It seems MAG, Motorcycle Action Group, has been campaigning in opposition to this scheme, on the grounds that the raised kerb lane dividers are dangerous for motorcycles and cyclists,
http://www.mag-uk.org/en/newsdetail/a7169
When a scheme is designed to improve the safety of vulnerable road users by forcing motor vehicles to slow down then the opposition of motorised road users is only to be expected. Indeed, I consider it a key test of whether a scheme is worthwhile that it generates howls of anguish from motorists. Now they cannot openly admit that their real reason for objection is that the design is that it will slow them down by preventing them taking a racing line through the junction (ie that it will work as intended) so they dress it up as a concern for safety - just as the anti-speed-camera brigade pretend to be safety organisations.
no, it means that they're fearful that people will hit a low barrier and get hurt. And, my experience of the neo-turbo roundabout outside Chichester is that they have a point.When a scheme is designed to improve the safety of vulnerable road users by forcing motor vehicles to slow down then the opposition of motorised road users is only to be expected. Indeed, I consider it a key test of whether a scheme is worthwhile that it generates howls of anguish from motorists. Now they cannot openly admit that their real reason for objection is that the design is that it will slow them down by preventing them taking a racing line through the junction (ie that it will work as intended) so they dress it up as a concern for safety - just as the anti-speed-camera brigade pretend to be safety organisations.
And since viritually all urban roads come equipped with low barriers on either side (including the existing layout) it is rather a coincidence to that they suddenly develelp a kerb-phobia for this particular scheme.no, it means that they're fearful that people will hit a low barrier and get hurt. And, my experience of the neo-turbo roundabout outside Chichester is that they have a point.
kerbs where you expect them to be are one thing. Kerbs strewn hither, thither and yon.....not so good. My point is this - it ill behoves us to be cynical about people that have as much to lose of gain in terms of risk as we do.And since viritually all urban roads come equipped with low barriers on either side (including the existing layout) it is rather a coincidence to that they suddenly develelp a kerb-phobia for this particular scheme.
Yes indeed - those direct zebra crossings across all the arms of the junction (made possible by the reduced design speed of the roundabout) will be a real bind for anyone trying to cross the road on foot.Especially when we're discussing a bit of engineering that looks like it's set up to inconvenience pedestrians.
We could try having a sensible discussion...Oh dear... can we laugh and point?
it's about the distance people have to walk. Make it a crossroads, stick some traffic lights in, and put right-angle and diagonal crossings with a pedestrian only phase and you've got yourself a place rather than a diagram that people have to navigate around. (And, yes, we've had them for years in London). And, in the Bedford instance, you could have a bit more planting in the land you reclaim from roadway.
asking and spending twenty million quid on an ideological totem are two very different things.Yes, there is an argument that replacing it with a signalised junction would be better for vulnerable road users. But that doesn't make Pete Owens wrong in pointing out that providing zebra crossings is an improvement on what there is at the moment. Getting an improved roundabout is surely better than asking for a signalised crossing and getting no change at all?
Hmm, it looks a bit like the primary reason people are gathering together is because they're all waiting to cross the road.asking and spending twenty million quid on an ideological totem are two very different things.
Let's be clear about this - the roundabout in Bedford has nothing to do with anything other than the kind of instrumental thought that holds conceptualising dear. Somebody decided this was a good idea, and they decided on the basis of a conceptualised model of movement that has diddlysquit to do with placemaking and everything to do with a cast of mind. And, actually, it's not a very nice cast of mind.
And here............is a place at which people gather, recognise each other and feel like they belong.