> Does that change how we tag it?

I’m not sure, this is an interesting situation. I can see the arguments for tagging the two halves of the crossing differently; but can also see the arguments for tagging them both as traffic light controlled (it just happens that the safe crossing period for the general traffic lane is basically only the length of the amber on any of the parts of the light sequence).

Maybe tagging the two halves differently would be more representative of people’s actual experience when crossing, i.e. wait for a gap in the traffic and take your chances, rather than waiting for a specific part of the traffic light sequence.

Maybe when The Sail Works is finished, this junction will get reworked a little to improve things for pedestrians!

> As an aside, I think the labelling of Cable Street vs Parliament street is wrong

Agreed. I wonder if it’s actually Parliament Street on both carriageways all the way down to the junction around Sugar House Alley?

Looking at mapillary the only other road sign I can see is one for North Road on the building immediately south of Sugar House Alley (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=54.05146740053016&lng=-2.797175192922168&z=18.002058557365068&pKey=503566007671134&focus=photo).

I’ve fixed North Road in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170343078

Do you want to go ahead and fix Cable Street/Parliament Street to whatever you think is best supported by the evidence?

> I guess there's also the unmarked crossing of Greyhound Bridge Road to the NW of the lights.

Yeah, I think that should be tagged the same as the NE-bound Parliament Street. 

On that basis, I think I am leaning towards crossing=traffic_signals, crossing:signals=shared, button_operated=no for all of them, with different values of crossing:markings= for them.