Words fail me - almost

[Danny Colyer]

A few weeks ago, I mentioned some posts that had appeared on the
Bath-Bristol cyclepath. These posts partially obscured the view to
right when joining the path from Avon Lane in Saltford, making it harder
to check for traffic already on the path.

I complained to the council, and was told that the posts were for signs
relating to the forthcoming 12 month trial period when horses would be
allowed on the path. The work was put on hold while the engineer in
charge of the work decided whether there really was a problem with
visibility. He decided that there wasn't, and signs went up at the end
of July.

Anyway, a couple more signs went up when I was on holiday last week. I
joined the path this evening, looked to the right to check for traffic
already on the path, and saw this:
<url:http://www.colyer.plus.com/z-signs01.jpg>

The view of traffic coming from the right is completely obscured by the
signs. How eliminating the view of traffic at a junction can possibly
be considered not to be detrimental to safety is beyond me, but
apparently B&NES know better.

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

 

[Paul Boyd]

On 21/08/2006 19:41, Danny Colyer said,

> The view of traffic coming from the right is completely obscured by the
> signs. How eliminating the view of traffic at a junction can possibly
> be considered not to be detrimental to safety is beyond me, but
> apparently B&NES know better.

I'm having a half-hearted thing locally at the moment, where a hotel has
put a sign up at the end of a cyclepath that totally and utterly blocks
any vision of the road from the right, that curves away behind the sign.
This sign is actually more of an advertising hoarding.

It's only half-hearted because it isn't a route I use often. I suppose
I ought to gee things along a bit again though.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

 

[M-gineering]

Danny Colyer wrote:
> A few weeks ago, I mentioned some posts that had appeared on the
> Bath-Bristol cyclepath. These posts partially obscured the view to
> right when joining the path from Avon Lane in Saltford, making it harder
> to check for traffic already on the path.
>
> I complained to the council, and was told that the posts were for signs
> relating to the forthcoming 12 month trial period when horses would be
> allowed on the path. The work was put on hold while the engineer in
> charge of the work decided whether there really was a problem with
> visibility. He decided that there wasn't, and signs went up at the end
> of July.
>
> Anyway, a couple more signs went up when I was on holiday last week. I
> joined the path this evening, looked to the right to check for traffic
> already on the path, and saw this:
> <url:http://www.colyer.plus.com/z-signs01.jpg>
>
> The view of traffic coming from the right is completely obscured by the
> signs. How eliminating the view of traffic at a junction can possibly
> be considered not to be detrimental to safety is beyond me, but
> apparently B&NES know better.
>

Try explaining you hope to spot vehicles-smaller-than-cars

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

 

[Don Whybrow]

Danny Colyer wrote:
>
> The view of traffic coming from the right is completely obscured by the
> signs. How eliminating the view of traffic at a junction can possibly
> be considered not to be detrimental to safety is beyond me, but
> apparently B&NES know better.

Why isn't there a mad chainsaw wielding maniac about when you need one?

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"The POP3 server service depends on the SMTP server service,
which failed to start because of the following error: The
operation completed successfully." (Windows NT Server v3.51)

 

[Pyromancer]

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as Danny
Colyer <[email protected]> gently breathed:

>Anyway, a couple more signs went up when I was on holiday last week. I
>joined the path this evening, looked to the right to check for traffic
>already on the path, and saw this:
><url:http://www.colyer.plus.com/z-signs01.jpg>
>
>The view of traffic coming from the right is completely obscured by the
>signs. How eliminating the view of traffic at a junction can possibly
>be considered not to be detrimental to safety is beyond me, but
>apparently B&NES know better.

They're probably basing it on the need for visibility when everyone is
doing 5pmh or less. The idea of cycles going any faster than a brisk
walk appears to completely elude the people who design these things.

--
- DJ Pyromancer, The Sunday Goth Social, Leeds. <http://www.sheepish.net>

Broadband, Dialup, Domains = <http://www.wytches.net> = The UK's Pagan ISP!
<http://www.inkubus-sukkubus.co.uk> <http://www.revival.stormshadow.com>