Temporary Traffic Lights - Who Decides?
Discussion
This morning I spent 40 f
king minutes covering 1 mile of the A5 because someone had decided to dig up the road and then surround the molehill sized pile of dirt with christ knows how many barriers and rigged up temporary lights either side.
Once I'd got through the lights there was another mile or so of traffic tailed back in the opposite direction, right in the middle of rush hour.
Now obviously I can't be totally sure, but it literally looked like a pile of dirt, you'd have the be pretty much blind to drive into it, and that piece of the A5 easily accommodates 3 cars width.
Who gets to decide to put up these things? Is it as simple as "I'm a workman and I've got pass type XYZ that allows me to do this anywhere I like" or is there some level of planning involved?
king minutes covering 1 mile of the A5 because someone had decided to dig up the road and then surround the molehill sized pile of dirt with christ knows how many barriers and rigged up temporary lights either side.Once I'd got through the lights there was another mile or so of traffic tailed back in the opposite direction, right in the middle of rush hour.
Now obviously I can't be totally sure, but it literally looked like a pile of dirt, you'd have the be pretty much blind to drive into it, and that piece of the A5 easily accommodates 3 cars width.
Who gets to decide to put up these things? Is it as simple as "I'm a workman and I've got pass type XYZ that allows me to do this anywhere I like" or is there some level of planning involved?
If its a strategic route then the HA must be consulted and TRO's/ work space proposals must be submitted and approved, not an easy or simple process.
If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
Edited by TomE on Thursday 29th January 20:30
TomE said:
If its a strategic route then the HA must be consulted and TRO's must be submitted and approved, not an easy or simple process.
If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
All correct except that no Traffic Regulation Orders are required for temporary traffic signals.If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
tvrgit said:
TomE said:
If its a strategic route then the HA must be consulted and TRO's must be submitted and approved, not an easy or simple process.
If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
All correct except that no Traffic Regulation Orders are required for temporary traffic signals.If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
TomE said:
tvrgit said:
TomE said:
If its a strategic route then the HA must be consulted and TRO's must be submitted and approved, not an easy or simple process.
If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
All correct except that no Traffic Regulation Orders are required for temporary traffic signals.If its local authority roads then there would usually have been a plan of works etc submitted and approved, but there are way's round it I believe.
If it was the water board/ leccy co. etc then they have a statutory right to dig so can do what they want.
HTH
I don't know the A5 but consideration should be given to road with and traffic flow, plus nearby junctions before it is decided what type of traffic control is used (give 'n' take, Priority, Stop-Go or Lights). In order to maintain two-way traffic flow space for a lorry going each way is needed, including a safety zone for the works.
I have pondered this often. Temporary lights put up around an obstruction that is taking up no more space at the kerb than a legally parked car or van. If a car or van was parked there, we do not put up temporary traffic lights to control traffic around the car or van, so why does your tiny bloody hole need them to be put up?
Balmoral Green said:
I have pondered this often. Temporary lights put up around an obstruction that is taking up no more space at the kerb than a legally parked car or van. If a car or van was parked there, we do not put up temporary traffic lights to control traffic around the car or van, so why does your tiny bloody hole need them to be put up?
They don't neccesarily! Maybe the local HA inspectors are pedantic worriers?skip_1 said:
I don't know the A5 but consideration should be given to road with and traffic flow, plus nearby junctions before it is decided what type of traffic control is used (give 'n' take, Priority, Stop-Go or Lights). In order to maintain two-way traffic flow space for a lorry going each way is needed, including a safety zone for the works.
They are supposed to contact the roads authority to agree that first. As Tom says, sometimes they say "emergency" and just do it.skip_1 said:
Balmoral Green said:
I have pondered this often. Temporary lights put up around an obstruction that is taking up no more space at the kerb than a legally parked car or van. If a car or van was parked there, we do not put up temporary traffic lights to control traffic around the car or van, so why does your tiny bloody hole need them to be put up?
They don't neccesarily! Maybe the local HA inspectors are pedantic worriers?Balmoral Green said:
I have pondered this often. Temporary lights put up around an obstruction that is taking up no more space at the kerb than a legally parked car or van. If a car or van was parked there, we do not put up temporary traffic lights to control traffic around the car or van, so why does your tiny bloody hole need them to be put up?
That's exactly how it seemed, from how I saw it I don't think I'd have needed to have pulled out any wider than I would if it were a cyclist.This was at 7.30am. At 5.20pm or so I think it was still there, not entirely sure as I was later than usual coming home from work but it was one hell of a tailback if it wasn't due to that.
Oh and as often seems to be the case not a workman to be seen - don't misunderstand me I appreciate workmen have lives but I can't fathom that no sort of "impact assessment" seems to be done to work out what a few hours overtime with two chaps with Stop/Go boards would cost vs. miles of tailbacks during peak travel hours.
TomE said:
IIRC, a 1.2m safety zone is required around the works, that's on top of any area required to actually work in. I think the figure can be reduced under localised TM and temporary speed limits (possibly under 40mph?) but its been a while since I designed any TM works so can't remember off the top of my head.
Time to get Chapter 8 out!tvrgit said:
TomE said:
IIRC, a 1.2m safety zone is required around the works, that's on top of any area required to actually work in. I think the figure can be reduced under localised TM and temporary speed limits (possibly under 40mph?) but its been a while since I designed any TM works so can't remember off the top of my head.
Time to get Chapter 8 out!tvrgit said:
skip_1 said:
I don't know the A5 but consideration should be given to road with and traffic flow, plus nearby junctions before it is decided what type of traffic control is used (give 'n' take, Priority, Stop-Go or Lights). In order to maintain two-way traffic flow space for a lorry going each way is needed, including a safety zone for the works.
They are supposed to contact the roads authority to agree that first. As Tom says, sometimes they say "emergency" and just do it.There is a very complex piece of legislation (New Roads and Streetworks Act 1991 ...... <yawn> 
) that determines when you can or cannot work in the highway and how much notice must be given before hand. Without going into massive detail you can take it as read that to be working on a trunk route such as the A5 during a traffic sensitive period, the work would have been of an 'emergency' or 'urgent' nature i.e. danger to life and limb, either at the site or elsewhere that may be affected e.g. if a mains service or such like had fails.
If this was not the case, the contractor involved is a fool- the financial penalties for being at such a location without just cause are massive, and there would be a high probability of prosecution by the highway authority.
Not that any of this matters when you've been set in queue of traffic for what seems like forever. Having said that (and I work in the highways sector)- please understand that the guys on site really do not appreciate being threatened / sworn at / gobbed at just after they've spent all night repairing a cover in the road simply making it safe for road users.
) that determines when you can or cannot work in the highway and how much notice must be given before hand. Without going into massive detail you can take it as read that to be working on a trunk route such as the A5 during a traffic sensitive period, the work would have been of an 'emergency' or 'urgent' nature i.e. danger to life and limb, either at the site or elsewhere that may be affected e.g. if a mains service or such like had fails.If this was not the case, the contractor involved is a fool- the financial penalties for being at such a location without just cause are massive, and there would be a high probability of prosecution by the highway authority.
Not that any of this matters when you've been set in queue of traffic for what seems like forever. Having said that (and I work in the highways sector)- please understand that the guys on site really do not appreciate being threatened / sworn at / gobbed at just after they've spent all night repairing a cover in the road simply making it safe for road users.
paddyhasneeds said:
Oh and as often seems to be the case not a workman to be seen - don't misunderstand me I appreciate workmen have lives but I can't fathom that no sort of "impact assessment" seems to be done to work out what a few hours overtime with two chaps with Stop/Go boards would cost vs. miles of tailbacks during peak travel hours.
Unfortunately the stats companies don't have any kind of fines chalked up against them for leaving a big hole in the road for long periods of time. Until that starts happening, they can leave a small hole in the carriageway for as long as they please and there is little that can be done about it.TomE said:
skip_1 said:
Balmoral Green said:
I have pondered this often. Temporary lights put up around an obstruction that is taking up no more space at the kerb than a legally parked car or van. If a car or van was parked there, we do not put up temporary traffic lights to control traffic around the car or van, so why does your tiny bloody hole need them to be put up?
They don't neccesarily! Maybe the local HA inspectors are pedantic worriers?Usually the problem with these lights is that the timing is wrong and they cycle too fast so don't give the traffic chance to get moving.
There's some at the moment on the A54 near us on the way into Chester, but at busy times they're manually controlled. The guys have them working so well that they break the traffic up and the morning traffic queue into Chester has disappeared - it's knocked 10 mins off my journey time.
There's some at the moment on the A54 near us on the way into Chester, but at busy times they're manually controlled. The guys have them working so well that they break the traffic up and the morning traffic queue into Chester has disappeared - it's knocked 10 mins off my journey time.
I must learn to type quicker!
Tom E- there is legislation in NRSWA- it's called Section 74. On traffic sensitive streets, it's £2,000 as day (IIRC) if you exceed your permitted duration. .....And coming soon is 'road pricing' where the utilites will have to pay to occupy the highway to do their work.
Tom E- there is legislation in NRSWA- it's called Section 74. On traffic sensitive streets, it's £2,000 as day (IIRC) if you exceed your permitted duration. .....And coming soon is 'road pricing' where the utilites will have to pay to occupy the highway to do their work.
darren f said:
I must learn to type quicker!
Tom E- there is legislation in NRSWA- it's called Section 74. On traffic sensitive streets, it's £2,000 as day (IIRC) if you exceed your permitted duration. .....And coming soon is 'road pricing' where the utilites will have to pay to occupy the highway to do their work.
Well there you go! I learn more on PH than I do at work, maybe I should use that as an excuse for surfing it all day.....Tom E- there is legislation in NRSWA- it's called Section 74. On traffic sensitive streets, it's £2,000 as day (IIRC) if you exceed your permitted duration. .....And coming soon is 'road pricing' where the utilites will have to pay to occupy the highway to do their work.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff