Echo, are you sensationalising this story ? '30 traffic lights' How ?? should you not be counting sets of lights ? are you counting each pole the light sits on ??

"A three-week public consultation was carried out into the £2m scheme earlier this year"
Really?
Did anyone know about the consultation? Who was asked? Does anyone know anybody who was asked?
Odd sort of consultation process. I live locally and use the roundabout regularly both as a motorist and as a pedestrian. The consultation process as reported in the article above is the first I've heard about it. As I suspect it will be for most other folk.

Numbers dont add up in this story.

I use Millbrook Roundabout as both a motorist and cyclist, no ones consulted me!
This is the first Ive heard of it, and from what Ive seen at other roundabouts what is now flowing almost freely ( for example Charlotte place ) will be one big log jam, Please don't fix what ain't Broke! This I feel is just another example of the council poking its nose in where its not wanted.

"A three-week public consultation was carried out into the £2m scheme earlier this year"

Strange that the Echo didn't report that consultation.

Fred wrote:
"A three-week public consultation was carried out into the £2m scheme earlier this year" Strange that the Echo didn't report that consultation.

Probably because the council wanted to keep it hush-hush for fear of a backlash like the one happening now...

mathe wrote:
Numbers dont add up in this story.

I think you just can't do simple sums.

10 traffic lights plus 20 lights at toucan crossing = 30 lights.

Mixed reaction plans to install 30 traffic lights on roundabout

There is only ONE reaction...that of derision and amazement that the elected representatives can be so stupid and wasteful of money that could be spent on solving some of Southamptons social problems.

Harry Remmington wrote:
Mixed reaction plans to install 30 traffic lights on roundabout There is only ONE reaction...that of derision and amazement that the elected representatives can be so stupid and wasteful of money that could be spent on solving some of Southamptons social problems.

Apart from the reaction of people who think it's a good idea.

I hate to tell you Harry, but you don't speak for the masses.

However, the controversial plans have found favour with many pedestrians and cyclists who have given the scheme the thumbs-up.

So what? It's a major busy dual carriageway designed to get heavy traffic in and out of the city and the docks, the needs of that traffic should come first. Seriously, I'm all for making the roads safer for cyclists and pedestrians, but be sensible about it. Consider who the major users of a road are, and target it to make their lives easier

However, the controversial plans have found favour with many pedestrians and cyclists who have given the scheme the thumbs-up.
Are they paying road tax ?

Adrian Smith wrote:

mathe wrote: Numbers dont add up in this story.

I think you just can't do simple sums. 10 traffic lights plus 20 lights at toucan crossing = 30 lights.

It says 30 traffic lights. Toucan lights are not traffic lights, so again I say, the numbers dont add up.

mathe wrote:

Adrian Smith wrote:

mathe wrote: Numbers dont add up in this
story.

I think you just can't do simple sums. 10 traffic lights
plus 20 lights at toucan crossing = 30 lights.

It says 30
traffic lights. Toucan lights are not traffic lights, so again I say,
the numbers dont add up.

You say that like you're surprised. Remember, you're reading a newspaper, and newspapers are written by journalists (after a fashion). Journalists always reach for hyperbole when writing a story, and sexing up these numbers as large as they can manage is part and parcel of that

they could get macdonalds to sponsor them

Max Speed wrote:
However, the controversial plans have found favour with many pedestrians and cyclists who have given the scheme the thumbs-up. Are they paying road tax ?

No one pays road tax. It is Vehicle Excise Duty and many cyclist/pedestrians also pay it on there cars that are sat at home. It is also not only used for the road net work just like the money to pay for improvments can come from any source.

mathe wrote:

Adrian Smith wrote:

mathe wrote: Numbers dont add up in this story.

I think you just can't do simple sums. 10 traffic lights plus 20 lights at toucan crossing = 30 lights.

It says 30 traffic lights. Toucan lights are not traffic lights, so again I say, the numbers dont add up.

They are lights that affect the flow of traffic, ergo, they are traffic lights.

Dinlo.

George wrote:

mathe wrote:

Adrian Smith wrote:

mathe wrote: Numbers dont add up in this story.

I think you just can't do simple sums. 10 traffic lights plus 20 lights at toucan crossing = 30 lights.

It says 30 traffic lights. Toucan lights are not traffic lights, so again I say, the numbers dont add up.

You say that like you're surprised. Remember, you're reading a newspaper, and newspapers are written by journalists (after a fashion). Journalists always reach for hyperbole when writing a story, and sexing up these numbers as large as they can manage is part and parcel of that

Since when has "traffic light" been considered hyperbole?

Toucan crossings include traffic lights. The map clearly shows 30 traffic lights.

wouldnt the highway department be better dealing with the piece of land ,in Wimpson Lane,that has been used as an Illegal cars sales for years.

Max Speed wrote:
However, the controversial plans have found favour with many pedestrians and cyclists who have given the scheme the thumbs-up. Are they paying road tax ?

Look I cycle, walk and drive a car. I have a right to pass safely over that series of roads from my Council house in Millbrook to my place of work in the docks.

looking at the Southampton.gov website only the following can be found about the roundabout

Dockgate 20 (£2,027,000)
The major spend on Roads in 2008-09 will be the resurfacing of Millbrook
Roundabout and Dock Gate 20 access road. The project involves repairing
and stabilising the existing concrete road and applying a new blacktop
surface over the top. Traffic signals will be introduced on the roundabout and
new cycling and walking facilities introduced in the area. This is a composite
project that is funded from a number of budget headings. The project will
meet several LTP objectives and will enable this problem junction to be
comprehensively improved.
It is proposed to transfer £244,000 from Active Travel and Improved Safety
schemes, and £365,000 from The Principal and Unclassified Roads
schemes as detailed in Appendix 1 to the Capital Scheme at Dock Gate 20
to ensure delivery of this major piece of infrastructure which will offer greatly
improved access to Southampton Container Terminal, carriageway
reconstruction and radically improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists
both on the main Western Approach Cycle Route and from local
communities in Millbrook.
The scheme has been brought forward in the programme to meet Network
Management obligations within the Traffic Management Act and ensure that
these works are coordinated with other improvements on this busy corridor.
Since the Report to Council on 20th February 2008, the design has been
finalised and a full drainage survey has been carried out. The extent of the
8
problems under the existing road surface could not have been anticipated
and significant additional costs have been identified requiring additional
funding for this important scheme.

I see no mention of a public consultation.

Again it seems the taxpayers of southampton are being railroaded

What a bunch of moaning minnies. If you read the cycling campaign website you will see that the plans were announced earlier this year and a drop-in session was held to view the plans in January.

moaning minnie wrote:
What a bunch of moaning minnies. If you read the cycling campaign website you will see that the plans were announced earlier this year and a drop-in session was held to view the plans in January.

Well publicised then...

sod the cyclists.... they don't even use cyclepaths when they're provided.

The toucan crossings, placed where they are will cause gridlock around the entire roundabout.

This is a ludicrous plan, that is a waste of money.

I first saw the plans a few months ago, they were forwarded to us through our Bicycle User Group at work.
From a pedestrian/cyclist point of view these lights are very much needed. Anyone who has tried to cross any of the roads leading into the roundabout will know just how dangerous it can be.

So the councils idea of a public consultation, is actually a cyclists consultation.

one group of people is hardly a considered spread of views, is it?

Pn wrote:
So the councils idea of a public consultation, is actually a cyclists consultation.

one group of people is hardly a considered spread of views, is it?

Nah. Almost certainly, this work was instigated by a desire to sell a tender to some building contractor, and receive an appropriate back-hander in return. Any justifications like "oh, cyclists want it" will have been retro-fitted after the fact

Make no mistake. Any decision beyond the trivial is made so that someone making it can make some money out of it

Why not move Dock Gate to the bottom of the M271? Ok, it'll be a lot of work but would route heavy traffic away from the centre of Southampton.

Pn wrote:
So the councils idea of a public consultation, is actually a cyclists consultation.

one group of people is hardly a considered spread of views, is it?

I don't know....I can only talk about what I've seen, I don't know what the council's policy is on dissemination of information that is of interest to the public, but from experience outside of this particular issue, it's not, er, particularly proactive.
But our User Group is in regular conversation with the council anyway about improving cycle routes and safe routes to school amongst other things, this is probably how these plans came to our attention.

As a pensioner still awaiting my promised bus pass, if and when it arrives I will be able to cross the dual carriage ways to the bus stop. At present I have to take my life into my own hands as I try to cross the road safely. The lights will certainly be beneficial for all motorists, it's crazy trying to get out onto the roundabout at times, and so dangerous trying to leave as lorries push there way out of the docks road regardless of who is in there way. I'm assuming cameras will also be fitted at the roundabout to catch the vandels and the drivers who can't read colours!!!

As a pensioner still awaiting my promised bus pass, if and when it arrives I will be able to cross the dual carriage ways to the bus stop. At present I have to take my life into my own hands as I try to cross the road safely. The lights will certainly be beneficial for all motorists, it's crazy trying to get out onto the roundabout at times, and so dangerous trying to leave as lorries push there way out of the docks road regardless of who is in there way. I'm assuming cameras will also be fitted at the roundabout to catch the vandels and the drivers who can't read colours!!!

Having lived in nearby Freemantle and worked at Kings Toyota on Third Avenue for over 5 years I know already what a nightmare this roundabout is at busy times. Whilst I do agree that trying to cross the roads can be very dangerous as they are so busy it is going to cause absolute chaos having so many lights on such a busy junction. With the iminent building and opening of the Ikea down by West Quay (another ridiculous idea which is going to cause untold problems on the roads of Southampton) the problems are going to be further exasperated going forwards.
Unfortunately Southampton's traffic management (or lack of) seems to be run by people who don't actually use our Cities roads at all. Or maybe they just part own a traffic light company???

Why don't they just do like they have at Redbridge roundabout. Make subways and cycle paths that go over the road? then nobody has to take there life into their own hands or wait for lights to change all day?

I work in Northam and have to travel to work from the Shirley area. What with football matches on Wednesdays and IKEA coming to the old Pirelli site and now this - which I believe will cause even more delays and tailbacks - I would like to ask these councillors when did all this consultation take place? I also would make the point that this scheme is detrimental to the environment in that, for the most part, roundabouts keep traffic moving but traffic lights stop traffic, including the very large lorries which use this roundabout, and they are left at a standstill pumping out their noxious fumes.

I have just been made aware of this further example of Southampton’s worse than ludicrous fascination with traffic lights, stupid “traffic calming” measures with bits of curb etc. and excessively raised, car destroying speed bumps, all going towards making the whole city the fiendish gridlocked obstacle course that it probably world renowned by now.
I guess my council wants me to be incandescent with rage all the time.
Just to keep sane people on the boil, my council thinks it’s really intelligent to put a minority activity football stadium, not further away from the city centre’s impenetrable road network, but, stunningly, to a location even further into the wasteland that the city centre is fast becoming.
So as to just perhaps make me speechless forever, with an uncontrollable rage and a screaming urge, to rip, with my bare hands, the insides out of all the cretins who vote this kind of bilge into existence; My council adds poison to the pot by deciding that a certain 7day a week store should be built in one the most congested parts of the town centre area. Having a massive loyal fan base, which are willing to drive 100ml for a packet of Swedish meatballs and a shoddy table lamp, Ikea should keep the city’s roads fairly static into the foreseeable future.
Millbrook Roundabout and its lights may be just the thing to add a bit of changing colour for the non moving traffic to watch, whilst, not making its way to the not reachable alter to all that is Swedish, smack dab in the middle of town.
I may never make it, to and from my job at Segensworth, ever again, when all this genius master planning had been fully implemented. I will at least keep warm, what with my blood gently boiling with anguished intelligence insult overload and the heat trapped by the atmosphere weather inversion caused by all those grid locked vehicle exhausts.

Oh that's absolutely wonderful. More lights, more delays. Does the council have an overarching plan, or is this just more patchwork. Rather than lights, what about walkways for pedestrians..? Both further up the road and down the same road, they use this method to get pedestrians and bicycles across the road. Why not here..? No... slow the trafffic down even further, and we can all cough and splutter our way to our destinations... eventually.

A political party rep asked me the other day if I had any thoughts on the roads in the city.
Have any thoughts..? Where do you start? Southampton is a complete mess traffic wise, and although most of it seems to be planner induced, ok, its coastal location doesn't help. You simply can't put a road circumnavigating the city on its south side, because there'd be an almighty splash.

But it can't have escaped people's notice that when the traffic lights are out, the main traffic runs more smoothly. This isn't a hallucination, it's true. The victims are the vehicles in the side streets, but as they are often not even there, it matters very little for most of the day. In truth, if you give people more responsibility towards traffic safety, the vast majority will drive much better, and more aware. There is new research which backs this up.

So many of Southampton's roads seem to be burgeoned with ideas that stop, or slow the flow of traffic down. This results in greater pollution levels within those areas - something I would have thought S.C.C. would have thought very long and hard about before they implemented such ideas. There's nothing wrong with 30-40 mph intracity limits where appropriate; even 20 mph if really needed. But don't put sleeping policemen, traffic lights and lumpy mini roundabouts down at every opportunity. The stop/go effect lays down pollution much faster and destroys vehicles and roads quicker.
S.C.C's road policy is all about STOP. They should consider a little more GO in their ideas. Look for the research on this planners/councillors before you tighten the gridlock even further.

I cycle across this roundabout to/from work every day, crossing 4 lanes of traffic each way.

At busy times, when the traffic is choked up, it's not too difficult to cross provided drivers leave sensible gaps. I suggested to the council a while ago that they paint yellow boxes on the road to encourage this, but they rejected this cheap solution.

Toucan lights on roads leading TO the roundabout should help cyclists and pedestrians to cross, without having too much impact on traffic which is queuing to get onto the roundabout anyway.

But toucan lights on roads exiting FROM the roundabout could cause severe problems, as stopped traffic will be queuing back onto the roundabout, blocking other traffic trying to get round the roundabout or onto it from other roads.

Since the installation of (many) lights seems to be the only significant change, why couldn't the council arrange to set up temporary lights over a period of say 2 weeks (out of school holiday time) and monitor the outcome, before committing the money to a permanent solution?

Erm wrote:

moaning minnie wrote:
What a bunch of moaning minnies. If you read the cycling campaign website you will see that the plans were announced earlier this year and a drop-in session was held to view the plans in January.

Well publicised then...

Moaning Minnie of the cycling campaign thinks we are all a load of moaning minnies! What cycling campaign and what website? A public consultation should be for everybody not just the councils favoured cycling campaign, whoever they are.