An increasing trend among road planners in the UK is the use of fencing, hedges or banks deliberately to reduce visibility at certain junctions, especially roundabouts (traffic circles), presumably with the intention of forcing drivers approaching a roundabout to slow almost to a standstill every time, even if the roundabout is empty. This SABRE thread has some interesting examples and discussion of individual cases (including the Countess Roundabout on the A303 – above image from Google Earth*).
I can understand the safety reasoning – and this genuinely is an architecture of control with intended social benefit – but in many places where it’s applied, I believe it to be flawed. One of the main features of roundabouts as originally introduced was that they allowed non-discriminatory free flow to any traffic which was unopposed, i.e. if nothing’s coming from the right (UK) you can proceed without actually having to halt: all roads meeting at a roundabout have to give way to whoever’s already on the roundabout. It’s the ultimate in both deference and empowerment.
By removing drivers’ ability to respond by assessing what’s happening up ahead, you reduce the amount of information available, which apart from sheer frustration, must in many cases have deleterious safety implications.
For example, I drive a low car with a relatively long bonnet. If there’s anything in a lane to my right when waiting at a roundabout, I already either have to wait until that has gone, or nose out gradually, just in order to see what’s coming and whether or not I can proceed. It’s awkward and I don’t like it. Adding high fences to the central reservation forces that situation on every driver.
As ‘PeterA5145′ notes in the SABRE discussion:
“…improving sightlines generally tends to reduce collisions at junctions. You wouldn’t deliberately engineer a road with lots of blind turnings just to make people take more care, would you?
It is nonsense to assert that slower automatically means safer.”
*This image is probably from before the fencing was put up – if anyone has a more recent one showing the fences, please let me know!
I notice this at roundabouts here in Austin, Texas, that were added to my neighborhood in recent years. They are planted with various lovely bushed that impede viewing of oncoming traffic, and rather annoyed me. Your post makes me understand the rationale.
I did notice that at least one of these has had its plants razed to a height of about one foot. Whether the city did this (perhaps under the influence of the local neighborhood association?) or an annoyed vigilante with a lawnmower is anyone’s guess. I’m just glad they did it, and I hope to see more of the same.
[...] Note how this is a somewhat different practice to deliberately reducing visibility at junctions: using a bend to slow down a rider before an obstacle does not impede riders who are already travelling at a lower speed, while it makes the higher-speed riders slow down and hence keeps them safe, whereas wilfully removing sightlines at roundabouts would seem in many cases to work to the detriment of drivers who like to assess the road ahead well before the junction, and force all to stop instead. Please share this!These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
[...] Why are these techniques so much better than this kind of thing? [...]
[...] So the blue lighting ‘works’, but is it really a good idea to increase the risk that an injection will be done wrongly – maybe multiple times? This is perhaps a similar argument to that surrounding delibrately reducing visibility at junctions: the architecture of control makes it more dangerous for the few users (and those their actions affect) who ignore or bypass the control. This seems to be an architecture of control with the potential to endanger life, although the actual stated intention behind it probably includes ’saving lives’. [...]
[...] Many of the ‘built environment’ examples discussed here over the last year-and-a-bit have been intended to control (or “manage”) traffic in some way, e.g to slow drivers down, force them to take an alternative route, or force them to stop. I thought it would be worth mentioning a couple of other methods, the rationales behind them, and some of the problems: [...]
[...] be done wrongly – maybe multiple times? This is perhaps a similar argument to that surrounding delibrately reducing visibility at junctions: the architecture of control makes it more dangerous for the few users (and those [...]
Can anyone help.?
Near where I live there is dangerous country T -junction (already caused a serious accident)
One of the problems is that the landowner has put up a greene fence which causes im paired visibilty.
The county council have tried to take it down but say the landowner is insisting it stays.
Surely safety must rule in these situations.
THis fence has to be in violation of some kind of planning ?
THis is an urgent appeal for any advice.
Thanks