List here...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/h...t_01_07_10.pdf

I'm surprised Creffield Road / Twyford Avenue W3 hasn't been included,
so wonder what criteria they have used to select them for removal.

Basil Jet wrote:
List here...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/h...t_01_07_10.pdf


I'm surprised Creffield Road / Twyford Avenue W3 hasn't been included,
so wonder what criteria they have used to select them for removal.

"Being ten feet from the back gate of a primary school", in one case
(Sloane Avenue).

There doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason, but you can detect the
differing attitudes of various boroughs in there - this is largely an
exercise driven by Kensington and Chelsea.

Tom

On 03/07/2010 18:02, Tom Barry wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
List here...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/h...t_01_07_10.pdf


I'm surprised Creffield Road / Twyford Avenue W3 hasn't been included,
so wonder what criteria they have used to select them for removal.

"Being ten feet from the back gate of a primary school", in one case
(Sloane Avenue).

There doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason, but you can detect the
differing attitudes of various boroughs in there - this is largely an
exercise driven by Kensington and Chelsea.

Repeating myself Ken & Chel seem to be against all control of traffic.
I couldn't get them to accept that the Appleford Road / Adair Road
crossroads having no give way signs or lines on any of the four
approaches was a bad idea.

On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 13:43:59 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:
List here...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/h...t_01_07_10.pdf

Not sure what status this list has.

The one Ealing junction that I think is going ahead isn't listed.

Acton High St / Birkbeck Grove is probably the westbound bus gate, which
has been bagged for years.

I'm surprised Creffield Road / Twyford Avenue W3 hasn't been included,
so wonder what criteria they have used to select them for removal.

This was on Ealing's original list, but dropped when parents at the nearby
Twyford High School objected. It seems parents are not confident of their
children's ability to cross the road without coloured lights to tell them
when to do it. Of course, the kids know better, and it all goes wrong
anyway when a driver runs a red light. I think zebras are better than
lights, and they're certainly no less safe, because drivers and
pedestrians are looking out for each other.

The problem with taking traffic lights away is what you replace them with.
Often the answer is a mini-roundabout, which severely disadvantages
pedestrians. If new crossing points are provided, they are some distance
away from the roundabout. Crossing at the roundabout is tricky because you
have to look so many ways and gauge who is and isn't going to stop.

Colin McKenzie


--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

Basil Jet wrote:


Repeating myself Ken & Chel seem to be against all control of traffic.
I couldn't get them to accept that the Appleford Road / Adair Road
crossroads having no give way signs or lines on any of the four
approaches was a bad idea.

That's what being a one-party state gets you, they go a bit cuckoo after
a while. In this case it's probably not unconnected to the ideas put
about by Daniel Moylan and his boss Sir Merrick Cockell, who's just
picked up a 'K' for basically sitting around on an unassailable majority
talking crap for years. I think K&C are the chaps with the
ratepayer-funded Bentley, too. Ah, yes:

http://kensingtonandchelsealibdems.o...t_auditor.html

They're the main guys behind the 'shared space' nonsense*, where they
seem to think a roundabout in a small town in Holland is the model for
London streetscapes, neglecting other more beneficial aspects of Dutch
life such as proper cycle facilities and trams. All of which wouldn't
matter unless, oo, Moylan was the defacto Chairman of TfL and had
recently popped up heading a group vetting every streetscape plan TfL
are undertaking. Which he is.

Tom

* If you want to see this in action, visit New Road in Brighton, where
it's working marvellously, mainly because all the drivers think it's
pedestrianised and avoid it, I saw two cars in twenty minutes. Can
anyone see the flaw in applying this principle generally to a whole area?

On 03/07/2010 22:46, Tom Barry wrote:

They're the main guys behind the 'shared space' nonsense*

* If you want to see this in action, visit New Road in Brighton, where
it's working marvellously, mainly because all the drivers think it's
pedestrianised and avoid it, I saw two cars in twenty minutes.

Even the Google Streetview car wouldn't go down it!

Basil Jet wrote on 04 July 2010
05:14:29 ...
On 03/07/2010 22:46, Tom Barry wrote:

They're the main guys behind the 'shared space' nonsense*

* If you want to see this in action, visit New Road in Brighton, where
it's working marvellously, mainly because all the drivers think it's
pedestrianised and avoid it, I saw two cars in twenty minutes.

Even the Google Streetview car wouldn't go down it!

There are "no motor vehicles" signs at the North Street end.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On 04/07/2010 10:25, Richard J. wrote:
Basil Jet wrote on 04 July 2010
05:14:29 ...
On 03/07/2010 22:46, Tom Barry wrote:

They're the main guys behind the 'shared space' nonsense*

* If you want to see this in action, visit New Road in Brighton, where
it's working marvellously, mainly because all the drivers think it's
pedestrianised and avoid it, I saw two cars in twenty minutes.

Even the Google Streetview car wouldn't go down it!

There are "no motor vehicles" signs at the North Street end.

Of course, it's one way.

Basil Jet wrote on 04 July 2010
14:44:51 ...
On 04/07/2010 10:25, Richard J. wrote:
Basil wrote on 04 July 2010
05:14:29 ...
On 03/07/2010 22:46, Tom Barry wrote:

They're the main guys behind the 'shared space' nonsense*

* If you want to see this in action, visit New Road in Brighton, where
it's working marvellously, mainly because all the drivers think it's
pedestrianised and avoid it, I saw two cars in twenty minutes.

Even the Google Streetview car wouldn't go down it!

There are "no motor vehicles" signs at the North Street end.

Of course, it's one way.

Who says, apart from Google Maps? The sign implies that cycles and
horse-drawn traffic are allowed to enter from North Street. At the
other end (Church Street), there are no one-way signs, but the double
yellow line on Church Street goes straight across the entrance to New
Road, implying that New Road isn't a public carriageway at all. Yet
there are Restricted Zone signs that prohibit parking except for the
disabled. I'm not surprised that drivers avoid it.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

In article ,
(Basil Jet) wrote:

Repeating myself Ken & Chel seem to be against all control of
traffic. I couldn't get them to accept that the Appleford Road /
Adair Road crossroads having no give way signs or lines on any of
the four approaches was a bad idea.

A few cycle lanes would be nice too. I largely avoid main roads in K&C
because of lack of cycling facilities. I would do so more if Albert Bridge
wasn't closed.

--
Colin Rosenstiel