New Esplanade road layout

[Scorrie]

"Wavy patterns"? Do you mean the broken white angled lines on approach to the actual crossing at the sides of the road?

[Rasmie]

I think you'll find it is illegal to run over pedestrians, unless due to unforeseen circumstances you can prove its unavoidable.

[Colin]

I thought that the red bits painted in the road were stategically placed to minimise the blood stains that are likely given the general confusion about the layout.

 

The crossing at the Church Road/Commecial Street junction is, imho, quite dangerous.because;

1. It is placed directly in the path of vehicles wanting to enter commercial street. 

2. It is on a blind corner.

3. The crossing is so badly placed that any motorist "bowling" along The Esplanade expecting to make a "neat" turn into the Post Office end of Commercial Street has a very real chance of meeting a pedestrian (head on) about to use the crossing. (happened to me a few times already)

 

As a committed(?) pedestrian, I have to ask;

1. What was wrong with the crossing in it's original place with clear visibilty on one side and, a few extra yards on the other?

2. Was there a deliberate intention to cause confusion amongst tourists who seem to think that any kind of marking in the road is a crossing point that gives them a right of way?

3. What kind of mind altering substances was the road designer on and, where can I get some..

Edited July 31, 2017 by Colin

[Berserker]

"Wavy patterns"? Do you mean the broken white angled lines on approach to the actual crossing at the sides of the road?

No. I was meaning the red/buff coloured half round markings crossing the road. There's one outside Captain Flints and one between McKays and the Thule.

 

I've heard them referred to as 'Courtesy crossings' but can't seem to find much in the way of hard facts. They don't seem to be mentioned in the highway code.

 

I did find a reference saying they are not actually crossings but are there to assist pedestrians to find a place where it may be safe to cross.

[brecken]

 

"Wavy patterns"? Do you mean the broken white angled lines on approach to the actual crossing at the sides of the road?

No. I was meaning the red/buff coloured half round markings crossing the road. There's one outside Captain Flints and one between McKays and the Thule.

 

I've heard them referred to as 'Courtesy crossings' but can't seem to find much in the way of hard facts. They don't seem to be mentioned in the highway code.

 

I did find a reference saying they are not actually crossings but are there to assist pedestrians to find a place where it may be safe to cross.

 

 

Think these new road markings came straight from an edition of Noddy shown during a SIC management training seminar!

[George.]

 

"Wavy patterns"? Do you mean the broken white angled lines on approach to the actual crossing at the sides of the road?

No. I was meaning the red/buff coloured half round markings crossing the road. There's one outside Captain Flints and one between McKays and the Thule.

 

I've heard them referred to as 'Courtesy crossings' but can't seem to find much in the way of hard facts. They don't seem to be mentioned in the highway code.

 

I did find a reference saying they are not actually crossings but are there to assist pedestrians to find a place where it may be safe to cross.

 

 

There's a description here about them. https://www.hants.gov.uk/transport/roadsafety/pedestriancrossings

[Twerto]

Contrary to what Twerto says(sorry Twerto) there are no less than four sets of speed bumps in the system.

 

One set in Church Road and three out past the Bressay ferry towards the Viking Bus Station.

 

They're an utter menace and cause cars to mount over them in 1st gear each time and take off again(more pollution).  It doesn't matter how slowly you go over them it jolts and bangs your car.

 

Once again I have to be honest and based on what I've witnessed with the busy tourist season(utter confusion between traffic & pedestrians) the whole area is now an accident waiting to happen.

 

Defination of Speed hump and Speed cusions 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_bump 

[Capeesh]

I thought that the red bits painted in the road were stategically placed to minimise the blood stains that are likely given the general confusion about the layout.

 

The crossing at the Church Road/Commecial Street junction is, imho, quite dangerous.because;

1. It is placed directly in the path of vehicles wanting to enter commercial street. 

2. It is on a blind corner.

3. The crossing is so badly placed that any motorist "bowling" along The Esplanade expecting to make a "neat" turn into the Post Office end of Commercial Street has a very real chance of meeting a pedestrian (head on) about to use the crossing. (happened to me a few times already)

 

As a committed(?) pedestrian, I have to ask;

1. What was wrong with the crossing in it's original place with clear visibilty on one side and, a few extra yards on the other?

 

I agree, this crossing is the most dangerous one on the street. The problem for me with the way it was before was the very narrow piece of pavement on the corner of Commercial St/Church Road. When pushing a pram I had to use the road to get round that corner then try and find a place further up Church Rd to get back on the pavement to get to the traffic lights, I would imagine wheelchair users would've really struggled, the fix has cured that problem but at the same time caused the ones you've mentioned, unfortunately existing listed buildings make any better fix difficult.

[Ghostrider]

It's amazing to see how all the very valid reasons which were debated by the Councillors and the highways staff of the day which led to the old crossing being sited where it was, suddenly are forgotten when a refurb is by all accounts left up to the highways to design and be rubber stamped by Councillors, yet to the general public the same reasons are still very valid today, as evidenced by what's posted here.

 

If it should serve no other useful purpose, and by all appearances and accounts it won't, this scheme can stand as a perfect example of one of the largest problems with the SIC of the present, where it's a case of the elected Councilors either passing or rejecting whatever some office bound type has concocted from some theory text book, rather than Councils of 30 or 40 years ago, where such schemes were debated and discussed between hired 'experts' and elected members until a tolerable mutually acceptable design was agreed upon.

[Marooned in Maywick]

They're an utter menace and cause cars to mount over them in 1st gear each time and take off again(more pollution).  It doesn't matter how slowly you go over them it jolts and bangs your car.

 

Not for my car. It can quite happily travel over any of the new additions at 20mph without suffering any form of catastrophic failure. Or even a jolt or bang.

[Kavi Ugl]

 

They're an utter menace and cause cars to mount over them in 1st gear each time and take off again(more pollution).  It doesn't matter how slowly you go over them it jolts and bangs your car.

 

Not for my car. It can quite happily travel over any of the new additions at 20mph without suffering any form of catastrophic failure. Or even a jolt or bang.

 

 

Good for dee.......

[Marooned in Maywick]

 

 

They're an utter menace and cause cars to mount over them in 1st gear each time and take off again(more pollution).  It doesn't matter how slowly you go over them it jolts and bangs your car.

 

Not for my car. It can quite happily travel over any of the new additions at 20mph without suffering any form of catastrophic failure. Or even a jolt or bang.

 

 

Good for dee.......

 

 

I just thought I'd point out that whatever inadequacies you suffer due to your car or driving style it does not necessarily mean that everyone does likewise.

 

Thank you for understanding.

[Ghostrider]

Next time I think fit to visit the big city and cruise along the bumpy promenade, I'm doing it on a tractor, with a sharp blade on the front......set down nice and low, very, very low.

[Colin]

What gets me about the whole sorry mess is the amount of contempt that a number of councillors/officials have for publc opinion.

The works themselves, whilst they might look "pretty" and "modern" on someone's plan have resulted in the loss(?) of half a dozen (or more) parking places in an attempt to solve a problem that didn't really exist in the first place and, if it did, the solution (pc plod) was already there.  Just needed to be "activated".

They have also increased the level of "risk" to the general public.  Particularly in respect of the "stupid" sighting of the crossing at the Church Road end of the street and really confusing road markings that seem to have addled(?) a lot of tourists who appear to think that they are crossing points.

Traffic flow has not been improved.  How can the placement of "obstacles" in the roadway improve traffic flow?  Calling them "Speed Cushions" is laughable.  How stupid do they think people are?  If you place something in the roadway, it is an "obstacle" and obstacles are intended to impede/redirect the flow..  Sanitising it by dreaming up another name that is not so "aggressive" is the oldest trick in the book and, imho, is dishonest..  (Global Warming == Climate Change is another example)

I just wonder why they didn't leave things as they were or, at least, have a proper(?) consultation before doing anything at all.  Lerwick is not best suited to any kind of traffic other than a horse and cart and, the truth is you can take a "jobbie", smooth off the rough bits, sprinkle it with glitter but, it's still a "jobbie" and there is no way that you are going to pick it up by the "clean" end.

[Property2017]

Jobs for da boys when da roadie men get to rip it all up again