Cycle Warning sign on Roundabout entry

[G.Harman]

Near me there is a roundabout which has an area intended for cyclists marked with a different colour
surface and white line border around part of its periphery. Today I seen one of the entrance roads
has gained a new electronic sign,positioned adjacent to the Give way line to the right of a joining
vehicle. Though I have not seen it operate yet it would appear to illuminate showing a Bicycle
symbol within a warning triangle and possibly some flashing lights as well. Presumably the Cycle
"lane" has a sensor sensitive enough to activate the sign. Have these been put up anywhere else? At
first sight it looks quite well thought as regards positioning . Will have to observe it for a while
and see how well it works. A foreseeable snag would be if a cyclist takes a line through the
roundabout without using the marked route,which they are quite entitled to do especially when there
are no other vehicles forcing them to the periphery. A SMIDNSY's Lawyer might argue that not taking
the recommended route and gaining any protection afforded by it was contributory negligence etc. I
have not approached the roundabout from the other direction so I do not know if there is any
information to let a cyclist know about the sign and suggest they use the cycle lane .

The Location is at the end of the Itchen Bridge in Southampton at the city end. Those who
know it will appreciate that the down gradient off the bridge means that cycles can easily
maintain a good speed matching or exceeding the limit for motor vehicles. This does mean that
they can "surprise" joining traffic, however a rider doing that speed will not want to slow
into the cycle lane. Bit of a Dilemma for the highway engineer.

G.Harman

 

[Jeremy Parker]

G Harman tells us:

> Near me there is a roundabout which has an area intended for cyclists marked with a different
> colour surface and white line border around part of its periphery. Today I seen one of the
> entrance roads has gained a new electronic sign,positioned adjacent to the Give way line to the
> right of a joining vehicle.

Hmm. Interesting. Do keep us posted on further news.

My cynical view is that they wouldn't have spent the money for the sign unless there was a "real"
safety problem. safety problems only become "real" if there are actual dead and/or injured cyclists
(or motorists ete.).

I think that improvements only get installed if the money saved in dead etc. cyclists is likely
(according to the knowledge in cycling matters of those who installed the sign) to be "repaid" in
just a year or so. I think a dead cyclist counts as about 1.2 million pounds nowadays, a seriously
injured cyclist as about 1/10 a dead cyclist, and a slightly injured cyclist as about 1/80 a dead
cyclist. Adults and children count the same, as far as I know.

I wonder how much the sign cost.

The line-round-the-edge-route round a roundabout is described in rule 62 of the Highway Code, which
contrasts it to what rule 61 calls the "correct" procedure for cyclists to use a roundabout.

It would be interesting to know what turns the signs on, and how many seconds warning it gives
motorists to take action.

Jeremy Parker

 

[Dave Kahn]

Jeremy Parker <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
> I think a dead cyclist counts as about 1.2 million pounds nowadays...

... but don't forget that about 200 quid of that can be recouped by fining the harassed motorist.

--
Dave...

 

[Hywel Evans]

As you are most probably aware most council's are not very cycling frindly. They place these
obstacles on the roads to make it look good and that they are doing something towards cycling.
They usually paint the road surface green or red, which actually looks great but the daft buggers
has not realised that it is more dangerous when it is raining as the paint belomes very slippery.
These small paths are also a good place to sweep up the glass and other road debris that collect
on the road.

Most councils also like to place these paths everywhere but they have not allocated any money
towards the maintenance of them.

"Jeremy Parker" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> G Harman tells us:
>
> > Near me there is a roundabout which has an area intended for cyclists marked with a different
> > colour surface and white line border around part of its periphery. Today I seen one of the
> > entrance roads has gained a new electronic sign,positioned adjacent to the Give way line to the
> > right of a joining vehicle.
>
> Hmm. Interesting. Do keep us posted on further news.
>
> My cynical view is that they wouldn't have spent the money for the sign unless there was a "real"
> safety problem. safety problems only become "real" if there are actual dead and/or injured
> cyclists (or motorists ete.).
>
> I think that improvements only get installed if the money saved in dead etc. cyclists is likely
> (according to the knowledge in cycling matters of those who installed the sign) to be "repaid" in
> just a year or so. I think a dead cyclist counts as about 1.2 million pounds nowadays, a seriously
> injured cyclist as about 1/10 a dead cyclist, and a slightly injured cyclist as about 1/80 a dead
> cyclist. Adults and children count the same, as far as I know.
>
> I wonder how much the sign cost.
>
> The line-round-the-edge-route round a roundabout is described in rule 62 of the Highway Code,
> which contrasts it to what rule 61 calls the "correct" procedure for cyclists to use a roundabout.
>
> It would be interesting to know what turns the signs on, and how many seconds warning it gives
> motorists to take action.
>
> Jeremy Parker

 

[Mr R@T \ -Lsqco]

In news:[email protected], Jeremy Parker <[email protected]> typed:

> My cynical view is that they wouldn't have spent the money for the sign unless there was a "real"
> safety problem. safety problems only become "real" if there are actual dead and/or injured
> cyclists (or motorists ete.).
>
> I think that improvements only get installed if the money saved in dead etc. cyclists is likely
> (according to the knowledge in cycling matters of those who installed the sign) to be "repaid" in
> just a year or so. I think a dead cyclist counts as about 1.2 million pounds nowadays, a seriously
> injured cyclist as about 1/10 a dead cyclist, and a slightly injured cyclist as about 1/80 a dead
> cyclist. Adults and children count the same, as far as I know.
>
> I wonder how much the sign cost.
>

ISTR reading somewhere (perhaps a DfT report) that *any* road traffic collision involving more than
one road user costs *at least* £ 100,000 to the public purse to clear up, and even damage only ones
often result in street furniture (which isn't cheap!) being destroyed.

I'd say ( a rough estimate from reading DfT TAL papers) the sign project would have cost about
£40,000 max.

Even in bald financial terms if this project prevents just *one* RTC it has paid for itself
twice over!

Alex

 

[Just Meeeeeee.]

"Mr R@t (2.3 zulu-alpha) [comms room 2]" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In news:[email protected], Jeremy Parker <[email protected]> typed:
>
> > My cynical view is that they wouldn't have spent the money for the sign unless there was a
> > "real" safety problem. safety problems only become "real" if there are actual dead and/or
> > injured cyclists (or motorists ete.).
> >
> > I think that improvements only get installed if the money saved in dead etc. cyclists is likely
> > (according to the knowledge in cycling matters of those who installed the sign) to be "repaid"
> > in just a year or so. I think a dead cyclist counts as about 1.2 million pounds nowadays, a
> > seriously injured cyclist as about 1/10 a dead cyclist, and a slightly injured cyclist as about
> > 1/80 a dead cyclist. Adults and children count the same, as far as I know.
> >
> > I wonder how much the sign cost.
> >
>
> ISTR reading somewhere (perhaps a DfT report) that *any* road traffic collision involving more
> than one road user costs *at least* £ 100,000 to the public purse to clear up, and even damage
> only ones often result in street furniture (which isn't cheap!) being destroyed.
>
> I'd say ( a rough estimate from reading DfT TAL papers) the sign project would have cost about
> £40,000 max.
>
> Even in bald financial terms if this project prevents just *one* RTC it
has
> paid for itself twice over!
>
> Alex
>
>

I went from Dover to Calais. OK for me