Is this Sheff traffic light set up wrong?

[Planner1 428]

2 hours ago, Eater Sundae said:

Although lots of light controlled crossings have lights at the far side of the junction, some newer ones don’t. I don’t know why some differ.

Traffic signal junction designs differ because the junction or crossing layouts differ. There are government guidelines on design, but these give the designer scope to put in what they feel is appropriate and is required for safety at that particular site. 

[Planner1 428]

1 hour ago, Eater Sundae said:

Another one without any repeater lights beyond the junction...

 

Heading along Holme Lane from Malin Bridge towards Hillsborough corner. The traffic lights near Towsure allow pedestrians to cross (with stop lines for both sets of traffic, so it can be interpreted as a free standing pedestrian crossing, maybe).

 

However, the lights also form part of where trams turn onto Holme Lane and vehicles emerge from Ball Rd. Once you’ve passed the lights at the pedestrian crossing, there’s nothing to remind you that you’re still in a junction.  Having said that, it does seem to work, with nothing much except box junction markings.  However, traffic travelling along Holme Lane in the other direction does get a repeater, before seeing the pedestrian crossing as a separate set of lights. (I don’t know if the sequence of the lights will mean that drivers going towards Malin Bridge from either Holme Lane or Ball Rd would ever go through a green light to then see a red light at the pedestrian crossing)

All of the signals, including the crossing,  at the Ball Rd / tram terminus junction are part of the junction arrangement and are controlled by one traffic signal controller.

[Planner1 428]

2 hours ago, Eater Sundae said:

 (I don’t know if the sequence of the lights will mean that drivers going towards Malin Bridge from either Holme Lane or Ball Rd would ever go through a green light to then see a red light at the pedestrian crossing)

It obviously can happen, or they would not have put a stop line and signals in place for just that purpose!

[Weredoomed 10]

I've often thought that the secondary signal out side the Children's Hospital is particularly poorly placed (the one immediately to the right of the dark grey car on the link below.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3810275,-1.489014,3a,45.4y,230.61h,92.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8_TPWi4jRyNh14YPfQ0-vA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

 

On two occasions I've seen cars cross the stop line in slow moving traffic only for the lights to turn red as the get to the secondary. The clueless drivers incorrectly, (on both occasions), stopped at this signal, even though traffic ahead of them then moved off. Not so bad, you might think, except for the one or two cars stuck behind these morons who then blocked the junction either for busses trying to turn right into, or other traffic trying to turn right out of, Clarkson St. All for the sake of SCC saving the cost of a pole and a bit of cable.

[Planner1 428]

17 hours ago, Weredoomed said:

I've often thought that the secondary signal out side the Children's Hospital is particularly poorly placed (the one immediately to the right of the dark grey car on the link below.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3810275,-1.489014,3a,45.4y,230.61h,92.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8_TPWi4jRyNh14YPfQ0-vA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

 

On two occasions I've seen cars cross the stop line in slow moving traffic only for the lights to turn red as the get to the secondary. The clueless drivers incorrectly, (on both occasions), stopped at this signal, even though traffic ahead of them then moved off. Not so bad, you might think, except for the one or two cars stuck behind these morons who then blocked the junction either for busses trying to turn right into, or other traffic trying to turn right out of, Clarkson St. All for the sake of SCC saving the cost of a pole and a bit of cable.

I've seen people do that in several places.

 

Where exactly do you think the pole that they've "saved" on should have gone?

 

Saying that it's just a pole and a bit of cable is a gross over-simplification. There are also signal heads, electrical connections, ducting and cable access chambers in the footway to consider. But, if the designer or the independent safety auditor thought an additional signal was necessary, it would have been provided. Traffic signal junctions cost hundreds of thousands, so a extra signal or two is no big deal in cost terms.  

Edited May 14, 2019 by Planner1

[stillf 11]

20 hours ago, Weredoomed said:

I've often thought that the secondary signal out side the Children's Hospital is particularly poorly placed (the one immediately to the right of the dark grey car on the link below.

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3810275,-1.489014,3a,45.4y,230.61h,92.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8_TPWi4jRyNh14YPfQ0-vA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

 

On two occasions I've seen cars cross the stop line in slow moving traffic only for the lights to turn red as the get to the secondary. The clueless drivers incorrectly, (on both occasions), stopped at this signal, even though traffic ahead of them then moved off. Not so bad, you might think, except for the one or two cars stuck behind these morons who then blocked the junction either for busses trying to turn right into, or other traffic trying to turn right out of, Clarkson St. All for the sake of SCC saving the cost of a pole and a bit of cable.

I can't work out if it is incorrectly placed as I don't know the traffic light sequence but that is a pedestrian crossing just after it so does the pedestrian crossing go Green every time that light goes red or is it a case that the light will have been on red for a while due to the sequence of lights i.e. out of town traffic goes red, into town traffic and buses turning get a green light and then when that goes to red the pedestrian crossing gets activated which should have given sufficient time for the out of town traffic to clear the crossing.

When that light is on Red then surely no-one should be going through that light whilst the pedestrian crossing is on green. Would this be easily solved by 'hatching' the junction meaning that no-one should go through so can't be stuck at the secondary light on red and even if one car is the rest of the junction should be clear.

[Planner1 428]

7 hours ago, stillf said:

I can't work out if it is incorrectly placed as I don't know the traffic light sequence but that is a pedestrian crossing just after it so does the pedestrian crossing go Green every time that light goes red or is it a case that the light will have been on red for a while due to the sequence of lights i.e. out of town traffic goes red, into town traffic and buses turning get a green light and then when that goes to red the pedestrian crossing gets activated which should have given sufficient time for the out of town traffic to clear the crossing.

When that light is on Red then surely no-one should be going through that light whilst the pedestrian crossing is on green. Would this be easily solved by 'hatching' the junction meaning that no-one should go through so can't be stuck at the secondary light on red and even if one car is the rest of the junction should be clear.

The pedestrian crossing is an integral part of the junction setup and is integrated in the overall sequence.

 

You are only expected to stop at a traffic signal if there is a stop line. It isn’t difficult.

 

Designers often put a secondary signal on the far side of the junction if there isn’t space for one on the near side, or it is felt that one is needed for visibility or safety reasons. There are plenty of junctions like that and drivers should have seen them before. 

 

 

[Weredoomed 10]

On 14/05/2019 at 15:33, stillf said:

Would this be easily solved by 'hatching' the junction meaning that no-one should go through so can't be stuck at the secondary light on red and even if one car is the rest of the junction should be clear.

Yes, a box junction might help, although the busses that stop outside the Childrens often cause traffic to back up across the junction, all not helped by drivers leaving long gaps between their car and the car in front. If people would close the gaps up the junction might not jam up so often.

On 14/05/2019 at 12:28, Planner1 said:

I've seen people do that in several places.

 

Where exactly do you think the pole that they've "saved" on should have gone?

At the downhill end of the island obviously. The push button on that pole could go on a short length pole in the same location as the existing one.

[DerbyTup 10]

On 21/04/2019 at 08:55, Eater Sundae said:

Although lots of light controlled crossings have lights at the far side of the junction, some newer ones don’t. I don’t know why some differ. For example, at the bottom of Crookes Rd at Broomhill. If emerging from Nile Street, intending to turn right towards Witham Rd, then once you enter the junction and have passed your stop line and green light, you don’t know the status of the light. Not a great problem, but I do feel more comfortable if I can see a repeater light.

This is exactly the same junction that I had a problem with the other morning.  Although I was turning right from Crookes Road onto Fulwood Road.  But, similar thing.  There's a double-decker bus in front of me at the lights.  The lights change, the double-decker moves forward indicating right, but cannot turn right because of traffic coming up from Nile Street.  Eventually the bus completes it's turn, but by now I am over the stop line and the traffic lights are just about out of view for me, but I can see the traffic  is moving again along Witham and Fulwood road - so it's obvious that the lights have changed and it's no longer on green for me.  Through the back side window of my car, I can just see the cowl of the traffic light alongside me and make out that it's red.  I watch the traffic moving along Witham and Fulwood road and when they come to a stop, I strain my neck again to see if the faint red glow in the cowl has gone - and see if I can make out a green glow in the bottom cowl.  Then proceed.  

 

There is a repeater light just beyond the first light - as you can see in the photo below.  But the back of my car was roughly on  a level with that repeater light - and I couldn't see the light further beyond, on Nile Street, because of other traffic.  I was attempting the same manoeuvre as the yellow truck in the following - only I was still back on a level with the repeater light.

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.3778014,-1.5007709,3a,37.5y,141.21h,86.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s6S9NA3CVHn_i51iaTXa6cQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D6S9NA3CVHn_i51iaTXa6cQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D121.43737%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

 

These things can occur despite the best of planning of course.  In an ideal world, yes, no one would proceed beyond the stop lights unless they could see that their exit is clear.  But life isn't like that, and road traffic situations can change and people can find themselves stuck out on a limb.  It happens.  But with a bit of patience and a bit of care, it's possible to remain safe for drivers, pedestrians and other road users.

Edited June 24, 2019 by DerbyTup

[Planner1 428]

On ‎23‎/‎06‎/‎2019 at 10:02, Weredoomed said:

At the downhill end of the island obviously. The push button on that pole could go on a short length pole in the same location as the existing one.

One thing you don't appear to be considering is that with the signal in it's current position, if a single driver decides to erroneously stop at that signal, they are safe and out of the way of the conflicting traffic flow coming out of Clarkson St.

 

If the signal was a the location you think it should be and a driver stopped at it, they would block the traffic coming out of Clarkson St.

 

When the designers want to put in secondary signals at the far side of junctions they tend to position it on a pole that already has to be there if they can and only put in a separate pole for it if absolutely necessary and there's no other pole available. A separate pole and associated cabling and ducting is an extra capital cost and ongoing maintenance cost for the Council. There are nowadays pressures to reduce the amount of street furniture too, for aesthetic reasons. The secondary signal is exactly where I would have put it if I'd designed it.

[Weredoomed 10]

And what you don't appear to be considering is that if there is another vehicle immediately behind the idiot who has stopped, the idiot will be blissfully unaware of the blockage they are causing, as the blockage is behind them. If the secondary was at the downhill end of the island, the traffic trying to get out of Clarkson Street would be immediately to their dozy left. A sharp sounding of the horn from their left might wake them up.  Any vehicle which has followed them can blare their horn as loudly as they like though, the idiot just sits their smug in the knowledge that they have "correctly" (not) stopped at a red light. I was that following driver and the idiot pointedly gesticulated at the red light. The clueless idiot.

 

The secondary is in the wrong place.

[Planner1 428]

2 minutes ago, Weredoomed said:

And what you don't appear to be considering is that if there is another vehicle immediately behind the idiot who has stopped, the idiot will be blissfully unaware of the blockage they are causing, as the blockage is behind them. If the secondary was at the downhill end of the island, the traffic trying to get out of Clarkson Street would be immediately to their dozy left. A sharp sounding of the horn from their left might wake them up.  Any vehicle which has followed them can blare their horn as loudly as they like though, the idiot just sits their smug in the knowledge that they have "correctly" (not) stopped at a red light. I was that following driver and the idiot pointedly gesticulated at the red light. The clueless idiot.

 

The secondary is in the wrong place.

I have actually considered that, but how often does it happen and although it's an inconvenience, is it inherently unsafe?

 

Even though as a designer,  you think carefully about what could possibly happen, you can't engineer out every single possibility of an issue potentially being caused by rank bad driving.

 

I've been a traffic signal designer and that secondary signal is exactly where I would have put it. The layout will also have had an independent road safety audit and they clearly haven't had an issue with it. It is something that appears to happen occasionally when there is a crossing on the far side of the junction, but no actual stop line at the crossing,  just a secondary signal. It used to happen now and again out of city on Fulwood Rd at Manchester Rd signals till they changed the overall layout.

 

You're entitled to your opinion. If you feel strongly about it drop the Council a line and ask them to move the secondary signal. They have a traffic camera at that site, so can observe to see how often it happens.