New kent " Turbo Roundabout" with "colour coded" routes

[Bryn666]

In my opinon, this turbo roundabout near the Ashford Designer Outlet gets it right, though it would be preferable if it were signed overhead rather than on the side per what you said. There should also be physical lane segregation to minimise confusion, but I think the chevrons are enough. Before the pandemic, the junction was a standard roundabout. This is one of those cheap but cheerful upgrades which major roundabouts across the country should receive, especially when dual carriageways are involved.

It's not a turbo roundabout, it's a roundabout with some paint. That signage is also horrific and unauthorised. It is the wrong colour, wrongly incorporates a warning sign, tells you to get and stay in lane at the same time, and wastes space & causes confusion by duplicating all the destinations. Not to mention the strange arrows, which could be designed better, and the fact this sign comes before the actual direction sign.

The left alignment of everything is giving me a twitch.

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

It's not a turbo roundabout, it's a roundabout with some paint. That signage is also horrific and unauthorised. It is the wrong colour, wrongly incorporates a warning sign, tells you to get and stay in lane at the same time, and wastes space & causes confusion by duplicating all the destinations. Not to mention the strange arrows, which could be designed better, and the fact this sign comes before the actual direction sign.

My, oh, my, what has this roundabout done to you?

Laughs aside, I think the opposite to your main complaints:

• To me, the warning signage with "GET IN LANE STAY IN LANE" is good and clearly tells the driver to pick a lane and stay in it.
• The duplicated destinations make it clear to the driver that those lanes lead to the same destination.
• The direction sign behind the unique one provides clarity if there's any confusion.

Otherwise, I don't mind the arrows or the white-on-green paint scheme for the A2042/A2070. The latter suggests that the route is the one drivers should take to exit Ashford to reach the M20 or go to Hastings, though it could be changed heading westbound to make it clear that the route ahead leads into Ashford and is not of strategic importance.

I was wrong about calling it a turbo-roundabout though, thank you. It's more akin to a spiral roundabout with the left/right turns prioritised for the main road and this increases capacity. Before, IIRC, it was implied that you had to be in the right hand lane to continue to follow the main road, which caused congestion, though I'm sure that the left lane was used as an unofficial right-turn lane by drivers, especially at peak times. This is a cost-effective way of improving capacity and traffic flow at a roundabout where a dominant traffic flow exists, i.e. the A2042 here.

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

The left alignment of everything is giving me a twitch.

I agree. The text should be aligned down the middle. Ideally, the sign should look something more traditional like this direction sign with the hook-shaped arrow people suggested earlier in the thread to represent the fact that the junction is a roundabout. This would look better and clearer than what's presented at the moment.

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

Digression, with apology: the LILO-GSJ about 600m east looks rather extravagant, in the circumstances!
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.1262864 ... ?entry=ttu

Apology accepted; I'll digress too.

So, the arrangement made more sense in the past as the Bad Munstereifel Road was originally built to be a high-speed bypass of Ashford. J10, the parclo and terminal roundabout used to be the only junctions along the route. In recent years, the land surrounding the road was developed on and new roundabouts were built. Later, around the time when J10A was built, the speed limit was reduced from 70 mph to 50 mph and a roundabout was converted into a staggered signalised crossroads. At the time of construction, improving the corridor between Folkestone and Hastings was of high importance and the A2070 was likely improved to cater for the Hastings Bypass proposals of the 90s. I sometimes speculate whether the bypass would've been extended around Ashford but it seems unlikely.

Edit - Phrasing and grammar.

OpenStreetMap
Google Maps

[Chris5156]

Laughs aside, I think the opposite to your main complaints:

• To me, the warning signage with "GET IN LANE STAY IN LANE" is good and clearly tells the driver to pick a lane and stay in it.
• The duplicated destinations make it clear to the driver that those lanes lead to the same destination.
• The direction sign behind the unique one provides clarity if there's any confusion.

Good signage is about conveying all the information a motorist might need in the shortest possible time, so as to reduce the amount of time the driver’s eyes need to be diverted away from the road. The rules of the system are devised to do that as efficiently as possible, taking into account the length of time a sign is visible and legible while travelling at the road’s speed limit, and allowing for the possibility that it might be dark, or foggy, or that the driver might be elderly or have less than perfect eyesight. Looking at a picture of a sign on the screen in front of you, with no competing demands on your attention, no time pressure to read it and no other factors to diminish your ability to make sense of it, is a poor test of whether it’s a good sign or not.

The least defensible thing here is the duplicated destinations. They make you read everything twice just to see that both lanes go the same place. That’s incredibly inefficient and totally avoidable: you can achieve the same objective by having those destinations span both lanes, which halves the amount of text that has to be read - reducing vastly the amount of information to be read and the time required to view the sign - but also makes it clear without the driver having to read any text at all that most destinations can be reached from either lane, a valuable piece of information in itself.

By attempting to do multiple jobs - warning, instruction, lane allocation and direction sign - there’s far too much information on one sign panel for anyone driving past to take it all in and make use of it. That’s the criticism.

Otherwise, I don't mind the arrows or the white-on-green paint scheme for the A2042/A2070. The latter suggests that the route is the one drivers should take to exit Ashford to reach the M20 or go to Hastings, though it could be changed heading westbound to make it clear that the route ahead leads into Ashford and is not of strategic importance.

A white-on-green colour scheme has a specific meaning, conveyed to drivers over decades, which is that the road is a primary route. If it’s not a primary route then the colours are misleading.

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

Good signage is about conveying all the information a motorist might need in the shortest possible time, so as to reduce the amount of time the driver’s eyes need to be diverted away from the road. The rules of the system are devised to do that as efficiently as possible, taking into account the length of time a sign is visible and legible while travelling at the road’s speed limit, and allowing for the possibility that it might be dark, or foggy, or that the driver might be elderly or have less than perfect eyesight. Looking at a picture of a sign on the screen in front of you, with no competing demands on your attention, no time pressure to read it and no other factors to diminish your ability to make sense of it, is a poor test of whether it’s a good sign or not.

The least defensible thing here is the duplicated destinations. They make you read everything twice just to see that both lanes go the same place. That’s incredibly inefficient and totally avoidable: you can achieve the same objective by having those destinations span both lanes, which halves the amount of text that has to be read - reducing vastly the amount of information to be read and the time required to view the sign - but also makes it clear without the driver having to read any text at all that most destinations can be reached from either lane, a valuable piece of information in itself.

By attempting to do multiple jobs - warning, instruction, lane allocation and direction sign - there’s far too much information on one sign panel for anyone driving past to take it all in and make use of it. That’s the criticism.

A white-on-green colour scheme has a specific meaning, conveyed to drivers over decades, which is that the road is a primary route. If it’s not a primary route then the colours are misleading.

Fair enough, I suppose. A sign similar to the example I posted upthread but with hook-shaped arrows could be a better alternative to this sign. The sign at the roundabout definitely isn't optimal but the layout is a very cost-effective way of improving capacity.

[Chris5156]

Fair enough, I suppose. A sign similar to the example I posted upthread but with hook-shaped arrows could be a better alternative to this sign. The sign at the roundabout definitely isn't optimal but the layout is a very cost-effective way of improving capacity.

I agree, the overall design of the junction is good, and there are some useful innovations on the signs. But I’m afraid I can never take a relaxed view of flaws in sign design

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

I agree, the overall design of the junction is good, and there are some useful innovations on the signs. But I’m afraid I can never take a relaxed view of flaws in sign design

Experimentation is key.

At least KCC haven't made the roundabout larger for an eye-watering sum of money.

[Nathan_A_RF]

• To me, the warning signage with "GET IN LANE STAY IN LANE" is good and clearly tells the driver to pick a lane and stay in it.
• The duplicated destinations make it clear to the driver that those lanes lead to the same destination.
• The direction sign behind the unique one provides clarity if there's any confusion.

Otherwise, I don't mind the arrows or the white-on-green paint scheme for the A2042/A2070. The latter suggests that the route is the one drivers should take to exit Ashford to reach the M20 or go to Hastings, though it could be changed heading westbound to make it clear that the route ahead leads into Ashford and is not of strategic importance.

I was wrong about calling it a turbo-roundabout though, thank you. It's more akin to a spiral roundabout with the left/right turns prioritised for the main road and this increases capacity. Before, IIRC, it was implied that you had to be in the right hand lane to continue to follow the main road, which caused congestion, though I'm sure that the left lane was used as an unofficial right-turn lane by drivers, especially at peak times. This is a cost-effective way of improving capacity and traffic flow at a roundabout where a dominant traffic flow exists, i.e. the A2042 here.

The lane sign itself should be the indication to pick a lane, and it's by far simpler to see which lanes go where by having less text on the sign thus indicating clearly where each lane goes. If a sign is designed well, you shouldn't need another one for clarification, especially when approaching a junction at 70 mph! The sign could have easily been designed correctly, and cheaply too, using less material.