Councillor criticises 'dangerous’ roundabout revamp

7:40am Thursday 27th September 2012 in News By Tom Edwards

Whittington roundabout: New give way signage is being put by the sliproad. Picture by Paul Jackson. 38135705 Whittington roundabout: New give way signage is being put by the sliproad. Picture by Paul Jackson. 38135705

WORCESTER’S Whittington roundabout revamp has been branded “chaotic and potentially dangerous” during a bad-tempered city council meeting.

Councillor Paul Denham, the deputy leader of the city’s Labour group, said the £1.3 million overhaul of the route was done “without any mandate” from the public.

At a meeting of full council, he said the “large number of complaints” about the route should have raised alarm bells.

The roundabout, which underwent months of alterations, is currently being looked at once again by highways chiefs after drivers said the sliproad was difficult to negotiate.

During the debate Coun Simon Geraghty, the city council’s leader, said he was confident the measures would reduce congestion.

Coun Denham said: “Given the large number of complaints from the public about the £1.3 million cost of the work done on this roundabout, the fears expressed that it is now chaotic and potentially dangerous, and the outrageous suggestion that motorists are somehow responsible for this situation, does the leader regret handing over this council’s funds to pay for this expensive mistake?”

He added people in Worcester were not consulted over it and that residents have gained no benefits from the changes.

Coun Geraghty, who is also the deputy leader at Worcestershire County Council , which delivered the revamp, rejected the criticism.

He said early estimates have shown that driving times leading up to and away from the roundabout from the M5 have shown reductions of up to two minutes on average.

“It represents a good investment in terms of cutting congestion and I’m absolutely confident the issues raised will be addressed,” he said. “Traffic congestion is always a matter of concern in the city and we do have a key role to play in tackling it.”

He also said he was “in no way putting the blame on motorists” for the current changes, which are being done largely because drivers were failing to stop on the sliproad to allow other traffic to go past.

New give way signage is being put by the sliproad, as well as earlier road markings, in a bid to make it safer. The Whittington roundabout takes motorists off the M5 down the A440.

Comments(21)

mayall8808 says...
8:51am Thu 27 Sep 12

Coun Geraghty, Why has new signage have to be put up? because of the **** up made in the first place, this roundabout now is more of a danger now than before and because the council have spent !.£1.3 mill on it does not make it safe, the congestion is as bad, i live there and i see it all day, so i think Coun Geraghty needs a new pair of glasses.

Report this post »

uptonX says...
9:53am Thu 27 Sep 12

There is no issue about "potentially dangerous" it was proven to be dangerous by the many accidents there on the few days it was open. You can still see the glass and the skid marks. Thanks goodness it has been closed for the last few days with a row of cones. Best option now is to make that closure permanent, the traffic flow is better and safer without it.

Report this post »

johnowat says...
9:56am Thu 27 Sep 12

I think it doesnt help that the one side is a joining lane and on the other side of the road its a feeder lane. I havent lived in Worcester for 2 years and then came back at the weekend and it was a bit puzzling why they didnt widen the road all the way down to the roundabout by Norton?

Report this post »

Paul Oldroyd says...
10:02am Thu 27 Sep 12

Just came back to the finished product after 5 weeks away and immediately had a near miss when the feeder lane down towards St Peters turned out to be a "give-way" lane.

Appalling signage and you take your life in your hands when moving into the lane of moving traffic coming off the roundabout. The only way to have made this safe would be to have created two lanes down to the Norton roundabout.

Report this post »

oldguy says...
10:12am Thu 27 Sep 12

There is nothing wrong with the layout, however the drivers using it need to switch out of autopilot and adapt to the changes. I am sure that the perceived problems originate from drivers who have not read the highway code for many years.

Report this post »

Andy-Apache says...
10:31am Thu 27 Sep 12

I know I keep harping on about design in the other thread about this but...

Should we wait until there are a few motorists injured or dead before taking a look at the design? People make mistakes. Not everybody is as conscientious or skillful behind the wheel as 'oldguy', so why not remove the potential for error, re-assess the design, understand why there have been so many accidents and near misses in such a short space of time and put it right.

Make it as idiot proof as possible in other words.

Report this post »

Vox populi says...
1:37pm Thu 27 Sep 12

Nail hit on head Andy - idiots.

Report this post »

uptonX says...
1:51pm Thu 27 Sep 12

Of course there was something wrong with it, the accidents showed that. I think it actually slowed traffic as those on the main road had to slow down or at least cover their brake because of the likelyhood someone will pull out - that's before the risk of swerving in to the oncoming traffic which would have made people cautious coming up the hill in the right lane. The accidents there already could well affect the insurance premiums of those who live locally. Can anyone really defend "our" council creating an accident blackspot with our money ? No, I didn't think so. Best option then, leave it closed permanently and get rid of the idiots responsible for the project in the first place,

Report this post »

Smyffie says...
4:51pm Thu 27 Sep 12

Andy-Apache wrote:
I know I keep harping on about design in the other thread about this but...

Should we wait until there are a few motorists injured or dead before taking a look at the design? People make mistakes. Not everybody is as conscientious or skillful behind the wheel as 'oldguy', so why not remove the potential for error, re-assess the design, understand why there have been so many accidents and near misses in such a short space of time and put it right.

Make it as idiot proof as possible in other words.
Make anything idiot proof and someone will make a better idiot!

Report this post »

MarcBar says...
5:22pm Thu 27 Sep 12

Personally I don't see what the problem is it takes time to adjust to a new layout but look at the ketch roundabout that has a feeder lane and no more accidents there so it needs time for people to adjust and in the long term there wont be problems the money is spent and it cant be recovered just to put the road back as it was. people should stop moaning open there eyes and think further ahead not just about tomorrow. give it time

Report this post »

uptonX says...
8:16pm Thu 27 Sep 12

Layout at the Ketch is totally different, angles, traffic volumes etc. What should have happened at Whittington is three lanes at the roundabout, the seperation by the kerbing is what makes it dangerous as it implies a new lane going down the hill as would be the case with that layout in most other parts of the UK. The Whittington layout has created an accident blackspot, that's now proven, it's outragous that those responsible are still trying to defend it. It must be reworked to behave in a more conventional way. We have to accept the money has been wasted but more must be spent to remove the danger or somone will be killed there, messing around with signs and paint is idiotic. Either leave it coned off so it's safe or get the diggers out and make it right.

Report this post »

cressylock says...
9:57pm Thu 27 Sep 12

Comparing this junction to Ketch - the Ketch is a merge lane and seems to having a longer run merge area than this give way junction. Both have a kerb section splitting the traffic.

I think the issue with this junction is the people coming down the slip lane expect it to merge, while people coming round the roundabout expect it to be (as the road markings suggest) a give way.

If cars stop at the give way, they risk getting hit by the car behind who's busy looking at the traffic coming round the roundabout.

If the car moves forward into the traffic, they risk getting hit by a motorist expecting them to stop.

I really can't see why they didn't spend a few more quid and make it a longer merge junction. I suspect (I do not know!) that the contractors proposed design "A" for £xmillion... The councillors in their wisdom told them to cut the cost. Less money = less work! So we have plan "B".

The concillors pat themselves on each other's back for saving a few thousand quid, while spending £1.3m.

I have no evidence, its just a feeling...

Report this post »

ChrisJames8 says...
10:19pm Thu 27 Sep 12

Simples just learn to drive

Report this post »

reflector says...
8:59am Fri 28 Sep 12

ChrisJames8 wrote:
Simples just learn to drive
And just how am I going to get the chap behind to learn to drive?

Report this post »

DEMRICS says...
10:55am Fri 28 Sep 12

I've heard rumours that further corrective works are due to take place next week to try and make the new layout less dangerous. So more of the tax-payer's hard-earned cash is to be spent on trying to cure a disease of their own making. And to make matters worse, I believe they're going to be carried out during the rush hour. You couldn't make it up!

Report this post »

gemma6 says...
3:53pm Fri 28 Sep 12

The Norton roundabout is now congested with two lanes of traffic trying to merge into one towards the Ketch roundabout. I thought the newly marked right hand lane was for turning right into St. Peter's Estate. If so, it should be clearly marked as such as it now takes much longer to do so than it did when it was only one lane.

Report this post »

copierman says...
7:26pm Fri 28 Sep 12

They donot put turn right arrows before roundabouts any more in case anyone does just that and goes the wrong way and turns right in front of the rounabout. eg Northern byepass,Evesham byepass A46.

Report this post »

mrwrighty says...
9:10am Sat 29 Sep 12

The angle of approach on the new slip road is no different from the approach from Parsonage Way into Berkely Way where there is an extra slip road if turning left. There have been a number of close calls there but no debat about its safety. There are numerous roads that merge at the wrong angle but it's down to drivers to be careful and aware of their surroundings.

Report this post »

sirspamalot says...
10:30am Sat 29 Sep 12

The simple fact of the matter is that the whole point of a feeder lane is to merge into the existing taffic flow and thereby ease traffic congestion, not to create another obstruction as in the 'Give Way'. You might as well wait at the roundabout junction. The feeder lane the other side of the roundabout is what was needed from the motorway. Whoever sanctioned this ridiculous project and wasteful use of public funds, should be exposed and sacked. However the whole problem started when the original by-pass was built. Lack of foresight has exacerpated the original problematic design. It should have been designed as a dual carriageway with proper flyover junctions, slip on and slip off roads, and a direct link onto the motorway. If you look at today's costs of redesgining Powick Island, St Peters Island and Whittington Island, then if this had been used 25 years ago when the bypass was built we wouldn't be in this predicament.

Report this post »

reflector says...
9:19am Sun 30 Sep 12

sirspamalot wrote:
The simple fact of the matter is that the whole point of a feeder lane is to merge into the existing taffic flow and thereby ease traffic congestion, not to create another obstruction as in the 'Give Way'. You might as well wait at the roundabout junction. The feeder lane the other side of the roundabout is what was needed from the motorway. Whoever sanctioned this ridiculous project and wasteful use of public funds, should be exposed and sacked. However the whole problem started when the original by-pass was built. Lack of foresight has exacerpated the original problematic design. It should have been designed as a dual carriageway with proper flyover junctions, slip on and slip off roads, and a direct link onto the motorway. If you look at today's costs of redesgining Powick Island, St Peters Island and Whittington Island, then if this had been used 25 years ago when the bypass was built we wouldn't be in this predicament.
As with the M5 when it was built as a two lane motorway, there were probably insufficient funds to do more than they did. However, it should have been designed with future widening in mind and will have to be done sooner or later and, again just like the M5, widening will probably cost far more than the original construction.

However, like at Whittington, the St Peters and Ketch roundabouts are too small and were poorly designed in the first place and need to be improved now...........but please get someone other than whoever redesigned the Whittington roundabout to do it!

As for Councillor Denham, he seems to be echoing the views of the vast majority on here.............sur
ely no bad thing for a councillor and better than trying to defend the indefensible.

Report this post »

pronstar says...
9:18am Wed 3 Oct 12

TheIndependentPoliti
cian wrote:
The usual Socialist diatribe from Cllr Denham, but he offers no solutions. Isn't that just typical of his brand of soundbite politics to impress his colleagues in the Labour Group.
What is it with you and your views on socialism? Did it used to bully you at school or something? You must be about as right wing as is possible to be. No wonder you've got plans to become police commissioner (provided of course you get the Hoff to stump up your deposit).

Independent my a**e.

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree