A couple of signs
 

Firstly, the footbridge over the A406 near IKEA is signposted as
wheelchair accessible, despite being rather steep and stepped. Is that a
mistake, or could a wheelchair really get up there?
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.6113...8.2 9,,1,-2.1

Secondly, on the A10 northbound just before Bullsmoor lane, the large
green sign advising the possible directions at the crossroads has a
small sign placed on one of its supporting poles which says "Services"
followed by a turn right arrow, a knife-and-fork logo and then a
McDonalds logo. I presume this sign has been placed here illegally by
McDonalds, or rather by the McDonalds franchisee.

A couple of signs
 

On 2012\10\16 12:56, Paul Corfield wrote:

You can see the special central reservation
threatment that was put there to allow extraordinary loads to exit
from the former power transformer works that used to exist there.

Thanks, I noticed that but never understood it.

A couple of signs
 

On Tue, 16 Oct 2012 12:56:13 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
exit. I'm sure there used to be special traffic lights that could
stop the A406 traffic when such a manoeuvre was required.

On a related topic - there were some manually operated traffic lights that let
trucks out of a private side road on the eastbound just before brent cross
flyover but they've recently been taken out of service.

B2003

A couple of signs
 

Basil Jet wrote in news:507d409d$0$7321$5b6aafb4
@news.zen.co.uk:

Firstly, the footbridge over the A406 near IKEA is signposted as
wheelchair accessible, despite being rather steep and stepped. Is that a
mistake, or could a wheelchair really get up there?

I believe that the building regs (for non-residential property) state
maximum gradients of 1:20 amongst various other parameters. I don't think
they actually forbid steps, but surely that's assumed.

There are 3 ramps to get from street to bridge, each (measuring with a
ruler off Google aerial view) about 15m long. The bridge must be say 5m
high to clear a double-decker bus. So thats roughly 1:9.

So I think not.

Peter

--
|| Peter CS ~ Epsom ~ UK | pjcs02 [at] gmail.com |

A couple of signs
 

In message , at 14:09:31 on Tue, 16
Oct 2012, Peter Campbell Smith remarked:
I believe that the building regs (for non-residential property) state
maximum gradients of 1:20 amongst various other parameters. I don't think
they actually forbid steps, but surely that's assumed.

Perhaps steps are covered by the gradient of the riser?

I also agree that steps like those are awkward even for the able-bodied.
There's a very similar set over the Peterborough inner ring road
(between the station and the City Centre) that are difficult to
negotiate because the steps are too big for one stride each, and too
small for two strides each.
--
Roland Perry

A couple of signs
 

On 2012\10\16 14:32, d wrote:

On a related topic - there were some manually operated traffic lights that let
trucks out of a private side road on the eastbound just before brent cross
flyover but they've recently been taken out of service.

There were multiple button pushes, three I think, controlling the one
set of lights - have they all been taken out?

A couple of signs
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:09:31 on Tue, 16
Oct 2012, Peter Campbell Smith remarked:
I believe that the building regs (for non-residential property) state
maximum gradients of 1:20 amongst various other parameters. I don't think
they actually forbid steps, but surely that's assumed.

Perhaps steps are covered by the gradient of the riser?

I also agree that steps like those are awkward even for the able-bodied.
There's a very similar set over the Peterborough inner ring road (between
the station and the City Centre) that are difficult to negotiate because
the steps are too big for one stride each, and too small for two strides
each.
--
Roland Perry

I've sometimes wondered if such 'awkwardness' is deliberate. A slope, or
regular steps, can be taken at a run. Designs such as this are more
difficult to move over quickly and tend to slow the flow down which might be
seen as safer.

A couple of signs
 

On 2012\10\16 22:48, Graham Harrison wrote:

I've sometimes wondered if such 'awkwardness' is deliberate. A slope,
or regular steps, can be taken at a run. Designs such as this are more
difficult to move over quickly and tend to slow the flow down which
might be seen as safer.

I can't help thinking that a cable car would have been cheaper. Although
one might think that machinery would be more expensive than a stationary
lump of steel, the sheer quantity of steel in a footbridge must cost
more than a little gondola, two poles, a wire and a motor. Footbridges
make sense when you have a constant or occasionally strong flow of
people, but I doubt if this footbridge ever sees more than one person in
an hour, and so the vast majority of its structure spends the vast
majority of its time merely holding itself up. I have no idea of the
actual costs though.

A couple of signs
 

Basil Jet wrote on 16 October 2012 12:10:21 ...
Firstly, the footbridge over the A406 near IKEA is signposted as
wheelchair accessible, despite being rather steep and stepped. Is that a
mistake, or could a wheelchair really get up there?
http://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.6113...8.2 9,,1,-2.1

"The footbridge over the A406 near IKEA" isn't a unique identifier.
There is in fact another footbridge over the A406 near IKEA that appears
to be wheelchair accessible, having both steps and a separate series of
ramps, though Google Street View doesn't show any wheelchair signs. But
not the same IKEA as yours. (It's at Wembley.)
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

A couple of signs
 

On 2012\10\17 01:03, Richard J. wrote:

"The footbridge over the A406 near IKEA" isn't a unique identifier.
There is in fact another footbridge over the A406 near IKEA that
appears to be wheelchair accessible, having both steps and a separate
series of ramps, though Google Street View doesn't show any
wheelchair signs. But not the same IKEA as yours. (It's at
Wembley.)

Since we're being pedantic, it's in Neasden, part of the former
Municipal Borough of Willesden. The Municipal Borough of Wembley was on
the other side of the River Brent. I don't believe that the creation of
the London Borough of Brent by merging the two boroughs has caused
Wembley to grow across the river.