"OK - no hi-viz, how about Honda's new FACE?" thread in "Staying Alive"
Originally Posted by Voyager Do they remove direction signs too? I can remember a couple of years back the traffic lights failed on a complex ...

The Spin Doctor · 20-11-08, 09:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voyager

Do they remove direction signs too?

I can remember a couple of years back the traffic lights failed on a complex junction in Taunton (no-idea of the number of vehicles per day, quite a lot - perhaps Jim will know) but while the lights were out for a week the traffic worked out how to deal with it and there was not the usual backlog of traffic in each direction that having the lights there appears to create. As soon as they 'fixed' it the junction because the congestion that it always is.

I have a feeling the traffic management people like it as it keeps them in work - creating these stupid, complex systems to 'control' traffic flow - when all they are doing is buggering it up for everyone else and, by showing what a 'problem' it is, keeping themselves in a job.

I have no idea about the direction signs, but Drachten isn't exactly on a major crossroads - it's bypassed by two motorway-style roads both E-W and N-S. So really, it's only internal traffic they need to worry about, no cross-town stuff.

I suspect this is the roundabout where the photos in the news articles were taken. It's not hugely busy, as you can see! Given the number of cars parked in various carparks around town, we're not talking very early morning or weekends, here, but during the working day, so I think my guess about low traffic flow is right.

Why do we put lights in in the UK? I'd like to hear Jim's ideas too, but I suspect a lot of the 'improvements' are down to one, bad, accident that results in "killer junction must be fixed" style demands or to occasional exceptional traffic flow problems. My guess is that many lights are not there not to manage "average" situations, but to keep traffic flowing when the unmanaged junction would snarl up.

When I was despatching, they installed lights at Marble Arch. Before they put the lights in, it was noticable that if there was a queue building up, up Park Lane in the evening, that you could expect the police up there directing traffic by hand! Basically, at that time Marble Arch actually flowed far better when it was left to itself as a large roundabout.

The problem was that for unknown reasons, occasionally it would be come gridlocked, and then the problems rapidly spread. Down Park Lane, out along the Bayswater Road and up Edgware Road and Gt Cumberland Place. And once gridlocked, the traffic didn't really sort iself out till 7 in the evening when the rush was over.

After they put the lights in, it always took longer to get over the junction, but the gridlock situation didn't seem to occur so frequently.

Jim at SRSP · 20-11-08, 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

Netherlands, Drachten.

A small town.

Driving works because road users adhere to standard rules.

This idea that this kind of system works "without rules" is completely fallacious and mind-bogglingly simplistic.

After an initial period of uncertainty about what to do because of the lack of information, the road users come to operate them by common consent anyway. As the architect of the system said: "as you see, the cars look out for the cyclists, the cyclists look out for the pedestrians, and everyone looks out for each other".

In other words, the locals have already developed a set of unwritten rules to cope with each other - behaviour is not simply random - it can't be because as a species we are desperately trying to create order and avoid uncertainty.

It may well be that those "social" rules work better in terms of aggressive behaviour than imposed rules - I don't know.

But it's not rocket science to see that the problems will arise when someone from outside the area encounters the system and hasn't a clue how to operate under the local rules. Talk to Americans about roundabouts!

We recently had presentations on 'naked streets' and 'shared space'. Unfortunately the architect couldn't provide any data on collision or casualty reduction as a result of the scheme. When I pushed him on how they substantiate their claim that the system works, his answer was "Because there are about 5,000 shared space schemes in Europe."
From a design point of view they look much more aesthetically pleasing than our normal road layout and design. Watching the video of people 'negotiating a contract for space' you could see that there was definitely a lot more eye contact going on between road users and that pedestrians and cyclists were having to pay attention.

The issue around shared space that is most often overlooked is that the elements shown in their brochures are the 'slow network' and this should only be designed alongside the 'fast or supra network' if it is to work properly. ie. If I actually want to get to my destination on time in the car I can use the ringroad instead. (because obviously the ringroad will be a superb piece of engineering genius that will carry high volumes of traffic at high speed without congestion...)

Jim at SRSP · 20-11-08, 10:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

I have no idea about the direction signs, but Drachten isn't exactly on a major crossroads - it's bypassed by two motorway-style roads both E-W and N-S. So really, it's only internal traffic they need to worry about, no cross-town stuff.

My thoughts precisely when we watched the videos in the presentation, not much traffic...

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

Why do we put lights in in the UK? I'd like to hear Jim's ideas too, but I suspect a lot of the 'improvements' are down to one, bad, accident that results in "killer junction must be fixed" style demands or to occasional exceptional traffic flow problems. My guess is that many lights are not there not to manage "average" situations, but to keep traffic flowing when the unmanaged junction would snarl up.

A lot of lights (I can go away and get a meaningful number if you need it) are put in just to manage the traffic and reduce congestion in particular areas to an acceptable level. One fatal crash wouldn't be enough to justify implementing a set of lights unless it could be proven that not to implement lights would most likely give rise to a similar collision. A cluster of serious injury crashes might result in a set of lights being put in but it would be unlikely for this to be a knee-jerk reaction to one killer crash as the cost of putting them in is so high and implementing lights just changes the nature of the collision, rather than eliminating collisions entirely.

The Spin Doctor · 20-11-08, 10:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim at SRSP

We recently had presentations on 'naked streets' and 'shared space'. Unfortunately the architect couldn't provide any data on collision or casualty reduction as a result of the scheme. When I pushed him on how they substantiate their claim that the system works, his answer was "Because there are about 5,000 shared space schemes in Europe."
From a design point of view they look much more aesthetically pleasing than our normal road layout and design. Watching the video of people 'negotiating a contract for space' you could see that there was definitely a lot more eye contact going on between road users and that pedestrians and cyclists were having to pay attention.

The issue around shared space that is most often overlooked is that the elements shown in their brochures are the 'slow network' and this should only be designed alongside the 'fast or supra network' if it is to work properly. ie. If I actually want to get to my destination on time in the car I can use the ringroad instead. (because obviously the ringroad will be a superb piece of engineering genius that will carry high volumes of traffic at high speed without congestion...)

Interesting... and obviously Drachten has that ringroad option already.

Voyager · 20-11-08, 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim at SRSP

My thoughts precisely when we watched the videos in the presentation, not much traffic...

Do you record that many collisions in James Street in Taunton? It is (effectively) a short 'naked street' and 'shared space' isn't it?

Jim at SRSP · 20-11-08, 10:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voyager

Do you record that many collisions in James Street in Taunton? It is (effectively) a short 'naked street' and 'shared space' isn't it?

Not a traditional shared space as the chunky iron plant pots effectively give refuge to pedestrians if they choose to take it. I've looked through and we have a couple of cyclists running into people (failed to observe red light, failed to give way exiting junction), a car doing a 3 point turn in the one-way street hitting a pedestrian and a couple of other minors at the junction with North Street. Most of the issues occur turning into James Street, the 3 point turn and one of the cyclists are the only ones that occurred within the 'shared space' area.

Voyager · 20-11-08, 11:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim at SRSP

Not a traditional shared space as the chunky iron plant pots effectively give refuge to pedestrians if they choose to take it. I've looked through and we have a couple of cyclists running into people (failed to observe red light, failed to give way exiting junction), a car doing a 3 point turn in the one-way street hitting a pedestrian and a couple of other minors at the junction with North Street. Most of the issues occur turning into James Street, the 3 point turn and one of the cyclists are the only ones that occurred within the 'shared space' area.

Sounds like the problems are not the shared space - but where the shared space joins the controlled world. And one idiot.

Jim at SRSP · 20-11-08, 11:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Voyager

Sounds like the problems are not the shared space - but where the shared space joins the controlled world. And one idiot.

Since they removed the tick box for 'Idiocy' from STATS19 it would be conjecture on my part to suggest that any of the collisions I just looked through were down to an idiot

The Spin Doctor · 20-11-08, 11:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim at SRSP

My thoughts precisely when we watched the videos in the presentation, not much traffic...

Good to know the professional read it the same way I did, then.

Quote:

A lot of lights (I can go away and get a meaningful number if you need it) are put in just to manage the traffic and reduce congestion in particular areas to an acceptable level.

Quote:

One fatal crash wouldn't be enough to justify implementing a set of lights unless it could be proven that not to implement lights would most likely give rise to a similar collision. A cluster of serious injury crashes might result in a set of lights being put in but it would be unlikely for this to be a knee-jerk reaction to one killer crash as the cost of putting them in is so high and implementing lights just changes the nature of the collision, rather than eliminating collisions entirely.

My bad... etc...

I re-read that and what I think I meant to write was:

I suspect a lot of the 'improvements' are down to

* bad accidents that results in "killer junction must be fixed" style demands
* occasional exceptional traffic flow problems.

A lot clearer as bullet points

Horse · 20-11-08, 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horse

catch that up on an unlit M-way . . . at a closing speed of perhaps 60mph they won't have long to make a decision on what to do

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

So, what you do is have a standardised set of warnings for something like that:

WIDE LOAD
SLOW CONVOY AHEAD
Amber lights...

so......
................ although the sheer scale of the SITUATION you ENCOUNTER might be bigger than expected it's not outside the realms of what you already know and any UNCERTAINTY is limited to the minimum.

OK, thank you for persevering.

Now, at 60 mph closing speed, in the dark, how large and well-illuminated will that ^ text need to be so it can be read, understood, and a decision made, in time for a driver to take react safely?

The Spin Doctor · 20-11-08, 20:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horse

OK, thank you for persevering.

Now, at 60 mph closing speed, in the dark, how large and well-illuminated will that ^ text need to be so it can be read, understood, and a decision made, in time for a driver to take react safely?

I appreciate your point, but that's why there are flashing amber lights, and for really big loads, escorts.

Hopefully by the time you can read WIDE LOAD, you've already slowed

Horse · 20-11-08, 20:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

but that's why there are flashing amber lights, and for really big loads, escorts.

There's a move these days for 'self escorting' - plod are just too busy unless absolutely necessary.

Simplified, but you go on-line with the HA, register and set up an account, log a route, and employ a company with vans . . .

Department for Transport - Consultation paper: Amber warning beacons for abnormal load escort vehicles

In the past, the police normally escorted certain categories of abnormal loads or abnormal vehicles in order to warn other road users of their presence or direct traffic so that these vehicles or loads can safely negotiate a road route. From 1 January this year police forces in England and Wales no longer provide routine escorts for abnormal loads.

The Highways Agency has consulted on a voluntary code of practice for the self-escorting of abnormal loads and abnormal vehicles. The Code is endorsed by The Association of Chief Police Officers, The Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland, The Freight Transport Association, The Heavy Transport Association and The Road Haulage Association. It includes minimum standards for an escort vehicle, such as its appearance, markings and amber warning beacons.

Lickle-ickle van? Orange lights? That'll be the AA then . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

Hopefully by the time you can read WIDE LOAD, you've already slowed

It's actually 'Abnormal Load' nowadays

And look how small the text is - at night in-between two flashing lights . . . Could anyone read that at realistic closing speeds?

Edit: and the size isn't the van owner's choice - it's how the specification for livery sets it out.

And notice it's a Vauxhall but says 'Escort' on the bonnet

[/]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Spin Doctor

I appreciate your point . . . you've already slowed

Thank you

Default = 'slow'

I knew we'd get there

The Spin Doctor · 20-11-08, 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horse

Thank you

Default = 'slow'

I knew we'd get there

I've never said the first reaction shouldn't be "slow down", but realistically, when confused drivers and riders do nothing...

See Keith Code and Survival Reactions!

Horse · 05-12-08, 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim at SRSP

We recently had presentations on 'naked streets' and 'shared space'. Unfortunately the architect couldn't provide any data on collision or casualty reduction as a result of the scheme. When I pushed him on how they substantiate their claim that the system works, his answer was "Because there are about 5,000 shared space schemes in Europe."
From a design point of view they look much more aesthetically pleasing than our normal road layout and design. Watching the video of people 'negotiating a contract for space' you could see that there was definitely a lot more eye contact going on between road users and that pedestrians and cyclists were having to pay attention.

LARSOA | Presenting road safety across the UK

Strip lights and signs to save lives

Redesigning roads to leave drivers and pedestrians uncertain about who has priority will save lives, according to a report by the County Surveyors’ Society.

The report says that barriers and signs such as railings, kerbs, traffic lights and white lines cause crashes because people assume they will keep them safe and therefore fail to focus on what other road users are doing. Giving drivers less information by removing signs will encourage them to slow down to negotiate a safer course along high streets and junctions.

The report, Travel is Good, recommends a revolution in road design. It calls for widespread adoption of the concept of ‘shared space’, pioneered in the Netherlands and better known in Britain as ‘naked streets’.

In the Dutch town of Drachten the removal of traffic lights at one big junction resulted in crashes falling from 36 in the four years before the scheme was introduced to two in the next two years. The average time for each vehicle to cross the junction fell from 50 seconds to 30 seconds despite a rise in the volume of traffic.

In Kensington High Street, London, fewer pedestrians are being injured after almost 600 metres of railings were removed to allow people to cross where they liked. In the two years since they were removed, pedestrian casualties declined three times faster than the capital’s average. Traffic engineers believe that drivers are keeping a sharper eye out for pedestrians because they may cross at any point.

Full report:

How stripping the streets of traffic lights and signs may be a life saver - Times Online

With a comment:
Fantastic idea. Remove all the clutter from the roads and make it easier for everyone to get around. I've travelled all over S.E Asia and India and people seem to get by fine without all the barriers / signs / cameras etc.

Take a look at this clip I took in Hanoi as I crossed a road - The idea is to just walk onto the road keep a steady pace (don't stop or panic) and the traffic will drive around you. It works!!

YouTube - Playing with the traffic - Hanoi, Vietnam

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim at SRSP

The issue around shared space that is most often overlooked is that the elements shown in their brochures are the 'slow network' and this should only be designed alongside the 'fast or supra network' if it is to work properly. ie. If I actually want to get to my destination on time in the car I can use the ringroad instead. (because obviously the ringroad will be a superb piece of engineering genius that will carry high volumes of traffic at high speed without congestion...)

Which is the problem, also, with ideas like Oxford's intended blanket 20mph limit . . .

Proposals for 20mph speed limits in Oxford - Oxfordshire County Council

The council has agreed proposals for consultation, which recommend that 20mph limits could be introduced in 2009 on:

all minor residential roads within the city.

all unnumbered through-roads except where they are part of heavily-used bus routes into the city, for example the section of Blackbird Leys Road/Barns Road (north west of Balfour Road) and Old Abingdon Road.

some sections of the main A and B road network through busy shopping areas, for example the London Road through Headington and parts of the B4495 through the Temple Cowley area.

20mph speed limits, which are designed to be self-enforcing, can reduce accident levels - especially when associated with traffic-calming measures - and can bring other benefits, such as creating a more pleasant environment and encouraging more walking and cycling.

http://portal.oxfordshire.gov.uk/con...ity-centre.pdf

http://portal.oxfordshire.gov.uk/con...sey-Botley.pdf

The Spin Doctor · 05-12-08, 14:26

Quote:

In the Dutch town of Drachten the removal of traffic lights at one big junction resulted in crashes falling from 36 in the four years before the scheme was introduced to two in the next two years. The average time for each vehicle to cross the junction fell from 50 seconds to 30 seconds despite a rise in the volume of traffic.

Which is interesting because the follow up article DOESN'T suggest that at all but hinted that crashes just happened at lower speeds.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode


These advertisements are reduced in size when you become a registered member and removed when you become a TRC Supporter / Sponsor member.

"OK - no hi-viz, how about Honda's new FACE?" thread in "Staying Alive" Originally Posted by Voyager Do they remove direction signs too? I can remember a couple of years back the traffic lights failed on a complex ...

Thread Tags: face, honda

"OK - no hi-viz, how about Honda's new FACE?" thread in "Staying Alive"
Originally Posted by Voyager Do they remove direction signs too? I can remember a couple of years back the traffic lights failed on a complex ...