"
A BID to ease congestion in the city centre is set to slash waiting times for drivers at red lights affected by the trams thanks to new traffic light management technology, transport chiefs have pledged.
"
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
"Bid to cut tram jams at city centre traffic lights"
(14 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
The article claims the worst congestion is at the east end of Princes Street. That is true, but it has very little to do with the trams. It's always been bad there for as long as I can remember, due to the complexity of the multiple junctions, and drivers abusing them to queue across lines oncoming traffic, blocking the junctions.
Rather than purchasing new traffic signal systems, it might have been more cost effective to simply ban general traffic from the east end of Princes Street altogether. "No Entry except Buses, taxis and cycles" signs are pretty cheap I would think. A standard off the shelf item. Is that too radical for the traffic planners?
Posted 10 years ago # -
We are truly in a utopian age of smooth-flowing traffic thanks to the mythical application of "if we could just synchronise the lights".
If the buses aren't around the corner at the bus stop, as the Taxi-ist observes, they are either further up the road, with other buses in their place, or they are waiting on North Bridge. If they aren't waiting there, they are waiting on South Bridge. You can't get rid of the buses by just tweaking some lights.
Yes there are some daft traffic light sequences in Edinburgh - I seem to waste much of my commuting life sitting in front of them while vehicular chaos reigns around me - but as Crowriver says, they aren't responsible for there being so many single-occupant cars, people chancing the junctions, getting stuck and blocking them, or every single vehicle in the Lothian Buses fleet seemingly trying to fit on Princes Street at once.
Posted 10 years ago # -
If we banned general traffic, there'd be no need for traffic lights at all.
No hold ups, and no money spent. Job done.
Posted 10 years ago # -
But traffic spends money in shops and rents hotel rooms and employs mechanics and makes use of the endless free-flowing North Sea Oil.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I've not read the article but there are places where the Tram holds the buses up that would be improved by better signaling. East bound buses can be held up by a west bound tram for 5 minutes even though the tram is a mile away, so even banning general traffic wouldn't help.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Ban the tram!
Posted 10 years ago # -
Ban the tram!
I thought it was #bloodycyclists who were always holding up 'the traffic'.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I remember marvelling at the simplicity of how they had solved this problem in Manhattan. They put a police officer at the junctions during the rush hours to stop traffic blocking junctions. The lights still worked but anyone crossing the line when the lights turned was booked.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Crowriver "No Entry except Buses, taxis and cycles" signs are not a standard off the shelf item. Special authorisation is needed. The Government consulted on changing this and decided this month that it wouldn't allow the signs generally, despite most respondents wanting it (see question 10).
Re the computer system STM/SPRUCE there are lots of details of this on the web relating to Leeds Trolley Vehicle, including how it should work in Edinburgh (see APP-6-3)
Re enforcement of yellow box junctions to stop motorists getting in each others way, London has had cameras to do this for years, and Cardiff is to get it next month. (Scottish Government won't let this happen here as it is too worried about upsetting bad drivers?)
Dubai trams start tomorrow "One hundred and fifty traffic officers will monitor traffic at tram intersections, Dubai Police said."
Posted 10 years ago # -
They could ban trams at peak times -) probably cause more congestion than ease, slowing buses down with long wait times.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Scottish Government won't let this happen here as it is too worried about upsetting bad drivers?"
Don't think you need the question mark!
There's too much circularity in all this.
Civil servants say 'politicians wouldn't like it'.
Politicians say 'we were advised against it'.
Apart from the stupidity of assuming that 'most people who vote drive', there's the greater stupidity of believing that 'all motorists want is more roads and higher speeds'.
And that's without even imagining that politicians might be there to show a little leadership and say 'less traffic and better enforcement would suit the majority of people'.
Though of course many people already think that - politicians don't want to listen or believe.
Posted 10 years ago # -
David begg was the last politician/adviser not worried about losing votes/job
See also fear of increasing taxation.
Just not possible for politicians to question driving, need for driving, the deaths caused through bad driving etc
Only red Ken did this with his politburo imposition of the highly successful congestion charge. We had to have a congestion charge referendum which went the opposite way from my vote in quite substantial way. Which everybody knew would happen as people are sheep.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Only red Ken did this with his politburo imposition of the highly successful congestion charge.
Except parts of London are now congested with the high-end motors of the super rich.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
