Has anyone else noticed the traffic around city centre getting worse?

[Cyclone 10]

http://www.bristol247.com/2010/02/01/traffic-light-switch-off-will-bring-out-best-in-road-users/

 

That's the Bristol one.

[Cyclone 10]

http://www.transportxtra.com/magazines/local_transport_today/news/?ID=21528

 

And apparently bridges are acceptable for getting people around in London during the Olympics, coupled with disabling the pedestrian crossings and traffic lights in order to improve traffic flow.

[Planner1 428]

http://www.bristol247.com/2010/02/01/traffic-light-switch-off-will-bring-out-best-in-road-users/

 

That's the Bristol one.

Hasn't happened yet as far as I know. And, in the article you point to, there are some interesting words:

 

"have been selected as both have low vehicle speeds and high visibility, minimising the risk – particularly to pedestrians."

 

So, they are recognising that it currently isn't something which they'd consider everywhere.

[Planner1 428]

http://www.transportxtra.com/magazines/local_transport_today/news/?ID=21528

 

And apparently bridges are acceptable for getting people around in London during the Olympics, coupled with disabling the pedestrian crossings and traffic lights in order to improve traffic flow.

 

You're pointing to an article which mentions things which people are suggesting or considering, nothing which is definitely going to happen.

[Planner1 428]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1533248/Is-this-the-end-of-the-road-for-traffic-lights.html

 

A report in the news about the idea.

 

A report in the press from 4 years ago questioning whether it was the end of the road for traffic lights. The end of the road doesn't seem to be approaching anytime soon, does it?

 

The point I'm making here is that the way you talk about these "studies" implies that they have already taken place and have shown that the signals aren't needed. When, in fact, you can only point at one real study which as far as I know, hasn't yet started.

 

If you actually thought about it, you'd realise that it's already happened in Sheffield. Do you not remember that a set of signals was removed at the Pinstone St / Leopold St / Barkers Pool junction when the area was improved?

[Tony 10]

Hasn't happened yet as far as I know. And, in the article you point to, there are some interesting words:

 

"have been selected as both have low vehicle speeds and high visibility, minimising the risk – particularly to pedestrians."

 

So, they are recognising that it currently isn't something which they'd consider everywhere.

 

I think you are splitting hairs there.

 

 

City / Average traffic speed (mph)

Bristol 16.8

Glasgow 17.3

Southampton 17.8

Liverpool 17.8

Manchester 18.3

Cambridge 18.8

Birmingham 19.4

Sheffield 19.6

Cardiff 21.8

Newcastle 24.0

 

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/news/aa-patrols-on-motorbikes-in-london.html

[Planner1 428]

I think you are splitting hairs there.

 

 

City / Average traffic speed (mph)

Bristol 16.8

Glasgow 17.3

Southampton 17.8

Liverpool 17.8

Manchester 18.3

Cambridge 18.8

Birmingham 19.4

Sheffield 19.6

Cardiff 21.8

Newcastle 24.0

 

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/news/aa-patrols-on-motorbikes-in-london.html

Don't think so.

 

City-wide "average" speeds are not a good indicator of approach speeds at a particular junction.

 

Try switching off the traffic signals at, for example, the Upper Hanover St / Glossop Rd junction and see whether approach speeds on the dual carriageway are anything resembling 19mph.

[Tony 10]

How do junction approach speeds differ in Sheffield to those in Bristol?

[Planner1 428]

How do junction approach speeds differ in Sheffield to those in Bristol?

And what has that to do with anything?

 

What they are "trialling" in Bristol has already been done here.

[Cyclone 10]

No it hasn't, a complete change of the road layout to not require traffic lights is not the same as trialling switching off a set of lights that people similar to you have determined to be necessary.

Why are you so defensive about the idea? Do you have shares in a traffic light manufacturing company? Would you prefer it if it turns out that roads run more smoothly without dozens of sets of lights.

For a start why can't the majority of sets be turned off in the late evening and back on in the morning? As I pointed out already, I drove from the Manor to Walkley at 0300 last week and stopped at about 8 sets out of 16 lights. In all 8 stops, I saw one car go through the opposing set, one car which I only saw because I'd already been sat there for a minute waiting. Park Sqr roundabout is a perfect example, it would function just fine as a normal roundabout when the traffic is below a given volume, yet the lights are on 24/7.

It's just like the Hillsborough tram gate, it took a change of council before it was acknowledged that it didn't need to operate 24 hrs a day.

[Tony 10]

How do junction approach speeds differ in Sheffield to those in Bristol?

 

And what has that to do with anything?

 

 

 

 

I dunno. You brought it up in this post:

 

Don't think so.

 

City-wide "average" speeds are not a good indicator of approach speeds at a particular junction.

 

Try switching off the traffic signals at, for example, the Upper Hanover St / Glossop Rd junction and see whether approach speeds on the dual carriageway are anything resembling 19mph.

[Planner1 428]

I dunno. You brought it up in this post:

 

Read back through the posts, you brought up the avarage speed issue in the previous post.