No wonder they can't gauge a 1.5m overtaking clearance

Indeed, if you look at the videos though you can see that the area hasn't been resurfaced recently though.

A quick Google turns up...

"The couple would like to see the seven foot wide restriction, which has been the way it is now for around ten years, to be taken away. Instead, they would like to see cameras installed that catch out prohibited large vehicles using Woodmere Avenue."

"The restriction wasn’t always so narrow. Originally it was 2.3 metres wide (7’ 6”) before being reduced to two metres (7’) following complaints from residents about bigger vehicles attempting to get through, Councillor Bibby said. It’s been there since 1980, with the unforgiving bollards added about 10 years ago."

Fair enough - it does look like the story's been mangled. The restriction is and always has been 7', but the bollards were moved from 7'6" to 7' in 2011.

https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/19668485.watford-width-restrictio...

https://watford.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s625/Appendix%20A-%20Woodmere%...

Side note: apparently the bollards were reduced in height, because 'several vehicles sustained damage to their wing mirrors'...

Wing mirrors???!!!  etc...

mdavidford wrote:

..... wing mirrors'...

beetlejuice

shoko wrote:

...., with the unforgiving bollards added about 10 years ago."

That would be the necessary protecting of people on the footway

Captain Badger wrote:

shoko wrote:

...., with the unforgiving bollards added about 10 years ago."

That would be the necessary protecting of people on the footway

I think bollards at 7'6" would also protect people on the footway, unless they were walking along the kerbstones

wycombewheeler wrote:

Captain Badger wrote:

shoko wrote:

...., with the unforgiving bollards added about 10 years ago."

That would be the necessary protecting of people on the footway

I think bollards at 7'6" would also protect people on the footway, unless they were walking along the kerbstones

That would narrow the footway.

wycombewheeler wrote:

Captain Badger wrote:

shoko wrote:

...., with the unforgiving bollards added about 10 years ago."

That would be the necessary protecting of people on the footway

I think bollards at 7'6" would also protect people on the footway, unless they were walking along the kerbstones

Except the original bollards were apparently forgiving. So they may have looked the other way while people were run over.

David9694 wrote:

How many dozy drivers do you see who clearly can't judge speed or distance. 

Had me a little Google of this location: here's what you don't see in the movie, if you go in close, you can see bits of trim from recent victims.  Yet Mr Appliances Direct seemed to have made it ok. 

because it's a 7 foot wide opening, no one other than HGVs should have problems driving through there, I remember a lot of these restrictions at 6'6" when I was a new driver, when they really wanted to deter large vehicles. There was normally a gate where the bus lane is on this example, the gate would be locked and the fire brigade would have the keys.

AS a reckless youth I used to drive though the 6'6" without slowing down, anyone who can't get their car through a 7' gap needs either

• retraining
• being taken off the roads
• limited to small cars.

wycombewheeler wrote:

David9694 wrote:

How many dozy drivers do you see who clearly can't judge speed or distance. 

Had me a little Google of this location: here's what you don't see in the movie, if you go in close, you can see bits of trim from recent victims.  Yet Mr Appliances Direct seemed to have made it ok. 

because it's a 7 foot wide opening, no one other than HGVs should have problems driving through there, I remember a lot of these restrictions at 6'6" when I was a new driver, when they really wanted to deter large vehicles. There was normally a gate where the bus lane is on this example, the gate would be locked and the fire brigade would have the keys.

AS a reckless youth I used to drive though the 6'6" without slowing down, anyone who can't get their car through a 7' gap needs either

• retraining
• being taken off the roads
• limited to small cars.

limited to classes of car would be brilliant.

Acceleration and top speed to be limited across the board.

classes such as SUV/4WD restricted to commercial use only (concession for the vanishingly few people who need heavier vehicles due to their place of abode, such as teh cairngorms)

NCAP safety ratings to primarily include 3rd party safety as priority importance, and insurance class to be formulated on that basis

Captain Badger wrote:

wycombewheeler wrote:

David9694 wrote:

How many dozy drivers do you see who clearly can't judge speed or distance. 

Had me a little Google of this location: here's what you don't see in the movie, if you go in close, you can see bits of trim from recent victims.  Yet Mr Appliances Direct seemed to have made it ok. 

because it's a 7 foot wide opening, no one other than HGVs should have problems driving through there, I remember a lot of these restrictions at 6'6" when I was a new driver, when they really wanted to deter large vehicles. There was normally a gate where the bus lane is on this example, the gate would be locked and the fire brigade would have the keys.

AS a reckless youth I used to drive though the 6'6" without slowing down, anyone who can't get their car through a 7' gap needs either

• retraining
• being taken off the roads
• limited to small cars.

limited to classes of car would be brilliant.

Acceleration and top speed to be limited across the board.

classes such as SUV/4WD restricted to commercial use only (concession for the vanishingly few people who need heavier vehicles due to their place of abode, such as teh cairngorms)

NCAP safety ratings to primarily include 3rd party safety as priority importance, and insurance class to be formulated on that basis

anyone caught damaging street furniture, getting to 9 points on their license, limited to driving a citroen c1 or toyota aygo. No please of hardship need be heard because they are still mobile.

I'm all for working with humans - so although the Schadenfreude is strong here I'd be tempted to say "OK - lots of people just can't manage this. And we've happily drifted along nodding as cars got bigger and now they just are. How do we work with that?". So the appropriate response to this would not be just to point and laugh - however tempting.  Nor should it be  "just remove the bollards" - even if you brought in cameras.  If you have people going down here who shouldn't / going too fast:

• Modal filter - this simply becomes a no-through road (but access for cycles - and appropriately wide!). So you have bollards / blocks that are really obvious and it's clear you cannot drive through here, rather than "it doesn't say no vehicles so I'll just squeeze by..."
• More expensive but for speed issues I like the "self-enforcing" designs e.g. carriageway narrows (trees rather than bollards?) and road becomes winding etc. Speed humps aren't great for bikes. Yep - would still require a generation to get through to people - but almost any change seems to take years...

Alternatively as suggested have another category of vehicles - microcars. And if you prove you can't handle a big one - but haven't been lethally useless - after you've served a ban / been retested you can start back with one of these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B9ly7JjqEb0

Citroen c1 is 5'4" wide. BMW X5 is 7'3" (must include mirrors)

People who are choosing to drive oversided vehciles need to be aware of the consequences. Such as not bing able to drive through these restricted roads