Best Farcility of the Year?? £210,000 Wasted?? Chichester

[TonyR]

I'd likely join the flow of traffic as I'd feel safer and I'd be able to get on rather than wait and give way. The scheme is going to encourage some drivers to believe that they have - not only at this giratory but on the roads in general - priority over cyclists.

To be fair to them the Council's website on the changes does say:

Motorists should also be aware that cyclists are not required by law to use the cycle lane and that they have an equal right to use the main carriageway, should they choose to do so. This road position is often preferred by more confident cyclists.

[niggle]

I'd likely join the flow of traffic as I'd feel safer and I'd be able to get on rather than wait and give way. The scheme is going to encourage some drivers to believe that they have - not only at this giratory but on the roads in general - priority over cyclists.

To be fair to them the Council's website on the changes does say:

Motorists should also be aware that cyclists are not required by law to use the cycle lane and that they have an equal right to use the main carriageway, should they choose to do so. This road position is often preferred by more confident cyclists.

Not much use just saying it on the website, it needs to be on a billboard in the middle of the roundabout.

[gaz]

Don't know why they don't go the whole hog and put Cyclist Dismount signs at each entry to the gyratory.

I take it that you've already seen the designs for phase two of the plan

[TonyR]

Don't know why they don't go the whole hog and put Cyclist Dismount signs at each entry to the gyratory.

I take it that you've already seen the designs for phase two of the plan

Ah, but we have a cunning plan for Phase 3. We put No Entry Except Cycles signs on every exit.

[matt_twam_asi]

I'd love to say I'm surprised but West Sussex County Council are desperate to show that they are splashing as much cash as possible on transport infrastructure at the moment. Well thought out schemes need not apply - as seen in this week's Chichester Observer: http://www.chichester.co.uk/news/local/ ... -1-6660027

As for Northgate, the Council's own employees lobbied senior management hard in 2010 to improve pedestrian access to the Council & Fire Service buildings on the gyratory after someone was struck whilst crossing the road (this happens way too frequently). The response back then was along the lines of "we'll look into it", so I don't hold out much hope for anything sensible happening in that area any time soon.

[mjr]

To be fair to them the Council's website on the changes does say:

Motorists should also be aware that cyclists are not required by law to use the cycle lane and that they have an equal right to use the main carriageway, should they choose to do so. This road position is often preferred by more confident cyclists.

DUAL. NETWORK. EVIL. BAD. WRONG. If any council officer starts excusing the crap they're building because "more confident cyclists" can use the carriageway, then that should be a huge blaring foghorn of a warning sign that what they're building is unsafe and bad practice. They don't build two roads, one for "more confident motorists" and a circuitous one that gives way to it for ordinary motorists. They don't build a crap footway and say that more confident pedestrians and wheelchair users can just walk in the carriageway (as in fact pedestrians are entitled to do).

Sorry for the rant. I'm so glad that I don't have to deal with WSCC and their "I can't believe it's not criminal negligence/incompetence" approach to roads. I won't be going there on holiday again any time soon. I wish all of you who suffer those muppets all the best in dealing with them. Alert the press. Form campaign groups. Lobby like crazy. See whether Pete Owens would run FotM's first ever multi-cock-up special feature? WSCC sound worthy of such recognition.

Courage!

[snibgo]

DUAL. NETWORK. EVIL. BAD. WRONG.

Yes.

The common design goal for UK "dual networks" seems to be as somewhere for kiddies to play, away from the big dangerous motorists, ensuring kiddies don't hold up (adult) motorists.

I'm not against providing facilities for real kiddies. That's great. The problem comes when cycling is infantalised, and designers think that all cycling facilities need to be playgrounds that are separate from the important business of travelling, which they want to be done by motoring.

[FatBat]

DUAL. NETWORK. EVIL. BAD. WRONG.

Indeed. In my days as a Transport Planner, my mantra to the highway engineers would be "Safe enough for the beginners, convenient enough for the confident". Obviously, they took no notice and then grumbled when their shiny new farcility was never used. Ho hum.