Green Man at crossroads

ciaran75

Guys,

Does anyone know what idiot has decided to change junctions/crossroads over the last year so that traffic now stop on all four directions while the green man comes on.

If you look they come on for 30 seconds every 2 minutes regardless of people so basically thats 15 minutes every hour nothing moves

They will probably argue safety but irish people DON'T wait 90 seconds to cross a road when the traffic light is already red and no traffic moving, they just cross. 90 seconds doesn't sound like much but when your waiting it is.

I've seen it done once or twice in australia & germany but only for really busy pedestrian junctions. eg. It works fine for the dame st / georges st junction as lots of people cross but they have it at junctions where you get tiny numbers crossing daily.

No wonder traffic doesn't move in the city as we've lights every 50 meters, all on their own timing system, nothing is linked.

Cheers,

Trampas

say the lights have only one green light and no filters. how would you work the pedestrian lights then at a crossroad?

Stark

I love the pedestrian trick of "start crossing the road. As your crossing, hit the button." 30 seconds later, lights go red and not a pedestrian in sight.

ciaran75

generally the way it was done before was

eg.
traffic moving north/south have 1 minute green light while traffic east/west have red light with the green man for say 30/45 seconds then allowing some time for traffic to turn east/west if required.

then visa versa,

Del2005

Trampas wrote: »

say the lights have only one green light and no filters. how would you work the pedestrian lights then at a crossroad?

Same way as lots of other countries do it. The pedestrian goes in the same direction of traffic flow. If anyone is turning the pedestrian has right of way over traffic so everything stops till pedestrians cross the road. All it takes is a bit of information and enforcement.

murphaph

Del2005 wrote: »

Same way as lots of other countries do it. The pedestrian goes in the same direction of traffic flow. If anyone is turning the pedestrian has right of way over traffic so everything stops till pedestrians cross the road. All it takes is a bit of information and enforcement.

Yup-instant massive increase in junction capacity and consequent reduction in congestion. You'll now get all the arguments that 'irish drivers couldn't handle it' etc. etc. but in fact I think irish drivers are pretty good at giving way to pedestrians where required by law.

Run_to_da_hills

Its got to do with the audio for the blind. A blind guy could be waiting at a corner and the audio beep for the all clear for one direction at an intersection but not for the other. The guy subsequently walks out in front on an on coming bus and gets flattened. To play safe the council halts traffic in all directions. Ireland is away ahead the US & Australia on this one.

Stark

A good idea in the cases where audio crossings exist. I've seen the four-way green man setup in many cases where there were no beepers at the crossings though.

bazzer

It's strange when people talked about getting knocked down, it always seems to be by a bus!

Stark

Probably because you stand a chance of getting up again after being knocked down by a car, whereas a bus is a different story.

ciaran75

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Its got to do with the audio for the blind. To play safe the council halts traffic in all directions. Ireland is away ahead the US & Australia on this one.

At least its some sort of explanation but does mean the rest of us suffer cause of it. Could they not come up with a better solution so blind people know when to cross safely.

The US will never put this in to practice as now even on a green man traffic is still allowed turn but pedestrians get priority.

Zoney

If they did implement the system of allowing left-turn traffic filter with pedestrians crossing on side road, we should make use of the amber man that crossings here have - i.e. unless pedestrians have exclusivity, warn them to look out for maniac drivers by having flashing amber instead of green. Also drivers could have the flashing amber arrow left turn signal (already used for give way to through traffic on the other road) rather than a carte blanche green turn signal. Pedestrians could still press the button to wait for exclusivity (e.g. blind, elderly, buggy-laden or cautious pedestrians needing to cross).

I thought as regards beeping, different tones were used for the different crossings at the junction, also the beeping is very directional (although I guess if you have hearing in only one ear this is less useful). Anyway, certainly there are crossings (in Limerick at least) that have green pedestrian sequence at different times on different junction arms (facilitated by one way traffic restrictions) despite audio feedback.

Audio feedback is useful for ordinary pedestrians too (potentially more observable than signals across the road) - important obviously for it not to be misleading.

elekid

From a pedestrian point of view it's great when the entire crossroads gets the green man at once because it means you can cross from one corner to the opposite corner without having to wait twice as long for 2 seperate sets of lights to change. If anything I'd like to see it happen at more crossroads. Although it is crazy for it to happen when there is no one actually waiting to cross.

I know there are many good drivers out there (and posting in this thread) but from my daily experience of walking through Dublin city centre I can't say I'd trust a lot of drivers to behave if allowed to make turns through pedestrian crossings.

Pedestrian lights at junctions should only go red when someone wants to cross and have pressed the button, also the lights have intelligent controllers attached to road sensors, so why not use them!

So annoying having to wait for nonexistant traffic (vehicular & pedestrian)at the lights!

godtabh

A rap around red phase (all red phase) is considered the safest approach for pedestrian safety in built up areas. It reduces flow efficiency but increase pedestrian safety. It’s becoming more and more standard.

cyclopath2001

Deleted User wrote: »

Pedestrian lights at junctions should only go red when someone wants to cross and have pressed the button, also the lights have intelligent controllers attached to road sensors, so why not use them!

So annoying having to wait for nonexistant traffic (vehicular & pedestrian)at the lights!

Do you mean give priority to vehicular traffic at all times and only permit pedestrians to cross as and when convenient and permitted by drivers?

I think a first/come first/served system would be fairer.

L1011

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Do you mean give priority to vehicular traffic at all times and only permit pedestrians to cross as and when convenient and permitted by drivers?

I think a first/come first/served system would be fairer.

No, he didn't say that at all, but you had to imagine it to further your platform...

MYOB

MYOB wrote: »

No, he didn't say that at all, but you had to imagine it to further your platform...

Yes! thanks, as you have correctly understood, (rephrased for those that don't get it) what I mean is the lights respond to the needs of all users, but only when there is a requirement for them to cross.

cyclopath2001

Deleted User wrote: »

Yes! thanks, as you have correctly understood, (rephrased for those that don't get it) what I mean is the lights respond to the needs of all users, but only when there is a requirement for them to cross.

So signals for both vehicles and pedestrians on red until one or other arrives? And, whoever gets there first gets priority?

Present system gives priority to vehicles by default, so this would be a welcome change in favour of pedestrians, who are at present, unequally treated.

cyclopath2001

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

So signals for both vehicles and pedestrians on red until one or other arrives? And, whoever gets there first gets priority?

When it's quiet, yes there's nothing worse than waiting for the lights to go through a times sequence with tumbleweed at the other phases. If a pedestrian presses the button the lights will immediatly change for them as well as switch for the odd car that passes at those times.

Or even better (where possible), use the flashing amber phase (as used in the US)

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Present system gives priority to vehicles by default, so this would be a welcome change in favour of pedestrians, who are at present, unequally treated.

if the junction is in an area with a large pedestrian to vehicle ratio, then it makes sense to have pedestrians crossing "hard coded" in during busy times, the remainder of the time, use the sensors/buttons to allow the lights to respond to needs of all users.

MOH

Deleted User wrote: »

Pedestrian lights at junctions should only go red when someone wants to cross and have pressed the button, also the lights have intelligent controllers attached to road sensors, so why not use them!

So annoying having to wait for nonexistant traffic (vehicular & pedestrian)at the lights!

On the flip side, if cars are stopped at a red light where there's pedestrian lights, but there's nothing turning into the road (or it's one way), why don't the pedestrian lights automatically go green instead of staying red unless the button is pushed?

Doodah7

What really drives me mad are the junctions where the pedestrian crossings are activated even if there are no pedestrians. SDCC seem particularly guilty of this. Ends up that all four routes ast a junction wait for green-amber-red man sequence even though no-one pressed the button or is crossing the road. Complete waste of time...

MOH

MOH wrote: »

On the flip side, if cars are stopped at a red light where there's pedestrian lights, but there's nothing turning into the road (or it's one way), why don't the pedestrian lights automatically go green instead of staying red unless the button is pushed?

I think that already happens at some junctions (or part of) where there is no chance of road traffic crossing the pedestrians path, if it doesn't it should!

cyclopath2001

Personally, I'm in favour of removing traffic signals, lowering speed limits and having a first/come first served approach, with every other vehicle giving way and pedestrians having priority at all times. The delay caused by lower speeds might be compensated by smoother flowing traffic.

Traffic signals are a failed effort to regulate selfish behaviour.

cyclopath2001

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Personally, I'm in favour of removing traffic signals, lowering speed limits and having a first/come first served approach, with every other vehicle giving way and pedestrians having priority at all times. The delay caused by lower speeds might be compensated by smoother flowing traffic.

A recipe for creating the perfect conditions for road rage!.

FruitLover

bazzer wrote: »

It's strange when people talked about getting knocked down, it always seems to be by a bus!

Given Dublin Bus' track record, is it a surprise?

cyclopath2001

Deleted User wrote: »

A recipe for creating the perfect conditions for road rage!.

From what I see, we already have that.

There must be some way of getting people to respect each other?

L1011

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Personally, I'm in favour of removing traffic signals, lowering speed limits and having a first/come first served approach, with every other vehicle giving way and pedestrians having priority at all times. The delay caused by lower speeds might be compensated by smoother flowing traffic.

No, the reason you're in favour of lowering speed limits and removing traffic signals is to further your sole platform - that of the Cycling Facist - as no traffic signals would mean you could claim you were never in the wrong; and lower speed limits would make there little advantage to using a car.

Your woeful attempts at showing your 'knowledge' of the rules of the road and the basic tenets of safe driving demonstrate this thoroughly.

cyclopath2001

MYOB wrote: »

No, the reason you're in favour of lowering speed limits and removing traffic signals is to further your sole platform - that of the Cycling Facist - as no traffic signals would mean you could claim you were never in the wrong; and lower speed limits would make there little advantage to using a car.

Your woeful attempts at showing your 'knowledge' of the rules of the road and the basic tenets of safe driving demonstrate this thoroughly.

It's with some sadness That I read your abuse and lies. I am so sorry that you felt the need to attack me personally, but believe me, I do understand how threatened you must feel when ideals you believe to be sacred in are challenged. New ideas can be quite threatnening.

The advantage of using a car comes, quite often, at the expense of curtailing the rights of others.

The idea of lowering limits, removing signs and traffic signals is quite a valid one and is being tried elsewhere.

murphaph

The problem of misleading audio indicators to blind people at 4 way (or more compex) crossroads was solved many years ago and is in use in Germany and the UK (and to a limited extent in Dublin City also). You simply switch off the audio and use a tactile method. The vision impaired person simply holds a little knob which rotates (UK system) or they sometimes vibrate (that's what we and the germans use).

There is no good excuse for not implementing the "pedestrians with traffic fow" method. This method also encourages use of 'on path' cycle lanes, much despised by cyclists because they have to yield at every intersection to turning vehicles.

cyclopath2001

murphaph wrote: »

There is no good excuse for not implementing the "pedestrians with traffic fow" method. This method also encourages use of 'on path' cycle lanes, much despised by cyclists because they have to yield at every intersection to turning vehicles.

The arguments in favour of suitably adapted traffic signals for the visually impaired are quite strong. It's unlikely that at the speeds most vehicle drivers prefer to travel, that they will have time to appreciate the individual difficulties of a visually impaired person.

Pedestrians already have a range of laws giving them right-of-way at junctions but these are generally ignored by vehicle-drivers and not are enforced. For example, I've never seen anyone ticketed for failing to give way to pedestrians when coming out of a side-road or entrance. Examples:

A driver of a vehicle entering a public road from a place which is not a public road shall yield the right of way to all vehicles and pedestrians proceeding in either direction along the public road.....A driver of a vehicle approaching a road junction by a road which is not a major road shall, notwithstanding that there is no traffic sign indicating that the last mentioned road is a major road, yield the right of way to traffic and pedestrians on the major road.....A driver shall not overtake, or attempt to overtake, if to do so would endanger, or cause inconvenience to, any other person.

The function of traffic signals serves mostly to limit the right of way of pedestrians to cross and to give the most priority to vehicular traffic. This is due to the long delays between crossing phases, short crossing times and absurd impositions requiring people to wait/stop/cross up to three times the distance of the actual junction they wish to cross.