Planning and traffic in Stafford.... terrible?

[Astro Boy]

Of course Branson's idea of doing this currently is to throw loads of cash at Network Rail and convince them to close the local stations. (Stone, Norton Bridge, Barlaston, Wedgewood)

Norton Bridge went a long time ago and was replaced by a bus service that runs twice daily.

 

[expert]

One last point.... Shugborough Tunnel?

Cycle path (joke!!!)

But where would your magical road go then?
Next you'll be advocating the filling in of canals and putting roads over them, and then it'll be pistols at dawn Sir!
(besides, you can't do that anymore.. the goverment say so... thats why the M6Toll has that aqueduct over it that isn't actually connected to a canal yet. Yet.

I had thought the magic road would end around Baswich. However now you mention the canals.......bypass

 

[henryscat]

No, it doesn't. What precisely are you an "Expert" on, because it isn't transport planning?

This will be good, as it will remove the need for two railway lines through stafford. We can keep the railway line that goes south to Penkridge and remove the one going to Great Haywood. This can be changed to a road therefore taking traffic away from the centre of town and ease congestion.

 

[henryscat]

Norton Bridge is still technically open even though it doesn't have a footbridge to get to the platform or a train service to call at the platform you can't access!!!

Norton Bridge went a long time ago and was replaced by a bus service that runs twice daily.

 

[Toble]

This is the road that we really need:

From A518/Hydrant Way, island at Tixall Road, cross the minor road, across the swamp, junction with A34, more swamp crossing, Join with A449 at Acton Gate.

Housing estates demolished: nil


As Bez sed, Jobs a Good 'Un!

 

[henryscat]

Yep, it did, because Expert (on what I haven't worked out yet) said he'd take the railway and station out of Stafford entirely, whereas the idea put forward in the Express and Star is for extra railway, an additional station, with extra trains.

wasn't this one of the suggestions that expert made in this thread, which got poo-pooed?

 

[expert]

Yep, it did, because Expert (on what I haven't worked out yet) said he'd take the railway and station out of Stafford entirely, whereas the idea put forward in the Express and Star is for extra railway, an additional station, with extra trains.

wasn't this one of the suggestions that expert made in this thread, which got poo-pooed?

My quote below just mentioned reducing the number of lines not removing the train station or trains from Stafford. My quote also states I am no expert on railways and just offering a suggestion.

How about this..... the railway line that runs next to the retail park with Pets at Home on it is very wide (4 railway lines). Now I am not a railway man and therefore do not know if this is possible.

Could the railway line be reduced down to one line and use the remaining space to build a single carriage way that people could join from the A34 or the A449 and bypass the town and come out by the railway station. With the construction of a second motorway junction off the Newport Road, traffic would be removed from the centre.

I think the problem Stafford has as a road network is there are one or two roads into the centre that all meet at the same point. There are very few shortcuts so all traffic is converged into one area.

 

[Toble]

How about this..... the railway line that runs next to the retail park with Pets at Home on it is very wide (4 railway lines). Now I am not a railway man and therefore do not know if this is possible.

Could the railway line be reduced down to one line ...

Why 4 lines?
Well imagine that you have trains going in both directions. You need at least 2 lines, to avoid a head on collision.

Now trains travel at differing speeds, and sometimes even break down, blocking up a line. So you need, in effect a fast upline, slow upline, fast downline and slow downline. At the very least.

I'm not an expert on trains (all I know comes from Transport Tycoon - get the open source version here - http://www.openttd.org/ ), but thats how it seems to me.

 

[db]

What precisely are you an "Expert" on, because it isn't transport planning?

Expert (on what I haven't worked out yet)

well, someone got out of bed the wrong side this morning! lol

 

[henryscat]

Feeling quite chilled today!! Though I may have had a temporary blip when posting....

well, someone got out of bed the wrong side this morning! lol

 

[henryscat]

Yep, that's more or less it. You've got intercity trains at up to 125mph, freight is 75mph max, local/regional services at between 75mph and 100mph. Then add in differences in acceleration characteristics, junctions, and stations, and that all starts to impact on the number of trains that can be operated. Stafford is a national bottleneck on the West Coast Main Line because of the limitations on the track layout where the Trent Valley and Wolverhampton lines meet, and how freight trains particularly need to cross lines. Norton Bridge is another tricky junction - the bypass proposals would include grade separation there.

Why 4 lines?
Well imagine that you have trains going in both directions. You need at least 2 lines, to avoid a head on collision.

Now trains travel at differing speeds, and sometimes even break down, blocking up a line. So you need, in effect a fast upline, slow upline, fast downline and slow downline. At the very least.

I'm not an expert on trains (all I know comes from Transport Tycoon - get the open source version here - http://www.openttd.org/ ), but thats how it seems to me.

 

[db]

A new railway station just outside Stafford may be on the cards as part of a planned high speed rail “bypass†for the area.

this story has hit the bbc today, fyi:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/7506983.stm

 

[Toble]

I hope you all enjoyed the chaos this afternoon caused by the incident on the M6 down at Cannock, and the continuing saga of Wolverhampton Road.

Whilst stuck in the slow moving queue on Wolverhampton Road I noticed something which is going to make things worse (if it ever gets back to normal)...

1. Some form of build-up is being constructed at the end of Rowley Grove. This is either an un-needed traffic calming contraption, or (more likely seeing where it is) a build-out in the bus stop to force the buses to stop in the middle of the road instead of tucking in by the kerbside.

2. Someone seems to have decided that the road needs to be narrowed by about a foot, halfway up Rowley Bank.


Still, its not as mental as a bit of the A34 in Trent Vale, which has 2 sets of traffic lights.... six feet apart.

 

[henryscat]

Hopefully the latter, because people never let buses pull out from a stop. If people drove properly then build-outs wouldn't be needed to help buses.

1. Some form of build-up is being constructed at the end of Rowley Grove. This is either an un-needed traffic calming contraption, or (more likely seeing where it is) a build-out in the bus stop to force the buses to stop in the middle of the road instead of tucking in by the kerbside.

 

[Lunar Scorpion]

Hopefully the latter, because people never let buses pull out from a stop. If people drove properly then build-outs wouldn't be needed to help buses.

They do drive properly - head straight forward, eyes on road...

 

[db]

They do drive properly - head straight forward, eyes on road...

clearly you haven't seen the sort of people who drive round stafford..

 

[Lucy]

It appears they are also building one at the Herbert Road end of Park Crescent. I guess this is just to force traffic out into the road, so that they don't go back into the parked cars. However, just before there is a traffic light sign; are we going to have yet another pedestrian crossing?

 

[AndyST17]

However, just before there is a traffic light sign; are we going to have yet another pedestrian crossing?

Yes, I've seen this and wondered that myself

 

[Mr X]

These roadworks will mean another set of lights on the journey from Castlefields roundabout to Redhill/Audi garage.
With temporary set included, the 2.5 mile journey will take in 15 sets of traffic lights, with 17 sets on the return journey.

That's counting pedestrian crossings though isn't it? And you'll never stop at all 15 in one journey.

No, maybe not, but for every set that you get stopped at, there will be a load of cars that gets stopped at the one that you didn't. Remember that it isn't just you in your car that stops. It could be 20+ people at some sets of lights. All of whom must start moving again afterwards and that takes time.

The more time spent sitting at a red light means the more time you are on the roads before getting to your destination, therefore increasing the number of cars on the roads at a time. It's no wonder Stafford gets jammed up at rush hour [edit: and every other hour] -

It isn't lights jamming up Stafford - and compared to lots of places traffic jams in Stafford aren't really that bad - its the number of people driving!! Generally the increased traffic comes before the installation of lights, rather than the other way round....!

I think you have missed my point here. If I time my journey well and no-one presses the button at any crossings then I get home quickly. If I get stopped at one set of lights behind a few cars then the chances are I will get stopped at all the subsequent sets as it takes time for people in front to move off and get through the lights. My journey through town can even take 5-10 minutes longer sometimes. The worst places for getting stopped at every set are Foregate Street into Gaol Square and also the Lichfield Road Island.

everyone is about 2 miles from home

Indeed... so there's a lot more people driving than need be!

That may be so but try telling that to someone who works a long way out of Stafford and in many cases it is not feasible to take the bus or train. Many (dare I say most?) people have no realistic way to get to work without taking the car. The rest of the journey is fine until they get to the last few miles then they get stuck in traffic.


I do realise that roundabouts have a maximum capacity before they stop functioning and traffic lights are the only option. I am also aware that there are sets of traffic lights that do work well. The problem is that in Stafford we have traffic lights in such a high density that it is ridiculous. Take the Newport Road from the station as far as the cinema. This is 0.2 miles with 4 sets of lights (including crossings). This means that there is one set every 88 yards.

There are also locations where crossings have absolutely no purpose. Why is there are crossing on the lammoscote road that goes from the leisure centre. There is a perfectly good place to cross on the corporation street junction. I'm not sure why anybody needs to cross at that point as the only building on the other side is pennycroft court which is right on the junction anyway. Another example is the crossing by the Lamb. I never press the button here as it is quicker to just wait for the Sainsbury's crossing to change then there are no cars on the one side and a queue of cars on the other so it is safe to cross. All that pressing the button does is adds to the Chell Road congestion!

 

[henryscat]

That may be so but try telling that to someone who works a long way out of Stafford and in many cases it is not feasible to take the bus or train. Many (dare I say most?) people have no realistic way to get to work without taking the car. The rest of the journey is fine until they get to the last few miles then they get stuck in traffic.

You only need to reduce traffic volumes a little bit to have a big effect on congestion (like during school holidays). I think you'd be surprised at the number of people who do have an alternative. Even if you say its only 20% of drivers (and the true figure will be higher) can take an alternative without any great inconvenience, it would make a huge difference if they did. IIRC the RAC Foundation (not exactly anti-car) did a study some time back that found only 20% of car journeys really really couldn't be made in any other way.

There are also locations where crossings have absolutely no purpose. Why is there are crossing on the lammoscote road that goes from the leisure centre. There is a perfectly good place to cross on the corporation street junction.

Actually the leisure centre crossing is does have a purpose...Only one of the four arms on at the crossroads (Riverway) has a pedestrian phase on the lights, the others don't. The leisure centre crossing provides a safe crossing not available at the junction. Crossing over any arm of that junction is a life in your own hands job because of the number of twats who go through on red. Then there's no time before the other direction goes green.