log in
register

Useless dangerous road hatching

  • Creator
    Topic
  • November 30, 2018 at 8:13 pm #29173
    longassballs

    On many roads hatching in the middle, as on the photo below, influences lots of drivers not to cross them which automatically means a close pass on cyclists.

    What’s the design template solution to this type of road marking to make it safer for cyclists?

    https://i.ibb.co/VWRXTFW/Screenshot-20181126-215501.jpg

    This is the A6 on the way to Chorley in Greater Manchester. It’s on the list of Boardman’s proposed Beelines so presumably something will change, but what? I ask this in complete ignorance.

    I assume the road marking’s purpose is to limit the road to one lane each way, prevent overtaking & make it easier to install pedestrian crossing points. I’m beginning to really resent the crossings too. I’ll bet on every single ride every cyclist gets passed on a pinch point. I don’t necessarily want segregated bike lanes on every main road but it’s frustrating when many wide roads are limiting their width all the while we’re told there isn’t enough space for cycling.

  • Creator
    Topic
Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • December 4, 2018 at 10:42 am #932215
    0
    EK Spinner

    The A93 North Deeside Road in

    The A93 North Deeside Road in Aberdeen has many faults, but when the cycle lane and the pedestrian refuge islands collide, the cycle lane widens (so many dissappear) to encourage the rider to take the primary position.

    I would like to think that this educates drivers a little as to when and why riders take this position (If only) 

    On the original topic of hatching, as I understand it when hatching is bounded by a solid line (rare I know) then it MUST not be driven on but when it has dashed lines around it then it may be driven on with caution and when safe to do so. But I think these finer details are lost on far to many road users particularly those who have no interest.

    December 4, 2018 at 10:25 am #932213
    0
    janusz0

    This doesn’t sound right.
    This doesn’t sound right:

    PRSboy wrote:

    Double white lines on the downhill side, single on the uphill side to allow overtaking.

    The important point is whether the lines are “broken” as in the photograph, or “solid”. The continuous, unbroken, white lines mean do not cross. See Highway code 127 – 129. So in your example, you may only enter the “ghost island” on the uphill side.

    December 4, 2018 at 10:17 am #932211
    0
    Cugel
    HarrogateSpa wrote:
    I agree with the original post. I don’t think drivers know exactly what the hatching means, except for a vague idea that they shouldn’t be driving on it.

    There’s a road with hatching I have to use regularly, and I can virtually guarantee close passes every time I’m there.

    It’s astonishing, isn’t it, that so many drivers don’t know what lots of road markings and signage mean. It’s astonishing that they can’t seem to control their cars. It’s astonishing that they can’t seem to grasp that many of their driving habits are illegal, inadvisable and highly dangerous. It’s astonishing that ….

    This “issue” underlines the need for drivers to be much more vigorously tested before they get a license; and to be tested regularly thereafter. Ignorance and stupidity in such a domain (driving a high weight of metal at high speeds) is very dangerous, as the so-called “accident” statistics demonstrate.

    But ignorance and stupidity seem all the fashion these days. Does no one take any responsibilty for anything anymore? Have the concepts of duty, cictizenship and even good manners disappeared forever?

    Cugel

    December 4, 2018 at 10:00 am #932209
    0
    PRSboy

    Its not just cycles that fall

    Its not just cycles that fall victim to halfwittery… there is a three lane A road near us, with a hatched area in the middle.  Double white lines on the downhill side, single on the uphill side to allow overtaking.

    The problem is, people ignore the double whites on the downhill side and overtake anyway while the uphill guys assume its safe to overtake and just pull out.

    There has been more than one fatal accidents there, but for some reason it remains unchanged.

    December 1, 2018 at 9:55 am #932207
    0
    HarrogateSpa

    I agree with the original

    I agree with the original post. I don’t think drivers know exactly what the hatching means, except for a vague idea that they shouldn’t be driving on it.

    There’s a road with hatching I have to use regularly, and I can virtually guarantee close passes every time I’m there.

    December 1, 2018 at 3:57 am #932205
    0
    Mungecrundle

    When the hatched areas,
    When the hatched areas, either bounded with a broken line or a solid are on the kerbside, car drivers can get annoyed that cycles are not in those areas.

    I avoid using those areas, not only in deference to Highwady Code, but because they accumulate debris, some of which is sharp.

    The problem is not so much with the road markings but in drivers not understanding that they apply to cyclists, and that in the case of those bounded by a broken line such as the images shown above, that the motorist can cross into that area if it is necessary and safe to do so, e.g in order to overtake a cyclist.

    November 30, 2018 at 10:15 pm #932203
    0
    Drinfinity

    Plenty of those still round

    Plenty of those still round here, to discourage dodgy car car overtakes by narrowing the perception of the lane. Plenty of opportunity to improve when there is space like this. 

     

    We should campaign as much for pedestrian facilities as cycle infra. There’s a pedestrian island up the road from our house, and the kids can cross there unsupervised. Outside the house I need to cross them over. So I live with taking primary at the pinch point so the kids can get to the park and school under their own steam. (Picture not from near our house!)

  • Author
    Replies
Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.