Do Sheffield City Council Have Something Against Roundabouts ?

[Findlay]

People selfishly play with risk when they drive either by speeding or closing gaps which clogs roundabouts in busy traffic. 
The only way to solve this is by YOU not being selfish and taking risks, its not an engineering thing its a people thing.
Authorities have tried to solve it with traffic lights and as we all know, it's made things worse.
 

[spilldig]

11 hours ago, Planner1 said:

This thread is about roundabouts and the conversation was on the merits of signalled junctions vs roundabouts and prioritisation of available funding.

 

What you are talking about is low traffic neighbourhoods, which is a somewhat different thing. It’s designed to get more people walking and cycling, particularly on shorter local trips. It also improves safety, air quality and noise pollution in the scheme area.

 

There have been quite a few of them introduced in recent years in London, so that’s where the research is being done. From the studies I’ve seen, LTN’s do not actually increase traffic on the roads around their periphery and so there’s no increase in pollution.

 

What happens is referred to as “traffic evaporation”. Route choices include many factors and drivers don’t often follow what you or I might think of as the logical choice of route if they are just having to now avoid a particular area. They go a different way altogether, as it suits their purpose better. So, resulting traffic diversions are spread across the network and aren’t really noticeable. That’s what appears to have happened in London.

 

It is something that’s been observed worldwide and studies have been done on it by eminent people in the industry ( Professor Phil Goodwin for one).

 

Have a read of this article which covers a lot of the questions people have about LTN’s and includes links to research.

Ok Planner. Well I know that they want to cut pollution levels and I'm all for that but I still think that blocking roads is stopping traffic moving and therefore creating more pollution. I know, in theory, these days cars engines cut out when they're stood but in practice many don't and I'm still wondering why traffic lights will automatically go to red at all times even when nothing else is on the road. Surely it makes no sense to stop a vehicle for no reason when there are sensors laid in the road?

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, spilldig said:

I'm still wondering why traffic lights will automatically go to red at all times even when nothing else is on the road. Surely it makes no sense to stop a vehicle for no reason when there are sensors laid in the road?

Some are set that way for safety, to slow drivers down.

[spilldig]

22 minutes ago, Planner1 said:

Some are set that way for safety, to slow drivers down.

It is a fair point considering how some of them drive

 

Just now, spilldig said:

It is a fair point considering how some of them drive

 

That, I think, has answered that

 

[Chekhov]

On 29/08/2023 at 18:00, Planner1 said:

>>Chekhov said:
It comes down to this, if using a certain type of junction significantly reduces capacity for 99% of its users (incl any passengers in those vehicles), but makes it easier to use for the other 1% (cyclists mainly), is that reasonable ?

 I cannot help thinking that if the council were having to pay, even at only at the national minimum wage for all the time people had to spend waiting in queues, they'd sort the roads out on double quick time.<<

 

>>Chekhov said:
If money is short and it has to be used for the minority usage that smacks of, tails, wagging and dogs to me.

I'm not saying cyclists needs should be ignored, even less pedestrians, but the strategy should be more proportionate.<<

 

I’d disagree.

I’d expect that funding would be used to achieve the policy aims of the funder and the delivery organisation.

Transport policy at the moment is to prioritise active travel and public transport.

>>I’d expect that funding would be used to achieve the policy aims of the funder and the delivery organisation.<<

 

More authoritarianism then ?

"We will tell people how to live their lives".

I am unconvinced how many people would even vote for such a policy, if it were put to them honestly.

 

Two alternative versions of the same questions [with Nett Zero equivalent in brackets] :

 

1 - Are you in favour of promoting cycling and walking ?

[Do you think we should try to get to Nett Zero to try and avoid any climate change ?]

Motherhood and apple pie questions that almost everyone would answer in the affirmative.

 

2 - Are you in favour of road improvement works at your local junction (which will improve journey times for many thousands) being cancelled in favour of cycle improvement works (which will make journeys easier for hundreds, or possibly even just dozens) ?

[are you in favour of the following Nett Zero policies : expensive gas and electricity, expensive car travel, expensive (possibly even rationed) airline travel ? ]

How stuff will actually affect people.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

On 30/08/2023 at 01:27, Longcol said:

It has increased though - and we have a big increase in the number of vehicles - so what has happened is that we have a large increase in vehicles, especially in urban areas, doing short journeys, hence the increased congestion.

I suspect its more case that most people, feel they need a car but use it less than they used to because :

 

1 - It's getting so expensive to use, particularly fuel.

 

2 - It's getting such a PITA to drive, what with congestion (they have cut right back on road investment) but also there are more and more restrictions, particularly in built up areas e.g. lack of (and/or expense) of parking, dead ends, one ways, no right turns, tram/bus gates etc etc 

[Chekhov]

23 hours ago, Planner1 said:

What happens is referred to as “traffic evaporation”. Route choices include many factors and drivers don’t often follow what you or I might think of as the logical choice of route if they are just having to now avoid a particular area. They go a different way altogether, as it suits their purpose better. So, resulting traffic diversions are spread across the network and aren’t really noticeable. That’s what appears to have happened in London.

>>as it suits their purpose better<<

 

Really ? ! ?

Being forced to go a more awkward / long way "suits their purposes better" ? ! ?

Please.

 

Basically you appear to be saying that reducing the capacity of the road network has minimal effect on road capacity, which is plainly rubbish.

You may be right about “traffic evaporation”, but only because politicians / planners are forcing people off the roads by making their journeys too much trouble. Or, to put it a different way : telling people how to live their lives.

Edited August 31, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov]

22 hours ago, Findlay said:

People selfishly play with risk when they drive either by speeding or closing gaps which clogs roundabouts in busy traffic. 
The only way to solve this is by YOU not being selfish and taking risks, its not an engineering thing its a people thing.
Authorities have tried to solve it with traffic lights and as we all know, it's made things worse.

I agree with you in a  way. People speeding onto roundabouts and showing what a "fantastic" driver they are by cutting safety margins to the bone and just missing the other cars as they fly across the roundabout etc etc . It was for just such reasons I did not like the roundabout next to Law Brothers, particularly as it was so small. But, with the benefit of hindsight, it was better than what they have now. I hate that junction with a passion.

I sometimes wonder if the ideal solution at that roundabout would have been to make the old roundabout a bit larger if possible, but also have (shallow) speed bumps on its entry lanes !

[Planner1]

1 hour ago, Chekhov said:

>>as it suits their purpose better<<

 

Really ? ! ?

Being forced to go a more awkward / long way "suits their purposes better" ? ! ?

Please.

 

Basically you appear to be saying that reducing the capacity of the road network has minimal effect on road capacity, which is plainly rubbish.

You may be right about “traffic evaporation”, but only because politicians / planners are forcing people off the roads by making their journeys too much trouble. Or, to put it a different way : telling people how to live their lives.

Yes, as  I said, people have differing reasons for selecting a particular route, it may be that if a section of that route is no longer viable, they choose a different way as it suits them better.

 

The research seems to be showing that peripheral roads around Low Traffic Neighbourhoods don’t actually get busier. Yes some of that might result from local people walking and cycling instead of taking the car.

 

I have come across people who deliberately go via back streets to avoid queues on main roads. It might be further, it might actually take them a bit longer, but they keep moving so feel it’s better.

 

LTN’s don’t generally fully close off roads to traffic, so at least in theory they don’t affect overall network capacity. They just mean it’s used in a different way. I’ve seen the traffic evaporation effect many times over the years. Something new gets introduced, there are queues and chaos on the first day or two, but then the traffic melts away into the network and you don’t see any major difference anywhere else.

 

Allowing through traffic to use residential side streets could be seen as imposing greater levels of car use on the local residents, as they may feel that walking or cycling isn’t safe. How does that square with your theory of not telling people how to live their lives?

 

Studies on LTN’s appear to be showing increased levels of active travel and lower levels of car ownership among residents, so it’s clearly allowing them to make different choices in how they travel.

 

The people who make the policy at national, regional and local levels are your elected representatives, accountable at the ballot box. So, people can vote for something different if anyone is proposing an alternative.

[Jack Grey]

Yes

 

Because they love going around in circles