| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related 19:41 - Jan 26 with 12246 views | WatfordR |
Received a Penalty Charge Notice yesterday for turning right off Bloemfontein Road into Bryony Road before the West Brom game. I've done that for years and years, but apparently now prohibited. Good thing I got the notice or I'd have done the same last night!!
Had a look for the signage last night, which is now half way up a sodding lampost. As far as I'm aware, no kind of warning anywhere the traffic flow change was being implemented. £65 penalty, doubled if not paid in 14 days.
Anyone else been done? |  | | |  |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 22:18 - Jan 27 with 1955 views | colinallcars |
I've always been a bit of a petrolhead but driving in London with all the obstacles mentioned on this thread, I now only use the car when absolutely necessary.
The public transport system in London is much improved and we get that famous Irish grocery delivery company O'cado to deliver ( sorry, couldn't resist that one ).
I just wish there was a way to get the boy racers off the streets. |  | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 01:49 - Jan 28 with 1842 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 17:13 - Jan 27 by Tonto |
Firstly a declaration - I am a transport planner by trade. I dont work for H&F, so am not responsible for the original post's concern, but there are sooo many distorted and worrysome comments here, that I need to correct some of the misinformation and bias.
1 - In the case of Byrony road, the "no right turn" sign is there. The "i didn't know it was there/lots of other people did it/i've done it before and it was ok" defences are irrelevant. It is you as the drivers' responsibility to read the information given to you. Even if it had changed recently the sign is there and you should see it and obey it. The issue is that you were probably familiar with this road and simply dont look out for changes, but this is, unfortunately, your fault. Streetview on Google shows a sign being there as long ago as 2008.
2 - You can call cameras "money makers" for Councils, or a war on motorists if you want. But if you follow the signs and dont do what you shouldnt, then the Council wouldn't make any money. Dont blame others for your own mistakes.
3 - Vehicular traffic is responsible for almost 40% of Carbon emissions. Unless you want your great grandchilren to be the last people who can live on this planet before it dies, we have to do something. just under 20% of journeys by car are less than 1km. not only is that incredibly lazy, its probably not even time saving compared to walking or cycling once you have parked the car and walked back to the shop/school/wherever you were going. 33% of car trips are less than 2 km.
4 - dont complain about being "stuck in traffic". you ARE traffic. you are as big a part of the problem as everyone else sitting in their car, all alone. Now I get that some people do need a car to carry things or are unable to walk. thats fine. but the other 80% of you dont have that excuse.
5 - all this rubbish about bike lanes causing congestion - no they dont. the road is still wide enough for cars, buses and lorries. Rarely does an entire carrigeway get removed - but in London especially, very few roads are wide enough to be dual carriageway.
6 - a 1mph reduction in speed results in a 6% reduction in fatalities in accidents. so yes 20mph zones are all about road safety.
IM sure Im going to get pelters for this, frankly its nothing I havent heard before on a daily basis in my job. |
Sorry but I'm not buying this.
The cameras are money makers as they're often positioned strategically such as on a downhill stretch. Leeway is 10% so you only have to be doing 23 in a 20 zone to get flashed. Is driving at 23mph really deserving of an £80 fine?
Moreover, driving at 20mph as opposed to 30 is more harmful for the environment. It requires the motorist to drop down a gear or two, which works the engine harder and results in greater fuel consumption and higher emissions.
Some signs (such as this no right-hand turn) are being erected in unreasonable places and shouldn't be there to begin with. There is no justification whatsoever for preventing motorists from using innocuous side streets. Moreover, it's simply unfair to charge motorists road tax and then exclude them from some roads.
In addition, the environmental argument that is being used to justify these measures simply doesn't stack up. Studies clearly show that emission levels have risen with the introduction of LTNs.
New bike lanes are causing congestion (and therefore greater emissions) as lanes are being removed to accommodate them. Take the Marylebone Road in Kings Cross, for example. Prior to the pandemic it was 3 lanes, with the first a bus lane and 2 for other traffic. During lockdown the first lane became a dedicated cycle lane, the second a bus lane, leaving motorists with just 1 lane. This has resulted in a seismic increase in congestion and emissions, not to mention road rage.
Simply put, cars are at their most polluting when in slow, heavy traffic. They are cleaner and more efficient when moving at speed. Forcing all cars to use main roads and sticking them behind buses results in more traffic and increased carbon emissions.
Anyone responsible for planning such measures should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. It's a blatant attack on honest motorists and an abuse of the information held by the DVLA. To add insult to injury, these measures are being touted as environmentally friendly when all the evidence is to the contrary.
There's something ironic about policies such as ULEZ and CCZ that aim to reduce pollution and congestion yet still allow combustion-engined cars to enter Central London provided that drivers are prepared to pay for the pleasure. It is clearly a money-making scheme and quite obviously disadvantages the poor.
If local and central government are serious about reducing pollution and easing congestion then invest in infrastructure and provide proper incentives for drivers to migrate to EVs. Introduce inclusive policies (such as car pool lanes) that encourage folk to car share and stop obsessing with cycling as it's simply isn't practical for most purposes (shopping, transporting children/goods, commuting, etc.) . Provide a network of rentable EVs to discourage car ownership in the city. But hey, these initiatives would cost money so they're not interested. The focus instead remains on revenue generating policies.
P.S. I know a few folk who have resorted to registering their cars under fake keepers and addresses. Some are simply sick of being treated as cash cows. Others feel like they are being boxed into a corner because they need to drive to work to feed their kids but 1 fine can result in no food on the table.
P.P.S "Frankly its nothing I haven't heard before on a daily basis in my job." Perhaps it's time then that you started listening? [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 12:36]
|  | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 07:37 - Jan 28 with 1784 views | E17hoop |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 17:09 - Jan 27 by WatfordR |
Just had a look at the photo on the PCN. The no right turn sign is not on the crossing (gone since at least Oct 2020) and is not attached to the lampost on the pavement a shown in your photo, but on a lampost about level with where the photo was taken.
I mean it's obviously my fault, but the signage now is not obvious. If you're looking to imminently turn right, I'd suggest you're not likely to be looking for signs halfway up a lampost on your left, and even less likely if the sign is now set 50-100 yards back from the right turn. Why move the sign on the crossing? |
Apologies, I wasn't clear. Some people were saying the prohibited right turn had recently been had been implemented. My picture not was highlighting it has been in place for at least 8 years. |  |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 07:37 - Jan 28 with 1783 views | PunteR |
I would like to know Tontos thoughts about residential parking permit allocation vs pay and display.
It's ridiculous how it's split up into zones on the same road and how there's a maximum time slot for pay and display if that's not a moñy making scheme I dont know what is .
It's an absolute pain in the arse for builders. Not only the extortionate cost of parking but having to move your van every 2 or 4 hour and drive around to find a parking spot every day, losing time/money on your job in the process is pretty soul destroying.And what makes it worse is there is a fair bit of parking but it's all residential.
Even the residents are passed off as they have to buy parking permits to allow visitors or in my case builders to the property.
Then you've got snidey little wardens on their mopeds buzzing around all day trying to slap a fine on your van. Yeh I love chucking £60 pound in the skip before I start my day.
I get the safety measures regarding the 20 mph zines but it's everywhere, even down roads where the number of pedestrians walking are minimal compared to vehicles. Something is not right there.
It's like with most H&S it reduces accidents but human error will always happen unfortunately and its a tough pill to swallow when H&S rules disrupts your day to day life but that's the way it is I guess.
[Post edited 28 Jan 2022 7:58]
|  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 07:55 - Jan 28 with 1774 views | Tonto |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 01:49 - Jan 28 by Benny_the_Ball |
Sorry but I'm not buying this.
The cameras are money makers as they're often positioned strategically such as on a downhill stretch. Leeway is 10% so you only have to be doing 23 in a 20 zone to get flashed. Is driving at 23mph really deserving of an £80 fine?
Moreover, driving at 20mph as opposed to 30 is more harmful for the environment. It requires the motorist to drop down a gear or two, which works the engine harder and results in greater fuel consumption and higher emissions.
Some signs (such as this no right-hand turn) are being erected in unreasonable places and shouldn't be there to begin with. There is no justification whatsoever for preventing motorists from using innocuous side streets. Moreover, it's simply unfair to charge motorists road tax and then exclude them from some roads.
In addition, the environmental argument that is being used to justify these measures simply doesn't stack up. Studies clearly show that emission levels have risen with the introduction of LTNs.
New bike lanes are causing congestion (and therefore greater emissions) as lanes are being removed to accommodate them. Take the Marylebone Road in Kings Cross, for example. Prior to the pandemic it was 3 lanes, with the first a bus lane and 2 for other traffic. During lockdown the first lane became a dedicated cycle lane, the second a bus lane, leaving motorists with just 1 lane. This has resulted in a seismic increase in congestion and emissions, not to mention road rage.
Simply put, cars are at their most polluting when in slow, heavy traffic. They are cleaner and more efficient when moving at speed. Forcing all cars to use main roads and sticking them behind buses results in more traffic and increased carbon emissions.
Anyone responsible for planning such measures should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. It's a blatant attack on honest motorists and an abuse of the information held by the DVLA. To add insult to injury, these measures are being touted as environmentally friendly when all the evidence is to the contrary.
There's something ironic about policies such as ULEZ and CCZ that aim to reduce pollution and congestion yet still allow combustion-engined cars to enter Central London provided that drivers are prepared to pay for the pleasure. It is clearly a money-making scheme and quite obviously disadvantages the poor.
If local and central government are serious about reducing pollution and easing congestion then invest in infrastructure and provide proper incentives for drivers to migrate to EVs. Introduce inclusive policies (such as car pool lanes) that encourage folk to car share and stop obsessing with cycling as it's simply isn't practical for most purposes (shopping, transporting children/goods, commuting, etc.) . Provide a network of rentable EVs to discourage car ownership in the city. But hey, these initiatives would cost money so they're not interested. The focus instead remains on revenue generating policies.
P.S. I know a few folk who have resorted to registering their cars under fake keepers and addresses. Some are simply sick of being treated as cash cows. Others feel like they are being boxed into a corner because they need to drive to work to feed their kids but 1 fine can result in no food on the table.
P.P.S "Frankly its nothing I haven't heard before on a daily basis in my job." Perhaps it's time then that you started listening? [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 12:36]
|
Knew this was coming. So here we go.
Cameras are NOT speed cameras. They are safety cameras. They areonlt paotiined at locatioms where there have been people killed and speed was the factor in thatvpersons death. And you should keep your speed below the limit even if its downhill. Lear to control your car.
20 mlh speed limits are about reducing the severity of accidents not about reducing emissions. Re read my comment. But here is the rider... by reducing speeds you can smooth out traffic flow and reduce congestion. This becuase as opposed tonspeeding off and stopping atvthe next junction you can time traffic lights better and keep traffic moving as opposed to stop. I know you will point at examples where traffic remains too heavy or it doesn't work but I can point to any more examples where it does and we are making incremental improvements.
There are plenty of reasons for keeping vehicles out of RESIDeNTIAL streets (rather than innocuous side streets). Thats where the majority of people live. That's where children could play thats where there are more elderly people thatsvwhere there are cats and dogs thats where cyclists could go and avoid the need for the segregated cycle lanes you seem to hate. These roads were not designed for cars to speed down to avoid but don't consider what might be behind a parked car becusse they are in a hurry.
Yiu don't pay road tax by the way. You pay an excise duty. Subtle point I appreciate but it means that the money goes into the geralntreasury coffers. It doesn't pay directly for your use of the vehicle. Besides as a member of society there are plenty of things you pay for but don't (hopefully) use, the police, NHS, schools if your kids are young or grown up. The list goes on.
I agree that cars are most efficient when moving. But as a associate for the last several decades we have fooled ourselves that the car is the best or only way of moving about. Simply put we cannot keep trying to increase capacity. In London there simply isn't the room but loom atvthe extra lanes on the M25... they didnt solve the problem did they. We need to change how we think about travelling especially for those trips of less than 1km.
So will.i listen to the tired illogical and outdated complaints? No. Ill get on with making the place better. |  |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 09:17 - Jan 28 with 1704 views | LimehouseR |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 01:49 - Jan 28 by Benny_the_Ball |
Sorry but I'm not buying this.
The cameras are money makers as they're often positioned strategically such as on a downhill stretch. Leeway is 10% so you only have to be doing 23 in a 20 zone to get flashed. Is driving at 23mph really deserving of an £80 fine?
Moreover, driving at 20mph as opposed to 30 is more harmful for the environment. It requires the motorist to drop down a gear or two, which works the engine harder and results in greater fuel consumption and higher emissions.
Some signs (such as this no right-hand turn) are being erected in unreasonable places and shouldn't be there to begin with. There is no justification whatsoever for preventing motorists from using innocuous side streets. Moreover, it's simply unfair to charge motorists road tax and then exclude them from some roads.
In addition, the environmental argument that is being used to justify these measures simply doesn't stack up. Studies clearly show that emission levels have risen with the introduction of LTNs.
New bike lanes are causing congestion (and therefore greater emissions) as lanes are being removed to accommodate them. Take the Marylebone Road in Kings Cross, for example. Prior to the pandemic it was 3 lanes, with the first a bus lane and 2 for other traffic. During lockdown the first lane became a dedicated cycle lane, the second a bus lane, leaving motorists with just 1 lane. This has resulted in a seismic increase in congestion and emissions, not to mention road rage.
Simply put, cars are at their most polluting when in slow, heavy traffic. They are cleaner and more efficient when moving at speed. Forcing all cars to use main roads and sticking them behind buses results in more traffic and increased carbon emissions.
Anyone responsible for planning such measures should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves. It's a blatant attack on honest motorists and an abuse of the information held by the DVLA. To add insult to injury, these measures are being touted as environmentally friendly when all the evidence is to the contrary.
There's something ironic about policies such as ULEZ and CCZ that aim to reduce pollution and congestion yet still allow combustion-engined cars to enter Central London provided that drivers are prepared to pay for the pleasure. It is clearly a money-making scheme and quite obviously disadvantages the poor.
If local and central government are serious about reducing pollution and easing congestion then invest in infrastructure and provide proper incentives for drivers to migrate to EVs. Introduce inclusive policies (such as car pool lanes) that encourage folk to car share and stop obsessing with cycling as it's simply isn't practical for most purposes (shopping, transporting children/goods, commuting, etc.) . Provide a network of rentable EVs to discourage car ownership in the city. But hey, these initiatives would cost money so they're not interested. The focus instead remains on revenue generating policies.
P.S. I know a few folk who have resorted to registering their cars under fake keepers and addresses. Some are simply sick of being treated as cash cows. Others feel like they are being boxed into a corner because they need to drive to work to feed their kids but 1 fine can result in no food on the table.
P.P.S "Frankly its nothing I haven't heard before on a daily basis in my job." Perhaps it's time then that you started listening? [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 12:36]
|
"P.S. I know a few folk who have resorted to registering their cars under fake keepers and addresses. Some are simply sick of being treated as cash cows. Others feel like they are being boxed into a corner because they need to drive to work to feed their kids but 1 fine can result in no food on the table."
Not having a dig at you at all. But it might be worth having a word with them about that.
If the police ever stop the car and do some basic checks they will very likely get themselves arrested, initially for TDA/TWOC and then they will likely never get their car back if they cannot prove ownership. Or if they do prove ownership they would be setting themselves up for a fraud offence. Not worth it. |  | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 09:53 - Jan 28 with 1652 views | Juzzie |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 21:18 - Jan 27 by collegeranger |
That'll be Meadway then! I live off it and it has to be the worse rat run in the borough and council will do nothing about it, oopposition will do nothing about it in the borough. 21 years here never seen a speed gun yet drive past a school in the holidays and you will get a fine! Ludicrous. |
Close but north side of the A316! OK, I was talking about Warburton Road which runs parallel to Hospital Bridge Road. HBR is a main run down to the A316 and traffic queues build up due to the traffic light crossroads at Whitton Corner, just before the A316.
So people try and jump that traffic queue by blapping down Warburton Road and turning left into Longford Road (which is even more dangerous as it has a tight, blind, kink in the road) to rejoin HBR further down.
At least that 'only' happens when there's an event at the stadium. Once the new big Turing House school opens on HBR it'll be like this on a daily basis and drivers on a school run are even worse. Someone will get hurt.
I too contacted LBRuT a few years ago and they could not be more disinterested if they tried. "Contact everyone in the road and gauge their opinions etc etc and come back to us". Yeah, like I have the time to knock on nearly a hundred doors. Let's just wait until someone gets hurt or killed because that's usually when authorities wait to do something about it. Then they'll act all surprised that such a terrible tragedy occurred. |  | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 10:21 - Jan 28 with 1618 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 07:55 - Jan 28 by Tonto |
Knew this was coming. So here we go.
Cameras are NOT speed cameras. They are safety cameras. They areonlt paotiined at locatioms where there have been people killed and speed was the factor in thatvpersons death. And you should keep your speed below the limit even if its downhill. Lear to control your car.
20 mlh speed limits are about reducing the severity of accidents not about reducing emissions. Re read my comment. But here is the rider... by reducing speeds you can smooth out traffic flow and reduce congestion. This becuase as opposed tonspeeding off and stopping atvthe next junction you can time traffic lights better and keep traffic moving as opposed to stop. I know you will point at examples where traffic remains too heavy or it doesn't work but I can point to any more examples where it does and we are making incremental improvements.
There are plenty of reasons for keeping vehicles out of RESIDeNTIAL streets (rather than innocuous side streets). Thats where the majority of people live. That's where children could play thats where there are more elderly people thatsvwhere there are cats and dogs thats where cyclists could go and avoid the need for the segregated cycle lanes you seem to hate. These roads were not designed for cars to speed down to avoid but don't consider what might be behind a parked car becusse they are in a hurry.
Yiu don't pay road tax by the way. You pay an excise duty. Subtle point I appreciate but it means that the money goes into the geralntreasury coffers. It doesn't pay directly for your use of the vehicle. Besides as a member of society there are plenty of things you pay for but don't (hopefully) use, the police, NHS, schools if your kids are young or grown up. The list goes on.
I agree that cars are most efficient when moving. But as a associate for the last several decades we have fooled ourselves that the car is the best or only way of moving about. Simply put we cannot keep trying to increase capacity. In London there simply isn't the room but loom atvthe extra lanes on the M25... they didnt solve the problem did they. We need to change how we think about travelling especially for those trips of less than 1km.
So will.i listen to the tired illogical and outdated complaints? No. Ill get on with making the place better. |
I look forward to seeing your Utopia Tonto.
I suspect if we ever get there you and I will be long gone. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 11:28 - Jan 28 with 1556 views | MrSheen |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 17:13 - Jan 27 by Tonto |
Firstly a declaration - I am a transport planner by trade. I dont work for H&F, so am not responsible for the original post's concern, but there are sooo many distorted and worrysome comments here, that I need to correct some of the misinformation and bias.
1 - In the case of Byrony road, the "no right turn" sign is there. The "i didn't know it was there/lots of other people did it/i've done it before and it was ok" defences are irrelevant. It is you as the drivers' responsibility to read the information given to you. Even if it had changed recently the sign is there and you should see it and obey it. The issue is that you were probably familiar with this road and simply dont look out for changes, but this is, unfortunately, your fault. Streetview on Google shows a sign being there as long ago as 2008.
2 - You can call cameras "money makers" for Councils, or a war on motorists if you want. But if you follow the signs and dont do what you shouldnt, then the Council wouldn't make any money. Dont blame others for your own mistakes.
3 - Vehicular traffic is responsible for almost 40% of Carbon emissions. Unless you want your great grandchilren to be the last people who can live on this planet before it dies, we have to do something. just under 20% of journeys by car are less than 1km. not only is that incredibly lazy, its probably not even time saving compared to walking or cycling once you have parked the car and walked back to the shop/school/wherever you were going. 33% of car trips are less than 2 km.
4 - dont complain about being "stuck in traffic". you ARE traffic. you are as big a part of the problem as everyone else sitting in their car, all alone. Now I get that some people do need a car to carry things or are unable to walk. thats fine. but the other 80% of you dont have that excuse.
5 - all this rubbish about bike lanes causing congestion - no they dont. the road is still wide enough for cars, buses and lorries. Rarely does an entire carrigeway get removed - but in London especially, very few roads are wide enough to be dual carriageway.
6 - a 1mph reduction in speed results in a 6% reduction in fatalities in accidents. so yes 20mph zones are all about road safety.
IM sure Im going to get pelters for this, frankly its nothing I havent heard before on a daily basis in my job. |
Small point, but vehicular traffic is the source of about 20% of carbon emissions, not 40%. Obviously, a proportion of this is freight, not passengers.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy
https://ourworldindata.org/co2 |  | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 11:44 - Jan 28 with 1534 views | slmrstid |
Sort of on-topic, sort of not, but the point Tonto made about the proportion of car journeys used for 1-2km trips is a really pertinent one.
I've been lucky enough to cycle now to 2 different jobs for the last 5 and a half years. My current one is not quite as safe a cycle route as my old one due to needing to use more open roads but its largely OK. Saved me so much money on fuel as the car is largely now only used at weekends.
My old journey was approx 5.5km, new one about 4.5km.
I do strongly believe though that we need a travel revolution in this country in regards to this - at my old job there were people who lived within a mile of the office who would drive instead of cycling or walking - and there were safe traffic free options for both which I saw as nothing but pure bone idleness.
Anyone who lives within 5 miles of their workplace should, IMO, be able to have cycling to work as a feasible and safe option. Some they don't do it because the roads aren't safe enough - whether thats the condition of the roads (there's a lot that are full of feckin massive holes) or the traffic (I can totally get if your commute involves a 40/50/60mph road that is bloody scary to cycle on if you haven't got your own dedicated space).
Covid does seem to be a bit of an accelerator toward this - all over there's been a lot more cycle lanes popping up, but all it seems to have done is make car drivers more angry and aggressive toward cyclists rather than encouraging a change of travel use.
Not really sure what the answer is in regards to getting that change - but it should be feasible for everyone. It was noticeable in Leicester during the March/April 2020 lockdown how much the air quality improved when the roads were so much quieter, and how worse its got again since it all came back.
Will add - I do have a car because I still need it for my longer travel - but I try and avoid using it Monday - Friday as much as I can. |  | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:04 - Jan 28 with 1501 views | Juzzie |
My commute is 15 miles, no feckkin' way am I cycling that but yes, people who use a car for less than a mile is appalling.
Though try forcing people to cycle if they're less than 5 miles from work when it's cold, pi$$ing down with rain, greasy/leafy pot-holed roads, etc.... good luck with that!
I have for 35+ years commuted by motorbike so kind of sit in the middle I guess. Not as polluting or road damaging/traffic blocking as a car/van/lorry but able to avoid having to use public transport which is a 'mare.
I go along Marylebone Road to Kings Cross (where our office moved to a few years ago) and pre-covid it was just about manageable. As Benny said, it's now been changed (eastbound only) to one lane for vehicles from the underpass all the way along. It's insane, the traffic is now worse than ever.
The cycle lane that goes along the underpass is full of rubbish, shopping trolleys and homeless people. I never see cyclists use it. The rest of the road that has two lanes for buses & cyclists is devoid of both, even motorbikes are no longer allowed to use the bus lane that they could beforehand.
I now avoid it all together and go a longer way around via Prince Albert Road, Parkway/Camden and into Kings Cross from there.
With the new Highway Code rules coming (tomorrow I think?) that basically means pedestrians & cyclists can do whatever they like with no consequences is just going to make matters worse. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 12:07]
| | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:29 - Jan 28 with 1466 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:04 - Jan 28 by Juzzie |
My commute is 15 miles, no feckkin' way am I cycling that but yes, people who use a car for less than a mile is appalling.
Though try forcing people to cycle if they're less than 5 miles from work when it's cold, pi$$ing down with rain, greasy/leafy pot-holed roads, etc.... good luck with that!
I have for 35+ years commuted by motorbike so kind of sit in the middle I guess. Not as polluting or road damaging/traffic blocking as a car/van/lorry but able to avoid having to use public transport which is a 'mare.
I go along Marylebone Road to Kings Cross (where our office moved to a few years ago) and pre-covid it was just about manageable. As Benny said, it's now been changed (eastbound only) to one lane for vehicles from the underpass all the way along. It's insane, the traffic is now worse than ever.
The cycle lane that goes along the underpass is full of rubbish, shopping trolleys and homeless people. I never see cyclists use it. The rest of the road that has two lanes for buses & cyclists is devoid of both, even motorbikes are no longer allowed to use the bus lane that they could beforehand.
I now avoid it all together and go a longer way around via Prince Albert Road, Parkway/Camden and into Kings Cross from there.
With the new Highway Code rules coming (tomorrow I think?) that basically means pedestrians & cyclists can do whatever they like with no consequences is just going to make matters worse. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 12:07]
|
I was just reading about the new Highway Code rules.
https://www.gov.uk/government/
I think your description is a little off but the first rule change actually goes against what I was taught in my driving lessons. I was told that drivers shouldn’t wave pedestrians across a road because it’s unsafe. | |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:37 - Jan 28 with 1439 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 11:44 - Jan 28 by slmrstid |
Sort of on-topic, sort of not, but the point Tonto made about the proportion of car journeys used for 1-2km trips is a really pertinent one.
I've been lucky enough to cycle now to 2 different jobs for the last 5 and a half years. My current one is not quite as safe a cycle route as my old one due to needing to use more open roads but its largely OK. Saved me so much money on fuel as the car is largely now only used at weekends.
My old journey was approx 5.5km, new one about 4.5km.
I do strongly believe though that we need a travel revolution in this country in regards to this - at my old job there were people who lived within a mile of the office who would drive instead of cycling or walking - and there were safe traffic free options for both which I saw as nothing but pure bone idleness.
Anyone who lives within 5 miles of their workplace should, IMO, be able to have cycling to work as a feasible and safe option. Some they don't do it because the roads aren't safe enough - whether thats the condition of the roads (there's a lot that are full of feckin massive holes) or the traffic (I can totally get if your commute involves a 40/50/60mph road that is bloody scary to cycle on if you haven't got your own dedicated space).
Covid does seem to be a bit of an accelerator toward this - all over there's been a lot more cycle lanes popping up, but all it seems to have done is make car drivers more angry and aggressive toward cyclists rather than encouraging a change of travel use.
Not really sure what the answer is in regards to getting that change - but it should be feasible for everyone. It was noticeable in Leicester during the March/April 2020 lockdown how much the air quality improved when the roads were so much quieter, and how worse its got again since it all came back.
Will add - I do have a car because I still need it for my longer travel - but I try and avoid using it Monday - Friday as much as I can. |
"I've been lucky enough to cycle now to 2 different jobs for the last 5 and a half years."
That's the point; you've been lucky enough. Most people aren't.
I agree that a travel revolution is required but that includes cyclists registering their bicycles and paying road tax. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 12:39]
| | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:42 - Jan 28 with 1423 views | slmrstid |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:37 - Jan 28 by Benny_the_Ball |
"I've been lucky enough to cycle now to 2 different jobs for the last 5 and a half years."
That's the point; you've been lucky enough. Most people aren't.
I agree that a travel revolution is required but that includes cyclists registering their bicycles and paying road tax. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 12:39]
|
By all means debate the use of cycles but please don't go down the road tax argument Benny because its irrelevant - its well known it doesn't exist as a tax and hasn't done since the 1930s. You pay a charge on the amount of CO2 your vehicle pumps out, which last time I checked cycles did zero of.
Low emission/electric vehicles - do not pay
Classic cars - do not pay
Etc.
And to sound very harsh on Juzzie's point - if its raining on your morning commute and you get a bit wet...tough. Take a towel with you - I do! | | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:48 - Jan 28 with 1412 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 07:55 - Jan 28 by Tonto |
Knew this was coming. So here we go.
Cameras are NOT speed cameras. They are safety cameras. They areonlt paotiined at locatioms where there have been people killed and speed was the factor in thatvpersons death. And you should keep your speed below the limit even if its downhill. Lear to control your car.
20 mlh speed limits are about reducing the severity of accidents not about reducing emissions. Re read my comment. But here is the rider... by reducing speeds you can smooth out traffic flow and reduce congestion. This becuase as opposed tonspeeding off and stopping atvthe next junction you can time traffic lights better and keep traffic moving as opposed to stop. I know you will point at examples where traffic remains too heavy or it doesn't work but I can point to any more examples where it does and we are making incremental improvements.
There are plenty of reasons for keeping vehicles out of RESIDeNTIAL streets (rather than innocuous side streets). Thats where the majority of people live. That's where children could play thats where there are more elderly people thatsvwhere there are cats and dogs thats where cyclists could go and avoid the need for the segregated cycle lanes you seem to hate. These roads were not designed for cars to speed down to avoid but don't consider what might be behind a parked car becusse they are in a hurry.
Yiu don't pay road tax by the way. You pay an excise duty. Subtle point I appreciate but it means that the money goes into the geralntreasury coffers. It doesn't pay directly for your use of the vehicle. Besides as a member of society there are plenty of things you pay for but don't (hopefully) use, the police, NHS, schools if your kids are young or grown up. The list goes on.
I agree that cars are most efficient when moving. But as a associate for the last several decades we have fooled ourselves that the car is the best or only way of moving about. Simply put we cannot keep trying to increase capacity. In London there simply isn't the room but loom atvthe extra lanes on the M25... they didnt solve the problem did they. We need to change how we think about travelling especially for those trips of less than 1km.
So will.i listen to the tired illogical and outdated complaints? No. Ill get on with making the place better. |
When I was 16 I worked part-time at Safeways (remember them folks?) working on the tills as a Checkout Assistant. During my employment there was a rebranding that included providing employees with new name tags. I still worked the tills but all of sudden, I was a Customer Services Executive.
Cameras are speed cameras however you try to re-brand them. Similarly, VED is still Road Tax. 'Smart' motorways are anything but; they've negated any benefit from extra lanes, reduced safety by encouraging motorists to use the hard shoulder, and increased congestion (and therefore emissions) by trying to control the flow of traffic through variable speed limits. Despite the overwhelming evidence against, LAs are forging ahead with these mindless measures simply because it's income generating. You're happily going along with it and soothing your conscious by pretending that you make the world a better place when you're actually making it worse.
Now get off your high horse, Tonto, and start listening to the hoards of people who write into you every week because they're on to you. They know full well that you're hiding behind fake concerns for safety and the environment in order to justify robbing them of their income.
If you genuinely care about safety and the environment then plan more parks, open spaces, and playgrounds so kids don't have to resort to playing on the street. Introduce pedestrian only zones in central areas and design genuine cycles lanes that don't put the squeeze on motorists. Instead of wasting money on (not so) smart motorway technology, introduce car pool lanes to encourage sharing. Introduce the 'Tonto Car' as an alternative to Boris Bikes to discourage unnecessary ownership in highly residential areas. And future proof our cities by prioritising EV charging zones/stations ahead of petrol/diesel forecourts.
In essence, earn your corn and prove your worth by designing and implementing measures that really make a difference for all and don't focus on generating income through fines. In case you hadn't noticed, there's a cost of living crisis happening out there and folk need every penny they can get their hands on right now. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 13:46]
| | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:13 - Jan 28 with 1376 views | PunteR |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:48 - Jan 28 by Benny_the_Ball |
When I was 16 I worked part-time at Safeways (remember them folks?) working on the tills as a Checkout Assistant. During my employment there was a rebranding that included providing employees with new name tags. I still worked the tills but all of sudden, I was a Customer Services Executive.
Cameras are speed cameras however you try to re-brand them. Similarly, VED is still Road Tax. 'Smart' motorways are anything but; they've negated any benefit from extra lanes, reduced safety by encouraging motorists to use the hard shoulder, and increased congestion (and therefore emissions) by trying to control the flow of traffic through variable speed limits. Despite the overwhelming evidence against, LAs are forging ahead with these mindless measures simply because it's income generating. You're happily going along with it and soothing your conscious by pretending that you make the world a better place when you're actually making it worse.
Now get off your high horse, Tonto, and start listening to the hoards of people who write into you every week because they're on to you. They know full well that you're hiding behind fake concerns for safety and the environment in order to justify robbing them of their income.
If you genuinely care about safety and the environment then plan more parks, open spaces, and playgrounds so kids don't have to resort to playing on the street. Introduce pedestrian only zones in central areas and design genuine cycles lanes that don't put the squeeze on motorists. Instead of wasting money on (not so) smart motorway technology, introduce car pool lanes to encourage sharing. Introduce the 'Tonto Car' as an alternative to Boris Bikes to discourage unnecessary ownership in highly residential areas. And future proof our cities by prioritising EV charging zones/stations ahead of petrol/diesel forecourts.
In essence, earn your corn and prove your worth by designing and implementing measures that really make a difference for all and don't focus on generating income through fines. In case you hadn't noticed, there's a cost of living crisis happening out there and folk need every penny they can get their hands on right now. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 13:46]
|
Don't bring Tontos horse into this.. | |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:25 - Jan 28 with 1348 views | colinallcars |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:13 - Jan 28 by PunteR |
Don't bring Tontos horse into this.. |
He may be undergoing Kemo therapy. | | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:39 - Jan 28 with 1319 views | Tonto |
apologies, that was an unfortunate typo. it should have read nearly 30% (thirty)
its 27% (in the UK) slightly higher in London - 28% are the precise figures.
still high though - and still something that needs to be resolved. | |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:39 - Jan 28 with 1317 views | Tonto |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 10:21 - Jan 28 by CliveWilsonSaid |
I look forward to seeing your Utopia Tonto.
I suspect if we ever get there you and I will be long gone. |
gotta start somewhere. | |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:43 - Jan 28 with 1300 views | Tonto |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:48 - Jan 28 by Benny_the_Ball |
When I was 16 I worked part-time at Safeways (remember them folks?) working on the tills as a Checkout Assistant. During my employment there was a rebranding that included providing employees with new name tags. I still worked the tills but all of sudden, I was a Customer Services Executive.
Cameras are speed cameras however you try to re-brand them. Similarly, VED is still Road Tax. 'Smart' motorways are anything but; they've negated any benefit from extra lanes, reduced safety by encouraging motorists to use the hard shoulder, and increased congestion (and therefore emissions) by trying to control the flow of traffic through variable speed limits. Despite the overwhelming evidence against, LAs are forging ahead with these mindless measures simply because it's income generating. You're happily going along with it and soothing your conscious by pretending that you make the world a better place when you're actually making it worse.
Now get off your high horse, Tonto, and start listening to the hoards of people who write into you every week because they're on to you. They know full well that you're hiding behind fake concerns for safety and the environment in order to justify robbing them of their income.
If you genuinely care about safety and the environment then plan more parks, open spaces, and playgrounds so kids don't have to resort to playing on the street. Introduce pedestrian only zones in central areas and design genuine cycles lanes that don't put the squeeze on motorists. Instead of wasting money on (not so) smart motorway technology, introduce car pool lanes to encourage sharing. Introduce the 'Tonto Car' as an alternative to Boris Bikes to discourage unnecessary ownership in highly residential areas. And future proof our cities by prioritising EV charging zones/stations ahead of petrol/diesel forecourts.
In essence, earn your corn and prove your worth by designing and implementing measures that really make a difference for all and don't focus on generating income through fines. In case you hadn't noticed, there's a cost of living crisis happening out there and folk need every penny they can get their hands on right now. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 13:46]
|
do I not listen to the hundred of people who write in demanding change then Benny?
i prefer to base my decision on facts rather than opinion.
besides view is quite nice from up here  | |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:54 - Jan 28 with 1271 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:43 - Jan 28 by Tonto |
do I not listen to the hundred of people who write in demanding change then Benny?
i prefer to base my decision on facts rather than opinion.
besides view is quite nice from up here |
Yes because they know better than you. These people are living the impact of your decisions (which, by the way, are based on cash not facts). They can't feed their kids (let alone allow them to play in the streets) because of an extortionate PCN simply for turning left off Gunnersbury Lane on to the Uxbridge Road.
Consider it customer feedback, if you will, and improve from it. | | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:57 - Jan 28 with 1269 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 07:37 - Jan 28 by E17hoop |
Apologies, I wasn't clear. Some people were saying the prohibited right turn had recently been had been implemented. My picture not was highlighting it has been in place for at least 8 years. |
Length of existence still doesn't make it right (no pun intended). It just means that the LA have been shafting motorists for 8 years and counting. | | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 13:57 - Jan 28 with 1268 views | RangersDave |
Wasnt the first speed cameras (for thats what they are) on the elevated section of the westway?
not many cyclists, or pedestrians there.
Oh and the M6 between crewe and the M56 have the most twitchy'est sped cameras in christendom. They are activated to the speed set by the overhead gantry's and the other night, they had cones the outside lane off for about 8 miles north and south bound for road works.... fair enough, but no one started work until about 2am. (i was there and saw), but the cameras were set for 40mph both ways.
The cameras were almost like strobe lighting, with vehicles getting caught left right and centre. like daylight it was.
'Ugrading to a digital road' my arse..... the 56 is being 'upgraded to higher technology'....... arseholes should just leave well alone..... as for a non road paying cyclist has preference over a road tax paying driver..... they can fcuk right off! |  |
| |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 14:14 - Jan 28 with 1246 views | Benny_the_Ball |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 12:42 - Jan 28 by slmrstid |
By all means debate the use of cycles but please don't go down the road tax argument Benny because its irrelevant - its well known it doesn't exist as a tax and hasn't done since the 1930s. You pay a charge on the amount of CO2 your vehicle pumps out, which last time I checked cycles did zero of.
Low emission/electric vehicles - do not pay
Classic cars - do not pay
Etc.
And to sound very harsh on Juzzie's point - if its raining on your morning commute and you get a bit wet...tough. Take a towel with you - I do! |
It's entirely relevant. It was introduced to pay for maintenance of the roads and has been rebranded as VEH to enable the authorities to get away with charging motorists more and using the money elsewhere.
As for cycling, I'm all for it. With the correct focus (i.e. not on fines) I think that road users can co-exist in a way that's fair to all. LAs feed off a 'them and us' culture between motorists, cyclists and pedestrians in order to generate support for its entirely unfair policies. If you read my earlier response to Tonto, you'll see that I've come up with a list of eminently better initiatives that improve life for all. However, LAs are not interested because this involves spending money as opposed to generating it.
This inclusive approach to motorists is important because the reality is that cycling alone is impractical for modern living and will never replace cars. In any event, if we succeed in achieving cycling utopia do you honestly believe that the authorities will simply kiss goodbye to the trillions it generates each year from VED, fuel tax, car sales tax, PCNs, and the motoring industry in general? No, they'll simply rebrand again and introduce ways of charging cyclists. Bike Sales Tax, Bike registration, Bike Excise Duty, Bike MOTs, Cycling speed limits of 10mph, Speed cameras capturing and fining those who exceed this limit, PCNs for riding through red lights, chaining bikes to lampposts/railings and riding on pavements, Pay and Display for cycle parks; the possibilities are endless. Only then, in your utopia, will you understand the pain of the modern-day motorist.
Be careful what you wish for. If you fancy a revolution then be prepared to pay for it. [Post edited 28 Jan 2022 14:33]
| | | |
| Driving Penalty Charge - QPR related on 15:36 - Jan 28 with 1178 views | colinallcars |
It's all very well exhorting people to cycle but the bane of cycling, apart from punctures, is finding somewhere safe to leave the bike.
I'm sure all those that cycle will have tales of bikes being nicked or vandalised - it's happened to me on numerous occasions.
I like the idea of those big metal security cages that one sees on certain roads. Are these suppied by the local council I wonder ? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
