John Rowland wrote:
The traffic lights at Cricklewood Lane / Claremont Road are a particular
conundrum, because they only allow about 4 vehicles to emerge from busy
Cricklewood Lane before quiet Claremont Road has a full minute of green
phase. This has the effect of punishing traffic which sticks to the main
Cricklewood Lane, and rewarding traffic which rat-runs down The Vale and
Claremont Road or Minster Road and Lichfield Road.

Typically in Barnet, the light will have an "off" phase on either red or
green depending on how long it takes the engineer to replace the bulbs.
There's a few that have been dead for weeks - even with the council
being notified.

--
Simon Hewison

"John Wright" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:00:36 +0100, "nightjar" nightjar@insert my
surname here.uk.com wrote:


"JamesB" wrote in message
. ..
...
If I can see to the other side of those temp ones (often they are for
all
of about 10 metres) I'll go through them anyway (if its clear) same as
overtaking a parked bus really!

Except that it is legal safely to overtake a parked bus, but, contrary to
popular belief, you are breaking the law by going through the red at
temporary traffic lights.

Is there actually a law which covers that? Normally traffic lights are
subject to approval by local authorities. These things tend to be set
up on different authority for different purposes.

Local Authority approval has to do with whether the lights can be set up,
not what they mean when they are. That is covered by The Traffic Signs
Regulations and General Directions 2002, which does not differentiate
between the meanings given to temporary and to permanent lights.

Colin Bignell

Ian wrote:

Thanks Nick for the link. So if a cyclist rides across a pedestrian crossing
can I legally knock him/her over?

If you are a pedestrian, possibly.

"Ian" wrote...

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

[ ... ]

http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/misc/misc.html
has an appropriate discussion.

It does indeed, and concludes that a person pushing a bike, on a
pedestrian crossing anyway, is a pedestrian. "a person who is walking
across a pedestrian crossing pushing a bicycle, having started on the
pavement on one side on her feet and not on the bicycle, and going
across pushing the bicycle with both feet on the ground so to speak is
clearly a 'foot passenger'."

Thanks Nick for the link. So if a cyclist rides across a pedestrian
crossing can I legally knock him/her over?

The old chestnut...

You still have to drive with due consideration for other road-users (even
the ones who, like too many cyclists, have no intention whatever of
complying with any aspect of road traffic law they find inconvenient), and
you have to drive with due care and attention (ie, you have to stop to avoid
a collision if you can). But you are under no obligation to give precedence
to anyone illegally cycling across a *pedestrian crossing*, any more than
you would have to give way to a motor vehicle being driven across the
crossing from footway to footway.

Ian wrote:

The police no longer enforce the no cycling on the pavement law as can be
clearly seen in dft_foi_037604.pdf. In 1984 there were 1991 successful
prosecution for cycling on the pavement. By 2003 there were only 82.

The facts you advance do not show that at all. They show that the law
continues to be enforced. The figures only show that fewer cases are
dealt with by the courts.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9767111.html
(303 082 taking the Glossop line off Dinting Viaduct in 1985)

Ian wrote:
According to dft_transstats_031373, 214 pedestrians were hit by cyclists, 38
were seriously injured and 4 killed. I don't suppose that those injured and
the relatives of those killed by cyclists think that dangerous cycling is as
trivial as the police obviously now do.

Except that, something like 214 (from memory, around 150) pedestrians
were *killed*, on the pavement, by motor vehicles in the same year.
Plus many more on the road.

And 4 killed by cyclists is unusually high. It's usually about 1.

Luckily the police have a slightly better idea of who poses the
biggest risk to others than you do.

Colin McKenzie

Colin McKenzie wrote:
Ian wrote:

According to dft_transstats_031373, 214 pedestrians were hit by
cyclists, 38 were seriously injured and 4 killed. I don't suppose that
those injured and the relatives of those killed by cyclists think that
dangerous cycling is as trivial as the police obviously now do.


Except that, something like 214 (from memory, around 150) pedestrians
were *killed*, on the pavement, by motor vehicles in the same year.

Nope.

Or especially at 2 in morning when the side road only goes into a
supermarket.

Perhaps councils and the like should be forced to put in intelligent
lights that have sensors (and ones that work!) rather than going for
the cheap and cheerful fixed phase option. By all means operate fixed
timing in peak periods (and the sensor can automatically detect when
this is) but having to wait any time at all during the night is stupid.
It encourages people to jump, with potentially disasterous results if
there are any people wandering about (quite possibly drunk or not quite
with it).

I also cannot understand why we don't have all lights set on red at
night (would be stupid in peak periods). When a car approaches, the
appropriate road changes to green. This means there's not even a delay
as the other side goes back to red (usually the primary road) and
pedestrians don't need to wait if they get there first either.

Sweden has always had this (well, at least since I was a kid - and I'm
31), and Denmark have the countdown timer on lights. They've also used
LED traffic lights for ages, even though I remember the Highways Agency
going on about how good they were a few years ago - and still today we
have virtually none in operation (often a secondary light at a junction
or roundabout). Illuminated cats eyes have also never taken off, even
though the ones near Nazeing, Essex are fantastic (but clearly
expensive) and must be a major boost to road safety at night on country
roads.

The good old UK likes to lag behind, and then we claim to be the first
because our new system is slightly improved/different (one extra LED in
the light means we're first to have lights with 301 diodes instead of
300).

Next time Tesco build a new store, or a new retail park opens, I bet
any road junction built gets cheap and annoying lights that will
continue to hold you up at 2am. If you're really 'lucky', they'll even
bung in a Red Light camera to make some money from those who don't want
to wait!

Jonathan

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"Richard J." wrote in message
.uk...

Try reporting it as a fault to http://streetfaults.tfl.gov.uk/

Thanks!

No-one bother me for a while, I have a few hundred street faults to
report.

6 weeks later, I have to wonder why I bothered, because 5 of the 8 faults I
reported have definitely not been fixed, and I'm not sure whether the other
3 have been fixed or not. Presumably this website is another of Blair's
initiatives - always look like you're doing something, but never actually do
anything.

--
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

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, John Rowland wrote:

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"Richard J." wrote in message
.uk...

Try reporting it as a fault to http://streetfaults.tfl.gov.uk/

Thanks!

No-one bother me for a while, I have a few hundred street faults to
report.

6 weeks later, I have to wonder why I bothered, because 5 of the 8
faults I reported have definitely not been fixed, and I'm not sure
whether the other 3 have been fixed or not.

Maybe they're waiting for you to get through the rest of the few hundred?

Presumably this website is another of Blair's initiatives - always look
like you're doing something, but never actually do anything.

Yes, John, i'm sure Tony Blair himself personally masterminded the TfL
street faults website. Where on earth do you get this extraordinary idea
that emitting platitudes while doing nothing is a Blair invention? Is this
is not what every single human government *ever*, all the way back to the
Jericho town council, has done?

tom

--
Your words are mostly meaningless symbols -- Andrew, to Niall