Colin Blackburn wrote:

From:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4151047.stm

"Exhibition Road, home of the Science, Natural History and Victoria
and Albert museum, could have a maximum speed limit of 20mph

I don't know the road, so I'll trust a 20mph limit is fine and
appropriate for the road - but I thought the whole point of the naked
roads business was that drivers had to work everything out for
themselves, and thus drive more carefully? (as opposed to being nannied
with excessie warning and restrictions to an extent that they don't
think and thus miss the hazards they weren't warned of). Surely
(stricter) traffic regulations go against this, in so much as there is
still an element of nannying?

and drivers will not automatically have right of way over pedestrians
who will be able to cross anywhere on the road."

*Sigh*

This is already the case -

Also I hope that there is still an expectation that pedestrians should
look before crossing instead of just bumbling into the road (and of
course that there remains one that drivers et al be prepared for the
possibility that pedestrians may cross without looking just in case).

There are too many of these schemes which perpetrate the myth that there
is or should be a heirarchy of road users, where as IMV more should be
done to promote the reality that everyone has equal right to use the
road and that people should be considerate of that.



It is interesting that drivers on Exhibition Road do currently have
automatic right of way of pedestrians. No mention in the article of
the potential effects for cyclists.

I would assume they would be the same as for other vehicles, but it
wouldn't surprise me if this possibility of a cyclist using the road
simply hadn't been considered.

article snip

I do support anything that encourages road users to think more when
using the road - but this sounds a bit like a LA trying to be trendy and
wasting vast sums of money in doing so.