Ho hum ... (potholes)

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
ChrisP100
Posts: 298
Joined: 24 Sep 2020, 9:00am

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by ChrisP100 »

danfoto wrote: 16 Jul 2021, 3:33pm ImageI was recently cycling along a quiet country road when, thanks to an inconsiderate car driver overtaking me, I was forced to ride over this "pothole" rather than try to swerve and avoid it.
Image
Image

I therefore reported it on the Highways Authority's website as "potentially lethal to cyclists". Today I have been favoured with a rather surprising response from the "Highways Steward", who tells me that
This location has been recently inspected and although some areas have been noted as appearing untidy, it is not at a level which it is causing a safety issue for users. As such we will not be carrying out any immediate repairs at this time.
I have just replied to him, saying "Thank you for your email. I ride a bicycle, and having been forced by an inconsiderate car driver to ride over the defective road surface which I photographed, I can assure you that it most definitely is a potential hazard for cyclists. Is the safety of cyclists not taken into consideration when you decide whether or not to repair a pothole?

I'll be back to report any response to that ...
Might be worth an FOI request to find out what the Council base their risk assessments on when considering road repairs. I wouldn't be surprised if it were just a simple question of economics in that there just aren't enough incidents involving cyclists for them to justify spending on road repairs that predominantly just benefit cyclists.
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by thirdcrank »

East Sussex CC's "Highways Asset Management" policies are here.

https://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/roadsandt ... anagement/
ChrisP100
Posts: 298
Joined: 24 Sep 2020, 9:00am

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by ChrisP100 »

Good news for once:

I now have one less lethal obstacle on my journey home thanks to the local Council repairing a pothole that I reported.

To be fair, they are usually quite good at assessing any reports, and carrying out necessary repairs within a decent time frame.

https://fixmystreet.lincolnshire.gov.uk ... n=-0.53331
fastpedaller
Posts: 3435
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by fastpedaller »

Psamathe wrote: 17 Jul 2021, 11:56am The ones I really dislike are the "slot shaped" ones that run along your direction of travel (so your wheel gets stuck in them ...)
e.g. IMG_0919 copy.jpg

Yesterday cycling on a single track road, round a sharp blind bend (hedges blocking any visibility round the bend) and suddenly appeared large oncoming SUV so I moved to left edge - but recently surface dressed without repairing potholes so into lose gravel and suddenly a well camouflaged pothole and ... my groin felt the consequences! (SUV was going sensible speed taking sensible road position, etc. - no issue with drivers part)

Ian
Have you reported to Norfolk CC? If it was in Norfolk of course. I had a real rant at them a few years ago about when they surfaced dressed without filling holes, therefore leaving a worse situation (at least the holes were visible before :shock: ). Their answer was that if I'm riding at the correct speed there won't be a problem. I asked them what speed they suggested, given that I'm less likely to fall if going faster, but the consequences (if I did fall) could be worse. They wouldn't say of course.
fastpedaller
Posts: 3435
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by fastpedaller »

We were in Hereford (not on bikes though :( last week, and the state of some of the A and B roads was horrendous - pick a slalom course through to avoid wrecking the car suspension!
fastpedaller
Posts: 3435
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by fastpedaller »

One problem is that 'their' analysis is one of simple measurement and doesn't seem to take any account of sharp edges, which we know are dangerous. Crazy thing is the longer it's left the worse it'll get - a stitch in time!
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by Psamathe »

fastpedaller wrote: 25 Jul 2021, 7:24pm One problem is that 'their' analysis is one of simple measurement and doesn't seem to take any account of sharp edges, which we know are dangerous. Crazy thing is the longer it's left the worse it'll get - a stitch in time!
Do they take into account shape and position e.g. a long 2"wide slot along direction of movement middle of lane could be very nasty yet might not meet the depth or area criteria.

I caught one the other day close to the road edge except on a sharp blind bend on a single track road where you are looking for oncoming vehicles rather than at the road surface and SUV coming and you automatically move to the edge and catch the pothole - uncomfortable but road only surface dressed a few months ago so expect no repairs for a bit.

Ian
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by thirdcrank »

Perhaps the big problem is the lack of cash for repairs. The various levels of local authorities have all sorts of calls on their £££ and some are more immediate than others, child protection being an example. There's always likely to be a tendency for things like road maintenance to be kicked further down the path. The only way to change this would be to have road maintenance separate from other local functions, with set high standards and sufficient budgets to achieve them. That's not going to happen so reporting problems is worthwhile.
fastpedaller
Posts: 3435
Joined: 10 Jul 2014, 1:12pm
Location: Norfolk

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by fastpedaller »

IMHO one issue (which certainly grates with me) is that repairs seem to be either poor or too late (or both) resulting in abigger repair or multiple repairs of the same hole. Another thing which grates is the huge 'golden handshake' payouts given to some redundant staff - One such payout in Norfolk amounted to nearly £300k IIRC, and the recipient then immediately took up a senior role with a local Charity (and I will boldly suggest she isn't a volunteer). I've no problem with redundancy payments, but they should be (as for most employees) to the statutory maximum of £15750 (if over 20 years service)
ChrisF
Posts: 665
Joined: 22 Mar 2014, 7:34pm

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by ChrisF »

Looking at the photos again, this seems a somewhat unusual pothole to me - the road has clearly been very recently resurfaced, and the contractor has forgotten to check that the area around the drain cover was finished correctly. Perhaps they ran out of tarmac?
Chris F, Cornwall
JimmAwelon
Posts: 1
Joined: 8 Feb 2022, 9:59am

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by JimmAwelon »

Just saw this in Feb/March 2022 print copy and was minded to register with the site in order that i could reply, although I do appreciate that some time has passed since you first mentioned this. I am surprised at the Highway Authority not attempting to pass this on to the Water Undertaker given that they have taken the time to go out there and inspect. The letters 'SV' on that cover stands for sluice valve so it is clearly apparatus belonging to the Water Company providing potable water in the area. They would usually do this via a Section 81 notice under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991, thus removing themselves from any responsibility should any injury or damage to property result from the defect. Perhaps the issue has been resolved? Let me know.
Slowtwitch
Posts: 744
Joined: 25 Oct 2021, 11:35pm

Re: Ho hum ... (potholes)

Post by Slowtwitch »

Potholes... I now have 42mm tubeless tires, running at 55psi. Can't feel a thing :lol:
Post Reply