Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

[teuchter]

its a coach house and probably only one of the garages belongs to the property above, the other garages would most likely belong to other properties on the development.

Doesn't really matter who owns the garages; the point is that priority is given to vehicle storage such that the humans are forced up some pokey stairs and nothing is offered to the street except an expanse of paving.

 

[Elpenor]

Doesn't really matter who owns the garages; the point is that priority is given to vehicle storage such that the humans are forced up some pokey stairs and nothing is offered to the street except an expanse of paving.

You do realise that humans need to go up stairs in the vast majority of properties?

 

[teuchter]

Forgot to post this great example of design, that I came across the other day.

My guess is the estate was originally built with the footpath on the right continuing to the junction, but at some point someone decided it was more important to squash in some extra parking spaces, and wheelchair users can just take their chances on the road.

 

[teuchter]

You do realise that humans need to go up stairs in the vast majority of properties?

Please refer to my previous post:

It also prioritises garage space over anyone who needs level access such as wheelchair users.

In fact I'm not really sure how it was allowed to be built because building regs say that generallly in a newbuild you should have a level access entrance to the living area and an accessible toilet.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Would most modern cars even fit in those garages?

My car wouldn't.

Secondly, no-one has an "absolute right" to convert part of their property to a garage.

Shame as my garage is integral to my house and contains five bicycles and a workshop area to service them. Never thought you'd be so anti-bikes, but there we are.

 

[MickiQ]

its a coach house and probably only one of the garages belongs to the property above, the other garages would most likely belong to other properties on the development.

Can't say I'm overly keen on that idea myself, I can see great potential for neighbourly disputes when someone needs a early night or is working shifts and one of their neighbours is working on their motorbike whilst listening to heavy metal directly below.

Forgot to post this great example of design, that I came across the other day.

My guess is the estate was originally built with the footpath on the right continuing to the junction, but at some point someone decided it was more important to squash in some extra parking spaces, and wheelchair users can just take their chances on the road.


View attachment 281120

You've moved from being the champion of cyclists to the equally unwanted champion of wheelchair users now? What about motability vehicles? they're cars. I take it your in favour of their confiscation and the forcing of their users back onto public transport.

 

[teuchter]

You've moved from being the champion of cyclists to the equally unwanted champion of wheelchair users now? What about motability vehicles? they're cars. I take it your in favour of their confiscation and the forcing of their users back onto public transport.

This is almost as stupid as something T & P would write.

 

[T & P]

Shame as my garage is integral to my house and contains five bicycles and a workshop area to service them. Never thought you'd be so anti-bikes, but there we are.

After his experience travelling the Scottish Highlands in a car, teuchter is a changed man.

I recknon he secretly likes cars so much, he hates garages as they deprive him of the sight of the things parked on the street.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

After his experience travelling the Scottish Highlands in a car, teuchter is a changed man.

I heard he's been eyeing up helicopter lessons.

 

[teuchter]

It's encouraging to hear this morning of the revisions to the highway code. I haven't gone though them in detail but they seem to be positive and recognise a hierarchy of road users with pedestrians at the top as they should be.

I don't think we can rule out the possibility that people at the DfT follow this thread.

 

[SpookyFrank]

You do realise that clearly someone ha converted their own house which they have an absolute right to do and that any new buyer has an equally absolute right to convert it back again

That's far from clear because 'coach houses' like this are a standard part of new developments.

 

[platinumsage]

It's encouraging to hear this morning of the revisions to the highway code. I haven't gone though them in detail but they seem to be positive and recognise a hierarchy of road users with pedestrians at the top as they should be.

I don't think we can rule out the possibility that people at the DfT follow this thread.

Lots of extra ambiguity added, it's mostly bad.

This one for cyclists is good to see though:

"ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"

becomes

"ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so"

 

[SpookyFrank]

Would most modern cars even fit in those garages?

No and it's profoundly annoying that people with garages park their cars on the street or the pavement because the bloated monstrosities that are in production today don't fit in them. Although tbf people being too lazy to back into the garage, and street/pavement parking being so universally tolerated, doesn't help either.

 

[teuchter]

Lots of extra ambiguity added, it's mostly bad.

This one for cyclists is good to see though:

"ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"

becomes

"ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so"

I don't think the final wording for that one has been announced yet.

I think the proposed new wording above is better than the old one anyway.

 

[SpookyFrank]

What about motability vehicles? they're cars. I take it your in favour of their confiscation and the forcing of their users back onto public transport.

I reckon you'd have to have some basis for an accusation like that, or run the risk of coming off as a bit of a cunt.

Cars being so ubiquitous, along with the traffic congestion and parking chaos that results, is obviously bad for those who genuinely need them. This is so obvious in fact that I refuse to accept that even you are too dim to figure it out.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Lots of extra ambiguity added, it's mostly bad.

This one for cyclists is good to see though:

"ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"

becomes

"ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so"

Cyclists don't know what is and isn't safe. You'd have to assume all cyclists are also motorists, which clearly isn't the case. And because most cyclists are twats, they'll simply say "I didn't think it was safe".
It's like the Highway code is being edited by wooly liberals.

 

[DownwardDog]

Would most modern cars even fit in those garages?

The standard UK garage door is 7 feet wide (2.13m). A full fat Range Rover is 1.9m wide so you might have to push it in. Or get a BMW X5 that you can remote park with the key.

 

[Doodler]

Just received a signed secondhand copy of Heathcote Williams's 'Autogeddon', published around 1990 or 1991, quite influential in its day. A long illustrated poem with a good collection of quotes and news reports as an appendix.

 

[hash tag]

Lots of extra ambiguity added, it's mostly bad.

This one for cyclists is good to see though:

"ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"

becomes

"ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so"

That will work. Forget the highway code; Cyclists can't appreciate when it is safe to cross through a red light.
I nearly touched the front wheel of one a day or two back when pulling away from a green light and a red light cycling
jumped a red light in the other direction. Had I sped away for lights I would have hit them.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Lots of extra ambiguity added, it's mostly bad.

This one for cyclists is good to see though:

"ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends"

becomes

"ride in single file when drivers wish to overtake and it is safe to let them do so"

If that is the wording then great. You’ll pass when I deem it safe to do so. Which is exactly how I ride now, but it’ll be nice to have the code to back it up at last

 

[Artaxerxes]

Not everyone wants a bay window, and twee small patch of grass and a bush in front of their house.

I feel called out here

 

[Saul Goodman]

That will work. Forget the highway code; Cyclists can't appreciate when it is safe to cross through a red light.
I nearly touched the front wheel of one a day or two back when pulling away from a green light and a red light cycling
jumped a red light in the other direction. Had I sped away for lights I would have hit them.

You should have hit him. I think I might start mowing down red light jumpers for the lulz.

 

[Saul Goodman]

If that is the wording then great. You’ll pass when I deem it safe to do so. Which is exactly how I ride now, but it’ll be nice to have the code to back it up at last

Exactly as I said. Cyclists will now ride like even bigger cunts.

 

[SpookyFrank]

If that is the wording then great. You’ll pass when I deem it safe to do so. Which is exactly how I ride now, but it’ll be nice to have the code to back it up at last

Controlling a lane and riding two abreast are separate things. You can, and should, control your lane even if riding by yourself if it is unsafe for other road users to overtake you.

 

[platinumsage]

If that is the wording then great. You’ll pass when I deem it safe to do so. Which is exactly how I ride now, but it’ll be nice to have the code to back it up at last

If it went to court the judge would ask whether a reasonable cyclist ought to have facilitated overtaking, so keep that in mind.

 

[maomao]

You should have hit him. I think I might start mowing down red light jumpers for the lulz.

Cyclists are perfectly justified in jumping reds in your presence given your proclivity for taking pervy crotch shots at traffic lights.

 

[teuchter]

If it went to court the judge would ask whether a reasonable cyclist ought to have facilitated overtaking, so keep that in mind.

Are we about to see a bunch of red-faced drivers taking cyclists to court for not letting them overtake? That'll be a good laugh.

 

[platinumsage]

Are we about to see a bunch of red-faced drivers taking cyclists to court for not letting them overtake? That'll be a good laugh.

More likely cyclists needlessly holding up huge queues of vehicles for miles, perhaps including ambulances responding to a terrorist outrage or whatever, great stuff.

 

[maomao]

More likely cyclists needlessly holding up huge queues of vehicles for miles, perhaps including ambulances responding to a terrorist outrage or whatever, great stuff.

Most cyclists don't actually want to hold up traffic they just want you to wait till it's safe so it sounds like it'll work fine to me.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Most cyclists don't actually want to hold up traffic they just want you to wait till it's safe so it sounds like it'll work fine to me.

Bullshit. Most cyclists are jealous of car drivers, and would deliberately hold them up given any opportunity.