metalman Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 How would pedestrians get across when a tram is at the stop? He's not talking about crossing the tram track though, he's talking about crossing the road. So it's irrelevant whether there's a tram there, as it's also irrelevant for Planner1 to say that the platform is raised. Personally I don't have any great issues with the crossings there, and Cyclone is wrong when he says they are pedestrian driven because it makes not a blind bit of difference to the timings of the lights whether you push the button or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Planner1 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Are you honestly trying to defend the 4 sets of traffic lights, at least 2 of which are pedestrian driven, within the space of 200 metres, which cause traffic to back up onto the roundabout and are not in any way synchronised? Are you trying to say that the thousands of people who cross there don't need a crossing? Motorists aren't the only road users. They Council has to consider everyone. [/color] The data would seem to disprove this. The IRR is slower than the old route and over such a short time period that the volume of traffic has not changed. The volume of traffic which uses that route has increased substantially. The route of the IRR is also considerably longer than the old route. The Star were given that data. Given that it's slower than the old route, I can't see why it would have attracted anyone. And where would they come from, would they hear about the new IRR and rush off to buy a car It is a well known phenomenon that adding new capacity to a route attracts new trips. It's called supressed demand. You don't think that your journey might be quicker if you didn't have to stop at so many? Council gets criticised if they block routes off, but you still complain when they don't. You can't have it both ways. ---------- Post added 05-02-2014 at 08:34 ---------- He's not talking about crossing the tram track though, he's talking about crossing the road. So it's irrelevant whether there's a tram there, as it's also irrelevant for Planner1 to say that the platform is raised. Personally I don't have any great issues with the crossings there, and Cyclone is wrong when he says they are pedestrian driven because it makes not a blind bit of difference to the timings of the lights whether you push the button or not. The crossings have to get across both carriageways. A lot of people want to get across both carriageways, the crossings aren't just used by tram users. A crossing in the middle of the tramstop would be difficult to use when a tram is in the stop as those wanting to get all the way across would have to go round the tram. The platform being raised is relevant because how are you going to accommodate the drop in level within the width of a tram platform and still maintain safe access? It is quite a drop, have a look when you drive past. The crossings are better at the ends of the platform where they drop down to carriageway level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincentb Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Its a bit like the flooding in somerset - much better to create a blockage upstream than having a flood downstream... Oh hold on, if they had dredged the river downstream it could have coped... I suppose that that is like suggesting that if they put in proper traffic management and flow control, then the traffic would flow better...? Now I see it... Except that it turns out that dredging would not have prevented flooding in Somerset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 He's not talking about crossing the tram track though, he's talking about crossing the road. So it's irrelevant whether there's a tram there, as it's also irrelevant for Planner1 to say that the platform is raised. Personally I don't have any great issues with the crossings there, and Cyclone is wrong when he says they are pedestrian driven because it makes not a blind bit of difference to the timings of the lights whether you push the button or not. Two of the four pairs of lights will not go red unless a pedestrian pushes the button. ---------- Post added 05-02-2014 at 10:58 ---------- Are you trying to say that the thousands of people who cross there don't need a crossing? Motorists aren't the only road users. They Council has to consider everyone. No, I clearly didn't say that, you just made it up. You however really are trying to defend the current arrangement as a good one, when it's clearly not. The volume of traffic which uses that route has increased substantially. The route of the IRR is also considerably longer than the old route. The Star were given that data. Longer and significantly slower. That would be a failure wouldn't it? Or are you claiming that slower is somehow better? And over what time period are you claiming the volume has increased? It is a well known phenomenon that adding new capacity to a route attracts new trips. It's called supressed demand. Yes, I get that. But since the capacity hasn't actually been increased that probably isn't why the new route is now slower than the old one. And HAS BEEN from DAY ONE. Council gets criticised if they block routes off, but you still complain when they don't. You can't have it both ways. True, I criticise when left turns are closed. I can see more of an argument for closing minor road right turns across a major road. The crossings have to get across both carriageways. A lot of people want to get across both carriageways, the crossings aren't just used by tram users. A crossing in the middle of the tramstop would be difficult to use when a tram is in the stop as those wanting to get all the way across would have to go round the tram. Perhaps some of this might have been foreseeable and a bridge or underpass planned in. If pedestrians don't like underpasses then maybe the cars should have gone under, or over. The platform being raised is relevant because how are you going to accommodate the drop in level within the width of a tram platform and still maintain safe access? It is quite a drop, have a look when you drive past. The crossings are better at the ends of the platform where they drop down to carriageway level. There's no good reason for separately controlled crossings at both sides. They could at least operate together and not independently, and work in conjunction with the other sets of works instead of in opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metalman Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 The crossings have to get across both carriageways. A lot of people want to get across both carriageways, the crossings aren't just used by tram users. A crossing in the middle of the tramstop would be difficult to use when a tram is in the stop as those wanting to get all the way across would have to go round the tram. The platform being raised is relevant because how are you going to accommodate the drop in level within the width of a tram platform and still maintain safe access? It is quite a drop, have a look when you drive past. The crossings are better at the ends of the platform where they drop down to carriageway level. I was just pointing out that you could have a road crossing in the middle of the tram stop. Obviously people would have to go along to the end of the tram platform and back on the other side if they want to go all the way across the road. You could however for that matter have some steps down in the middle of the tram platform because the tram doors never end up there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 All the signals on main roads are connected to an urban traffic control computer system, which allows the Council to set different timing plans for different times of day and different traffic conditions and co-ordinate adjacent sets of signals. Timing plans can be changed automatically by time of day / day of week or by sensors triggered by queuing traffic, or by operator control. Thanks for that. I recall similar comments from you on earlier threads, but as I understood it, there were only a few sets of lights connected in little groups, not a full flow from one end to the other. (Edit. How many sets of lights might be brought together in control terms?) Also, I think I recall you saying that in many cases there are problems caused by faults which mean that sometimes the lights have to be switched to a default simple sequence. If its all working properly, is it possible to get a clear run, designed to operate as such, between, say, Shalesmoor roundabout and Leppings Lane roundabout, maybe inbound in the morning, and outbound at night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrissoftley Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Penistone road one way into town. Langset road/middlewood road one way out of town. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litotes Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Except that it turns out that dredging would not have prevented flooding in Somerset. According to the people who DIDN'T dredge... According to others, it would... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewC Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Its a bit like the flooding in somerset - much better to create a blockage upstream than having a flood downstream... Oh hold on, if they had dredged the river downstream it could have coped... I suppose that that is like suggesting that if they put in proper traffic management and flow control, then the traffic would flow better...? Now I see it... So then clever clogs, the next step in your metaphor of course is where do you get the money to pay for the dredging? ---------- Post added 05-02-2014 at 20:39 ---------- Penistone road one way into town. Langset road/middlewood road one way out of town. Its that simple. Good work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Clowning Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Wasn't it really made to bypass Pitsmoor? in which case it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.