Never been a fan of the "we shouldn't make the smaller, easier improvements because we need to do the bigger, harder things instead" argument...

Yes, we need more and better public transit, but that is going to take a whole lot of time, money, and effort to work towards. Yes, it's worthwhile, and we shouldn't STOP working towards it because of this, but I don't think that's a reason to balk at a smaller, easier incremental change that encourages safer driving while also simply being more efficient.

The DOT planning department I worked for (in the 80s) had studies showing that synchronizing the lights 10-15mph ABOVE the speed limit kept traffic flowing "optimally" to minimize congestion without having to expand the infrastructure (mostly: lanes). Even today I see city traffic lights synchronized mostly +10mph over the posted limit in the direction of highest flow on major arteries - you can tell when you "make" one yellow light, then lock in cruise control at limit+10 and "make" the next 3+ lights at exactly the same flash of yellow as you approach.

They do this to delay improvement projects like additional lanes, straightening curves, etc. by showing a higher "level of service" for the roadway than they would have with the lights synchronized at, say: speed limit -10mph. If you're talking about a 45mph roadway, moving the cars at 55mph instead of 35mph means 157% as many vehicles per hour at the same spacing, and we all know that people don't actually increase following distances at higher speeds, so... it's a real, and significant difference. Not as significant as getting people to carpool, or take public transit, but that's about as likely to happen as increasing following distances.

"Essentially, rather than encouraging drivers to speed up by presenting an endless succession of green lights, this strategy makes red the default state for lights on a busy road. When traffic approaches the red light, the cycle triggers. Traffic moving faster than the limit will approach the light while it’s still red, forcing it to slow or stop for the light before it changes, while traffic moving at the limit will be met with a perfectly-timed green.

Drive the limit, in other words, and you’re rewarded with a constant rhythm of green lights."

That's why the title makes sense

engineers who set up the timing cycles

The engineers who set up the timing cycles in my DOT planning department set the cycles to run over the speed limit intentionally to get more cars per hour through the same roadway compared with moving them slower. Accident statistics were equivocal - similar accident rates at or +10 above the speed limit, but that is a politically charged statement, so you don't say it loudly.

Some people seem like driving is a game to them. They'll speed ahead at a green only to slam on the brakes at the next red, as long as they can get around you first.

Yep. My hometown went to speed limit timed lights over 20 years ago. It was fantastic if you could catch the “Green Wave” and make ot all the way through a busy part of town without stopping.

In the Netherlands they have electronic "green wave" signs on some main streets. They show the speed you need to get all green traffic lights on that street (and turn off when you won't catch a green wave, e.g. because you entered from another street).

It's amazing.

Remember, though: if the punishment is a fine, then to the rich, it's not a punishment. It's a price.

Punishment doesn’t prevent behavior that already happened and is usually missed. Road modifications help every time.

My town has a major road that was one of the most infuriating and dangerous in town. It was two lanes in each direction, constant jockeying for position or to make the light or to get around a turning car.

All it took was repainting. Now it’s one lane in each direction with turning lanes. There is no jockeying for position since it’s only one lane. But turning cars are no longer blocking so no infuriating stop and go. They even coordinated the lights.

Now that road is slower, calmer, no road rage or angry drivers and everyone gets through in less time

USA has an increasing number of roundabouts.

Please dont put anymore roundabouts in the US until its included in the drivers license test. Every trip to work is a gamble and I have to slam my breaks while in the circle at least once a day, people will even use the right turn only lane to go fully around...

This is actually a thing in some places. I'm sure the cost is why it's not more widely adopted.

Maybe there should be more lights? That way we don't have little old ladies crossing 6-lane stroads without a crosswalk to get to the market, while the nearest crosswalk is a half mile in the wrong direction.

Obviously this only works where there's one major throughway and most perpendicular streets are minor...like every retail center in every city >35k pop in the country. These roads often have very predictable traffic patterns.

Getting lights synced up for a consistent speed is the easy part.

We need more roundabouts, too.