Drivers and their problems

David9694 wrote:

The scene of the crime (2 years ago) 

It causes him (a tattoo artist who lives alone) a problem because now he only has two parking spaces instead of three.

I guess he needs a couple of work vans to carry his heavy tattoing tools and ladders, or something.

David9694 wrote:

The 2021 article is worth a look. B1NSF comes up as a white Mercedes 2008 on DVLA. 

While you're doing DVLA checks, don't forget to check date of last V5C issue, on this reg it's 20/02/23, so nothing automatically dodgy with it being on a blue C Class in 2021. 

But but why have they put a road there if you're not meant to drive on it? How am I supposed to take in all these signs, watch out for cars, pedestrians, motorbikers and cyclists AND keep to the speed limit (while balancing my coffee, checking the sat-nav, telling the kids in the back to stop fighting and worrying about what we're going to eat this evening?

Actually - in one sense in the UK with the cultural norms we have those are valid complaints. We could bridge the gap between legal expectation and daily reality by applying something like "sustainable safety" principles. Reduce the cognitive workload for drivers, prevent some foreseeable mistakes and also improve training for better understanding of the level of attention required for this task...

Then after that nick and ban anyone still incapable.

David9694 wrote:

Mr "It's not in anyone's way" here is a new one on me, but this is a chance to revisit several "I'm prepared to go to court (prison in one case) over this" stories, many of which we've had on here. What cars do to people. 

I get that it's a crappy operating model, but drivers and their constant bullshit, try-ons and whingeing have brought this on themselves. 

 https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/gallery/holidaymakers-pu...

But the dropped kerb he's parked on forms part of the footway, not part of his driveway.  It doesn't grant right of way, even, only grants him a right of access to cross the footway to access his tarmac garden...

Funny that the headline isn't "driver pictured driving dangerously close to cyclist".

Weird situation there. Both the adults came out from the passenger side of the vehicle but it looked like the car had cut up the van and then the van had crumped the rear drivers side door.  So had he pulled up to give a peace of his mind and caused an accident, the woman then got out in a stress because of the initial actions of the driver had caused the collision, which he then compounded by deciding to commit assault. 

Not just cycle lanes drivists think they should be allowed to drive on then!

So many things here.  Consultation pics show lots of old and disabled people - but given the time of day (or finding the time at all) that could be a selection effect.

The council consultation site says:

The Phase 1 Consultation was held in November and December 2020
577 unique users responded to the consultation, of which nearly 70% lived in Heavitree or Whipton.

(Phase 2) In September and October 2021, we consulted on a range of measures to address the issues raised during the Phase 1 Consultation... Considering online, email, letter and telephone responses, nearly 1,400 people participated in the consultation, of which over 70% lived in Heavitree or Whipton. ... A small majority of everyone that responded supported the introduction of traffic filters to reduce traffic.

Now - clearly they didn't reach people because people were not reached.  But this was over 2 years ago they started this... Are council consultations done well in general, trying to honestly gather opinion?  Quite possibly no.  However the few occasions where I've seen that there has been a decent effort to engage with people before time (advertising in the public space, in and around the area affected, letters and leaflets, online comms) 99.9% of people simply don't engage.  They may do so because they feel it's a foregone conclusion or they won't be heard (definitely times this has been true).  Like not voting though their missing view cannot possibly count.

David9694 wrote:

Battle rumbles on as ‘inconsiderate’ neighbour blocks access again to St Wulfram's Church in Grantham

https://www.granthamjournal.co.uk/news/battle-rumbles-on-as-inconsiderat...

it seems to me the inconsiderate neighbour in this story in the church, using a footpath to access the church instead of nearby church street. Allegedly wedding cars have been unable to access. Because apparently brides can't walk the 66m along this footpath. (the distance from the actual road to the church is about the same as the length of the church, so who knows what they do once they get inside. Funerals I have more sympathy for, but again if the church were to remove the two steps from the access in church street they would have perfect access without driving on a footpath.

Even the google streetview car appears to have gone down this road footpath ffs.

David9694 wrote:

Western governments can't get enough of this crazy life hack - ban all men from driving!

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/one-change-driving-rule...

I'm sure that could be made shorter and much more general, reducing a more general class of offenses...

Unfortunately, thinking it looks like a footpath does not make it a footpath. It is not marked as any kind of Public Right of Way (https://www.lincolnshire.gov.uk/coast-countryside/public-rights-way/3). It's not clear if the land is owned privately (presumably by the Church?) or publicly (most likely by the council) - it does not appear to have been registered, but then nor are the Church grounds (https://www.landregistry-uk.com/map-search). If privately owned by the Church, and no other restrictions exist, then they are free to drive down it. 

David9694 wrote:

It's people's ability to blank out things they don't want to hear that really interests me here - in this case, until the wheels have turned and it's (probably) too late.

Any species that didn't react to signs of change in their environment (eg food / water supply, predators) would not be well favoured by natural selection. 

Agree - but that is all of us about something!  Belief - or hope - that things will remain the same is very common.  Our outrage when they don't?  Simply because nature took a handy shortcut in our design which means if we're given a banana we're pleased but if someone then takes that banana away we get boilingly angry or miserably upset about our loss.

These scenes are (in the best case!) going to be enacted in every mid-sized habitation and up across the land.  And as always the disadvantaged, the old, the poor etc. will be worst affected.   And those who oppose change - who are often the least affected themselves and don't normally give a stuff - will immediately cry discrimination on their behalf.

So these processes are worth a look.  I certainly learned just how differently I saw things from some people when listening in on some council sessions concerning covid-era infra changes.

David9694 wrote:

Any species that didn't react to signs of change in their environment (eg food / water supply, predators) would not be well favoured by natural selection. 

I've always wondered about ground-nesting birds.  You see the signs up on gates saying take care.  Bringing it on themselves, I say, plenty of decent trees about the place*.

* OK since the early neolithic those numbers have (mostly) been coming down, but that's about 5000 years in these parts - plenty of time to move house to a decent area...

I've got a solution: there's no reason why the junction with the adjacent Dinsdale Close needs quite such a wide corner radius. Build out the footway and they will gain an extra 5m of space where they can position the pedestrian crossing, and will also improve conditions for pedestrians in the area (e.g. walking to the station or convenience store). 

https://goo.gl/maps/5xjnLfm9ZgwD9QjM6 

That retro reflective bollard needs to show more situational awareness...

Maps available from links here:
https://www.devon.gov.uk/exeterstreets/active-streets-trial-scheme/

On "ambulances won't get through" / "no-one has been here" - this is not what the council say at least - from the site:

DCC wrote:

Devon County Council are currently engaging with emergency services and healthcare providers on the proposals for a Low Traffic Neighbourhood trial in Heavitree and Whipton. This would involve the installation of modal filters, removing through vehicular traffic whilst allowing the passage of pedestrians, cyclists and (where relevant) buses.

A monitoring programme is also being undertaken to establish baseline walking, cycling and vehicular traffic levels. This will allow the project team to monitor the effectiveness of the scheme should a trial be undertaken.