|
The London Borough of Lewisham must be up their somewhere. The roads are without question the worst I've driven on in the UK. Yes, traffic calming measures are in evidence but then I have no problem with them per se, just the ones which are OTT. What's far worse is the state of the roads in many places (eg potholes, worn road surfaces etc.) and all the restrictions (e.g. no entry, no right turn etc.). I lived there for many years and thought I knew the area well. Now on the rare occasions I return I'm forced to get from a to b via cdefgh.........and z! There are no simply journeys left. Mind you, with the state of the roads they need less road humps.
|
err.... "up their somewhere?"
Freudian slip or spelling error? :)
Oh and while I'm ranting, to add insult to considerable injury there's nowhere to park either. Vast areas restricted with armies of wardens. You take you loved ones to the General Hospital but have to park miles away. Be warned!
|
|
Reckon London has it then, I forgot about the congestion charge there, how long before other cities get on the bandwagon?
|
|
Barney - it's not just drivers in other cities which should be worrying, the London Congestion Charge covers only a relatively small area and doesn't affect most London Boroughs. Will they extend the scheme or set up new ones? If the latter, how much will drivers have to pay to drive through multiple zones? It really doesn't bear thinking about!
|
|
|
|
I would agree with Cambridge (home of the rising bollard that lets buses and taxis through but punches a hole in your sump if you are unfortunate enough to not realise they're there), extortionate parking charges, humps and pinch points for no reason. And it's a LibDem council, not Labour. But they're even more left-wing than nuLabour these days aren't they?
Either there or Nottingham, SPECS-camera land.
Mike
|
anti-car council? No contest, it has to be Barnet.
The ripping out of speed bumps is a measure guaranteed to produce a backlash from all the people whose neighbourhoods have been improved by traffic calming. In fact, if someone was trying to build support for a ban-all-cars agenda, this sort of provocation seems like a very effective way to do it. Thankfully, other councils do not seem to be following Barnet's folly.
|
Well I never saw that one coming...
--
Adam
|
|
Watch it NoWheels, you could be the subject of a Christmas Carol... :-)
|
Watch it NoWheels, you could be the subject of a Christmas Carol... :-)
Now there's an idea......
|
|
|
|
Doesnt this all come down to the minority. spoil it for those that drive sensibly.I could never understand why it was said that speed cameras should be in site of view.That point to my mind is a load of rubbish.I think speed cameras should be hidden.road humps done away with. then fit speed cameras in places you would not know about..If you break the limit.its your fault..
--
Steve
|
|
And while they're fitting hidden speed cameras, let's reduce the dual carriageway speed limit from 70mph to 40mph. No reason, other than they've just installed speed cameras!!!
|
|
lets be frank theres no science that backs up the claims for scam cameras, they dont reduce accidents, and for that reason alone they should go
|
I'm generally in favour of things like speed cameras and other safety or environmental measures. If you don't speed you don't have to pay any fines - I don't see what the problem is!
However, one forthcoming measure worries me. That is the proposal to introduce a multiple occupancy lane on the M1. This is crazy. It flies in the face of the whole purpose of motorways, just like the silly M4 bus lane. It is an ill thought-out gesture to the anti-car lobby.
Cheers, SS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
