http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Temporary traffic lights en Mon, 18 May 2026 13:49:12 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113852 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 17:03:18 +0000 SRD 113852@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Correction. this is not policy. rather 'a report is being prepared for consideration by the transport cttee'. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113826 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:51:40 +0000 Min 113826@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>I flagged this as an issue at one of the transport forums and was told that I 'wasn't being strategic' because it had already been sorted. </em></p> <p>That is clearly just great big enormous baggy pantaloons isn't it? I sometimes wonder if any of our officials actually live here. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113825 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:46:34 +0000 Min 113825@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I meant at Broughton Road. I know lack of crossings is the case almost everywhere else too but there are always roadworks there. Always. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113823 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:43:56 +0000 kaputnik 113823@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>No deaths (that I know of)</em></p> <p>How about the unfortunate tourist at Palmerston Place earlier this year one evening? Through a tramworks diversion where pedestrians had been "designed out" or forgotten about in the contrafllow. Pretty sure someone was knocked down and seriously injured a few days after too. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113822 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:42:22 +0000 SRD 113822@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I flagged this as an issue at one of the transport forums and was told that I 'wasn't being strategic' because it had already been sorted. </p> <p>More evidence (if that were needed) of the general principle that a 'policy' approved by council does not automatically transform into different ways of doing things. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113821 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:37:35 +0000 wangi 113821@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'll I've done so far is the tweets above and a further follow up to @edinburgh_cc. Planning some emails this evening. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113820 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:33:39 +0000 SRD 113820@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Wangi - have you flagged it to Lesley Hinds? Pretty sure council policy is to include pedestrians in such designs. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113819 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:33:21 +0000 steveo 113819@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>It does genuinely seem like temporary lights are considered merely from the driving point of view. </em></p> <p>I'm not sure it seems like I'd say that is demonstrably true. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113818 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:32:18 +0000 Min 113818@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>"Pedestrians are routinely run over..." ?</em></p> <p>No deaths (that I know of), which makes it okay. Presumably the inconvenience caused by occasionally scraping them off the tarmac is less than the effect on "traffic flow" if you put a pedestrian phase in. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113816 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:27:25 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 113816@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>Pedestrians are routinely run over...</em>" ?</p> <p>The temporary lights saga on Melville Drive were another example of truly mindblowingly poor provision and consideration. It does genuinely seem like temporary lights are considered merely from the driving poitn of view. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113815 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:26:06 +0000 BenN 113815@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Wangi, wholely agree with you on this one - my most recent example was when they suspended the lights of the (incredibly busy) crossroads between Comely Bank Road and East Fettes Ave / Comely Bank Ave. This Junction is right next to a school, and no pedestrian phase was provided, with no nearby alternate crossing - leading to people constantly running out into 30mph traffic. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113813 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:23:57 +0000 Min 113813@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes, I hate this too. Pedestrians are routinely run over during the Broughton Road Ultraroadworkathon (which has been going on for years) but still just get ignored every time each new set of roadworks gets put in. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10418#post-113806 Tue, 11 Jun 2013 14:13:17 +0000 wangi 113806@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Getting increasingly frustrated about this... Almost all temporary traffic lights at road works are put in place with zero consideration of pedestrians and cyclists. It's pretty common for the lights to be put in place where there is an existing pedestrian crossing, but for the temporary one to have absolutely no capacity for pedestrians.</p> <p>There are two (at least) currently which are really irritating. At the junction of Macdonald Rd and Broughton Rd where the St Mark's path joins == no provision for cyclists or pedestrians. This is right next to Broughton primary school...</p> <p>The other is at the Seafield Rd &amp; St junction - where the LCN10 Porty-Leith path goes. Again zero consideration on how cyclists will get from the shared use pavement across to Seafield St.</p> <p>Tweeted this morning:<br /> <a href="https://twitter.com/talkporty/status/344374652136730625" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/talkporty/status/344374652136730625</a><br /> <blockquote>Dear @Edinburgh_CC 1/2: why do majority of temporary traffic lights have zero provision for pedestrians (often replacing a ped crossing)?</blockquote></p> <p><a href="https://twitter.com/talkporty/status/344374665915019265" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/talkporty/status/344374665915019265</a><br /> <blockquote>DDear @Edinburgh_CC 2/2: please do not approve temporary traffic regulation orders unless most vulnerable users provided for safely</blockquote></p> <p>This is entrenched common practice at roadworks. Please pass on comment to your local councillors so we can try and get consideration of this as critical part of temporary traffic regulation orders and road occupation permits.</p> <p>thanks/L </p>