On the A21 just north of Flimwell they put in these lines with a solid boundry on what was a fine dual carrigeway separated by a thick central reservation.
The road was reduced to just one lane either way.
To prevent road users entering the section they put up bollards all along the covered area, they are small and in poor visability such as fog, are hard to see!
They have effectively ruined a perfectly good dual carrigeway.
|
They have effectively ruined a perfectly good dual carrigeway.
They love doing that, the carphounds.
Same on the Mickleham bends on the A24 near Dorking. The notice before them used to say: DECEPTIVE BENDS. They were indeed deceptive, quite a lot faster than they looked. However this used to tempt regular users into excesses which could be quite nasty, as there are some discreet junctions on the bends. Bit of a biker blackspot.
|
Interesting that the extra hatching etc is "ruining a perfectly good dual carriageway"
I remember being told by an ex police driver on a driver training day that lots of paint on the road usually meant that the junction or bend or whatever had had a lot of accidents at it.
I still tend to think thats more likely than some troll sitting in a council office thinking "where can we ruin for perfectly safe motorists next?"
|
This may help.
Chapter 5 Traffic Signs Manual.
Hatch markings intended to
divide opposing flows of traffic on two-way roads. It
may be used on the approach to refuges as a more
emphatic alternative to the warning line.. Where road studs are used,
they must be white, and should be uni-directional. May be used to
separate opposing flows of traffic where the warningline is considered insufficient at hazards such as a
bend or the brow of a hill. Unless this marking starts
at a physical obstruction, e.g. a refuge, it should
always be preceded by the tapered marking.
Ghost island junctions are usually provided to
afford right-turning vehicles some protection and
assist free flow of major road through traffic.
The use of ghost islands on unrestricted rural
single carriageway roads can sometimes pose safety
problems. Where overtaking opportunities on the
major road are limited, the presence of a widened
carriageway, albeit with hatched markings, might
result in overtaking manoeuvres which conflict with
right turns into and out of the minor road. Where this
proves to be a problem, consideration should be
given to the use of kerbed islands to prevent
overtaking and to guide traffic through the junction.
Alternatively, double white lines.
NOTE: The width should be increased to 150 mm if the road is 10 m or more in width with no ghost island.
7.4 The through lane in each direction should not be more than 3.65 m wide,
exclusive of hard strips, nor less than 3 m. The
desirable width of the turning lane is 3.5 m,
although this may be reduced to 3 m. At urban junctions it can sometimes be
advantageous to use a wider turning lane, not
exceeding 5 m. This provides some degree of shelter
in the centre of the road, helping vehicles turning
right from the minor road to make the turn in two
separate stages. On rural roads, with speeds above
85 kph (50 mph), or where hard strips are present,
widths greater than 3.65 m are inadvisable because
wide ghost islands in these situations create a sense
of space which could encourage overtaking at
hazardous locations. Where space is very limited, a
reduced width may be unavoidable. In such cases the
width of ghost islands should not be less than 2.5 m,
except as described below.
.
On narrow urban roads it might not be possible
to provide full width right-turning lanes. It might still
be worth offsetting the main road centre line towards
the minor road and using hatched markings, even if the hatched width is less than
2.5 m. This can create space to help ahead traffic pass
right-turning vehicles and make the junction more
conspicuous. However, this technique is not
appropriate where the speed limit is more than
30 mph, or the carriageway is less than 7.3 m wide.
No through lane should be narrower than 3 m.
dvd
|
|
|
|
Same on the Mickleham bends on the A24 near Dorking. The notice before them usedto say: DECEPTIVE BENDS. They were indeed deceptive quite a lot faster than they looked.
After which the 10cc album of the same name was, er, named. It was recorded in Dorking when the band were living in Epsom, I believe.
|
"...so I looked up the Highway code. Apparently you can still use the lane if it's safe to do so and only if it's really necessary..."
May I ask a question here?
On the slip between the M4 eastbound and the M25 southbound it is single lane with a lane width on the left painted in such diagonal white lines.
The slip is signposted NSL, but it is a rather sharp curve and my car, being rather light, cannot take it at over 50mph. Anything faster and I can feel the back end getting a bit lively, to say the least!
On one occasion I found myself on this slip with a limpet just inches behind me. At the time myself and the limpet were the only two cars on the slip - it was an extremely light traffic day.
Would it have been legal for me to have indicated left then pulled over left onto the diagonal white lines to let the limpet get past me?
|
The diagonal lines are nothing to do with right turns, in this case.
There were I think three or four crashes in the space of five years resulting in fatalities on Gangsdown Hill, (I've lived within six miles for the last fifteen years) - in one case two parents and their two children were killed. The road had three lanes, one for all traffic down the hill, and two for traffic up the hill, but traffic down the hill could overtake using the "middle" lane.
Something had to be done, I guess, and this is the result.
You may not overtake by crossing into/over the diagonal lines, as I understand.
|
You may not overtake by crossing into/over the diagonal lines as I understand.
Then you understand wrong - you may overtake provided you do not cross solid white lines in order to do so.
|
......you may overtake provided you do not cross solid white lines in order to do so.
Correct ~ rule 130 of the Highway Code.
|
>>>I still tend to think thats more likely than some troll sitting in a council office thinking "where can we ruin for perfectly safe motorists next?"
LOL
There were a few accidents but a camera would have been better so that you don't get stuck behind a Sunday driver & I hate cameras!
|
I still tend to think thats more likely than some troll sitting in a council office thinking "where can we ruin for perfectly safe motorists next?"
Do you really think that? As and earlier post stated two children were killed on this road.
As a practical solution a separator lane of white diagonals bounded by broken white line works well in circumstances like this. It has the advantage over the solid white lines with two lanes one way and one way the other in that it allow traffic to cross the broken white line and enter the diagonal shaded area if necessary - for example if the single lane is blocked by a parked vehicle
|
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/3526178.stm
"Over the weekend, work on a series of traffic calming measures started on the A4130 at Gangsdown Hill near Nettlebed in Oxfordshire.
As part of the scheme, the county council will resurface the road, put down new road markings, cut back hedges and trees and put a ban on overtaking. "
|
That explains it then. An appalling record. From what I understand then that before the diagonals were introduced, overtaking was possible for both directions in what was the central lane? If that is the case it's not rocket science for the reasons behind it becoming a black spot.
They could (& should) have put solid white lines on the downhill side leaving the two lanes available for the uphill side but i guess the powers would want to show something more complicated to make a big impact & justify the expense it cost to draw up such plan.
|
|
Those replies don't leave me any clearer about my query because I would not have been the one doing the overtaking; I would have been pulling over to allow the limpet to get past me.
|
In your case on the M4 - m25 slip I don't know the legal view but I wouldn't move over in that situation, the limpet has, at most, 10 seconds before you are on the motorway and he can go his merry way.
What are you driving by the way I've never had problems on that bend at 50.
|
|
Muggy - looking at Google Earth the area you mention is bounded by a solid white line (as I suspected it would be being on a motorway)- not to be entered unless directed to do so or in an emergency.
|
Thank you to the last two. :-)
I did not, as it happens, pull over - I stayed in the lane. But it was a lot more than 10 seconds - he was on my tail all the way round from the exit off the M4 until the slip joined the M25. Why he didn't come past me prior to the slip I have no idea - he had been behind me for a mile or so by that point!
My car is a 1996 Suzuki Swift - very low tare weight, front wheel drive, and the boot was empty on the day in question, which didn't help. Rock solid on that slip at 50, but beyond 55 it was wiggling somewhat.
I have to wonder, though, whether getting out of the way of an aggressive limpet would constitute an emergency?
Edited by Muggy on 05/03/2008 at 17:32
|
|
|
|
