Jump to content


Bochum Parkway speed limit

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Freebooter said:

I wasn't actually questioning the 50 limit but comparing it to the traffic on Boham Parkway, simply saying that whilst it was to some extent ignored, this was less than the almost universal ignoring that occurs there. I did say that the 30 limit at the beginning of the parkway was wrong.

The slip roads onto Sheffield Parkway are a whole set of different wrongs however.

I think you'll find the 30mph limit on the first bit of the Parkway is because the junction with Derek Dooley Way is less than 200 yards from Park Square Roundabout - and before that South Quay Drive joins the Parkway only about 100 yards up from Park Square.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3846913,-1.4570062,3a,75y,65.07h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg26pNLcmbrghsVIGtvZioA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en&authuser=0

 

Oh, and surprise, surprise - the lights are on red.

Edited by Longcol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

 

I doubt a crash barrier is needed on Bochum Parkway

Your opinion is based on what exactly? Any facts or just that it's requirement makes the increased speed limit out of the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Previously not needed and unnecessary, they are now needed.

Now we know its is a bit more than a few discs, how much will it cost  for the new signs?

At the Norton Lane end where will the new signs be placed?

Will it be before or after the farm entrances, school entrance, road crossing, footpaths etc. 

How many more warning/hazard signs will be needed(eg. SLOW DOWN, Heavy Plant crossing etc.) on the main road and side roads?

 

Is it still worth it for half a mile?

 

 

 

Yes it is.

21 hours ago, Foot said:

Your opinion is based on what exactly? Any facts or just that it's requirement makes the increased speed limit out of the question.

Opinion based on a large central reservation. However, if it needed them to comply with legal tick box exercises then I'd still support it, even at higher cost. Sheffield council needs to do more to support motorists. Increasing artificially low speed limits where safe to do so is a good start. Scrapping bus lanes is next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Yes it is.

Opinion based on a large central reservation. However, if it needed them to comply with legal tick box exercises then I'd still support it, even at higher cost. Sheffield council needs to do more to support motorists. Increasing artificially low speed limits where safe to do so is a good start. Scrapping bus lanes is next.

The world doesn't revolve around motorists, and scrapping bus lanes would acheive what? 

 

Ecclesall Road has bus lanes either side in rush hour, which are essentially parking bays outside of rush hour. Presume you would make it a dual carriageway during rush hour?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bargepole23 said:

The world doesn't revolve around motorists, and scrapping bus lanes would acheive what? 

 

Ecclesall Road has bus lanes either side in rush hour, which are essentially parking bays outside of rush hour. Presume you would make it a dual carriageway during rush hour?

Yes I would. Twice the capacity, half the queue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, WiseOwl182 said:

Yes I would. Twice the capacity, half the queue.

And the pedestrians?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bargepole23 said:

And the pedestrians?

They would cross at the crossings as they do now. Personally I'd like to see the light cycles de-prioritise pedestrians slightly to avoid what happens at the moment: a constant trickle rather than efficient batching of crossing pedestrians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Scrapping bus lanes is next.

Wouldn’t make much difference.

 

Congestion  is generally caused by inadequate capacity at junctions. The bus lanes stop before the junctions, so general traffic can use all lanes on the approaches to the junction. Therefore the bus lanes have little effect on delays for general traffic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/02/2019 at 11:34, ads36 said:

yes, he/she's a moron, it's 40 for good reason.

 

 

Not it's not 40 for good reason.  I've lived in the area for 50 yrs.  

It used to be 40mph because there was a farm 1/2 way along and there were lights to allow the cows the to be taken across the carriageways twice a day to the fields on the other side. That farm has long since gone and neither cows nor people cross.

 

Now you have a stretch of dual carriageway, with wide verges, completely rural on both sides - fields and woods and with no reason for anyone to cross., nor does anyone cross. 

Google earth shows the real picture to speak - stretch marked between the red lines:

Bocjum-Parkway.jpg

 

There are many other dual carriageways in far less rural locations that have 70mph speed limits. There's absolutely no reason why 70mph couldn't be implemented safely on here and many drivers already drive in that range anyway out of frustration as it's not just rural but very wide in it's carriageways as well. It would just be sensible and make a sensible limit legal.

If anyone wants to be concerned about speed then they should be more concerned about the stretch on the other side of the top island in the picture from Lightwood Training Centre to Gleadless Town End. This stretch is 40mph, although probably wants to be 50 mph as it's suitable for that. However, drivers regularly drive like idiots on here and it has a housing relatively close by along with a school (although the kids are fenced in and there's a lay-by for parents separated from the road), and pedestrian crossing.  I've often waited at that pedestrian crossing by the tram stop with drivers flying through at 70-80mph+.

The sensible option would be to increase Bochum Parkway to 70mph between Lightwood and Jordanthorpe Parkway, and increase the limit to 50mph between Lightwood and Gleadless Town to  just before Herdings Road, to impose a sensible limit that's less tempting to exceed along with a fixed speed camera near the pedestrian crossing adjacent to the tram stop in both directions.  That would force the traffic to slow to within the new 50mph limit for the pedestrian crossing and junction with Bowman Drive and area next to the school. I beleive after Herdings Road, 40mph is sensible until Hollinsend Road, at which point 50mph is sensible until Manor Top Traffics lights.

The stretch from Manor Top to the island junction with the Parkway, is also more suited to 50mph.

Having sensible and safe limits is far more likely to encourage the majority of drivers to stick to them, than having low limits and having most drivers not just exceeding them but many exceeding them by large amounts.

Edited by Alsone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Personally I'd like to see the light cycles de-prioritise pedestrians slightly to avoid what happens at the moment: a constant trickle rather than efficient batching of crossing pedestrians.

so, inconvenience pedestrians, for the benefit of drivers?

 

Edited by ads36

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Face facts, it's not going to happen. The costs prohibit an increased speed limit above 40mph on dual carriageways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Planner1 said:

Wouldn’t make much difference.

 

Congestion  is generally caused by inadequate capacity at junctions. The bus lanes stop before the junctions, so general traffic can use all lanes on the approaches to the junction. Therefore the bus lanes have little effect on delays for general traffic.

Rubbish. It would have the length of queues, which has the knock on effect of unblocking previously blocked junctions upstream. I'm addition to better timed traffic light crossings that batch pedestrians up, traffic would flow much better.

7 hours ago, ads36 said:

so, inconvenience pedestrians, for the benefit of drivers?

 

Yes. They're not distinct groups, they're just people. Sometimes the person will be a driver, sometimes a pedestrian. Batching up crossings may cause a pedestrian a maximum of 1 minute to wait to cross the road (and any other pedestrians coming along after will not have as long to wait), which could add up to several minutes to dozens of drivers given the concertina effect. It's for the greater good. Many crossings already work like this but newer ones tend to turn to the green man as soon as they're pressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.