Wednesday, March 26, 2014

U-Turns and “Street Clutter”

First the latest update on the long running issue of U-Turns in Clayhall Avenue. As promised by the Roding Councillors the decision to ban U-Turns in Clayhall Avenue has been requisitioned and now cannot go ahead until after it is debated at Full Council in June. The requisition was made by their Liberal Democrat colleague, Councillor Shoaib Patel, who is a Valentines ward member and the Redbridge Cabinet member for Environment, Transportation and Crime (which includes Highways and road safety).

Now, at the Area 3 Committee meeting last week Councillor Harold Moth, (Fullwell ward) made a statement that make my ears prick up. He said that he had recently seen an elderly woman coming out of the Winningales retirement home and nearly being knocked over by a lorry attempting a 3-point turn at the location where U-Turns are currently legal. I thought that couldn’t be right because there are railings all the way alongside the kerb on that side of the road and that’s where they continually get smashed and buckled by such manoeuvres, as pictured on previous post. The longer vehicles can’t do the turn in one go so they end up doing a 3-point turn.

Then on Monday I was on my way to get the 123 bus and lo and behold those railings are now gone. Disappeared, vanished, removed, AWOL. We do not know who removed them, or why. But we do know that Transport for London and Redbridge Council have a policy of removing "street clutter".

the missing safety railings

The point here is this. The railings further along, that don’t get damaged, are still there. But the railings that do get frequently damaged, that is doing the job they were put there for and protecting passing pedestrians from being hit by a vehicle are not there. Whether it is a decision based on the cost of continually replacing them, or in anticipation that the U-Turn ban would go ahead is not the point. The point is they were there for safety reasons and they are still needed.

Please can we have our safety railings back, Cllr Patel.

Here you can see the railings on the left stretching
right along almost to the width restriction

14 comments:

  1. Even if the prohibition of U-turns had gone ahead unhindered by naked party politics it does not mean that all drivers would have observed the ban. You are quite right B21 - the railings are still required. In the meantime Councillor Patel should p*** of and louse things up in his own Valentines ward.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The area committees of the wards affected clayhall and fullwell have agreed this. So what do the losers do? They requisition it. If at first you dont succeed ......... never mind hopefully they won't be around when it us due to be discussed. Thank you area committees fir supporting residents of clayhall and full well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks to the area committees who supported their residents in clayhall and full well. Let's hope that the losers who are not from the wards affected aren't around when it us due to be discussed after their decision to requisition it. A few minutes can save lives I for one believe in this.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have commented earlier on the necessity for banning this U-turn but with this posting another point has arisen. Why have we suddenly acquired a council member for ‘Environment, TRANSPORTATION and Crime’? Why cross the Atlantic for our council titles? What’s wrong with using the English word ‘Transport’? Does the word ‘Transportation’ make councillors feel more important or is the title an attempt at some kind of linguistic diversity to appease the thousands of United States citizens who have emigrated to Redbridge?

    Will TfL in future mean Transportation for London, and does Boris know?

    Are we about to see a member of council become responsible for Blacktops, Sidewalks and Comfort Stations in Downtown Redbridge?

    ‘Transportation’ is what used to happen to convicts exiled to Australia…ah yes! Transportation AND Crime. They obviously intend to deport parking offenders to Australia!

    Shoaib, I’ve already got my bag packed.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I support the idea of your penultimate paragraph Alfred. Solve the overcrowding problems in UK prisons - still plenty of room in Oz.

      Delete
  5. I guess the powers that be will wait till at least three old people have been killed before the railings are put back - for that is what Tfl tell you if you ask for speed cameras to be installed when over 50% of drivers are exceeding the speed limit. We old folk are dispensible -although there will be lots of doffing caps and grinning on doorsteps when the local elections are round the corner.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And that leading Roding councillor is scarcely in the first flush of youth.

      Delete
  6. U-turns in Clayhall Avenue may save Roding ward residents a minute or two on their journey but they cause a longer and slower queue in Clayhall Avenue and hold up traffic coming out of Claybury Broadway. One of the Roding councillors claimed that it takes 10 minutes to drive the alternate route via the roundabout at Longwood Gardens and Beehive Lane, which is a great exaggeration with rare exceptions. Let's have no U-turns and camera enforcement.

    ReplyDelete
  7. As an experiment I recently turned left out of Portman Drive, turned right into Marston and Wensleydale and then right into Clayhall Avenue and down to the lights. It is 0.9 miles and took a few minutes; the only 'hold-up' being that there were four cars waiting to turn into Clayhall Ave.

    I don't know what the residents of Marston and Wensleydale would think about increased traffic but it is clearly not necessary to use Clayhall Avenue for a U-turn.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The residents of the Marston/Wensleydale area have to use Clayhall Avenue to get to Charlie Browns roundabout and would be the ones waiting in the queue in Clayhall Avenue and complaining about U-Turns.

      Delete
    2. This has been going on for years, but for some reason a Roding councillor is stirring it all up again now. Is there a particular event taking place on 22 May?

      Delete
  8. Please can you correct your article which is misleading. Pedestrian guardrailing is ONLY used to STOP PEDESTRIANS CROSSING the road, it is not to 'protect pedestrians' as the article states. In fact, it is designed to crumple when hit by a vehicle (hence the condition it gets in) and it is a blight on our streets. If you don't believe me please take the time to speak to a highways engineer, or look on the internet.

    ReplyDelete