CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

Is it time to get rid of traffic lights?

(14 posts)

  1. 559
    Member

    Can see where the writer is coming from, but not sure how this would work in our current roads culture, especially re pedestrians, cyclists etc

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18072259

    Posted 11 years ago #
  2. Uberuce
    Member

    Instinctively, we want to be kind to each other, especially out on the road. When you first meet a stranger, unless you're a mugger, you want to be nice to that stranger.

    Dear alien calling self Martin,
    Busted.
    Yours faithfully,
    The Men in Black

    Posted 11 years ago #
  3. crowriver
    Member

    I can't believe the BBC have given this nutter the time of day, let alone a slot on Radio 4 to air his half baked views. Not a single mention of the benefits oif traffic lights for pedestrians, let alone cyclists. His 'views' can be summed up as "Why can't we drivers roam free as birds? Then all our congestion problems would be solved."

    We all have relationships with strangers in their thousands or millions on the road but road user relationships are corroded and corrupted by the system of control which makes us almost have a greater respect for a traffic light than for a human life.

    It's not the traffic lights that are the problem, Martin, it's that half ton of metal you're sitting in. The one with the glass windows, isolating you from what's going on around you, outside of your box.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  4. AKen
    Member

    I note that this has been tried with some success in a few places in the Netherlands. I also note that these are places that I have never heard of. It might work in sleepy Dutch towns where drivers already have a greater awareness and respect for pedestrians, cyclists and other road users but they certainly aren't doing away with traffic lights across Rotterdam.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  5. "... system of control which makes us almost have a greater respect for a traffic light than for a human life"

    That's so close to one of the EEN frothers who, on the bus lane 'issue', demanded if the Council would prefer him to mow down an 'errant' pedestrian or cyclist rather than swerve into the bus lane and pick up a fine... (clearly said frother had never haerd of the brake pedal, and also thought that a £30/60 fine was something worse to live with than taking another life).

    Posted 11 years ago #
  6. crowriver
    Member

    I note that this has been tried with some success in a few places in the Netherlands.

    That is a different idea: the 'shared space' concept where pavements. etc. are done away with. It's used in town centres: basically like pedestrianisation except vehicles are allowed in. Pretty sure it's teamed with low speed limits, eg. 15kph.

    Imagine if there were no traffic lights on, say two side out of three on Picardy Place roundabout. Imagine how dangerous it would be. Oh, wait...

    Posted 11 years ago #
  7. That's exactly it, you don't just get rid of traffic lights and live in a nirvana. It needs a 'buy-in' (shoot me now, please) from everyone involved for it to work. For space to be shared.

    Get rid of traffic lights and do nothing else and I'm pretty sure the result is an even more car-centric urban area. Might as well do away with the pavements, and not to 'share space', but simply because no-one will be able to walk anywhere.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  8. Min
    Member

    Yes, I can't think of anything worse than removing traffic lights.

    "Not a single mention of the benefits oif traffic lights for pedestrians, let alone cyclists."

    Well he does hint that he might let women with prams cross the road IF there is not a 10 ton truck tailgating. Presumably if you do away with traffic lights then 10 ton truck drivers will simply cease to tailgate anyone.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  9. wingpig
    Member

    The only way that would remotely stand a chance of working over here is if it were pavements which were continuous rather than roads and motor vehicles had to hop up kerbs and meekly shuffle over a thick rumblestrip to cross between the isolated car-channels.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  10. Wingpig, that would be a ridiculous way to treat a legitimate form of transport. Ridiculous. I can't see that happening for any type of transportation in Edinburgh. Because it would be ridiculous.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  11. steveo
    Member

    To be fair a bumped kerb at every junction wouldn't be much fun on a racer either, as a purely pedestrian measure i'm sure it would be fantastically effective.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  12. Min
    Member

    The cycle lanes would run along side the pavements so we wouldn't need to bump.

    Posted 11 years ago #
  13. Roibeard
    Member

    I think the shared space concept has been discussed at some length in the London cycle blogs. Basically the places where they've done this in London have had too much vehicular traffic, so rather than every negotiating, the motorised vehicles take over and pedestrians cower.

    It only works (and is only used in the mainland) in areas of low traffic flow (Rose Street might be a good place to try it in Edinburgh), where the occasional vehicle behaves itself.

    With sufficient flow, majority rules, so anyone in the minority is inconvenienced without some external control, whether that be folk joining from side roads in vehicles, or pedestrians, cyclists, mothers with prams...

    Incidentally, the equivalent concept should work better for bicycles, as cyclists are not insulated from their environment, but even then, I think the multiway giveway in the Meadows is less convenient than the priority for MMW - even speaking as someone that is usually crossing or joining, rather than continuing with the obvious priority. If nothing else, cyclists coming down the hill should have priority - it's only a practical acknowledgement of speed/energy/braking distances/physics!

    Oh, hang on, that's also the argument for separation...

    The discussion I've turned up via a search (but probably not the one that stuck in my mind originally, as the diagram isn't as intuitive as some I've seen) is:

    http://pedestrianiselondon.tumblr.com/post/21138891681/unregulated-junctions

    Robert

    Posted 11 years ago #
  14. crowriver
    Member

    The cycle lanes would run along side the pavements so we wouldn't need to bump.

    Except in 'shared space' there are no cycle lanes, no pavements, no roads. Just 'the street'. Frankly I think it only works in quaint medieval towns with narrow, windy streets. For Scotland think Kirkwall, Stornoway, the Old Town in Edinburgh, old town in Stirling, etc. Can't see it happening on wide boulevards built any time from the 18th century onwards though.

    Posted 11 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin