Search

Showing posts with label abusive. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abusive. Show all posts

Nisa Today's drivers shows their awareness of pedestrians

Posted by Kimberly on Sunday, December 12, 2010

While in London the cyclist campaigners mourn the fact that HGV drivers are often oblivious to cyclists, in Bristol the large delivery vehicles are aware of more vulnerable road users, and rather than use their indicators to warn of impending actions, use hand signals and voice calls to ensure that everyone is aware of the issue.

Here we see FJ59DFF making their intent clear to pedestrians crossing the road, using hand and voice, and by engaging in a dialogue, understanding that their manoeuvres will be carried out, such as the turn from Cotham Brow into Kingsley Road, and from Kingsley road to Zetland Road, where we see the driver adding some voice and eye contact, to make sure that they have been seen.


You could indicate before your truck turns, but then you may not be sure that the pedestrians planning to cross have actually seen it. Hand signals and shouting are more effective.

Note that Nisa Today's are a community set of shops who work together for better pricing; their deliveries are all handled by DHL -hence the little DHL logo on the side of the van. The driver is paid by DHL, so their impact on Nisa Today's branding by appearing in such videos is of little direct consequence.
More aboutNisa Today's drivers shows their awareness of pedestrians

The Bloomsbury Problem

Posted by Kimberly on Saturday, November 13, 2010

Another issue we had with the Russel Square area is that this marked a clear attempt to bring cycle-friendly infrastructure into the inner city, rather than, as in Bristol, leave it places where we hope it doesn't get in the way of anyone important.

First, signs, encouraging cyclists to find their way round

Full green bike paths, with raised kerbs to make it slightly harder to accidentally park in them.
Junctions for the bicycles themselves, with no cyclists dismount signs
And here, worst of all, an "except cycles" get-out clause on a one way street. Not "except cycles, taxis and van drivers", but cycles only.
What is really depressing here is that the Camden council staff behind such schemese visited the proposed GBBN Whiteladies Road development, the one that will help motorists driving in to town by removing the zebra crossings in our way and making cycling more dangerous. We know this as we infiltrated the event, keeping track of what people were saying, and whether complaints were being dismissed -as expected- or actually listened to, and tried to slip our own ideas in to distract them.

On the topic of that camden council cycle team visit, can we extend our apologies to the woman driving the green nissan micra down WL road who was held up for fifteen seconds by the funny bicycle people. Yes, you were right to beep your horn at us for not being in the bike lane, even though cyclists don't have to cycle in them, they can cycle two abreast legally, and the traffic jam ahead meant you weren't losing any time. Yes, you were right to complain that eight people on bicycles at 08:50 on a weekday were causing utter chaos, which is why the local council had arranged the cyclist visit to during the quiet period mid-morning.  Sadly, some of the cycle troublemakers had spotted the flaw there and pressured for a rush hour visit, which is why you were held up by three people cycling two-abreast down whiteladies road.

Because we were trying to blend in with these subversives we did have to come up and argue with you while you were stopped at the traffic lights, as anything else would have aroused the suspicions of the rest of the group.

Sorry!

We didn't really mean to call you a selfish idiot who would clearly benefit from getting out of their car and trying to do some exercise! It's your right to get fat and stay unfit by driving to work and back, stopping only in the supermarket to buy ready-to-fry fast foods.

We didn't really want to dispute the niceties of the highway code and the fact that nowhere in it does it say "bicycles should be banned from our roads"  -because like you, we think it ought to! It was just something we had to do to blend in!
More aboutThe Bloomsbury Problem

Cyclists must know their place

Posted by Kimberly on Saturday, September 11, 2010

Clearly motorists are more important and must take priority on the road, regardless of the right of way of inferior pedestrians or cyclists. It is concerning to us then that so many of these "alternative" travel modes seem to think that they can be considered as a legitimate form of transport.

Consider this next case. Imagine you are almost 30 seconds away from your destination and you want to turn right into Stanton road from PenPark road, Southmead after a long morning doing something important. A cyclist decides to turn in front of you, thinking that they have right of way as another car might have in his same situation. It will not do at all and is likely to add several seconds to your journey.

It is important to make a point about this impudence! P198HWK takes such action and attempts to force cyclist onto the pavement where he would normally belong. Disappearing around the corner there is an inspired one finger salute just in case there was any doubt by the cyclist that he had done something wrong.





The trouble is that we cannot condone this sort of action. Imagine the engine and tyre wear that vehicles would suffer from this revving and squealing and if this was the norm then it will only add to the large expense that us poor motorists already suffer. Let's hope at least that this one cyclist has learned his lesson.
More aboutCyclists must know their place