What we are up against 3
Discussion
Hi Y'all.
Thought I'd relate my endeavours to get a traffic calming scheme scrapped in my village.
Some time ago there was a local parish meeting, which had been called by some local residents to get speed reduction methods employed.
I was unable to attend the meeting, so waited till the proposals were posted on the various lampposts in the village.
I then objected with the use of the ABD objection pack, and the help of an ABD council member, this process took a significant amount of time, statements of reason's have to be obtained ffom the highways department.
The statement of reasons in our case, were of perceived danger.
I went on to challenge the various schemes, although not all of them, based on accident history, 85th percentile rules, and other relevant reasons.
I was duly informed that my objections would be heard at the next highways meeting.
Within a week of said meeting I recieved a fairly curt letter, along the lines of, we have noted your objections, but have decided to go with the proposals anyway.
I was fairly angry at this point and wrote straight back to the highways department requesting a copy of the minutes of the meeting.
This they did send, and according to the minutes, my objections were heard.
I WAS THE ONLY OBJECTOR.
Reading through the minutes I looked at the details of the original council meeting that I could'nt attend.
There was a total of 30 people there, 20 were for the scheme, and 10 against.
THIS IS IN A VILLAGE OF 2000 PEOPLE.
SO, a few vecifeous locals get their way, no matter what the facts are.
I am quite demoralised over the whole issue, but there are lessons to be learnt.
Make sure you get in the initial meeting, and drag other like minded people along.
It proves what we are up against, which is almost universal apathy.
I spoke to my friend in the ABD, and he reckons, let them put the scheme up, wait for the accidents to rise, and watch for the calls to pull it down, you can then write to interested parties and say "I told you so", not much compensation but maybe a feeling that you were right all along
Thought I'd relate my endeavours to get a traffic calming scheme scrapped in my village.
Some time ago there was a local parish meeting, which had been called by some local residents to get speed reduction methods employed.
I was unable to attend the meeting, so waited till the proposals were posted on the various lampposts in the village.
I then objected with the use of the ABD objection pack, and the help of an ABD council member, this process took a significant amount of time, statements of reason's have to be obtained ffom the highways department.
The statement of reasons in our case, were of perceived danger.
I went on to challenge the various schemes, although not all of them, based on accident history, 85th percentile rules, and other relevant reasons.
I was duly informed that my objections would be heard at the next highways meeting.
Within a week of said meeting I recieved a fairly curt letter, along the lines of, we have noted your objections, but have decided to go with the proposals anyway.
I was fairly angry at this point and wrote straight back to the highways department requesting a copy of the minutes of the meeting.
This they did send, and according to the minutes, my objections were heard.
I WAS THE ONLY OBJECTOR.
Reading through the minutes I looked at the details of the original council meeting that I could'nt attend.
There was a total of 30 people there, 20 were for the scheme, and 10 against.
THIS IS IN A VILLAGE OF 2000 PEOPLE.
SO, a few vecifeous locals get their way, no matter what the facts are.
I am quite demoralised over the whole issue, but there are lessons to be learnt.
Make sure you get in the initial meeting, and drag other like minded people along.
It proves what we are up against, which is almost universal apathy.
I spoke to my friend in the ABD, and he reckons, let them put the scheme up, wait for the accidents to rise, and watch for the calls to pull it down, you can then write to interested parties and say "I told you so", not much compensation but maybe a feeling that you were right all along
Same sort of thing happened where I used to live. Proposal for humps produced, lots of verbal objection at a display, more than for it etc. Council sends out the voting papers. Humps introduced. Apparantly less than half returned the voting papers and just over half of them voted for it. So less than a quarter of the local community voted for it and one!
So I moved
So I moved
quote:
Council sends out the voting papers. Humps introduced. Apparantly less than half returned the voting papers and just over half of them voted for it. So less than a quarter of the local community voted for it and one!
Maybe there should be a requirement for minimum levels of voting for these things - i.e. a majority of those voting, and a minimum of 30% of those eligible to vote, so apathy wins...
Only case I know of where this was the case was the 1979 'Scottish Independence' referendum, where a minimum vote of 40% of those eligible was required.
The independence vote was the majority, but only 33%, so nothing happened...
But for a council to install humps on the basis of 20 votes against 10 in a population of 2000 is crazy. But so is the apathy of the 2000... "you get the government you deserve".
quote:
Only case I know of where this was the case was the 1979 'Scottish Independence' referendum, where a minimum vote of 40% of those eligible was required.
The independence vote was the majority, but only 33%, so nothing happened...
That was only for devolution not indpendence!
The objections to that principle are still valid: People on the voters' roll who can't vote - including dead ones for eg - count as 'no' votes. My Grandfather deliberately didn't vote that time knowing that he would then count as a 'no'.
Assuming that a fair number of people did this that vote would probably have produced a "no" if a straight majority had been in place ... and we probably wouldn't have the parliament here we have now as there would have been less ammunition from that referendum (cheer or boo at your pleasure) ... I digress.
Compulsory voting would help of course as the turnout would be much higher - you could then reasonably take a straight majority of the, say, 90% voter turnout you'd actually get.
>> Edited by JohnL on Wednesday 17th July 10:20
The very fact that only 30 out of 2000 people registered a vote says it all.
It's a sham of a democracy we live in, literally.
The entire anti-car lobby just HAS to be wrong: the drooling vegetables who legislate the conspiracy against us take advantage of the fact that most motorists are working to finance their mindless power trips and the window of opportunity to attend the various rubber stamping ceremonies - sorry, consultation meetings - is unfeasibly tiny (2.30 - 2.45 PM on a Tuesday, how's that for convenient, Mr.Motorist? No good? Well too bad, 'cos I'll just be coming off my 2 hour lunch break...)
The only solution MUST be some form of forced voting; you HAVE to pay Dick Turpin (tax) so you should HAVE to vote - surely this is an ESSENTIAL part of a civilised, democratic system?
It's a sham of a democracy we live in, literally.
The entire anti-car lobby just HAS to be wrong: the drooling vegetables who legislate the conspiracy against us take advantage of the fact that most motorists are working to finance their mindless power trips and the window of opportunity to attend the various rubber stamping ceremonies - sorry, consultation meetings - is unfeasibly tiny (2.30 - 2.45 PM on a Tuesday, how's that for convenient, Mr.Motorist? No good? Well too bad, 'cos I'll just be coming off my 2 hour lunch break...)
The only solution MUST be some form of forced voting; you HAVE to pay Dick Turpin (tax) so you should HAVE to vote - surely this is an ESSENTIAL part of a civilised, democratic system?
What a beaut.
A village I drive through - at usually well under 30mph - has just been 'bunny-hugged' and is now littered with concrete speed lumps and a chicaine
.
There were two minor injury accidents in the last 5 years, so there was obviously a thoroughly valid case for forcing drivers to crawl over tank traps and make their lives hell.
Perhaps someone ran over Mrs Miggins' cat and she complained to the council...
Where I used to drive at 30 or less, that now jars hell out of the car, so I take the humps at 40 which is a hell of a lot more comfortable
. All the numpties slow right down for each hump and crawl over at 5mph, it causes massive congestion and everyone's watching the humps, not the road.
Great. What a f
g stunning victory for common sense and road safety. Not. 
A village I drive through - at usually well under 30mph - has just been 'bunny-hugged' and is now littered with concrete speed lumps and a chicaine
. There were two minor injury accidents in the last 5 years, so there was obviously a thoroughly valid case for forcing drivers to crawl over tank traps and make their lives hell.
Perhaps someone ran over Mrs Miggins' cat and she complained to the council... Where I used to drive at 30 or less, that now jars hell out of the car, so I take the humps at 40 which is a hell of a lot more comfortable
. All the numpties slow right down for each hump and crawl over at 5mph, it causes massive congestion and everyone's watching the humps, not the road. Great. What a f
g stunning victory for common sense and road safety. Not. If its anything like the council I now have, they convince themselves that they are right. Anyone who has an objection is quite obviously a nutter. A car park in town has a road going past an entrance. For no reason that I can find out about it has been blocked off, probably the chance of a minor shunt! You now have to go through a crazy one way system to get to it.
quote:
they supposedly took speed readings in the proposed 20mph zone and noted that the traffic travelled between 21 mph and 31mph, so therefore they argued that drivers would in all likelyhood keep to the 20 limit and so the proposal goes ahead????????????
'Course. Makes perfect sense. About as much sense as the whole 'speed kills' philosophy. Fu
wits.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff