Pedestrians made to wait as cars get the green light

RicardoSmith

cyclopath2001 wrote:

These are preposterous notions.......If cars are stuck in traffic it's because they're wasting too much road space.

Yeah you should fill that road space with pedestrians. That will get the city moving. Put pedestrian lanes along side the bus lanes, and ban all motor traffic within 1 mile of any pedestrians. Then you won't be able to legally walk to your car. Problem solved.

cyclopath2001

RicardoSmith wrote:

Yeah you should fill that road space with pedestrians. That will get the city moving. Put pedestrian lanes along side the bus lanes, and ban all motor traffic within 1 mile of any pedestrians. Then you won't be able to legally walk to your car. Problem solved.

There's no need to throw the toys out of the pram.

Why not be reasonable?

RicardoSmith

cyclopath2001 wrote:

There's no need to throw the toys out of the pram.

Why not be reasonable?

Sorry 10 miles. Happy?

seamus

The "X pays road tax" argument point is moot. Do we start classifying who has rights on the road by how much tax they pay? Should HGV be allowed mow down motorycles because they pay more tax? Of course not.

Road tax in theory is based on how much a vehicle costs the country to be driven. Pedestrians (in the capacity of walking) have little or no immediate or medium-term effect on road surfaces and the environment. Besides, you can't really tax walking. that's like taxing air.

There is little to no biase against pedestrians in this country. 4 minutes (and this is the longest, 100 seconds average for christ sake) is not a long time to wait to cross a road, especially considering most of the rest of your journey is made unimpeded by junctions and other pedestrians. Road vehicles cannot say the same.

There is a need to rethink timings of lights. Especially in Dublin city centre, there are plenty of times when it would be safe to cross at a junction of one-way roads, but the lights don't turn green. That's not to say people don't cross, but it means people don't think it's safe to cross. As well as that, there are plenty of places where a left or right turn slip lane could be added in, so people can cross at least most of the road, then wait briefly to cross the slip lane.

But there's certainly no biase. Pedestrians have highest priority on our roads, legally. Once a pedestrian is on the road, he has right of way. Period.

The problem is not law, it's education and enforcement.
Pedestrians need to learn:
1. To cross a road where a pedestrian crossing exists is an offence.
2. Crossing the road in front of moving traffic is not only dangerous to themselves, but creates a danger for drivers and other pedestrians who may be hurt in the process of trying to avoid said pedestrian.
3. When you attempt to cross the road, you don't just go. Traffic cannot, nor should not attempt to, just stop on a penny.

Motorists need to learn:
1. Travelling through any junction, anywhere, increases the liklihood of coming upon a pedestrian on the road. Even if you see a green light way off, does not mean it's safe to continue through at 50mph.
2. Regardless of how much bigger you are, pedestrians are far more unpredictable, and any pedestrian within 5m of your driving path should be expected to run in front of your at the drop of a hat.

But none of this is any use without enforcement. Pedestrians crossing on a red light, or not crossing where a pedestrian crossing is provided, must be caught and charged. Drivers speeding in built-up (and I mean Westmoreland St/O'Connell St built-up) need to be caught and charged. Drivers failing to yield (given reasonable notice) to a pedestrian attempting to cross the road, and indicating their intention (one foot on the road), need to be caught and charged.

Ideally, the necessity for the last item would be eliminated by increasing the number of pedestrian crossings on busy roads, and making it an offence to walk down/attempt to cross more types of high-speed/high-volume roads, and not just motorways. The N4 between the main junction after Heuston Station and the next main junction (outbound), for example.

Victor

seamus wrote:

Pedestrians have highest priority on our roads, legally. Once a pedestrian is on the road, he has right of way. Period

Having been run over and killed is 9/10ths of the laws of physics.

1. To cross a road where a pedestrian crossing exists is an offence.

Surely you mean "To cross a road where a pedestrian crossing is available within 15m is an offence"?

Guy:Incognito

Who said anything bout rights depending on how much tax and insurance is paid, what i said was that cars pay tax and insurance and for petrol to be able to us ethe road therefore they should get preference over people who pay nothing and are only going to be on tthe road to cross it for say 5 seconds.


And if its causing you so much stress having to wait to cross the road, go live in the country.

A Dub in Glasgo

seamus wrote:

The "X pays road tax" argument point is moot. Do we start classifying who has rights on the road by how much tax they pay? Should HGV be allowed mow down motorycles because they pay more tax? Of course not.

Road tax in theory is based on how much a vehicle costs the country to be driven. Pedestrians (in the capacity of walking) have little or no immediate or medium-term effect on road surfaces and the environment. Besides, you can't really tax walking. that's like taxing air.

There is little to no biase against pedestrians in this country. 4 minutes (and this is the longest, 100 seconds average for christ sake) is not a long time to wait to cross a road, especially considering most of the rest of your journey is made unimpeded by junctions and other pedestrians. Road vehicles cannot say the same.

There is a need to rethink timings of lights. Especially in Dublin city centre, there are plenty of times when it would be safe to cross at a junction of one-way roads, but the lights don't turn green. That's not to say people don't cross, but it means people don't think it's safe to cross. As well as that, there are plenty of places where a left or right turn slip lane could be added in, so people can cross at least most of the road, then wait briefly to cross the slip lane.

But there's certainly no biase. Pedestrians have highest priority on our roads, legally. Once a pedestrian is on the road, he has right of way. Period.

The problem is not law, it's education and enforcement.
Pedestrians need to learn:
1. To cross a road where a pedestrian crossing exists is an offence.
2. Crossing the road in front of moving traffic is not only dangerous to themselves, but creates a danger for drivers and other pedestrians who may be hurt in the process of trying to avoid said pedestrian.
3. When you attempt to cross the road, you don't just go. Traffic cannot, nor should not attempt to, just stop on a penny.

Motorists need to learn:
1. Travelling through any junction, anywhere, increases the liklihood of coming upon a pedestrian on the road. Even if you see a green light way off, does not mean it's safe to continue through at 50mph.
2. Regardless of how much bigger you are, pedestrians are far more unpredictable, and any pedestrian within 5m of your driving path should be expected to run in front of your at the drop of a hat.

But none of this is any use without enforcement. Pedestrians crossing on a red light, or not crossing where a pedestrian crossing is provided, must be caught and charged. Drivers speeding in built-up (and I mean Westmoreland St/O'Connell St built-up) need to be caught and charged. Drivers failing to yield (given reasonable notice) to a pedestrian attempting to cross the road, and indicating their intention (one foot on the road), need to be caught and charged.

Ideally, the necessity for the last item would be eliminated by increasing the number of pedestrian crossings on busy roads, and making it an offence to walk down/attempt to cross more types of high-speed/high-volume roads, and not just motorways. The N4 between the main junction after Heuston Station and the next main junction (outbound), for example.

Some very valid points but it is almost impossible to stop 'jaywalking'. I done it plenty of times in Dublin city centre in the late 1980s/early 1990s when the traffic was not as busy as ir is now (hard to imagine considering it was very busy back then). It is totally impractical to haul everyone to the cells who 'jaywalk'. It is not right but I think the traffic police have much bigger fish to fry.

The one junction that really irritates me when crossing is Phibsboro Road and the North Circular Road (I stay in Phibsboro when I go to Dublin). The traffic light sequence for all sides at the junction is green for straight ahead and red for left filter. During this red filter time, the green man appears for pedestrians to cross. The amount of times I have been nearly run over by idiots who see the green light and turn left (without an indicator either) and ignore the red is unbelievable.

seamus

Victor wrote:

Surely you "To cross a road where a pedestrian crossing is available within 15m is an offence"?

Of course . Damn tiredness.

Stekelly wrote:

Who said anything bout rights depending on how much tax and insurance is paid, what i said was that cars pay tax and insurance and for petrol to be able to us ethe road therefore they should get preference over people who pay nothing and are only going to be on tthe road to cross it for say 5 seconds.

A person pays tax on a mode of transport, in principle for the cost of their mode of transport to the country. Cars pay a certain amount of tax, motorcycles less, trucks more. So everyone pays an equal amount, relative to their effect on the infrastructure/environment. Since pedestrians and cyclists have no real cost to the country (while using their chosen mode of transport), then in principle they're paying an equal amount of tax due compared to a motorist, relative to their net effect on the country, i.e. nil. That means that they pay their fair share, so why should motorists be given preference?

A Dub in Glasgo

Stekelly wrote:

Who said anything bout rights depending on how much tax and insurance is paid, what i said was that cars pay tax and insurance and for petrol to be able to us ethe road therefore they should get preference over people who pay nothing and are only going to be on tthe road to cross it for say 5 seconds.


And if its causing you so much stress having to wait to cross the road, go live in the country.

In a city centre environment, priorty should be given over to pedestrians. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

cyclopath2001

RicardoSmith wrote:

Sorry 10 miles. Happy?

Listen, I know change is hard, but try to be part of the solution, not the problem.

pork99

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

In a city centre environment, priorty should be given over to pedestrians. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Traffic in Dublin City Centre has become scelerotic - it's at a dysfunctional level. Thankfully I no longer work in the city centre but last week I had to go into town at 5 pm. The 46A took about 25 minutes to get from Stillorgan to Stephens Green (bus lanes). It then took 15 minutes to get from Stephens Green to Dame Street, at which point I got off and walked the rest of the way because at that rate it would have taken at least another 15 minutes at least to get to Parnell Square.

Laws enforcing pedestrian right of way should be aggressively enforced as one means of discouraging private car drivers from coming into the city centre.

When I worked in city centre I used to get the bus to work. One of my bosses who lives near me ALWAYS drove his Merc in. He lived near the same bus routes as me but never used public transport - it was as though it was a status thing - "I can't go on the bus like a peasant". People like that need to be penalised very harshly (give me a 2x4 and I'd happily punish him - and not only for his private car usage )

His superior (the CEO) lived further away and yet rarely used his car usually commuting by bus or motorbike. He was Swedish though. They are used to being able to afford nice cars AND have access to public transport and therefore probably don't have the same compulsion to display their nouveau riche social status by driving a Merc every day.

RicardoSmith

Its all very well to moan about car use if you don't HAVE to use one. Theres a lot of Dublin City and the rest of the country where public transport is not a practical option. So the attitude, its ok for me so its ok for everyone, is just being facile.

cyclopath2001

RicardoSmith wrote:

Its all very well to moan about car use if you don't HAVE to use one. Theres a lot of Dublin City and the rest of the country where public transport is not a practical option. So the attitude, its ok for me so its ok for everyone, is just being facile.

So, why MUST you use a car & why must the rest of us suffer because of your life choices?

RicardoSmith

cyclopath2001 wrote:

So, why MUST you use a car & why must the rest of us suffer because of your life choices?

Its saves 2+ hours a day. Public transport is unreliable. The trains are dangerously overcrowded. Public transport is uncomfortable. Theres no public transport in certain areas. You have items you need that you can't carry. You have kids.

Theres lots of reasons.

Why should road users (the majority) suffer because of the minority? Besides I don't think those 20 minute pedestrian tailbacks are that much of hardship. Can you not read a book or something, or just jay walk for entertainment. Motorists get a kick of that at least.

cyclopath2001

RicardoSmith wrote:

Its saves 2+ hours a day. Public transport is unreliable. The trains are dangerously overcrowded. Public transport is uncomfortable. Theres no public transport in certain areas. You have items you need that you can't carry. You have kids.

These are all the consequences of choices YOU made. Move to a place with public transport.

Waiting at pedestrian crossings is also uncomfortable. The footpaths are dangerously overcrowded becauase cars take up too much space.

How big is your car? Why not ride a motorbike?

Why should road users (the majority) suffer because of the minority?

In the city centre, car-users are a minority.

seamus

cyclopath2001 wrote:

These are all the consequences of choices YOU made. Move to a place with public transport.

Like where?

All of the best serviced places are, how shall we put it, upper-middle class. Barring D4, D6W and along the Stillorgan dual carraigeway up to Blackrock, nowhere in this country has reliable, speedy, frequent public transport.

You cannot choose to move somewhere if you cannot afford it. Where I live, public transport is remarkably speedy for the distance, but in the mornings and evenings, it's a nightmare. It gets stuck in traffic and is always overcrowded. Not to mention that for some people in the area (Lucan) the closest bus into town can be a two mile walk away.

I drive a motorbike, but that's not for everyone. Frankly, there a lot of people driving cars, I'd prefer didn't drive motorbikes.

You can say that a person's problem with transport is down to a choice they've made, but that doesn't mean that our transport system shouldn't allow people to make these choices. Having children, buying a cheaper home, living a while away from work, these are all choices that people make, but why should transport be a hinderance? Why shouldn't they have a right to make these choices, and still have the benefit of reliable, decent, speedy(ish) transport, however they transport themselves?

RicardoSmith

cyclopath2001 wrote:

These are all the consequences of choices YOU made. Move to a place with public transport..

Ah yes its more practical to spend 200k on living in the city center than it is to buy a 10k car. Its obviously very astute to pay more rent in the city center than you would on a mortgage elsewhere. Very sensible.

Oh course where I live does have public transport. And its everybit as dire as it was 10 years ago. But I didn't realise that I should move every time I'm working in a new location. Its not as if the rest of the family are important. No we should all move to suit me. Its so easy to move isn't. Sure you'd do it in a day. Doesn't cost anything either.

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Waiting at pedestrian crossings is also uncomfortable. The footpaths are dangerously overcrowded becauase cars take up too much space.
..

How about we make all roads one lane wide. Yes that would be practical. Like you said earlier people need the same room as cars, trucks and buses. Dangerously overcrowded. Yes thats true. Standing on the pavement, is more overcrowded than a bus or train at peak time. How many times have I stood on a city center pavement stuck with my arms pinned to my side for 40 mins, thinking I must bring the kids next time. They'd love it.

cyclopath2001 wrote:

How big is your car? Why not ride a motorbike?

Yes a motorbike. Much safer and practical. The family love being strapped to the pannier on a icy morning, with the refreshing winter rain. Room for everything and safe as houses. Having the lower part of you legs shattered is nothing to the fun of making metal detectors go bing, and sure you get used to the broken collar bones after 2 or 3.

cyclopath2001 wrote:

In the city centre, car-users are a minority.

Great the way the whole population can fit into a mile radius of the city center isn't it. Theres no trucks and buses so I guess that explains why is so roomy and why families are dying to live bang in the middle of all that night life.


Ah you have to laugh...

cyclopath2001

There go the toys out of the pram again.

I know many people who live within 30 miles of Dublin, not 1 mile, and who commute by public transport. I know people who cycle from 10 miles out.

Most of the cars I see in the city centre are empty: just a driver & a lot of wasted space, not a kid in sight.

You might be saving money by living where you do, but it is at expense of the wellbeing of others who have to give way to your car & breath your fumes.

You have choices, make good ones.

RicardoSmith

cyclopath2001 wrote:

There go the toys out of the pram again..

What toys, prams take up too much room. Ban then. No problem.

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I know many people who live within 30 miles of Dublin, not 1 mile, and who commute by public transport. I know people who cycle from 10 miles out.

Funny, you'd think you'd have persuaded them to move to somewhere where they can walk from by now. Why on earth live so far out?

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Most of the cars I see in the city centre are empty: just a driver & a lot of wasted space, not a kid in sight.

Yeah. Since the majority of schools and school runs are in the city center thats kinda odd. You'd think at the end of the journey that the cars would be full since no one would get dropped off on the way. Its obviously more efficent to spend 2 hours on a bus than 20 mins in car, so its only the crazy people in the cars.

cyclopath2001 wrote:

You might be saving money by living where you do, but it is at expense of the wellbeing of others who have to give way to your car & breath your fumes.

Actually I have to give way to pedestrians. The law apparently. But you're right its obviously more healthly to live in the city center than not. Which is why all the health concious people and families live in the city center. The only way to have no fumes is to have no cars, buses or trucks. Another very practical suggestion.

cyclopath2001 wrote:

You have choices, make good ones.

Or just be crazy as a coot. Then you can spout any nonsense.

cyclopath2001

I can see that you're obviously very agitated that your way of life is under threat. It's natural to respond irrationally, I understand.

Or just be crazy as a coot. Then you can spout any nonsense.

Yes indeed.

Maybe sometime in the future you'll see that to solve the problem you need to be part of the solution.

In the meantime, we'll just have to breathe your fumes & stay out of your way.

seamus

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I know many people who live within 30 miles of Dublin, not 1 mile, and who commute by public transport. I know people who cycle from 10 miles out.

And they're happy with that. But it doesn't magically make public transport good. Some people it suits to use public transport. Some it suits to cycle. I'd love to cycle to work, but given the distance, I'd be sweating no matter how fit I was, and there are no showers in our place, so that's that out of the question. Oh, but wait, that's my fault for choosing to work here isn't it?

I put it to you, that inhaling car fumes and waiting at traffic lights are a consequence of your choices. Deal with it.

cyclopath2001

seamus wrote:

I put it to you, that inhaling car fumes and waiting at traffic
lights are a consequence of your choices. Deal with it.

There's a difference, you're messing with my freedom.

c:\

DadaKopf

Across Scandinavia and in Finland, everyone waits at the traffic lights until they see the green man.

I think it's great and it makes me angry when walking through Dublin at the best of times that pedestrians are just as bad as drivers and cyclists.

The way I see it is this: the whole pedestrian crossing thing is a contract between pedestrians and drivers which is worth keeping for two reasons, (1) it ensures a smooth throughflow of traffic and (2) less people get knocked down.

Now, people only got like that in Scandinavia because the police enforced jay-walking fines. I think our police, or Corporation lads should consider doing the same thing. I can't see how this is some fascist hate crime, it seems to me it's a perfectly rational, socially responsible effort at changing Dublins shoe culture.

Whoever said our pedestrian crossing laws or whatever are made by people who hate freedom has a screw loose. However, the Green Party has a point when they say that crossings are often biased in favour of traffic, which only encourages people to rush across the road even more. But I can imagine that it's tough to balance chronic traffic congestion with the pedestrian flows. Many footpaths of Dublin are more congested than in major thoroughfares in London.

But I also don't see how extending crossing times might induce people to walk in Dublin more, and reduce traffic congestion because they're there already. So the trump card is, unfortunately, in favour of the monster machines. I also can't see how it's a long-term problem when traffic congestion should hopefully be reduced with the introduction of an effective, integrated transport system, whenever that happens, after which time, the traffic lights can be reprogrammed.

But, really, why are people in such a rush these days anyway?

Victor

A very few pedestrian crossing have instant response to a pedestrian request and htese are probably th best crossings in the city.

seamus wrote:

I put it to you, that inhaling car fumes and waiting at traffic lights are a consequence of your choices. Deal with it.

Pollution levels are are generally higher inside vehicles than at the kerbside (soot aside perhaps).

RicardoSmith

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I can see that you're obviously very agitated that your way of life is under threat. It's natural to respond irrationally, I understand.

Yes indeed.

Maybe sometime in the future you'll see that to solve the problem you need to be part of the solution.

In the meantime, we'll just have to breathe your fumes & stay out of your way.

I'm just amused at how you can make so many surreal suggestions and expect anyone to take you seriously. Your arguments are all one sided and nonsensical. You refuse to accept that some people need to use a motor vehicle or that life exists outside of the city center, or indeed outside of getting to work. I actually haven't driven to work on a regular basis in a couple of years, but that doesn't mean I'm oblivious to other peoples need to do so.

sliabh

Victor wrote:

A very few pedestrian crossing have instant response to a pedestrian request and htese are probably th best crossings in the city.

These are pretty hard to find though. I have heard there is one opposite the Dail (to allow politicians get back from the pub in a hurry) but do you know of any others?

Up in Sandyford there is one down from the Luas stop. About half the time you get an instant response from it.

RicardoSmith

Re: pedestrian crossing with an instant response to a pedestrian request

How does this work with traffic, and especially heavier vehicles stopping distances at 20-30mph?

sliabh

RicardoSmith wrote:

Re: pedestrian crossing with an instant response to a pedestrian request

How does this work with traffic, and especially heavier vehicles stopping distances at 20-30mph?

When you hit the button the road traffic light goes orange straight away. Then there is the usual 3-5 seconds before the red light. Motorists get as much notice as they usually do.

cyclopath2001

RicardoSmith wrote:

You refuse to accept that some people need to use a motor vehicle or that life exists outside of the city center, or indeed outside of getting to work. I actually haven't driven to work on a regular basis in a couple of years, but that doesn't mean I'm oblivious to other peoples need to do so.

You've either mis-understood or deliberately mis-quoted what I said. It's OK, I understand, you're resistant to change. It's a normal human reaction when what you believe is challenged.

I've no problem with people using motor vehicles as long as they do not injure, poison or obstruct others.

I live outside of the city centre.

I refuse to accept that that there can be any justification for unfairly discriminating against pedestrians.

Alun

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I've no problem with people using motor vehicles as long as they do not injure, poison or obstruct others.

So that's buses out of the picture too then ?