View Single Post
  #107   Report Post  
Old June 24th 04, 11:24 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling,uk.transport,uk.transport.london
Velvet Velvet is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jun 2004
Posts: 20
Default Everything we know about traffic-calming is wrong

David Martin wrote:

On 24/6/04 9:26 am, in article
, "Velvet"
wrote:


I can't see that removing
what little markings there are (four side turnings) would slow people on
the section that doesn't have any. Humps *might just* slow the buggers
down though, to something approaching reasonable speeds for the road.



Howabout redoing the priorities at the site turnings so that anyone going
straight on has to give way? Bad ascii art follows:


----------------------------------------------------


------------------------=========-------------------
| |
| |
| |
| |

goes to

----------------------------------------------------
||
||
------------------------ -------------------
| |
| |
| |
| |


Where double lines indicates a give way or stop.

Could even do a three way stop?


No road humps, but natural traffic calming by setting the priorities.


..d



Might make a difference in the very short stretch where the junctions
are, but since they are all culdesacs the actual traffic coming out of
them is very low, and I'd imagine most would ignore the markings and
treat it as it is now - priority for those going straight ahead,
regardless of what the people coming out the side road do (who would
then gaily swing out into the path of erroneously oncoming traffic,
leading to many nasty accidents).

However, the rest of the road (fairly long, with no side turnings) would
continue to be a high-speed ratrun scenario that really *would* benefit
from speed humps.

Having heard article about speed humps this morning on the radio, was
rather appalled to hear that a driving organisation is against them
'because of the constant speeding up and braking that you have to do' -
any decent driver knows a constant reasonable speed can be kept over the
majority of sane speed humps, needing no braking, and very little
acceleration. Yes now and then there are bigger ones, but - guess what
- they're in there cos of the arseholes that fly over all the bumps
wrecking their car over the years in the process!

I've never had any problems negotiating speed humps at a reasonable yet
constant speed. There's no braking and accelerating required, just a
shame the majority of drivers seem to utterly lack this understanding,
really.


--


Velvet