> Where's the evidence that traffic light timing has become more > "aggressive?" How is de-synchronizing lights an aggressive policy > versus one of neglect?
It's an agressive attack on the automobile, and the people who drive them. It's a deliberate attempt to make driving less pleasant, in an attempt to goad people onto the train, and buses (apparently). > My pet peeve are the lights which turn red for non-existent cross > traffic, especially during times of extremely light traffic of any kind. > Nothing like sitting at a light on say Penn Ave. with no other car > around for miles. Make them blinking red/yellow at night, or install > the sensors to properly detect traffic. That is very annoying. Trouble is, drivers are mostly ignorant about anything out of the ordinary. I've seen lots of people stop, and remain stopped at flashing red lights, and others just blow through flashing yellow without even slowing down. Just look at how confused drivers get at the traffic circle at Minnehaha Falls! Don't people know what "Yield" means?! Of course, they don't. Sensors, of course, cost money, and no government agency can install new traffic devices (or anything else for that matter) without wasting gobs of it on studies, hearings, consultants, and general corruption. At a time when Minneapolis is scraping for more revenue (well, when aren't we?), it seems unlikey that the city will invest in better traffic management, especially when the holy grail on the City Council's agenda is mass transit. > > Years ago most lights were timed to allow traffic to flow at the posted > > speed. > > It may seem that way, but I wonder if it's true. I'm positive it is. > Very often I see > citizens suggest that the lights be synchronized on heavy two-way > streets like Lake Street, or complain that they used to be but are no > longer. The laws of physics don't make that possible. In general, you > can synchronize one way streets, or one direction of travel on a two way > street, but not both directions at once on a two way street. One > direction has got to get a red from the other's passing eventually. More than likely, but it can be minimized with careful planning. > >Did > > the policy to install light meters at every freeway ramp prove to be > > effective or prudent after it was actually put to the test? > > Is there such a policy? I'd guess it more likely that there is just > less money and/or man-power being spent on traffic studies and then > follow-up light timing to best move the traffic through with the minimum > of stops. I'd be surprised if there was actually a policy of timing > lights so as to result in more stops. We already have an air pollution > problem on heavily traveled streets in Minneapolis. More stops make > that problem worse. It also creates more congestion, wasting more time, > and is again something that seems counter productive. > > Yes, ramp meters have proven to be effective. SOME ramp meters were determined to be effective. Remember when they switched them all off? I was in heaven. I was driving limo at the time, and on the road constantly. The only other time traffic ran so smooth was during the transit strikes. Dan McGrath Longfellow REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
