A Moan About Road Quality
Discussion
Jesus, the roads really are s
t these days aren't they?
Here are my beefs with bad road design.
a) Unecessary mini-roundabouts. Why do councils insist in putting in mini-roundabouts where t-junctions would be far more appropriate? Example - Arkleston Road on Paisley, there are two mini-roundabouts where 95% of the traffic is straight over. That traffic flow is so dominant that people end up essentially not looking or giving way at all, which IMO makes it more dangerous when someone pulls out from the less-used junction, than if they had just made it a main road with a t-junction for the less travelled road. Winds me up. It almost seems like some form of equality drive to try and make all roads equal (or perhaps so that road planners don't have to actually _think_).
b) Putting traffic lights EVERYWHERE where roundabouts used to do perfectly fine. Case in point - Braehead. There used to a muckle big roundabout on the main approach from the M8. It flowed pretty well. But no - they had to take that away and put in a massive set of traffic lights where you have to sit for minutes. The traffic is now horrendous. I would rather go to Silverburn than Braehead now, even though it is further away. I'm sure I am not alone.
c) Creating vast, traffic light controlled junctions, that look great on paper but don't work in reality and cause massive delays. Case in point - Glasgow Harbour. Signs near this bloated, expensive junction, proudly proclaim what a great job the council has done in 'improving' the junction. Is it just me, or do other people have to sit for ages at a red light as absolutely NO traffic passes? The old design was antiquated, but this is definitely slower than it used to be and must have cost millions.
Why are there lengthy, mandatory pedestrian phases when there isn't a pedestrian in sight? What about being eco-friendly? Funny how that doesn't count when it is arrogant road design that makes us waste petrol as we sit stationary for minutes at a time.
d) Leaving us to sort it out when they could have given guidance that would reduce conflict. Case in point - Barrhead Road, Westbound, West of Silverburn. You approach a roundabout in two lanes, which then splits into three for the roundabout. There is no guidance on which of the two lanes you should be in to get into the middle when it becomes three. Result - lots of near-misses and unnecessary conflict as people switch lanes without looking.
I won't even get started about the actual surfaces themselves, which where I live are absolutely knackered, and could form another rant on its own. The council's solution, once the potholes become completely out of control, is to send a wee man round with a bucket of tar and a shovel, to hopefully delay the problem for a few months. It drives me mental. There is something very metaphorical about the whole approach to the problem, and I also think the general decline of this country can be seen and measured very clearly in our roads.
Phew. Rant over
t these days aren't they?Here are my beefs with bad road design.
a) Unecessary mini-roundabouts. Why do councils insist in putting in mini-roundabouts where t-junctions would be far more appropriate? Example - Arkleston Road on Paisley, there are two mini-roundabouts where 95% of the traffic is straight over. That traffic flow is so dominant that people end up essentially not looking or giving way at all, which IMO makes it more dangerous when someone pulls out from the less-used junction, than if they had just made it a main road with a t-junction for the less travelled road. Winds me up. It almost seems like some form of equality drive to try and make all roads equal (or perhaps so that road planners don't have to actually _think_).
b) Putting traffic lights EVERYWHERE where roundabouts used to do perfectly fine. Case in point - Braehead. There used to a muckle big roundabout on the main approach from the M8. It flowed pretty well. But no - they had to take that away and put in a massive set of traffic lights where you have to sit for minutes. The traffic is now horrendous. I would rather go to Silverburn than Braehead now, even though it is further away. I'm sure I am not alone.
c) Creating vast, traffic light controlled junctions, that look great on paper but don't work in reality and cause massive delays. Case in point - Glasgow Harbour. Signs near this bloated, expensive junction, proudly proclaim what a great job the council has done in 'improving' the junction. Is it just me, or do other people have to sit for ages at a red light as absolutely NO traffic passes? The old design was antiquated, but this is definitely slower than it used to be and must have cost millions.
Why are there lengthy, mandatory pedestrian phases when there isn't a pedestrian in sight? What about being eco-friendly? Funny how that doesn't count when it is arrogant road design that makes us waste petrol as we sit stationary for minutes at a time.
d) Leaving us to sort it out when they could have given guidance that would reduce conflict. Case in point - Barrhead Road, Westbound, West of Silverburn. You approach a roundabout in two lanes, which then splits into three for the roundabout. There is no guidance on which of the two lanes you should be in to get into the middle when it becomes three. Result - lots of near-misses and unnecessary conflict as people switch lanes without looking.
I won't even get started about the actual surfaces themselves, which where I live are absolutely knackered, and could form another rant on its own. The council's solution, once the potholes become completely out of control, is to send a wee man round with a bucket of tar and a shovel, to hopefully delay the problem for a few months. It drives me mental. There is something very metaphorical about the whole approach to the problem, and I also think the general decline of this country can be seen and measured very clearly in our roads.
Phew. Rant over
breagh said:
Jesus, the roads really are st these days aren't they?
b) Putting traffic lights EVERYWHERE where roundabouts used to do perfectly fine. Case in point - Braehead. There used to a muckle big roundabout on the main approach from the M8. It flowed pretty well. But no - they had to take that away and put in a massive set of traffic lights where you have to sit for minutes. The traffic is now horrendous. I would rather go to Silverburn than Braehead now, even though it is further away. I'm sure I am not alone.
I reckon the buses repeatedly failing to give way and just bullying their way onto that roundabout had something to do with it. The number of times I was cut up coming off the M8 by a bus coming onto the roundabout without stopping from the west was unreal. It was pretty much routine. t these days aren't they?b) Putting traffic lights EVERYWHERE where roundabouts used to do perfectly fine. Case in point - Braehead. There used to a muckle big roundabout on the main approach from the M8. It flowed pretty well. But no - they had to take that away and put in a massive set of traffic lights where you have to sit for minutes. The traffic is now horrendous. I would rather go to Silverburn than Braehead now, even though it is further away. I'm sure I am not alone.
Some councillor's wife probably got hit on her way to Ikea... And you're right, the lights have made to whole area one to avoid.
breagh said:
c) Creating vast, traffic light controlled junctions, that look great on paper but don't work in reality and cause massive delays. Case in point - Glasgow Harbour. Signs near this bloated, expensive junction, proudly proclaim what a great job the council has done in 'improving' the junction. Is it just me, or do other people have to sit for ages at a red light as absolutely NO traffic passes? The old design was antiquated, but this is definitely slower than it used to be and must have cost millions.
I suspect this is connected with the new tram route. Wait? No one's told you? That's also probably deliberate.Edited by dxg on Sunday 3rd May 18:25
breagh said:
b) Putting traffic lights EVERYWHERE where roundabouts used to do perfectly fine. Case in point - Braehead. There used to a muckle big roundabout on the main approach from the M8. It flowed pretty well. But no - they had to take that away and put in a massive set of traffic lights where you have to sit for minutes. The traffic is now horrendous. I would rather go to Silverburn than Braehead now, even though it is further away. I'm sure I am not alone.
I'd vote all the new lights in dundee as you head through from the north. 2 sets of roundabouts removed and replaced with lights, and I'm sure the traffic is much much worse now.We have some of worst roads in the UK in Ayrshire most being amber or red condition. its not doing our cars any favours.
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland/Lasers-reveal-the...
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland/Lasers-reveal-the...
The insects at council or government level engaged in systematically dismantling the 'fun' that driving always was and still promises to be are chunnering communists.
The car is the embodiment of a social mobility which fundamnetally challenges their wet dream of the masses' enslavement to the state and for them to be no less supplicant in their limited, ideally parochial, transportational aspirations.
To wit, it is a physical threat to their insidious drive for totalitarianism and anything they can effect, actively or passively to ensure vehicular utility is as unpleasant or unfeasible as possible, they will embrace.
The car is the embodiment of a social mobility which fundamnetally challenges their wet dream of the masses' enslavement to the state and for them to be no less supplicant in their limited, ideally parochial, transportational aspirations.
To wit, it is a physical threat to their insidious drive for totalitarianism and anything they can effect, actively or passively to ensure vehicular utility is as unpleasant or unfeasible as possible, they will embrace.
Ian974 said:
I'd vote all the new lights in dundee as you head through from the north. 2 sets of roundabouts removed and replaced with lights, and I'm sure the traffic is much much worse now.
They don't actually appear to have made it any worse than it was which is a surprise.The ones that really annoy me are the ones on the roundabout after the Tay Bridge - on the Dundee side obviously - which were part time when first installed but are now permanent.
It's ludicrous sitting at a red light at a roundabout at, say, midnight when there's no other traffic coming. You're just wasting fuel and adding unnecessary emissions.
That applies to all roundabout traffic lights though.
TimR69 said:
Ian974 said:
That applies to all roundabout traffic lights though.
I've noticed these springing up everywhere, does my head in. You get the disadvantages of both of them with none of the advantages of each on their own. There are a lot more in England than up here, as there are some monster roundabouts with 4-5 lanes, 7 or 8 exits with the same amount of lights on them. It's an absolute nightmare if you're unfamiliar with them. Though judging by the majority of traffic around me shifting lanes/cutting people up, the regulars don't know how they work either.
I live in Ayrshire, and although the roads are not great, they aren't anywhere near as bad as where I'm originally from (Bradford) Kwik Fit do a mean trade down there!
Mini roundabouts or any roundabouts are always used for a reason........ cant be bothered going into detail and every locations different, but anyone can look up info if they annoy you that much. Or contact local roads authority and ask questions, they should be able to back up any decisions......people always think they wont be able to and complain about councils doing things without thinking, but thats because they havent asked!
I dont really know the areas mentioned by OP anyway, they might not be well designed.....but anything will have been done for a reason, there must have been a need for a change!
And thats usually always public safety related.
And for info regarding the state of roads in someone elses post, my council for example is getting into loads of debt to get all roads up to an acceptable standard over the next few years.......maybe others are too, the amount of money needed is huge anyway!
I dont really know the areas mentioned by OP anyway, they might not be well designed.....but anything will have been done for a reason, there must have been a need for a change!
And thats usually always public safety related.
And for info regarding the state of roads in someone elses post, my council for example is getting into loads of debt to get all roads up to an acceptable standard over the next few years.......maybe others are too, the amount of money needed is huge anyway!
Edited by P17_GTA on Tuesday 5th May 13:16
Do you work for the council, P17 GTA?
It's taken me a couple of days to actually figure out what it is about your response that bothers me, apart from the somewhat disdainful "cant be bothered going into detail" part.
Where can I look up this info you refer to?
My main point, though, is your assertion that all this stuff is done for a reason, and that that reason is public safety. I take issue with this on both counts:
1. That the council's reasons are good ones, and that there is a 'need for a change'.
2. That 'public safety' is apparently the only concern in these design decisions.
I could go on about point 1 at some length, but I feel point 2 is the more important one, and I think you (perhaps unwittingly) have absolutely nailed the motivation and thinking process that underlies these decisions.
Saying that something has to be done for 'public safety' is one of those classic things that councils and other politically-motivated bodies and individuals do, when they want to justify something that could be argued against, but they want to try to neutralise the argument by defining it in terms that, if you choose to argue against it, you look like you are irresponsible or selfish.
What kind of good citizen would argue against more public safety, after all? Do you WANT to see kids being run over? It's just the same as someone arguing against the mind control about global warming being hit with "do you want the polar bears to all die?"
How's this for public safety? Make us not drive anywhere.
Can I also point you in the direction of this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7998182.stm , about 'green wave' traffic lights. Up til now, the government would rather councils made us stop at every set of traffic lights, so they got more money from fuel duty. Now, suddenly, it's all changed and for the 'good of the environment' they want to allow councils to have green waves.
It's enough to make you weep. It's just like 1984 where one minute we're at war with Eastasia and the next with Eurasia (and the previous state of affairs is never acknowledged).
It's taken me a couple of days to actually figure out what it is about your response that bothers me, apart from the somewhat disdainful "cant be bothered going into detail" part.
Where can I look up this info you refer to?
My main point, though, is your assertion that all this stuff is done for a reason, and that that reason is public safety. I take issue with this on both counts:
1. That the council's reasons are good ones, and that there is a 'need for a change'.
2. That 'public safety' is apparently the only concern in these design decisions.
I could go on about point 1 at some length, but I feel point 2 is the more important one, and I think you (perhaps unwittingly) have absolutely nailed the motivation and thinking process that underlies these decisions.
Saying that something has to be done for 'public safety' is one of those classic things that councils and other politically-motivated bodies and individuals do, when they want to justify something that could be argued against, but they want to try to neutralise the argument by defining it in terms that, if you choose to argue against it, you look like you are irresponsible or selfish.
What kind of good citizen would argue against more public safety, after all? Do you WANT to see kids being run over? It's just the same as someone arguing against the mind control about global warming being hit with "do you want the polar bears to all die?"
How's this for public safety? Make us not drive anywhere.
Can I also point you in the direction of this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7998182.stm , about 'green wave' traffic lights. Up til now, the government would rather councils made us stop at every set of traffic lights, so they got more money from fuel duty. Now, suddenly, it's all changed and for the 'good of the environment' they want to allow councils to have green waves.
It's enough to make you weep. It's just like 1984 where one minute we're at war with Eastasia and the next with Eurasia (and the previous state of affairs is never acknowledged).
Edited by breagh on Thursday 7th May 22:26
Edited by breagh on Thursday 7th May 22:27
breagh said:
Do you work for the council, P17 GTA?
It's taken me a couple of days to actually figure out what it is about your response that bothers me, apart from the somewhat disdainful "cant be bothered going into detail" part.
Where can I look up this info you refer to?
My main point, though, is your assertion that all this stuff is done for a reason, and that that reason is public safety. I take issue with this on both counts:
1. That the council's reasons are good ones, and that there is a 'need for a change'.
2. That 'public safety' is apparently the only concern in these design decisions.
I could go on about point 1 at some length, but I feel point 2 is the more important one, and I think you (perhaps unwittingly) have absolutely nailed the motivation and thinking process that underlies these decisions.
Saying that something has to be done for 'public safety' is one of those classic things that councils and other politically-motivated bodies and individuals do, when they want to justify something that could be argued against, but they want to try to neutralise the argument by defining it in terms that, if you choose to argue against it, you look like you are irresponsible or selfish.
What kind of good citizen would argue against more public safety, after all? Do you WANT to see kids being run over? It's just the same as someone arguing against the mind control about global warming being hit with "do you want the polar bears to all die?"
How's this for public safety? Make us not drive anywhere.
Can I also point you in the direction of this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7998182.stm , about 'green wave' traffic lights. Up til now, the government would rather councils made us stop at every set of traffic lights, so they got more money from fuel duty. Now, suddenly, it's all changed and for the 'good of the environment' they want to allow councils to have green waves.
It's enough to make you weep. It's just like 1984 where one minute we're at war with Eastasia and the next with Eurasia (and the previous state of affairs is never acknowledged).
It's because the State knows best. Haven't we all learnt to sucumb to this mantra?It's taken me a couple of days to actually figure out what it is about your response that bothers me, apart from the somewhat disdainful "cant be bothered going into detail" part.
Where can I look up this info you refer to?
My main point, though, is your assertion that all this stuff is done for a reason, and that that reason is public safety. I take issue with this on both counts:
1. That the council's reasons are good ones, and that there is a 'need for a change'.
2. That 'public safety' is apparently the only concern in these design decisions.
I could go on about point 1 at some length, but I feel point 2 is the more important one, and I think you (perhaps unwittingly) have absolutely nailed the motivation and thinking process that underlies these decisions.
Saying that something has to be done for 'public safety' is one of those classic things that councils and other politically-motivated bodies and individuals do, when they want to justify something that could be argued against, but they want to try to neutralise the argument by defining it in terms that, if you choose to argue against it, you look like you are irresponsible or selfish.
What kind of good citizen would argue against more public safety, after all? Do you WANT to see kids being run over? It's just the same as someone arguing against the mind control about global warming being hit with "do you want the polar bears to all die?"
How's this for public safety? Make us not drive anywhere.
Can I also point you in the direction of this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7998182.stm , about 'green wave' traffic lights. Up til now, the government would rather councils made us stop at every set of traffic lights, so they got more money from fuel duty. Now, suddenly, it's all changed and for the 'good of the environment' they want to allow councils to have green waves.
It's enough to make you weep. It's just like 1984 where one minute we're at war with Eastasia and the next with Eurasia (and the previous state of affairs is never acknowledged).
Edited by breagh on Thursday 7th May 22:26
Edited by breagh on Thursday 7th May 22:27
Nice day today so went for a drive, down to Douglas > Muirkirk > Strathaven.
Strathaven - Muirkirk has always been a local favourite but always
remember the change in surface condition going from Strathaven (Lanarkshire)
to Muirkirk (Ayrshire), halfway and the gravelly (Is that a word?) pot-
holed road became a smooth ribbon of tarmac.
Well it looks like Ayrshire council have given up on it, their half of the
road is now falling to bits and is even single-track at one point
Come on Ayrshire council...give us our mini-Stelvio back!
Was a still a great drive though!
Strathaven - Muirkirk has always been a local favourite but always
remember the change in surface condition going from Strathaven (Lanarkshire)
to Muirkirk (Ayrshire), halfway and the gravelly (Is that a word?) pot-
holed road became a smooth ribbon of tarmac.
Well it looks like Ayrshire council have given up on it, their half of the
road is now falling to bits and is even single-track at one point
Come on Ayrshire council...give us our mini-Stelvio back!
Was a still a great drive though!
Yes my work partly involes me in Traffic Management / Road Safety scheme designs and consultation with Police, Road Safety Officers, schools, Councillors, residents etc.
I understand what your saying, and sorry for being vague in that post.
For info on design standards and all roads issues and regulations etc, the dft websites a good place to look.
I'm not saying every decision made by a local authority is a good one.
But things aren't done on a whim like most people think!, much thought and consultation can go on for years before any change is implemented.......so when something is installed its because many people involved or consulted think its a good idea. I'm only talking from experiences in my area mind you!
A change can be made in an area with no history of serious accidents, but trying to prevent one before it happens is better than waiting until it has.
Yeah Road Safety is a big issue just now, but traffic flow and pollution also are too.
We've just done pedestrian crossing alterations and new light signal timings over a big area for example, looking to help improve all those issues for a section of a town in one go!
I understand what your saying, and sorry for being vague in that post.
For info on design standards and all roads issues and regulations etc, the dft websites a good place to look.
I'm not saying every decision made by a local authority is a good one.
But things aren't done on a whim like most people think!, much thought and consultation can go on for years before any change is implemented.......so when something is installed its because many people involved or consulted think its a good idea. I'm only talking from experiences in my area mind you!
A change can be made in an area with no history of serious accidents, but trying to prevent one before it happens is better than waiting until it has.
Yeah Road Safety is a big issue just now, but traffic flow and pollution also are too.
We've just done pedestrian crossing alterations and new light signal timings over a big area for example, looking to help improve all those issues for a section of a town in one go!
Edited by P17_GTA on Wednesday 13th May 11:03
TimR69 said:
Would that be Cupar by any chance
SSSHhhhh its not all finished yet! 
......well the new signal timing software isn't in yet anyway. The construction was quite quick but getting the lights on and working has been a nightmare, and no I didn't design it. 
That was a collegue, I just used it as an example! 
scotty_d said:
We have some of worst roads in the UK in Ayrshire most being amber or red condition. its not doing our cars any favours.
http://www.scotsman.com/scotland/Lasers-reveal-the...
In the towns around here, I agree. http://www.scotsman.com/scotland/Lasers-reveal-the...
But I reckon almost all of our B Roads are in pretty good condition!
Edinburgh - Portobello - one year to change a roundabout to traffic lights for a congestion prblem that lasted for only about an hour each day.
Edinburgh end of M8 where most traffic heads east into Edinburgh - has to juggle through the lanes for traffic on the city bypass heading west. Result? Probably the worst congestion in the city all thanks for numpties who didn't bother to study traffic flow.
And the Sheriffhall roundabout - months taken to widen the access on to it from 3 lanes to......3 !! But at least the traffic actually does flow better now.
Edinburgh end of M8 where most traffic heads east into Edinburgh - has to juggle through the lanes for traffic on the city bypass heading west. Result? Probably the worst congestion in the city all thanks for numpties who didn't bother to study traffic flow.
And the Sheriffhall roundabout - months taken to widen the access on to it from 3 lanes to......3 !! But at least the traffic actually does flow better now.
P17_GTA said:
TimR69 said:
Would that be Cupar by any chance
SSSHhhhh its not all finished yet! ......well the new signal timing software isn't in yet anyway. The construction was quite quick but getting the lights on and working has been a nightmare, and no I didn't design it. That was a collegue, I just used it as an example! That's good to hear because some of the changes made (like the original ones done in Cupar about 10 years ago) made me think Fife's roads were being 'adjusted' by someone who couldn't drive
There's hope for us yet.
I regularly drive along London Road in Glasgow and the state of theinside lane as you pass the new housing at the side of the old Belvidere Hospital is horrendous. This was all redone only 2 years ago.
I reported it to the council through the RALF scheme earlier this week and got sn acknowledgement and assurance it would be dealt with within 24 hours so will next be along there on Monday - I wonder if anything will have been done?
On an other note, I recently complained about the traffic light sequence in a village near me and got this reply
This crossing has the most up to date traffic signal system it is possible to install in the United Kingdom, having a microprocessor at its heart.
It uses a technology called MOVA (Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle
Actuation)which uses the detectors (8 off) at the site to continuously learn the traffic patterns and queues which occur at the junction. As such there are no defined timings installed as there would be at a traditional set of signals, instead the detectors measure both the speed of approach of vehicles and the queue lengths and looking at all three approaches adjust each individually and continuously to optimise the traffic through the junction. In this way there are savings in the time which would normally be lost by changing from approach to approach every 90 secs whether required or not as happened in the past. This time is then given to the heaviest traffic flows.
There are also detectors which measure whether there are vehicles waiting to make a right turn into Stevenson Street and if so then the Right turn filter arrow is used as and when required, but again it is only called if there are more than 2 vehicles waiting.
Sounds promising that Technology is there to be utilised, its just that much of the time its not used!
I reported it to the council through the RALF scheme earlier this week and got sn acknowledgement and assurance it would be dealt with within 24 hours so will next be along there on Monday - I wonder if anything will have been done?
On an other note, I recently complained about the traffic light sequence in a village near me and got this reply
This crossing has the most up to date traffic signal system it is possible to install in the United Kingdom, having a microprocessor at its heart.
It uses a technology called MOVA (Microprocessor Optimised Vehicle
Actuation)which uses the detectors (8 off) at the site to continuously learn the traffic patterns and queues which occur at the junction. As such there are no defined timings installed as there would be at a traditional set of signals, instead the detectors measure both the speed of approach of vehicles and the queue lengths and looking at all three approaches adjust each individually and continuously to optimise the traffic through the junction. In this way there are savings in the time which would normally be lost by changing from approach to approach every 90 secs whether required or not as happened in the past. This time is then given to the heaviest traffic flows.
There are also detectors which measure whether there are vehicles waiting to make a right turn into Stevenson Street and if so then the Right turn filter arrow is used as and when required, but again it is only called if there are more than 2 vehicles waiting.
Sounds promising that Technology is there to be utilised, its just that much of the time its not used!
Gassing Station | Scotland | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff