Topic ID 6113
Twice in the past week, when doing 30 mgh on The Avenue, two cars overtook me on the stretch of road before a sharp right into Church Road! I hooted at them both times, this is the summer holidays and later I will be trying to talk to Cllr Peter Ruffles. These people clearly were going to the station at Hertford North and not only was I doing the speed, I felt their actions mindless as a) its residential not a main road and b) its the summer holidays and the kids are out. I am incensed that one of these was a woman, should know better if she herself has kids, but that's the type of driver we have cutting through the upper bits of bengeo now the rat run cuts them off at Cross road in the mornings..
Reply ID 82618
It is not just that end it happens all the way along The Avenue, turning out of The Drive right into The Avenue you take your life in your hands as they come along there so fast. You can e mail Peter Ruffles if you wish he is often difficult to get hold of by phone, I think his email is on the Town Council site if not I have it.
Reply ID 82623
Thanks Marilyn I will. For ages now we've put up with cars mounting pavements, driving too fast and aggressively right outside the school at the entrance to the avenue and in the past week, well, I am glad my niece wasnt on her bike. As it was, the guy today who overtook, only did it so he could park his car on Fanshaw Street, outside someone's house, so not to pay for parking at Hertford North (trust me I know commuters when I see them!) So his "rush" was nothing to do with anything other than he was late! I am sick and tired of lack of any council decisions putting others lives at risk in this area..... Time for all of us to say no to this sort of aggressive, unsafe driving.
Reply ID 82624
So what are you asking Cllr Ruffles to do to stop drivers driving illegally (e.g. breaking the speed limit, recklessly mounting the pavement)? Do you want speed cameras? Traffic calming?
Reply ID 82625
Page 5 of today's Mercury might inform further comment
Reply ID 82626
Im not sure what Page 5 in the Mercury states but both LoBRA and MRA residents associations have recently been lobbying for installation of ANPR cameras to police the no through access restrictions. The idea being, the restrictions can then be enforced automatically. It wont resolve the traffic problems on Bengeo Street and down Port Hill but, if it works, it should completely stop the commuters cutting through and the sort of terrible and dangerous behaviour witnessed by DQ
Reply ID 82627
quote:Unenforceable. I would only have to say that I accessed the area to buy a paper at the newsagents which is a legitimate reason for being there.
Originally posted by Razor
Im not sure what Page 5 in the Mercury states but both LoBRA and MRA residents associations have recently been lobbying for installation of ANPR cameras to police the no through access restrictions. The idea being, the restrictions can then be enforced automatically. It wont resolve the traffic problems on Bengeo Street and down Port Hill but, if it works, it should completely stop the commuters cutting through and the sort of terrible and dangerous behaviour witnessed by DQ
Reply ID 82628
quote:30mph in The Avenue....sounds a bit fast to me even if it is the legal speed limit. What was the point of hooting at the other drivers? Are you aware that sounding your horn is to warn other drivers of your presence on the road. Using it to express annoyance is actually an offence.
Originally posted by Drama Queen
Twice in the past week, when doing 30 mgh on The Avenue, two cars overtook me on the stretch of road before a sharp right into Church Road! I hooted at them both times, this is the summer holidays and later I will be trying to talk to Cllr Peter Ruffles. These people clearly were going to the station at Hertford North and not only was I doing the speed, I felt their actions mindless as a) its residential not a main road and b) its the summer holidays and the kids are out. I am incensed that one of these was a woman, should know better if she herself has kids, but that's the type of driver we have cutting through the upper bits of bengeo now the rat run cuts them off at Cross road in the mornings..
Reply ID 82629
quote:As it was, the guy today who overtook, only did it so he could park his car on Fanshaw Street, outside someone's house, What exactly is your point. No-one owns the road outside their house, so if this guy was parking there what's the problem if he's not contravening any parking regulations?
Originally posted by Drama Queen
Thanks Marilyn I will. For ages now we've put up with cars mounting pavements, driving too fast and aggressively right outside the school at the entrance to the avenue and in the past week, well, I am glad my niece wasnt on her bike. As it was, the guy today who overtook, only did it so he could park his car on Fanshaw Street, outside someone's house, so not to pay for parking at Hertford North (trust me I know commuters when I see them!) So his "rush" was nothing to do with anything other than he was late! I am sick and tired of lack of any council decisions putting others lives at risk in this area..... Time for all of us to say no to this sort of aggressive, unsafe driving.
Reply ID 82631
quote:Why is it unenforceable when it would be there to enforce an existing restriction? The system would be set up to allow residents of the area unrestricted access and also would only "trigger" if someone drove in and out within a certain (short) space of time so visitors will be ok. I agree it wont be straightforward but I am aware of other schemes which operate currently so evidently it is possible. If you bought the newspaper and then drove out the same way you came in you wouldnt be in breach, but I take the point that there a large number of permutations that will need to be considered if it is installed.
Originally posted by buzzquote:Unenforceable. I would only have to say that I accessed the area to buy a paper at the newsagents which is a legitimate reason for being there.
Originally posted by Razor
Im not sure what Page 5 in the Mercury states but both LoBRA and MRA residents associations have recently been lobbying for installation of ANPR cameras to police the no through access restrictions. The idea being, the restrictions can then be enforced automatically. It wont resolve the traffic problems on Bengeo Street and down Port Hill but, if it works, it should completely stop the commuters cutting through and the sort of terrible and dangerous behaviour witnessed by DQ
Reply ID 82633
quote:Agreed. 30 mph along The Avenue is excessive - the required 12m braking distance does not allow for the unexpected on this residential road, particularly during a school holiday period. The limit is not a target to be reached regardless of road conditions and along this residential road an appropriate maximum of 20 mph should suffice.
Originally posted by buzzquote:30mph in The Avenue....sounds a bit fast to me even if it is the legal speed limit. What was the point of hooting at the other drivers? Are you aware that sounding your horn is to warn other drivers of your presence on the road. Using it to express annoyance is actually an offence.
Originally posted by Drama Queen
Twice in the past week, when doing 30 mgh on The Avenue . . .
Reply ID 82634
quote:Ok, so I'm a resident within the 'controlled area'. I take my car into the garage for some repairs and I am given a loan car. Does that mean I would have to register the car before I could drive it home? I have a friend who lives within the area and decide to call in to see him, but he is not at home. Does that mean I have to drive back out the way I came in? As for "other schemes" which you mention, I would be intrigued to learn of details. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to these "other schemes" and how they operate. Your idea is totally unenforceable.
Originally posted by Razorquote:Why is it unenforceable when it would be there to enforce an existing restriction? The system would be set up to allow residents of the area unrestricted access and also would only "trigger" if someone drove in and out within a certain (short) space of time so visitors will be ok. I agree it wont be straightforward but I am aware of other schemes which operate currently so evidently it is possible. If you bought the newspaper and then drove out the same way you came in you wouldnt be in breach, but I take the point that there a large number of permutations that will need to be considered if it is installed.
Originally posted by buzzquote:Unenforceable. I would only have to say that I accessed the area to buy a paper at the newsagents which is a legitimate reason for being there.
Originally posted by Razor
Im not sure what Page 5 in the Mercury states but both LoBRA and MRA residents associations have recently been lobbying for installation of ANPR cameras to police the no through access restrictions. The idea being, the restrictions can then be enforced automatically. It wont resolve the traffic problems on Bengeo Street and down Port Hill but, if it works, it should completely stop the commuters cutting through and the sort of terrible and dangerous behaviour witnessed by DQ
Reply ID 82635
I cannot see how an ANPR scheme is enforceable. Yet more examples for how it could catch people not abusing the rat run....... My son's childminder used to live within the rat run area and often when I collected him I would be there for but a minute........ I have often dropped children off within the rat run zone after football practice. When they don't muck around too much the drop off is about 2 minutes. So if there was an ANPR system in place with fines attached to rat runners would I have been caught?
Reply ID 82636
quote:I agree. I frequently drive to a premises within the area, pick something up and then exit the other end. ANPR cameras would tag me every day for going about my legitimate business. How much are these cameras going to cost each resident? Is everybody prepared to pay, or just the militant residents?
Originally posted by Ewoowar
I cannot see how an ANPR scheme is enforceable. Yet more examples for how it could catch people not abusing the rat run....... My son's childminder used to live within the rat run area and often when I collected him I would be there for but a minute........ I have often dropped children off within the rat run zone after football practice. When they don't muck around too much the drop off is about 2 minutes. So if there was an ANPR system in place with fines attached to rat runners would I have been caught?
Reply ID 82637
I can't see ANPR solving the problem either, it might help put people off using the roads as a shhort cut to the station but won't make any difference to speed as far as that goes some sort of calming humps is the better solution but not sure the residents would want that. I have seen a number of "locals" ignore the no right turn into Cross Road between 7.30 and 9.30 so they no doubt think it does not apply to them. As we know all it has done is move the problem to The Avenue etc anyway and in fact spped was less of a worry when peoople used that way as the roads are not suitable to get up to speed on. I am afraid it is a problem that can never be solved, people want to be able to use cars but don't want traffic or parking and the two go together!
Reply ID 82638
I have found reading comments to my original one really interesting. My point Mr Buzz is the guy overtaking me had to be doing more than 30 mph, this is a residential road, not the M1 and its summer holidays, lots more children about on bikes etc, etc. I guess Mr Buzz thinks that's okay. I will hoot my horn, the guy was a *anker .. and I guess when someone gets knocked over people will remember that the council didn't solve our problems in Bengeo, it just pushed them onto other roads... I am saddened that for not discernible reason, the guy who overtook me clearly wasn't in any need of doing the manoeuvring that he did.. Maybe he's one of these men who doesn't like women drivers... who knows.. but I guess that's another thread. As for hooting my horn is an offence, I shall continue to do so. I certainly hear people everyday in the UK doing that when they've been cut up on roundabouts etc, so offence of not I shall continue to use it...
Reply ID 82640
You really don't read the posts do you? If you did you would see that I said that 30mph in The Avenue was excessive. As for hooting your horn and committing an offence. You say you don't care. Perhaps you have the same attitude to other offences committed by motorists. Oh! Wait, yes of course you do, you have already said you break the speed limit in Bengeo Street. Silly me!
Reply ID 82641
quote:I believe the suggestion was that the money come from Sainsbury's S106 contribution.
Originally posted by shunt
How much are these cameras going to cost each resident? Is everybody prepared to pay, or just the militant residents?
Reply ID 82643
quote:Initially maybe... then what?
Originally posted by Stevequote:I believe the suggestion was that the money come from Sainsbury's S106 contribution.
Originally posted by shunt
How much are these cameras going to cost each resident? Is everybody prepared to pay, or just the militant residents?
Reply ID 82644
quote:First of all Buzz, why do you insist on posting in such an aggressive and antagonistic manner. It really isnt necessary, and personally I find it offensive. I guess that is just the sort of person you are, but I wish you could be just a little bit more "polite" when posting - it is just common manners surely? Anyhow, in response, I fully accept the scenarios you and a couple of other people have posted highlight potential difficulties with such a scheme. I recognised this in a previous post. However, I do believe such circumstances (childminder, deliveries, loan car etc) could be resolved by way of some sort of special circumstances dispensation. I dont know this for sure but I daresay if the system is introduced this will need to be looked into in some detail. I am not suggesting this is a perfect scheme, far from it. It just seems to be (IF it can work) it will satisfy those people adversely affected by the "rat run" (I am not one of them) and those people currently affected by speeding along the Avenue and Church Road (I am not one of those either) and it is an alternative which means we dont have to worry about the installation of a barrier (I AM one of those!). As for other schemes I mentioned, one that springs to mind is in place at the Addenbrookes hospital estate. By placing the phrase in inverted commas twice you seem to be suggesting I am making this up, which again, is somewhat offensive. I am sure if you are genuinely interested if you do a google search you will be able to find reference to this, and indeed any others. Buzz, I do not want a "fight" with you, as I know from previous threads how much you seem to relish this. I hope you take my reply in the measured way it is intended as a response to your queries and a polite comment as to the nature of your posting.
Originally posted by buzzquote:Ok, so I'm a resident within the 'controlled area'. I take my car into the garage for some repairs and I am given a loan car. Does that mean I would have to register the car before I could drive it home? I have a friend who lives within the area and decide to call in to see him, but he is not at home. Does that mean I have to drive back out the way I came in? As for "other schemes" which you mention, I would be intrigued to learn of details. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to these "other schemes" and how they operate. Your idea is totally unenforceable.
Originally posted by Razorquote:Why is it unenforceable when it would be there to enforce an existing restriction? The system would be set up to allow residents of the area unrestricted access and also would only "trigger" if someone drove in and out within a certain (short) space of time so visitors will be ok. I agree it wont be straightforward but I am aware of other schemes which operate currently so evidently it is possible. If you bought the newspaper and then drove out the same way you came in you wouldnt be in breach, but I take the point that there a large number of permutations that will need to be considered if it is installed.
Originally posted by buzzquote:Unenforceable. I would only have to say that I accessed the area to buy a paper at the newsagents which is a legitimate reason for being there.
Originally posted by Razor
Im not sure what Page 5 in the Mercury states but both LoBRA and MRA residents associations have recently been lobbying for installation of ANPR cameras to police the no through access restrictions. The idea being, the restrictions can then be enforced automatically. It wont resolve the traffic problems on Bengeo Street and down Port Hill but, if it works, it should completely stop the commuters cutting through and the sort of terrible and dangerous behaviour witnessed by DQ
Reply ID 82645
Buzz - tell me, hand on heart you don't and never have broken a speed limit? I don't overtake on a road which is residential at a speed which I think is fast enough (30 mph in the avenue is way too fast) and I wanted to go slower but the guy hassled me. Secondly, I believe I can use my horn/hooter to alert another driver to dangerous driving? Oh and by the way, that's probably better than giving the tosser the finger, which is what I wanted to do. You clearly like a fight, I am being an honest person, sometimes I have gone above the speed limit, even Princess Anne manages that, so I don't believe your Mr Perfect.. There is a time and place to go fast, but not what has been going on recently.. He wasn't an ambulance, fire engine or MI5.. He had no cause to overtake me in the aggressive and dangerous manner he did, and that's my point. So when you've got off your "I am so perfect" high horse, come down and join the rest of us.. if we'll have you!
Reply ID 82646
quote:Firstly I am mystified as to why you find my posts "aggressive and antaganonistic". I was merely pointing out the defects in your argument for ANPR cameras. Secondly, you were the one who stated that you were aware of "other schemes" And yes I put "other schemes" in inverted commas to show that I was quoting you. As you raised the point I was asking you to direct me to the source of your information. Aggressive? Antagonistic? If you find plain speaking by someone who disagrees with you to be "offensive" (Yes, inverted commas again) perhaps you ought to question whether you should be involving yourself here.
Originally posted by Razorquote:First of all Buzz, why do you insist on posting in such an aggressive and antagonistic manner. It really isnt necessary, and personally I find it offensive. I guess that is just the sort of person you are, but I wish you could be just a little bit more "polite" when posting - it is just common manners surely? Anyhow, in response, I fully accept the scenarios you and a couple of other people have posted highlight potential difficulties with such a scheme. I recognised this in a previous post. However, I do believe such circumstances (childminder, deliveries, loan car etc) could be resolved by way of some sort of special circumstances dispensation. I dont know this for sure but I daresay if the system is introduced this will need to be looked into in some detail. I am not suggesting this is a perfect scheme, far from it. It just seems to be (IF it can work) it will satisfy those people adversely affected by the "rat run" (I am not one of them) and those people currently affected by speeding along the Avenue and Church Road (I am not one of those either) and it is an alternative which means we dont have to worry about the installation of a barrier (I AM one of those!). As for other schemes I mentioned, one that springs to mind is in place at the Addenbrookes hospital estate. By placing the phrase in inverted commas twice you seem to be suggesting I am making this up, which again, is somewhat offensive. I am sure if you are genuinely interested if you do a google search you will be able to find reference to this, and indeed any others. Buzz, I do not want a "fight" with you, as I know from previous threads how much you seem to relish this. I hope you take my reply in the measured way it is intended as a response to your queries and a polite comment as to the nature of your posting.
Originally posted by buzzquote:Ok, so I'm a resident within the 'controlled area'. I take my car into the garage for some repairs and I am given a loan car. Does that mean I would have to register the car before I could drive it home? I have a friend who lives within the area and decide to call in to see him, but he is not at home. Does that mean I have to drive back out the way I came in? As for "other schemes" which you mention, I would be intrigued to learn of details. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to these "other schemes" and how they operate. Your idea is totally unenforceable.
Originally posted by Razorquote:Why is it unenforceable when it would be there to enforce an existing restriction? The system would be set up to allow residents of the area unrestricted access and also would only "trigger" if someone drove in and out within a certain (short) space of time so visitors will be ok. I agree it wont be straightforward but I am aware of other schemes which operate currently so evidently it is possible. If you bought the newspaper and then drove out the same way you came in you wouldnt be in breach, but I take the point that there a large number of permutations that will need to be considered if it is installed.
Originally posted by buzzquote:Unenforceable. I would only have to say that I accessed the area to buy a paper at the newsagents which is a legitimate reason for being there.
Originally posted by Razor
Im not sure what Page 5 in the Mercury states but both LoBRA and MRA residents associations have recently been lobbying for installation of ANPR cameras to police the no through access restrictions. The idea being, the restrictions can then be enforced automatically. It wont resolve the traffic problems on Bengeo Street and down Port Hill but, if it works, it should completely stop the commuters cutting through and the sort of terrible and dangerous behaviour witnessed by DQ
Reply ID 82647
quote:1. I have never said that I hadn't exceeded a speed limit. What I can say is that I have never exceeded the 30mph speed limit in Bengeo Street. "The guy hassled me". That is so pathetic an excuse! 2. You may believe that you can use your horn in that manner, but the law disagrees, (oh, but we've already established you have no regard for the law) Also, the Highway Code states: #The Highway Code - Rule 92 The horn. Use only while your vehicle is moving and you need to warn other road users of your presence. Never sound your horn aggressively. 3.Holding up Princess Anne as a paragon of virtue when it comes to driving history is a bit of a joke as well! Just because she is the Queen's daughter doesn't make her Mother Theresa 4. How do you know for certain the guy wasn't M15. I happen to know someone who lives locally who actually is!! As for joining the rest of you, if you are representative of them, I'm not sure I want to join you. 5. As for
Originally posted by Drama Queen
Buzz - tell me, hand on heart you don't and never have broken a speed limit? I don't overtake on a road which is residential at a speed which I think is fast enough (30 mph in the avenue is way too fast) and I wanted to go slower but the guy hassled me. Secondly, I believe I can use my horn/hooter to alert another driver to dangerous driving? Oh and by the way, that's probably better than giving the tosser the finger, which is what I wanted to do. You clearly like a fight, I am being an honest person, sometimes I have gone above the speed limit, even Princess Anne manages that, so I don't believe your Mr Perfect.. There is a time and place to go fast, but not what has been going on recently.. He wasn't an ambulance, fire engine or MI5.. He had no cause to overtake me in the aggressive and dangerous manner he did, and that's my point. So when you've got off your "I am so perfect" high horse, come down and join the rest of us.. if we'll have you!
Reply ID 82648
quote:I have no problem with the manner in which the majority people represent their views on this forum. While you raise the subject, I wouldnt be surprised if quite a lot of people on this forum would rather you didnt involve yourself here!
Firstly I am mystified as to why you find my posts "aggressive and antaganonistic". I was merely pointing out the defects in your argument for ANPR cameras. Secondly, you were the one who stated that you were aware of "other schemes" And yes I put "other schemes" in inverted commas to show that I was quoting you. As you raised the point I was asking you to direct me to the source of your information. Aggressive? Antagonistic? If you find plain speaking by someone who disagrees with you to be "offensive" (Yes, inverted commas again) perhaps you ought to question whether you should be involving yourself here.
Reply ID 82649
quote:Really? Given that people that work at MI5 aren't allowed to tell people they work for MI5 either:- a) they're a cleaner, in which case that doesn't count. b) they're crap at their job c) they're family, in which case you should know better than to splash this about on the web. d) they're lying e) you're lying. I'll leave people to make up their own minds as to which option it could be.
Originally posted by buzz 4. How do you know for certain the guy wasn't M15. I happen to know someone who lives locally who actually is!!
Reply ID 82651
quote:Actually, seeing that M15 are now openly advertising for recruits it aint that much of a problem. However, as to your point. I have not disclosed who that person is, nor would I do so,you are basically accusing me of lying. In addtion, if you had bothered to check out their website you will see that the Head of MI5 is Jonathan Evans. Hardly a secret. If the head of the service can be identified that just about says it. If you are accusing me of lying, as your post implies, I would suggest you either put up or shut up.
Originally posted by jamesquote:Really? Given that people that work at MI5 aren't allowed to tell people they work for MI5 either:- a) they're a cleaner, in which case that doesn't count. b) they're crap at their job c) they're family, in which case you should know better than to splash this about on the web. d) they're lying e) you're lying. I'll leave people to make up their own minds as to which option it could be.
Originally posted by buzz 4. How do you know for certain the guy wasn't M15. I happen to know someone who lives locally who actually is!!
Reply ID 82652
quote:You have evidence to support that view do you? I would suggest that from some of the replies to this thread suggest the very opposite.
Originally posted by Razorquote:I have no problem with the manner in which the majority people represent their views on this forum. While you raise the subject, I wouldnt be surprised if quite a lot of people on this forum would rather you didnt involve yourself here!
Firstly I am mystified as to why you find my posts "aggressive and antaganonistic". I was merely pointing out the defects in your argument for ANPR cameras. Secondly, you were the one who stated that you were aware of "other schemes" And yes I put "other schemes" in inverted commas to show that I was quoting you. As you raised the point I was asking you to direct me to the source of your information. Aggressive? Antagonistic? If you find plain speaking by someone who disagrees with you to be "offensive" (Yes, inverted commas again) perhaps you ought to question whether you should be involving yourself here.
Reply ID 82653
Actually I find that posts by Buzz are usually concise and to the point,which on a forum like this,is what you need. I don't view any of his posts agressive. Anyhow,off-topic, sorry.[:)]
Reply ID 82654
quote:Same here. He's a straight-to-the-point individual who can engage in debate without the need to use either flowery or gutter language, unlike at least one of his accusers. Neither does he come across as contrary in his posts. I've posted before, however, that the written word can come across as more direct than the spoken word because of the lack of other communication aids, such as inclination of tone and body-language. People can become emotive to alternative viewpoints through misjudging the intent of a post, just because it is made succinctly by a person holding an opposing view. Asking for such members to be barred, name calling or requesting for posts to be deleted are common symptoms observed. [V]
Originally posted by dutch knight
Actually I find that posts by Buzz are usually concise and to the point,which on a forum like this,is what you need. I don't view any of his posts agressive. Anyhow,off-topic, sorry.[:)]
Reply ID 82657
http://www.herts24.co.uk/news/pavement_parking_ban_in_welwyn_garden_city_1_965464 A nice Mrs police woman that I spoke to today told me that the same is coming to Hertford in April next year. All pavement parking will be given a fine.
Reply ID 82659
quote:Interesting that it only applies to WGC town centre. I wonder if it will only apply to Hertford town centre where, to be honest, pavement parking does not seem to be much of a problem.
Originally posted by James007
http://www.herts24.co.uk/news/pavement_parking_ban_in_welwyn_garden_city_1_965464 A nice Mrs police woman that I spoke to today told me that the same is coming to Hertford in April next year. All pavement parking will be given a fine.
Reply ID 82660
quote:Sorry Joby, she told me that the parking attendants/wardens (whatever they are called) will be able to ticket a parked car on any pavement from April next year in the whole of Herts as the police are dissolving powers to the relevant council. If this is right, lower Bengeo residents will be very glad due to the commuter parking on the pavements.
Originally posted by Jobyquote:Interesting that it only applies to WGC town centre. I wonder if it will only apply to Hertford town centre where, to be honest, pavement parking does not seem to be much of a problem.
Originally posted by James007
http://www.herts24.co.uk/news/pavement_parking_ban_in_welwyn_garden_city_1_965464 A nice Mrs police woman that I spoke to today told me that the same is coming to Hertford in April next year. All pavement parking will be given a fine.
Reply ID 82661
I think we may be losing sight of the O/P.
Reply ID 82662
@buzz From the MI5 website at https://www.mi5.gov.uk/careers/how-to-apply-discretion.aspx
quote:
During the application process you must limit those you tell about your application to your partner or a close family member. Should your application be successful, you will be given a full briefing on the reasons why it is important not to disclose that you work for the Security Service and what to say if people ask you or your family about your career.
Reply ID 82663
Yep, sight of the o/p has definitely been lost. By the way, I still can't find any way of turning right from The Avenue into Church Road, except from a standing start at the top of the steps leading up from Molewood?
Reply ID 82664
quote:Funnily enough I applied for a job with MI6 after university (didnt get it). You can actually tell people you work for MI5/MI6 unless you are involved sensitive field rolls, such rolls are few and far between. Most of the jobs are very mundane and boring anyway and the money is rubbish so worked out for the best :)
Originally posted by james
@buzz From the MI5 website at https://www.mi5.gov.uk/careers/how-to-apply-discretion.aspxquote:
During the application process you must limit those you tell about your application to your partner or a close family member. Should your application be successful, you will be given a full briefing on the reasons why it is important not to disclose that you work for the Security Service and what to say if people ask you or your family about your career.
Reply ID 82665
quote:And, your point is?
Originally posted by james
@buzz From the MI5 website at https://www.mi5.gov.uk/careers/how-to-apply-discretion.aspxquote:
During the application process you must limit those you tell about your application to your partner or a close family member. Should your application be successful, you will be given a full briefing on the reasons why it is important not to disclose that you work for the Security Service and what to say if people ask you or your family about your career.
Reply ID 82666
quote:I very much doubt that lower Bengeo residents will be glad, due to the fact that it is they are the people, in the main, who park on the pavements.
Originally posted by James007quote:Sorry Joby, she told me that the parking attendants/wardens (whatever they are called) will be able to ticket a parked car on any pavement from April next year in the whole of Herts as the police are dissolving powers to the relevant council. If this is right, lower Bengeo residents will be very glad due to the commuter parking on the pavements.
Originally posted by Jobyquote:Interesting that it only applies to WGC town centre. I wonder if it will only apply to Hertford town centre where, to be honest, pavement parking does not seem to be much of a problem.
Originally posted by James007
http://www.herts24.co.uk/news/pavement_parking_ban_in_welwyn_garden_city_1_965464 A nice Mrs police woman that I spoke to today told me that the same is coming to Hertford in April next year. All pavement parking will be given a fine.
Reply ID 82670
quote:Mind you, should put a stop to rat-runners :-) P
I very much doubt that lower Bengeo residents will be glad, due to the fact that it is they are the people, in the main, who park on the pavements.
Reply ID 82672
quote:How?
Originally posted by Paulquote:Mind you, should put a stop to rat-runners :-) P
I very much doubt that lower Bengeo residents will be glad, due to the fact that it is they are the people, in the main, who park on the pavements.
Reply ID 82673
All it would do is stop people parking on the pavement would not stop people driving through. Will also affect a lot of people in Duncombe Road who park 1/2 on the pavement. Getting back to the Op the only way I can see traffic being slowed in The Avenue is some sort of "traffic slowing humps".
Reply ID 82674
quote:Well yes. Perhaps getting back to the reason for roads. To allow people on foot, with animals or carriages to pass and repass
Originally posted by Marilyn
All it would do is stop people parking on the pavement would not stop people driving through. Will also affect a lot of people in Duncombe Road who park 1/2 on the pavement. Getting back to the Op the only way I can see traffic being slowed in The Avenue is some sort of "traffic slowing humps".
Reply ID 82676
Speed is likely to become more of a problem as vehicle technology moves on. Drivers judge speed by ride quality, feedback through the steering, noise levels etc. Modern cars are designed to isolate the driver from all these factors (excepting some high performance models). Even modest, boxy hatchbacks are light enough to out accelerate their older conterparts without drama, so drivers reach a higher velocity in a shorter space. However, do not wish for speed humps or chicanes. They create noise, burn fuel and in wet weather you'll be forever sweeping up the remains of dead motocyclists because of fuel residue on the road as other vehicle decelerate and accellerate between them and debris from parts which become detached. Never mind. The Bengeo urban terrorists will ensure that enough roads are blocked that the Avenue will eventually become like Cowbridge;- at a standstill and unusable.
Reply ID 82677
quote:Good job we've got a major supermarket coming to help out with the traffic situation on Cowbridge then.
Originally posted by shunt
Never mind. The Bengeo urban terrorists will ensure that enough roads are blocked that the Avenue will eventually become like Cowbridge;- at a standstill and unusable.
Reply ID 82678
I'm getting a sense of deja vu here
Reply ID 82679
quote:[:D]
Originally posted by Steve
I'm getting a sense of deja vu here
Reply ID 82768
Gosh! MI5, lower Bengeo parking, other road traffic offences and Sainsbury's all in one thread! Agree with others that buzz presents a logical but firm argument and I haven't sensed any form of aggression from buzz.
Reply ID 82771
quote:I agree, and also with Buzz's point that it is unenforceable and always has been. I frequently visit the area quite legitimately for moments, to collect or deposit items from premises within the area with a stop time of only minutes. Plainly my route in depends where I've been last and my route out depends where I'm going next.
Originally posted by Woodyquote:Same here. He's a straight-to-the-point individual who can engage in debate without the need to use either flowery or gutter language, unlike at least one of his accusers. Neither does he come across as contrary in his posts. I've posted before, however, that the written word can come across as more direct than the spoken word because of the lack of other communication aids, such as inclination of tone and body-language. People can become emotive to alternative viewpoints through misjudging the intent of a post, just because it is made succinctly by a person holding an opposing view. Asking for such members to be barred, name calling or requesting for posts to be deleted are common symptoms observed. [V]
Originally posted by dutch knight
Actually I find that posts by Buzz are usually concise and to the point,which on a forum like this,is what you need. I don't view any of his posts agressive. Anyhow,off-topic, sorry.[:)]
Reply ID 82773
quote:With hindsight, perhaps aggressive was the wrong word to use. Apologies Buzz.
Originally posted by SallyB
Gosh! MI5, lower Bengeo parking, other road traffic offences and Sainsbury's all in one thread! Agree with others that buzz presents a logical but firm argument and I haven't sensed any form of aggression from buzz.
Reply ID 82774
quote:As discussed already, surely easily resolved by a dispensation for you and any others who have legitimate reasons to be in and out of the area quickly? As Ive already said its not a perfect idea but I havent heard of a better one to solve the various issues complained about. As it is already in operation in at least one other location, how can you say the principle is unenforceable?
Originally posted by shuntquote:I agree, and also with Buzz's point that it is unenforceable and always has been. I frequently visit the area quite legitimately for moments, to collect or deposit items from premises within the area with a stop time of only minutes. Plainly my route in depends where I've been last and my route out depends where I'm going next.
Originally posted by Woodyquote:Same here. He's a straight-to-the-point individual who can engage in debate without the need to use either flowery or gutter language, unlike at least one of his accusers. Neither does he come across as contrary in his posts. I've posted before, however, that the written word can come across as more direct than the spoken word because of the lack of other communication aids, such as inclination of tone and body-language. People can become emotive to alternative viewpoints through misjudging the intent of a post, just because it is made succinctly by a person holding an opposing view. Asking for such members to be barred, name calling or requesting for posts to be deleted are common symptoms observed. [V]
Originally posted by dutch knight
Actually I find that posts by Buzz are usually concise and to the point,which on a forum like this,is what you need. I don't view any of his posts agressive. Anyhow,off-topic, sorry.[:)]
Reply ID 82776
quote:Your apology is accepted. Your argument is not.
Originally posted by Razorquote:With hindsight, perhaps aggressive was the wrong word to use. Apologies Buzz.
Originally posted by SallyB
Gosh! MI5, lower Bengeo parking, other road traffic offences and Sainsbury's all in one thread! Agree with others that buzz presents a logical but firm argument and I haven't sensed any form of aggression from buzz.
Reply ID 82778
quote:How would you practically dispense this "dispensation"?
Originally posted by Razorquote:As discussed already, surely easily resolved by a dispensation for you and any others who have legitimate reasons to be in and out of the area quickly? As Ive already said its not a perfect idea but I havent heard of a better one to solve the various issues complained about. As it is already in operation in at least one other location, how can you say the principle is unenforceable?
Originally posted by shuntquote:I agree, and also with Buzz's point that it is unenforceable and always has been. I frequently visit the area quite legitimately for moments, to collect or deposit items from premises within the area with a stop time of only minutes. Plainly my route in depends where I've been last and my route out depends where I'm going next.
Originally posted by Woodyquote:Same here. He's a straight-to-the-point individual who can engage in debate without the need to use either flowery or gutter language, unlike at least one of his accusers. Neither does he come across as contrary in his posts. I've posted before, however, that the written word can come across as more direct than the spoken word because of the lack of other communication aids, such as inclination of tone and body-language. People can become emotive to alternative viewpoints through misjudging the intent of a post, just because it is made succinctly by a person holding an opposing view. Asking for such members to be barred, name calling or requesting for posts to be deleted are common symptoms observed. [V]
Originally posted by dutch knight
Actually I find that posts by Buzz are usually concise and to the point,which on a forum like this,is what you need. I don't view any of his posts agressive. Anyhow,off-topic, sorry.[:)]
Reply ID 82781
Actual scenarios in one week. From Bengeo Street to Balfour Street to pick up collegue, then on to work at Tewin. From Welwyn to Molewood Road to drop off excess materials at commercial premises, then home, via Bengeo Street. Visit friend in Farquar St. Friend is not in, so continue to another friend's house in Watton. From Bengeo Street to drop off son at former wife's house in Port Vale, before continuing to work in St Albans. How would an ANPR know why any of these journeys took place? The answer is, it wouldn't, niether would a real person. Unenforcable and as plainly ridiculous as it has been for the entire 30 years that this whinging has been going on. In the time wasted on this, whole families have grown up and had families of their own.
Reply ID 82783
Sometimes, I really wish you could enable a 'like' facility on this forum. Go shunt and buzz - the only people who actually talk sense!
Reply ID 82785
quote:And yet the problem is still there. I'm no longer personally affected by it but the concerns about the safety of children walking to primary school are just as relevant now, as are the many other inevitable problems involved in having a large amount of traffic attempting to squeeze down small suburban streets that are completely unsuitable when it comes to through traffic. Words like "whingeing" only serve to divide and it's partly this polarisation of views that has stood in the way of any solution being agreed after god knows how many years.
Originally posted by shunt
Actual scenarios in one week. From Bengeo Street to Balfour Street to pick up collegue, then on to work at Tewin. From Welwyn to Molewood Road to drop off excess materials at commercial premises, then home, via Bengeo Street. Visit friend in Farquar St. Friend is not in, so continue to another friend's house in Watton. From Bengeo Street to drop off son at former wife's house in Port Vale, before continuing to work in St Albans. How would an ANPR know why any of these journeys took place? The answer is, it wouldn't, niether would a real person. Unenforcable and as plainly ridiculous as it has been for the entire 30 years that this whinging has been going on. In the time wasted on this, whole families have grown up and had families of their own.
Reply ID 82786
If only the children would walk to primary school a lot of the issues with the rat run would be solved. I'm also no longer affected as its a few years since I moved from the area but this is a safety situation that can only be managed and not removed. My opinion is that there should be an emphasis on safety in the area by slowing down traffic and dealing with inconsiderate/dangerous parking. There is really no way that traffic can be stopped/access controlled within the area as there is too much need for cars to enter - plus as a motorist I don't see why I should be stopped from using a through route that makes such a difference to journey times, the roads were originally provided for access and through routes - not as car parks which is what they have become in the lower bengeo area.
Reply ID 82787
quote:Yes, the problems are still there. Due in the main to the selfish and illegal parking by residents. When are people going to accept that roads were built for one purpose. To allow the passing and re-passing of vehicles, people driving animals and those on foot. They were not built or intended as private parking places for residents. If LOBRA are really so intent on improving road safety perhaps they could lobby the police to take action against the parking problem, instead of suggesting costly and unenforceable schemes such as ANPR.(Incidentally has any costing been made for how much police time would be taken in tracing 'culprits' identified by ANPR, particularly in these times of police cutbacks?) If they still want to stop people using the roads for the purpose for which they were meant, ok. Block off the road completely at the junction of Molewood Road, Nelson Street and Port Vale. To everyone. No ongoing costs and inconveniencing the residents of that area as much as everyone else.
Originally posted by dennismoorequote:And yet the problem is still there. I'm no longer personally affected by it but the concerns about the safety of children walking to primary school are just as relevant now, as are the many other inevitable problems involved in having a large amount of traffic attempting to squeeze down small suburban streets that are completely unsuitable when it comes to through traffic. Words like "whingeing" only serve to divide and it's partly this polarisation of views that has stood in the way of any solution being agreed after god knows how many years.
Originally posted by shunt
Actual scenarios in one week. From Bengeo Street to Balfour Street to pick up collegue, then on to work at Tewin. From Welwyn to Molewood Road to drop off excess materials at commercial premises, then home, via Bengeo Street. Visit friend in Farquar St. Friend is not in, so continue to another friend's house in Watton. From Bengeo Street to drop off son at former wife's house in Port Vale, before continuing to work in St Albans. How would an ANPR know why any of these journeys took place? The answer is, it wouldn't, niether would a real person. Unenforcable and as plainly ridiculous as it has been for the entire 30 years that this whinging has been going on. In the time wasted on this, whole families have grown up and had families of their own.
Reply ID 82794
The reason I use a term like whinging is not to be rude, but to describe complaint without the application of logic or audit. Several generations have now looked at this and dismissed it. There is no a solution to the "problem", because what is complained about is not the problem, but the symptom. What a small group of Bengeo residents complain about exists to a degree all over Europe. We cannot close every road. The focus has to be on how we interact when using that public space, not an attempt at gaining exclusive rights over rights of way. Speed, parking, teaching children to be safe pedestrians, considering lines of sight at juctions etc. all help, but the fault in the OP is an individual, not the road or the public in general.
Reply ID 82808
At the risk of being shot down in flames but what exactly is the problem? I have heard about the infamous rat run but not what is the problem. Is it volume of traffic? Is it speed? Is it the parking?
Reply ID 82815
quote:http://www.hertford.net/issues/bengeoratrun.asp
Originally posted by Kateg28
At the risk of being shot down in flames but what exactly is the problem? I have heard about the infamous rat run but not what is the problem. Is it volume of traffic? Is it speed? Is it the parking?
Reply ID 82817
To add to Steve's post the traffic problems stem mainly from a conflict between those who want to park long term on the local roads, i.e. residents and commuters which makes it difficult for cars negotiating the narrow streets and tight turns that make up the through route - particularly in the Byde St., Wellington St. and Nelson St. areas. This leads to cars driving on pavements, road rage incidents, delays and damage to parked cars. In addition there are other local problems with parking for parents dropping off children at the Duncombe School and customers using the Co-Op in Bengeo St. As for the the actual problem rather than the traffic problems above that is more difficult to identify though it is the main topic of the conversations; I'm sure others will give you their views on what exactly is 'the problem'.
Reply ID 82821
quote:They already have done and at great length!
Originally posted by Golden
I'm sure others will give you their views on what exactly is 'the problem'.
Reply ID 82827
quote:The cause being - that on average, between 7:00 am and 9:00pm, seven days a week, one car passes by every 12 seconds (last time Highways published a measurement). P
Originally posted by Golden
As for the the actual problem rather than the traffic problems above that is more difficult to identify though it is the main topic of the conversations; I'm sure others will give you their views on what exactly is 'the problem'.
Reply ID 82833
Paul, is that in one direction or both - five cars a minute doesn't seem that many to me for peak traffic rates?
Reply ID 82834
The "problem", if there is one, is conflict and bad feeling. There a lot of houses and very few parking spaces which are not either dangerous, or obstructive in that they narrow junctions to an unacceptable extent. This creates the conflict. Other things which happen in the streets stem from this and in this world of entitlement expectation, many people behave badly, dangerously, selfishly or rudely. This kind of behaviour is exacerbated by local residents not accepting that all locations in Hertford have plus and minus points and many are similar to lower Bengeo. These factors determine pricing to an extent. There is an element of crying wolf here. By continually comlaining about their fellows in Hertford, (many of whom live with similar), when Lower Bengeo residents do have a genuine complaint, it is difficult to generate sympathy. It made worse by the displacement effect of making Lower Bengeo a special case. If I succeeded in closing my road, Byde Street would get busier. That would be no more justifiable than attempts to do the same in reverse.
Reply ID 82835
quote:Quiet then, by comparison to many. It's rush hour. What else would you expect?
Originally posted by Paulquote:The cause being - that on average, between 7:00 am and 9:00pm, seven days a week, one car passes by every 12 seconds (last time Highways published a measurement). P
Originally posted by Golden
As for the the actual problem rather than the traffic problems above that is more difficult to identify though it is the main topic of the conversations; I'm sure others will give you their views on what exactly is 'the problem'.
Reply ID 82842
quote:Not peak traffic rates, not 7:00 am to 9:00 am - but five cars a minute passing through (average) - every minute of every hour, from 7:00 am in the morning to 9:00 pm in the evening - seven days a week! P
Originally posted by Golden
Paul, is that in one direction or both - five cars a minute doesn't seem that many to me for peak traffic rates?
Reply ID 82843
I see the LoBRA website has disappearred
Reply ID 82844
quote:They have a blog now. Were you looking for this? 30,679 vehicles a week back then. P http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l495/bengeo01/traffic-ratrun.jpg
Originally posted by Steve
I see the LoBRA website has disappearred
Reply ID 82845
quote:
Originally posted by Paulquote:They have a blog now. Were you looking for this? 30,679 vehicles a week back then. P http://i1120.photobucket.com/albums/l495/bengeo01/traffic-ratrun.jpg
Originally posted by Steve
I see the LoBRA website has disappearred
