Discover Hertford Online Forum

Archived Topic

Topic ID 1858

15/08/2006 by Fish Wife

Fore Street

Now here's something that's been puzzling me lately....can anyone tell me when it became acceptable for cyclists to ride the wrong way down a one-way street? I ask this as someone who has almost been knocked flying recently, and would like to add that it's all ages, not just kids and includes postmen. I would also like to add that it's the older irresponsible cyclists who are the most verbally inarticulate, knowing only three words, two of which are 'you' and 'off.'


0 replies

Archived Replies

Reply ID 23499

16/08/2006 by ian.ball

I'm not entirely sure it *is* one way - depends if you mean the bit by Millets then I think you'll find cycles are allowed - they always used to be anyway? Irrespective of that, I agree there does seem to be a large increase in adults on bikes abusing roads and pavements these days [:(]


Reply ID 23509

16/08/2006 by Ewoowar

Which stretch of Fore Street? I cycle from Lussmans through to Parliament Square and usually get comments and gestures from car drivers travelling the other way. They clearly do not understand the traffic restrictions for this road.


Reply ID 23520

16/08/2006 by David Yates

I think Fish Wife means the stretch between M&S and Ugly's. This is one way. And one way means one way for all. It's just a matter of time before the undertaker is called into action right on his doorstep! Worst of all is that if I call out to advise that the road is one way, some cyclists tend then to switch to the pavement. A super move of great quality I think you'll agree!


Reply ID 23528

16/08/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by ian.ball
I'm not entirely sure it *is* one way - depends if you mean the bit by Millets then I think you'll find cycles are allowed - they always used to be anyway? Irrespective of that, I agree there does seem to be a large increase in adults on bikes abusing roads and pavements these days [:(]
It's the stretch from M & S to The Corn Exchange, and I agree with Mr Yates - it is becoming more and more common for cyclists to use the pavement if they can't do what they like going the wrong way up a one way street. I think I am also right in saying that the stretch of Fore Street from The Shire Hall to Parliament Square is prohibited to all motor vehicles except buses.....yeah right! Again, excellent use of limited vocabularies.


Reply ID 23535

16/08/2006 by Dude

I saw a car drive the wrong way up Fore street a few weeks back.


Reply ID 23536

16/08/2006 by Deveraux

quote:
Originally posted by Dude
I saw a car drive the wrong way up Fore street a few weeks back.
It's not unknown - I always make a point of looking both ways, especially when exiting the premises next to the premises next to Mr Yates' office ....


Reply ID 23538

16/08/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Deveraux
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
I saw a car drive the wrong way up Fore street a few weeks back.
It's not unknown - I always make a point of looking both ways, especially when exiting the premises next to the premises next to Mr Yates' office ....
[;)] Quite right too and probably a very good idea, assuming that seeing is still an option after coming out of the premises next to the premises next to Mr Yates'fine emporium, otherwise you could end up in the premises next to his! Nevertheless, there is an all too 'I'm all right Jack' attitude from some people lately. Is it me? Am I doing it all wrong[?][?][?]


Reply ID 23551

17/08/2006 by ian.ball

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife Nevertheless, there is an all too 'I'm all right Jack' attitude from some people lately. Is it me? Am I doing it all wrong[?][?][?]
No, it's not just you - I've noticed a step change over the last few years, not only in cyling but also driving and even parking - there are more and more people who are using the pavement as a parking space and not allowing room for pedestrians for example.


Reply ID 23552

17/08/2006 by Ewoowar

quote:
Originally posted by ian.ball
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife Nevertheless, there is an all too 'I'm all right Jack' attitude from some people lately. Is it me? Am I doing it all wrong[?][?][?]
No, it's not just you - I've noticed a step change over the last few years, not only in cyling but also driving and even parking - there are more and more people who are using the pavement as a parking space and not allowing room for pedestrians for example.
Like the person who lives on the corner of Cross Lane and North Road and who dumps their 4x4 entirely on the pavement outside the house on Cross Lane?


Reply ID 23554

17/08/2006 by Tigger

Try the Taxi drivers! Obviously in a hurry to pick up his fare. Drove straight towards me then swerved, grinning to avoid me. But too shocked to actually clock him.


Reply ID 23566

17/08/2006 by David Yates

quote:
Originally posted by Dude
I saw a car drive the wrong way up Fore street a few weeks back.
I can concur with this - it's not an unusual happening. Also as my mortgage brokerage is on Fore Street and I am there all day I can tell you that a large number of cars REVERSE up the wrong way instead of going around the one way system. It appears in this world that people will pick and choose which of the laws they will adhere to and which ones they will choose to ignore. It boils down to a lack of respect for others. A couldn't care less attitude that prevails in many aspects of life today. Now I really sound like a grumpy old man!


Reply ID 23596

18/08/2006 by Mr P

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife Nevertheless, there is an all too 'I'm all right Jack' attitude from some people lately. Is it me?
You are right. People are beginning to believe their own PR.


Reply ID 23597

18/08/2006 by Reg Varny

quote:
I can concur with this - it's not an unusual happening. Also as my mortgage brokerage is on Fore Street and I am there all day I can tell you that a large number of cars REVERSE up the wrong way instead of going around the one way system. It appears in this world that people will pick and choose which of the laws they will adhere to and which ones they will choose to ignore. It boils down to a lack of respect for others. A couldn't care less attitude that prevails in many aspects of life today. Now I really sound like a grumpy old man!
Drivers should follow the rules of the road but when they are messed around with so much by the powers that be is it really surprising that some chose to ignore them?


Reply ID 23601

18/08/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Reg Varny
quote:
I can concur with this - it's not an unusual happening. Also as my mortgage brokerage is on Fore Street and I am there all day I can tell you that a large number of cars REVERSE up the wrong way instead of going around the one way system. It appears in this world that people will pick and choose which of the laws they will adhere to and which ones they will choose to ignore. It boils down to a lack of respect for others. A couldn't care less attitude that prevails in many aspects of life today. Now I really sound like a grumpy old man!
Drivers should follow the rules of the road but when they are messed around with so much by the powers that be is it really surprising that some chose to ignore them?
In what way are drivers so "messed around" with by the "powers that be" that justifies driving the wrong way up a one way street?


Reply ID 23660

19/08/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Reg Varny
quote:
I can concur with this - it's not an unusual happening. Also as my mortgage brokerage is on Fore Street and I am there all day I can tell you that a large number of cars REVERSE up the wrong way instead of going around the one way system. It appears in this world that people will pick and choose which of the laws they will adhere to and which ones they will choose to ignore. It boils down to a lack of respect for others. A couldn't care less attitude that prevails in many aspects of life today. Now I really sound like a grumpy old man!
Drivers should follow the rules of the road but when they are messed around with so much by the powers that be is it really surprising that some chose to ignore them?
In what way are drivers so "messed around" with by the "powers that be" that justifies driving the wrong way up a one way street?
Messed around? How and by whom exactly? There is no excuse whatsoever for ignoring the rules of the road, it boils down to the simple fact that some people couldn't care less about anyone else as long as they are getting to where they want to be, as quickly and with as little inconvenience to themselves as possible.


Reply ID 23675

19/08/2006 by Reg Varny

As I said I am not condoning those who break the rules of the road. "In what way are drivers so messed around" Well I would have thought that was obvious. Parts of the town are now pedestrianised. Much of the free on street parking has gone. Parts of roads have been raised so that no one knows if you are on a path or a road. Roads have bee narrowed making it difficult for buses to get through the town which holds up traffic. Roads are now one way. You have to drive out of town and round Gascoyne Way just to get from Fore Street to Parliament Square. Need I go on?


Reply ID 23681

19/08/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Reg Varny
As I said I am not condoning those who break the rules of the road. "In what way are drivers so messed around" Well I would have thought that was obvious. Parts of the town are now pedestrianised. Much of the free on street parking has gone. Parts of roads have been raised so that no one knows if you are on a path or a road. Roads have bee narrowed making it difficult for buses to get through the town which holds up traffic. Roads are now one way. You have to drive out of town and round Gascoyne Way just to get from Fore Street to Parliament Square. Need I go on?
These changes have been in place for years. It appears that it is only recently that drivers have adopted selfish attitudes to rules that don't suit them


Reply ID 23682

19/08/2006 by Reg Varny

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Reg Varny
As I said I am not condoning those who break the rules of the road. "In what way are drivers so messed around" Well I would have thought that was obvious. Parts of the town are now pedestrianised. Much of the free on street parking has gone. Parts of roads have been raised so that no one knows if you are on a path or a road. Roads have bee narrowed making it difficult for buses to get through the town which holds up traffic. Roads are now one way. You have to drive out of town and round Gascoyne Way just to get from Fore Street to Parliament Square. Need I go on?
These changes have been in place for years. It appears that it is only recently that drivers have adopted selfish attitudes to rules that don't suit them
Yes I agree with what you say there does seem to be a trend in Britain at the moment of people breaking laws that they personally regard as silly. I am talking about people in general here not just motorists. People seem to be becoming less torlerant.


Reply ID 23703

20/08/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Reg Varny
As I said I am not condoning those who break the rules of the road. "In what way are drivers so messed around" Well I would have thought that was obvious. Parts of the town are now pedestrianised. Much of the free on street parking has gone. Parts of roads have been raised so that no one knows if you are on a path or a road. Roads have bee narrowed making it difficult for buses to get through the town which holds up traffic. Roads are now one way. You have to drive out of town and round Gascoyne Way just to get from Fore Street to Parliament Square. Need I go on?
If it says 'One Way' then it means One Way, whatever changes may have taken place.


Reply ID 23733

21/08/2006 by Lady Pinking

But then most of the so called "drivers" probably only passed by the sink of their teeth and then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign. This is hearsay, from a source, so if you don't like it you may take it off.


Reply ID 23734

21/08/2006 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Lady Pinking
But then most of the so called "drivers" probaly only passed by the sink of their teath and then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign.
I'd suggest you stop reading The Daily Mail [:D]


Reply ID 23743

21/08/2006 by Lady Pinking

What would you suggest I read instead! ;-)


Reply ID 23752

21/08/2006 by Victor Meldrew

A dictionary [:D]


Reply ID 23756

21/08/2006 by Joby

quote:
Originally posted by Lady Pinking
But then most of the so called "drivers" probaly only passed by the sink of their teath and then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign.
Wow. Words fail me [V]


Reply ID 23765

21/08/2006 by 2929paul

quote:
Originally posted by Lady Pinking
then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign.
Admin - I find this offensive. In fact, I would call it racist. Can it be removed from the site please. At the very least, it is off topic.


Reply ID 23768

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

How is it racist? I'm more intrigued to know if this is true or not? As for Fore Street, remember, once you have 'mistakenly' entered a one-way street the wrong way you MUST continue to the end of the road, you must never attempt to turn your car/vehicle round [;)]


Reply ID 23773

21/08/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
How is it racist? I'm more intrigued to know if this is true or not? As for Fore Street, remember, once you have 'mistakenly' entered a one-way street the wrong way you MUST continue to the end of the road, you must never attempt to turn your car/vehicle round [;)]
Where do you get this idea from? It is far safer, if you realise you have made a mistake to turn round, rather than face oncoming drivers who believe they will not be facing traffic driving the wrong way


Reply ID 23774

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

The Highway code states if you find yourself going the wrong way in a one-way street continue to the end of the road.


Reply ID 23779

21/08/2006 by Victor Meldrew

STAY OFF THE ROADS!! http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/11.htm#121 121: One-way streets. Traffic MUST travel in the direction indicated by signs. Buses and/or cycles may have a contraflow lane. Choose the correct lane for your exit as soon as you can. Do not change lanes suddenly. Unless road signs or markings indicate otherwise, you should use the left-hand lane when going left the right-hand lane when going right the most appropriate lane when going straight ahead. Remember - traffic could be passing on both sides. Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & RTRA sects 5 & 8


Reply ID 23781

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

You obviously haven't taken a driving test (recently??) or read any current literature . One of the very questions you are asked in the theory part of the driving test is; what should you do if you find yourself driving the wrong way up a one-way street? Answer: Carry on driving to the end of the road.


Reply ID 23784

21/08/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by 2929paul
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Pinking
then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign.
Admin - I find this offensive. In fact, I would call it racist. Can it be removed from the site please. At the very least, it is off topic.
I don't get the racism bit [V]


Reply ID 23786

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

Me neither, it's a statement, not an opinion. But is it true? [;)]


Reply ID 23787

21/08/2006 by Dude

How is it racist?


Reply ID 23789

21/08/2006 by ridley

I also find the comment about immigration offensive. As the author says its hearsay - where a lot of racism seems to spring from. And the comment has got nothing to do with this topic.


Reply ID 23791

21/08/2006 by Victor Meldrew

No your right, However, I took the information from the Highway code, as per their website, so unless the information is outdated on that site, or different to the hard version, I would be very disappointed if I failed on that basis.


Reply ID 23792

21/08/2006 by Dude

quote:
Originally posted by ridley
I also find the comment about immigration offensive. As the author says its hearsay - where a lot of racism seems to spring from. And the comment has got nothing to do with this topic.
I still don't understand how his comment is racist? Dislikable, maybe, controversial, possibly. But how is it racist? Is this political correctness gone mad again?


Reply ID 23793

21/08/2006 by Frenchie

The code, i believe, says keep going until you find an exit road in which to safely turn off onto, dont try a U turn. Confusion is that Sarah states 'go the END of the road".


Reply ID 23794

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

That's because I keep picturing Fore Street when I've been replying [;)]


Reply ID 23798

21/08/2006 by ridley

<<I still don't understand how his comment is racist? Dislikable, maybe>> As well as 'dislikeable' Dude it is a prejudicial, ignorant, mean- spirited, insular and ill-informed comment directed at a particular group of people who are not originally from this country. Thats how I see it as racist. ITS JUST WRONG OK?


Reply ID 23802

21/08/2006 by Lady Pinking

Well back to the one way system...


Reply ID 23804

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

It is nothing more than a fact on what immigrants are currently eligible to apply for if they so wish. It doesn't even go into any personnal opinion. I do however agree it's hugely off-topic [:p] back to Fore Street me thinks....


Reply ID 23807

21/08/2006 by 2929paul

Last off topic word (to try and make it easier for some to understand)...substitute a certain colour for "immigrant" and then it becomes highly emotive and the post would have been censored immediately. Politically correct?????


Reply ID 23808

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

quote:
Originally posted by 2929paul
Last off topic word (to try and make it easier for some to understand)...substitute a certain colour for "immigrant" and then it becomes highly emotive and the post would have been censored immediately. Politically correct?????
Are you saying there is only one 'colour' of immigrant to the UK? When I hear immigrant I don't think of any one 'colour'?? What 'colour' would you like to replace the word immigrant with?


Reply ID 23810

21/08/2006 by 2929paul

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
quote:
Originally posted by 2929paul
Last off topic word (to try and make it easier for some to understand)...substitute a certain colour for "immigrant" and then it becomes highly emotive and the post would have been censored immediately. Politically correct?????
Are you saying there is only one 'colour' of immigrant to the UK? When I hear immigrant I don't think of any one 'colour'?? What 'colour' would you like to replace the word immigrant with?
No. Colour has nothing to do with it. It was by way of example. You have missed the point entirely. It is about ignorance and intolerance.


Reply ID 23812

21/08/2006 by Lady Pinking

I thought we were getting back to the Fore Street argument...


Reply ID 23815

21/08/2006 by ridley

<<sarah says "It is nothing more than a fact on what immigrants are currently eligible to apply for if they so wish.">> NO ITS NOT!! Its just some bigoted piece of cr*p that that someone has invented for their own nasty little reasons and you are passing it around. When did "immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination get a grant for a car" ever become a fact. I challenge Sarah to say where she read this. I'll calm down now.


Reply ID 23817

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

Quote myself earlier in the thread, sorry I didn't keep reapeating the same things over and over [V]

quote:
Me neither, it's a statement, not an opinion. But is it true?


Reply ID 23827

21/08/2006 by Fish Wife

Whoa, steady tigers....... I thought this was supposeed to be about the one way traffic in Fore Street, not everyone ranting at one another about racism/political correctness/being upset etc ad infinitum, The 'fact' of the matter is that there is a one-way system in place in Fore Street, that a lot of people of all ages choose to ignore if it means getting to where they want to go much more quickly than safely. The majority of them are cyclists of ALL ages, with very limited vocabulary. There....can we please get this back on track and if need be, start another thread called 'Ranting and Raving At Each Other.'


Reply ID 23829

21/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

A few months ago, whilst driving down the Parliament Square section of Fore Street the car in front tooted a cyclist who he obviously thought was going the wrong way. The cyclist responded by kicking the driver's door of the car quite aggressively as he cycled by [?] No vocab was involved at all in this instance [;)]


Reply ID 23831

21/08/2006 by Dude

quote:
Originally posted by 2929paul
Last off topic word (to try and make it easier for some to understand)...substitute a certain colour for "immigrant" and then it becomes highly emotive and the post would have been censored immediately. Politically correct?????
If you were to substitute with a colour then yes, it could be considered racist. But the fact is, it doesn't mention colour, and it doesn't even suggest one. Ignorance and intolerance is subjective, and opinion based. To ask for someone's non racist comment to be removed on racist grounds is asking for censorship of opinion, which could be viewed as an action of intolerance also.


Reply ID 23845

21/08/2006 by 2929paul

Dude, this is something best discussed over a pint and not here. The topic is Fore Street driving and it seems to me that it only continues a general theme of lazy and "me first" selfish driving (by which I mean a disregard for the rules of the road, whether or not one agrees with them) highlighted by various forum discussions recently: Driving through Access Only signs in lower bengeo Turning right out of tesco onto Ware Road Abusing blue badge and child and parent spaces Abusing parking restrictions including meters, yellow lines and pavement parking Driving in excess of the speed limit when we think it's safe to do so. IMHO it is a result of the changing society that we live in that puts a premium on time and demands that we do everything at the double. I believe that we should respect the laws of the land (I'm not saying I'm whiter than white) and make every effort to treat each other the way we would wish to be treated ourselves. Sounds like self-righteous claptrap (and probably is) but it helps to keep me calm and sane. I now need a pint more than ever.


Reply ID 23847

21/08/2006 by Berbatov

(I'm not saying I'm whiter than white) [/quote] Ouch. Is that allowed Dude?


Reply ID 23849

21/08/2006 by lemonjelly

quote:
Originally posted by Lady Pinking
But then most of the so called "drivers" probably only passed by the sink of their teeth and then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign. This is hearsay, from a source, so if you don't like it you may take it off.
I don't know if this is true although I suspect it isn't. I can not find any websites confirming this and would suggest that 'Lady Pinking' thinks (if she can) before she types unsubstantiated hearsay.


Reply ID 23851

21/08/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by Lady Pinking
But then most of the so called "drivers" probably only passed by the sink of their teeth and then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign. This is hearsay, from a source, so if you don't like it you may take it off.
Surely a normal reed isn't long enough? Which type of reed are we talking about here? Help?


Reply ID 23853

21/08/2006 by lemonjelly

My personal gripe with cyclists (of all creeds and colours) is the minority who seem to think that traffic lights do not apply to them. I often see this whilst waiting for the lights to change, although I've not yet seen this in Hertford. Traffic signs and signals apply to all vehicles, whether they have an engine or not. I used to work in London's West End and, one morning on my way to work, witnessed a speeding cyclist hit a pedestrian really hard on the back of the head because (presumably) she had walked across the road in front of him, although there was enough distance between them for her to do this safely. She had no idea who or what had hit her. Thankfully the vast majority of cyclists are not like this but it does seem to me that more and more are flouting the law - or is this just something that comes with age???


Reply ID 23870

21/08/2006 by Dude

quote:
Originally posted by 2929paul
Dude, this is something best discussed over a pint and not here.
Agreed! [:)]


Reply ID 23871

21/08/2006 by Dude

quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
(I'm not saying I'm whiter than white)
Ouch. Is that allowed Dude?
I never said that!? Did you mean Dude (ie me), or as in "Whoa Dude!"?! [:)]


Reply ID 23872

21/08/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
(I'm not saying I'm whiter than white)
Ouch. Is that allowed Dude?
I never said that!? Did you mean Dude (ie me), or as in "Whoa Dude!"?! [:)]
The latter mate.


Reply ID 23878

21/08/2006 by Dude

quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
(I'm not saying I'm whiter than white)
Ouch. Is that allowed Dude?
I never said that!? Did you mean Dude (ie me), or as in "Whoa Dude!"?! [:)]
The latter mate.
Thats what I thought! [:)]


Reply ID 23923

22/08/2006 by Joby

quote:
Originally posted by lemonjelly
My personal gripe with cyclists (of all creeds and colours) is the minority who seem to think that traffic lights do not apply to them. I often see this whilst waiting for the lights to change, although I've not yet seen this in Hertford.
Many drivers also seem to think traffic lights don't apply to them, at least ones of the only-just-turned-red-variety. I've been cycling in and around Hertford for ages, and to be honest I think most of the cyclists here are ok - I don't tend to see them skipping lights/riding on pavements etc. anywhere near as much as I do in Cambridge where I work. I also (generally) find the tolerance of drivers towards cyclists much better in Hertford.


Reply ID 23931

22/08/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Joby
quote:
Originally posted by lemonjelly
My personal gripe with cyclists (of all creeds and colours) is the minority who seem to think that traffic lights do not apply to them. I often see this whilst waiting for the lights to change, although I've not yet seen this in Hertford.
Many drivers also seem to think traffic lights don't apply to them, at least ones of the only-just-turned-red-variety. I've been cycling in and around Hertford for ages, and to be honest I think most of the cyclists here are ok - I don't tend to see them skipping lights/riding on pavements etc. anywhere near as much as I do in Cambridge where I work. I also (generally) find the tolerance of drivers towards cyclists much better in Hertford.
I totally agree with you regarding drivers who don't think red lights apply to them. One of the worst spots is the lights by the Sportsman/Marks & Spencer. Try crossing the road as a pedestrian, and many drivers think it is their God given right to run you over, even after the lights have changed to red for them.


Reply ID 24005

22/08/2006 by David Yates

quote:
Originally posted by Joby
quote:
Originally posted by lemonjelly
My personal gripe with cyclists (of all creeds and colours) is the minority who seem to think that traffic lights do not apply to them. I often see this whilst waiting for the lights to change, although I've not yet seen this in Hertford.
Many drivers also seem to think traffic lights don't apply to them, at least ones of the only-just-turned-red-variety. I've been cycling in and around Hertford for ages, and to be honest I think most of the cyclists here are ok - I don't tend to see them skipping lights/riding on pavements etc. anywhere near as much as I do in Cambridge where I work. I also (generally) find the tolerance of drivers towards cyclists much better in Hertford.
I think the clue here is 'in Cambridge where I work'. I work on Fore street and see cyclists going the wrong way all of the time. This morning I saw a cyclist going over the lights by M&S from Fore Street while I was waiting for the lights to change. I did shout that he was going the wrong way. unfortunately he didn't hear me as he was wearing a walkman! Perhaps he had it on a low volume so he would be able to hear the police car/ambulance that may be behind him? I would hate to think that it would be impeeding his cycling even more than his yellow cycling shorts. Also in response to the earlier comments regarding the highway code and 'proceeding to the end of a one way street if you find yourself going the wrong way' I don't think that this applies to DECIDING to go the wrong way.


Reply ID 24006

22/08/2006 by ~Sarah~

quote:
Also in response to the earlier comments regarding the highway code and 'proceeding to the end of a one way street if you find yourself going the wrong way' I don't think that this applies to DECIDING to go the wrong way.
Of course it doesn't but how many people will admit they are doing it on purpose [?] Is it technically unenforcable as the (silly) rules state that you must continue to the next exit, which in Fore Street is the other end?


Reply ID 24031

22/08/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
quote:
Also in response to the earlier comments regarding the highway code and 'proceeding to the end of a one way street if you find yourself going the wrong way' I don't think that this applies to DECIDING to go the wrong way.
Of course it doesn't but how many people will admit they are doing it on purpose [?] Is it technically unenforcable as the (silly) rules state that you must continue to the next exit, which in Fore Street is the other end?
[?] We're talking about push bikes, not 18-wheel pantechnicon lorries - just pull into the kerb, stop, get off and turn your bike around, but hey - that would involve far too much effort, and so what if someone gets knocked over or a vehicle damaged? The cyclists aren't insured, have no dedicated cycling licence and most likely the last time they underwent ANY form of cycling proficiency was at junior school. Add to that being plugged in to a walkman/MP3 player and a disregard for basic road user etiquette and you have a recipe for harm. I'm not entirely sure that this behaviour in unenforceable, the problem is you can't endorse someone's licence when they haven't got one!


Reply ID 24041

22/08/2006 by MrTuco

I am new to this forum so hi to all,[:D]. I am also situated on Fore St quite close to the I have on several occasions almost come close to being knocked over. I feel it is unbelievable that I have to look both ways on a 1 way street. I do think, as stated later on this topic that is just a lack of consideration for others as some people seem to think that there journey is infinitely more important than every one else's. It is only a matter of a short time before there is a serious accident due to this mindless act of selfishness. I just hope that I am not driving down there when someone is coming the wrong way as I would hate to be caught up in such a mess. (although I do know the undertaker does an exceptional job)

quote:
Originally posted by David Yates
I think Fish Wife means the stretch between M&S and Ugly's. This is one way. And one way means one way for all. It's just a matter of time before the undertaker is called into action right on his doorstep! Worst of all is that if I call out to advise that the road is one way, some cyclists tend then to switch to the pavement. A super move of great quality I think you'll agree!


Reply ID 24056

22/08/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
I am new to this forum so hi to all,[:D]. I am also situated on Fore St quite close to the I have on several occasions almost come close to being knocked over. I feel it is unbelievable that I have to look both ways on a 1 way street. I do think, as stated later on this topic that is just a lack of consideration for others as some people seem to think that there journey is infinitely more important than every one else's. It is only a matter of a short time before there is a serious accident due to this mindless act of selfishness. I just hope that I am not driving down there when someone is coming the wrong way as I would hate to be caught up in such a mess. (although I do know the undertaker does an exceptional job)
quote:
Originally posted by David Yates
I think Fish Wife means the stretch between M&S and Ugly's. This is one way. And one way means one way for all. It's just a matter of time before the undertaker is called into action right on his doorstep! Worst of all is that if I call out to advise that the road is one way, some cyclists tend then to switch to the pavement. A super move of great quality I think you'll agree!

Don't stand still for too long outside his shop - he can estimate your size in no time! The quality never ceases to amaze!


Reply ID 24164

23/08/2006 by MrTuco

qOk, tonight was the last straw, Whilst about to leave my premises close to the Mortgage Broker's on Fore St. A guy in a blue Ford KA (X808 FBY) reversed from the Ram all the way to the top of Fore St at speed. He a few minutes later drove back down at a slower speed & stopped to go to the newsagent, when I explained to him that the street was one way his reply was 'so what, it dowwwn't (I think he meant does not) matter' So I then proceeded to ask him 'what if someone was to step out whilst looking in the correct direction & was to be knocked down by him. He answered 'Their bad luck'. When is this selfish infantile attitude going to stop? I would hope it is well before our friendly undertaker, who is situated next to our friendly Mortgage Broker, has to become involved.


Reply ID 24174

23/08/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
qOk, tonight was the last straw, Whilst about to leave my premises close to the Mortgage Broker's on Fore St. A guy in a blue Ford KA (X808 FBY) reversed from the Ram all the way to the top of Fore St at speed. He a few minutes later drove back down at a slower speed & stopped to go to the newsagent, when I explained to him that the street was one way his reply was 'so what, it dowwwn't (I think he meant does not) matter' So I then proceeded to ask him 'what if someone was to step out whilst looking in the correct direction & was to be knocked down by him. He answered 'Their bad luck'. When is this selfish infantile attitude going to stop? I would hope it is well before our friendly undertaker, who is situated next to our friendly Mortgage Broker, has to become involved.
Well it is to be hoped that his nearest and dearest are never struck down by someone who says 'It dowwwwwn't ma''er. At least you didn't get the usual reply, suggesting that you fornicate yourself, together with a wildly gesticulating semi-clenched fist. Charm personified. Unfortunately his Mother probably would be very proud of him.


Reply ID 24178

23/08/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
qOk, tonight was the last straw, Whilst about to leave my premises close to the Mortgage Broker's on Fore St. A guy in a blue Ford KA (X808 FBY) reversed from the Ram all the way to the top of Fore St at speed. He a few minutes later drove back down at a slower speed & stopped to go to the newsagent, when I explained to him that the street was one way his reply was 'so what, it dowwwn't (I think he meant does not) matter' So I then proceeded to ask him 'what if someone was to step out whilst looking in the correct direction & was to be knocked down by him. He answered 'Their bad luck'. When is this selfish infantile attitude going to stop? I would hope it is well before our friendly undertaker, who is situated next to our friendly Mortgage Broker, has to become involved.
Is this serious?


Reply ID 24179

23/08/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
qOk, tonight was the last straw, Whilst about to leave my premises close to the Mortgage Broker's on Fore St. A guy in a blue Ford KA (X808 FBY) reversed from the Ram all the way to the top of Fore St at speed. He a few minutes later drove back down at a slower speed & stopped to go to the newsagent, when I explained to him that the street was one way his reply was 'so what, it dowwwn't (I think he meant does not) matter' So I then proceeded to ask him 'what if someone was to step out whilst looking in the correct direction & was to be knocked down by him. He answered 'Their bad luck'. When is this selfish infantile attitude going to stop? I would hope it is well before our friendly undertaker, who is situated next to our friendly Mortgage Broker, has to become involved.
Well it is to be hoped that his nearest and dearest are never struck down by someone who says 'It dowwwwwn't ma''er. At least you didn't get the usual reply, suggesting that you fornicate yourself, together with a wildly gesticulating semi-clenched fist. Charm personified. Unfortunately his Mother probably would be very proud of him.
Oh, sorry, now I see.


Reply ID 24180

23/08/2006 by David Yates

I just hope that the nice undertaker on Fore Street's next job isn't caused by the prevailing attitude outside his premises. He's a freindly fellow, but not one you would want to meet on a professional basis before you really need to?! Come on Hertford road users. Follow the rules before someone gets hurt.


Reply ID 24381

27/08/2006 by Landy

I think cyclist's think the pavement is equally split between them and pedestrians 80-20% that is. I've nearly been knocked over once or twice whilst walking my elderly mum to her car.


Reply ID 24524

30/08/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by Landy
... whilst walking my elderly mum to her car.
Er, if you have to walk your elderly mum to her car, one wonders if she's fit enough to be driving it which I assume is what she's doing as you state "her car" (and there's no mention of it being anything other than a normal vehicle?) Just a thought....


Reply ID 24545

30/08/2006 by Landy

quote:
Originally posted by 60sDJ
quote:
Originally posted by Landy
... whilst walking my elderly mum to her car.
Er, if you have to walk your elderly mum to her car, one wonders if she's fit enough to be driving it which I assume is what she's doing as you state "her car" (and there's no mention of it being anything other than a normal vehicle?) Just a thought....
Maaaaybe it's her car but I drive it precisely because of her age?? Hmmm??? Maaaaybe it's my car but she bought it, so technically her car?? "Anything other than a normal vehicle" could be called a Motability vehicle, just a thought... Anyway we digress, my point was referring to cyclists on pavements which led on from the subject of Fore Street. I thank you.


Reply ID 24628

02/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Landy
quote:
Originally posted by 60sDJ
quote:
Originally posted by Landy
... whilst walking my elderly mum to her car.
Er, if you have to walk your elderly mum to her car, one wonders if she's fit enough to be driving it which I assume is what she's doing as you state "her car" (and there's no mention of it being anything other than a normal vehicle?) Just a thought....
Maaaaybe it's her car but I drive it precisely because of her age?? Hmmm??? Maaaaybe it's my car but she bought it, so technically her car?? "Anything other than a normal vehicle" could be called a Motability vehicle, just a thought... Anyway we digress, my point was referring to cyclists on pavements which led on from the subject of Fore Street. I thank you.
Could it be that Landy has to walk walk his/her elderly Mum to her car to ensure that she doesn't get knocked flying by some arrogant twerp, exercising his/her 'right' to use his/her bike on the pavement, having found it too difficult to cycle the wrong way up the one way street because of the cars that are reversing into the flow of traffic to get to the newsagents? The undertakers must be rubbing their hands in glee......


Reply ID 24661

03/09/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
quote:
Originally posted by Landy
quote:
Originally posted by 60sDJ
quote:
Originally posted by Landy
... whilst walking my elderly mum to her car.
Er, if you have to walk your elderly mum to her car, one wonders if she's fit enough to be driving it which I assume is what she's doing as you state "her car" (and there's no mention of it being anything other than a normal vehicle?) Just a thought....
Maaaaybe it's her car but I drive it precisely because of her age?? Hmmm??? Maaaaybe it's my car but she bought it, so technically her car?? "Anything other than a normal vehicle" could be called a Motability vehicle, just a thought... Anyway we digress, my point was referring to cyclists on pavements which led on from the subject of Fore Street. I thank you.
Could it be that Landy has to walk walk his/her elderly Mum to her car to ensure that she doesn't get knocked flying by some arrogant twerp, exercising his/her 'right' to use his/her bike on the pavement, having found it too difficult to cycle the wrong way up the one way street because of the cars that are reversing into the flow of traffic to get to the newsagents? The undertakers must be rubbing their hands in glee......
Do the undertakers wish to comment?. It may be in Landy's best interests and that of his elderly mother that he leaves her in the confines of her home whilst he takes her/his/jointly owned/ car and does the shopping etc for her. Sidewalk cyclists are here to stay and will avoid using the Fore Street and any roads which they would argue is more risky for them than for pedestrians in fear of collision. The police don't have the time to deal with them unless an accident occurs, (even then...?) Of course they could always set up a anti-sidewalk cyclists taskforce who would chase them suitably kitted out with flashing blue lights atop their helmets, heh heh...


Reply ID 24713

04/09/2006 by Landy

quote:
Do the undertakers wish to comment?. It may be in Landy's best interests and that of his elderly mother that he leaves her in the confines of her home whilst he takes her/his/jointly owned/ car and does the shopping etc for her. Sidewalk cyclists are here to stay and will avoid using the Fore Street and any roads which they would argue is more risky for them than for pedestrians in fear of collision. The police don't have the time to deal with them unless an accident occurs, (even then...?) Of course they could always set up a anti-sidewalk cyclists taskforce who would chase them suitably kitted out with flashing blue lights atop their helmets, heh heh...
Whilst I agree young people riding bikes on pavements may not be an easy problem to resolve I don't really like 60sDJ mentioning undertakers and my elderly mother almost in the same breath, nor do I feel it's appropriate to keep referring to the ownership her car. I do a lot of shopping for Mother anyway but she does like to go out for a ride in the car. I do see the funny side of his joke concerning police men on bicycles with flashing blue lights on their helmets, very good.


Reply ID 24720

04/09/2006 by Fish Wife

Boys/girls, this isn't about elderly parents, cars or flashing blue lights. Nor is it solely about young cyclists as many of the worst offenders are quite elderly themselves, and they all seem to adhere to the cyclists' mode of picking and choosing which rules of the Highway Code they will respect - one-way streets/cycling on pavements/ignoring red lights etc ad infinitum. Someone will get seriously hurt one day, then it will be spread across the local rag that 'something should be done.....' Tra la laaaaa


Reply ID 24749

05/09/2006 by 60sDJ

Absolutely right and maybe a "keep pavements for people" campaign by the Mercury could be the start of safer walkways. Glad you saw the funny side of my joke Landy,(was wondering??) but nothing implied with regards to who owns your car(???). I do think you're stretching things a bit with your reaction to my mentioning undertakers and your elderly mother almost in the same breath!!! Try not to be so sensitive, we're all here to exchange views with some humour too. :)


Reply ID 24756

05/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

I think that people are missing the point here on what is a very serious problem. This weekend I was walking from M&S (past the undertakers and the nice Mortgage Broker) and THREE bikes went past me on the pavement. This part of Hertford is turning into a racetrack! Any ideas on how we put a stop to this?


Reply ID 24761

05/09/2006 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
This weekend I was walking from M&S (past the undertakers and the nice Mortgage Broker) and THREE bikes went past me on the pavement.
Were they together and how old were the riders?


Reply ID 24774

05/09/2006 by shunt

My suggestion would be a cycle path all the way down one side and make it legal to use this route. It would, of course, require car drivers to not park on it. The longer route round Railway Street is a death trap for cyclists (pot holes, cobbles on a tight bend, a trench across the mini roundabout, dithering pedestrians in the road, four junctions) and though I do not condone using a one way street to avoid it, I can see why one might wish too. I have enough trouble negotiating the route on a conspicuous motorcycle safely. On narrower tyres, and a silent vehicle, it would be very scary indeed! The alternative is the dual carriageway, for cyclists with a more serious death wish. Until there is a such a facility, pavement riding is absolutely a no-no. Let's face it, pedestrians can't get the hang of not wandering about in the road, looking around them, or not jaywalking even on the proper route. If you stray into their domain, you are going to hurt someone and saying "sorry" just doesn't cut it!


Reply ID 24784

05/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by shunt
My suggestion would be a cycle path all the way down one side and make it legal to use this route. It would, of course, require car drivers to not park on it. The longer route round Railway Street is a death trap for cyclists (pot holes, cobbles on a tight bend, a trench across the mini roundabout, dithering pedestrians in the road, four junctions) and though I do not condone using a one way street to avoid it, I can see why one might wish too. I have enough trouble negotiating the route on a conspicuous motorcycle safely. On narrower tyres, and a silent vehicle, it would be very scary indeed! The alternative is the dual carriageway, for cyclists with a more serious death wish. Until there is a such a facility, pavement riding is absolutely a no-no. Let's face it, pedestrians can't get the hang of not wandering about in the road, looking around them, or not jaywalking even on the proper route. If you stray into their domain, you are going to hurt someone and saying "sorry" just doesn't cut it!
I have only just joined this forum and cannot believe this answer. Bikes allowed to go the other way on a cycle path? Cars not allowed to park? Cycling on very narrow wheels scary? Most of the bikes being used are 'mountain bikes' anyway and if a cyclist can't use the road correctly and safely (and in the right direction)then I suggest that they shouldn't be on ANY roads. If a cyclist wants to avoid a particular stretch of road then there is a clear and obvious solution. Dismount and push. Or would this just be too easy (or simply too much trouble)?


Reply ID 24785

05/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
This weekend I was walking from M&S (past the undertakers and the nice Mortgage Broker) and THREE bikes went past me on the pavement.
Were they together and how old were the riders?
Teenagers - Old enough to know better anyway! Two together and one just behind.


Reply ID 24789

05/09/2006 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
Teenagers - Old enough to know better anyway! Two together and one just behind.
I would suggest the problem is principally about teenagers, not cyclists.


Reply ID 24791

05/09/2006 by shunt

Sheila. If I made roads unsuitable for your make of car, would you get out and push it? Maybe the road surfaces are responsible for the popularity of 4x4s? Bicyclists have, as you pointed out, already had to buy a different type of bike over the last twenty years to cope with worsening conditions. If you read, I am not advocating pavement riding, but condemning it. As for the cycle lane, I'm suggesting a narrow lane on the post office side of the road. Do you think you could refrain from parking on the side of the road which is "No Parking" now, or would that be too much trouble? How about we make Fore Street one way for pedestrians, or remove the pavemants and make it cars only? Would you walk round, or perhaps try to nip through? Sometimes, to stop a problem, one has to think how it was created.


Reply ID 24793

05/09/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by shunt
As for the cycle lane, I'm suggesting a narrow lane on the post office side of the road.
Shunt. What about the buses? Berb.


Reply ID 24794

05/09/2006 by shunt

Yeah I know. I knew somebody would get me on that one! Didn't say the plan was perfect.


Reply ID 24795

05/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
Teenagers - Old enough to know better anyway! Two together and one just behind.
I would suggest the problem is principally about teenagers, not cyclists.
A shame that so many adults also use Fore Street in this way too, including post office workers on their bikes! This is not just teenagers causing the problem.


Reply ID 24798

05/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by shunt
Sheila. If I made roads unsuitable for your make of car, would you get out and push it? Maybe the road surfaces are responsible for the popularity of 4x4s? Bicyclists have, as you pointed out, already had to buy a different type of bike over the last twenty years to cope with worsening conditions. If you read, I am not advocating pavement riding, but condemning it. As for the cycle lane, I'm suggesting a narrow lane on the post office side of the road. Do you think you could refrain from parking on the side of the road which is "No Parking" now, or would that be too much trouble? How about we make Fore Street one way for pedestrians, or remove the pavemants and make it cars only? Would you walk round, or perhaps try to nip through? Sometimes, to stop a problem, one has to think how it was created.
If the roads were unsuitable for cars then my CAR TAX (directly or indirectly) would be used to repair them. I don't think that cyclists should dictate any new road system when the one that is there would work fine if the rules were being obeyed.(and yes I do ride a bike too). I simply don't see your argument. Furthermore, quite clearly a bike can be pushed by one person for 100 yards, a tad more difficult for a car, or am I wrong there too? A cycle lane? What happens to the taxi rank? What about deliveries? (as well as the bus stop as previously mentioned) Just for the record I have just walked round Fore Street (the right way) and the road appears fine. Yes there are junctions, yes there is a strip of cobble stones, but there is nothing whatsoever that should scare any competent cyclist. Surely it is more scary and vastly more dangerous to ride a bike the wrong way up the middle of a one-way street. Going the wrong way is not a choice of the safer route for cyclists, it is simply lazyness and a total disregard for any other road user.


Reply ID 24800

05/09/2006 by shunt

I've got it! Rip up all the traffic calming, pedestrian areas, fancy, slippery cobbles that people mistake for pedestrian areas and step out onto without looking, remove one way signs. Re-surface the roads, fill in the pot holes and rely on drivers negotiating a town center courtiously and sensibly as they once did with pedestrians crossing the road according to the highway code.........no, forget that........... erm.........? The problem is that a bike is neither a pedestrian (slow, stable and able to stop quickly), or a car (comfortable and requiring no effort to go the long way round), but something in between. The route from Old Cross to Bluecoats is twice as far for a cyclist than for a pedestrian because of concessions made to cars and pedestrians. I won't even start on all the ways we kill hundreds of motorcyclists unecessarily, 'cos that's a national issue, but emergency braking of any two wheeled vehicle on some of these surfaces is lethal. I used to be a keen Hertford cyclist, I am not now, for just these reasons.


Reply ID 24801

05/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

Shunt, Hang on just a minute here. Emergency braking? In a town centre? Just how fast do you think a bike should be going? Not only do I drive a car and ride a bike I also drive (I prefer drive to ride) a motorbike. All of which I manage to use in Hertford whilst observing the rules of the road. It is not difficult. Honest. In any case the discussion thread here is concerning people disregarding the rules of the road. The road is one way and should be treated as one way by ALL road users. Surely you must agree?


Reply ID 24803

05/09/2006 by shunt

I do, and have said so several times. I'm pointing out an imbalance in policy, not advocating public insurrection or saying it's impossible. As for speeds, how slow do you need to go to avoid a pedestrian, on a mobile, looking the other way, who steps onto the cobbles opposite Barclays believing it to be just for them? I normally reckon 4mph on the motorcycle in the wet. 8-10mph in a car. Most push bikes are faster than that.


Reply ID 24805

05/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

That's a fair point, but probably off the subject. That strip of cobbles does cause confusion I agree, especially when you have to walk around two taxi's parked on the pedestrian area to get to it! But that's not the area we are discussing here. Pedestrians looking the right way when crossing Fore Street still face the possibility of being hit by traffic coming the wrong way. It's just a shame that the possibility of a nasty accident appears not to deter the cyclists and any mention of their actions to them while they are doing it only get's a two word reply - usually ending in 'off'. What a society we live in where no-one says 'sorry, my fault' any more.


Reply ID 24806

05/09/2006 by shunt

We are in total agreement on that point.


Reply ID 24839

05/09/2006 by Landy

If I could also make a suggestion, perhaps there could be more cameras, like the one on this site, covering all of Fore Street from various angles? That way dangerous cyclists of all ages caught riding on the pavements could be reported to the police. It is becoming quite worrying now, especially for elderly people who don't always hear these cyclists coming behind them.


Reply ID 24859

06/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

Quality moment this morning. I am at a red light by M&S heading (the right way) down Fore Street. I was overtaken by a post office worker on a push bike wearing a walkman. Not only risking a car turning right from Railway Street but also risking not hearing anyone shouting a warning (or abuse I Suppose). At least he was going the right way though!


Reply ID 24866

06/09/2006 by shunt

Walkmans on bicycles, aaargh! I'd feel very insecure, insulated from the outside world like this. In theory it should be no different than driving a car with the windows closed and the radio on. Somehow it is. Or maybe our perception of the safety of the latter acceptable practice is what's skewed.


Reply ID 24911

06/09/2006 by MrTuco

Sheila, Do you where a pink sparkly dress?

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
Quality moment this morning. I am at a red light by M&S heading (the right way) down Fore Street. I was overtaken by a post office worker on a push bike wearing a walkman. Not only risking a car turning right from Railway Street but also risking not hearing anyone shouting a warning (or abuse I Suppose). At least he was going the right way though!


Reply ID 24922

06/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by shunt
Walkmans on bicycles, aaargh! I'd feel very insecure, insulated from the outside world like this. In theory it should be no different than driving a car with the windows closed and the radio on. Somehow it is. Or maybe our perception of the safety of the latter acceptable practice is what's skewed.
Oh so going over the red light is ok on a bike then? Once again you missed the real point I'm afraid.


Reply ID 24924

06/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
Sheila, Do you where a pink sparkly dress?
quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
Quality moment this morning. I am at a red light by M&S heading (the right way) down Fore Street. I was overtaken by a post office worker on a push bike wearing a walkman. Not only risking a car turning right from Railway Street but also risking not hearing anyone shouting a warning (or abuse I Suppose). At least he was going the right way though!

Mr Tuco, Of course - especially at weekends when my friends call me Florence! Now can we get back to the point please?


Reply ID 24928

06/09/2006 by shunt

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
quote:
Originally posted by shunt
Walkmans on bicycles, aaargh! I'd feel very insecure, insulated from the outside world like this. In theory it should be no different than driving a car with the windows closed and the radio on. Somehow it is. Or maybe our perception of the safety of the latter acceptable practice is what's skewed.
Oh so going over the red light is ok on a bike then? Once again you missed the real point I'm afraid.
No, I didn't miss the point, but considered it made adequately by yourself and picked a less obvious one, but if it makes you feel better, "Absolutely! Awful! Jumping a red light is illegal everybody!" Apologies, Shiela, but I naturally assumed that having mentioned the walkman too, you considered it relevant and wished your post to be read in it's entirety.


Reply ID 24929

06/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by shunt
quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
quote:
Originally posted by shunt
Walkmans on bicycles, aaargh! I'd feel very insecure, insulated from the outside world like this. In theory it should be no different than driving a car with the windows closed and the radio on. Somehow it is. Or maybe our perception of the safety of the latter acceptable practice is what's skewed.
Oh so going over the red light is ok on a bike then? Once again you missed the real point I'm afraid.
No, I didn't miss the point, but considered it made adequately by yourself and picked a less obvious one, but if it makes you feel better, "Absolutely! Awful! Jumping a red light is illegal everybody!" Apologies, Shiela, but I naturally assumed that having mentioned the walkman too, you considered it relevant and wished your post to be read in it's entirety.
A little overly aggressive I feel for a Wednesday afternoon. I'm just trying to back up my feeling that SOME cyclists are dismissive of rules and safety by offering an example. If in any way I have offended anyone on this forum I apologise. Hang on just a second...... I have just seen someone on a bike, going the Correct way down Fore Street, using the road and not the pavement, not using a walkman, and not travelling so fast that he couldn't stop if something was to happen in front of him. Fantastic. Well done to the unnamed cyclist. You never know this behaviour might catch on!


Reply ID 24930

06/09/2006 by shunt

Ok, I'll expand a little. Many of us have experienced near misses and learned from them. Isolation from traffic conditions prevents this learning curve. The red light jumper will never hear a car horn or screaching tyres as a result of his poor riding, if it occurs and will similarly be insulated from the anger of other road users at his antics. In this guy's case, such shocks may save his life. You need no license to ride a bike, but since it is a part of the job of Postman, the PO could consider checking basic competency and adherence to highway code as a responsible HR practice. ...and Shiela, I was smiling with good humour in my comments. Hope you weren't too offended.


Reply ID 24931

06/09/2006 by MrTuco

Yes you are correct the point is the issue here & not your dress? Yesterday I was able to see a van driver having to brake sharply for a guy on a cycle going the wrong way & through a red light. Is there anybody who can come up with a solution to this sillyness before the nice undertaker next to the nice mortgage broker is asked to make arrangements for a very unnecessary funeral? & I do apologise for my missuse of the word where in my last post.

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
Sheila, Do you where a pink sparkly dress?
quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
Quality moment this morning. I am at a red light by M&S heading (the right way) down Fore Street. I was overtaken by a post office worker on a push bike wearing a walkman. Not only risking a car turning right from Railway Street but also risking not hearing anyone shouting a warning (or abuse I Suppose). At least he was going the right way though!

Mr Tuco, Of course - especially at weekends when my friends call me Florence! Now can we get back to the point please?


Reply ID 24934

06/09/2006 by shunt

Regrettably, the answer is to give in and make it easier for cyclists. There is no licensing system (thankfully)and the problem has increased as we make road alterations for cars which disadvantage cycles. One way systems, traffic lights, bollards, pavements which are smoother than roads, are all very inviting to abuse if you have a vehicle on which you can take advantage and the alternatives are uninviting. It's going to be a carrot, not a stick that makes the difference.


Reply ID 24936

06/09/2006 by Avery

Well maybe there should be some sort of licensing system. I myself had a road and bike safety course when I was at school, but this was an after school activity, maybe this would be a good thing to add to the curriculum. Or perhaps a course you could take at the local college.


Reply ID 24937

06/09/2006 by MrTuco

I am with you all the way Avery, there should be some way of being able to pinpoint these people who decide that they are more important or less accountable than the rest of society.

quote:
Originally posted by Avery
Well maybe there should be some sort of licensing system. I myself had a road and bike safety course when I was at school, but this was an after school activity, maybe this would be a good thing to add to the curriculum. Or perhaps a course you could take at the local college.


Reply ID 24943

06/09/2006 by shunt

The cycling proficiency is still in operation and compulsory for anyone wishing to use a bike to get to school at Bengeo. I'm not sure about other schools.


Reply ID 24945

06/09/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
Yes you are correct the point is the issue here & not your dress? Yesterday I was able to see a van driver having to brake sharply for a guy on a cycle going the wrong way & through a red light.
Was the guy on a cycle wearing a dress?....of any colour? Normally van drivers especially the red ones (see, not always "WVM" White Van Man / Men drive poorly) but one that stops at very short notice at pillar boxes (I think they have ex-Formula 1 ceramic brakes pads) wouldn't stop for much if there's a brew on back at the depot.[:D]


Reply ID 24951

06/09/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
Quality moment this morning. I am at a red light by M&S heading (the right way) down Fore Street. I was overtaken by a post office worker on a push bike wearing a walkman....... At least he was going the right way though!
Aah it's when they come the wrong way, straight at you with the Walkman full on texting as they go,(which could be achieved by the more "proficient"?) that the fun starts. Who might get measured up 1st then by the nice man at the undertakers?


Reply ID 24955

06/09/2006 by shunt

quote:
Originally posted by Avery
Well maybe there should be some sort of licensing system. I myself had a road and bike safety course when I was at school, but this was an after school activity, maybe this would be a good thing to add to the curriculum. Or perhaps a course you could take at the local college.
See my earlier reply, but also consider this. We all percieve the problem to have got worse, though rules and training for cyclists are apparently unchanged. Surely it would make sense to examine the cause of this change in behaviour, specific to Fore St, rather than add yet another piece of legislation to address symptoms. Are we to assume the population in general have got worse and need more rules to control them?


Reply ID 24981

06/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

Quite simply put, the cyclists that we are talking about here DECIDE to ignore the rules (for whatever reason) so putting more rules in place would be pointless. Let's face it, the rules that there are would work if people adhered to them (drivers, cyclists, 'bikers AND pedestrians). It is not a case of cycling proficiency, or even about cycling, but more about people's attitude toward others. I don't know, but perhaps it's the old wrinkly in me that feels that it's pointless trying to change the general attitude of people. The attitude that somehow gets magnified when using the roads that is very irritating at best and downright dangerous at its worst.


Reply ID 24994

06/09/2006 by ~Sarah~

Having watched numerous Police officers drive their cars the wrong way down a one-way street (Maidenhead Street), I think the cyclists are the least of the towns problems. Maybe if those people who are being paid to set an example actually did so; it might go some way to encourage/educate others to do the same?


Reply ID 24995

06/09/2006 by Steve

As far as I know it isn't a one-way street, it's access only, and I think the police are perfectly entitled to drive down it if they're fulfilling their duty of protecting the public.


Reply ID 24996

06/09/2006 by ~Sarah~

The end that joins to Bull Plain has 'no entry' signs. Regarding Fore Street, today I have seen one woman riding her bike along the pavement and one teenager riding his bike the wrong way - but no one cycling correctly - quite ironic me thinks! [:p]


Reply ID 25000

06/09/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
The end that joins to Bull Plain has 'no entry' signs. Regarding Fore Street, today I have seen one woman riding her bike along the pavement and one teenager riding his bike the wrong way - but no one cycling correctly - quite ironic me thinks! [:p]
Oh please!!! I cycle along Maidenhead Street both ways. There isn't a law against it as it applies to cars and motorcycles. When are the self righteous people going to join us market town folk and realise that people cycle? As for Fore Street and cobble stones and postmen and cars and etc etc, if I get knocked over, it's my fault. I should be more aware as I don't pay a single bean of insurance money. Closed!


Reply ID 25002

06/09/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
The end that joins to Bull Plain has 'no entry' signs. Regarding Fore Street, today I have seen one woman riding her bike along the pavement and one teenager riding his bike the wrong way - but no one cycling correctly - quite ironic me thinks! [:p]
Did you bother to stop him Sarah and advise him that the etiquette is to dismount on a pavement? Naa, thought not.


Reply ID 25011

06/09/2006 by Fish Wife

Do you know what? When I first started this thread I had an idea that there would be self-righteous rage and indignation both for and against cyclists. The fact of the matter is that NO-ONE, whether they be on a bike, in a car, strapped to the underside of a low flying aircraft, or roller skating should be either on the footpath OR travelling in the road in the wrong direction with the likelihood of causing an accident. It is not acceptable that pedestrians and other road users should be put at risk of injury or worse because of the selfish, couldn't care less attitude of a few cyclists OF ALL AGES who believe that they will pick and choose the rules (assuming that they have some sort of understanding of the rules) that suit their needs. Unfortunately, once 'blind eyes' are turned on these matters, they are given credance and become accepted behaviour.


Reply ID 25012

06/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
The end that joins to Bull Plain has 'no entry' signs. Regarding Fore Street, today I have seen one woman riding her bike along the pavement and one teenager riding his bike the wrong way - but no one cycling correctly - quite ironic me thinks! [:p]
It's also worth noting that the end of Fore Street by Shire Hall also has a no entry sign, with access restricted to buses travelling towards the War Memorial. This doesn't seem to stop car drivers from entering at this point and forcing traffic that is travelling in the right direction to the side of the road whilst they continue their merry way, the wrong way!


Reply ID 25015

06/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
The end that joins to Bull Plain has 'no entry' signs. Regarding Fore Street, today I have seen one woman riding her bike along the pavement and one teenager riding his bike the wrong way - but no one cycling correctly - quite ironic me thinks! [:p]
Oh please!!! I cycle along Maidenhead Street both ways. There isn't a law against it as it applies to cars and motorcycles. When are the self righteous people going to join us market town folk and realise that people cycle? As for Fore Street and cobble stones and postmen and cars and etc etc, if I get knocked over, it's my fault. I should be more aware as I don't pay a single bean of insurance money. Closed!
When you mention self-righteous, perhaps you should think about the damage you may cause to the car which may have collided with you because you were not observing the rules of the road. Add to that the possible shock this would cause to the driver. As you point out - you have no insurance, so the driver picks up the tab in more ways than one. Being a market town does not give anyone the right to behave as though we still had dirt tracks and donkeys.


Reply ID 25017

06/09/2006 by Landy

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
......The fact of the matter is that NO-ONE, whether they be on a bike, in a car, strapped to the underside of a low flying aircraft, or roller skating should be either on the footpath OR travelling in the road in the wrong direction with the likelihood of causing an accident.......
I fully agree with your sentiments as they make sense, I just have one area of difficulty in undertanding you, surely aircraft wouldn't be going the wrong way on Fore Street. I suppose they will always be going in the right direction in terms of flying, unless of course they had been re-routed or worse under the control of those intent on hijacking it, in which case then yes it would be flying in a direction not originally intended, ergo the wrong direction. I found it funny though imagining an aircraft on Fore Street.


Reply ID 25024

06/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Landy
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
......The fact of the matter is that NO-ONE, whether they be on a bike, in a car, strapped to the underside of a low flying aircraft, or roller skating should be either on the footpath OR travelling in the road in the wrong direction with the likelihood of causing an accident.......
I fully agree with your sentiments as they make sense, I just have one area of difficulty in undertanding you, surely aircraft wouldn't be going the wrong way on Fore Street. I suppose they will always be going in the right direction in terms of flying, unless of course they had been re-routed or worse under the control of those intent on hijacking it, in which case then yes it would be flying in a direction not originally intended, ergo the wrong direction. I found it funny though imagining an aircraft on Fore Street.
Are you actually Roy from Coronation Street or are you American? It's called Irony, which bears no relation to coppery, aluminum-ary or tinny. Americans sometimes confuse irony with cynicsm/sarcasm. A shame really as there seems to be no understanding or appreciation of any of them.


Reply ID 25045

07/09/2006 by ~Sarah~

quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
The end that joins to Bull Plain has 'no entry' signs. Regarding Fore Street, today I have seen one woman riding her bike along the pavement and one teenager riding his bike the wrong way - but no one cycling correctly - quite ironic me thinks! [:p]
Did you bother to stop him Sarah and advise him that the etiquette is to dismount on a pavement? Naa, thought not.
As much as I would love to be I am not tomb raider and cannot spring from my third floor office window to complete such feats of public spirit ..... perhaps I'll buy a load speaker......


Reply ID 25068

07/09/2006 by gabriel

quote:
Originally posted by Landy
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
......The fact of the matter is that NO-ONE, whether they be on a bike, in a car, strapped to the underside of a low flying aircraft, or roller skating should be either on the footpath OR travelling in the road in the wrong direction with the likelihood of causing an accident.......
I fully agree with your sentiments as they make sense, I just have one area of difficulty in undertanding you, surely aircraft wouldn't be going the wrong way on Fore Street. I suppose they will always be going in the right direction in terms of flying, unless of course they had been re-routed or worse under the control of those intent on hijacking it, in which case then yes it would be flying in a direction not originally intended, ergo the wrong direction. I found it funny though imagining an aircraft on Fore Street.
Pedant!


Reply ID 25075

07/09/2006 by Capitalist piglet

On the subject of one-way streets Market Place is (according to the signage) one -way - doesn’t stop the court vans going up from the White Hart end & parking & causing problems for the poor guys loading/unloading at East Herts Electrical. Maybe they have a dispensation - loads of cars though park the wrong way seemingly untouched by our famed Traffic Wardens. Maybe I just imagine the no entry sign every day..............


Reply ID 25081

07/09/2006 by ~Sarah~

I agree it does seem the 'no entry' signs at Maidenhead Street and Market Place mean didly squatt even to the authorities!


Reply ID 25112

07/09/2006 by lemonjelly

I don't know, but perhaps it's the old wrinkly in me... [/quote] You've got an old wrinkly in you...? Whereabouts?


Reply ID 25117

07/09/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Capitalist piglet
On the subject of one-way streets Market Place is (according to the signage) one -way - doesn’t stop the court vans going up from the White Hart end & parking & causing problems for the poor guys loading/unloading at East Herts Electrical. Maybe they have a dispensation - loads of cars though park the wrong way seemingly untouched by our famed Traffic Wardens. Maybe I just imagine the no entry sign every day..............
I am reliably informed by EHDC that the prison vans do have a dispensation regarding travelling against the "No Entry" signs. Why? I have no idea. What is also disturbing is the fact that many vehicles, including Dutch flower sellers are routing very large HGV'a down Maidenhead St. When I challenged a driver recently, he told me to mind my own business, and that as he was delivering to Charlottes florists he was perfectly entitled to use Maidenhead St.


Reply ID 25178

07/09/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Capitalist piglet
On the subject of one-way streets Market Place is (according to the signage) one -way - doesn’t stop the court vans going up from the White Hart end & parking & causing problems for the poor guys loading/unloading at East Herts Electrical. Maybe they have a dispensation - loads of cars though park the wrong way seemingly untouched by our famed Traffic Wardens. Maybe I just imagine the no entry sign every day..............
I am reliably informed by EHDC that the prison vans do have a dispensation regarding travelling against the "No Entry" signs. Why? I have no idea. What is also disturbing is the fact that many vehicles, including Dutch flower sellers are routing very large HGV'a down Maidenhead St. When I challenged a driver recently, he told me to mind my own business, and that as he was delivering to Charlottes florists he was perfectly entitled to use Maidenhead St.
EHDC informed you of this??? I doubt it. Maidenhead Street is a delivery point. How else would he park his vehicle? How else would you buy your Mum flowers on Mother's Day? Let me guess... Tesco.


Reply ID 25190

07/09/2006 by ~Sarah~

You are entitled to enter Maidenhead Street, at any time, to load/unload your vehicle and also if you are displaying a valid disabled badge. Other than that it is a Pedestrian Zone, so no one else should be using it between the times stated (including bicycles [;)] ). And entering it via Bull Plain is a defiante no as there are 'no entry' signs.


Reply ID 25191

07/09/2006 by Berbatov

It is a load/unload area.


Reply ID 25195

07/09/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Capitalist piglet
On the subject of one-way streets Market Place is (according to the signage) one -way - doesn’t stop the court vans going up from the White Hart end & parking & causing problems for the poor guys loading/unloading at East Herts Electrical. Maybe they have a dispensation - loads of cars though park the wrong way seemingly untouched by our famed Traffic Wardens. Maybe I just imagine the no entry sign every day..............
I am reliably informed by EHDC that the prison vans do have a dispensation regarding travelling against the "No Entry" signs. Why? I have no idea. What is also disturbing is the fact that many vehicles, including Dutch flower sellers are routing very large HGV'a down Maidenhead St. When I challenged a driver recently, he told me to mind my own business, and that as he was delivering to Charlottes florists he was perfectly entitled to use Maidenhead St.
EHDC informed you of this??? I doubt it. Maidenhead Street is a delivery point. How else would he park his vehicle? How else would you buy your Mum flowers on Mother's Day? Let me guess... Tesco. Are you suggesting that I am lying? Have you contacted EHDC regarding the prison vans contravening the No Entry signs? The way that Dutch flower delivery vehicles could go to Charlottes is via Fore Street and the prevailing one way system


Reply ID 25196

07/09/2006 by Berbatov

Buzz - Maidenhead Street is a load/unload point for the shops that we need so much. I haven't had the need to contact EHDC as it is a Highway concern. I have asked Highways, not EHDC, about this in the past. Berbatov.


Reply ID 25246

08/09/2006 by Fish Wife

Just a quick question here......is Maidenhead Street the new Fore Street now? Of has the tumbleweed seen on Maidenhead Street from 9 till 5 confused people........[?]


Reply ID 25249

08/09/2006 by Landy

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
Just a quick question here......is Maidenhead Street the new Fore Street now? Of has the tumbleweed seen on Maidenhead Street from 9 till 5 confused people........[?]
I can't say I personally have seen tumbleweed in Maidenhead Street, isn't that an American bush and not a native here? (I hope you'll see the connection in my reply with your last post!) but not to digress, if there is an increased volume of traffic or pedestrians it would logically follow that, mindful of a lower social conscience and care for others these days, a greater number of people would deposit more litter and generally lower the standard of cleanliness of what I have always found to be above average in Maidenhead Street.


Reply ID 25263

08/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Landy
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
Just a quick question here......is Maidenhead Street the new Fore Street now? Of has the tumbleweed seen on Maidenhead Street from 9 till 5 confused people........[?]
I can't say I personally have seen tumbleweed in Maidenhead Street, isn't that an American bush and not a native here? (I hope you'll see the connection in my reply with your last post!) but not to digress, if there is an increased volume of traffic or pedestrians it would logically follow that, mindful of a lower social conscience and care for others these days, a greater number of people would deposit more litter and generally lower the standard of cleanliness of what I have always found to be above average in Maidenhead Street.
Maidenhead Street clean? I don't think you've been down there for a very long time. We are talking Maidenhead Street Hertford, not Maidenhead Berkshire.


Reply ID 25273

08/09/2006 by Mad Mick

with reference to the above. I have to say the last time i was in maidenhead street it wasnt all that tidy. As to the tumbleweed i really cant comment. Never seen it, wouldnt know what it was if some landed on my head!!


Reply ID 25282

08/09/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
Buzz - Maidenhead Street is a load/unload point for the shops that we need so much. I haven't had the need to contact EHDC as it is a Highway concern. I have asked Highways, not EHDC, about this in the past. Berbatov.
Maidenhead Street is a load/unload point for shops in Maidenhead Street, not for adjoining streets. I mean, where would you draw the line? Is it OK for lorries delivering to Tesco to use Maidenhead St?


Reply ID 25374

08/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

It's a shame it comes to this when we have to draw lines. If people just thought about what they were doing and considered if it would be dangerous/inconvenient to others and just acted responsibly on Maidenhead Street and Fore Street as well as the rest of the town things would be so much easier for all of us. Cloud Cuckoo land? Maybe.


Reply ID 25517

11/09/2006 by gabriel

I was in traffic this morning at 8.44am opposite Villiers Street, which is one-way. I watched a fella in a yellow jersey and with mandatory MP3 earplugs, cycle the length of Villiers Street the wrong way, then he turned right on to the Ware Road,eventually cutting up beside Stag House and on to the dual carriageway. Yes - there is an argument that car users have radios, etc., but car users also have mirrors to enable them to see what's going on behind them, plus earplugs make you totally isolated to sounds around you. But hey - that's not the issue here. Don't cyclists have to adhere to any aspects of the Highway Code in respect to one-way streets and other road users? Wow [:0]


Reply ID 25590

12/09/2006 by Andrew

quote:
Originally posted by gabriel
Don't cyclists have to adhere to any aspects of the Highway Code in respect to one-way streets and other road users? Wow [:0]
Many do. I do get tired of so many motorist V cyclist arguements that take a specific instance of either a motorist or cyclist doing something wrong and immediately apply it to all motorists or all cyclists. We could all list multiple instances of cyclist/motorist/pedestrians doing things wrong/dangerous/stupid but to then say that they all apply to everyone is not sensible.


Reply ID 25602

12/09/2006 by ~Sarah~

Just looking out of my window today I have seen cyclists, motorists and pedestrians all breaking the highway code. It's laughable that there are so many parking wardens when the problem is not the parked vehicles; it's the moving ones!


Reply ID 25811

14/09/2006 by Fish Wife

Hey hey hey...... A new emergency service in Fore Street: This afternoon a postman on a bicylce came out of Post Office Walk, cycled into the middle of Fore Street, then proceeded up Fore Street the wrong way, before stopping at Nat. West. A distance of probably 50 yards max, thereby risking an accident for the sake of walking this short distance. When it was pointed out to him that he was going the wrong way, he replied that he could cycle in whichever direction he liked, intimating the postmen on bikes are above the law! Now, I realise that the emergency services can go in any direction they need, and wondered, therefore, if the Post Office is now running a new emergency service? Urgent relief supplies of junk mail perhaps?


Reply ID 25815

14/09/2006 by Berbatov

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
Hey hey hey...... A new emergency service in Fore Street: This afternoon a postman on a bicylce came out of Post Office Walk, cycled into the middle of Fore Street, then proceeded up Fore Street the wrong way, before stopping at Nat. West. A distance of probably 50 yards max, thereby risking an accident for the sake of walking this short distance. When it was pointed out to him that he was going the wrong way, he replied that he could cycle in whichever direction he liked, intimating the postmen on bikes are above the law! Now, I realise that the emergency services can go in any direction they need, and wondered, therefore, if the Post Office is now running a new emergency service? Urgent relief supplies of junk mail perhaps?
As he implied, he can freely go in whichever direction he wants, it's his choice. However, when he breaks his lower torso from an oncoming bus, I doubt sympathy will rise from his rapidly approaching grave. Just reading the replies, has anyone bothered to contact the Sorting Office in Greencoates to mention this to the boss? I may be a bit of a killjoy, but Health and Safety???


Reply ID 25828

15/09/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
Hey hey hey...... A new emergency service in Fore Street: This afternoon a postman on a bicylce came out of Post Office Walk, cycled into the middle of Fore Street, then proceeded up Fore Street the wrong way, before stopping at Nat. West. A distance of probably 50 yards max, thereby risking an accident for the sake of walking this short distance. When it was pointed out to him that he was going the wrong way, he replied that he could cycle in whichever direction he liked, intimating the postmen on bikes are above the law! Now, I realise that the emergency services can go in any direction they need, and wondered, therefore, if the Post Office is now running a new emergency service? Urgent relief supplies of junk mail perhaps?
I nearly got knocked off my feet when one of them was pulling up quickly outside the Mortgage Brokers shop. Nearly wiped the smile off my face after having been given some good news about a mortgage worry.


Reply ID 25849

15/09/2006 by ian.ball

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife When it was pointed out to him that he was going the wrong way, he replied that he could cycle in whichever direction he liked, intimating the postmen on bikes are above the law!
Not just postmen on bikes! The other day I was walking to work and the post van was parked right on the pavement so no one could get by. As I was walking in the (busy) road to get past, said postman came back to van and at least he had the decency to apologise!


Reply ID 25890

15/09/2006 by MrTuco

How can that remark be racise, it says nothing about a race of people?

quote:
Originally posted by 2929paul
quote:
Originally posted by Lady Pinking
then there are the immigrant drivers who come over here and say that they can't reed the bus numbers and destination so get a grant for a car. So if they can't read a bus destination how can they read a road sign.
Admin - I find this offensive. In fact, I would call it racist. Can it be removed from the site please. At the very least, it is off topic.


Reply ID 25891

15/09/2006 by MrTuco

I would love to see you try that trick on the M25...LMAO

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
The Highway code states if you find yourself going the wrong way in a one-way street continue to the end of the road.


Reply ID 25895

15/09/2006 by David Yates

Serious problem. I'm sorry to maybe get off the point of bikes going the wrong way, but here goes. Yesterday afternoon I heard a car reversing at high speed along Fore Street and on looking up it flashed past my window. It transpired that the said car had reversed from way down the street (Post Office Walk) to park in a spot just outside the Hertford Flooring Shop. I then took a phone call and whilst on the phone heard a gentleman on the street pointing out (very calmly) that Fore Street was one way and this reversing at high speed was really dangerous to other traffic, pedestrians and the like. The driver of the car was adamant that his actions were ok. He was a good driver (his own words) and he was looking where he was going. Furthermore, the gentleman pointing out his actions being incorrect should 'not get involved' 'Not get involved' was questioned. The driver pointed out that it was none of his concern and that people who did get 'involved in things that were none of their concern may find that knives and guns could be used' It was at this point that I requested the town centre CCTV via my 2 way radio to keep an eye on the altercation taking place, which they promptly did. This is an escalation of a problem beyond which no one could have expected. Fore Street is one way and there remains a problem. Someone will get hurt.


Reply ID 25906

15/09/2006 by gabriel

It is certainly a sign of the times that people are now being threatened with guns and knives for pointing out to some ignorant, selfish pillock that he is driving dangerously. Someone will end up seriously hurt - or killed.


Reply ID 25909

15/09/2006 by OldCross

This is pretty sad - Its a shame there are so many idiots in the world today, I blame a lot of it on the weak criminal justice system, the idiot was more likely to get done for a motoring offence than threatening behaviour!


Reply ID 25911

15/09/2006 by nora batty

quote:
Originally posted by David Yates It was at this point that I requested the town centre CCTV via my 2 way radio to keep an eye on the altercation taking place, which they promptly did.
Wow! Do all traders in Hertford have 2 way radio contact with the CCTV's around town?


Reply ID 25915

15/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by nora batty
quote:
Originally posted by David Yates It was at this point that I requested the town centre CCTV via my 2 way radio to keep an eye on the altercation taking place, which they promptly did.
Wow! Do all traders in Hertford have 2 way radio contact with the CCTV's around town?
As I understand it anyone can get hold of one through the Town Centre Manager.


Reply ID 25934

15/09/2006 by MrTuco

Mr Car was recently valued at £3.00, Boy do I wish I was coming the right way at that time. It takes a person to be killed by this kind of driving before the authorities act as we need them to, but is there any way we can get them to act before this sad event takes place, & I really do not want a child in my Chapel when there is no need.


Reply ID 25935

15/09/2006 by sloopjohnb

quote:
As I understand it anyone can get hold of one through the Town Centre Manager.
Technically yes. Some budgetary restictions may apply. There are now 39 radios out there somewhere between shops/pubs/bars/police/taxi marshalls. A good spread of cameras and an excellent success rate in prevention and detection of crime as well as lost children. It is really due to the involvment of all the radio users that the Hertford model is seen as the one to copy throughout Hertfordshire and beyond.


Reply ID 25988

16/09/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by sloopjohnb
Technically yes. Some budgetary restictions may apply. There are now 39 radios out there somewhere between shops/pubs/bars/police/taxi marshalls. A good spread of cameras and an excellent success rate in prevention and detection of crime as well as lost children. It is really due to the involvment of all the radio users that the Hertford model is seen as the one to copy throughout Hertfordshire and beyond.
Are these the licenced units under the PMR 446 legislation? (Personal Mobile Radios allocated a set of sub-frequencies under 446 MHz for readers not familiar with this) I think the business version are licenced however... The licence free models seen in Argos etc are generally regarded as domestic / recreational family models but there are higher quality units available from specialist shops. It would be interesting if sufficient users of these formed a “Radio Neighbourhood Watch” network, quite apart from the existing service, for various reasons, but which might prove useful in its own right? There seems to be an increase in their use, with keeping in touch with family members at Theme Parks or at beaches being given as ideal uses and on a more luxury level for point to point communications when you’re skiing, as they can be used throughout Europe. Yes they may create a bit of a nerdy image but that would soon go if they were to be used as a network with a serious purpose in mind. I’m not suggesting pedestrians would patrol Fore Street with “Roger Roger and Copy That” uttered at every other doorway, along with the curtain twitchers keeping up a constant commentary of anything that moves [:D] but they might be worth a thought? For more info on them click http://www.446user.co.uk/ Over & out....


Reply ID 26004

16/09/2006 by sloopjohnb

The radios are not from Argos[:)] - supplied by DCRS with licence fee to Ofcom paid, legal frequency allocated to Hertford and regulated etc etc. They also rely on a fixed aerial for which we also have permissions etc. This scheme was set up as a partnership between CCTV, police and the radio provider with funding from various sources. The majority are kept inside each store - except me who is usually mobile. Most bars have a Town Watch radio and an internal system for door staff. Hence the taxi marhsals have a radio from me so that we are all sharing the same information. A third party neighbourhood watch scheme wouldn't have access to our network unless they became part of the Town Watch scheme as well. But you would be pleasantly surprised at the amount of community assistance all the bars and shops contribute by just having and using the radio. Unfortunately once you get out of the Town Watch area either through the signal or the camera network there's not much help the scheme can give. Why can't it be extended? I was asked this question at the re-launch in 2004 and the answer remains the same - funding. A sure as God made little green apples.


Reply ID 26252

19/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by David Yates
Serious problem. I'm sorry to maybe get off the point of bikes going the wrong way, but here goes. Yesterday afternoon I heard a car reversing at high speed along Fore Street and on looking up it flashed past my window. It transpired that the said car had reversed from way down the street (Post Office Walk) to park in a spot just outside the Hertford Flooring Shop. I then took a phone call and whilst on the phone heard a gentleman on the street pointing out (very calmly) that Fore Street was one way and this reversing at high speed was really dangerous to other traffic, pedestrians and the like. The driver of the car was adamant that his actions were ok. He was a good driver (his own words) and he was looking where he was going. Furthermore, the gentleman pointing out his actions being incorrect should 'not get involved' 'Not get involved' was questioned. The driver pointed out that it was none of his concern and that people who did get 'involved in things that were none of their concern may find that knives and guns could be used' It was at this point that I requested the town centre CCTV via my 2 way radio to keep an eye on the altercation taking place, which they promptly did. This is an escalation of a problem beyond which no one could have expected. Fore Street is one way and there remains a problem. Someone will get hurt.
Just out of interest, the same thing happened again on Monday, but with a different car and driver. Perhaps it's a new trend? Perhaps the morons who do it don't consider themselves to be travelling in the wrong direction as the front of their cars are pointing in the right direction?


Reply ID 26640

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

I think you will find that if you are lucky enough to own a BMW or similar you ARE allowed to reverse the wrong way up a one way street, especially when you have to sort out a mortgage on your 3rd property (and i understand there is a most excellent purveyor of same in Fore St)


Reply ID 26657

26/09/2006 by gabriel

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
I think you will find that if you are lucky enough to own a BMW or similar you ARE allowed to reverse the wrong way up a one way street, especially when you have to sort out a mortgage on your 3rd property (and i understand there is a most excellent purveyor of same in Fore St)
Lucky? I wasn't aware that luck played a part in owning a BMW! I thought it was more likely to be bad taste that prompted the purchase? Obviously that goes hand in hand with the assumption that it is acceptable to reverse the wrong way along Fore Street which is the financial centre of Hertford, and not a stretch of road best suited to the needs of those who are desperately needy for attention and don't care who gets hurt in their quest to display their fragile egos.


Reply ID 26661

26/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
I think you will find that if you are lucky enough to own a BMW or similar you ARE allowed to reverse the wrong way up a one way street, especially when you have to sort out a mortgage on your 3rd property (and i understand there is a most excellent purveyor of same in Fore St)
This is just the sort of crass comment expected from such drivers. I actually think it wasn't made in jest either! Mad Mick, you should read the highway code (especially the bit about BMW drivers)


Reply ID 26665

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

Well clearly its not luck! I take it from the 2 posts above that neither of you has the good fortune to own such a vehicle. If so you would realise that it comes with an "impunity License" as such drivers are allowed (if not activly encouraged by BMW) to drive where and how they like. And quite right in my opinion!


Reply ID 26666

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

Thats a quick bit of editing Sheila I actually spied all of those posts as they came on...I dont see why a thread has to get personal. I am only pointing out my opinion!


Reply ID 26668

26/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

And a fine opinion it is too. Unfortunately, if this attitude prevails it is only a matter of time before someone gets hurt. It could be a child, it could be someone elderly or even a foreign visitor or a group of foreign visitors to Hertford. (I have some friends from Portugal over at the moment). This would not be a good advert!


Reply ID 26670

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

I fear we may be going just a tad off topic! To get back to the Original point. I think that if a driver is going the wrong way and gets caught (if they can be ar**d) by the constabulary then fine. You just go and pay the fine. However for members of the public to trunk in with their 2 penny worth and instruct someone who clearly knows what he is doing, on the rights and wrongs of the Road Traffic Act, is bordering on oafishness!


Reply ID 26674

26/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

It's exactly the topic of potential harm being caused to the public that is being discussed here. The driver with the 'who cares' attitutude is one that we don't need on the road. This is a local issue but has highlighted the attitude of SOME drivers all over the country. I'm not advocating wholesale changes but perhaps Hertford can lead the way in considering bringing back the 'red flag carrier' to go in front of this kind of driver for the sake of everyone's safety. That would slow them down until they ran the flag carrier over!


Reply ID 26676

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

You mean like "red rag to a bull"? which is what it would be to me. Just make sure to tell your portugese freinds/family to look both ways when crossing the road! It is for cars after all!!


Reply ID 26677

26/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

Your comments and attitude are duly noted. It's just a good job that most people on Fore Street are aware of other road users, pedestrians and cyclists. All we have to do is make the minority, and we know who they are, observe simple rules and the road and the town will be better for everyone. Keep driving like you say you do and you'll soon need a visit to an undertaker - there's a nice one on Fore Street.


Reply ID 26678

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

I dont see why you automatically assume, that people who are reversing cant see other road users and will therefore have an accident. Can you please explain then, why they put a reverse gear on cars?


Reply ID 26680

26/09/2006 by Sheila W Heel

The point is being missed here. This is a one-way street and should be used as one. Of-course cars have reverse gears so cars can go backwards, but surely even the worst of drivers wouldn't try to reverse where it simply isn't safe (ie a one way street in the middle of a county town!). It's not the drivers not being able to see where they are going, but others not expecting vehicles coming from the wrong direction that are at risk. Assuming others will see you and take steps to get out of your way when you are in the wrong is quite simply a staggering attitude to take. Hertford Constbulary please note.


Reply ID 26681

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

Yeah Hertford Constabulary please note!! You have to be having a laugh now. the last time i saw a police officer out of his car in Fore St was to go to the Kebab shop!


Reply ID 26690

26/09/2006 by Leo Densian

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick the last time i saw a police officer out of his car in Fore St was to go to the Kebab shop!
Too true unfortunately [V]


Reply ID 26698

26/09/2006 by Landy

I doubt this will be the final post on this but, reversing up a one way street by way of getting around the traffic regulations irrespective of what make of car or ego involved is just crass stupidity, likened to using mobile phones without the required hands free equipment. There will no doubt be an army of such drivers claiming perfect safety is guaranteed whilst using them. Observe the rules, grow up and shut up!!


Reply ID 26701

26/09/2006 by Fish Wife

Dear Oh Dear... Boys! Sheila! There's so much foot stomping going on here that the point is being lost. Mad Mick - could it be that in reality YOU are the person who threatened the unctious undertaker when he pointed out the error of your way? Sheila - BMW drivers attempt to assume an air of superiority merely for the fact that they drive (usually badly) overpriced extensions to their raison d'etre. Landy -despite the fact that you have irritated me on previous posts I have to agree with you, they should shut up and get back to the point. Only an inconsiderate, reckless fool drives any car at speed in reverse gear, especially the wrong way up a one way street. [:(!]


Reply ID 26705

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

Ok here goes! Fishwife, Whilst I appreciate that you would prefer everybody to drive Ford Focus (dont know the plural) there are those of us out here who prefer something a little more discerning! I think the nub of the problem is that too many parking spaces are taken up by badly parked scooters, and whilst i do not condone this kind of driving (reversing wrong way) I can understand the motive.


Reply ID 26707

26/09/2006 by Steve

I've recently returned from Italy and can report that it's commonplace for cyclists to cycle on both sides of the road (not at the same time of course!). For a Brit driving a hire car on the "wrong" side of the road it can be most disorientating to see cyclists regularly travelling against the flow of traffic!


Reply ID 26708

26/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
Ok here goes! Fishwife, Whilst I appreciate that you would prefer everybody to drive Ford Focus (dont know the plural) there are those of us out here who prefer something a little more discerning! I think the nub of the problem is that too many parking spaces are taken up by badly parked scooters, and whilst i do not condone this kind of driving (reversing wrong way) I can understand the motive.
I think the plural of Focus may be Focii. Personally I have no preference at all to whatever cars are being driven, as long as they are being driven safely,especially in a busy road like Fore Street. I understand that in poseur terms a Focus does not have perceived 'street cred.' And as for scooters - why are children being allowed to park their scooters against the curb? I realise that these little aluminium scooters are suitable for children up to the age of 12, but surely parental guidance and instruction should stop them from riding them in the road. >>>> Steve - having endured driving conditions in Naples where traffic lights, correct side of the road and driving on the pavement are all optional, I would hate to think that those practises would be adopted here.


Reply ID 26709

26/09/2006 by Mad Mick

FW. I was thinking more about motor scooters, As for the parental guidance, i never got any so why should we bother these days is the attitude of many a parent. There is a type of FOCUS that has much street cred, alas.. you know the rest!!


Reply ID 26712

26/09/2006 by Wrapper

There is nothing wrong with a Ford Focus. I have a Black Panther one - GGGGRRRRRRRRR!!!


Reply ID 26718

26/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
FW. I was thinking more about motor scooters, As for the parental guidance, i never got any so why should we bother these days is the attitude of many a parent. There is a type of FOCUS that has much street cred, alas.. you know the rest!!
Do you have small man syndrome? [:0]


Reply ID 26733

26/09/2006 by Landy

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
Dear Oh Dear... Boys! Sheila! There's so much foot stomping going on here that the point is being lost. Mad Mick - could it be that in reality YOU are the person who threatened the unctious undertaker when he pointed out the error of your way? Sheila - BMW drivers attempt to assume an air of superiority merely for the fact that they drive (usually badly) overpriced extensions to their raison d'etre. Landy -despite the fact that you have irritated me on previous posts I have to agree with you, they should shut up and get back to the point. Only an inconsiderate, reckless fool drives any car at speed in reverse gear, especially the wrong way up a one way street. [:(!]
Oh dear I may have cause some misunderstanding with my out of character outburst. I must clarify that my closing comments were not directly aimed at Mr Mad Mick or Ms Sheila Heel but rather at all drivers who blatantly disregard the traffic regulations and drive like idiots putting lives at risk without a care in the world! They should be severely punished even imprisoned for their ridiculously selfish ignorant and stupid actions. They should have their vehicles impounded for a year and only be allowed to use public transport or made to walk everywhere. That would give them time to reflect as they would need to prepare for a retaking of an obligatory driving exam at the end of the year’s ban.


Reply ID 26736

26/09/2006 by MrTuco

I think you will find that the plural for focus would be focus', not knowing that kind of basic grammar does actually place you in the correct car. However when I read that a BMW was a little more discerning I nearly lost my bladder. I think what you may have wanted to say was that if you were somewhat more refined then you would have purchased a Jaguar.

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
Ok here goes! Fishwife, Whilst I appreciate that you would prefer everybody to drive Ford Focus (dont know the plural) there are those of us out here who prefer something a little more discerning! I think the nub of the problem is that too many parking spaces are taken up by badly parked scooters, and whilst i do not condone this kind of driving (reversing wrong way) I can understand the motive.


Reply ID 26739

26/09/2006 by CSP

If I were a teacher I'd probably find that the plural of the Latin focus is foci. If I were a greengrocer I'd probably write focu's and focus'. If I were a car salesman I'd probably refer to Focusses. If I were William Hague I'd probably write Ffocus.


Reply ID 26745

26/09/2006 by Berbatov

13 pages, great. Why hasn't anyone suggested the one-way system and a more laid back attitude? Surely we are talking about 120 seconds around the block?


Reply ID 26750

26/09/2006 by Ewoowar

quote:
Originally posted by CSP
If I were a teacher I'd probably find that the plural of the Latin focus is foci. If I were a greengrocer I'd probably write focu's and focus'. If I were a car salesman I'd probably refer to Focusses. If I were William Hague I'd probably write Ffocus.
[:)]


Reply ID 26752

26/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by CSP
If I were a teacher I'd probably find that the plural of the Latin focus is foci. If I were a greengrocer I'd probably write focu's and focus'. If I were a car salesman I'd probably refer to Focusses. If I were William Hague I'd probably write Ffocus.
Aha CSP......about time! I like the cut of your gib, in ffact I thought it was ff****g ffantastic and ffunny. If you were a 'booty parla tecknishun' you would've wrote Focussessories, or is I wrong?


Reply ID 26755

26/09/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
I think you will find that the plural for focus would be focus', not knowing that kind of basic grammar does actually place you in the correct car. However when I read that a BMW was a little more discerning I nearly lost my bladder. I think what you may have wanted to say was that if you were somewhat more refined then you would have purchased a Jaguar.
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
Ok here goes! Fishwife, Whilst I appreciate that you would prefer everybody to drive Ford Focus (dont know the plural) there are those of us out here who prefer something a little more discerning! I think the nub of the problem is that too many parking spaces are taken up by badly parked scooters, and whilst i do not condone this kind of driving (reversing wrong way) I can understand the motive.

The apostrophe does not denote plural, it denotes possession as in the tomatoes' leaves - the leaves that belong to the tomatoes OR James' car - the car belonging to James. When a word ends in s it is not necessary to use s's.


Reply ID 26767

27/09/2006 by shunt

Oh dear! Spelling and grammar insults again, class being linked to literacy or type of vehicle ownership. As for scooters in parking bays, how does that constitute "badly parked"? Does anybody care or know what the plural of Focus is, or if there is one, now that Ford has made it into a noun? Yawn.........


Reply ID 26778

27/09/2006 by Ray_by_the_Beane

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
I think you will find that the plural for focus would be focus', not knowing that kind of basic grammar does actually place you in the correct car. However when I read that a BMW was a little more discerning I nearly lost my bladder. I think what you may have wanted to say was that if you were somewhat more refined then you would have purchased a Jaguar.
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
Ok here goes! Fishwife, Whilst I appreciate that you would prefer everybody to drive Ford Focus (dont know the plural) there are those of us out here who prefer something a little more discerning! I think the nub of the problem is that too many parking spaces are taken up by badly parked scooters, and whilst i do not condone this kind of driving (reversing wrong way) I can understand the motive.

The apostrophe does not denote plural, it denotes possession as in the tomatoes' leaves - the leaves that belong to the tomatoes OR James' car - the car belonging to James. When a word ends in s it is not necessary to use s's.
You only leave off the s when it's the possessive of a plural, so it should be "James's car" ("The Grammar Cookbook" by Pat Bensky).


Reply ID 26783

27/09/2006 by shunt

Since the word Focus with a capital "F" as a proper noun didn't exist until Ford invented it, there is no correct or incorrect plural or possessive. May I suggest "Foci" as a way of illustrating how ridiculous the whole grammar/spelling competition is?


Reply ID 26788

27/09/2006 by CSP

My point exactly.


Reply ID 26790

27/09/2006 by Avarice

Some of these posts seem to edge almost on BMW racism [:p]


Reply ID 26791

27/09/2006 by shunt

quote:
Originally posted by CSP
My point exactly.
Sorry CSP. Missed your post and virtually duplicated it.[:I]


Reply ID 26793

27/09/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by Berbatov
13 pages, great. Why hasn't anyone suggested the one-way system and a more laid back attitude? Surely we are talking about 120 seconds around the block?
Erm, can I suggest a laid back one way system. Toll points optional[:)]


Reply ID 26796

27/09/2006 by gabriel

quote:
Originally posted by Ray_by_the_Beane
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
quote:
Originally posted by MrTuco
I think you will find that the plural for focus would be focus', not knowing that kind of basic grammar does actually place you in the correct car. However when I read that a BMW was a little more discerning I nearly lost my bladder. I think what you may have wanted to say was that if you were somewhat more refined then you would have purchased a Jaguar.
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
Ok here goes! Fishwife, Whilst I appreciate that you would prefer everybody to drive Ford Focus (dont know the plural) there are those of us out here who prefer something a little more discerning! I think the nub of the problem is that too many parking spaces are taken up by badly parked scooters, and whilst i do not condone this kind of driving (reversing wrong way) I can understand the motive.

The apostrophe does not denote plural, it denotes possession as in the tomatoes' leaves - the leaves that belong to the tomatoes OR James' car - the car belonging to James. When a word ends in s it is not necessary to use s's.
You only leave off the s when it's the possessive of a plural, so it should be "James's car" ("The Grammar Cookbook" by Pat Bensky).
Contentious point here. (The Jesuit Brothers, St. Ignatious College).


Reply ID 26798

27/09/2006 by Dell Boy

Can you tell me please are cyclists allowed to cycle down past millets and the Salisbury Hotel in Hertford town centre towards Cafe Rouge? I have contacted the highways but no one is available to answer me this question until tomorrow (28th). I am sure I read in the Mercury about a year ago that cyclists were allowed along there, can anyone provide information please.


Reply ID 26800

27/09/2006 by jez_p

Yes they are. The Sign at the start of that (Millets) stretch means "No Motor Vehicles" Pedal Cycles are not motor vehicles so they can perfectly legally drive that way (as can horses and carts) The other end of Fore Street has no entry signs so it is completely one way and cyclists are not allowed to go the "wrong way"


Reply ID 27469

05/10/2006 by Mad Mick

Has anyone noticed that a new (naturally formed) speed bump has appeared in Fore Street? it appears that the road has subsided around the edge of a man hole just past the post office (travelling the correct direction!!)


Reply ID 28430

18/10/2006 by bikeman

Hello, regading cyclist and the one way part of Fore Street, cyclist ARE allowed to cycle against the flow of traffic in the same way as the buses, ie from Midland Bank to Parliment Square. There is work commencing Monday to put new signs up to clarify this. Happy cycling, Bikeman.


Reply ID 28453

18/10/2006 by James007

I think that you may have got the area wrong Bikeman. The above posts suggest the area between the Post Office and the traffic lights, in that direction.


Reply ID 28460

18/10/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by James007
I think that you may have got the area wrong Bikeman. The above posts suggest the area between the Post Office and the traffic lights, in that direction.
Yep - the area in question is Fore Street from Market Street to the end of Fore Street at the junction with South Street. It is one way only for all traffic unless you're on a bike cycling 3 abreast and causing pedestrians to run for safety, or cars to swerve to avoid you, or you're reversing at speed in a BMW, steering with one hand and using your phone/Raspberry/knitting with the other.


Reply ID 28468

18/10/2006 by bikeman

I am clarifying the ONLY place on Fore Street where cyclist ARE aloud to ride against the traffic is on the one way part from Midland Banks to Parliament Square i.e. past the newsagents, Salisbury, Millets Indian Chinese Blockbusters in the same way that the buses are aloud. Also stating work will be commencing Monday to put signs up to some effect to make this clearer.


Reply ID 28469

18/10/2006 by dutch knight

has anyone else noticed that the highway code does not apply between midnight and 7am.I am in town several mornings a week and there are quite a few vehicles that travel from Fore Street to Parliament Square.Also,because people feel that they are the only ones on the road,they do not have to stop at the traffic lights at M&S end of Fore St.while they are showing red.


Reply ID 28498

19/10/2006 by buzz

It's not only between midnight and 7 am. A couple of weeks back, a van (white naturally) attempted to drive past Shire Hall towards Parliament Square. I pointed out to the driver that this was for "buses only" After the usual abuse (from him, I hasten to add) I just stood in front of him until he had to reverse back. The traffic lights by the Sportsman are ignored by most drivers whatever time of day it is.


Reply ID 28504

19/10/2006 by jez_p

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
It's not only between midnight and 7 am. A couple of weeks back, a van (white naturally) attempted to drive past Shire Hall towards Parliament Square. I pointed out to the driver that this was for "buses only" After the usual abuse (from him, I hasten to add) I just stood in front of him until he had to reverse back. The traffic lights by the Sportsman are ignored by most drivers whatever time of day it is.
It is a shame they got rid of the No Entry except busses and replaced it with a no motor vehicles except busses. People seem more inclined to ignore the latter.


Reply ID 28583

19/10/2006 by Dude

quote:
Originally posted by jez_p
quote:
Originally posted by buzz
It's not only between midnight and 7 am. A couple of weeks back, a van (white naturally) attempted to drive past Shire Hall towards Parliament Square. I pointed out to the driver that this was for "buses only" After the usual abuse (from him, I hasten to add) I just stood in front of him until he had to reverse back. The traffic lights by the Sportsman are ignored by most drivers whatever time of day it is.
It is a shame they got rid of the No Entry except busses and replaced it with a no motor vehicles except busses. People seem more inclined to ignore the latter.
Very true. I hadn't realised they changed it.


Reply ID 28591

20/10/2006 by ~Sarah~

quote:
It is a shame they got rid of the No Entry except busses and replaced it with a no motor vehicles except busses. People seem more inclined to ignore the latter.
Are you kidding, numerous people, (including the Police!) drive through the 'No Entry' signs at the end of Maidenhead Street everyday - they really couldn't care less.... [V] I don't think it matters what sign is put up, people will do as they please!


Reply ID 28599

20/10/2006 by buzz

Police have exemption from complying with road signs/traffic lights etc, if it would impede the use to which the vehicle is being put. I.E. if they are responding to a report of a mugging for instance, they would be justified in non-compliance with "No Entry" signs. If they are not, question them as to why they are doing so, take a note of the registration number of the vehicle, the time of day, and the names of the officers involved and report them to the Professional Standards Unit at Police Headquarters, Welwyn Garden City


Reply ID 28600

20/10/2006 by ~Sarah~

Buzz I can assure you most are not 'responding to a call' when they drive through the signs. Infact just this week I had just finished talking to an Officer regarding a crime, when he drove off straight through the signs [^] Crazy, it's really like the signs don't exist!


Reply ID 28621

20/10/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by ~Sarah~
Buzz I can assure you most are not 'responding to a call' when they drive through the signs. Infact just this week I had just finished talking to an Officer regarding a crime, when he drove off straight through the signs [^] Crazy, it's really like the signs don't exist!
Well, don't just complain on here...........do as I suggest and make a complaint! We are entitled to have examples properly set and Police officers should be the ones setting the standards


Reply ID 28677

22/10/2006 by 60sDJ

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
Police have exemption from complying with road signs/traffic lights etc, if it would impede the use to which the vehicle is being put. I.E. if they are responding to a report of a mugging for instance, they would be justified in non-compliance with "No Entry" signs. If they are not, question them as to why they are doing so, take a note of the registration number of the vehicle, the time of day, and the names of the officers involved and report them to the Professional Standards Unit at Police Headquarters, Welwyn Garden City
“Er , scuse me officer, I’m recording your vehicle registration and require your names as I will be reporting you to the PSU at Welwyn Garden City” “No Officer I’m not wasting Police time but I have reason to believe that you‘ve contravened a traffic sign, whilst not responding to an emergency call and I wish to make a report.” “Officer, why are you applying the Attitude Test to me ? I’m being perfectly polite to you whilst pursuing what I believe is a correct course of action in relation to your contravention of the road sign” “Sorry Officer why should I just go away? I haven’t committed a misdemeanour but I do believe you have, now if I may have those details please?” Officer, why are you handcuffing me? Officer, why are you calling for back up? Officer why am I being taken to the local station? The point I’m making is not many would want to act as a Police Officer towards a Police Officer. In the same way as they won’t know how a member of the public will react to a situation involving their intervention you have no idea how an Officer will react to being “pulled” by you. I’d suggest recording the vehicle number, obviously having a witness available and write giving full details to the PSU, that way the complaint might be processed with without what might be seen as confrontation in the street, which if escalated at the time might well weaken the strength of your complaint. Enough written complaints and the incidents might well decrease. "Evening all" [:)]


Reply ID 30820

17/11/2006 by Fish Wife

What fun and frolics in Fore Street this afternoon! Apparently there was a lorry making deliveries some way along the street which meant that none of the car drivers could possibly wait or safely negotiate the obstruction. So, to make their journies easier, these drivers were reversing the length of the one-way stretch then REVERSING THROUGH THE LIGHTS and turning down South Street! You couldn't make it up. It was all caught on CCTV and also reported to the Police control room via the traders radio link......


Reply ID 30826

17/11/2006 by Landy

I regularly journey along Fore Street and reading this brings me to despair. It seems that safety not to mention abiding by common sense, if nothing else, is to be sacrificed for the sake of gaining a minute or two.


Reply ID 30831

18/11/2006 by Steve

Isn't obstructing the highway an offence? Maybe someone needs to have a word with Albany (not their fault I know, but their deliveries should not be allowed to disrupt the flow of traffic through the town)


Reply ID 30832

18/11/2006 by Leo Densian

Not sure what time of day this was all happening, but there are plenty of towns up and down the country that have limitations on this sort of activity. My company has to ensure that deliveries are made pre-8am in many places for 40ft vehicles or pre-9am for smaller 7.5 ton vehicles.


Reply ID 30833

18/11/2006 by Marilyn

What is Fore Street like on a Sunday morning[?] Got to unload for the wedding fare next week at the Corn Exchange.


Reply ID 30874

19/11/2006 by David Yates

Sundays are quiet, but if there are lots needing to unload at the Corn Exchange it could be unusually busy. I think if everyone is sensible there shouldn't be a problem. The problem on the street on Friday was at about 3pm and it was absolute bedlam for about 15 mins. The high speed reversing and U-turning was quite unbelievable. It has been said before, but I really believe that someone will get hurt on Fore Street - it's just a matter of time.


Reply ID 30881

19/11/2006 by Marilyn

quote:
Originally posted by David Yates
Sundays are quiet, but if there are lots needing to unload at the Corn Exchange it could be unusually busy. I think if everyone is sensible there shouldn't be a problem. The problem on the street on Friday was at about 3pm and it was absolute bedlam for about 15 mins. The high speed reversing and U-turning was quite unbelievable. It has been said before, but I really believe that someone will get hurt on Fore Street - it's just a matter of time.
Thanks I think it will be Ok the organiseres are trying to give us unlaoding times so everyone does not arrive together, i have asked for 8.30 am so hopefully no one else will be up!


Reply ID 30882

19/11/2006 by James007

Isn't the thread called 'Fore Street'? And we are all banging on about cars. Surely we should be talking about the shops?


Reply ID 30883

19/11/2006 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by James007
Isn't the thread called 'Fore Street'? And we are all banging on about cars. Surely we should be talking about the shops?
In a "Traffic and Parking" forum? (see the top of the page)


Reply ID 30900

19/11/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by James007
Isn't the thread called 'Fore Street'? And we are all banging on about cars. Surely we should be talking about the shops?
See also Page 1 of this thread.


Reply ID 31613

29/11/2006 by Sooty

Just got done for parking in Church St, just off Fore St (next to Salisbury). Have rung up and been told it's a "restricted zone". Without going back now... does anyone know if it's clearly marked?


Reply ID 31614

29/11/2006 by Della Cook

HI I got stung today but a female traffic warden in the same place. I looked at there were no yellow lines but was a sign which apprently means restricted parking. Needless to say I parked in the only space in that street where you can get a ticket (before the sign). The female traffic warden did say that I could appeal...yeah right.


Reply ID 31615

29/11/2006 by ~Sarah~

That is a restricted zone and there are signs that say 'end of restricted zone', indicating that you should not park before them, so I would say yes, it's clearly marked.


Reply ID 31693

30/11/2006 by dutch knight

Unbelievable!!! While driving along Fore Street today(about 15:20), from Parliament Square into town,a Ford Ka was trying to come the other way .As no-one would give way to the young girl(as it is one-way),she decided to drive along the pavement.If anybody had ventured out of the Salisbury Arms at that moment,they would have been knocked down,but,it seemed one big joke to the driver and her passenger,as they were happily laughing away.What will it take for people like this,to realise that what they are doing is so dangerous?


Reply ID 31694

30/11/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by dutch knight
Unbelievable!!! While driving along Fore Street today(about 15:20), from Parliament Square into town,a Ford Ka was trying to come the other way .As no-one would give way to the young girl(as it is one-way),she decided to drive along the pavement.If anybody had ventured out of the Salisbury Arms at that moment,they would have been knocked down,but,it seemed one big joke to the driver and her passenger,as they were happily laughing away.What will it take for people like this,to realise that what they are doing is so dangerous?
How about a lobotomy? Mind you, a lobotomy would necessitate having a brain in the first place. Not a care or concern for anyone other than themselves and their immediate needs. [:(!]


Reply ID 31705

01/12/2006 by codek2

quote:
Originally posted by dutch knight
Unbelievable!!! While driving along Fore Street today(about 15:20), from Parliament Square into town,a Ford Ka was trying to come the other way .As no-one would give way to the young girl(as it is one-way),she decided to drive along the pavement.If anybody had ventured out of the Salisbury Arms at that moment,they would have been knocked down,but,it seemed one big joke to the driver and her passenger,as they were happily laughing away.What will it take for people like this,to realise that what they are doing is so dangerous?
That bit isnt one way... busses certainly go both ways down that bit.. which i always thought was surely a recipe for madness!


Reply ID 31707

01/12/2006 by Joby

quote:
Originally posted by codek2
That bit isnt one way...
It is to cars, buses are (ridiculously) exempt. Can't the CCTV footage be reviewed to ensure that half-wits like that are retrospectively punished?


Reply ID 31776

03/12/2006 by JohnSmith

And yet another bizarre incident in Fore Street today. I was sat in Ask this afternoon when a pheasant ran along Fore Street, in the road. At least it had the common sense to run the right way up the street. A few minutes later it re-appared running the wrong way along Fore Street and disappeared through the gates next to the Ram Inn. How much longer will we have to put up with birds running the wrong way up Fore Street? It's a recipe for disaster.


Reply ID 32130

09/12/2006 by 60sDJ

Me again... Found the answer to the problem of vehicles driving/reversing the wrong way along Fore Street. With appropriate sensors suitably positioned it could just work! [:D] http://video.uk.msn.com/v/en-gb/v.htm?g=3802D36C-6603-442E-AA66-3B99BB206798&f=&fg=copy


Reply ID 32132

09/12/2006 by Steve

FWIW and slightly off-topic, I saw a Porche drive along part of Railway Street on the wrong side of the road, including the wrong side of a traffic island. This was not an overtaking manouever either, just an unwillingness to be a part of the general traffic flow. Such a shame there wasn't anything coming the other way to obstruct him. (This was the stretch between Lloyds Bank and The Lord Haig)


Reply ID 32138

09/12/2006 by shunt

Taking a trip through Hertford's traffic system it's easy to spot why people get it wrong or defy it. It is important to be ready for the priorities to have changed since the last attempt. Long term residents will remember many different schemes. First, from The Wash, turn left into Parliament Square, which isn't a square anymore but an extension of Fore Street. This section of road is two way until you reach the junction with Bell Lane when it becomes one way by virtue of "No motor vehicles" signs, which face the other way (except when it they make it one way for year or so and then revert). Just as well, because the appearance of a bus coming in the opposite direction might be a surprise if you'd missed the "except busses" qualification. Exit this narrow part onto a two way section of the same road in which traffic turning right towards Bull Plain and coming from it has priority. You are directly facing oncoming traffic in the right-hand lane at this point. After a few yards, you have to turn left into the narrow Market Street because the straight wide road you were on has just become one way again. Dodging suicidal pedestrians dithering around in the road and cabs and cars which can't quite fit the space they've paused in, turn right into Railway St which is still one way for a moment more and then becomes two way, with priority from a side road leading to the bus station. After a few yards, a mini roundabout. Railway St continues to the left (Don't go there. It gets even more mad). Instead, turn right. This is Star St, sometimes one way, but for the moment, two way again, but don't get complacent. Proceed to traffic lights where you must turn left if you don't want to get into the same maze again. (You will require a 4x4 at this point due to the road surface at the junction.) Ok, you,ve reached the London Rd. roundabout and are almost free. Here, the priorities are so arranged that you'll need to swap the 4x4 for something capable of accelerating from 0-60 in 4 seconds and with large intimidating spikes down the right hand side. This is almost your only chance of ever joining the roundabout and escaping Hertford.


Reply ID 32166

10/12/2006 by Landy

quote:
Originally posted by shunt
Taking a trip through Hertford's traffic system it's easy to spot why people get it wrong or defy it. It is important to be ready for the priorities to have changed since the last attempt. Long term residents will remember many different schemes. First, from The Wash, turn left into Parliament Square, which isn't a square anymore but an extension of Fore Street. This section of road is two way until you reach the junction with Bell Lane when it becomes one way by virtue of "No motor vehicles" signs, which face the other way (except when it they make it one way for year or so and then revert). Just as well, because the appearance of a bus coming in the opposite direction might be a surprise if you'd missed the "except busses" qualification. Exit this narrow part onto a two way section of the same road in which traffic turning right towards Bull Plain and coming from it has priority. You are directly facing oncoming traffic in the right-hand lane at this point. After a few yards, you have to turn left into the narrow Market Street because the straight wide road you were on has just become one way again. Dodging suicidal pedestrians dithering around in the road and cabs and cars which can't quite fit the space they've paused in, turn right into Railway St which is still one way for a moment more and then becomes two way, with priority from a side road leading to the bus station. After a few yards, a mini roundabout. Railway St continues to the left (Don't go there. It gets even more mad). Instead, turn right. This is Star St, sometimes one way, but for the moment, two way again, but don't get complacent. Proceed to traffic lights where you must turn left if you don't want to get into the same maze again. (You will require a 4x4 at this point due to the road surface at the junction.) Ok, you,ve reached the London Rd. roundabout and are almost free. Here, the priorities are so arranged that you'll need to swap the 4x4 for something capable of accelerating from 0-60 in 4 seconds and with large intimidating spikes down the right hand side. This is almost your only chance of ever joining the roundabout and escaping Hertford.
On a humourous note could negotiating this route be considered as an element of the Advanced Driving Test?


Reply ID 32174

10/12/2006 by sloopjohnb

Despite agreeing with every word uou say Shunt, you have to ask - well, I ask a lot of people at Highways etc - why do so many drivers enjoy this route rather than carry on to Gascoyne Way. When Highways last researched this 'rat run' the majority (can't find the actual figure) admitted to having no business whatsoever in town but just as obvious preferred it to staying on the A414. I have no car and haven't experimented with timings etc but is there a gain to be made by avoiding Gascoyne Way. I once offered the thought to Highways that all this was a deliberate attempt to either a) force people to turn left at South Street and continue the rat run into Hertford East, Mill Road and eventually exit at Fairfax Road or b) stay on Gascoyne Way. This of course was no act of policy at all so why is the only place on the M&S roundabout where there are no lights at the exit from South Street. As you say - 'you put your foot down and pray'. There is an alternative solution - to stop all traffic turning into Fore Street from Parliament Square. Highways managed this exercise last time they dug up Fore Street. It resulted in a less congested part of town but led to complaints from the traders in that part of the world. I hope to have the whole area back on the agenda next year.


Reply ID 32175

10/12/2006 by buzz

Sloop; there are a lot of things that I disagree with you over, but I must agree that stopping all traffic from entering the town into Fore St from Parliament Square is an obvious solution to reducing in some part the town's traffic problems. Why were there complaints from traders?. What earthly difference would it make to them? If they contend it would affect deliveries, how? Why would it matter from what direction the delivery vehicles approached them? As I may have mentioned on another thread earlier, at the moment there are more "entry" routes into the town centre than "exit" routes: it's no wonder there's a problem


Reply ID 32178

10/12/2006 by sloopjohnb

Buzz, I spend my life listening to traders complaints. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't - but I don't ignore them. They all go in the mill so to speak. Then I pass it all upwards where it gets lost. Whatever you try, or do in town there will be a sector who dislikes it. Sometimes I wish we lived in a society where what appears sensible to the common man prevails over debate, discussion and consultation which usually leads to no action whatsoever. Generally speaking I stay out of so much on these boards because I know more than is possibly good for me and will not betray confidences.


Reply ID 32392

15/12/2006 by Mad Mick

With regard to the above! when coming from the north station end of town, i do not turn right to go monto the 414, rather i go straight on past waters then cross the lights and turn left by the memorial. i do this because i like hertford, and like to see whats going on! I didnt move here so that i could simply drive past it every day!


Reply ID 32412

15/12/2006 by Dude

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
With regard to the above! when coming from the north station end of town, i do not turn right to go monto the 414, rather i go straight on past waters then cross the lights and turn left by the memorial. i do this because i like hertford, and like to see whats going on! I didnt move here so that i could simply drive past it every day!
Depends when you moved here. To some, the A414 doesn't cut past, it cuts through the town! [:)]


Reply ID 32419

15/12/2006 by Mad Mick

OK Dude point taken (especially as i used to live up by the sorting office!) what i mean is i like to drive through the town centre!


Reply ID 32432

15/12/2006 by jez_p

It can be more pleasant to drive through the town centre, and look at the Christmas lights - rather than stuck on Gascoyne Way with the rush hour brigade. (and No I don't drive to work or pick up Kids from schools.)


Reply ID 32478

15/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
With regard to the above! when coming from the north station end of town, i do not turn right to go monto the 414, rather i go straight on past waters then cross the lights and turn left by the memorial. i do this because i like hertford, and like to see whats going on! I didnt move here so that i could simply drive past it every day!
An admirable sentiment. But why don't you just park the car and walk through the town. You'll see a lot more that way, and , incidentally, cause less obstruction to the buses.


Reply ID 32556

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
With regard to the above! when coming from the north station end of town, i do not turn right to go monto the 414, rather i go straight on past waters then cross the lights and turn left by the memorial. i do this because i like hertford, and like to see whats going on! I didnt move here so that i could simply drive past it every day!
An admirable sentiment. But why don't you just park the car and walk through the town. You'll see a lot more that way, and , incidentally, cause less obstruction to the buses.
Because coming from the A1 direction and living in Hertford Heath , It may take a little while to get home dont you think?


Reply ID 32562

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
With regard to the above! when coming from the north station end of town, i do not turn right to go monto the 414, rather i go straight on past waters then cross the lights and turn left by the memorial. i do this because i like hertford, and like to see whats going on! I didnt move here so that i could simply drive past it every day!
An admirable sentiment. But why don't you just park the car and walk through the town. You'll see a lot more that way, and , incidentally, cause less obstruction to the buses.
Because coming from the A1 direction and living in Hertford Heath , It may take a little while to get home dont you think?
Well, I do believe that there are actually a couple of car parks in the town


Reply ID 32563

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

RIGHT OK! So on my way home you want me to stop, park in a car park (and presumably pay?) then go for a nice stroll! yeah nice thought but if i wanted to go for a walk in the town i would probably walk into the town from HH (which i frequently do btw). What i am talking about is (and what has already been pointed out!) NOT driving on the A414 and sitting in traffic queues with nothing to look at other than the other sheep! rather driving through the town (on the roads that i assume where put there for that very reason) so that i can sit in traffic and look at other things more varied than on the A414. I hope that explains it well enough for you!. If in their infinite wisdom the council decide to pedestrianise the entire town centre then thats fine, I wont drive through town, but until they do i will!


Reply ID 32564

18/12/2006 by buzz

Well, you are having a little rant aren't you!! It appears that you would rather add to the congestion in the town centre, and then have to spend ages getting out onto the A414 by the Marks & Spencer roundabout rather than queue for a couple of minutes on Gascoyne Way. You are wrong in the assumption that the roads were put there "for that very reason". The roads were actually put there for horses, carts and pedestrians, not for the high volume of mechanically propelled vehicles we have on the roads today. That's what Gascoyne Way was built for.


Reply ID 32565

18/12/2006 by David Yates

There's a horse and cart outside my mortgage brokerage just now. The parking attendants are looking to put a ticket on it, but can't find a windscreen....


Reply ID 32568

18/12/2006 by Sheila W Heel

Mechanically propelled vehicles = evil? I don't agree. It is nice sometimes to travel home 'via the town' to see what's going on. Generally nothing, agreed, but you never know. The 'bypass' while being necessary does rather encourage the 'out of towners' to do just that - bypass. Some of my friends had bypassed Hertford many times, but really liked it when they came to visit. Let's face it from the Gascoyne Way you don't get to see Hertford at its best? Oh and just a point, it is the vehicles that pay for the road, so surely they should be able to use it too?


Reply ID 32569

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

ok so when the horse and carts left and the automobile took over why didnt someone either a: close the roads, B: ban traffic from the Town Centre or c:,,, hang on pedestrians, hey everybody the roads ARE for pedestrians after all, ok everybody who has had a go at people walking in the roads we have just learnt that, that is what they are for! and yes i know it "takes longer" to get through the town centre but it also "looks nicer"!


Reply ID 32574

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
ok so when the horse and carts left and the automobile took over why didnt someone either a: close the roads, B: ban traffic from the Town Centre or c:,,, hang on pedestrians, hey everybody the roads ARE for pedestrians after all, ok everybody who has had a go at people walking in the roads we have just learnt that, that is what they are for! and yes i know it "takes longer" to get through the town centre but it also "looks nicer"!
And clogs up the town with unnecessary traffic, causing hold-ups for buses and delivery vehicles, creating even more pollution in the town centre just because it "looks nicer".


Reply ID 32575

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
Mechanically propelled vehicles = evil? I don't agree. It is nice sometimes to travel home 'via the town' to see what's going on. Generally nothing, agreed, but you never know. The 'bypass' while being necessary does rather encourage the 'out of towners' to do just that - bypass. Some of my friends had bypassed Hertford many times, but really liked it when they came to visit. Let's face it from the Gascoyne Way you don't get to see Hertford at its best? Oh and just a point, it is the vehicles that pay for the road, so surely they should be able to use it too?
Well, I'm afraid that vehicles don't pay for the road. You may pay a vehicle excise licence fee (i.e. road tax) but that was first plundered by Winston Churchill to pay for other things, and has been ever since.


Reply ID 32584

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

The only time i am ever held up in Town Centre is when a delivery driver , or bus driver, hasnt got the ability to drive/park his/her vehicle!


Reply ID 32595

18/12/2006 by Sheila W Heel

quote:
Well, I'm afraid that vehicles don't pay for the road. You may pay a vehicle excise licence fee (i.e. road tax) but that was first plundered by Winston Churchill to pay for other things, and has been ever since.
Tell you what. Let's go back to mud roads and S*** in the streets. It appears the way of life would be ideal for some people. This would also remove the need for the health service, and the welfare state therefore ensuring most ordinary people don't live beyond the age of 35. I'm just off now to use my new-fangled flameless electrickery toasting machine.


Reply ID 32597

18/12/2006 by spitfire

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
ok so when the horse and carts left and the automobile took over why didnt someone either a: close the roads, B: ban traffic from the Town Centre or c:,,, hang on pedestrians, hey everybody the roads ARE for pedestrians after all, ok everybody who has had a go at people walking in the roads we have just learnt that, that is what they are for! and yes i know it "takes longer" to get through the town centre but it also "looks nicer"!
And clogs up the town with unnecessary traffic, causing hold-ups for buses and delivery vehicles, creating even more pollution in the town centre just because it "looks nicer".
I come back from work in Hatfield on the 414 and find its cutting though st.andrews street & the town is quicker than crawling like a snail down gascoyne way. Sitting in queuing traffic creates more pollution than driving at a steady pace.


Reply ID 32616

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
Well, you are having a little rant aren't you!! It appears that you would rather add to the congestion in the town centre, and then have to spend ages getting out onto the A414 by the Marks & Spencer roundabout rather than queue for a couple of minutes on Gascoyne Way. You are wrong in the assumption that the roads were put there "for that very reason". The roads were actually put there for horses, carts and pedestrians, not for the high volume of mechanically propelled vehicles we have on the roads today. That's what Gascoyne Way was built for.
Yes i am having a rant, and YES i WOULD rather add to the congestion in the town centre than add to the conjestion on the 414, regardless of which came first or was designed by whom with whatever in mind and paid for by anybody, which by the way includes ME!


Reply ID 32625

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
The only time i am ever held up in Town Centre is when a delivery driver , or bus driver, hasnt got the ability to drive/park his/her vehicle!
Well, the answer is blazingly obvious. Don't go through the town centre


Reply ID 32626

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

obviously you didnt read my last post?


Reply ID 32627

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
The only time i am ever held up in Town Centre is when a delivery driver , or bus driver, hasnt got the ability to drive/park his/her vehicle!
Well, the answer is blazingly obvious. Don't go through the town centre
Whereas I am constantly held up down gascoyne way because of those stupid bloody traffic lights!! I would have thought a more obvious answer would be to better train the drivers, wouldnt you?


Reply ID 32628

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Sheila W Heel
quote:
Well, I'm afraid that vehicles don't pay for the road. You may pay a vehicle excise licence fee (i.e. road tax) but that was first plundered by Winston Churchill to pay for other things, and has been ever since.
Tell you what. Let's go back to mud roads and S*** in the streets. It appears the way of life would be ideal for some people. This would also remove the need for the health service, and the welfare state therefore ensuring most ordinary people don't live beyond the age of 35. I'm just off now to use my new-fangled flameless electrickery toasting machine.
I can only assume that you are under the influence of some mind bending substances


Reply ID 32629

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

Out of interest buzz do you go back to the lsat time you posted and then answer every post since then?


Reply ID 32630

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
obviously you didnt read my last post?
Sorry, which bit am I missing? You complain about congestion on the A414, and you complain about bus drivers, delivery drivers holding you up in the town centre. What exactly do you want?


Reply ID 32631

18/12/2006 by shunt

Despite everybody getting a bit out of their prams, there are some good points here. In the days when a journey involved every town center along the way, people didn't use cars as much or go as far in them to work or to drliver goods. It wouldn't have been practical. We have by-passes and motorways to thank for the increase. However, when a long journey was made, it was often rather interesting to see all the places along the way, not just motorway embankments planted only a year or two ago. I discovered Hertford and knew I wanted to live here, because it lay between my childhood home and my grandparents house and I passed through it twice a year. If the roads had been as they are now, it would have just been a another name on a signpost.


Reply ID 32633

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
Out of interest buzz do you go back to the lsat time you posted and then answer every post since then?
isn't that what most sensible people do?


Reply ID 32638

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

I wasnt complaining about the drivers (although it would be great if they could actually drive!!) what im saying is that if im going to get held up anywhere, i would rather it was in town so that at least there may be something to look! and in relation to the most recent post, not if they dont read what else has been written no!


Reply ID 32639

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

quote:Originally posted by buzz Well, you are having a little rant aren't you!! It appears that you would rather add to the congestion in the town centre, and then have to spend ages getting out onto the A414 by the Marks & Spencer roundabout rather than queue for a couple of minutes on Gascoyne Way. You are wrong in the assumption that the roads were put there "for that very reason". The roads were actually put there for horses, carts and pedestrians, not for the high volume of mechanically propelled vehicles we have on the roads today. That's what Gascoyne Way was built for. Yes i am having a rant, and YES i WOULD rather add to the congestion in the town centre than add to the conjestion on the 414, regardless of which came first or was designed by whom with whatever in mind and paid for by anybody, which by the way includes ME! just to save you flicking back and forward to much!


Reply ID 32645

18/12/2006 by buzz

quote:
Originally posted by Mad Mick
quote:Originally posted by buzz Well, you are having a little rant aren't you!! It appears that you would rather add to the congestion in the town centre, and then have to spend ages getting out onto the A414 by the Marks & Spencer roundabout rather than queue for a couple of minutes on Gascoyne Way. You are wrong in the assumption that the roads were put there "for that very reason". The roads were actually put there for horses, carts and pedestrians, not for the high volume of mechanically propelled vehicles we have on the roads today. That's what Gascoyne Way was built for. Yes i am having a rant, and YES i WOULD rather add to the congestion in the town centre than add to the conjestion on the 414, regardless of which came first or was designed by whom with whatever in mind and paid for by anybody, which by the way includes ME! just to save you flicking back and forward to much!
Well, you seem to have shown your true colours! Don't care about the congestion in the town centre etc. And by the way it is not "to" much, it is "too" much"


Reply ID 32681

18/12/2006 by Mad Mick

As i have already said (and yet again been edited!) I go through the town because of the congestion on the A414 aswell as because i enjoy going through the town! I do hope thats not TOO hard to grasp?


Reply ID 32715

19/12/2006 by Tigger

Mad Mick, Buzz, you both have valid points, but come on - I know we don't have to read this but give us a break.....


Reply ID 32720

19/12/2006 by Mr P

quote:
Originally posted by Tigger
Mad Mick, Buzz, you both have valid points, but come on - I know we don't have to read this but give us a break.....
Seconded...


Reply ID 32725

19/12/2006 by carlos fandango

I also on occasion go through the town centre rather than round the 414 just to see what's going on, look at the lights, gaze in awe at the saddos queueing to get into a pub, check out the latest style of double parking outside the Sun Light. If I get held up I get held up. C'est la vie.


Reply ID 32727

19/12/2006 by gabriel

quote:
Originally posted by carlos fandango
I also on occasion go through the town centre rather than round the 414 just to see what's going on, look at the lights, gaze in awe at the saddos queueing to get into a pub, check out the latest style of double parking outside the Sun Light. If I get held up I get held up. C'est la vie.
Me too. It is a far more enjoyable experience than sitting on the A414. I go through the town at most times of day and on most days EXCEPT Friday evenings as I am usually travelling at about the time when the aforementioned saddos have got themselves tanked up and are ready to start swinging at each other and/or vomitting, to the caterwauling encouragement of the barely dressed Friday night laydeeeeeez.


Reply ID 32767

19/12/2006 by Roth Man

I will always go through town if i can and am not in too much of a hurry, Its good to see who's about or if there are any new shops etc!


Reply ID 32892

22/12/2006 by buzz

Regardless of what has been said before on this topic, I suggest that people think twice before driving through the town either today or tomorrow. As I walked through today at midday there was absolute gridlock. Traffic entering the town from the war memorial couldn't get through as traffic was backed up along Fore St upto the war memorial. In spite of this, vehicles attempting to turn into Fore St from the war memorial, who could presumably see that the traffic wasn't moving, waited to turn, thus blocking traffic travelling to or from Old Cross. In turn, this meant that buses couldn't get through from the other direction, as vehicles totally ignored the "give way " lines outside the Shire Hall. A stationary line of traffic then stretched along the remaining part of Fore St, Market St, Railway St, South St, back along the bit of Fore St outside M&S upto the roundabout. In the opposite direction, traffic attempting to enter the town from what used to be called "The Plough " roundabout, (A414) blocked the roundabout itself, preventing vehicles from accessing the roundabout. Absolute madness! [:(]


Reply ID 32902

22/12/2006 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by buzz
Regardless of what has been said before on this topic, I suggest that people think twice before driving through the town either today or tomorrow. As I walked through today at midday there was absolute gridlock. Traffic entering the town from the war memorial couldn't get through as traffic was backed up along Fore St upto the war memorial. In spite of this, vehicles attempting to turn into Fore St from the war memorial, who could presumably see that the traffic wasn't moving, waited to turn, thus blocking traffic travelling to or from Old Cross. In turn, this meant that buses couldn't get through from the other direction, as vehicles totally ignored the "give way " lines outside the Shire Hall. A stationary line of traffic then stretched along the remaining part of Fore St, Market St, Railway St, South St, back along the bit of Fore St outside M&S upto the roundabout. In the opposite direction, traffic attempting to enter the town from what used to be called "The Plough " roundabout, (A414) blocked the roundabout itself, preventing vehicles from accessing the roundabout. Absolute madness! [:(]
Chaos and pandemonium...but there was an awfully good reason this morning: Tesco will be closed on CHRISTMAS DAY, so panic buying in full swing.


Reply ID 35961

20/02/2007 by Fish Wife

I know this thread has been quiet for some time now, but they were out in force again on Saturday: No.1. Possibly aged 35+ wearing cycling helmet, knee protectors, elbow protectors, padeed cycling shorts, goggles...in fact - wearing everything to lessen an injury to himself, but despite all this he was cycling into the oncoming traffic along Fore Street. When this was pointed out to the two wheeled fool, he rode onto the pavement and continued his journey.....all the way to the Nat West cash point. Bless his little lycra clad botty. No.2. Following in his slip-stream was Hertford's answer to the juvenile cast of the film ET - likewise hurtling along Fore Street against the flow of the traffic on bikes that look far too small for them. Could they be the same little tykes who ride at speed in groups of 4 or more across the pavement on Ware Road in the dark, clad in black and without lights, defying anyone to attempt to use the pavement for its intended purpose? According to one of them, they could be killed riding in the road! Yes - quite likely when they make themselves impossible to see. (I deny all responsibility for the highlights).


Reply ID 35966

20/02/2007 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
No.1. Possibly aged 35+ wearing cycling helmet, knee protectors, elbow protectors, padeed cycling shorts, goggles...in fact - wearing everything to lessen an injury to himself, but despite all this he was cycling into the oncoming traffic along Fore Street. When this was pointed out to the two wheeled fool, he rode onto the pavement and continued his journey.....all the way to the Nat West cash point. Bless his little lycra clad botty.
Sounds like the guy I saw ride straight through a red light in Ware Road


Reply ID 36188

27/02/2007 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Steve
quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
No.1. Possibly aged 35+ wearing cycling helmet, knee protectors, elbow protectors, padeed cycling shorts, goggles...in fact - wearing everything to lessen an injury to himself, but despite all this he was cycling into the oncoming traffic along Fore Street. When this was pointed out to the two wheeled fool, he rode onto the pavement and continued his journey.....all the way to the Nat West cash point. Bless his little lycra clad botty.
Sounds like the guy I saw ride straight through a red light in Ware Road
Posey lycra pants, kevlar helmet, go-faster gauntlets, safety stabilisers, peanut studded back peddling handlebars? TWUNT tattoo on forehead? Yep - could be him. In fact it could be anyone of the dozens who do likewise. I expect they're only having fun though.


Reply ID 36192

27/02/2007 by Ewoowar

Is it really a problem?


Reply ID 36199

28/02/2007 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by Ewoowar
Is it really a problem?
Well consider this: As a pedestrian, you are attempting to cross Fore Street and depending which side you are standing on, you look either to your right OR to your left as it is a one-way street at this point. As you see no traffic coming towards you, you step off the pavement only to be mown down by a cyclist - possibly exercising his civil liberties by ignoring the traffic regulations. Better still - consider the possiblity that it could be your frail parent or young child who is attempting to cross the road who is then mown down by some selfish sod? Would it be a problem then? Answers on a post card please?


Reply ID 36201

28/02/2007 by Ewoowar

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
quote:
Originally posted by Ewoowar
Is it really a problem?
Well consider this: As a pedestrian, you are attempting to cross Fore Street and depending which side you are standing on, you look either to your right OR to your left as it is a one-way street at this point. As you see no traffic coming towards you, you step off the pavement only to be mown down by a cyclist - possibly exercising his civil liberties by ignoring the traffic regulations. Better still - consider the possiblity that it could be your frail parent or young child who is attempting to cross the road who is then mown down by some selfish sod? Would it be a problem then? Answers on a post card please?
I agree that this behaviour is inexcusable. However I cannot see that it is serious or very dangerous. If it were cars going up Fore St then yes that is very dangerous but cyclists? While not within the law I suggest they are not the most dangerous.


Reply ID 36210

28/02/2007 by Joby

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
As a pedestrian, you are attempting to cross Fore Street and depending which side you are standing on, you look either to your right OR to your left as it is a one-way street at this point.
You must have more confidence in the law-abiding abilities of road users than me. I always look both ways on a one-way street, although often that's because I can't remember which way the one is.


Reply ID 36254

28/02/2007 by Fish Wife

I would be the very last person to have any confidence in the behaviour of pedestrians when crossing any road. Some are not of this world, others couldn't care less and will cheerfully hurl themselves in front of anything that moves, and then there are many who are elderly and perhaps just a tad unaware of the behaviour of some cyclists who, whilst knowing the street is one-way, choose to ignore the ruling and/or use the pavement 'cos no-one will mind. Small kids on bikes on the pavement is one, wholely understandable thing. Grown adults who are too lazy or ignorant to abide by the highway code is another matter altogether. In all of this is the cast of ET who ride in groups of up to 4-5 stretched across the road into oncoming traffic in Fore Street, who then spread themselves scross the pavement on Ware Road. Surely if a road or part of a road is one-way, then that applies to all vehicles/modes of transport without exception, or is it the case now that cyclists can pick and choose which rules apply to them unless of course they are injured in the course of their recklessness when it will always be the motorist's fault?


Reply ID 36257

28/02/2007 by Herbert Lemons

If you have only third party insurance and somebody from Baroosh who is late for their tanning session happens to unwittingly bound across Fore St and in the process test their mass against a big momentum-laden combustion engine thingy who pays for the damage? I mean, just imagine it, the aforementioned pasty-faced person could easily be a big old boiler and leave an unsightly scuff on your paintwork of the kind that no amount of buffing will erase. How do we sort that out, that's what I want to know.


Reply ID 36402

02/03/2007 by Dillinquent

Isn't it about time Fore Street was pedestrianised?


Reply ID 36408

02/03/2007 by Steve

quote:
Originally posted by Dillinquent
Isn't it about time Fore Street was pedestrianised?
Discussed at http://www.hertford.net/yoursay/topic.php?id=1323


Reply ID 37516

16/03/2007 by Fish Wife

Two incidents of irresponsible and dangerous driving this week! The first involved a woman who drove the right way down the one way part of Fore Street, to then decide she wanted to turn around.....she somehow managed a 3 point between the parked cars and then attempted to drive the wrong way back towards M&S. When this was loudly pointed out to her, she claimed that there was nothing at the start of the street by M&S showing that it's one way. She obviously didn't see the two blue signs with white arrows indicating one way, or probably thought they didn't apply to her. The second, and horrendously dangerous accident happened this afternoon at about 1.30pm, when the driver of a black BMW decided to reverse back up the one way street at considerable speed to get a parking space outside The Ram. In the process of doing this he knocked down an elderly man who was just getting out of his car. The only reason this man wasn't completely run over was that passers by were screaming at the driver of the BMW to stop. He blamed the elderly man for not taking care!!!! The behaviour of some road users never ceases to amaze, but I suppose they are exercising their rights to do as they please.


Reply ID 37521

16/03/2007 by James007

Are there parking spaces outside the ram now then? I'm confused.


Reply ID 37522

16/03/2007 by simcut

lol....gotta love BMW drivers.


Reply ID 37526

16/03/2007 by Willow

That is outrageous - did the elderly man need emergency treatment?


Reply ID 37528

16/03/2007 by spitfire

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
Two incidents of irresponsible and dangerous driving this week! The first involved a woman who drove the right way down the one way part of Fore Street, to then decide she wanted to turn around.....she somehow managed a 3 point between the parked cars and then attempted to drive the wrong way back towards M&S. When this was loudly pointed out to her, she claimed that there was nothing at the start of the street by M&S showing that it's one way. She obviously didn't see the two blue signs with white arrows indicating one way, or probably thought they didn't apply to her. The second, and horrendously dangerous accident happened this afternoon at about 1.30pm, when the driver of a black BMW decided to reverse back up the one way street at considerable speed to get a parking space outside The Ram. In the process of doing this he knocked down an elderly man who was just getting out of his car. The only reason this man wasn't completely run over was that passers by were screaming at the driver of the BMW to stop. He blamed the elderly man for not taking care!!!! The behaviour of some road users never ceases to amaze, but I suppose they are exercising their rights to do as they please.
I hope the elderly man is Ok, and the driver prosecuted. I trust the police were called.


Reply ID 37540

16/03/2007 by Fish Wife

quote:
Originally posted by James007
Are there parking spaces outside the ram now then? I'm confused.
It's really not confusing at all: the pillock in the BMW must've noticed that someone had pulled out from the kerb opposite The Ram, so he reversed his car back up Fore Street in the wrong direction 'cos heaven forfend that someone might get the space before he got there. Obviously this would have caused great inconvenience to the BMW driver as it would mean he had to drive all the way round in the right direction, to come back into Fore Street. A full 2 minutes could've been added to his journey time. Meanwhile, an elderly man was getting out of his car - never expecting someone to be travelling backwards in the wrong direction - and was knocked down by the BMW, and only saved from more serious injury due to passers-by yelling at the fool in the car. Simple. His reaction was to blame the old fella for getting out of his car in the first place. As far as I am aware the man was very shaken but otherwise OK, and I don't know if the police were called. This has been the most serious incident of drivers and cyclists continuing to flout the one-way restriction in Fore Street so far, and the way things are going it won't be long before someone is seriously hurt. Perhaps it's time the restrictions were seriously enforced?


Reply ID 37549

17/03/2007 by Steve

The area is covered by CCTV. The Police should be informed, so that at the very least they know there's an issue here.


Reply ID 37662

19/03/2007 by MrTuco

I have been away from the forum for a while & I am sure you all have missed me. I did say months ago this would happen, I wonder if he was on his phone at the time. How I wish I had been there. Now that this has happened are the coulncil going to anything to put a stop to this senseless behaviour?

quote:
Originally posted by Fish Wife
Two incidents of irresponsible and dangerous driving this week! The first involved a woman who drove the right way down the one way part of Fore Street, to then decide she wanted to turn around.....she somehow managed a 3 point between the parked cars and then attempted to drive the wrong way back towards M&S. When this was loudly pointed out to her, she claimed that there was nothing at the start of the street by M&S showing that it's one way. She obviously didn't see the two blue signs with white arrows indicating one way, or probably thought they didn't apply to her. The second, and horrendously dangerous accident happened this afternoon at about 1.30pm, when the driver of a black BMW decided to reverse back up the one way street at considerable speed to get a parking space outside The Ram. In the process of doing this he knocked down an elderly man who was just getting out of his car. The only reason this man wasn't completely run over was that passers by were screaming at the driver of the BMW to stop. He blamed the elderly man for not taking care!!!! The behaviour of some road users never ceases to amaze, but I suppose they are exercising their rights to do as they please.


Reply ID 37679

19/03/2007 by Fish Wife

Mr T - I have missed you with a furious and curious passion that has bordered on mania...... Fore Street continues to be used by be some drivers who don't care one iota for anyone other than themselves and their immediate needs. [:(]


Reply ID 37972

27/03/2007 by 60sDJ

I bet the Beamer was an E30 type.....synonymous with the most reckless idiotic drivers of that marque. It really has gone far enough now. Pedestrianise Fore Street.


295 replies