A Trip To Traffex

I spent part of today at the Traffex 2015 trade fair, held Birmingham's NEC. The rest of the day was taken up with getting there and back (but that's not very interesting). Traffex 2015 closes tomorrow, so get you skates on if you want to go!

OK, I know what you are thinking, highway engineer goes to a trade fair and all we get is a post about bollards, well, there were some I cannot deny it (thanks Glasdon)! The event is held every two years and as I haven't been or a while I was looking forward to going. Actually, there was something I was really looking forward to see, but more on that later.

Traffex had the usual mix of exhibitors with an emphasis on traffic - designing and providing for (and remember, traffic includes pedestrians and those riding bikes too), but there were some contractors and that meant plenty of big bits of kit parked up for a look around.

An interesting area was set up with dimmed lights to show off kit which lights up such as traffic signs, zebra crossing beacons and the like which was a great idea, even though it was a little surreal. 

I have to mention bicycles of course and two stands caught my eye. First was Cycle-Works who supply all sorts of cycle parking arrangements (secure and open us), but they have an integrated bicycle pump and tool kit in a housing about the size of a bollard - one I will be following up for the day job. There was also Bikes-on-Buses who were there promoting cycle carriers on buses with a couple of case studies in the UK. There was a bit of bike-wash going on, but I won't bother writing about it.

For hi-viz enthusiasts (and I mean when being used on site, not for utility cycling!) Viz Reflectives were showing off clothing which as well as being bright for day use and retroreflective for night use, it also had photo-luminescent stripes which "charge" in UV light giving added visibility in low light or darkness.

I had an interesting discussion with the rep from Charles Endirect about street lighting technology. In the age of austerity and street lighting being turned off or dimmed, it was nice to see some practical ideas and Charles Endirect has a system which detects traffic flow and adjusts lighting accordingly (aimed at motorways on the whole) - when the road is busy, the lighting brightens and vice versa - the system also has an override to provide more illumination if there is an incident. The street lighting can also "talk" to base stations on the network which allows remote monitoring of faults which reduces the need to send people out to physically check things.

There were lots and lots of traffic signals, detectors, speed cameras and more traffic signals which is to be expected and to be honest, much was a variation on a theme. What did stand out was the number of hire companies with temporary traffic signals available with pedestrian and cyclist stages built in - SRL had pretty much every layout on show!. This kit is so easily available, there is no longer an excuse to exclude people walking and riding bicycles when temporary signal control is needed.

Speaking of signals, to my personal highlight of the event and before I go on, remember where you read this first as I really hope this is a success. Neatebox is a small company run by Gavin and Steve which has (among other things) developed a smart phone app which uses bluetooth to control the pedestrian demand on signalised crossings.

It sounds like such a simple idea and it is in a way, but the challenge has been to get the industry and the traffic authorities interested - it does seem some big players are interested and in fact, a full trial site (on-street) is due to come forward in Edinburgh in the next few months (surely an excuse for me to venture north of the border).

Steve (l) and Gavin (r) with the app in action.

The app works by the user activating it as they start their journey and as they get within a pre-set distance of a crossing, the app will tell them that they are near. A touch of the screen presses the button on the crossing for you and shows a red man. When the green man comes in, the app shows the same green man and you are away.

Why is this such a revolutionary idea? There are many people in our society who struggle with the push button on crossings. For example, someone using a wheelchair might find it awkward to get close to the push button or the ramp to the carriageway is steep and it is hard to get into the right position - the app allows the person to stop and wait where they feel happy. Gavin showed me a video of someone walking with her guide dog across a staggered pelican crossing (and, yes, I learned something today).

Green man on the puffin push button, green man on the app.

As the woman approached the crossing with her dog, she instructed him to sit while she found the push button. She holds her dog on her left and so pushes the button with her right hand. The green man came in and she started walking, but almost immediately, her dog stopped at the kerb (as they are trained) and so vital seconds of crossing time where lost.

On the island, the push button was on the woman's left which was no good for her when walking with her dog and so she crossed by putting her arm out and waiting for drivers to stop - pretty scary and hardly inclusive. The app would have mean the woman could have stopped with the dog without having to reach the push button. With a green showing on the app (with an audible signal) she could have crossed over the the centre and instructed the dog to keep going. On the island, the button in an unhelpful place would not have mattered. You might be interested in this video giving some more examples of who could benefit.

Tap the screen and press that button!

Of course, I had to see the cycling angle and I mused on the application with Gavin whereby toucan crossings would no longer be the reach-over-your-handle-bars-to-reach-the-button pain that they can be (I have to deal with one every day which gets me half off the bike). You could have your phone on your handlebars and activate the crossing from where you wish. Or how about, automatic demand as you reach the crossing!

This is a great application of technology and I sincerely wish Gavin and Steve well with this project. I look forward to Neatebox being a standard component in our crossings and those engineers and campaigners reading this, please spread the word. For me, this is another one of the little things which we can do which can help make our streets accessible for all and proves once again, we don't always need huge projects to make a difference to everyday journeys. Three cheers for Neatebox!

Stealth Cameras

It seems that Labour was getting all hot under the collar about "stealth" speed cameras on the motorway network over the weekend, although it was old news recycled to have a pop at the Conservatives who had allowed all of these hidden cameras to be installed.

The outrage was reported by many newspapers, including the Daily Mail (naturally!) - if you would rather not click on the link, the thrust of the news report was related to the enforcement of variable speed limits on the motorway network;

• 112,000 drivers given penalty notices in 12 months because of the cameras
• Increase due to 'grey cameras' on motorways with variable speed limits
• Critics say the measures are used to catch out drivers and make money
• Numbers of drivers fined will rise as system is extended across the country

Well, let's have a look at those four points before I return to the politics. First, 112,000 drivers received fines because they were driving too fast and yes, if it wasn't for those pesky cameras keeping everyone safe they would have gotten away with it.

Yes, many of the cameras in use are grey, but as this image of a gantry on the M6 shows, the cameras sit behind the variable speed signs over each traffic lane and yellow cameras wouldn't be much help to drivers not wishing to pick up fines. (Images from Google Streetview). There are plenty other systems running, some with yellow cameras, some grey.

I guess that people getting fines and those who purport to be representing them might be called "critics", but as for catching out motorists, I simply cannot accept it. Presumably, people know what the speed limit is on the motorways and when the variable speed limit is in operation, there are some big signs on the gantries above the road and as one enters a variable limit section from a slip road; so how are people being "caught out"? Perhaps people feel ashamed and their representatives feel the group shame!

As for the numbers of people fined going up as "smart motorways" are rolled out, that may well be true, but as it becomes normal to stick to the speed limit, then I am certain that the numbers will drop and as a percentage of annual trips on the motorway, the numbers being fined are already supremely tiny to the point where this isn't really a story and me commenting is a waste of time!

Back to the politics. Labour issued a press release at the beginning of February where it quoted Michael Dughar MP, Shadow Transport Secretary;

This camera on a Transport for London road is new
and yellow!

“The previous Labour Government issued strict guidelines that speed cameras should be in accident blackspots and that they should be painted yellow. At the same time, we worked to deliver the best road safety record in the EU.

“Under this Conservative Government we have seen a proliferation of grey, hidden 'stealth’ cameras, and at the same time road safety has deteriorated.

“This Government’s belated and half hearted review is insufficient. We should have one universal standard whereby all fixed speed cameras are in accident blackspots and are painted yellow. Ministers should issue guidelines to the Highways Agency today to stop treating motorists like a cash cow.”

The first paragraph is true, although they were guidelines and so not following them never would have invalidated enforcement activity; although most camera operating authorities and partnerships did as they were told. The point about having the best road safety record in the EU is highly questionable, although in 2010, the Conservative/ Liberal Democrat coalition introduced swingeing cuts to road safety work, including the removal of revenue from camera fines being reinvested in safety camera partnerships.

The whole issue about treating motorists as cash cows was, is and always will be nonsense when it comes to law enforcement and to say otherwise is populist nonsense. At the simplistic level, one could say that if you stick to the speed limit, then you have nothing to fear and that is OK to some extent. The wider issue is that people should drive according to the conditions and for sure, automatic cameras cannot police this and this brings the gradual cuts to traffic policing in the UK into sharp relief.

If our politicians (all of them) were more serious about speeding, they would be calling for changes in the law to tighten up on penelities, stopping serial offenders from driving whilst banned and ending the nonsense that allows people to carry on driving with more than 12 points. Of course, this is all about motorways and I think far more is needed in enforcing speed limits on local roads. Cameras will have their place, but they cannot be a substitute for roads policing.

If you want to find out the detail of how safety cameras (speed and red signal) have been funded and kicked around as a political football, then the House of Commons Library Standard Note 350 will be of interest.

Sign Make It Better

I do occasionally tag traffic sign-related tweets as #signmakebetter and as we approach election season, it does make me smile that politicians seem to love them so much, despite pushing us to declutter our streets.

Yes, I have covered clutter before and I am not going to repeat myself, this is about the elections. In London, we are "only" voting for our MPs and actually, it has been a lot quieter than usual on the correspondence front and so I am hopeful that the current and potential MPs in my area had more important issues to campaign on than getting new signs put in!

Transport never features highly in elections at any level, unless it is a shiny big-ticket scheme like HS2 which will often divide opinion and so the stuff that gets people about on a daily basis is all but forgotten. This is sad, because it is the funding decisions, the national and local policies and indeed the views of elected people which make or break the small interventions which can often make all the difference or at least set the foundations for greater and more equitable things. Our transport policies have direct impacts on health, poverty, access to employment, pollution, personal safety; the list goes on - but then you all knew this anyway! 

No, as we move to the elections I will be voting for those who know that there are signs which can make things better such as those bearing the number "20", pictures of little green men and little green bicycles, the words "except cycles" and "bus stop", the "no through road sign" and lots and lots of little blue signs showing people safe and direct routes for walking and cycling where motorised traffic plays second fiddle.

Because Buses Cause Congestion*

(*no they don't) First, a massive Hat Tip to Alistair Coleman who runs the angry people in local newspapers blog where he trawls the local newspaper websites for the big stories of the day which are making local people very angry.

I must admit, that this website appeals to me, as working for an organisation which is often on the receiving end of local "journalism" where (in common with many local rags) we are presented with an issue that some local people don't like and then through the written form of talking heads, various people give opinions and that is it. No facts, no background and so much digital fish'n'chips wrapping. Yes, I am indulging in armchair-punditry again, but there is more to this story than meets the eye.

Station Road, Didcot. Image from Google Streetview.

There are some excellent local newspapers which undertake extensive extensive investigative journalism, but it appears that a story in a recent Oxford Mail was of the former variety. The issue is about plans for a bus route along Station Road in Didcot which is linked to the redevelopment and extension of the Orchard Centre. According to John Cotton, Leader of South Oxfordshire District Council;

“It’s great news that Hammerson is now able to progress with the next phase of the Orchard Centre. People living in Didcot and the surrounding area want more shops and amenities in the town centre and I am confident that what Hammerson is proposing will add to the growing reputation of Didcot as a great place to live.”

A bus (plus taxis and bicycle) only road is to be built on which
means shifting the buses (and taxis and bicycles) somewhere else.
Image from Google Streetview.

To enable the redevelopment to take place, an existing bus-only link road will be closed (to build on) and so (according to the article) the developers want to send up to 7 buses an hour along Station Road to access the shopping centre, much to the residents' disgust. They are concerned that the road is too narrow and that buses will end up going through the pedestrianised area at one end of the street. They also claim the buses will cause congestion.

The developers want to reroute the buses so they can avoid the congested Jubilee Way roundabout which sits to the west of Didcot Town Centre and presumably, the natural route to take when the link road through the extension of the shopping centre is to be built on. In other words (mine, from the armchair), the closure of the link road will force buses to use a roundabout which is currently stuffed and so the operators are not happy, so using Station Road will keep them happy.

Station Road ends at a modern, pedestrianised retail park.
Image from Google Streetview.

I admit that I was cynical (!) when I first read the article as after all, who wants buses rumbling past their homes? I chuckled at the residents for suggesting that buses cause congestion as that is clearly nonsense, but I thought I would dig deeper and I think there is a story in here that the paper simply didn't pick up on. 

From what I have read, it seems that the Orchard Centre is in fact Didcot's town centre which opened in 2005. The town is also a growth area and the expansion of the Orchard Centre is an aim of the local authority and it has a supplementary planning document to support this. Actually, I think the residents have a point. Their road does look too narrow to run two-way bus services along, although I think they might be as concerned about the potential to lose parking on the street.

The residents should be asking why the expansion is closing a purpose-built link road when buses could stop right in the shopping centre. They should be asking why their town centre is owned by a private developer. They should be asking why their town centre is essentially a retail park. They should also be asking South Oxfordshire District Council why their town centre is being made the main centre for the sub-region;

South Oxfordshire District Council intends that, by 2026, the town centre will have grown significantly to provide a vibrant, dynamic and living heart at the centre of the town -competing effectively in the sub-region as the principal town centre within the district.

No, it is not buses that cause congestion, it is the policies of the local authority which cause congestion and that is the real story here as it is up and down the country.