ATLM has been installed by Department of Transport, Planning & Infrastructure (DPTI) along the edges of the Main South Rd over Sellicks Hill. ATLMs are raised thermoplastic bars around 150mm long laid just outside the edge of lane line(fog line) exactly where a cyclist rides. The bars shake a bike considerably when you ride over them, quite sufficiently to cause possible loss of control if done at speed, especially when wet. Riding over them is definitely to be avoided. In some areas there is a rideable shoulder to the left of the ATLMs but in other places the shoulder is only 150mm or less. To ride the road there are many places where you need to ride within the marked traffic lane & cross the ATLMs to get back to the shoulder. DPTI's own standards state "Minimum criteria for edge line ATLM: Sealed shoulder shall be no less than 0.5m wide" See DTPI Pavement Marking Manual page C78. I feel that even this width of shoulder would be inadequate. Around 0.8m wide outside the ATLMs of clean smooth pavement should be the minimum. The ATLMs would then even provide cyclists some protection to ride on the shoulder.
The Main South Road is designated a cycling corridor, Sellicks Hill is the only way to cycle south from the Aldinga, Maslins, Moana region unless you go inland to Willunga Hill. The BikeSA Coast to Coast goes over Sellicks Hill. DTPI have successfully made Fleurieu cycling more dangerous, continuing what seems like a deliberate policy of discouraging road cycling by Local & State Government. No wonder riders are cycling less.
Why am I not surprised that authorities improve vehicle occupant safety, while making it more hazardous to cycle?
How does one persuade DPTI to belatedly widen the road shoulder for safer cycling? Say it is run-off for motorised vehicles? There is a state election pending.
Pavement Marking Manual by Safety and Service Division of DPTI plus State Govt, p. C-78, states:
“Minimum criteria for edge line ATLM: Sealed shoulder shall be no less than 0.5m wide.”
Is anything likely to happen if we jump up and down? or is it fait de compli
Can we prevent it from happening on other roads or is there no announcement that this is going to be done?
Afraid really not sure Greg. I am hopeful that my post will raise cyclist's awareness & hopefully BISA or others will will make clear their unhappiness to DPTI, police & local members. I did ring & speak to a DPTI cycling & pedestrian group member back in July after I first came across them. We have climbed Sellicks Hill twice with these marking & both times we had close passes in the passing lane section. DPTI does make announcements about ATLMs, problem is who reads all their news and is aware of what it all means. I searched a bit & found some like the following.
George hi, I was over Sellicks about 10 days ago and thought exactly the same, great for safety to wake up a drowsy driver and stop them hitting a tree but really bad idea for cyclists riding up the hill as there is nowhere to get off the main road in places as the shoulder is non-existent.
Yes the manual says 500mm but that is not clear it includes the 100mm white fog line and the 100mm ATLM plus your 300mm equals 500mm. criteria met. :-( Just like lane widths include the 100mm for each lane making line/fog line etc.
I thought it a particularly silly place to have the markings... safety rail one side, hill on the other, no trees around - those nearer the top of the hill are all behind barriers.. but particularly, it's a scenic, windy bit of road, having driven it many times, it's one area I am probably most alert and unlikely to wander off the road!
Would absolutely agree Baron. Certainly not a very sleep inducing stretch of road and less dangerous than most sections if you do leave the road. The biggest danger is not crossing the edge line but crossing the centerline. This is where a drivers failure will likely kill absolutely innocent people. I would fully support use of ATLMs along the center line on Sellicks Hill but not on the edge lines.
Looking at DPTI plans for using ATLM on other roads (52kms on nothern roads & 39km mid north), I can't help but wonder if its going to be like guard rails. An easy solution to appearing to enhance road safety but at the expense of cyclists.
@George @Baron - clearly then the ATLM is in the wrong place - it needs to be fixed.
Good spotting Norm.
Re shoulder width, I did wonder just how we measure a shoulder.
Did find in DPTI pavement manual as linked to by Heather, above on page C1
All markings are dimensioned centre to centre & an example of measuring lane width.
Thus conclude a 0.5m shoulder is measured from the centre of the edgeline(fogline) to edge of bitumen. After install of 150mm ATLM on outside of the 100mm edge line we would then have 300mm of shoulder left for the cyclist. This is pretty close to the width shown in the picture I posted. Clearly inadequate for cycling use.
In fact the DPTI Operational Instructions for ATLM see https://www.dpti.sa.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/40151/Versio...
say "Sealed shoulder 0.5m or greater; 1.0m preferred if available"
1.0m is much more sensible. Suggest we should be pushing for minimum of 1.0m shoulders.
Out of interest has anyone actually contacted DPTI with this information?