We’d take it! God, what I wouldn’t give for some of our roads to be slower. Our neighbors and my family lobbied the city to install traffic calming measures on our road, but they declined, unfortunately. We even offered to give them the money to install even just a set of speed humps. Our road has lots of bicycles, children, and buses. People in private vehicles shouldn’t be doing 60+ on a 40 kmh road.
The biggest question I had when reading this was, what’s wrong with speed bumps?
They allow two way traffic, slow people down, and will last longer than a bunch of plastic crap stuck to the pavement.
People would still complain. There is never ending complaints about any kind of traffic calming measures in Hamilton. Hamilton isn’t even that big, I never understand why everyone here needs to drive so fast everywhere they go. I think it barely even saves time.
It does sound like much more notice should have been given to residents, on the other hand it also sounds like the council gets a lot of local complaints of speeding on that road… I’m not sure what the locals there are expecting them to do besides traffic calming measures?
Oh, no doubt, but this genuinely does sound like a cock up to me.
Bump, but easy to install.
But there are better (more comfortable) calming methods, like chicanes.However, some UK and Irish “traffic calming” schemes, particularly involving road narrowings, are viewed as extremely hostile and have been implicated directly in death and injury to cyclists and pedestrians.
Trust the British to fuck it up. One issue with a chicane is, if there’s no oncoming traffic, you can use both lanes and just not slow down.
People who want to drive like cunts are upset that something is done to stop them driving like cunts…
It really is just that simple.
My semi-local equivalent was the council removing physical barriers separating a bike lane because drivers kept hitting them.
Think about that for a minute.
This is really painful to read. One would think they’d be swapping them to wood, metal, or concrete…
They were the small concrete ‘pill’ barriers. So no more than a kerb.
Apparently soccer mums (please excuse the gender stereotype) and their, barely controlled, rav4’s were too much to handle.
Did you actually read the article? They’ve created a traffic jam, nobody knows what’s going on, and the worst part is, if there’s no other traffic, you could still fang it though the chicanes from what I can see.
I read it, it sounds like a bunch of entitled cunts annoyed that something they’re familiar with has changed.
“Everybody’s confused!”. Ok, maybe the 1st day. If you’re still confused in a week you shouldn’t be driving.
It sounds like there’s no designated right of way, so who is supposed to go?
And if they’re not used to having an artificially created traffic jam on their street, honestly, I think that’s fair enough.
There’s always a right of way, indicated by signs or just road law. If a driver doesn’t know the relevant rules they’re not qualified to be on the road.
And if they’re not used to having an artificially created traffic jam on their street, honestly, I think that’s fair enough.
Yes, let’s stick with the 100km/h traffic in the residential area.
So who has the right of way then? Because I don’t see any signage indicating that in the photo.
And as I said earlier, what’s wrong with speed bumps?
I didn’t say there’s anything wrong with speed bumps. Though I’ve noticed a trend away from them, so there may be a reason for it.
It’s a bit bold to take a look at a single low res picture and say there’s nothing there indicating right of way. It might be marked on the road, it might be just out of the camera angle, whatever.
There may be signage, but between the “nobody knows what’s going on” comment, and the fact there’s no evidence of it, would you say it’s more likely there is or isn’t a designated right of way?
