nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Ridiculous short interval at traffic lights

davindub

I just want guage how widespread this problem is, but over the last few months, traffic lights sequence in north dublin city (Beaumount, Santry) has changed. Some lights are only green for a brief second on major roads and it means only 2 cars get out at a time.

Anyone else experienced this in other areas?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

The Muppet

NickNickleby wrote: »

paying motor tax is only required if you're going to take the car on the public road. So its a bit of a misnomer in my opinion. Its a tax on motorists who use the road.

Motorist are not the only people who use the roads, perhaps if a user pays policy was implemented for all road use motorist would have less reason to feel aggrieved by the implementation of measures such as those discussed here.

markpb

The Muppet wrote: »

Motorist are not the only people who use the roads, perhaps if a user pays policy was implemented for all road use motorist would have less reason to feel aggrieved by the implementation of measures such as those discussed here.

Pay per mile? Force every pedestrian to get a Fitbit and charge them per step?

Some motorists feel aggrieved because road policy put them at the top of the priority list for the last few decades and now others are very slowly inching up the priority list. But nationally the vast majority of transport space is dedicated to roads. The vast majority of the capital budget is spent on roads. The vast majority of maintenance budget is spent on roads. So motorists are only annoyed because they’re not getting 100% of everything any more.

Dravokivich

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

If it's taxes that are required to stop our unfettered planet destroying consumption then so be it.

Taxes aren't the answer at a consumer level. You're punishing the consumer, for decisions that were made by a manufacturer.

Stark

The Muppet wrote: »

Motorist are not the only people who use the roads, perhaps if a user pays policy was implemented for all road use motorist would have less reason to feel aggrieved by the implementation of measures such as those discussed here.

They'll find something else to complain about. They always do.

GLaDOS

magicbastarder wrote: »

was wondering the other day, if they wanted to make the lights more pedestrian friendly, why not change the sequence of the lights, rather than the timings alone?

e.g. at some junctions i've seen, they go green for north, then south, then east, then west, then pedestrian, then repeat.

why not do N, S, Ped, E, W, Ped, then repeat? rather than N, S, E, W, Ped, repeat?

i was third in a queue at some lights the other day and the lights were already red again by the time i has halfway through the junction after them going green.

They've done something like this at the big junction at Beggar's Bush. The junction was a disaster when they changed the lights originally, with massive tailbacks up the Shelbourne road as only 2 or 3 cars got through on a green. They've changed it now to include 2 pedestrian sequences and lengthened the green sequence. The result is you wait a bit longer for the green but far more cars get through when it arrives, which is much more efficient.

Seems a much better system than flashing the green for 2 seconds.

magicbastarder

yeah, at a junction i pass through quite often, the one in the middle of ballymun, i've been at the front of the queue at the lights, and have seen them go amber again before i've even made it through the junction. i'd guess three seconds on green maybe, which is nuts. you'd get barely 3 cars per lane through on that.

The Muppet

markpb wrote: »

Pay per mile? Force every pedestrian to get a Fitbit and charge them per step?

Some motorists feel aggrieved because road policy put them at the top of the priority list for the last few decades and now others are very slowly inching up the priority list. But nationally the vast majority of transport space is dedicated to roads. The vast majority of the capital budget is spent on roads. The vast majority of maintenance budget is spent on roads. So motorists are only annoyed because they’re not getting 100% of everything any more.

Thats all well and good but there are large parts of Dublin with no public transport. Would it not make sense to give people viable options to get to work school etc via public transport before trying to force them out of their cars.

thecretinhop

same in terryland and gsc lights in galway.
mayhem yesterday.
i have said it before town's and cities wud work better if the council stayed at home. useless either incompetent or idalogues..

markpb

The Muppet wrote: »

Thats all well and good but there are large parts of Dublin with no public transport. Would it not make sense to give people viable options to get to work school etc via public transport before trying to force them out of their cars.

Leave the hyperbole out, no one is being forced out of their car. All that’s happening is that other road users are seeing some small increase in priority when it comes to road space and time.

The last census showed that the vast majority of urban trips are under 5km. That means walking and cycling are viable for a lot of people. If we’re being encouraged to avoid public transport for non-essential trips, that leaves two choices: encourage proper to walk or cycle if they can or let everyone climb into their cars and then wonder why the traffic is so heavy and who we can blame?

magicbastarder

all that is true, but i think there's better ways of giving greater priority to pedestrians than creating light sequences 3 seconds long. as mentioned, changing the order rather than the length of sequences may be one way of doing it.

having light sequences lasting 3 seconds is only greatly magnifying the already stupid inefficiencies of the car in terms of moving people around.

The Muppet

markpb wrote: »

Leave the hyperbole out, no one is being forced out of their car. All that’s happening is that other road users are seeing some small increase in priority when it comes to road space and time.

A 5k walk becomes a 10k walk on your return . Its not viable for many people. For many different reasons. Thats the reality of the situation.

Live in denial all you want but there definitely is a push to get people out of cars and onto non existant suitable public transport and bicycles which will never be an acceptable form of transport for many people .

markpb

The Muppet wrote: »

A 5k walk becomes a 10k walk on your return . Its not viable for many people. For many different reasons. Thats the reality of the situation.

Where did I say that everyone should walk? Where did anyone say that everyone should walk?

Also you understand that “under 5km” means that some people are travelling less than 5km. Could be 1 or 2 which is less than 4km round trip.

The Muppet

markpb wrote: »

Where did I say that everyone should walk? Where did anyone say that everyone should walk?

If we're playing that game where did i say that you said everyone should walk?

markpb

I said that people should be encouraged to walk or cycle where possible. You replied that some people couldn’t walk which is a bit tautological. Of course some people can’t walk but it doesn’t stop other people walking and it doesn’t mean the councils shouldn’t encourage those other people who can walk to walk.

Not everyone can drive but it doesn’t stop us building roads.

Macy0161

The Muppet wrote: »

Motorist are not the only people who use the roads, perhaps if a user pays policy was implemented for all road use motorist would have less reason to feel aggrieved by the implementation of measures such as those discussed here.

They're not the only ones that pay for it either. I would also say that it's a very rate household that doesn't have someone at least walk on a public road at some point during the day/ week?

It also makes the assumption that there's not lots of people that have vehicles for which they're paying this mythical "road" tax and fuel duties, and then also walk and cycle at various points.

Hotblack Desiato

The Muppet wrote: »

Thats all well and good but there are large parts of Dublin with no public transport.

Calling BS on that. Dublin Bus go basically everywhere.

.anon.

The Muppet wrote: »

Thats all well and good but there are large parts of Dublin with no public transport.

Can you name those parts of Dublin?

There are plenty of parts of Dublin where public transport is extremely unreliable because buses are forced to sit behind queues of private cars and are given zero priority at junctions and traffic lights. But there are not 'large parts of Dublin with no public transport'.

[Deleted User]

The Muppet wrote: »

Motorist are not the only people who use the roads, perhaps if a user pays policy was implemented for all road use motorist would have less reason to feel aggrieved by the implementation of measures such as those discussed here.

"User pays" is an interesting idea. Would you be up for a payment for all road users proportional to the wear and tear arising?

beachhead

Wasn't this a traffic lights phasing thread? I complained to my local council about one set of pedestrian lights on a continuous sequence of red/green cycling.They said it was to help pedestrians.I replied no pedestrians.Lights went back to normal operation 3 days later.

Strumms

magicbastarder wrote: »

yeah, at a junction i pass through quite often, the one in the middle of ballymun, i've been at the front of the queue at the lights, and have seen them go amber again before i've even made it through the junction. i'd guess three seconds on green maybe, which is nuts. you'd get barely 3 cars per lane through on that.

I use these daily, they are a joke... east or west bound you basically get about 3 or 4 cars at absolute best in each direction, depending on each car getting moving in good time... ie I’ve been that fourth car and if somebody is asleep with car 1,2 or 3 as seems to be commonplace at this junction it’s 3 cars each way going straight east and west. In the evening times the east and westerly traffic flows become busier than the north south flow it’s still the same...

Traffic backed up no end... then you have the people thinking they might chance it, last second think better of it and slam on the breaks... whoever designed and planned the sequencing of these lights is an incompetent jackass.

Thinkingaboutit

Artificially created traffic through brief green lights just means more pollution at junctions like the KCR, which are dangerous enough already. It also means, and I see it, more lights jumpers. Having found Dublin City Council odious to deal with on some matters, this just annoys me more. Probably people will still vote for Labour and Green Councillors like zombies, so not much can be done.

The Muppet

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Calling BS on that. Dublin Bus go basically everywhere.

Really ? Which Dublin Bus serves Oldtown or Ballyboughal ?

There may bus services but run a couple of times a day at most and a journey that takes half an hour by car will take up to two hours. Who has 4 hours a day to sit on a bus?

magicbastarder

i don't think they're messing with the traffic light sequences in oldtown and ballyboughal, to be fair.

The Muppet

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

"User pays" is an interesting idea. Would you be up for a payment for all road users proportional to the wear and tear arising?

Not sure how that could be implemented, it would be easier to levy a charge on all road users. Keep it simple.

The Muppet

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't think they're messing with the traffic light sequences in oldtown and ballyboughal, to be fair.

True, the people out there are so lucky not to have to travel outside of their areas for work, education, hospital etc as ar the people from outside those areas that happen to work in them.

Duckjob

The Muppet wrote: »

Not sure how that could be implemented, it would be easier to levy a charge on all road users. Keep it simple.

Pretty easy really.

Simple rate table that factors in both emissions and vehicle weight. People pay in direct proportion to the weight of their vehicle and the amount of pollution it emits, both of which are have readily available data.

The Muppet

Duckjob wrote: »

Pretty easy really.

Simple rate table that factors in both emissions and vehicle weight. People pay in direct proportion to the weight of their vehicle and the amount of pollution it emits, both of which are have readily available data.

That could work once it included a flat rate charge for usage which all users would pay to fund maintenance etc.

Hotblack Desiato

The Muppet wrote: »

Really ? Which Dublin Bus serves Oldtown or Ballyboughal ?

There may bus services but run a couple of times a day at most and a journey that takes half an hour by car will take up to two hours. Who has 4 hours a day to sit on a bus?

"Large parts of Dublin" and "no public transport", you said...

Duckjob

The Muppet wrote: »

That could work once it included a flat rate charge for usage which all users would pay to fund maintenance etc.

No problem with a flat rate as long as the amount paid remains in direct proportion to road wear and pollution emitted.

Wait. Just remind me again, what does this have to do with traffic light intervals ?

[Deleted User]

The Muppet wrote: »

That could work once it included a flat rate charge for usage which all users would pay to fund maintenance etc.

Why a flat rate for maintenance, when it is vehicle weight that drives maintenance cost?

If you're happy to go with a charge proportional to the wear and tear arising, you should check out the 4th power rule. A €100 fee per cyclist would work out at about €1.4 million annual payment per motorist, so bring it on.