well its missing for the last few yards before the junction . but a little further back its there . would be better if there was none at all. and people learned how to use the roads properly. you know SHARE.
Well, if wishes were horses, then... we wouldn't need bicycles because we could just ride the horses. But really, there is no viable way to do this. Every motorist is already meant to have read a booklet that tells them not to do what pregnant glasses woman did... you're never going to get everyone to behave well all the time, even if you flood the roads with traffic police.
I don't like the grief I get when I choose not to ride in the segregation because its
a) full of detritus
b) has all the ironwork for service access smack in the middle ( yeah really thought that one out didn't ya LCC)
c) flooded
d) as rough as a bears backside where it hasn't been constructed to a decent quality.
a) should be reported for cleaning on
www.FixMyStreet.com;
b) the carriageway also has ironwork for service access in it, so this isn't much of a differentiator;
c) should be reported for drain clearing - highwaymen hate standing water because it usually indicates a deeper problem which will destroy their roads;
d) should be reported for resurfacing - this is the one which will probably be the acid test of whether TfL are putting proper resources into it or just trying to look good.
But in general, I will keep defending any cyclist who wants to ride on the carriageway. There are usually good reasons to do so and I think these botched junctions are good reasons. Elsewhere, I'm currently objecting to an attempt to build a cycleway with an even worse junction than that, so I really am of the "build it properly or leave it alone" view...
all that money wasted when it could have been used for so much more.
It need not be wasted if they go back and complete it. That'll be what, the third attempt after the original blue paint and the current stop-start track?
And anybody who thinks the UK is rich enough to widen every road by 10 feet is living in cloud-cuckoo land.
We don't need to. In most places, the road is plenty wide enough and it's simply a case of allocating some of it to a cycle track. In urban areas, the whole road width is often tarmacked so it'll mean replacing a carriageway lane with a cycle track, which could help regulate how fast surges of motorists arrive at bottlenecks like old town walls. It will also mean people don't have to walk right next to jostling motorists.
On major roads in rural areas, the carriageway often only uses part of the width of the highway, so at worst it'll mean building a cycle track alongside and at best it just needs a barrier erecting (where a three-lane carriageway has been reduced to two because the authorities don't like central "chicken lanes" any more). Both of those would also benefit walkers, mobility scooter users and so on, who are currently supposed to walk along single carriageways such as the A47 between East Winch and King's Lynn... but at the moment, Highways England says we can't have a track there because not enough people ride/walk along the minimum-width 60mph bendy hilly carriageway to justify it
Red Light Jumper, a good second after red there... you're never completely safe from people who break the law that blatently. Heck, a car ended up in a shop window of Bristol's Cabot Circus a few years back after doing an estimated 100mph on a 30mph road and getting airborne crossing a kerb, so does that mean the shop design is unsafe?
