Bad road surfaces and tragedies

[Jdsk]

I suspect that lack of funding plays a greater part than lack of concern.

Jonathan

[fastpedaller]

I suspect that lack of funding plays a greater part than lack of concern.

Jonathan

I'd suggest they show little concern, and it wouldn't cost them much to close roads (or partially close/cone them off) when there are large defects.
As an example, before Christmas our local B-road (a primary route for all traffic) had a large sink hole developing in the centre of the road - a water main was leaking. It had been white-marked. The Council website asks to report defects which are dangerous by telephone, and indeed if the public 'click' it's a dangerous defect they are unable to proceed via the web reporting page. After being on the phone waiting for an hour trying to report it I gave up. I then rang the Police and explained the situation and said I didn't know what other action to take. they said they had a direct line and would take contact the Council. Within an hour the road was closed and a guy was digging! It shouldn't need the intervention of the public and Police to ensure the Council do the job they are paid to do.
My suggestion is....... If you have a council which don't fix reported holes in a reasonable time, maybe contact the local Police to try and get action. If enough of us do it the Police will get fed up with the situation and maybe 'persuade' the Council.

[Vorpal]

An organisation, such as a council is incapable of concern. Individuals may be concerned, but are seldom in a position to do anything.

I once had an off on a cycle path due to a crack that caught the wheel of the tandem. It was between sections of the pavement & seemed to be the result of a bad join.

We weren't going very fast & had the trailer to stabilise the bike, but it could easily have resulted in a much more serious incident. I reported it to Essex County Council multiple different ways & the answer came back repeatedly 'does not meet criteria for repair' I talked with the cycling officer (they had one at the time) & emailed my councillor & explained that the criteria for repair did not adequately consider cyclists. They tried to get them to update the criteria, if only for cycle paths, but I'm not aware that they got anywhere with it.

That crack remained as it was for years. It was visible on google earth from the nearby road, as seen by the passing google van. It never got big enough to meet the criteria for repair, but they eventually resurfaced one of the adjoining sections & it was fixed then.

I expect if there had been a serious incident, they would have had to 'do something', but I expect that it would have been just to repair that crack, and that the ECC criteria for repair are no more considerate of cyclists now than they were 15 years ago.

[awavey]

I suspect that lack of funding plays a greater part than lack of concern.

paradoxically I dont think lack of funding is the real issue, much like lots of government funded stuff you could literally double the cash they get and still end up with the same bad outcomes, because its what you do with that funding and how you measure the outcomes that really counts, simply giving them more money wont help fix those problems.

like an example theres a bad pothole on a T-junction I know about on one of the routes I ride, its on an unlit/country road thats NSL, the worst part isnt the hole itself as long as you remember its there, but the amount of large pebbles and debris that get spat out of it on to the road adjacent.

it got really bad & deep last year and took months and multiple reports to the council to get them to fix, but the contracted repairers just looked like they chucked a spade full of tarmac in the hole and left it at that, they didnt clear the debris, prepare the hole for repair properly or seal it, and because the council admit they can only check roughly 1% of all the fixes it got marked as job done & "fixed".

Unsurprisingly before long the "fix" started to break up, like within weeks, and here we are a year later now with the same hole back again, thats had to be reported again and is marked for repair again, but we'll see how long it takes this time

So will they do a better job this time? who knows, but effectively the council will have paid twice to fix the same hole, meaning the money they spent on the first fix was completely wasted, well if their budget was made bigger how many holes would they be just going round to spend that money on fixing again ? rather than concentrate on getting the job done right in the first place, at which point they wouldnt need the extra money, because theyd save it by not having to repeat the work so quickly again.

[mattsccm]

I suspect that rather than trying to pick the problem we should realise that there are probably a variety of reason why a hole exists or isn't mended and probably a combination. Excessive wear of course, possibly by veicles that were not anticipated when the road was build. Plenty like that round me. Cost with limited budgets an issue which is also reflected in the fact that councils often sub contract . These contractors won't do a full job as they are not paid to do so. If a hole is next to one marked my local gang won't fix it even when asked to. "Not on the job sheet".No one checks. You can't properly mend a little hole, you need a big bit of tarmac to stick.
I will suggest one thing that won't go down well.
We should all ride/drive/walk according to the conditions should we not. That is stated here when some motorist hits a cyclist. As cyclist we should ride at a speed where we can see the road ahead and if in doubt go slower/stop/walk/divert. (And I will aknowledge the idiot who doesn't then swerves at the last minute creating another danger.)
It holds no strength if you are tail ended and nor does it here. I am about to leave for work. Terrible roads, lots of standing water meaning ice as well. Mud, wild boar, rabbits. My problems.
I know we all like a smooth surface and rightly expect them but it isn't realistic at the moment and I would happily chuck a few million at my local hospital and drive slowly on a road like a motocross track if need be.

[fastpedaller]

We should all ride/drive/walk according to the conditions should we not. That is stated here when some motorist hits a cyclist. As cyclist we should ride at a speed where we can see the road ahead and if in doubt go slower/stop/walk/divert. (And I will aknowledge the idiot who doesn't then swerves at the last minute creating another danger.)

All very well - but how do we achieve that? Round our way they surface dress the roads without filling the existing holes - this means there exists a hole which is either filled with loose chips and will 'grab' a bike wheel, or it just remains a hole 60mm deeper than the surrounding surface, but with a layer of grey chips. Here's where you 'ride to the conditions' fails - because the surface is covered with a uniform grey chip, it is impossible to see these defects until you hit them - So 'riding to the conditions' would mean riding around at 2MPH, thus creating a wobbling hazard to following traffic.... Just in case the unseen holes are there. Prior to the surface dressing, at least the holes could be seen (in daylight anyway). The answer is to maintain the roads to a good condition and as others have said, the 'repairs' that fall out within weeks, days, or indeed hours, are worthless but we are all paying for them.

[Vorpal]

Being aware of a problem and taking care is something everyone should do, but we cannot always predict the circumstances that lead to a tragedy, whether it is because a motorist forces us to take a line we'd rather not, a hazard that is difficult to see, or a moment's inattention. No one deserves to die for hitting a pothole.

The highways authorities have statutory obligations under the Highways Act 1980 to maintain highways, and can be required to pay compensation when defects cause damage or injury.

But insufficient funds are being budgeted for highways. https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/230 ... -potholes/ I expect that most highways authorities have a similar state of affairs.It is a significant problem, that is only in the short term, going to get worse. Not only is there a growing backlog of repairs, there is a shortage of bitumen, caused by the war in Ukraine https://news.sky.com/story/cost-of-fixi ... e-12685421

[fastpedaller]

The highways authorities have statutory obligations under the Highways Act 1980 to maintain highways, and can be required to pay compensation when defects cause damage or injury.

Indeed - I've even tried to get the Norfolk Police to enforce the Council to do repairs by quoting this statutory obligation. Unfortunately they said they couldn't do a prosecution, and they couldn't tell me who could. Hmm.... they also called the Council 'our partners', which I asked them to explain, as there is no direct financial connection, and I assume no legal connection - they went quiet on that. Closing ranks against the public?
I am, however proud to say I think I achieved a big result regarding a junction in Cambridgeshire....... The roundabout interchange called Brampton Hut was the primary route for the area (now largely bypassed by the new A14 route) and was absolutely horrendous. There were huge (and I mean HUGE) potholes all around, which we had to weave around in a car- a motorcyclist (especially if it was raining) wouldn't stand a chance! I reported it to Highways Agency (name now changed! - always a bad sign) who gave the usual "we make regular checks etc" and dismissed my comments completely. I contacted the then Cambridge PCC by email, giving him copies of the email correspondence and stating the HA official was just making excuses and not doing his job. I didn't receive a reply, but within 2 weeks the surface was superb!
Complaining and making as much nuisance as possible can take some time, but may work.

[mattheus]

I will suggest one thing that won't go down well.

There is a reason it won't go down well. If you have to ask ...

But anyway:

We should all ride/drive/walk according to the conditions should we not.
<snip>
I know we all like a smooth surface and rightly expect them but it isn't realistic at the moment and I would happily chuck a few million at my local hospital and drive slowly on a road like a motocross track if need be.

Doesn't matter if I (or you) like a "smooth surface": mending the roads is preventative healthcare. If you divert the maintenance funds, other cyclists more foolish than thee or me (and quite likely drivers too!) will crash and need hospital treatment.
So there you go: a simple financial incentive for you to support good road surfaces! Win-win

[cycle tramp]

I am sorry to hear about the tragic news, and my sympathies are with their friends and family.

Most of what I was going to say has already been covered, however one thing which hasn't been brought to people's attention is just how fast a road surface can develop issues, and issues which can cause death or life changing injuries...

For example we've just had a prolonged period of wet weather followed by freezing conditions. Even on seemingly well maintained tarmac roads, there's a chance that rain water has found mirco gaps in the tarmac and has effectively puddled between the chippings or stones... if it freezes the water will expland possibly lifting the road material and causing a pot hole to appear over night... its not common, but it can happen. However it is more likely to happened around areas where pot holes have occurred in the past...

...drain failure is another fast acting road hazard. All manner of pipes are placed under roads - more often than not urban roads, some follow the length of the road other pipes run across it, if the structural integrity of the pipe fails, then the road can deform or if the pipe is big enough (like a mains sewer) fall into it. It doesn't happen alot, but again it doesn't take too much heavy traffic running over a failing pipe to cause an issue in a short space of time..

Going back a page or two Fastpedaller noted that the roads should be checked more often, and I can understand that logic, but a road can go from being safe to potentially hazardous in less than 24 hours. Even if you had the staff capacity to check the roads every week (which would be incredibly expensive) you could not ensure the road you inspected today would be hazard free tomorrow.

The only option is to report any road hazards directly to your local council, ensuring that your complaint is registered, when it comes to voting in your local council, vote for those local councillors who champion maintaining and improving the quality of your roads, and to cycle with the knowledge that just because the road you were cycling on was free of pot holes yesterday does not ensure that it will be free of potholes the day after*

(* terrible things happen, a few years ago there was a landside in Devon I think, completely covered an entrance to a tunnel. Work was organised and diggers were brought in to move the tons of soil which had covered the area. Having cleared a percentage of the soil it was found that a car had been buried in that landside complete with two occupants).

[rjb]

The Beaminster tunnel tragedy on the Somerset/Dorset boundary. Not far from you CT.

The tunnel has been rebuilt but locals now blow their horns in the tunnel to ward off evil spirits.


'Rapid death' for Beaminster Tunnel couple - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-18931369

[fastpedaller]

I agree surfaces can degrade quickly, but when local authorities leave existing holes for months (sometimes years) before fixing them? - there is really no excuse. Lack of funds is often cited, but (good quality) early rectification saves money compared to leaving the defect. to get worse over time.

[cycle tramp]

I agree surfaces can degrade quickly, but when local authorities leave existing holes for months (sometimes years) before fixing them? - there is really no excuse.

No, but there may be reasons. As a guy who used to work taking calls about pot holes, here's a couple if reasons why it might haven taken longer than expected;

I) reported via a third party.. if you've informed the local council of a pot hole via fix my street or fill that hole or whatever otherr app.. then there's a chance the email may not have made it through. Third parties have technical issues, things get set to the wrong council. For the best response, use the council's own website to report the road issue.

II) not enough accuracy in the report. I've lost count of the number of times that the council was informed of a pot hole, and by informed, the customer used the phrase 'there's a big pot hole on a lane between Taunton and Bridgwater'. Nothing happens with those reports, unless they've included an email address. Ideally your roads and transport team would like a photo of the pot hole, an exact location and even a what three words reference.

III) In some instances a road woukd have been dug up by a contractor working for gas or water or whatever broadband provider. After they have finished the work and made good tge road surface- they are responsible for its up keep for a defined period (its stops your council tax being used to correct road faults caused because the road easily put back again properly) if the pot hole happens in that time, then it's the contractor's responsibility to put it right.. this can add a considerable amount of time to fix any road defect. And I am the first to say its not ideal

IV) the road defect isn't considered large enough to be a hazard. Your council will be working to a set of standards when it comes to pot holes, not long enough, deep enough or wide enough and it will not be seen as an issue. You can use the freedom of information request to find out the minimuim dimensions of the pothole required for a road repair (and yes, I have dropped my brompton skinny small front wheel into a pothole which wasn't viewed as dangerous)

[fastpedaller]

I agree surfaces can degrade quickly, but when local authorities leave existing holes for months (sometimes years) before fixing them? - there is really no excuse.

IV) the road defect isn't considered large enough to be a hazard. Your council will be working to a set of standards when it comes to pot holes, not long enough, deep enough or wide enough and it will not be seen as an issue. You can use the freedom of information request to find out the minimuim dimensions of the pothole required for a road repair (and yes, I have dropped my brompton skinny small front wheel into a pothole which wasn't viewed as dangerous)

Thanks for your insight.
All very well having standards, but surely the earlier they are fixed the better? I realise there is a need to prioritise large holes over smaller ones though. A stitch in time saves 9 is a good moto (is that the correct descriptive?)
Unfortunately in most industries/fields the 'standard' is "the lowest we can get away with" rather than "the best we can attain"
I am led to believe the Japanese have a different culture

[mattheus]

Interesting experience (for a commuting cyclist) this week, catching a lift in a colleague's car. She uses the same potholes - oops, I mean roads - as me to come in.

As we approach the new "Jan 2023" holes, I think how a car-driver will avoid the same hole that I have to swerve round on the bike ...
,,,
,,, and then she just drives straight over the thing! :-O But of course car suspension soak these things up a lot better (+vehicle mass... yada yada ... ). Nevertheless, I'm sure if *I* drove down the same stretch, I would do my upmost to avoid them, as the hits still make a horrible noise.