which has been backed up well by design choices.
can you explain why a council would deliberately reduce the vision of drivers approaching a round about with those green posts?
Concerns that roads are being designed to INCREASE danger and accidents.
- Thread starter asim18
- Start date
which has been backed up well by design choices.
can you explain why a council would deliberately reduce the vision of drivers approaching a round about with those green posts?
There isn't a deliberate attempt to make roads worse and more dangerous, it's just a side effect of austerity. A road surfaced in the past decade will be of noticeably worse quality than one made in the preceding decade because it was done as cheaply as possible, lower quality tarmac, worse markings, etc.
It's hitting even harder than it should have in some cases because this country was always terrible for stuff like pavements, for some reason our councils have always had an aversion to building proper concrete pavements that will last decades and instead go for cheaper tarmac ones that will only last years, this has gotten even worse now as the quality is lower like the roads and in many cases it isn't even leveled.
It's hitting even harder than it should have in some cases because this country was always terrible for stuff like pavements, for some reason our councils have always had an aversion to building proper concrete pavements that will last decades and instead go for cheaper tarmac ones that will only last years, this has gotten even worse now as the quality is lower like the roads and in many cases it isn't even leveled.
For what it's worth the councils round here do something similar at certain dual carriageway roundabouts with grassy knolls (if that's the right term, it's late) they were asked about it in 2007 and their official response was that by limiting vision it forces drivers to stop and check the roundabout before entering it.
An example of poor planning in Swindon is to replace a Give Way junction and pelican crossing with a "shared" area. The idea is motorists stop for pedestrians to have right of way and as regards joining traffic, well it's a free for all. Although the area is subject to a 20 MPH speed limit, there's no other signage to indicate how the layout works. Fine if you're local and have read about it in the local press or survived a couple of journeys across the hazard, but not if you're from out of town or never encountered the arrangement before.
Despite considerable protests the council have stubbornly refused to budge and return to a more disciplined traffic arrangement. It's only a matter of time before someone is killed or injured.
Despite considerable protests the council have stubbornly refused to budge and return to a more disciplined traffic arrangement. It's only a matter of time before someone is killed or injured.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,705
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
And the one quote he is known for never actually happened the way people say it.
He said he knew people who could get a Mach 18 in 3 minutes which is way different to saying he could get a Mach 18 in 3 minutes.
However it's GD with their normal reading abilities.
Shouldn't take him that long to get it off those folks he knows though. Maybe another 2 mins?
@Tefal of course they're careful! The ban hammer swings freely!
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2011
- Posts
- 6,305
- Location
- Southampton
This is so you don't have "too much" visibility. This is so you have to slow down in order to have sufficient time to judge the speed of vehicles you're giving way to. Obviously going slower means accidents are less severe, and accidents are less likely to happen because of reduced stopping distances.I would hope visibility is not reduced beyond design standards which might increase accidents.
Of course What you probably don't realise is that this might not be for your benefit; it could be for the people at the next arm of the roundabout that give way to you. Because you're going slower, they have more gaps to enter the roundabout, reducing queuing on their approach.
Around here councils seem to be doing everything they can in the name of safety to impede traffic flow which is the exact opposite of what you describe.
Reading council are notorious for removing roundabouts and replacing them with traffic-lit crossroads. Safer for sure but the traffic jams they caused as a result are horrendous.
Reading council are notorious for removing roundabouts and replacing them with traffic-lit crossroads. Safer for sure but the traffic jams they caused as a result are horrendous.
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,353
Associate
- Joined
- 6 May 2016
- Posts
- 693
A few years ago the council removed the centre markings from a nice wide road with cycle lanes either side. This is a clear attempt at killing all who use this 30mph road.
Alternatively, they might have done this as it's been shown to slow traffic down when you remove centre markings.
Alternatively, they might have done this as it's been shown to slow traffic down when you remove centre markings.
I bet road designers are kpi’d on accidents / safety and not satisfaction / queue length / journey time etc. It’s the council etc that need kidney punching.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Apr 2003
- Posts
- 8,119
Oh make no mistake, I would have been as equally blunt had a mod posted the same comments with the same degree of conspiracy theory self-efficacy.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,705
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
you're right, he never said he could get a mach 18 at all, it was a mac 10
There you go then
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,353
Associate
- Joined
- 28 May 2017
- Posts
- 1,122
- Location
- Aberdeen
you're right, he never said he could get a mach 18 at all, it was a mac 10
The mac 18 is the new model for this year.
EDIT - re: post below, I know, just being silly.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 8,353
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,512
- Location
- ST4