Penistone999 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 There's moves afoot to alow the Council to enforce box junctions and banned turns by camera, like they already do in London. And you STILL claim sheffield council arnt anti car. Its all about fleecing motorists isnt it.? milking the cash cow as usual. cameras here, more cameras there . But i dare say you will claim it isnt about raising revenue . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 And you STILL claim sheffield council arnt anti car. Its all about fleecing motorists isnt it.? milking the cash cow as usual. cameras here, more cameras there . But i dare say you will claim it isnt about raising revenue . Box junctions HELP motorists. Adding cameras make them more effective. If someone WANTS to pay money to be allowed to block box junctions they can, but it is not compulsory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 And you STILL claim sheffield council arnt anti car. Its all about fleecing motorists isnt it.? milking the cash cow as usual. cameras here, more cameras there . But i dare say you will claim it isnt about raising revenue . What exactly is anti-car about keeping traffic moving? That is the aim of box junctions. And what is anti car about penalising motorists who commit dangerous offences like ignoring banned turns? Motorists have a very simple way of not paying anything, just don't commit the offence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 What exactly is anti-car about keeping traffic moving? That is the aim of box junctions. And what is anti car about penalising motorists who commit dangerous offences like ignoring banned turns? Motorists have a very simple way of not paying anything, just don't commit the offence. You mean like the one at the bottom of Walkley Lane at the junction of Holme lane where you cant turn right ,but have to do a mile detour all the way up Malin Bridge and back just to get 50yds from where you started. ? That banned right turn has never been dangerous ,and until Hillsbro corner was altered to accommodate the tram there was never an issue with turning right there. That is a good example of stupid road planning of the highest order. Making vehicles travel a mile just to progress 50yds. Banned turns arnt always there because it is dangerous , they are there purely to force traffic to go where the council want it to go . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 You mean like the one at the bottom of Walkley Lane at the junction of Holme lane where you cant turn right ,but have to do a mile detour all the way up Malin Bridge and back just to get 50yds from where you started. ? That banned right turn has never been dangerous ,and until Hillsbro corner was altered to accommodate the tram there was never an issue with turning right there. That is a good example of stupid road planning of the highest order. Making vehicles travel a mile just to progress 50yds. Banned turns arnt always there because it is dangerous , they are there purely to force traffic to go where the council want it to go . Most of the banned turns are there either for safety or to keep traffic moving. Making some of the banned turns can be extremely dangerous. The Police can and do prosecute drivers for these offences, are they anti-car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 Most of the banned turns are there either for safety or to keep traffic moving. Making some of the banned turns can be extremely dangerous. The Police can and do prosecute drivers for these offences, are they anti-car? So its acceptable ,and good planning to make motorists take a one mile detour to progress just 50yds from where they started. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 So its acceptable ,and good planning to make motorists take a one mile detour to progress just 50yds from where they started. ? There are alternative routes available to motorists who don't want to go round the Malin Bridge loop. Would you rather they just blocked that road off completely? If you are making a major change, like running a tram through a constrained junction like that, sometimes you have to ban some movements in order to minimise delays and allow the other movements to run safely. Sometimes sacrifices are necessary to achieve the bigger aim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightFlight Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 You mean like the one at the bottom of Walkley Lane at the junction of Holme lane where you cant turn right ,but have to do a mile detour all the way up Malin Bridge and back just to get 50yds from where you started. ? That banned right turn has never been dangerous , No, it's not dangerous to make that right turn, particularly when traffic is quiet. However, during peak times, if two people want to turn right there and traffic is backed up because of a red light you quickly end up with traffic on holme lane stationary in both directions. I've noticed a tend to shift away from bridges to cross roads in favour of traffic light controlled crossings.. anyone know why this is? Complete separation of soft squidgy things from haphazardly controlled big heavy things seems like a good idea on paper? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retep Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 And you STILL claim sheffield council arnt anti car. Its all about fleecing motorists isnt it.? milking the cash cow as usual. cameras here, more cameras there . But i dare say you will claim it isnt about raising revenue . Milking the cash cow is about right, as well as the anti car bit, keeps one in a job, and forces the rest onto a bus, part of the bus company's plans for more profit, all for our own good of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted January 5, 2013 Share Posted January 5, 2013 I've noticed a tend to shift away from bridges to cross roads in favour of traffic light controlled crossings.. anyone know why this is? Complete separation of soft squidgy things from haphazardly controlled big heavy things seems like a good idea on paper? Do you mean pedestrian footbridges? If we want people to walk, crossing the road has to be safe and accessible to all. Footbridges are not popular because pedestrians regard them as inconvenient and unsafe, particularly at night, pretty much the same as underpasses. They are also not accessible to people who are less able. ---------- Post added 05-01-2013 at 21:55 ---------- Milking the cash cow is about right, as well as the anti car bit, keeps one in a job, and forces the rest onto a bus, part of the bus company's plans for more profit, all for our own good of course. Absolute drivel. It's nothing whatsoever to do with forcing people onto buses. How can the Council introducing more camera enforcement be anything to do with a bus company's plans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.