howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
the subject has been raised again this time in neighbouring shepway.
the joint transportation board is considering removing them from outside schools and railway stations.
a group has already been formed to fight any possible removal, brings back memories of john goodwin leading the fight here in dover.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#2
Well you know how I feel about this one,there are far to many of what they call Guard Rails,outside schools they must stay,but that is the only place.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#3
Apart from schools you also have pubs, clubs and cafe's where people congregate on the pavement. This encourages other pedestrians to walk around them and hence closer to the road. In other places traffic and geography leads people to take risky 'short-cuts' unless discouraged by guard rails. Any time you see a guard rail bent or damaged by a vehicle you are seeing proof of their value.
Far too many motorists pay far too little attention to pedestrians and too many pedestrians think they are faster than a moving car. Pedestrian guard rails are a very necessary safety feature on our roads.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
#4
Absolutely. They reduce risks sufficiently to be cost effective.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#5
I do not agree if they were not there both the car driver and the pedestrians would be more carfull,and they could bring down the speed of cars to 20mph in the towns and parishs.
#6
Neither of those things are going to happen, realistically, and we have a duty to reduce risks if appropriate. Have you seen how some of them drive around town and in residential areas??!!
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#7
As we have seen on other threads, motorists do not follow parking regulations, do not wait for green lights and do not keep to speed limits. Any attempts to get them to behave in a safer manner are met with outbursts in the press etc about their 'rights' to drive. Every driver will tell you they are a 'sensible' driver and yet accidents continue to happen.
Look at any pavement design where there is a wide curve and you will see a muddy path where pedestrians cut the corner.
In the news yesterday a pedestrian was killed while crossing the road at a proper crossing, he was hit by a police car. They claim he was on his phone and not paying attention but they did not say why they were not.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#8
Bern you are right in what you say,so it is down to the lawmakers to stop that happing and it can be easy done,when I worked in Germany if you was stoped you had to pay the fine then not later,if you did not have the cash, you was taken there and then to the jail and your car taken off you. Pedestrians were also fine if they walked across the road when the lights were telling them to wait.The laws are far to soft in the UK.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#9
Once again Vic, we have seen in other threads that the laws are there but there is no will on the part of the police to enforce them.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#10
when this new bill is past we will as Cllrs have new powers, and will have alot more say on how our town is policed. Read the bill in full and you will understand what I am saying.Town Cllrs will have a very part in all this so you all need to read it.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#11
haven't seen any mention of a new bill vic, tell us more.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#12
With due respect to John, it was Nigel who got the removal of guard rails thrown out; John posted on here about it, but it was Nigel who took the action - at the beginning and at the end.
Short memories some people have.
Roger
Guest 673- Registered: 16 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,388
#13
The New Bill are the same as the Old Bill but there are not so many of them.
Guest 683- Registered: 11 Feb 2009
- Posts: 1,052
#14
I think there's a lot more tot his that we may appreciate. though there seems to be no definitive science the findings tend to support the idea of 'shared spaces'. This is from the Timesonline:
"In Kensington High Street, almost 600 metres of railings have been removed to allow pedestrians to cross where they want. The results have discredited the belief that railings prevent accidents: in the two years after they were removed, pedestrian casualties declined three times faster than the London average. Traffic engineers believe that drivers are now keeping a sharper eye out for pedestrians because they know that they may cross at any point".
I would like to see a comprehensive review of traffic usage in Dover to see if it can't be improved/enhanced for the pedestrian and cyclist. We have given cars priority at the cost of these groups and it is time to redress the balance.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#15
I agree in full with Mr Robsons post and the bill now being looked at is the Localism bill and you all can download it by loging into Communities and local Government,but Town and parishs and district should already have it.
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#16
The traffic in Kensington High Street is a lot slower than in Dover and is also part of the congestion zone. A comparison between the two is pointless.
Whatever powers there are or will be to decide how you want policing done will still depend on the available police officers (remembering that funding for the semi pointless PCSO's is only in place for another two years) and their will to enforce the rules.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#17
I again do not agree there is as you say alot more traffic in Kensington,and having worked there for some time at times in the day the Traffic is geting a move on,but the more Traffic you have the bigger the risk is to both the driver and the walker or a person on a bike. Railings do not stop anyone running across the rd, We all seen it ,the walker just goes to the end of the rail or even gets over it and then runs over the road. The cars are going at some speed because they think it is safe to do so because there is a railing in place.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#18
PCSOs have no authority to issue penalty tickets to drivers. Railings stop people accidentally straying or being pushed into the road but do not stop a fast
moving car or a lorry. Neither do they stop idiots vaulting over them, as a half hour observing pedestrians at the York St roundabout will reveal.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#19
roger
it was john that raised the issue on here and the press in a big way that led to the change of heart, i don't doubt that nigel done a lot of work on it later. the dismantling would have gone ahead without debate if john had not highighting the issue originally.
vic
the railings are to stop vehicles coming onto the pavement not so much to stop pedestrians running in the road.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
#20
So what are you saying Peter, they should go or stay.?