Southend Council to enhance pedestrian crossings at City Beach (From Echo)

Why do they call it 'City beach'? Its not a city Southend. People of Southend really do think they are gods gift. Its an absolute pile of sh!t.

Put a traffic light pedestrian crossing there and be done with it, the council know they will have to in the end.

I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

Contrasting paving blocks? That's not a clear sign of where you can cross. A zebra crossing or lights are clear signs of where you can cross!

Anybody actually been to Exhibition Road? I have. More pedestrians, more cyclists, fewer cars ... but still a racetrack.

Here's another example:

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=i4LZiWZvL
fk

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

That may be. But you also have to watch out for cyclists, who do not observe the no cycling signs and also believe they have right of way over pedestrians.

DEATH RACE 2012
I could knit a jumper the time waiting for a car to let me cross. Motorists use people crossing the road on the seafront as moving targets then toot there horn like its a game sad people.

milkshake wrote:
DEATH RACE 2012 I could knit a jumper the time waiting for a car to let me cross. Motorists use people crossing the road on the seafront as moving targets then toot there horn like its a game sad people.

So, proper solution is to install a pedestrian crossing. Then traffic gets stopped by traffic signals and pedestrians can cross safely.

shoebury52 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

That may be. But you also have to watch out for cyclists, who do not observe the no cycling signs and also believe they have right of way over pedestrians.

There no 'no cycling' signs on Marine Parade. The area is shared space and cyclists are permitted to use all of the space between the arcades and the beach.

And when it rains or snows drivers will not be able to see them. (Same for road markings which are becoming to popular just because it is cheap ie Sadlers Farm etc etc.

Flamin' obvious this was a silly idea from the start, not so bad for locals who know the system but what about strangers in town who have probably never seen a "shared road space" before? And never mind installing silly coloured surfaces, what about putting in proper pedestrian crossings which are clear to everyone? As for the name "City beach", words fail me! Why is it that when people become Councillors they leave all common sense and integrity at the door?

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:
It would be better if they completely did away with any indication of a road and created a real shared space like Exhibition Road:

http://www.rbkc.gov.

uk/subsites/exhibiti

onroad.aspx

Photos of Exhibition Road here: http://www.flickr.co

m/photos/73419983@N0

5/sets/7215762911316

3377/show/

See above.

how about a couple of lollypop people

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

shoebury52 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

That may be. But you also have to watch out for cyclists, who do not observe the no cycling signs and also believe they have right of way over pedestrians.

There no 'no cycling' signs on Marine Parade. The area is shared space and cyclists are permitted to use all of the space between the arcades and the beach.

Was meaning part behind sealife centre and also at the end by chalkwell along side the rail line. But also along city beach where they wiz along. Accident waiting to happen if you ask me

shoebury52 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

shoebury52 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

That may be. But you also have to watch out for cyclists, who do not observe the no cycling signs and also believe they have right of way over pedestrians.

There no 'no cycling' signs on Marine Parade. The area is shared space and cyclists are permitted to use all of the space between the arcades and the beach.

Was meaning part behind sealife centre and also at the end by chalkwell along side the rail line. But also along city beach where they wiz along. Accident waiting to happen if you ask me

I spoke to a policeman and asked him about the area behind the Sealife centre, and he said it was ok to cycle there as there are no signs prohibiting cycling there. Cycling is also permitted everywhere on the City Beach area because that is the shared space area, which is what the above article is about.

Hardly the height of the holiday season, and with no illuminations makes the whole exercise somewhat superficial surely? There are other very serious problems that SBC need to address and allocate funds to surely?

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

shoebury52 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

shoebury52 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

That may be. But you also have to watch out for cyclists, who do not observe the no cycling signs and also believe they have right of way over pedestrians.

There no 'no cycling' signs on Marine Parade. The area is shared space and cyclists are permitted to use all of the space between the arcades and the beach.

Was meaning part behind sealife centre and also at the end by chalkwell along side the rail line. But also along city beach where they wiz along. Accident waiting to happen if you ask me

I spoke to a policeman and asked him about the area behind the Sealife centre, and he said it was ok to cycle there as there are no signs prohibiting cycling there. Cycling is also permitted everywhere on the City Beach area because that is the shared space area, which is what the above article is about.

This might shock you but...

To me you seem like a courteous cyclist and would obey road regulations such as stopping at red lights and not cycling on pedestrian footpaths where there is a cycle path running along side, such as along Eastern Esplanade.

What is your view on the adult cyclists that persit on using the pedestrian footpath alongside the sea wall sometimes riding three abreast expecting those on foot to step aside, would you agree that those cyclists are in the wrong and should not be riding on the footpath.

I do like this stretch of Sarfend. I keep well under the 20mph give way to every pdestrian I can, relax and watch the "I need to be there yesterday's! snarling and hammering their steering wheels.
As to it being safe for pedestrians. Do what I do. Go slower. The better drivers are slowing themselves down anyway.Next move: Lower the limit to 15 mph. Then post coppers at either end and a spy in the middle. Anybody aggravating the pedestrians, pull them up and make them wait 45 minutes, then £60 squid on the spot fine. Most if not all of them will go some other way!
Anyway, Cameron is now the law giver (Self appointed) so just chat to him. He'll change the laws to suit what he thinks, job done! (Telegraph, CBI conference, He's looking for emergency wartime powers with our law now!

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

Why ? it's a road for god's sake put a crossing in between the Kursaal and Pier Hill most people know it makes sence except the Dictatorship at the
" Ivory Towers " at what cost the new paving wouldn't that pay for said crossing?. What about Keymed they always sponsor crossings but not this time oddly enough but they DID sponsor the yellow peril speed ?? cameras on the 20mph seafront wonder why

southchurch bob wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

Why ? it's a road for god's sake put a crossing in between the Kursaal and Pier Hill most people know it makes sence except the Dictatorship at the
" Ivory Towers " at what cost the new paving wouldn't that pay for said crossing?. What about Keymed they always sponsor crossings but not this time oddly enough but they DID sponsor the yellow peril speed ?? cameras on the 20mph seafront wonder why

It's a shared space. That's what the big signs at each end of it mean. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars all have EQUAL right of way in that area. But drivers are too selfish to accept that.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

southchurch bob wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

Why ? it's a road for god's sake put a crossing in between the Kursaal and Pier Hill most people know it makes sence except the Dictatorship at the
" Ivory Towers " at what cost the new paving wouldn't that pay for said crossing?. What about Keymed they always sponsor crossings but not this time oddly enough but they DID sponsor the yellow peril speed ?? cameras on the 20mph seafront wonder why

It's a shared space. That's what the big signs at each end of it mean. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars all have EQUAL right of way in that area. But drivers are too selfish to accept that.

Not all drivers. Usually BMW, Auidi and Lexi. Occasionally a 4x4.
Oh, and boy racers. And women.
But not me, nor my fellow Citroen Xsara Picasso drivers.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

southchurch bob wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

Andycal 172D wrote:
I wonder how much the "independent safety review" cost? It's interesting because most of us have been saying WE TOLD YOU IT'S DANGEROUS for months now.

It isn't dangerous at all.

The drivers who refuse to accept they must allow pedestrians to cross are dangerous.

It could be fixed with a couple of signs at each end saying 'Give way to pedestrians'.

Why ? it's a road for god's sake put a crossing in between the Kursaal and Pier Hill most people know it makes sence except the Dictatorship at the
" Ivory Towers " at what cost the new paving wouldn't that pay for said crossing?. What about Keymed they always sponsor crossings but not this time oddly enough but they DID sponsor the yellow peril speed ?? cameras on the 20mph seafront wonder why

It's a shared space. That's what the big signs at each end of it mean. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars all have EQUAL right of way in that area. But drivers are too selfish to accept that.

Sad to say there is no UK definition in law of a "shared space" and just because the Council posts signs saying it is doesn't make it so either.

By application of your logic, cars could drive anywhere like the cyclists but they can't. There is a road for cars, albeit ill defined, and they have to stick to it.

As for giving way to pedestrians, would that be when they're looking like they will cross the road or when they actually are crossing the road? There is a difference as half the pedestrians on a summer weekend are not actually paying attention where they are walking.

Unfortunately, the whole idea, whilst terrific as a concept, failed in the implementation. And adding even MORE signs at the start of either end of the strip will only make it even more confusing for drivers/cyclists that don't know the area.

Now we're back in the winter months with minimal foot traffic along the seafront the road functions as a road should but it's lack of definition is still a problem when pedestrians, cyclists and drivers don't know where the borders are supposed to be.

And for these reasons I maintain IT IS DANGEROUS - FOR ALL CONCERNED

Why does this Council take at least two attempts to get anything that it does right?

You would have thought the amount of public funds spent on consultancy fees should guarantee at least one project that does not have to undertake rework weeks/months later.

I am amazed that this is so contoversial. Call it what you will, City Beach is such a better place to be than it was before and is so much more attractive for pedestrians. I have always felt that the subliminal massages for motorists are clear. As a cyclist however I am still not entirely clear where I should ride so stick to the carriageway as I still haven't fathomed out where the cycle lane is! In its previous existence it it was noticeable that the raised speed tables were assumed by predestrians to be crossing points and this always struck me as dangerous. Now that the whole area is shared space, it seems to work more successfully. Yes it makes people think but is that such a problem? Shared spaces work successfully elsewhere both here and abroad. Why can't the people of Southend cope with this?

MHWoods wrote:
I am amazed that this is so contoversial. Call it what you will, City Beach is such a better place to be than it was before and is so much more attractive for pedestrians. I have always felt that the subliminal massages for motorists are clear. As a cyclist however I am still not entirely clear where I should ride so stick to the carriageway as I still haven't fathomed out where the cycle lane is! In its previous existence it it was noticeable that the raised speed tables were assumed by predestrians to be crossing points and this always struck me as dangerous. Now that the whole area is shared space, it seems to work more successfully. Yes it makes people think but is that such a problem? Shared spaces work successfully elsewhere both here and abroad. Why can't the people of Southend cope with this?

There isn't a cycle lane on Marine Parade because the entire area is shared space. You can cycle anywhere on it.

MHWoods wrote:
I am amazed that this is so contoversial. Call it what you will, City Beach is such a better place to be than it was before and is so much more attractive for pedestrians. I have always felt that the subliminal massages for motorists are clear. As a cyclist however I am still not entirely clear where I should ride so stick to the carriageway as I still haven't fathomed out where the cycle lane is! In its previous existence it it was noticeable that the raised speed tables were assumed by predestrians to be crossing points and this always struck me as dangerous. Now that the whole area is shared space, it seems to work more successfully. Yes it makes people think but is that such a problem? Shared spaces work successfully elsewhere both here and abroad. Why can't the people of Southend cope with this?

I couldn't agree more. Having visited many countries where this kind of area works in coastal towns and elsewhere, I can't understand all the fuss we make.I would suggest that there probably have been no more accidents or near misses o the seafront than there have been on any other road in the borough.
The biggest mistake the council made was calling it a " shared space". If the work had just happened without this, I doubt that people would have noticed the difference to any other road, ( where care is always needed when crossing). We are becoming a nation of moaners.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

MHWoods wrote: I am amazed that this is so contoversial. Call it what you will, City Beach is such a better place to be than it was before and is so much more attractive for pedestrians. I have always felt that the subliminal massages for motorists are clear. As a cyclist however I am still not entirely clear where I should ride so stick to the carriageway as I still haven't fathomed out where the cycle lane is! In its previous existence it it was noticeable that the raised speed tables were assumed by predestrians to be crossing points and this always struck me as dangerous. Now that the whole area is shared space, it seems to work more successfully. Yes it makes people think but is that such a problem? Shared spaces work successfully elsewhere both here and abroad. Why can't the people of Southend cope with this?

There isn't a cycle lane on Marine Parade because the entire area is shared space. You can cycle anywhere on it.

So if it's a 'shared' space we can drive anywhere we want to? As there is no road I assume that this is what you mean.

perini wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

MHWoods wrote: I am amazed that this is so contoversial. Call it what you will, City Beach is such a better place to be than it was before and is so much more attractive for pedestrians. I have always felt that the subliminal massages for motorists are clear. As a cyclist however I am still not entirely clear where I should ride so stick to the carriageway as I still haven't fathomed out where the cycle lane is! In its previous existence it it was noticeable that the raised speed tables were assumed by predestrians to be crossing points and this always struck me as dangerous. Now that the whole area is shared space, it seems to work more successfully. Yes it makes people think but is that such a problem? Shared spaces work successfully elsewhere both here and abroad. Why can't the people of Southend cope with this?

There isn't a cycle lane on Marine Parade because the entire area is shared space. You can cycle anywhere on it.

So if it's a 'shared' space we can drive anywhere we want to? As there is no road I assume that this is what you mean.

That's how Exhibition Road and the scheme in Coventry work. And they work very well.

The area is not dangrous, all it takes is everyone to look where they are going. I belive only one person has been hit in the 'share' space a boy who run out between to parked vans with out looking.

Pedestrians - follow the yellow brick road. Dont be daft, if there is a car in front or it rains how is a driver going to see a different coloured brick . in the dark will they be fluorescent ? Hate driving there.

Drove through there today, can't really see why there is the need to do anything. If a pedestrian walks towards the road, I stop and wait for him to cross. If the traffic coming the other way doesn't want to stop, good! Sooner or later they will be behind me and at least they will know why they are held up! It's because of people like them!
(That's called Karma these days!)

sorry traffic light will never happen they used their quota at cookoo corner

Signage is inadequate, and a proper pedestrian crossing is essential, with aids for the disabled. Not to mention the drunks trying to sell you the illuminations!

Another Tory disaster which may prompt more residents to vote in local elections.

I live in hope.

Of course it's dangerous ..all roads are dangerous but this stretch is extremely bad because no one has a clue what a SHARED SPACE is.
Millions of £'s are spent to make signs easily understood at glance...here we have a small scribble saying SHARED SPACE and that's it.
This is made worse because this stretch of road is popular with tourists whose main concern will be keeping one eye on their speedo and one eye on trying to park ..they 're not gonna see or understand the vague intent of our SHARED SPACE cos none of us do.
And not one person on this forum can clarify (legally) as in Highway code precisely what ,where ,how and when with regards to the SHARED SPACE..because it's one major balls up

echoforum wrote:
Of course it's dangerous ..all roads are dangerous but this stretch is extremely bad because no one has a clue what a SHARED SPACE is.
Millions of £'s are spent to make signs easily understood at glance...here we have a small scribble saying SHARED SPACE and that's it.
This is made worse because this stretch of road is popular with tourists whose main concern will be keeping one eye on their speedo and one eye on trying to park ..they 're not gonna see or understand the vague intent of our SHARED SPACE cos none of us do.
And not one person on this forum can clarify (legally) as in Highway code precisely what ,where ,how and when with regards to the SHARED SPACE..because it's one major balls up

People in Coventry didn't know what shared space was either, and they're getting on with it just fine:

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=i4LZiWZvL
fk

Just as the people who use Exhibition Road are getting on just fine:

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=8Nof1AbyE
TI

Seems it's only in Southend where the meaning of two very simple words - shared space - is too difficult for people to comprehend.

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

echoforum wrote:
Of course it's dangerous ..all roads are dangerous but this stretch is extremely bad because no one has a clue what a SHARED SPACE is.
Millions of £'s are spent to make signs easily understood at glance...here we have a small scribble saying SHARED SPACE and that's it.
This is made worse because this stretch of road is popular with tourists whose main concern will be keeping one eye on their speedo and one eye on trying to park ..they 're not gonna see or understand the vague intent of our SHARED SPACE cos none of us do.
And not one person on this forum can clarify (legally) as in Highway code precisely what ,where ,how and when with regards to the SHARED SPACE..because it's one major balls up

People in Coventry didn't know what shared space was either, and they're getting on with it just fine:

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=i4LZiWZvL

fk

Just as the people who use Exhibition Road are getting on just fine:

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=8Nof1AbyE

TI

Seems it's only in Southend where the meaning of two very simple words - shared space - is too difficult for people to comprehend.

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?NR=1&v=XFFf
83HMmbE&feature=ends
creen

http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=5II1mb47T
PM

Seems like it's not all good!

mark-986 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

echoforum wrote:
Of course it's dangerous ..all roads are dangerous but this stretch is extremely bad because no one has a clue what a SHARED SPACE is.
Millions of £'s are spent to make signs easily understood at glance...here we have a small scribble saying SHARED SPACE and that's it.
This is made worse because this stretch of road is popular with tourists whose main concern will be keeping one eye on their speedo and one eye on trying to park ..they 're not gonna see or understand the vague intent of our SHARED SPACE cos none of us do.
And not one person on this forum can clarify (legally) as in Highway code precisely what ,where ,how and when with regards to the SHARED SPACE..because it's one major balls up

People in Coventry didn't know what shared space was either, and they're getting on with it just fine:

http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=i4LZiWZvL


fk

Just as the people who use Exhibition Road are getting on just fine:

http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=8Nof1AbyE


TI

Seems it's only in Southend where the meaning of two very simple words - shared space - is too difficult for people to comprehend.

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?NR=1&v=
XFFf
83HMmbE&feature=
ends
creen

http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=5II1mb47T

PM

Seems like it's not all good!

another one.
http://www.youtube.c
om/watch?v=Vv-R6Hn12
O0

Good for you but not the blind.

mark-986 wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

echoforum wrote:
Of course it's dangerous ..all roads are dangerous but this stretch is extremely bad because no one has a clue what a SHARED SPACE is.
Millions of £'s are spent to make signs easily understood at glance...here we have a small scribble saying SHARED SPACE and that's it.
This is made worse because this stretch of road is popular with tourists whose main concern will be keeping one eye on their speedo and one eye on trying to park ..they 're not gonna see or understand the vague intent of our SHARED SPACE cos none of us do.
And not one person on this forum can clarify (legally) as in Highway code precisely what ,where ,how and when with regards to the SHARED SPACE..because it's one major balls up

People in Coventry didn't know what shared space was either, and they're getting on with it just fine:

http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=i4LZiWZvL



fk

Just as the people who use Exhibition Road are getting on just fine:

http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=8Nof1AbyE



TI

Seems it's only in Southend where the meaning of two very simple words - shared space - is too difficult for people to comprehend.

http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?NR=1&v=

XFFf
83HMmbE&feature=

ends
creen

http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=5II1mb47T


PM

Seems like it's not all good!

another one.
http://www.youtube.c

om/watch?v=Vv-R6Hn12

O0

Good for you but not the blind.

You miss the point, shared space - when properly implemented - puts the onus of responsibility on drivers to drive slowly and carefully. Simply put drivers are expected to drive as if the entire area is pedestrianised. This is why shared spaces - or woonerfs - are so successful on the continent: http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Woonerf

The problem on Marine Parade is that Southend council have failed to properly implement a shared space.

"The problem on Marine Parade is that Southend council have failed to properly implement a shared space."

Plus, unless you are pointing a double barrelled shotgun in their faces, some of our better off cannot comprehend the meaning of driving slowly.

I have witnessed this phenomenom both here and on the A127. We moan along there at under 50mph and are buried in the dust generated by the fat cats..... or do they simply pay the fines out of their exe's?

In these hard times it seems those with cars costing more than £65, 000 didn't buy them to have to drive withing the limits set by average speed cameras - Or could it be that the cameras do not see these cars?

It's just another practical engineering problem which this Tory Council have consistently fouled-up on!
Every time we have a practical issue to deal with, they screw-up! Millenium Clock, Cuckoo Corner, the lifts from Pier Hill, the West Cliffs, Shared-Space, the Airfield, you name it. They simply need voting out. Please vote!!!

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

mark-986 wrote:

Shoebury_Cyclist wrote:

echoforum wrote:
Of course it's dangerous ..all roads are dangerous but this stretch is extremely bad because no one has a clue what a SHARED SPACE is.
Millions of £'s are spent to make signs easily understood at glance...here we have a small scribble saying SHARED SPACE and that's it.
This is made worse because this stretch of road is popular with tourists whose main concern will be keeping one eye on their speedo and one eye on trying to park ..they 're not gonna see or understand the vague intent of our SHARED SPACE cos none of us do.
And not one person on this forum can clarify (legally) as in Highway code precisely what ,where ,how and when with regards to the SHARED SPACE..because it's one major balls up

People in Coventry didn't know what shared space was either, and they're getting on with it just fine:

http://www.youtube.c




om/watch?v=i4LZiWZvL




fk

Just as the people who use Exhibition Road are getting on just fine:

http://www.youtube.c




om/watch?v=8Nof1AbyE




TI

Seems it's only in Southend where the meaning of two very simple words - shared space - is too difficult for people to comprehend.

http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?NR=1&v=


XFFf
83HMmbE&feature=


ends
creen

http://www.youtube.c



om/watch?v=5II1mb47T



PM

Seems like it's not all good!

another one.
http://www.youtube.c


om/watch?v=Vv-R6Hn12


O0

Good for you but not the blind.

You miss the point, shared space - when properly implemented - puts the onus of responsibility on drivers to drive slowly and carefully. Simply put drivers are expected to drive as if the entire area is pedestrianised. This is why shared spaces - or woonerfs - are so successful on the continent: http://en.wikipedia.

org/wiki/Woonerf

The problem on Marine Parade is that Southend council have failed to properly implement a shared space.

i must admit i have been down there in my car i always try to stop but iv'e been people using there horns when people walk out it does need to be improved maybe it will work one day.