Possible £1,000 fine for moving traffic signage

3 Aug

A few weeks ago I came across yet another sign that had been placed needlessly on a pavement. I asked the workmen to move it into the coned-off layby. They told me that they couldn’t move it because it had been put there by a subcontractor and that it would be illegal for them or me to move it. To be honest I didn’t believe them and moved it anyway. I have since spotted the law they were referring to which states: “If a person without lawful authority or excuse—(a) takes down, alters or removes any fence, barrier, traffic sign or light erected or placed in pursuance of subsection (1) or (2) above, or (b) extinguishes a light so placed, he commits an offence and is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.” New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 (section 65). Level 3 on the standard scale is currently £1,000! Here is the sign before and after I committed the offense!

The road sign placed needlessly across the pavement over the textured pavement

The same sign moved so that it will  cause no obstruction to anyone

I did however also spot one useful clause in the official manual which tells contractors where to place all their cones and signs which states very clearly that “in no circumstances must the width of the footway be reduced to less than 1m, preferably not less than 1.5m” (chapter 8 clause D4.4.1). I will continue to move signs where this rule is being broken but will probably refrain from moving signs otherwise in future!

Sheds, cycle stores, planters and sofas…

1 Aug

I was reminded yesterday that once upon a time people who parked on the highway took care to park facing in the direction of travel and to use parking lights at night. It is a long time since I heard of either these regulations being enforced and to be honest had forgotten all about them so I have done some investigating. Some things have changed in the intervening period but some have not. Here are the current regulations:

  • “You MUST NOT park on a road at night facing against the direction of the traffic flow unless in a recognised parking space” (Highway Code rule 248, Road Vehicles Construction and Use Regulations 1986 Section 101, Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 section 24).
  • “Goods vehicles exceeding 1525 kg [which include Ford Transits  btw] MUST NOT be left on a road at night without lights [regardless of the speed limit]” (Highway code rule 250, Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 section 24).
  • “All vehicles MUST display parking lights when parked at night within 10 meters of a junction [regardless of speed limit]”. (Highway code rule 249, Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 section 24).
  • “All vehicles MUST display parking lights when parked on a road or a lay-by on a road with a speed limit greater than 30 mph” (Highway code rule 249, Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 section 24).
  • Then of course there are of course the rules that you must not drive on the pavement (Highway Code rule 145) and rule 239 which says something along the lines of ‘you should not park on the highway unless you have to’ which is of course completely pointless without a clear definition of what ‘have to’ means.

A quick survey around where I live shows that there is an average of 1 contravention per parked vehicle which is quite an achievement given that a significant number of vehicles are parked legally. One commercial vehicle that was parked at night facing the wrong way with wheels up on the pavement without lights within 10 meters of a junction scoring a maximum 4 points. Many others scored 2 (wrong direction and up on the pavement).

Clearly the authorities are not enforcing these regulations and I am quite sure that no amount of encouragement will persuade them to start doing so. So why mention it at all? Only because if these authorities seem happy for people to do pretty much what they want to when if comes to leaving cars on the highway then possibly it is time to start leaving other interesting ‘stuff’ on the highway to stir things up a bit and get some debate going.

What would happen if a rash of sheds, planters, children’s play equipment, bicycle stores and sofas etc etc turned up on roads across the country. Each item would have a clear label saying that this was private property and an explanation of why it ‘had to be’ left of the highway. One person ‘had’ to leave a shed on the highway because there was not enough room for it in their  garden? another ‘had’ to put a cycle rack in the road because the front hall was not wide enough for people to get past if the cycle was kept indoors? and a third ‘had’ to put a kids swing in the road because it wouldn’t fit down the passageway beside the house, etc etc?.

When the authorities come after the owners then the owner will ask for confirmation that the law is going to be enforced fairly and will string things out. It would be visual and engaging for the media!

I am reminded of the splendid person who gave evidence to the parliament back in 2001 who said “If pedestrians placed a chair on the carriageway it would be removed immediately, even though it would obstruct a smaller proportion of the road than when a car parks on the pavement. Cars could slow down and take care to avoid the chair, as pedestrians have to with parked cars. The Highways Act applies equally to the road and the footway. Pedestrians are being discriminated against“.

Any thoughts?

Ipswich Borough council 1 Pavement grabbers 0

1 Aug

I am pleased to say that I spotted a warden from the borough slapping warning notices on bins that were being left permanently on the pavement today. He said that he had issued a total of 600 stickers today in various locations around town where complaints had been made and that he was expecting to receive about 60 phone calls tomorrow saying it wasn’t fair! He did say that in most cases it was an effective deterent, especially the bit about the £1,000 fine. He was however interested to hear that Preston Council were planning to confiscate bins from people who ignored the warning and charge a more modest £20 for their return.

Bins sporting nice new warning notices

And a close up of the notice.

Close up of notice – warning of £1,000 fine

Carillion – ‘making today a worse place’

29 Jul

Carillion like roads, they are paid to build them and maintain them and their mission is to ‘make tomorrow a better place’. Unfortunately one of their vehicles is regularly left blocking a pavement overnight, is probably also damaging the paving and is definitely making today a worse place for local residents. I have just placed a report on fixmystreet and have also complained to them using their nice feedback form. Let’s put huge pressure on these companies that are paid to build roads and who then don’t respect pedestrians. Feel free to tell them what you think as well.

Anti-social overnight parking by Carrillion (who are paid to maintain roads!)

No chance of getting by.

Not much chance of getting by!

And of course this is not one-off. Here is another highway maintenance vehicle being parked overnight on the pavement in the area.

Another highway maintenance vehicle parked overnight on the pavement

US mother faced with jail after hit-and-run driver kills her child

28 Jul

This blog mainly reports on how UK pedestrians are regularly ignored, insulted and treated with contempt and also about the wonderful things that people in this country are doing to challenge this sorry situation. However, a comment on this blog yesterday alerted me to an appalling story in the USA where a mother, who’s 4yo child was killed by a hit-and-run driver as she crossed a busy road was found guilty of ‘vehicular homicide‘, an offense which seems to be primarily used against reckless drivers who kill but in this case was used again a pedestrian and who could have got a 3.5 years prison sentence. In fact she got ‘only’ got 40 hours community service and the chance of a retrial.

What comes clear from an interview with the mother on USA Today is that:
1) There is no provision for people to cross the road from the bus stop she used to the set of apartments opposite.
2) The road is a dual-carriageway and probably has a 45mph speed limit.
3) The transport authority is claiming that people should not cross the road, but should instead take an 800 meter diversion to use a proper crossing.
4) The jury has made up of people who didn’t use public transport or walk beside busy roads.

To me this an extreme example of ‘autocentric‘ planning and attitudes which resulting in everything being considered primarily from the motorist’s perspective. We see the same thing here where motorists park across the pavement to avoid inconveniencing other motorists, where maps fail to show footpaths because they are not relevant to motorists, where bins are left on the pavement by councils to avoid be sued by motorists, where signs warning motorists of diversions actually cause pedestrians to ‘divert’ into the road, and when the police arrest blind people in minutes as soon as they say they will deflate the tires of a car parked repeatedly across the pavement having failed to act on earlier requests from that person to get the motorist to stop parking there!

All of the above results in the perpetuation of the ‘oppression’ of pedestrians. What is great is to witness a huge global movement growing made up of people demanding that things change; not least, Ken Edelstein, from the Green Building Chronicle in Atlanta, who is doing a great job pointing out the injustice of this particular incident and showing how things could so easily be done differently in future.

Diversion starts, thanks to Trek Highway Services Ltd

18 Jul

The sign says ‘diversion ends’, however for pedestrians the diversion onto the road in Ipswich to get round the signage and the vehicle is just starting. Putting signs across the pavement like this is thoughtless and unnecessary, and there are plenty of other ones in the area as you can see below. We can thank Trek Highway services Ltd this time.

Diversion ‘starts’ for pedestrians who now have to go into the road

I clearer some of the stuff away to allow pedestrians to get past. It then looked like this:

That’s better! Pedestrians can get through now

Here are a whole bunch of thoughtlessly placed signs in the area:

Possibly the sign should read ‘Pavement blocked’

Make it big so motorists can read it. Just tough for pedestrians really

Let’s put this sign right across the pavement!

Here is a better position for the sign

‘Trek highway services Ltd 01842 821991’

Pioneering pavement parking ban for Welwyn Garden City?

18 Jul

Welwyn Hatfield Council and Herts County Council are planning to ban all vehicles and in particular commercial vehicles from parking on pavements and verges in central Welwyn Garden City 24/7 using the new legislative powers announced by the government back in February. The engineer for the council said ‘Vehicles driving over and parking on footways and verges in these areas have been observed to cause damage to kerbs, paving slabs, soft verges and can cause obstruction and risk to pedestrians’ and ‘ the scheme would make parking or the loading/unloading of a vehicle on the footway or verge in these areas illegal.’

Great stuff, especially as Welwyn Garden City was designed with every road having  wide grass verge with a central parkway which was once described as one of the world’s finest urban vistas! Indeed it still is very pretty as shown below, but do notice the car tracks across the verges in the foreground. Not major at present and possibly there are worse problems elsewhere, but it is best not to drive on a garden!

Parkway, Welwyn Garden City (copyright Google)

Preston City Council to confiscate wheelie-bins left on the pavement

4 Jul

Preston City Council has announced that it will remove bins left permanently on the pavement and charge people for their return. They approach will be to first leave yellow stickers, then a red ones and then confiscate them and charge the owners £11 to get them both. Both the labour and conservative groups support the move; deputy leader, Councillor John Swindells explained: “People have complained bitterly about them being out on the streets all the time.. we have tried with education and neighbourhood management teams. Residents requested further action be taken”.

Needless to say, one does not need to go to Preston to find bins left permanently on the pavement. Notice that these people living in my home town have actually got space on where they could store their bins on their land but choose instead to keep them on the pavement where they get in someone else’s way and create a pretty little garden on their patch. It makes a mockery of the dropped kerb; notice also that the bollards which were put their to keep the pavement clear of parked cars are now making the pavement even less usable. My council have said that it would be too difficult to do anything about it and have not followed up my complaint with any letters or whatever.

Bins on pavement with pretty private garden behind

Cars Off Pavements campaign leads to 75% reduction in pavement parking

4 Jul

A trial ‘Cars Off Pavements campaign‘ at four parking hot-spots in Charnwood, a borough of 167,000 people in Leicestershire, led to a 75% reduction in pavement parking and is now going to be rolled out across the borough. The campaign is being run by Charnwood Borough Council, Leicestershire Police and the Royal National Institute for the Blind. Charnwood Borough Council street wardens will issue £50 Parking Charge Notices to offenders who park on pavements in contravention of the signs and lines. Police officers and PCSOs can issue fixed penalty notices to offenders who cause pavement obstructions.The local MP was out recently showing his support. Great to see such no-nonsense coordinated action on the issue!

Charnwood parking leaflet (copyright)

Being treated with contempt and being ‘in contempt’

25 Jun

Back in 2001 a parliamentary transport committee concluded the pedestrians were treated with contempt. Contempt is an interesting word with two main meanings: The first meaning is given as the ‘an attitude of regarding someone or something as inferior, base, or worthless’ and ‘the state of being despised or dishonored; disgrace’. The second (legal) definition is more interesting which is the defined as ‘open disrespect or willful disobedience of the authority of a court of law or legislative body’. To be ‘in contempt’ there must be a lawful order, the person needs to have knowledge of the order, the ability to comply with the order and to fail to do so. Bill Clinton was found to be ‘in contempt’ when it was proven that he had deliberately given misleading answers to the investigators over the Monika Lewinsky affair.

As pedestrians we seem to have a choice: we can either accept that we are ‘despised or dishonored or in disgrace‘ and are ‘inferior, base, or worthless‘. If we accept this then we should just give up. Alternatively we can decide that the people who are making are lives difficult are ‘in contempt’ and act accordingly!

Here are a few local examples motorists and companies that I consider are ‘in comtempt’. All these photos have been taken in the past 24 hours near where I live. The first to are of vehicles owned by companies that are paid to maintain the highway!

The first vehicle is owned by Carilion plc, who’s moto is ‘making tomorrow a better place’. It is frequently parked across the footway overnight next to a new raised pedestrian crossing. Today there is about 500mm between its wing-mirror and the hedge.

Nice raised crossing, shame about the Carilion ‘highway maintenance’ van across the pavement

The next is a vehicle owned by Peek Traffic (or should that be ‘Peak Traffic’) which is parked on the pavement on double yellows with no-loading pips in such a way that pedestrians can’t use the pavement on the approach to a post office, a co-op and a bus stop. It has its official lights flashing and the driver is doing his paperwork. He says he had a right to park there (he doesn’t). I suggested that he moved off the pavement and onto the hard-standing but he wasn’t interested. Hopefully he will do so next time.

Peek Traffic, disruption for pedestrians

And here is a vehicle owned by Suffolk County Council which is fitted out to move disabled people around. There is no need to be parked up on the pavement at all at this point and it sends out all the wrong messages.

Suffolk County Council – should set a better example really

Of course there are all the other cars left on the pavement that the police refuse to deal with and consequently very narrow spaces left for pedestrians on the approach to schools. There are the maps that don’t including pedestrian routes (even the maps created specifically for pedestrians). When someone does dare to do something about it, as this blind man did in Wales, he got locked up. Another person who shoved a car out of the way that was blocking his garage ended up having to pay for the repair of the pavement parker’s car. There are the local councils that instruct their wheelie-bin collection staff to leave bins all over the pavement rather than back on private property and refuse to discuss the issue. I could go on but I won’t! What is clear is that pedestrians need to get out of victim mode and be a lot more assertive and start by using the right definition of contempt.

Update

Someone, possibly from Peek Traffic but possibly not has corrected me in a comment below saying that highway maintenance vehicles are allowed to ignore waiting restrictions to “allow the maintenace of roads and services there in”.   I will check these regulations at some point to see if they cover this situation.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →