Raised Rib Markings. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 2/95 March Introduction

Similar documents
Entry Treatments. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 2/94 August Introduction. Design. Vertical Deflections. Locations

Chicane Schemes. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 12/97 December Introduction

Cyclists at road narrowings

Road humps: discomfort, noise, and groundborne

Traffic Calming Regulations

Cycle Routes. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 3/95 March Introduction. Implementation. Project aims. Design

Traffic calming regulations (Scotland)

Bus priority in SCOOT

Improved cycle parking at South West Trains' stations in Hampshire

TRAFFIC ADVISORY LEAFLET

Traffic Management and Emissions

TRAFFIC ADVISORY LEAFLET

PART 5 TD 51/17 SUMMARY

PART 5 TD 51/03 SEGREGATED LEFT TURN LANES AND SUBSIDIARY DEFLECTION ISLANDS AT ROUNDABOUTS SUMMARY

You can download the latest version of this Traffic Signs Manual chapter and all other Traffic Signs Manual chapters from:

Monitoring Local Cycle Use

INTERIM ADVICE NOTE 188/16

Know Your TRAFFIC SIGNS. Official Edition. London: TSO

Bikerail - combined journeys by cycle and rail

CHECKLIST 2: PRELIMINARY DESIGN STAGE AUDIT

Appendix A Type of Traffic Calming Measures Engineering Solutions

INTERIM ADVICE NOTE 93/07 DRIVER LOCATION SIGNS INTERIM PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATION

CONTROL AND COMMUNICATIONS PROVISION PART 1 TD 46/05 MOTORWAY SIGNALLING SUMMARY

SECTION 12 ROAD MARKINGS AND DELINEATION

Cycling to work. Traffic Advisory Leaflet 11/97 November Introduction. Government perspective. Workforce

Cycle parking - examples of good practice

TRAFFIC ADVISORY LEAFLET

SECTION 12 ROAD MARKINGS AND DELINEATION

AT403.1 Ancient monument Note 3 amended P500 Basic triangle New size 1800mm added

Design and Installation of Low Level Cycle Signals

1 This technical note considers the issues associated with the use of tidal flow bus lanes on key public transport corridors in Cambridge.

INTERIM ADVICE NOTE 150/12. Guidance for Alternative Temporary Traffic Management Techniques for Relaxation Schemes on Dual Carriageways.

West Midlands Cycle Design Guidance Cycling and the Midland Metro

CHAPTER 1 STANDARD PRACTICES

(HIGHWAY GEOMETRIC DESIGN -1)

Frascati Road and Temple Hill Route Improvements. Outline Design Report to Accompany Public consultation

Road Safety Factsheet

Issues at T junctions:

SLOUGH Stage 3 Road Safety Audit of A4 London Road, M4 J5 to Sutton Lane

Land Transport Rule: Traffic Control Devices 2004

15/06/2015. The new TSRGD: Signals and cycling. Sally Gibbons Senior Engineer Traffic Division 18 May The story so far

CHECKLIST 6: EXISTING ROADS: ROAD SAFETY AUDIT

Reducing Sign Clutter

11 CHECKLISTS Master Checklists All Stages CHECKLIST 1 FEASIBILITY STAGE AUDIT

INTERSECTIONS AT GRADE INTERSECTIONS

LIGHTING CONTROL EQUIPMENT PART 1 TA 12/07 TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON HIGH SPEED ROADS SUMMARY

The Location and Layout of Lay-bys and Location Markers

Streets for All : 9 Use of white lines

Marcus Jones, TRL. Presented by Name Here Job Title - Date

Proposed: Temporary Traffic Management Design Guidance

R O A D S A F E T Y E D U C A T I O N

RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSING CHECKLIST Road Safety Review of Railway Crossings

GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF ROUNDABOUTS AND TRAFFIC S IGNAL SIGNAL CONTROLLED

Process for managing parking on verges, footways and footpaths

CHECKLIST 5: ROADWORK TRAFFIC SCHEME AUDIT

Footpath design. A guide to creating footpaths that are safe, comfortable, and easy to use

Vehicle Security Barriers within the Streetscape Traffic Advisory Leaflet 1/11. Vehicle Security Barriers within the Streetscape

Road Safety Audit training course. Motorways - safety issues of the motorway design

CIRCULAR NO. O-13. Recommended Practices for Manual Protection of Highway/Railway Grade Crossings

Pedestrians safety. ROAD SAFETY SEMINAR PIARC/AGEPAR/GRSP Lome, Togo October 2006 Lise Fournier, Canada-Qu

DRAFT INTERIM ADVICE NOTE 150/17

CHECKLIST 4: PRE-OPENING STAGE AUDIT

SECTION TRAFFIC REGULATIONS

Introduction Methodology Study area and data collection Results and recommendation Conclusion References

Traffic Sensitive Streets. Guidance Notes. GeoPlace Streets Team. Traffic Sensitive Streets. Guidance Note Page 1 of 7.

CHAPTER 5: GENERAL SITE AND BUILDING ELEMENTS

Beany Block Combined Kerb and Drainage System

Cycling Design Guide October 2006

Aiming for Zero Road Worker Safety. Mark Pooley Highways Agency Road Worker Safety Programme Manager Monday 11 June 2012

Safe Working On Roads Standard Operating Procedures

London Cycling Design Standards. Chapter 4 Links Cycle lanes, cycle tracks and other cycle facilities

Land Transport Rule Traffic Control Devices 2004

INTERIM ADVICE NOTE 150/11. Temporary Traffic Management Signing: Simplification of lane change zone signing for relaxation schemes.

Traffic Design Requirements for Road Murals

CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION

1 VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Ver VicRoads Access Management Policies May 2006 Version 1.02

CAR PARKING [15] General provision

Local Highway Panels Members Guide. 5 Crossing Facilities

M9/A90/M90 Edinburgh to Fraserburgh Trunk Road. A90 Tealing. Moving Cursor Programme Junction Study

Traffic Signs and Signals

Road Markings. Lecture Notes in Transportation Systems Engineering. Prof. Tom V. Mathew. 1 Overview 1. 2 Classification 2

Road Safety Audits of Traffic Signal Schemes

A24 HOP OAST ROUNDABOUT

TGSI Tactile Ground Surface Indicators

TRAFFIC CONTROLS FOR BICYCLE FACILITIES

Part B Design Guidance / Principles _

Access Management Standards

TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL GUIDELINES FOR HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS

Speed Limit Policy Isle of Wight Council

Road to the future What road users want from Highways England s Route Strategies Summary report November 2016

Rhebogue Neighbourhood Greenway. Road Safety Audit Stage 2

HORN PROHIBITED NO PARKING NO STOPPING STRAIGHT PROHIBITED NO ENTRY

Chapter 4 Route Window C3 Hyde Park and Park Lane shafts. Transport for London

Vehicle Security Barriers within the Streetscape

Road Condition Statistics: Notes and definitions

DMURS - Practical Implications

KERBWAY CONTENTS. Note: AutoCAD.dwg files, K1 to F1, may be downloaded from maxq.com.au.

Section 9A.07 Meaning of Standard, Guidance, Option, and Support

ADVICE ON Road crossings for horses

Guide to Road Design Part 3: Geometric Design Session I 18 October 2016

Transcription:

Traffic Advisory Leaflet 2/95 March 1995 Raised Rib Markings Introduction Raised rib markings consist of a continuous line marking with ribs across the line at regular intervals. They were first specially authorised for use on motorways as an edge line marking to separate the edge of the hard shoulder from the main carriageway. Special authorisation was then necessary as they were not prescribed in the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1981. The objective of the marking is to achieve improved visual delineation of the carriageway edge in wet conditions at night. It also provides an audible/vibratory warning to vehicle drivers, should they stray from the carriageway, and run onto the marking. The possible benefit of using this marking on all purpose roads was also recognised, and a number of special authorisations were given in the early 1990s for their use on these roads. Once the markings started to appear, concern was raised by cycling organisations over the potential for danger or discomfort to cyclists when crossing them. As a result, Allott and Lomax, Consulting Engineers, were commissioned by the Driver Information and Traffic Management Division of the Department of Transport, to investigate and make recommendations on the effects that the use of raised rib markings might have on vulnerable road users. The result of the research has been to suggest that different dimensions should be used for raised rib markings on all purpose roads, from those used on motorways. These recommendations have been incorporated into the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 (TSRGD). The purpose of this Traffic Advisory Leaflet is to give advice, based on recommendations from the study. It covers the use of raised rib markings on all purpose roads with special reference to the needs of pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists.

Research Studies These included the following: An assessment of the degree of hazard to pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists; in wet, dry, dark and light conditions, and at different approach angles, for various heights of raised rib markings. A review of the safety implications of raised rib markings already in use. Recommendations on the use of raised rib markings on all-purpose roads as edgeline markings, with or without a hard strip. Consideration of the use of raised rib markings in locations other than edgeline markings on all purpose roads. Assessment of the drainage implications of raised rib markings. Assessment of the retroreflectivity of raised rib markings. Various Highway Authorities, including the Regional Offices of the Department of Transport (now the Highways Agency), and the Cyclist Touring Club (CTC) were consulted. Existing sites with raised rib markings were studied. The main part of the investigation concerned off road trials in which pedestrians, including those with a mobility handicap, cyclists, and motorcyclists, took part. Tests were also made with cars and goods vehicles.

Results of trial The studies revealed that existing raised rib markings had not contributed to any accidents. However, the off road trials suggested that problems of handling and comfort could arise for cyclists where the maximum height of the rib then permitted (13mm), and the minimum spacing (250mm) was used. The studies found that motorcyclists had handling problems when travelling along lines with ribs at their maximum height. The full height rib lines were uncomfortable for pedestrians, and created some degree of hazard for them. Use of the continuous line can interfere with efficient drainage of the carriageway, particularly in flat areas, if suitable drainage gaps are not provided. In terms of retroreflectivity it was found that the smaller spacing between the upstand of the ribs did increase this, though this did not appear to be affected by the height of the ribs. However, in storm conditions higher upstand would logically be preferable because of the increased chance of the marking being visible above any ponding that might occur. Use of raised rib markings at junctions

Application As a general edgeline marking: Where there is a hard strip of 1m or more, whether or not there is a kerb upstand. As a means of delineating the edge of carriageway adjacent to a hazard such as an embankment or sharp bend: Where any hard strip is less than 1m wide, providing there is no kerb upstand. Should NOT be used: Where there is no hard strip, but there is kerb upstand. Dimensions These should be in accordance with Diagram 1012.3 of TSRGD. The height of the rib should be 6mm and the space between the ribs 500mm. Prescribed use Raised rib markings are only prescribed for use as edgeline markings. Any other use would require special authorisation. Based on present evidence it is unlikely that special authorisation would be given for the use of raised rib markings as a centre line marking. Crossing points Raised rib markings should be discontinued at defined pedestrian and cyclist crossings, and replaced by a non raised rib continuous marking. It would normally be appropriate for the discontinuation to be commenced a minimum of 1m before the crossing and finish a minimum of 1m after the crossing. Raised rib markings should be replaced with normal continuous markings in the vicinity of other locations where cyclists are likely to cross the lines when riding generally parallel to them. Such locations would be the termination of hard strips, and in the vicinity of side road junctions. In these cases the raised rib marking should be replaced by the continuous marking at least 20m in advance of the end of any hardstrip/side road junction. For merging and diverging lanes the raised rib marking should be replaced 10m in advance of the merge or diverge lane. Where gullies or similar features occur in the hardstrip, cyclists may need to cross the adjacent edge line marking to avoid them. Any raised rib marking adjacent to such features should be replaced by a normal continuous marking for a distance of 10m on both sides of the gully. Motor cyclists The trials indicated that motorcyclists could encounter handling problems if the raised rib marking was laid on curves of radii less than 1000m, and motorcyclists were likely to cross them. It is unlikely that difficulties will occur where raised rib markings are provided in conjunction with hard strips of

1m or less. For hard strips of 1.5m or more, raised rib markings should be replaced by continuous markings if there is any concern that motorcyclists might frequently cross into the hard strip. Drainage Drainage gaps should be provided, particularly where the longitudinal fall is less than 1:150, and there is a crossfall towards the raised rib continuous line. The gap should be 100mm to 150mm wide at 36m intervals. Maintenance Where raised rib markings are renewed, care should be taken that the rib height is not increased above the 6mm height prescribed. Experience suggests that the only satisfactory way of renewing is to remove the original line completely before relaying. It may also be necessary for drainage purposes to remove any existing line in the vicinity of a crossfall change area where the longitudinal fall is less than 1:150, if the final thickness of the base line is likely to exceed 3mm to 4mm. It may be advisable not to use raised rib markings in the vicinity of bus stops and lay-bys, as the frequent passage of vehicles across it can wear the rib away. Enquiries Department for Transport Traffic Management Division 2/06 Great Minster House 76 Marsham Street LONDON SW1P 4DR Tel: 020 79442974 References Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 1994 (SI 1994 No. 1519) Department of Transport, Traffic Signs Manual, Chapter 5, Road Markings 1985. Traffic Advisory Leaflets (TAL) are available to download free of charge on the Department for Transport website www.dft.gov.uk Sign up for a free e-mail alert to receive notification when a new TAL is published by sending an e-mail to tal@dft.gsi.gov.uk with the subject line "subscribe". To obtain a printed copy of this and/or other TAL's, contact: DfT Publications, PO Box 236, Wetherby, West Yorkshire, LS23 7NB. Telephone 0870 122 6236. Fax 0870 122 6237. E-mail: dft@twoten.press.net The Department for Transport sponsors a wide range of research into traffic management issues. The results published in TALs are applicable to England, Wales and Scotland. Attention is drawn to variations in statutory provisions or administrative practices between the countries. Within England, enquiries should be made to: Traffic Management Division, Department for Transport, 2/07 Great Minster House, 76 Marsham Street, London, SW1P 4DR. Telephone 020 7944 2478. E-mail: tal@dft.gsi.gov.uk