You are reading a single comment by @Oliver Schick and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • I'm replying here to some of the posts in the other thread mentioned above.


    Thanks Oliver, very comprehensive reply. I think that option number 1 looks really sensible and is v helpful in understanding how you can achieve the same impacts by having filters located away from the edge of the cell.

    Great to hear that comes across! I've been repeating this point ad nauseam, as it's one of the main points that people constantly get wrong. It's really to achieve a number of purposes, and the impacts aren't quite the same (but I know that's not what you mean). It does away with injudicious turning movements off main streets while maintaining the presence of side street junctions with main streets so that you don't get them to be completely de-prioritised; the purpose of a transport network is ideally not to prioritise one direction of travel over any other, but to enable interchange by means of people travelling in many directions. That may sound a little abstract, but to make it more concrete, if you take most junctions that have been closed off at the main street, you'll usually (not always) find that crossing the street there on foot or by bike is inconvenient or even hard, e.g. there may be a signalised pedestrian crossing twenty yards away and not near the (former) junction, or no dropped kerb for people cycling, and so forth. The upshot of this is always a suppression of travel across the main street, which is often what traffic engineers wish to achieve (see also dual carriageways with railings in the centre). You want to ensure that does not happen so much, and a proper junction mouth does help with that. Needless to say, the junction mouth should still be built in a modern way to enable people with mobility difficulties to cross easily, but not de-prioritised. If it's at the edge of a filtered area, there will be less through motor traffic coming out of it, giving transport planners less to worry about, but people on foot or cyclists will actually have an easier time if they need to cross the main street, as will the relatively small number of drivers coming out of there.

    I'm also pretty local, and am guilty of previously using Chobham Road as a convenient run through to Stratford.

    Well, who could blame you? The only other alignment is Cann Hall Road/Crownfield Road, and that's actually a little narrower, and obviously comprised of residential streets, too.

    It forms (or did form) part of a larger rat run that span across to the east of Leytonstone Road. I think it's more sensible to route that traffic down Major Road and Crownfield Road. It's a minor detour and the roads are much more suitable to the level of traffic. It also frees up Chobham Road as a more direct cycle route - up to this point it was a pretty horrible road to ride down.

    It's very interesting how that perception arises--in terms of alignment, (I would argue) Cann Hall Road and Crownfield Road are actually much more direct and continuous, and not a detour for most drivers. Unlike Chobham Road, it's not possible to argue that Crownfield Road should not be a cell boundary street, though.

    Although you stole the joke I was going to make about Major Road, so now I'm not happy.

    Pffft, I own all rubbish jokes, and if anyone is stealing anything, it's you. :)

    The best bit is where Major Road turns into quite a minor street, of course.