GTR1400MAN wrote:I just 'drove' it using StreetView and didn't even notice it. Had to turn round and go back to find it!
How on earth did that get past any safety review?
Agreed, but so many do
jont- wrote:In the same way that I think people in favour of "surface dressing" as a suitable alternative to resurfacing should be shot blasted by lorries driving along surface dressed roads at NSL speeds, maybe we should start requiring those implemented ludicrous cycle schemes to use them before signing off?
At the same time though - does a facility existing abrogate responsibility from a cyclist deciding that it's safe to use? It might be their right, but to exert that right in the face of ever falling driving standards, and where it's fairly obvious who's going to come off worse in an accident, what do they really hope to achieve by asserting their right to use such roads/facilities?
The road is a direct route: Some people need to get from A to B by bicycle. This is a designated facility, apparently designed to allow them to do so. without mixing with motor traffic. Once they get to this crossing, what else would you expect them to do but try to use it? Perhaps cycle up the slip road in the live lane instead? Or turn back?
Surely motorists should be prepared to share the road with those legally entitled to use it?
Horse wrote:jont- wrote: implemented ludicrous cycle schemes to use them before signing off?
At the same time though - does a facility existing abrogate responsibility from a cyclist deciding that it's safe to use? It might be their right, but to exert that right in the face of ever falling driving standards, and where it's fairly obvious who's going to come off worse in an accident, what do they really hope to achieve by asserting their right to use such roads/facilities?
So, at that junction, what's the unludicrous, affordable, alternative?
Since the cycle lane goes up to the roundabout, why on earth does it need to cross the slip first anyway?