum Fine,” recently went up at several spots along the Costa Mesa Freeway. If the signs, which were paid for by the Orange County Transportation Commission, prove to be an effective deterrent, we may soon see similar placards sprout along the San Diego Freeway car-pool lanes.