On Sun, 5 Sep 2004 15:07:29 +0100 someone who may be "Nick Finnigan"
wrote this:-

And if you look at the manual used by people who put up the signs, you
find the only exception allowed with 'no entry' is buses.

There are plenty of no-entry signs in Edinburgh, with plates below
them saying things like "Except for buses, cycles and taxis".

How few years ago?

Certainly no earlier than 2000. No idea which side of 2002 it was
though.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
Brimstone wrote:

Joanne wrote:
John Rowland says...

Hi all,.
At the north end of South Grove in Highgate, North London, are
no-entry signs with text beneath reading "No Entry Except From
East". In effect they are saying that you can do a left-turn into
South Grove but you can't do a right-turn into it.

Is there such a sign in the highway code? IIRC the rules are slightly
more complex and the HC is not the definitive guide, and "temporary"
signs are allowed for a testing period.
Having said that it is taking the **** to expect people to follow a
sign that's not in the HC..

Why? As long as ots meaning and intention are plain why can't people
be expected to comply?

If the sign said "Post a cheque for £10 to [insert name of your hate
figure]", would you still expect people to "comply"?

If not, why not?

This is yet another example of the attitude that leads to the kind of
petty rules that so many people complain about.

Let's get this straight...

You say that people should obey petty rules without compulsion, and that
if
they don't, the authorities are justified in setting the petty rules in
law?

It's refreshing to see that your ability to twist things is a strong as
ever. That is not what I'm saying as you well know.

Nick Finnigan wrote:
"David Hansen" wrote in message
...
There are plenty of no-entry signs in Edinburgh, with plates below
them saying things like "Except for buses, cycles and taxis". A few
years ago there was mention in the paper of someone claiming these
signs were invalid. However, I have not heard more and imagine that
is because the someone has discovered their assertion is incorrect.
If their assertion had been shown to be correct you may be sure that
the paper would have made a fuss about it.

How few years ago? They get a special mention in
http://www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#sch19pII2
21 (Plates to be placed only...)
(2) A plate shown...

Diagram 616 is 'No Entry'; 954.6 and 954.7 are
'Except buses and cycles' & 'Except buses cycles and taxis'.

And, from that document, signs allowed with it are 954, 954.2, 1046,
and 1048.3.
Respectively 'except buses', 'except local buses', 'no entry', and
'bus only'. (The last two are painted on the road).


Colin McKenzie


--
The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that
it leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead!

Nick Finnigan wrote:
"John Rowland" wrote in
message ...

At the north end of South Grove in Highgate, North London, are
no-entry signs with text beneath reading "No Entry Except From
East". In effect they are saying that you can do a left-turn into
South Grove but you can't do a right-turn into it. There are none
of the normal right-turn-banned signs at all. Since drivers are
not legally required to carry a compass or know the direction in
which they are travelling at a particular moment, I don't see how
anyone could be successfully prosecuted for doing a right turn
here. I also don't see why they didn't just mount a
right-turn-banned sign.

'No right turn' is not a strict offence, whereas 'no entry' is.
However, it would be interesting to see what the traffic
order says

Eh? You're saying that disobeying a mandatory "no-right-turn" sign is
not an offence? Please explain; I'm not sure what you mean by a
"strict" offence.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message
...

'No right turn' is not a strict offence, whereas 'no entry' is.

That's ironic, because virtually everyone who performs a banned right turn
is committing a deliberate crime, whereas virtually everyone who goes
through a No Entry sign (except at this junction) does so by mistake.

But anyway, perhaps you have found the key to the issue. Highgate is packed
full of Guardian readers, and Guardian readers believe it's okay to do what
the hell they like so long as they feel guilty afterwards, so maybe an
earlier banned-right-turn sign was being ignored so much by the locals that
TPTB decided to up the ante to a more serious offence.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

"Richard J." wrote in message
...
Nick Finnigan wrote:

'No right turn' is not a strict offence, whereas 'no entry' is.

Eh? You're saying that disobeying a mandatory "no-right-turn" sign is
not an offence? Please explain; I'm not sure what you mean by a
"strict" offence.

"No Entry" is simply defined, and crossing the line
allows a prosecution for failure to obey a road sign
(unless there is an invalid exception plate).

"Right turn" is vague, as is the area where it is prohibited,
so the prosecution would have to prove driving/cycling
without due care and attention. If a cyclist dismounted,
turned the bike through 90 degrees and cycled ahead,
is an offence committed?

On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, John Rowland wrote:

"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message
...

'No right turn' is not a strict offence, whereas 'no entry' is.

That's ironic, because virtually everyone who performs a banned right turn
is committing a deliberate crime, whereas virtually everyone who goes
through a No Entry sign (except at this junction) does so by mistake.

But anyway, perhaps you have found the key to the issue. Highgate is
packed full of Guardian readers, and Guardian readers believe it's okay
to do what the hell they like so long as they feel guilty afterwards, so
maybe an earlier banned-right-turn sign was being ignored so much by the
locals that TPTB decided to up the ante to a more serious offence.

Is it your time of the month or something, John?

tom

--
GOLDIE LOOKIN' CHAIN [...] will ultimately make all other forms of music both redundant and unnecessary -- ntk

John Rowland wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 6 Sep 2004:

That's ironic, because virtually everyone who performs a banned right turn
is committing a deliberate crime, whereas virtually everyone who goes
through a No Entry sign (except at this junction) does so by mistake.

Not here they don't - there is a very silly little bit of one-way street
outside my block of flats that serves no conceivable purpose except to
make life difficult. And it is widely ignored, or else people simply
reverse down it - it's only about 25 yards long.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 6 Sep 2004, John Rowland wrote:
"Nick Finnigan" wrote in message
...

'No right turn' is not a strict offence, whereas 'no entry' is.

That's ironic, because virtually everyone who performs
a banned right turn is committing a deliberate crime,
whereas virtually everyone who goes through a
No Entry sign (except at this junction) does so by mistake.

But anyway, perhaps you have found the key to the issue.
Highgate is packed full of Guardian readers, and Guardian
readers believe it's okay to do what the hell they like so long
as they feel guilty afterwards, so maybe an earlier
banned-right-turn sign was being ignored so much by the
locals that TPTB decided to up the ante to a more serious offence.

Is it your time of the month or something, John?

It's always my time of the month.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

In message , at 14:52:15 on
Sun, 5 Sep 2004, David Hansen
remarked:
There are plenty of no-entry signs in Edinburgh, with plates below
them saying things like "Except for buses, cycles and taxis".

A few years ago there was mention in the paper of someone claiming
these signs were invalid. However, I have not heard more and imagine
that is because the someone has discovered their assertion is
incorrect.

There have been long-running debates in Cambridge over signs that might
say "No Entry - except for cycles", which some people think would work
well in the local context of a few roads. The Cambridge City Council
continues to insist that such signs are illegal (presumably advised by
the Cambridgeshire County Council), even though they are to be found in
Peterborough (which is a Unitary Authority). The stand-off continues,
but few Peterborough traffic planners seem to end up in jail.
--
Roland Perry