Discussion
Recent changes to a junction local to me have resulted in a double 'roundel' configuration which is all well and good, but there is no mention of the word roundel as terminology specifically for a roundabout in the Highway Code. Why not call them mini-roundabouts to minimise confusion? Would these so called 'roundels' also be treated the same way (strictly speaking legally) as a roundabout in the event of a collision leading to insurance claims etc?
http://westleedsdispatch.com/cycle-superhighway-ci...
http://westleedsdispatch.com/cycle-superhighway-ci...
I live in Farsley (for my sins) 
so I come through this junction fairly frequently.
I took a look at the Poynton scheme and noted the following observations in contrast to the system in Stanningley.
- The surfaces are covered with block paving, which to me would give a stronger indication to drivers of it being a "shared area" where you would be more likely to come into contact with pedestrians and other vulnerable road users.
- The roundels themselves are much more clearly defined in the Poynton scheme. I also neglected to mention that the actual roundels in Stanningley are not the same colour as the mockup images for the Stanningley plan.
- The junction at Poynton appears to be spread over a larger area which allows for increased visibility on all approaches.
- All the approach roads to the junction seem to be specifically engineered to give the appearance of being narrow to encourage drivers to slow down.
In terms of visibility for example, you can see from the below link in Stanningley that traffic approaching from the right would have limited visibility:
https://goo.gl/maps/dAmXcFCnsFo
vs Poynton:
https://goo.gl/maps/j3N1AbgyddC2
So while I agree that the scheme is good for the community in general, I think there is still work to do to bring it up to a similar standard as Poynton.
so I come through this junction fairly frequently.I took a look at the Poynton scheme and noted the following observations in contrast to the system in Stanningley.
- The surfaces are covered with block paving, which to me would give a stronger indication to drivers of it being a "shared area" where you would be more likely to come into contact with pedestrians and other vulnerable road users.
- The roundels themselves are much more clearly defined in the Poynton scheme. I also neglected to mention that the actual roundels in Stanningley are not the same colour as the mockup images for the Stanningley plan.
- The junction at Poynton appears to be spread over a larger area which allows for increased visibility on all approaches.
- All the approach roads to the junction seem to be specifically engineered to give the appearance of being narrow to encourage drivers to slow down.
In terms of visibility for example, you can see from the below link in Stanningley that traffic approaching from the right would have limited visibility:
https://goo.gl/maps/dAmXcFCnsFo
vs Poynton:
https://goo.gl/maps/j3N1AbgyddC2
So while I agree that the scheme is good for the community in general, I think there is still work to do to bring it up to a similar standard as Poynton.
All that jazz said:
Any pics of the new road layout there then? I could drive up as it's only 15 mins away but I can't be arsed 
.
We just came through tonight and got a quick shot albeit slightly too late to show the visibility issue. The roundel is definitely clearer than I remember as well, I'm not sure if the wet surfaces are making a difference or I just plain remembered it wrong. Still, you can see the lack of block paving in comparison to Poynton..
Looks like I'm not the only one with reservations, its been featured on BBC Look North this evening 
- https://youtu.be/Y-wOWkjWszw
- https://youtu.be/Y-wOWkjWszwGassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff