Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What that intersection could use is one of these.

>

>

> http://www.freefoto.com/images/9906/09/9906_09_31-

> --4-way-stop-sign_web.jpg?&amp%3Bk=4+way+stop+sign


You're bang on the money Brendan. Being forced to make a complete stop would make a huge difference.

A four-way stop system works much like a roundabout (right of way) except that you HAVE to stop. In Canada I've had a pretty good fine for coming to only a rolling stop rather than a full stop. They're taken quite seriously and the fines are severe for not stopping. A fine adds points to your driver's license, which makes renewal very expensive and car insurance can become incredibly expensive. I think most people realize that it's just too expensive to be a terrible driver there. It would be perfect for that spot.

Hi,


All emergency vehicles have a wider axle than that of the normal car, thus humps will not affect ambulances or fire engines (except bog standard police cars). Local councils are reluctant to install humps unless there have been a noticeable increase in accidents as they can be sued for causing damage to the car.

I guess the problem is with the driver of private car's.

It is quite simple.... Take it easy, exit side roads with due care, wait at the pedestrian crossing until the lights give you the authority to move (both for driver's and pedestrians) and when you are at traffic lights or crossings stop closer to the pavement so that the Lycra Boy's do not undertake you and cause problems for other road user's.


I think that the more signs or other forms of slowing traffic down distract driver's and has the opposite effect.

Oh well, gotta go now as this thread is boring me.

Kind regards,

Libra Carr.

quick solution = average speed camera.


Those that don't drive much in London will realise how much damage speed bumbs do to a car. As a scooter rider I also realise that raod is the most dangerous in South London. Mostly due to undesirables speeding, I once asked a guy to slow down, you can imagine what his response was!

I'd be more happy with speed cameras than road humps as I'm not a speeder but hate the humps and will go miles out of my way to avoid them ,my ex small car just couldnt navigate them well and almost had to come to a stop when going over them,much to the annoyance of cars behind me and risking one ploughing into me.

espelli Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I didn't see the exact date (as I was driving at the time!) But it was

> either Saturday or Sunday at 12 something. Sorry I can't be more helpful.


No, that's fine, thanks. I'd been wondering what motivated it. In my belief, the police don't usually bother with such things unless they feel there's a strong need. I remember, for example, as a commuter, seeing such a notice turn up on Waterloo Bridge a month or so after an accident, and wondering what had happened (perhaps someone died?) to merit its appearance then.


For whatever reason, it's probably a good thing that the police are getting involved in the analysis process. All accident statistics are collected and can be collated (there are web pages available, for example, showing the locations of all accidents involving cyclist). So perhaps the question of Barry Road is reaching the desk of the appropriate managers in both the police and the council. Contacting local councillors or police liaison would be a good way of helping nudge any such process along.

Having done a speed awareness course this morning I discovered that cameras are usually only put up if there's 3 serious accidents within a 3 year period. There are about 600 cameras around London and you can find out the details of each one here http://lscp.org.uk.


It tells you why cameras are there and it's not to make money (although it was before 2002), it's a reactive response to accident blackspots. For example the speed camera that's on Peckham Rye (near the new school) is there because in the 36 months before it appeared:

Fatal collisions : 1 Number of Fatal collisions at this site.

Serious collisions : 4 Number of Serious collisions at this site.

Slight collisions : 17 Number of Slight collisions at this site.

KSI : 5 Killed or seriously injured

http://lscp.org.uk/?cameras&cameraID=119


So as Barry road seems to having a fair few accidents I would second Ianr's comment about contacting the local councillors and/or police liaison and chivvying them along if you want a camera on that road.


[edited once]

I don't know if he was a biker but he looked like a silver haired Nick Griffin with a beer belly. Anyway without taking this too much off topic it was an interesting course and it does explain further the difference in stopping distances between driving at 30, 32, 35 and 40 which was an eye opener.


He did also say that if there's enough call from local residents the police may set up random speed checks from the back of an incognito van to periodically catch speeders in an area.

Of course stopping distances are entirely variable according to what car you own. A new Mercedes with ceramic discs will stop in a fraction of the distance of some clapped out banger that scraped through it's MOT when both are travelling at the same speed. The speed limit is the same for everyone however. And this is correct; an interesting anomoly nonetheless.


I'm aesthically opposed to further street furniture, such as extra signs, bollards, flashing lights, road markings etc and decent research suggests that the removal of these "driver aids" can in fact lower the number of incidents.


But given the clamour of opinion in this case, a mini roundabout would seem a sensible solution.

espelli Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There is a yellow "Traffic Incident" board there

> now which may serve as a useful visual cue to slow

> down/look around etc.



But where they have chained it to a lamp post makes it even more difficult to see whats coming from the right up Barry Rd if you are trying to pull out from Underhill.

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Of course stopping distances are entirely variable

> according to what car you own.


The examples we were shown were police serviced vehicles with Class 1 police drivers and they took about 30 feet to stop at 30MPH plus thinking time, so about 45feet.

Roughly speaking, if someone walks out from behind a 33ft long bus, at 30MPH you're going to hit them, but it'll be at 6MPH. At 40 MPH you're going to hit them at 18MPH which will hurt them a lot more. And that's with a well looked after car.


(Blimey, do I sound like I've been brainwashed?)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • why do we think we have the right for the elected local council to be transparent?
    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...