PCN Notice Greenford / otter road yellow box

wealdroam

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

wealdroam wrote: »

Oh I see.
You are saying that this is a dual carriageway road where the bus lane is one carriageway and the other two lanes of traffic, travelling in opposite directions, are on the other carriageway.

So in your opinion the solid white line is the 'central reservation' - amazing.

And for clarity - I am referring to the video in the original post. Isn't that what we all should be discussing?

Not just what I am saying at all.

It is what the Highway Code states... (rest of sentence removed due to being inappropriate).

Well if the solid white line doesn't form the boundary between the carriageways, then what does?

In my opinion, this is a single carriageway road, and the carriageway is divided by direction by a broken white line with two lanes in one direction - where one is a bus lane - and one lane in the other direction.

It is quite clear to me, and you seem to agree, that there is no central reservation, therefore on no way can this be considered a dual carriageway.

Again for clarity - I am referring to the video on the original post.

Edwood_Woodwood

wealdroam wrote: »

Well if the solid white line doesn't form the boundary between the carriageways, then what does?

In my opinion, this is a single carriageway road, and the carriageway is divided by direction by a broken white line with two lanes in one direction - where one is a bus lane - and one lane in the other direction.

It is quite clear to me, and you seem to agree, that there is no central reservation, therefore on no way can this be considered a dual carriageway.

Again for clarity - I am referring to the video on the original post.

Look, why don't you just read THC?

A central reservation is not the only thing that defines a dual carriageway, road markings and signage do too.

If a road is considered a dual carriageway then that is what it is.

There hasn't always been bus lanes, cycle lanes and many other things like cycle boxes at traffic lights.

You appear to be of the single opinion that a dual carriageway has to have the classic appearance of a dual carriageway.

Let me tell you, a dual carriageway near me had the central railings removed and replaced with a solid white line instead.

Guess what? Still a dual carriageway.

A bus lane, with solid white lines, as in the footage, separates the carriageway.

That is all there is to it, like it or lump it.

AdrianC

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Look, why don't you just read THC?

A central reservation is not the only thing that defines a dual carriageway

Yes, it is. That is PRECISELY what defines a road with two carriageways.
As the Highway Code puts it...

A dual carriageway is a road which has a central reservation to separate the carriageways.

Edwood_Woodwood

AdrianC wrote: »

Yes, it is. That is PRECISELY what defines a road with two carriageways.
As the Highway Code puts it...

Oh Gawd.

Please, why don't you read the rest of the HC under the heading "Dual Carriageway?"

This includes bus lanes and cycle lanes with thick white lines!!!

"Central Reservation" is not literal.

What about a dual carriageway with no railings where there is one lane in one direction yet two lanes coming the opposite way?

That isn't central, it's one third seperated by two thirds!!!

Just like the bus lane in the video.

I can't take no more.

almillar

Wow. Edwood Woodwood - a dual carraigeway has a central reservation. Something physical, in between two roads, or 'carriageways' as they're also know. If there's a solid white line, it's not a dual carriageway. Yes, honestly! It doesn't matter if it's 4 lanes across - if there's only paint, it's not a dual carriageway.
I'll not comment on any of the rest of the thread, or even the OP, I'm not trolling, I have no interest in who is right and I'm not a member of any gang of bullies, but you're factually wrong and have misinterpreted what the Highway Code says.

AdrianC

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Please, why don't you read the rest of the HC under the heading "Dual Carriageway?"

Because the rest is rules in how to deal with them - and with other multi-lane roads, whether single or dual.

That, alone and complete, is the definition of a DC.

I tell you what, why don't you drive at 70mph down what you think is an NSL dual carriageway, and explain your theories to the nice policeman who points out the limit is 60?

Edwood_Woodwood

almillar wrote: »

Wow. Edwood Woodwood - a dual carraigeway has a central reservation. Something physical, in between two roads, or 'carriageways' as they're also know. If there's a solid white line, it's not a dual carriageway. Yes, honestly! It doesn't matter if it's 4 lanes across - if there's only paint, it's not a dual carriageway.
.

In the absence of something physical, like railings, a solid white line with no u-turn signs along its length is a dual carriageway.

Section of the A48 from Bridgend to the M4 is a dual carriageway.

Solid white lines and signage, no physical barriers whatsoever.

Oh, and national speed limit signs and another sign saying "Dual Carriageway Ahead>"

Probably thousands all over the country.

wealdroam

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Look, why don't you just read THC?

I did, and I quoted from it earlier:

wealdroam wrote: »

From The Highway Code:

Dual carriageways

A dual carriageway is a road which has a central reservation to separate the carriageways.

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

A central reservation is not the only thing that defines a dual carriageway, road markings and signage do too.

From The Highway Code:

Dual carriageways

A dual carriageway is a road which has a central reservation to separate the carriageways - as defined in The Highway Code.

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

If a road is considered a dual carriageway then that is what it is.

Are you really saying that if someone considers a road a dual carriageway then it is a dual carriageway?
Not too sure that I follow your logic there.

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

There hasn't always been bus lanes, cycle lanes and many other things like cycle boxes at traffic lights.

Yes, I agree. What is the point you are trying to make here?

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

You appear to be of the single opinion that a dual carriageway has to have the classic appearance of a dual carriageway.

I am of the opinion that a dual carriageway has a central reservation.

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Let me tell you, a dual carriageway near me had the central railings removed and replaced with a solid white line instead.

Guess what? Still a dual carriageway.

You may be of the opinion that it is still a dual carriageway, but your definition of a dual carriageway seems to differ from that in The Highway Code.
Can you say where? Streetview perhaps? I suspect it is now a four lane single carriageway road, but of course without knowing exactly where you are talking about, I cannot be sure.

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

A bus lane, with solid white lines, as in the footage, separates the carriageway.

The solid white line to the right of the bus lane simply defines the boundary between the bus lane and the rest of the carriageway.

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

That is all there is to it, like it or lump it.

I am not sure you are right there either.

dannyrst

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

In the absence of something physical, like railings, a solid white line with no u-turn signs along its length is a dual carriageway.

Section of the A48 from Bridgend to the M4 is a dual carriageway.

Solid white lines and signage, no physical barriers whatsoever.

Oh, and national speed limit signs and another sign saying "Dual Carriageway Ahead>"

Probably thousands all over the country.

Please keep posting. You're making my day. :rotfl:

AdrianC

Edwood_Woodwood wrote: »

Section of the A48 from Bridgend to the M4 is a dual carriageway.

Solid white lines and signage, no physical barriers whatsoever.

Oh, and national speed limit signs and another sign saying "Dual Carriageway Ahead>"

So a streetview link will be easy for you to provide?