Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
Get right back on it this instant!Dabbler said:
I am in total agreement with you - Whoever is responsible for planning the traffic light system in stafford has a defo fetish for them - if you look where the high build up of traffic is - you will find 4 or 5 traffic lights/crossings within yards of each other!!KelvinA said:
Totally agree.... the environmentalists argue that traffic solutions should be green but they won't accept that a 'green' solution is to allow the traffic to flow freely?? If we did get an Eastern by-pass then cars would be doing 50-60mph and operating at an optimum mpg rather than sitting at 15-20 sets of lights, burning unneccessary fuel and creating more emissions.KelvinA said:
yes i agree all laws should be enforced regardless of biker or driver.Edd209 said:
I assume that most decent cyclists would have public liability insurance, either as a specialist cyclist policy or as an extra on their home insurance. If a cyclist hit my car or scratched down the side then I would expect it fixing and if they had no insurance then they'd need to pay themselves.Miss Red said:
Found one in Brighton, but he was being done for a few other things, as well.Goldilox said:
A bypass can't be justified just incase of motorway disruption though. The amount of traffic that can disgorge from the motorway when there's an incident would clog Stafford with or without an Eastern Bypass.tek-monkey said:
For the most part all that stopping at a given set of lights means is that you don't get to the back of the next queue quite so soon. Not really a big deal. If you watch how most of the pedestrian crossings operate, they favour cars massively. Why is a pedestrian's journey less important than a car drivers?Miss Red said:
Stafford is easy driving. I lived in Brum for 9 years, and Stafford is not hard work to drive around nor does it have anything like the congestion that other places have.
What constitutes bad planning? There is not some kind of magic utopian solution that magics unlimited road space and free flowing traffic. Bad driving is not the fault of the road network, it is the fault of the drivers and no-one else. Its like the numpties who say they were "forced" to overtake dangerously because someone in front of them wasn't going fast enough.
Rubbish. Most of Stafford has bus services available from around 7am to late evening. This blanket statement of "public transport isn't much of an option" is usually spouted by people who don't use it. "Not much of an option" is often code for "I like my car too much".
What kind of statement is that? You have no idea of the circumstances of those accidents. Buses are far far safer to travel in than cars. How many accidents are there in Stafford each year involving cars? Lots. How many involve buses? Hardly any.
What is this "solution" then?
A bypass is not some kind of magic utopia that will bring about free flowing traffic forever more. Overall you would end up with more traffic on the network, and any capacity freed up by a bypass would be filled up with latent demand/induced traffic. There is no evidence to suggest that a bypass is an environmentally desirable option.phildo said:
The traffic lights in Stafford do not work to fixed times, do have detection, and are linked.Jimbo said:
The West Midlands also has a lot of dual carriageway and motorway... Birmingham was extremely pro-car in the 60s and 70s when a lot of new road was put in (e.g. Aston Expressway, Gravelly Hill Interchange, grade separated dual carriageways such as Birchfield Road, inner ring road). However, the planning of the 60s and 70s has not stood the test of time and causes problems of its own. Grade separation on the inner ring road was removed because it was constraining the City Centre, and for pedestrians was quite unpleasant.
Agree. The problem is that the current government favours developers who want to build houses in profitable (green field and not in the conurbation) locations which are not where sensible planning policy would tell you to build houses. From a planning point of view, brownfield land in the West Midlands conurbation should be redeveloped for housing, not shoving thousands of houses in Stafford, Lichfield and other similar places.
Yep, absolutely.
There are plenty of threads already in existence where you can have a bash at cyclists -Admin said:Doctor, your posts are very much appreciated, and it is wonderful to see someone so passionate about a subject, but please refrain from further derailing this thread! If you have any suggestions relevant to gk141054's original post, I'd love to see them here. "Get on a bike," is not a suitable answer to every single post.
gk141054 is looking for suggestions regarding planning and traffic in Stafford. Let's keep this thread on that topic! I have moved your posts to the more relevant Environment Thread that jchiltz has set up.
Thanks.
I appreciate that many people need to use a car to get to work - but likewise there are many, many who live and work in Stafford who don't.Miss Red said:
Is it a world of dread and fear?
