At the lights!

mackeminexile

Was out for a spin this afternoon and ended up coming back through Dun Laoghaire. At the lights at the bottom of town facing the Dart Station with Meadows and Byrne to my right. I was in the left hand lane in front of a queue of cars waiting for the feeder light. The main light goes green then back to red and I hear a beep or two. Ignored it and continued waiting. Another few beeps and I was approached by a guy from 2 cars back to tell me that I can turn when the light is green. I informed him that there is a feeder light with a pedestrian crossing so I have to wait. As he's instructing me in his version of the rues of the road the feeder light goes green and a load of the cars in the queue start beeping at him. I went on my merry way, smug as you like! Anyone else encountered this kind of behaviour?

ezra_pound

mackeminexile wrote: »

Was out for a spin this afternoon and ended up coming back through Dun Laoghaire. At the lights at the bottom of town facing the Dart Station with Meadows and Byrne to my right. I was in the left hand lane in front of a queue of cars waiting for the feeder light. The main light goes green then back to red and I hear a beep or two. Ignored it and continued waiting. Another few beeps and I was approached by a guy from 2 cars back to tell me that I can turn when the light is green. I informed him that there is a feeder light with a pedestrian crossing so I have to wait. As he's instructing me in his version of the rues of the road the feeder light goes green and a load of the cars in the queue start beeping at him. I went on my merry way, smug as you like! Anyone else encountered this kind of behaviour?

Was he not right though? Surely you can proceed turning left with the main green light? Don't really know the turn.

mackeminexile

not if the pedestrian crossing is there

DirkVoodoo

Was the pedestrian light green?

Normally a filter light is to let traffic turn left when the main light is red, otherwise the main light being green means proceed if clear for all traffic.

I know that normally when there is a pedestrian crossing that goes green, the filter light will actually stay red for the left turning lane. Similar to the rock road north at booterstown avenue, N11 north at fosters avenue, etc.

If the filter light was red with main light green and ped crossing green, then you were correct. Otherwise I would say you were holding up traffic. I know that turn, but I can't remember the light sequence.

Captain Havoc

mackeminexile wrote: »

not if the pedestrian crossing is there

No, once the light is green you can proceed. The filter light is for traffic going in that direction only but once the round light is green, all traffic can move.

DirkVoodoo

This turn, right? (no, left...haw haw!)

If the light was green, then conceivably the pedestrian light could also have been green, in which case you were right. But I'd imagine that for maintaining flow, the pedestrian light would go after this sequence.



Where is Fintan when you need him. Note the car above, stopped in such a way as to partially obscure both the cycle lane and the stop box for bikes. And the jaywalkers!

DirkVoodoo

Captain Havoc wrote: »

No, once the light is green you can proceed. The filter light is for traffic going in that direction only but once the round light is green, all traffic can move.

Proceed IF safe to do so. While unlikely, and totally unclear from the OP, if the pedestrian crossing has a green man then you must yield. Like I said, unlikely and needs clarification.

BTW, Hartleys across the road there in the old station building, super spot to eat. Get the cod and chips, amazeballs.

Cookie_Monster

Unless there was specifically a red light stopping you from proceeding you can as long as you're careful and give way to pedestrians.

Dermot Illogical

If by main light you mean a round green light, not another arrow-type light, then your smugness is unjustified.
You don't wait for filter lights if a universal green light is showing. Why would you?

cython

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

If by main light you mean a round green light, not another arrow-type light, then your smugness is unjustified.
You don't wait for filter lights if a universal green light is showing. Why would you?

This. If the ppedestrian crossing were to be Green then the "main" green should consist of a vertical arrow for straight on. If, however, it's a solid circle then proceed if safe and anyone in the crossing should not be there

ectoraige

mackeminexile wrote: »

Was out for a spin this afternoon and ended up coming back through Dun Laoghaire. At the lights at the bottom of town facing the Dart Station with Meadows and Byrne to my right. I was in the left hand lane in front of a queue of cars waiting for the feeder light. The main light goes green then back to red and I hear a beep or two. Ignored it and continued waiting. Another few beeps and I was approached by a guy from 2 cars back to tell me that I can turn when the light is green. I informed him that there is a feeder light with a pedestrian crossing so I have to wait. As he's instructing me in his version of the rues of the road the feeder light goes green and a load of the cars in the queue start beeping at him. I went on my merry way, smug as you like! Anyone else encountered this kind of behaviour?

If you're going to use the road, take a read through the rules of the road. Solid green light means you may proceed if it's safe to do so. Solid green arrow means you may proceed in the direction indicated if it's safe to do so. Even if there were pedestrians crossing, you should have proceeded as far as where they were crossing, unless it meant you could not clear a yellow box. I hope you're still feeling as smug.

MarkR

I'm terribly confused ted. Surely when the green arrow is on, you are expected to turn left at that junction? I can't see the lights being sequenced to that the green arrow would come on, but you'd be then blocked by pedestrians?

ted1

Green circle = go any direction
Green arrow, with red light to the right, only go on direction of arrow.
Red light with green arrow, only turn in direction of arrow.

TonyStark

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

If by main light you mean a round green light, not another arrow-type light, then your smugness is unjustified.
You don't wait for filter lights if a universal green light is showing. Why would you?

Universal green means straight on and left and right if safe to do so. For a right turn for example you may need to wait for oncoming traffic to clear.

A filter light means a clear path to that direction. They are most common for the right hand manouvre mentioned above. But it really can depend on the junction.

In this case if the light was green, it would be unlikely that the pedestrian crossings were engaged. In this case if the change was green to filter left, the driver is within his rights to ask you why you are causing an obstruction.

cormie

Yup, it's how the two above said. The regular green light being a circle is to allow traffic to proceed in all directions, there shouldn't be a regular circular light illuminated green at the same time pedestrian crossing on one side is green, unless there is a red light specifically for that direction, like here: http://goo.gl/maps/8vs5F (in fact at this junction, they replaced the red circular light on the left with a red filter light as people were breaking it while the pedestrian light was green when the green circle light on the right would illuminate for traffic going straight into town or right into the dart station). In your case, the red light is shared by the main light so you should assume you can't go unless the directional light is illuminated.

Best bet if you're not sure again is to pull into the cycle lane as opposed to possibly wrongly standing your ground and blocking everyone, makes for more stress free roads which is good for everyone

Just to note, at that junction, all pedestrian lights are green at the same time so traffic in all directions is stopped and this is the only time any pedestrian lights are green.

ford2600

Unless the Local Authority like getting sued, if a circular green was on for OP can't see how pedestrians could have a green on crossing to his left.

Sugarlumps

You shouldn't be on a bike if you can't follow a simple set of traffic lights.

Doctor Bob

Sugarlumps wrote: »

You shouldn't be on a bike if you can't follow a simple set of traffic lights.

Agreed. If you can't follow a simple set of traffic lights, you'd be safer in a car.

Dermot Illogical

Doctor Bob wrote: »

Agreed. If you can't follow a simple set of traffic lights, you'd be safer in a car.

In a passenger seat

mackeminexile

there were pedestrians crossing at the left as Dun Laoghaire was jammed from it being Blooms Day. I was stationed as far to the left as was possible, and holding no one up. I tend to take the view that safety is better than just going for it, and the last thing I'm going to do is barge through a load of pedestrians. If I was in the wrong how come there cars in front weren't moving?

DirkVoodoo

mackeminexile wrote: »

there were pedestrians crossing at the left as Dun Laoghaire was jammed from it being Blooms Day. I was stationed as far to the left as was possible, and holding no one up. I tend to take the view that safety is better than just going for it, and the last thing I'm going to do is barge through a load of pedestrians. If I was in the wrong how come there cars in front weren't moving?

You're not clarifying the points being made to you:

1) Was the pedestrian light green?
2) Was the main (big round light) green?
3) What cars in front?

You need to describe the actual situation and provide details, otherwise how can anyone offer an opinion?

mackeminexile

apologies, yes the main round light was green. I was at the front of the queue but as there's a cycle lane I wasn't blocking the car or 2 in front of the complainant from moving and they weren't trying to. The guy in the car decided that I was the cause of holding up his day. When I pointed out that I wasn't moving as there was a pedestrian crossing with pedestrians on it the light changed and everyone went. Where was I in the wrong?

Lumen

mackeminexile wrote: »

apologies, yes the main round light was green. I was at the front of the queue but as there's a cycle lane I wasn't blocking the car or 2 in front of the complainant from moving and they weren't trying to. The guy in the car decided that I was the cause of holding up his day. When I pointed out that I wasn't moving as there was a pedestrian crossing with pedestrians on it the light changed and everyone went. Where was I in the wrong?

We* don't understand how there can have been (a) a green pedestrian light, and (b) a green traffic light, at the same time.

* excuse the generalisation

markpb

Lumen wrote: »

We* don't understand how there can have been (a) a green pedestrian light, and (b) a green traffic light, at the same time.

Perhaps the OP had a green light, the pedestrians had a red light but were crossing anyway which made the OP unwilling to proceed because it wasn't safe to do so?

I don't think any council in Ireland would signal a junction so that motorists and pedestrians would both get a conflicting green light.

CramCycle

Having used that junction before (bar it was awhile ago), the ped light would have been red in the situation described but like most similar ped junctions (the right turn before crossing O'Connell bridge being the best example I can think of), the pedestrians seen no cars moving and though, well I am going and the rest follow like lemmings, no one stops until the majority of peds are clear or a vehicle starts to move around the corner and people think, well, lets not risk it now.

The OP was not wrong if he felt it was not safe but he was not required to wait, he could have started the turn, stopped due to pedestrians and continued when the path was clear (bar blocking the junction if there was a risk that this would happen). If there is no red filter light then the general green light means proceed if it is safe to do so in all directions that it is legal to proceed.

horslips

Sugarlumps wrote: »

You shouldn't be on a bike if you can't follow a simple set of traffic lights.

Is that you again Fintan?

mackeminexile

that was exactly it, sorry if that wasn't initially clear. Not sure whether the pedestrian light was green or not but there were people crossing regardless.

DirkVoodoo

mackeminexile wrote: »

that was exactly it, sorry if that wasn't initially clear. Not sure whether the pedestrian light was green or not but there were people crossing regardless.

They were jaywalking and didn't have right of way. I would have started to turn and waited for people to stop crossing. Unfortunately it's like that in town, like behind Brown Thomas, if you stop and let people cross...they will keep crossing despite being in the wrong.

You were technically right, but only because the pedestrians were wrong and you can't go knocking them down. It's not good for traffic flow and you need to be a bit more assertive.

Lumen

mackeminexile wrote: »

that was exactly it, sorry if that wasn't initially clear. Not sure whether the pedestrian light was green or not but there were people crossing regardless.

So the whole feeder light thing was irrelevant?

I still can't make any sense of your original post, particularly the bit I've bolded.

mackeminexile wrote: »

At the lights at the bottom of town facing the Dart Station with Meadows and Byrne to my right. I was in the left hand lane in front of a queue of cars waiting for the feeder light. The main light goes green then back to red and I hear a beep or two. Ignored it and continued waiting. Another few beeps and I was approached by a guy from 2 cars back to tell me that I can turn when the light is green. I informed him that there is a feeder light with a pedestrian crossing so I have to wait. As he's instructing me in his version of the rues of the road the feeder light goes green and a load of the cars in the queue start beeping at him. I went on my merry way, smug as you like!

mackeminexile

depending on the situation I would be and have been. This situation didn't warrant it as there was a feeder light that was about to give inarguable right of way. Have been in a similar situation ending up surrounded by pedestrians and clipped in on O'Connell Bridge, having to unclip quickly while doing the trackie balance to stop from creaming someone. That being said, I also watched amazed as a guy with a kid on the little seat on the frame went sailing through a red later that day, I'd rather be safe and get home!

DirkVoodoo

The point is you didn't need the filter, you had the main light...

I think you should open up a copy of the rules of the road and have a good read. You were essentially holding up traffic because of jaywalkers, but unless you continued to move, people would continue to cross. It's quite a busy crossing with the dart station on one side and Dun Laoghaire shopping quarter on the other.

I'm not saying knock anyone down or plough through a green-man. There was no green-man and if you had simply started to move, people would have stopped crossing. You can see this EVERY day in town.

ectoraige

If there were pedestrians crossing, they would have been doing so with a red light on the crossing. You do of course have to yield to them anyway, but you don't do it around the corner from where they are crossing.
When your light turned green, you should have proceeded around the corner a metre or so to where they were actually crossing. At this point the pedestrians would most likely stop crossing allowing you to proceed.

Consider if there was no pedestrian crossing, and they were crossing the road ten metres further down the road. Would you still have stayed in situ, or would have have rounded the corned and proceeded as far as it was safe to do so?

Mr.Fred

Cyclists - 0

Motorist- 1

That'll give them something to bang on about for a while.

You got it wrong OP I've used this junction many times and the Green man for pedestrians would definitely not be on it would have been his brother Mr.Red.

The pedestrians were in the wrong for crossing on red.
The motorist was in the wrong for getting out his car to confront you.
Cyclist was wrong about his interpretation of the junction/ROTR.

No winners really just a lesson learned.

ectoraige

mackeminexile wrote: »

depending on the situation I would be and have been. This situation didn't warrant it as there was a feeder light that was about to give inarguable right of way.

No such thing exists. Whether the pedestrians are in the right or in the wrong, you yield to them if they are on the road in front of you.

mackeminexile

ectoraige wrote: »

No such thing exists. Whether the pedestrians are in the right or in the wrong, you yield to them if they are on the road in front of you.

fair enough. Further to the point; I was not holding anyone up! I was in the cycle lane and had made the decision to not take the turn due to pedestrians. The cars behind me were well able to take the turn regardless of me. The issue was a gentleman driving deciding that it was I who was holding up the traffic and actually getting out of his car to come and remonstrate with me and not the other drivers.

Dermot Illogical

mackeminexile wrote: »

fair enough. Further to the point; I was not holding anyone up! I was in the cycle lane and had made the decision to not take the turn due to pedestrians. The cars behind me were well able to take the turn regardless of me. The issue was a gentleman driving deciding that it was I who was holding up the traffic and actually getting out of his car to come and remonstrate with me and not the other drivers.

That makes sense. I think people just might have been a bit confused by " I was in the left hand lane in front of a queue of cars waiting for the feeder light. " in your original post.

ted1

Bear in mind that it was also bloomsday yesterday and a hot day. So Dun Laoighre was particularly busy. there would have been a continous stream of people crosing the road.

Lumen

ted1 wrote: »

Bear in mind that it was also Bloomsday yesterday and a hot day. So Dun Laoghaire was particularly busy. There would have been a continuous stream of drunk people crossing the road.

Fixed that for you.

Boom_Bap

If you were stationary while the main light was green, the cars that were queued may have been confused by your actions. They may have been waiting for you to pull off. Where you signalling to take a left or to go straight?

I wasnt there so I couldn't be too sure about the whole thing.

But a solid green light means Go in all directions if safe to do so.
An arrowed green light means go in that direction only if safe.

If you where sitting on a solid green light, not indicating left, the car behind you is indicating left, they must wait for you to go as you may be going straight through. If you both start your manouvre at the same time, the car will hit you and this would be a different type of thread.

BofaDeezNuhtz

Sure why were ya stopped at the lights in the furst place ye eegit ya

Cookie_Monster

Lumen wrote: »

We* don't understand how there can have been (a) a green pedestrian light, and (b) a green traffic light, at the same time.

* excuse the generalisation

maybe I'm used to living in NZ and not Ireland anymore but this is common here and I thought there were a few junctions in Ireland where it occured, no?

The traffic can proceed but if turning across the pedestrian crossing simply has to yield to any peds already on the crossing, otherwise can just drive through.

ezra_pound

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

maybe I'm used to living in NZ and not Ireland anymore but this is common here and I thought there were a few junctions in Ireland where it occured, no?

The traffic can proceed but if turning across the pedestrian crossing simply has to yield to any peds already on the crossing, otherwise can just drive through.

In such a case the light would be green for pedestrians and flashing amber for traffic. Has nearly got me killed as a pedestrian twice by drivers unaware of meaning of flashing amber.

Chips Lovell

Pedestrians won't stop crossing until traffic starts moving.
If traffic doesn't start moving, pedestrians will keep crossing...

ectoraige

mackeminexile wrote: »

fair enough. Further to the point; I was not holding anyone up! I was in the cycle lane and had made the decision to not take the turn due to pedestrians. The cars behind me were well able to take the turn regardless of me. The issue was a gentleman driving deciding that it was I who was holding up the traffic and actually getting out of his car to come and remonstrate with me and not the other drivers.

I wouldn't feel comfortable taking a left turn around a cyclist at a corner, unless I was certain that they weren't about to move off. In the situation described I'd assume you were distracted and could at any time notice the green and move off. What I wouldn't have done is get out of my car and started acting the bollix. It goes without saying that what that guy did was also wrong.

Idleater

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

maybe I'm used to living in NZ and not Ireland anymore but this is common here and I thought there were a few junctions in Ireland where it occured, no?

The traffic can proceed but if turning across the pedestrian crossing simply has to yield to any peds already on the crossing, otherwise can just drive through.

This is particularly common in mainland Europe

seamus

OK, so you didn't want to go while there were pedestrians crossing, but how did the feeder light change things? If there were still pedestrians crossing when the feeder light went green, why did you go? The feeder light didn't change your right-of-way, at all. The feeder light still means, "You may proceed if it is safe to do so?". So why did you wait for the feeder light?

I've never come across a junction in Ireland where there's a conflict between a green ped light and a green traffic light. It's not the norm here, so putting this in would confuse the hell out of people.

galwaycyclist

seamus wrote: »

I've never come across a junction in Ireland where there's a conflict between a green ped light and a green traffic light. It's not the norm here, so putting this in would confuse the hell out of people.

No its not the norm here but it is the norm elsewhere. Arguably we are the "abnormal" example. This bizarre practice of always making pedestrians wait for turning cars (instead of the other way around) is one of the reasons why many Irish pedestrians don't feel any obligation to respect traffic signals.

And who, in fairness, could blame them?

The Bishop Basher

ectoraige wrote: »

I wouldn't feel comfortable taking a left turn around a cyclist at a corner, unless I was certain that they weren't about to move off. In the situation described I'd assume you were distracted and could at any time notice the green and move off. What I wouldn't have done is get out of my car and started acting the bollix. It goes without saying that what that guy did was also wrong.

To be fair, there's nothing in the op to suggest the driver acted the bollix. If approaching another road user is considered acting the bollix then why is it ok for cyclists to approach cars, vans buses etc ? If people are agressive that's a whole different ball game but there's no mention of it here.

The OP, by his own admission, was feeling smug and correct when in fact all he was doing was holding up a line of traffic at a green light for no apparant reason. I would have no problem approaching a cyclist or a motorist in this situation, if for no other reason then to make sure they're ok.

ectoraige

Swanner wrote: »

To be fair, there's nothing in the op to suggest the driver acted the bollix. If approaching another road user is considered acting the bollix then why is it ok for cyclists to approach cars, vans buses etc ? If people are agressive that's a whole different ball game but there's no mention of it here.

You're right, my bad. I was reading another thread elsewhere which featured driver aggression.

Personally though I wouldn't get out of the car - I'm generally pretty patient, I usually figure things will work themselves out eventually. I did tell somebody to shut up at a gig recently though

Dermot Illogical

ectoraige wrote: »

I did tell somebody to shut up at a gig recently though

Robbie Williams?

ectoraige

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

Robbie Williams?

Sorry, I should have said music gig.