Martin Underwood wrote:
"John Rowland" wrote in message
...

Hi all,

I live on a residential suburban London road used by many cars as a cut
through, despite the fact that there are no jams to speak of on the main
roads in my area. They use it because it is (by a short amount) the shortest
route between a number of major suburban town centres and pinchpoints in the
road network. The council has sent us all details of their plans to alter
the geometry of a local dangerous scissor junction between two heavily-used
cut-throughs to reduce the number of accidents, and wants our opinions. Both
cut throughs have width restrictions to prevent lorries using them, but this
does nothing to stem the continuous flow of cars.

I don't want the council to alter the geometry of the junction. I want them
to either turn the width restrictions into barriers, or remove the width
restrictions and put barriers where it will be easier to do three-point
turns. Or, best of all, to locate barriers through the neighbourhood such
that through routes will still exist to enable us residents to get out in
any direction, but they will be so zigzaggy that no-one will use the
neighbourghood as a cut through any more. Because the main road routes are
uncongested and only slightly longer than the cut throughs, forcing cars to
divert around a few blocks should remove all incentive to cut through my
neighbourhood.

I know that there are many neighbourhoods where cul-de-sacking has occurred.
They tend to be the poshest neighbourhoods or the scummiest neighbourhoods,
but not the in-between neighbourhoods. I live in an in-between
neighbourhood. How do councils decide which neighbourhoods to cul-de-sack?
How will it affect property values? Will my neighbourhood become posher? Or
scummier?

Has my idea about leaving through routes but making them zigzaggy been
performed anywhere?

What's my best next step - going to the council, or trying to organise
neighbours or start petitions? Printing up posters for people's windows and
distributing them?

As a driver, I destest cul-de-sacking. If a road exists, it should be there
for through traffic to use as well as residential traffic. I'd like to see
more use made of signs such as "this is not the preferred route" to
discourage through traffic, but leaving the road open and free of physical
restrictions so that it can still be used as a fall-back if an exceptional
circumstance (accident, road works) causes jams on the main route.

On my route to work (Abingdon to Thame) the main A road has been closed for
the next two months while roller-coaster subsidence is rectified. The
diversionary route has a right-turn onto a major road which is hellish in
the morning - if only the council would install temporary traffic lights
until the roadward are complete to give Abingdo-Thame traffic a chance to
turn right! All the roads roundabout have been marked "not the diversionary
route" which is churlish considering that all the diverted traffic is being
channelled down one road which cannot cope.

I know it's not nice to have continuous traffic down your road. If the width
is inadequate, impose a weight/width limit to prevent HGVs, but don't
restrict cars or make them take a tortuous route. That was tried in
Bracknell where I used to live and it failed badly: all the traffic
continued to use the route which had been made more tortuous because it
involved a traffic-light-controlled roundabout so traffic had a chance to
get out in the rush hour whereas the preferred route was an ordinary
roundabout and so traffic on that route didn't standa chance with
nose-to-tail traffic on the main road coing from the right.

I'm afraid I don't agree with you. When perfectly good alternatives to a
residential road exist, why subject the poor residents to increased
traffic with the associated inconvenience, danger and pollution? This
is, after all, why bypasses are built.

Changing signage would probably be pointless as signs are generally
intended for people who don't know the area; anyone who does will carry
on using the residential road.

For the problems you've mentioned between Abingdon and Thame, and in
Bracknell, you've already suggested the solutions - traffic lights
(either temporary or permanent) to control traffic flows.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London