Killiney Towers Roundabout is being made narrower!

monument

Irish and Proud wrote: »

..of course you retain traffic signals for people with mobility issues, and of course I didn't suggest breaking the law, but changing it like I've said.

Come on guys, read the damn posts will you...

Let's get this straight: you want to change the law so people can break red lights?

You want to make jaywalking at junctions and crossings legal?

Irish and Proud

monument wrote: »

Let's get this straight: you want to change the law so people can break red lights?

You want to make jaywalking at junctions and crossings legal?

Yes, pedestrians should be allowed jaywalk and should be allowed break lights - of course, motorists, cyclists and buses etc would have the right of way, but as a pedestrian, I prefer it that way with the lights as a last resort...

monument

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Yes, pedestrians should be allowed jaywalk and should be allowed break lights - of course, motorists, cyclists and buses etc would have the right of way, but as a pedestrian, I prefer it that way with the lights as a last resort...

That idea has to be the most anti-motorist and most anti-pedestrian safety suggestion I've seen in a while.

Anybody transcribing that into law would be reckless -- it would result in even more pedestrians jumping out on front of cars and bikes and you'd also slow slip roads down so much in such a messed up way that you'd be better off removing them.

It's a reckless idea. Much better, and much safer to redesign junctions.

patrickbrophy18

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

The roundabout is the borg and it will assimilate Dalkey....

Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by "borg" and "assimilate"?

Anyway, the work that is and has been carried out on Killiney Towers Roundabout is one of many measures in the burrough which, in my opinion is regressive. Contrary to what many people here and on similar threads may believe, I am neither anti-cycling nor anti-pedestrian as the latter is my primary mode of transport and both are very healthy. I also admire the encouragement of cycling in general from the government. Having said that, many of the methods used to that effect (in this country anyway) are nonsensical. The alterations made to Killiney Towers Roundabout would be in this list. The redesign of Killiney Towers Roundabout(KTR) is one of many that is guided by The National Cycle Manual.

The National Cycle Manual (NCM) is clearly a prototype for the recently released document called the "Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets (DMURS)". I had a read through it. Basically, the journeys made by motorised traffic (buses, trucks and cars) on many urban roads bar motorways or dual carriageways will be made significantly slower. I don't disagree with everything in the DMURS as many cul de sacs and side roads would indeed benefit from some of the measures therein. I even agree with the pedestrianization of main streets provided that there are decent distributor roads nearby. Moreover, many urban areas have side roads which are barely suitable for one-way traffic. Many (not all) of these could be rejigged to carry cyclists, provide cycle spaces or both. The side road/lane-way beside McDonalds in Dun Laoghaire comes to mind.

Nevertheless, roads directly linking urban centers, villages and towns should not be revised in a way that places hindrance on buses, trucks and cars. Barnhill Road is one of the main roads linking Dalkey with places like Glenageary/Killiney Shopping Centers, IADT, Cherrywood, Cornelscourt and Sandyford among others. Killiney Towers is one of the major junctions passed when doing the many trip variations mentioned and distributes traffic accordingly. As such, it is inappropriate for traffic calming. Barnhill Road between Topaz and Centra is already tight enough as it is without significantly downgrading the roundabout in question. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the move is/was USSR dictatorship-esque.

I do think junction tightening, slip/filter lane removal and any other form of road narrowing in suburbia is daft. For example, the work carried out on the junction between Castlepark Road and St. Catherine's Road about two years ago has resulted in buses crossing the center-line of the road to avoid mounting the kerb. This presents it's own dangers as a large part of the bus is temporarily in the path of on coming traffic. Conversely, the other end of St. Catherine's Road where it meets Station Road and Albert Road is equipped with a slip lane. At least this allows medium to long vehicles to turn on to Albert Road with ease while providing a median for pedestrians. Then again, the DMURS is disproving of this type of road design on the grounds that it's a two (or more) stage crossing process.

From the outset, the aim of the DMURS appears to be a deliberate move to inconvenience the car. Moreover, is seams to be giving prioritization to inherently slower modes of transport which effectively rounds down the pace of traffic from one suburb to the next.

josip

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by "borg" and "assimilate"?

Excellent deadpan or are you a real live non-Trekkie?

"Boldly going forward, coz we can't find reverse"

Amalgam

Has this got a mention yet..?

Apologies, I did look.

The Dun Laoghaire Gazette revisits the Killiney Towers roundabout.

---

Anger at €155k cost to fix road
DUN LAOGHAIRE: Killiney Towers works will cost taxpayer €472,000


Bairbre Ni Bhraonain
dunlaoghaire@gazettegroup.com
April 25, 2013

http://www.gazettegroup.com/news/news-dunlaoghaire/anger-at-e155k-cost-to-fix-road/

---

The paper issue is dated the same as the web article. It can be found at various commercial outlets in the publication area, Tesco, etc..

Larbre34

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, what do you mean by "borg" and "assimilate"?

Anyway, the work that is and has been carried out on Killiney Towers Roundabout is one of many measures in the burrough which, in my opinion is regressive. Contrary to what many people here and on similar threads may believe, I am neither anti-cycling nor anti-pedestrian as the latter is my primary mode of transport and both are very healthy. I also admire the encouragement of cycling in general from the government. Having said that, many of the methods used to that effect (in this country anyway) are nonsensical. The alterations made to Killiney Towers Roundabout would be in this list. The redesign of Killiney Towers Roundabout(KTR) is one of many that is guided by The National Cycle Manual.

The National Cycle Manual (NCM) is clearly a prototype for the recently released document called the "Design Manual for Urban Roads and Streets (DMURS)". I had a read through it. Basically, the journeys made by motorised traffic (buses, trucks and cars) on many urban roads bar motorways or dual carriageways will be made significantly slower. I don't disagree with everything in the DMURS as many cul de sacs and side roads would indeed benefit from some of the measures therein. I even agree with the pedestrianization of main streets provided that there are decent distributor roads nearby. Moreover, many urban areas have side roads which are barely suitable for one-way traffic. Many (not all) of these could be rejigged to carry cyclists, provide cycle spaces or both. The side road/lane-way beside McDonalds in Dun Laoghaire comes to mind.

Nevertheless, roads directly linking urban centers, villages and towns should not be revised in a way that places hindrance on buses, trucks and cars. Barnhill Road is one of the main roads linking Dalkey with places like Glenageary/Killiney Shopping Centers, IADT, Cherrywood, Cornelscourt and Sandyford among others. Killiney Towers is one of the major junctions passed when doing the many trip variations mentioned and distributes traffic accordingly. As such, it is inappropriate for traffic calming. Barnhill Road between Topaz and Centra is already tight enough as it is without significantly downgrading the roundabout in question. I wouldn't go so far as to say that the move is/was USSR dictatorship-esque.

I do think junction tightening, slip/filter lane removal and any other form of road narrowing in suburbia is daft. For example, the work carried out on the junction between Castlepark Road and St. Catherine's Road about two years ago has resulted in buses crossing the center-line of the road to avoid mounting the kerb. This presents it's own dangers as a large part of the bus is temporarily in the path of on coming traffic. Conversely, the other end of St. Catherine's Road where it meets Station Road and Albert Road is equipped with a slip lane. At least this allows medium to long vehicles to turn on to Albert Road with ease while providing a median for pedestrians. Then again, the DMURS is disproving of this type of road design on the grounds that it's a two (or more) stage crossing process.

From the outset, the aim of the DMURS appears to be a deliberate move to inconvenience the car. Moreover, is seams to be giving prioritization to inherently slower modes of transport which effectively rounds down the pace of traffic from one suburb to the next.

Yes and yes. The policy makers who published the manual wouldn't disagree with a word you say.

Not sure how many ways to phrase it, but the era of effortless intra-urban private car travel is ending fast.........

Bits_n_Bobs

Amalgam wrote: »

Anger at €155k cost to fix road
DUN LAOGHAIRE: Killiney Towers works will cost taxpayer €472,000


Bairbre Ni Bhraonain
dunlaoghaire@gazettegroup.com
April 25, 2013

http://www.gazettegroup.com/news/news-dunlaoghaire/anger-at-e155k-cost-to-fix-road/
.

Ouch! Poor county manager gets a kicking from a few of the councilors in that. If I remember correctly he's on circa €145k....probably just about enough wedge to give him a bit of comfort as he cries himself to sleep over the criticisms....

josip

Bits_n_Bobs wrote: »

Ouch! Poor county manager gets a kicking from a few of the councilors in that. If I remember correctly he's on circa €145k....probably just about enough wedge to give him a bit of comfort as he cries himself to sleep over the criticisms....

He'll probably just sign up for another €10,000 Euro, 3 week course in Harvard to cheer himself up. Which is small change compared to the cost of messing up with a roundabout.

Bits_n_Bobs

josip wrote: »

He'll probably just sign up for another €10,000 Euro, 3 week course in Harvard to cheer himself up. Which is small change compared to the cost of messing up with a roundabout.

You're right! By my back of the envelope calculations we could hire an additional 3 county council managers for the cost of that roundabout...imagine what sort of a change that would make to the quality of the umm "stuff" that dun laoighre county council could do...

galwayjohn89

Roundabout seems to be an improvement on the last attempt far less cluttered with signs. Although still nowhere near as good or efficient as it was before the debacle. Although have they scrapped the cycle lane altogether now? Seems to just merge with the foot path now.

patrickbrophy18

Larbre34 wrote: »

Yes and yes. The policy makers who published the manual wouldn't disagree with a word you say.

Not sure how many ways to phrase it, but the era of effortless intra-urban private car travel is ending fast.........

The problem with the DMURS is that the measures that are proposed to inconvenience the "private car" will also impact buses and trucks too and will also hinder access for emergency vehicles such as ambulances, fire trucks and garda cars. Like it or not, there are people who do need a car to get from A to B. For example, if one lives in Dun Laoghaire and works in City West or the vicinity of Liffey Valley, the car is the only convenient option as the other options can take twice to three times as long. I know this from a similar experience. When I was working in Damastown, it would sometimes take me 2 and a half hours to travel one way. Typically, I would have spent an average of 4 hours traveling each day. On the other hand, the car took a maximum of 45 minutes. With this extra personal time comes a better work-life balance. Just as a matter of interest, how long would a journey like this take on a bike assuming one isn't going at athletic speed (feel free to enlighten me)?

Bottom line, I think all modes of transport need to be optimized to meet their true potential and not this nonsense of optimization of one mode at the expense of another. Buses still take an hour to travel 10 miles along most routes which is absolutely madness. While pointless detours through neighbourhoods and stops in quick succession are a large culprit, traffic calming will certainly exacerbate this. Yes, buses can drop people much closer to where the want to go but, in suburbia, they should behave more like a rapid transit system. To date, the only route which comes very close to this is the N11 which is why the 46A and 145 routes are so attractive. I do acknowledge that the adjacent pedestrian and cycle facilities still leave a lot to be desired. However, on a phased basis, that is easily rectifiable. Unfortunately, poorly guided and non-strategic housing developments has left little room (and money [hence, our recession]) for an equally decent road in other parts of South Dublin and Dun Laoghaire burrough. The work at Killiney Towers Roundabout only seeks to make this worse as well as the DMURS.

Many here may also argue that motorised vehicles are being discouraged by the likes of the DMURS due to the fact that most of them still emit greenhouse gases. However, given that new (and completely green) ways of propelling them are constantly emerging, this rather large motive will be a thing of the past. For example, a completely electric car powered by energy generated from wind-farms is devoid of any greenhouse gases. Anyway, there's a bit of food for thought!

enas

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

On the other hand, the car took a maximum of 45 minutes. With this extra personal time comes a better work-life balance. Just as a matter of interest, how long would a journey like this take on a bike assuming one isn't going at athletic speed (feel free to enlighten me)?

(Just quoting that part, but it is really an answer to all your post.) Briefly: the reason to backtrack on a car-centric approach to transport is simply because we physically can't accommodate ever increasing volumes of car traffic. Those cars won't fit in the available space, and increasing that space has proved in the last few decades to be a non-sustainable solution. So we have to favour other modes of transports. Cycling is not the solution to everything, but it is a pretty good one for a vast array of needs. Efficient public transports cover other type of needs, which might be more suited to the needs you're describing. And if all of that fails, you might still feel the car is the best option. Then you'll be happy that everyone who could use a bike instead of his car does so, leaving a less congested road network for you to drive when you have no choice but to drive.

Irish and Proud

enas wrote: »

(Just quoting that part, but it is really an answer to all your post.) Briefly: the reason to backtrack on a car-centric approach to transport is simply because we physically can't accommodate ever increasing volumes of car traffic. Those cars won't fit in the available space, and increasing that space has proved in the last few decades to be a non-sustainable solution. So we have to favour other modes of transports. Cycling is not the solution to everything, but it is a pretty good one for a vast array of needs. Efficient public transports cover other type of needs, which might be more suited to the needs you're describing. And if all of that fails, you might still feel the car is the best option. Then you'll be happy that everyone who could use a bike instead of his car does so, leaving a less congested road network for you to drive when you have no choice but to drive.

That sounds perfectly logical and I'm not against modal shift for certain types of journeys. However, it's the design in many DLR projects which represent a downgrade for all modes is some cases. The Burton Hall Road Extension is a case in point - just look at the proposed junction with the Leopardstown Dual Carriageway for example - a small junction with a tight left turn for motor traffic, rubbish facilities for cyclists and no slip or island for pedestrians (for if those stupid jaywalking laws are abolished) and a rather long crossing distance for people with mobility issues. Lately, I've wondered who really benefits from this latest transport policy - well architects seem to hate anything utilitarian and since they've been banging on about cars for quite some time, I wonder has too much priority been given to architecture at the expense of people getting about by whatever means - remember the opposition to the LUAS at College Green - glad that line is going ahead BTW - I never heard such a load of nonsense at the appearance of overhead wires. Oh, don't get me started about the anti-loop line brigade. You can see where this is going. When I used the term Soviet Style Communism (rather strong I must admit at this stage), I was referring to the general practice of restricting the free movement of people with some measures implemented without proper consultation (that's where my use of 'dictatorship' came in...).

Seaswimmer

enas wrote: »

(Just quoting that part, but it is really an answer to all your post.) Briefly: the reason to backtrack on a car-centric approach to transport is simply because we physically can't accommodate ever increasing volumes of car traffic. Those cars won't fit in the available space, and increasing that space has proved in the last few decades to be a non-sustainable solution. So we have to favour other modes of transports. Cycling is not the solution to everything, but it is a pretty good one for a vast array of needs. Efficient public transports cover other type of needs, which might be more suited to the needs you're describing. And if all of that fails, you might still feel the car is the best option. Then you'll be happy that everyone who could use a bike instead of his car does so, leaving a less congested road network for you to drive when you have no choice but to drive.

Good point Enas.

Patrick.

Your trip from Dalkey to Damanstown is unsuitable for all but the keenest and fittest cyclists at roughly 17 miles. I dont think anyone has a problem with someone driving that commute. However I cycle the Rock Road every morning and nobody could tell me that ALL those single occupancy motorists dont have another choice. It takes me about 30 minutes to cycle into City Centre from near you, probably the same for someone on the Dart and a bit longer for someone on the 4/7/46A/145 but still all quicker on average than the private car.
Any trip up to about 6 miles is easily acheivable by a person of average fitness on an average bike and judging by the numbers of people I see commuting by bike this message is slowly getting through..

josip

Seaswimmer wrote: »

It takes me about 30 minutes to cycle into City Centre from near you

I cycle too, not as far, and I'm impressed by your 30 minute trip time.
Does that 30 minute include kit on, kit off time at each end? If not, how long does that take?

Seaswimmer

josip wrote: »

I cycle too, not as far, and I'm impressed by your 30 minute trip time.
Does that 30 minute include kit on, kit off time at each end? If not, how long does that take?

Well its only 6.5 miles so 13 MPH isint too impressive!!

I commute over to Santry in full cycling gear however I only ever cycle to town in normal clothes so no changing at either end.

josip

Do you manage to cycle to the city centre (not Ballsbridge or D4) from Dalkey in 30 minutes in normal clothes without breaking a sweat?
I'm even more impressed. What kind of bike do you ride?

patrickbrophy18

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Your trip from Dalkey to Damanstown is unsuitable for all but the keenest and fittest cyclists at roughly 17 miles. I dont think anyone has a problem with someone driving that commute.

Okay. I appreciate this and kudos to those "keenest and fittest cyclists" as commutes upwards of this length take a lot of motivation and physical energy.:D

Seaswimmer wrote: »

However I cycle the Rock Road every morning and nobody could tell me that ALL those single occupancy motorists dont have another choice.

While I do indeed suspect that many of these single occupancy motorists live along a parallel public transport alternative, there is probably a large remainder who travel from places out of reach from public transport.

Seaswimmer wrote: »

It takes me about 30 minutes to cycle into City Centre from near you

I'll try this cycle out at some point in the future as I am neither a full time nor part time cyclist. I guess this is down to personal preference though. How long have you been cycling?

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Probably the same for someone on the Dart and a bit longer for someone on the 4/7/46A/145 but still all quicker on average than the private car.

Unfortunately, the 7 and 8 routes still operate via Newtown Avenue which can add anything up to 15 minutes to the journey length depending on the time of day. Moreover, the recently installed contra-flow cycle lane makes it inappropriate for use by buses. This detour needs to be eradicated to speed up the 7 and 8.

Seaswimmer wrote: »

Any trip up to about 6 miles is easily acheivable by a person of average fitness on an average bike and judging by the numbers of people I see commuting by bike this message is slowly getting through..

Agreed, I have heard reports from many newspapers that the number of cyclists has increased dramatically due to schemes such as "Smarter Travel" and the like.

Having said that, I still disagree with the works carried out on the KTR. In fact, this particular version of it is less suitable for cyclists due to the fact that they have to dismount when taking the second and subsequent exits. For this reason alone, I can foresee that many cyclists will resort to using the circulatory carriageway to maintain momentum. Consequently, this will (by and large) render the kerb build-outs redundant and may result in widening the junction radii. This is my opinion anyway.

josip

Seaswimmer, given the amount you swim, how much you cycle weekly and the spec of your bike (I can't give the details here in case I get a ban , but anyone can check your other posts) would you describe yourself as an average cyclist and do you think your 30 minute Dalkey to the city centre spin is achievable by the average Joe?

Seaswimmer

josip wrote: »

Do you manage to cycle to the city centre (not Ballsbridge or D4) from Dalkey in 30 minutes in normal clothes without breaking a sweat?
I'm even more impressed. What kind of bike do you ride?

not quite.. I said I was near Patrick. (I am in Kill O Grange) Its 6.5 miles to Stephens Green. Its about 8 to Dalkey..

so about 40 minutes from Dalkey I would say..

Think we should move to cycling forum:)

Seaswimmer

josip wrote: »

Seaswimmer, given the amount you swim, how much you cycle weekly and the spec of your bike (I can't give the details here in case I get a ban , but anyone can check your other posts) would you describe yourself as an average cyclist and do you think your 30 minute Dalkey to the city centre spin is achievable by the average Joe?

No..30 minutes to town from Dalkey by bike is not really achievable for anyone. Its 8 miles. I do 6.5 in that time on my not so good bike.

On my regular commute to Santry I average about 15.5 MPH. But thats on a good bike in cycling gear and I would be fairly fit..

Just for people who may want an idea of cycling times from Kill o grange area for info.

My daughter cycles to Trinity (6.5 miles) on a reasonably good commuting bike.
Takes her 25 to 30 minutes.

My son cycles to Crumlin (9 miles) on a hybrid bike. Takes him 40 minutes.

He sometime cycles to Vincents Hosp (3,5 miles) Takes 15 minutes.

Neither of them dress in cycling gear but wear comfortable clothes (tracksuit bottoms, leggings ect) and they are not "cyclists". They also dont have showers when they arrive. If they can do it then most "normal" commuters can also do it..

but we probably need to get back on topic before the roundabout gets swamped by new commuting cyclists

errlloyd

That cycle from Deansgrange into town is a particularly nice one in terms of elevation. Apart from around blackrock its fairly flat going, even in black rock its only really that hill from the bypass up to the newtown park avenue junction.

OssianSmyth

The roundabout now seems to be finished.

I took a few photos the other day.

First thing is that it's not well signed. There is no yield sign before the pedestrian crossing, instead there is a blue sign marking a shared area for pedestrians and bikes. The yield sign is placed after the pedestrian crossing at the roundabout entrance. This means that cars try to run you down if you cross at the pedestrian crossings. The design drawing made no mention of where to place the signs.


When you are on a bike approaching the roundabout, the bike lane terminates where pedestrians would cross. You are then meant to make a 90 degree left turn to cycle on the footpath around to the next exit. This is confusing.

The result is that cyclists that I saw were ignoring the cycle track and cycling on the road.


When cars approach or exit the roundabout there is hardly any indication of a pedestrian bike crossing and no indication of priority. There are no lollipop signs, no zebra crossing stripes, just some discreet triangles on the road before the crossing that might indicate a yield but equally might be missed.

Here's the view from a dashcam of a circulating car approaching the exit.


The "shared area" for cyclists and pedestrians.


The finish looks good and it will look better when the grass grows in the buffer areas but the design is dysfunctional and I had written to the NTA before the project was approved with a list of the problems. Some were addressed but others weren't.


The problems include:

• There should not be 90 degree angles for cyclists to negotiate at every junction - instead there should be a circulating outer ring allowing cyclists and drivers to make eye contact at junctions
• There should be clear priority for cyclists at junctions marked by flashing lollipop signs, zebra crossings etc.
• The shared areas are unsafe and should be divided between cyclists and pedestrians
• The central roundabout reservation is far too large, reducing the room available for pedestrians and cyclists.
• There is a missing grass buffer separating cyclists and cars between Barnihill Rd and Killiney Rd.
• Again there was no public consultation despite the strong views of the public

galwaycyclist

OssianSmyth wrote: »

The result is that cyclists that I saw were ignoring the cycle track and cycling on the road.

I would not expect any reasonably confident fast cyclist to use those cycle tracks instead of the road.

If anyone has the impression that they should then they are misleading themselves.

galwaycyclist

OssianSmyth wrote: »

The problems include:

• The central roundabout reservation is far too large, reducing the room available for pedestrians and cyclists.

Agreed, looking at the pictures. If they were revisiting the design they should have significantly reduced the diameter of the central island.

Cookie_Monster

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Agreed, looking at the pictures. If they were revisiting the design they should have significantly reduced the diameter of the central island.

as in put it back the way it was before all this mess and money?

enas

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

as in put it back the way it was before all this mess and money?

I don't think they ever changed the diameter of the island during all that process, did they?

I know we recently had a long internet conversation with galwaycyclist regarding the benefit of experimenting a "Dutch-style" roundabout in isolation, but at least, if they want to experiment it, they should do it correctly. This thing looks pretty awful, and uselessly so (there is space, there is money and effort being spent on it).

miller50841

enas wrote: »

I don't think they ever changed the diameter of the island during all that process, did they?

I know we recently had a long internet conversation with galwaycyclist regarding the benefit of experimenting a "Dutch-style" roundabout in isolation, but at least, if they want to experiment it, they should do it correctly. This thing looks pretty awful, and uselessly so (there is space, there is money and effort being spent on it).

They changed everything including the centre. So many times now its getting confusing and I wish they would use the money on repainting all the dangerous roads and stupid ramps they paid big money for.

patrickbrophy18

It's just under a month since the second revision of this roundabout has been completed. So far, my thoughts of it are as follows:

1. Visual clutter is no longer an issue. Before, there were sign posts practically on the road with hypnotic yellow and black rubber kerbs. The cobble-lock buffer still remains. However, it was never really a distraction for drivers.
2. Inefficient use of space. They have decided to pretty it up with mud (soon to be grass) verges. While aesthetically pleasing, much of this space could have been used for a fully segregated cycle track.
3. The exit and entry radii still remain very tight. In fact, it is tighter in many respects than the first revision. A minor saving grace is the slight widening of the Upper Glenageary Road junction. Nevertheless, it is still barely suitable for vehicles in the 10-13 meter long range. Vehicles of practically all lengths were able to negotiate the original layout without a bother.
4. I amn't too bothered by the speed ramps. However, their close proximity to the circulatory carriageway mightn't allow longer vehicles to straighten up which could destabilize them. There should be an even weight distribution for all vehicles crossing speed ramps. In other words, both wheels in an axle should cross a speed ramp in unison.
5. Cyclists who intend taking the second or subsequent exits are expected to dismount at their junctions which reduces their momentum. This would explain why they many cyclists are taking to the main carriageway. OssianSmith raises a valid point in that cyclist also have to turn sharply immediately after entering the asphalt. This could easily cause the bicycle to topple over which is incredibly dangerous for two possible reasons:
   1. They may very likely be thrown onto the main carriageway and into the path of moving traffic which is potentially fatal.
   2. While not as serious, the impact of hitting the asphalt or a wall would cause serious injury.

The point about confusion over who has priority is a tad over the top. Here is where common sense comes into the equation. If a pedestrian is in the middle of crossing the road, drivers slow down and stop. If a car, bus or truck are in motion, pedestrians are advised not to step in front for their own safety. Drivers should respect cyclists and vice versa. I won't cover all permutations. Bottom line, observation is critical for safety and also mutual respect between all road users. Finally, I can foresee many re-revisions being made to this roundabout before complaints about it cease!