Jump to content

Bochum Parkway speed limit

Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

I'm addition to better timed traffic light crossings that batch pedestrians up, traffic would flow much better.

Prioritising car journeys, in a way that impacts on other, more efficient modes, is more or less the reason we have a transport problem.

 

if you want to improve car traffic, give people better 'not car' options. What you're suggesting is the exact opposite.

 

 

Edited by ads36

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ads36 said:

Prioritising car journeys, in a way that impacts on other, more efficient modes, is more or less the reason we have a transport problem.

 

if you want to improve car traffic, give people better 'not car' options. What you're suggesting is the exact opposite.

 

 

What I'm proposing is to wind back years of anti car measures and go back to better flowing traffic, which in turn reduces congestion and pollution. Accept that anti car measures don't work, because people simply won't give up their cars even when faced with horrendous traffic. Embrace them, improve journey times and reduce pollution.

 

Ps. How come you've spent the thick end of 10 pages arguing with my suggestion of raising the limit on Bochum Parkway to 50, and yet someone else comes in and suggests 70 and you (and everyone else) don't even bat an eyelid?

Edited by WiseOwl182

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because, all the reasons against are exactly the same, have been made in detail, at length, several times, by several people.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

What I'm proposing is to wind back years of anti car measures and go back to better flowing traffic, which in turn reduces congestion and pollution.

When there was less traffic on the road....................

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, WiseOwl182 said:

Accept that anti car measures don't work,

They really do. See : Copenhagen, Utrecht, Delft, etc. Every where they've been tried. It's never not worked.

 

Conversely, no city has ever fixed congestion by encouraging car use. Not one, ever. It's a 100 % failure rate.

 

Edited by ads36

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Longcol said:

When there was less traffic on the road....................

 

 

I'm talking 10 - 15 years ago, not decades ago.

12 minutes ago, ads36 said:

They really do. See : Copenhagen, Utrecht, Delft, etc. Every where they've been tried. It's never not worked.

 

Conversely, no city has ever fixed congestion by encouraging car use. Not one, ever. It's a 100 % failure rate.

 

Sheffield can buck the trend then. Let's make it easier and faster for cars. It could provide a much needed economic boost to the area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Running a car costs £3000 / year, and that's if only used for short journeys.

 

We sold one of our cars a couple of years ago. We haven't saved those £6000, we've spent them.

 

If you want an economic boost, invest in transport modes that enable more people to live without so many cars.

Edited by ads36

Share this post


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

Rubbish. It would have the length of queues, which has the knock on effect of unblocking previously blocked junctions upstream. 

No, it isn’t rubbish.

 

The discharge rate of vehicles across the stop line at the junctions would not change (because all traffic already uses all available lanes as bus lanes stop before junctions), so delays would not reduce.

 

There are very few places where queuing traffic actually blocks junctions for any length of time  ( as we have box junction markings which prohibit it and drivers tend to leave space anyway) so your clearing upstream blockages theory is a red herring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Planner1 said:

No, it isn’t rubbish.

 

The discharge rate of vehicles across the stop line at the junctions would not change (because all traffic already uses all available lanes as bus lanes stop before junctions), so delays would not reduce.

 

There are very few places where queuing traffic actually blocks junctions for any length of time  ( as we have box junction markings which prohibit it and drivers tend to leave space anyway) so your clearing upstream blockages theory is a red herring.

The bus lanes end yards from the stop line. It might be enough outside peak hours but during rush hour, it isn't. Queuing traffic often blocks junctions. Do you drive much in the city?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

70 mph for a half mile? Who benefits? Who pays?

The costs have now escalated massively.

How do you propose to prevent 140+ mph collisions without two sets of very expensive barriers?

Slip roads, foot bridge, hard shoulders, rumble strips etc.

 

All undermined by idiot drivers and those who think they are sensible.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow!  I started this post to object to the way anyone obeying the speed limit gets victimised and it has resulted in unleashing an apparently unresolvable discussion on speed limits. I would like to attempt to sumarise some of the points that appear to prevail.

Discussion about the validity of speed limits is pointless as they are unlikly to get changed.

There will always be people who will exceed the speed limit because it does not apply to them.

There will always be people who think that cars should drive behind a man carrying a red flag.

There will always be people who think that cars should be banned.

There will always be people who actually need their car.

There will always be people who think buses should be banned.

There will always be people who think that park & ride is a good idea.

There will always be people who own a car but go to work on the bus.

There will always be people who own a car but only use it to take the kids to school.

There will always be people who think that because they fit into any of the above groups they have the right to decide what everyone else should do.

There will always be people who think that the Earth is flat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is discussion pointless?

This is a discussion forum and pretty much every topic we discuss won't be changed by that discussion.

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
×

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.