A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
FosseWay
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 19621
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 22:26
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by FosseWay »

Here's Ashley Neal's take on the Birkenhead roundab... errr... thing.

I tend to agree with his description - "a pointless complication".
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
Debaser
Member
Posts: 2219
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 16:57

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Debaser »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 12:31 The Gloucester example is just a pair of unmarked junctions separated by a statue though, there is no compulsion - indeed the 'footways' clearly say don't - to drive around the statue there.
I'm not sure if the sculpture in Gloucester hasn't been moved - I seem to recollect that originally it formed a 'centre island' around which vehicles circulated. I was also trying to find one that's been done in one of the London Boroughs, which is essentially the spitting image of the Oxford and Poynton examples.
Chris5156 wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 08:52 Fundamentally, if you don't want people to treat it like a roundabout, don't paint circles on the ground. We live in a country full of roundabouts where drivers are conditioned to expect junctions to operate with roundabout priority rules. If you dropped a dinner plate in the middle of a crossroads most drivers would try and drive around it in a circle. I don't know how very highly qualified people doing this stuff for a living can so easily overlook that.
This is what the designers hope for but don't always want to admit. I once had a discussion with Ben Hamilton-Baillie himself about this. I floated the idea that if subtle traffic engineering like 'roundels' worked it was because drivers were habituated to 'proper' roundabouts (and mini-roundabouts) and acted accordingly. He didn't like the warm and fluffy 'roundels' being compared to the hard engineering of roundabouts.

And once again I quote Clive Sawers:
“If a...dome...was placed in the middle of an otherwise unmarked and unsigned crossroads...I believe that this would have the following effects on drivers:
1. They would all slow down;
2. They would all steer to the left of the dome;
3. They would each give way to any vehicle already circulating around it.
In other words, drivers would identify that this is a roundabout and would know what to do before any signs or carriageway markings were introduced. This clear and uncluttered layout is already speaking for itself. Let's keep this basic principle in mind.”
From Mini-roundabouts Getting them right! by Clive Sawers MA(Cantab), MICE, CEng. Published October 1996


Shared space in its most naked and aggressive? form, in theory has no rules (other than 'do no harm' and keep to the left). If pedestrians are encouraged to walk anywhere then, unless prevented by physical means, the quid pro quo is that similarly vehicles may also go anywhere and take any path - so long as they maintain that oh so necessary eye-contact with other road users. Think of suddenly driving into an otherwise unmarked public square surrounded by buildings but with multiple entrances and exits for vehicles.
pjr10th
Member
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2020 23:35

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by pjr10th »

That Gloucester one shows a perfect example of why we need to be cautious about the proposed Zebra crossing lites. They seem to have installed a zebra crossing without beacons, studs or a controlled zone. Did this get special authorisation or is a council bodge? Then when you look at the 2015 GSV it's nice and fresh but by 2020 it's lost its love and looks potentially dangerous. Considering the state of road marking maintenance in the UK, are marking-only crossings an intellegent move? If we have these sorts of Zebra lites at every side road, are councils going to cough up the cash to make sure they're constantly well maintained?

We have beaconless crossings in the Channel Islands - in Guernsey there have Euro-zebra signs and in Jersey there are belishas sometimes and no beacons other times (normally based on safety) but they always have controlled zones. They seem to work well without beacons (but I can't think of any outside a 20 zone without beacons). Can I not just theoretically pull up on the side of the road there or even over the zebra crossing? I understand that's a restricted zone but that doesn't stop me stopping over the zebra (and if they're allowed, not all these crossings are going to be installed in no waiting & no loading zones).
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by fras »

To be honest, I never seem to have a problem with hold-ups at Poynton since the new scheme came in, When the old traffic lights were there it was really quite awful. Of course until the bypass round Poynton is open, we won't know if it is really sustainable as a continuing installation, noting that so many HGVs with their sat navs will still go that way for a long time until word gets round.
User avatar
traffic-light-man
Member
Posts: 4728
Joined: Fri Sep 01, 2006 18:45
Location: Liverpool, UK

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by traffic-light-man »

FosseWay wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 12:37 Here's Ashley Neal's take on the Birkenhead roundab... errr... thing.

I tend to agree with his description - "a pointless complication".
That's a much better idea of the layout than my hasty photograph from the other day! What I hadn't noticed the other day was the use of what looks like the 'staircase' tactile paving to (presumably) indicate the suggested 'footway'. I'm not sure that's a particularly good idea, either.
Simon
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2604
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Barkstar »

fras wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 23:32 To be honest, I never seem to have a problem with hold-ups at Poynton since the new scheme came in, When the old traffic lights were there it was really quite awful. Of course until the bypass round Poynton is open, we won't know if it is really sustainable as a continuing installation, noting that so many HGVs with their sat navs will still go that way for a long time until word gets round.
I've never had to pass through the junction during rush hour since the scheme was opened. But given the weight of traffic I can't imagine it passes through any much quicker it might just involve less being stationary. As for the bypasses effectiveness that really depends on where most of the traffic is heading Anything aiming for the A6 into Stockport and eastbound on the M60 will still go through the village unless they put a weight limit on.
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Stevie D »

fras wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 23:32To be honest, I never seem to have a problem with hold-ups at Poynton since the new scheme came in, When the old traffic lights were there it was really quite awful. Of course until the bypass round Poynton is open, we won't know if it is really sustainable as a continuing installation, noting that so many HGVs with their sat navs will still go that way for a long time until word gets round.
How well does it work for pedestrians and cyclists?
User avatar
FosseWay
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 19621
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 22:26
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by FosseWay »

pjr10th wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 23:25 That Gloucester one shows a perfect example of why we need to be cautious about the proposed Zebra crossing lites. They seem to have installed a zebra crossing without beacons, studs or a controlled zone. Did this get special authorisation or is a council bodge? Then when you look at the 2015 GSV it's nice and fresh but by 2020 it's lost its love and looks potentially dangerous. Considering the state of road marking maintenance in the UK, are marking-only crossings an intellegent move? If we have these sorts of Zebra lites at every side road, are councils going to cough up the cash to make sure they're constantly well maintained?

We have beaconless crossings in the Channel Islands - in Guernsey there have Euro-zebra signs and in Jersey there are belishas sometimes and no beacons other times (normally based on safety) but they always have controlled zones. They seem to work well without beacons (but I can't think of any outside a 20 zone without beacons). Can I not just theoretically pull up on the side of the road there or even over the zebra crossing? I understand that's a restricted zone but that doesn't stop me stopping over the zebra (and if they're allowed, not all these crossings are going to be installed in no waiting & no loading zones).
Beaconless zebras are the norm elsewhere in Europe, I think; certainly here in Sweden they are, and (unlike in some continental countries) drivers do tend to respect pedestrians' priority on them, as they generally do in the UK.

On roads with 30 or lower limits, I'm not convinced that the beacons add a huge amount of extra security, tbh. Apart from anything else, it's usually not a problem with seeing/reacting to the crossing per se so much as drivers not seeing that a pedestrian is about to use/already using it, and the beacons don't add anything there.

What the UK would do well to avoid if it wants to copy other countries' crossings, though, is situations like this near me. This is on a 50 km/h road up a steep hill, so drivers are accelerating, and not shadowing the brake, as they approach the bend ahead (remember we're driving on the right here). Go two clicks further in GSV and what appears just round the bend?

Now, in the Swedish context, you often get crossings associated with side turnings like that, so if you've got your head screwed on, you will expect a crossing since you can see the signage associated with the left turn from considerably further back. But plenty of people don't have their head screwed on. Last time I came down that hill, I saw someone coming up who had to activate the ABS to stop in time for a pedestrian.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
pjr10th
Member
Posts: 194
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2020 23:35

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by pjr10th »

FosseWay wrote: Wed Apr 14, 2021 19:39
pjr10th wrote: Tue Apr 13, 2021 23:25 That Gloucester one shows a perfect example of why we need to be cautious about the proposed Zebra crossing lites. They seem to have installed a zebra crossing without beacons, studs or a controlled zone. Did this get special authorisation or is a council bodge? Then when you look at the 2015 GSV it's nice and fresh but by 2020 it's lost its love and looks potentially dangerous. Considering the state of road marking maintenance in the UK, are marking-only crossings an intellegent move? If we have these sorts of Zebra lites at every side road, are councils going to cough up the cash to make sure they're constantly well maintained?

We have beaconless crossings in the Channel Islands - in Guernsey there have Euro-zebra signs and in Jersey there are belishas sometimes and no beacons other times (normally based on safety) but they always have controlled zones. They seem to work well without beacons (but I can't think of any outside a 20 zone without beacons). Can I not just theoretically pull up on the side of the road there or even over the zebra crossing? I understand that's a restricted zone but that doesn't stop me stopping over the zebra (and if they're allowed, not all these crossings are going to be installed in no waiting & no loading zones).
Beaconless zebras are the norm elsewhere in Europe, I think; certainly here in Sweden they are, and (unlike in some continental countries) drivers do tend to respect pedestrians' priority on them, as they generally do in the UK.

On roads with 30 or lower limits, I'm not convinced that the beacons add a huge amount of extra security, tbh. Apart from anything else, it's usually not a problem with seeing/reacting to the crossing per se so much as drivers not seeing that a pedestrian is about to use/already using it, and the beacons don't add anything there.

What the UK would do well to avoid if it wants to copy other countries' crossings, though, is situations like this near me. This is on a 50 km/h road up a steep hill, so drivers are accelerating, and not shadowing the brake, as they approach the bend ahead (remember we're driving on the right here). Go two clicks further in GSV and what appears just round the bend?

Now, in the Swedish context, you often get crossings associated with side turnings like that, so if you've got your head screwed on, you will expect a crossing since you can see the signage associated with the left turn from considerably further back. But plenty of people don't have their head screwed on. Last time I came down that hill, I saw someone coming up who had to activate the ABS to stop in time for a pedestrian.
My issue with crossings that don't have anything more than zebra lines and the proliferation of zebra crossings to places with low numbers of pedestrians or cars is whether British councils will actually put in the money to maintain them. And the lack of controlled zone seems unsafe to me, since people could stop for any reason close to the crossing.

But my main problem is the fact that this scheme, which should be maintained above other ones since they've clearly invested money into, hasn't been maintained enough to repaint the markings. Are councils going to keep up painting the bars across every of the hundreds of junctions within their boundaries? If not, it may cause confusion if cars turning don't see the weared crossing but pedestrians do.
User avatar
FosseWay
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 19621
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 22:26
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by FosseWay »

pjr10th wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 00:22 My issue with crossings that don't have anything more than zebra lines and the proliferation of zebra crossings to places with low numbers of pedestrians or cars is whether British councils will actually put in the money to maintain them. And the lack of controlled zone seems unsafe to me, since people could stop for any reason close to the crossing.

But my main problem is the fact that this scheme, which should be maintained above other ones since they've clearly invested money into, hasn't been maintained enough to repaint the markings. Are councils going to keep up painting the bars across every of the hundreds of junctions within their boundaries? If not, it may cause confusion if cars turning don't see the weared crossing but pedestrians do.
Maintenance is always a problem. I'd imagine a simple crossing where basically just road paint needs renewing is more, not less, likely to be maintained than a light-controlled crossing that has so much more to go wrong.

I don't know the ins and outs of the scheme you refer to, but the proliferation of unprotected crossings in other countries is often down to the fact that they are used to warn drivers and guide pedestrians in contexts where pedestrians have priority anyway such as crossing the mouth of a side road. While UK drivers have historically been pretty good at obeying the rules at zebra crossings, they are poor compared to most other northern Europeans at giving way in the above and similar circumstances. It seems to me that it would be desirable to increase compliance with this, and marking on the roadway something that drivers instinctively see as giving pedestrians priority might be a way to help that.

One other thing on zebras and light-controlled crossings of various kinds. I've mentioned this anecdote before, but it is relevant here. 20 years ago I used to work at Brimscombe, on the A419 outside Stroud. In this GSV, my workplace was in the industrial area to the right, and the sandwich shop and post office in the row of shops on the left. The pelican crossing wasn't there then, and there was a big petition by employees in the industrial estate and residents further up the hill for some kind of crossing over the A419, which is/was busy and has a 40 limit. The council's response year after year was that they didn't have the money to put a pelican in as, in addition to the not inconsiderable cost of the crossing itself, they "had to" improve the lighting, add buildouts and GKW else that made it unrealistic given the council's other commitments. Clearly they've found the money at some point since, as there's a crossing there now (complete with entirely pointless buildout on the right that puts cyclists in danger). But my point is that sometimes the best is the enemy of the good.

We weren't asking for an expensive crossing; just a basic indication that drivers should give way to pedestrians. One argument that the council didn't use, but in my layman's eyes seems it could be relevant, was the speed limit: is it OK to have an unprotected crossing in a 40 limit? If not, drop the limit to 30 through Brimscombe (which would probably be a good idea anyway) and the problem reduces.

I do sometimes detect a tendency to do, or refuse to do, things because "this is how we do things" or "this is what the standard says" without looking at the specifics of the case in question.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2604
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Barkstar »

FosseWay wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 06:37 We weren't asking for an expensive crossing; just a basic indication that drivers should give way to pedestrians. One argument that the council didn't use, but in my layman's eyes seems it could be relevant, was the speed limit: is it OK to have an unprotected crossing in a 40 limit? If not, drop the limit to 30 through Brimscombe (which would probably be a good idea anyway) and the problem reduces.

I do sometimes detect a tendency to do, or refuse to do, things because "this is how we do things" or "this is what the standard says" without looking at the specifics of the case in question.
When my local council got the funds to put a few Puffin crossings in locally they removed the central pedestrian islands which I never understood. If you are still reasonably fleet of foot and cogent it is usually easy enough to cross a road without having to push the button if you only have to do one side at a time. Though there have been improvements some of the schemes we've had foisted on us still favour the car over pedestrians.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35758
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Bryn666 »

Barkstar wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:55
FosseWay wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 06:37 We weren't asking for an expensive crossing; just a basic indication that drivers should give way to pedestrians. One argument that the council didn't use, but in my layman's eyes seems it could be relevant, was the speed limit: is it OK to have an unprotected crossing in a 40 limit? If not, drop the limit to 30 through Brimscombe (which would probably be a good idea anyway) and the problem reduces.

I do sometimes detect a tendency to do, or refuse to do, things because "this is how we do things" or "this is what the standard says" without looking at the specifics of the case in question.
When my local council got the funds to put a few Puffin crossings in locally they removed the central pedestrian islands which I never understood. If you are still reasonably fleet of foot and cogent it is usually easy enough to cross a road without having to push the button if you only have to do one side at a time. Though there have been improvements some of the schemes we've had foisted on us still favour the car over pedestrians.
The idea, key word that, is that puffins vary the red time for people crossing so you should never need a central island because it should be impossible to get stranded in the middle.

The reality is of course different, and several puffins have detection failure so default to minimum ped crossing times of 7 seconds. Not great if you're not a fast walker.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11162
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by c2R »

And the removal of the central island prevents cyclists being used as squishy human traffic calming by allowing vehicles to overtake leaving a wide space.
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2604
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Barkstar »

Bryn666 wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 12:15
Barkstar wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:55
When my local council got the funds to put a few Puffin crossings in locally they removed the central pedestrian islands which I never understood. If you are still reasonably fleet of foot and cogent it is usually easy enough to cross a road without having to push the button if you only have to do one side at a time. Though there have been improvements some of the schemes we've had foisted on us still favour the car over pedestrians.
The idea, key word that, is that puffins vary the red time for people crossing so you should never need a central island because it should be impossible to get stranded in the middle.

The reality is of course different, and several puffins have detection failure so default to minimum ped crossing times of 7 seconds. Not great if you're not a fast walker.
Where there are islands it is often seems easier that waiting for the crossing. Even on the busy A6 there are gaps, I rarely need to use the button to cross safely. It just seemed that when the Puffin went in they automatically removed the island when it was useful and removing it was to no advantage - perhaps it's in the regs for them.
And the removal of the central island prevents cyclists being used as squishy human traffic calming by allowing vehicles to overtake leaving a wide space.
Yes there are a few central kerbs around here that can cause this issue but the islands that were removed didn't fall into this category.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35758
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Bryn666 »

Barkstar wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 14:09
Bryn666 wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 12:15
Barkstar wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 10:55
When my local council got the funds to put a few Puffin crossings in locally they removed the central pedestrian islands which I never understood. If you are still reasonably fleet of foot and cogent it is usually easy enough to cross a road without having to push the button if you only have to do one side at a time. Though there have been improvements some of the schemes we've had foisted on us still favour the car over pedestrians.
The idea, key word that, is that puffins vary the red time for people crossing so you should never need a central island because it should be impossible to get stranded in the middle.

The reality is of course different, and several puffins have detection failure so default to minimum ped crossing times of 7 seconds. Not great if you're not a fast walker.
Where there are islands it is often seems easier that waiting for the crossing. Even on the busy A6 there are gaps, I rarely need to use the button to cross safely. It just seemed that when the Puffin went in they automatically removed the island when it was useful and removing it was to no advantage - perhaps it's in the regs for them.
And the removal of the central island prevents cyclists being used as squishy human traffic calming by allowing vehicles to overtake leaving a wide space.
Yes there are a few central kerbs around here that can cause this issue but the islands that were removed didn't fall into this category.
It's not in the regs to remove islands, but staggered crossings are unpopular with disabled users because of lack of room to get wheelchairs around poles etc. They shouldn't be used on lower speed lower traffic urban roads for this reason.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Jim606
Member
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 11:11

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Jim606 »

The fact that we are still discussing Poynton points to the fact that this scheme, and others like it, still have problems. The designers didn't seem to want to listen to objective criticism. I refer to the infamous debate https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.c ... 6/poynton/ for anyone who wants to know more. On a slightly different note, Highways England ultimately came to the conclusion that public engagement helps produce a better scheme; as highlighted in this article in https://www.newcivilengineer.com/archiv ... 14-03-2018/ To quote;
The impression that the country operates a “we know best, it’s good for you and don’t worry your heads” approach to infrastructure planning is unlikely to be the best way to get the population behind the commission’s ambition. The commission itself is conscious of the need to bring the public with it in its deliberations.
I am not saying there wasn’t any public consultation at Poynton because by all accounts there was, but the end product isn’t ideal for cyclists who are ultimately only given a choice between the ‘pavement’ or ‘in with the traffic’. Separate cycle lanes could and should have been provided. Some excellent comments were made on the above mentioned ‘Perspectives on Poynton’ debate. One of these summed everything up;
Tom / June 23, 2014 at 6:33 pm Over time it has become apparent that the artistic and philosophical agenda is more important than practicality, legality, safety – and even an internally-consistent coherent argument.
I think what the author is saying here is; these shared space schemes are more about 'an artistic statement and bragging rights when it comes to awards time' rather than really engaging with certain groups to produce a fully functioning outcome for all parties concerned. As mentioned many times before, shared space works really well when traffic levels are very low, think of New Line in Brighton or Seven Dials in London, but when the numbers of vehicles are high, then it can be a different matter. Yes, a bypass could make a big difference to Poynton and an ultimate review may depend on this outcome? However, if people (cycle campaigners) are still complaining, then the designers of such schemes really need to listen.
Last edited by Jim606 on Sat Apr 17, 2021 12:04, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
FosseWay
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 19621
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 22:26
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by FosseWay »

Bryn666 wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 14:11 It's not in the regs to remove islands, but staggered crossings are unpopular with disabled users because of lack of room to get wheelchairs around poles etc. They shouldn't be used on lower speed lower traffic urban roads for this reason.
It's not just disabled people who dislike them. It can be a pain walking a bike across as well, if you've got people coming in the other direction too. But more generally, I dislike crossings that require me to activate and wait for several sets of lights when if I was crossing the same junction in the same direction in a car, I'd only have to pass one set. This is also a problem for cyclists, either at light-controlled junctions where there is a segregated cycle path or on roundabouts where the cycle path goes round the outside and you either have to give way at every arm or there are lights controlling both you and the traffic. Again, if you behave like a car, you wait once, to enter the roundabout, and then you have priority.

In both cases, the occasional mega-junction being treated this way is understandable, but it becomes tedious when pretty much every light-controlled junction requires pedestrians to hang around waiting for green phases two, three or four times in order to continue their journey.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2604
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Barkstar »

Bryn666 wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 14:11 It's not in the regs to remove islands, but staggered crossings are unpopular with disabled users because of lack of room to get wheelchairs around poles etc. They shouldn't be used on lower speed lower traffic urban roads for this reason.
These weren't staggered, just a simple refuge - a pair of guitar pick shaped kerbs with a gap between them and an illuminated arrow on each end. And at one particular local crossroads to solve the problem of pedestrians having to cross each lane separately pressing the button stops all traffic. There isn't a perfect answer, every junction having something different about it but some decisions are a bit puzzling.
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: A523 Poynton - New "shared space" junction

Post by Big L »

Note
I've corrected some incorrect quoting in some of the recent posts.
Carry on (but check what you're posting please).
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
Post Reply