[TCUG] Re: 'Wacky ideas'
- From: "David Overton" <dtoverton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 18:56:48 +0100
Mervyn
Thanks for that. I'm sorry I didn't make myself clear - I fully endorse
your opinion about the efficiency which staggered crossings bring, but the
advantage is in the separate signalling, not in the physical stagger. With
near-side indicators it is only moderately wacky to consider retaining the
separate signalling of each carriageway but without physically staggering
them. All the efficiency advantages with a much neater layout. Other
people do it ...
And another thing - can we kill once and for all the view of some safety
auditors that all staggers should be left-right! Let's hear it for the
right-left stagger! Crossing on the approach side is then at the stop line.
Crossing on the exit side far enough from the junction for traffic to be
travelling straight and to give the peds sight of them. More efficient and
safer.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tcug-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of mervyn.hallworth@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 11 June 2004 17:21
To: tcug@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [TCUG] Re: 'Wacky ideas'
David,
Thanks for helping to put many of these issues into context. I was going
to mention the way the Australians use red arrows - in the opposite sense
to the way we use filter arrows (i.e. they stop right-turners using an
amber arrow then a red arrow - after which they drop the red arrow off!),
but I thought we were probably still 2 decades away from that in UK!
Not sure about your comment about staggered crossings - we certainly don't
put them in for any 'see through' reasons at junctions - we put them in
largely for efficiency reasons (as a form of parallel peds they help
minimise the dreaded congestion!). I think that Birmingham have recently
'outlawed' all-round peds in favour of staggered crossings on the basis of
congestion - care to comment Paul?
I know staggers are not popular with 'planners', but I really do believe
they can be more meaningful to pedestrians - in the sense that for each
crossing arm they can be more often faced with a clear-cut situation -
there's either 'traffic' or there's a 'green man'. I know things are never
that perfect, but contrast this with an (inefficient) all-red stage which
has a red man up for so much of the cycle (including the inevitable period
to protect peds against non-existent left turners) that the red man signal
can become meaningless.
Mervyn
0113 2476750
________________________________________________________________________
The information in this email (and any attachment) may be for the
intended recipient only. If you know you are not the intended recipient,
please do not use or disclose the information in any way and please
delete this email (and any attachment) from your system.
Service of legal documents is not accepted by email
________________________________________________________________________
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
-----------------------------------------------------------
A message from the TCUG mailing list. For information about
the list visit //www.freelists.org/webpage/tcug
Other related posts:
