News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
todays accident at the Hutt St/Wakefield intersection where a pedestrian was run over by a righthand turning car is something I see near misses of every single day of the year along Hutt St. We urgently need to ban all green light right hand turns immediately and introduce red arrows. Its become so dangerous, that its 100 times more safer to cross a road away from traffic lights, than actually walking with the green man, because right and left turning cars pay absolutely no attention to pedestrians. The right hand turners are the worst because if they see a break in the oncoming traffic, they will 'floor it' around the corner, and right into pedestrians walking with the green man (as what exactly happened today). Ive never seen it so bad as in the last 6 months. And reduce the speed limit right now to 40km (like every other city centre) and fuck any bullshit arguments against it from News Ltd or that prick councillor Alex Antic
- Llessur2002
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
- Location: Inner West
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Funny you should mention this today but this morning on the way to work I saw a car very nearly hit someone crossing from the north side of North Terrace over to Gawler Place - car turning right out of Kintore Avenue obviously didn't realise pedestrians crossing had a green light and missed the person crossing in front of us by less than a meter. Not sure why this is allowed really - I've not seen it anywhere else. Granted it speeds up traffic flow by removing a light sequence but I'm not sure the extra risk it poses to pedestrians crossing is worth it. As a society we're conditioned to cross only at designated crossings and to wait for the green man, but with this comes a danger of complacency that green=safe. I'd also rather cross away from designated crossings using my eyes, ears and common sense than to presume that crossing in the 'correct' place is safe.jk1237 wrote:todays accident at the Hutt St/Wakefield intersection where a pedestrian was run over by a righthand turning car is something I see near misses of every single day of the year along Hutt St. We urgently need to ban all green light right hand turns immediately and introduce red arrows. Its become so dangerous, that its 100 times more safer to cross a road away from traffic lights, than actually walking with the green man, because right and left turning cars pay absolutely no attention to pedestrians. The right hand turners are the worst because if they see a break in the oncoming traffic, they will 'floor it' around the corner, and right into pedestrians walking with the green man (as what exactly happened today). Ive never seen it so bad as in the last 6 months. And reduce the speed limit right now to 40km (like every other city centre) and fuck any bullshit arguments against it from News Ltd or that prick councillor Alex Antic
- Nathan
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 3816
- Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
- Location: Bowden
- Contact:
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
I nearly got hit at the same intersection yesterday, walking along North Tce and crossing over Gawler Pl. Two cars turning right off North Tce into Gawler Pl just flew through while I was crossing. I've had it happen a few times while on my bike too going across the Frome St intersection.Llessur2002 wrote:Funny you should mention this today but this morning on the way to work I saw a car very nearly hit someone crossing from the north side of North Terrace over to Gawler Place - car turning right out of Kintore Avenue obviously didn't realise pedestrians crossing had a green light and missed the person crossing in front of us by less than a meter. Not sure why this is allowed really - I've not seen it anywhere else. Granted it speeds up traffic flow by removing a light sequence but I'm not sure the extra risk it poses to pedestrians crossing is worth it. As a society we're conditioned to cross only at designated crossings and to wait for the green man, but with this comes a danger of complacency that green=safe. I'd also rather cross away from designated crossings using my eyes, ears and common sense than to presume that crossing in the 'correct' place is safe.jk1237 wrote:todays accident at the Hutt St/Wakefield intersection where a pedestrian was run over by a righthand turning car is something I see near misses of every single day of the year along Hutt St. We urgently need to ban all green light right hand turns immediately and introduce red arrows. Its become so dangerous, that its 100 times more safer to cross a road away from traffic lights, than actually walking with the green man, because right and left turning cars pay absolutely no attention to pedestrians. The right hand turners are the worst because if they see a break in the oncoming traffic, they will 'floor it' around the corner, and right into pedestrians walking with the green man (as what exactly happened today). Ive never seen it so bad as in the last 6 months. And reduce the speed limit right now to 40km (like every other city centre) and fuck any bullshit arguments against it from News Ltd or that prick councillor Alex Antic
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
yep, Ive also seen heaps of near misses at the corner of North Tce and Gawler Place with right hand turning cars zooming into the path of pedestrians. Also the same at Rundle St/East Tce. Every intersection of Hutt st is unsafe for pedestrians. WTF do we do, is this acceptable that its now completely unsafe to cross at traffic lights with the green man in Adelaide. Us younger, urban minded people can generally read the traffic flow and be cautious, but what about the elderly, blind or young school kids. Where there is a critical mass of people, there is no problem, but south of Vic Square or east of Pulteney, cars give no thought whatsoever to pedestrians when turning left or right. Ive sent an email to the ACC tonight, but I realise it will achieve sweet FA. Do I make a complaint to the police, since its always been a road law that you give way to pedestrians when turning left or right, buts its never policed and 90% of Adelaideans don't even seem to know this road rule. Do we complain to Transport SA? Its totally pathetic
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
just as an edit, Ive seen many other cities (similar to the no right turn flashing lights in Pulteney St during peak hour) put large neon 'give way to pedestrians' lights at intersections in places like Melbourne. They need to be installed in Adelaide CBD urgently, or introduce permanent red arrows, one or the other. Its going to take a few deaths unfortunately to get some action, it appears.
I noticed a few years ago some city intersection introduced a left turning red arrow for a few seconds as a reminder to cars not to floor it around and wait for people. Hindmarsh Sq has them however the timing needs to be extended further because its almost psychologically making drivers think, OK red arrow is off, everyone get out of my way I'm driving through
I noticed a few years ago some city intersection introduced a left turning red arrow for a few seconds as a reminder to cars not to floor it around and wait for people. Hindmarsh Sq has them however the timing needs to be extended further because its almost psychologically making drivers think, OK red arrow is off, everyone get out of my way I'm driving through
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
I think the Kintore Avenue/Gawler Place/North Terrace intersection would be a great location for a scramble crossing. This will eliminate a lot of these near-misses. What do you guys think?
- monotonehell
- VIP Member
- Posts: 5466
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
- Location: Adelaide, East End.
- Contact:
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
I see right turning vehicles conflicting with pedestrians quite often in the city. Also left turning vehicles. I've often wondered why we allow this still.
As Norman pointed out, intersections with a scramble cycle are a good idea.
The other problem I see (especially at peak period) is vehicles entering a blocked intersection and becoming trapped when the lights change, meaning that they are now blocking the intersection for the next cycle. I see it at least once a day walking home from work.
There needs to be a law made about entering a blocked intersection (if there isn't already - I understand that there isn't) and a ban on entering an intersection to turn right (or left - sometimes I see people turn left around a corner when it's blocked). Then add right turn arrows and scramble cycles.
People entering intersections at peak periods cause further delays.
As Norman pointed out, intersections with a scramble cycle are a good idea.
The other problem I see (especially at peak period) is vehicles entering a blocked intersection and becoming trapped when the lights change, meaning that they are now blocking the intersection for the next cycle. I see it at least once a day walking home from work.
There needs to be a law made about entering a blocked intersection (if there isn't already - I understand that there isn't) and a ban on entering an intersection to turn right (or left - sometimes I see people turn left around a corner when it's blocked). Then add right turn arrows and scramble cycles.
People entering intersections at peak periods cause further delays.
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.
- Llessur2002
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2131
- Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
- Location: Inner West
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
On a side note, a couple of weeks back I was crossing North Terrace from Parliament House over towards 1 KWS. I was the only person crossing, did so completely on a green light, but a car turning left from KWS onto North Terrace stopped when he saw me and beeped his horn at me as if I was in the wrong! I obviously took this opportunity to politely tell him what I thought of him.
But...it seems that there are still drivers out there who don't expect there to be pedestrians crossing when they have a green light - which is a scary thought.
Something's definitely wrong with the system when a green man doesn't provide a guaranteed car-free safe crossing for pedestrians. What's the point in having them if they don't?
Love the idea of scramble crossings - we need many more of these in the city. I think this is in the Council's Smart Move strategy (currently under "review" I think) but it would be good to see some action here before more poor folk get run over despite following all of the rules.
But...it seems that there are still drivers out there who don't expect there to be pedestrians crossing when they have a green light - which is a scary thought.
Something's definitely wrong with the system when a green man doesn't provide a guaranteed car-free safe crossing for pedestrians. What's the point in having them if they don't?
Love the idea of scramble crossings - we need many more of these in the city. I think this is in the Council's Smart Move strategy (currently under "review" I think) but it would be good to see some action here before more poor folk get run over despite following all of the rules.
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Entering a blocked intersection is certainly an offence and a blight on city traffic. If I could nominate one aspect of traffic enforcement for SAPOL to focus on, this would be it. I see it at pretty much every intersection on my 15 minute walk home from work every day. KWS/Pirie/Waymouth intersection is particularly noteworthy. Also where waymouth intersects light square, although that whole intersection is incredibly poorly designed. It seriously impedes traffic flows and creates dangerous situations for pedestrians who are forced to walk around the offending car. It would be a better revenue raiser than pinging people who use their mobiles at a red light.
It's symptomatic of Adelaide road users' selfish and impatient attitudes.
It's symptomatic of Adelaide road users' selfish and impatient attitudes.
- Maximus
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 630
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:05 pm
- Location: The Bush Capital (Canberra)
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
And what on earth difference would that make to the conflict between pedestrians and right-turning cars? There's no way a car turning right is doing even 40kph, let alone 50 or 60kph. Also, did you not read the previous two pages of this thread discussing speed limits...?jk1237 wrote:And reduce the speed limit right now to 40km (like every other city centre) and f*ck any bullsh*t arguments against it from News Ltd or that prick councillor Alex Antic
PS: Can we perhaps be consistent in our enforcement of a certain level of decorum and appropriate language on this site? Someone else posted in this thread last week a reference to "the anti-car circle jerk on this forum", which was very quickly deleted, but "f*ck any bullsh*t arguments against it from News Ltd or that prick councillor Alex Antic" is allowed to stay...?
It's = it is; its = everything else.
You're = you are; your = belongs to.
Than = comparative ("bigger than"); then = next.
You're = you are; your = belongs to.
Than = comparative ("bigger than"); then = next.
- monotonehell
- VIP Member
- Posts: 5466
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
- Location: Adelaide, East End.
- Contact:
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
From memory, that was self-moderated by the person who posted it.Maximus wrote:...PS: Can we perhaps be consistent in our enforcement of a certain level of decorum and appropriate language on this site? Someone else posted in this thread last week a reference to "the anti-car circle jerk on this forum", which was very quickly deleted, but "f*ck any bullsh*t arguments against it from News Ltd or that prick councillor Alex Antic" is allowed to stay...?
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.
-
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2556
- Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:41 pm
- Location: Adelaide CBD, SA
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Personally, I don't have any problem with a bit of swearing; sometimes it's necessary in times of frustration (which is often, in regards to development), I think we're all adults and know where the limits lie (particularly in terms of not demeaning other users of this site with such language, councillors are fine ). For a long time I was always under the impression that swearing was banned from this site in the terms and conditions which is why I have up until recently I have refrained from swearing, but now I just follow the crowd on this one and let a couple of words go here and there...monotonehell wrote:From memory, that was self-moderated by the person who posted it.Maximus wrote:...PS: Can we perhaps be consistent in our enforcement of a certain level of decorum and appropriate language on this site? Someone else posted in this thread last week a reference to "the anti-car circle jerk on this forum", which was very quickly deleted, but "f*ck any bullsh*t arguments against it from News Ltd or that prick councillor Alex Antic" is allowed to stay...?
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Dang and gosh, and other 4 letter words?
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
- monotonehell
- VIP Member
- Posts: 5466
- Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
- Location: Adelaide, East End.
- Contact:
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Zipper that trash-mouth, mister!Wayno wrote:Dang and gosh, and other 4 letter words?
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.
- Maximus
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 630
- Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:05 pm
- Location: The Bush Capital (Canberra)
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Fair enough if that's the case. And, if so, I apologise for the allegation of inconsistent moderation. Still, one of the reasons I've participated in this Forum for so many years is that the discussion is, by and large, rational and respectful. I have my moments of swearing like a drunken sailor as much as anyone (which can be problematic when your 19-month-old is learning to speak! ), and I have no issue with the occasional four-letter bomb being used around these parts, but there is of course 'a line' (and a grey area either side). I suppose I'd just like everyone to be mindful of that line so we can continue to have robust, yet good-natured, discussion.monotonehell wrote:From memory, that was self-moderated by the person who posted it.
Now I'll just put down my walking stick and take out my hearing aids and leave you all be...
It's = it is; its = everything else.
You're = you are; your = belongs to.
Than = comparative ("bigger than"); then = next.
You're = you are; your = belongs to.
Than = comparative ("bigger than"); then = next.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Google [Bot] and 7 guests