Hazardous lumps!

Honest John Back Room » Motoring discussion
View Threaded
Wed 4 Dec 2002 13:10
Hazardous lumps! - Homme van Blanc
Does anyone remember the campaign to have old concrete lamp posts moved from roadsides because they were considered dangerous to motorists?

Now "traffic engineers" are allowed to dump unlit concrete lumps, sticky out bits of pavement, rising bollards and any manner of detritus into the roadway as long as they call it "traffic calming" or "accident remedial measures"!

Most of these things are dangerous, especially at night.

Where's RoSPA these days?

Homme van Blanc.
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 4 Dec 2002 13:35
Hazardous lumps! - BrianW
The amount of what is termed "street furniture" is a major factor in the difference in death/serious injury rates between motorways and urban roads.
A minor accident in town is likely to have serious consequences as any vehicle involved comes to an instant stop as it slams into a lamp post, traffic sign, bollard, island, no parking sign, bus lane sign, parking meter, etc. etc..
This junk could be halved or more by combining two functions on on post. Why not put parking signs etc. on lamp posts?
And why not put lamp posts at the back of the pavement instead of on the kerb edge where they are the first thing to be hit?
Reply | Report as offensive | Link
Wed 4 Dec 2002 14:01
Hazardous lumps! - Sparrow
I couldn't agree more. Near Basingstoke on the A340 there is an unlit new concrete lump, with two bollards. Its been hit so many times in the few months its been there. Now there is a huge red "new traffic islands" sign (also unlit) as you apporach it. If councils must put these things in then please, please light them at night!
I reckon thats where most of the "roads expenditure" is going at the espense of proper roas maintenance. Also near here there is new single lane section of calming. As soon as you turn back to the proper side of the road again you can only just about avoid a deep pothole that almost seems to have been left deliberately . . . .

Negligence???
Reply | Report as offensive | Link