swordfish1 Posted February 15, 2008 Share Posted February 15, 2008 Thanks for all the replies on this one. I've got an idea for the council now - put double yellows next to the humps please so I can save my cars suspension and they can make some more money from parking tickets! How about going over the humps at a reasonable speed, then you'd not ruin your suspension? Then the people who paid good money to live on the road, and probably didn't want the speed humps (as the majority on our road didn't, but we still got them), can park somewhere not miles from their houses, and you'd have no need to have a needless whinge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IRONMONGER Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 Just to get back to the original thread - I find it most annoying to find cars parked on the hump. I therefore cannot straddle the hump , which can then damage my car - even at walking pace ! I also read somewhere that larger vehicles driving over a hump can send vibrations through the earth eventually causing damage to the foundations of nearby houses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbees Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 If you can straddle the hump it's not doing it's job anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie_shef Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 Even if it were illegal to park on speed humps (and then enforced) cares parked near speed humps also make it really difficult as you have to slow considerably and turn in to then turn out again in order to continue down the road. Personally, i blame the type of speed hump.... what was wrong with the sleeping policemen type? People can (potentially) park on them, go over them at whatever width and they still force you to reduce speed In fact, the cambered style (don't know what they are called) are really annoying for me because I have a very narrow width of car and can't actually get over them anyway without 1 wheel (or both) going quite high up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie_shef Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 If you can straddle the hump it's not doing it's job anyway. I agree Darbees but I think thats what they are designed for. So that you can get over them without slowing too much but it forces you to line your car up (if you can) and this in turn provides the imputus for slowing down. i.e. I didn't slow down because there was a speed hump, but rather because I wished to get over it perfectly. think it is also a get out clause for the council, i.e. i can't sue you for damaging my suspension because I could have slowed appropriately and lined my car up (although not in my case as previusly mentionned) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbees Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 I agree Darbees but I think thats what they are designed for. So that you can get over them without slowing too much but it forces you to line your car up (if you can) and this in turn provides the imputus for slowing down. i.e. I didn't slow down because there was a speed hump, but rather because I wished to get over it perfectly. Yes but it could also be argued that by parking on humps the traffic is then forced to slow even more or it gets a bigger bump. The whole speed cushion is a dangerous idea because people going in opposite directions often head straight for each other in order to get their outer wheels in the same narrow but flat gap in the middle of the road. It's just a cheapskate way of traffic calming instead of putting them right across the road. More like traffic infuriating than calming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 I agree Darbees but I think thats what they are designed for. So that you can get over them without slowing too much but it forces you to line your car up (if you can) and this in turn provides the imputus for slowing down. i.e. I didn't slow down because there was a speed hump, but rather because I wished to get over it perfectly. think it is also a get out clause for the council, i.e. i can't sue you for damaging my suspension because I could have slowed appropriately and lined my car up (although not in my case as previusly mentionned) You could argue that it's illegal to obstruct the queens highway and that you should be able to safely drive over any speed 'cushion' at the speed limit of that road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newvanandman Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 You could argue that it's illegal to obstruct the queens highway and that you should be able to safely drive over any speed 'cushion' at the speed limit of that road. You could also argue that the roads design is dangerous and that the parking bays are not adequate for the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darbees Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 You could argue that it's illegal to obstruct the queens highway and that you should be able to safely drive over any speed 'cushion' at the speed limit of that road.Yes that's true, if the hump is designed to restrict speed to say 20mph, that should be the limit same as if parking is "inadvisable" there should be yellow lines. However to use Planner1's logic they are only there because it's "inadvisable" to drive at the speed limit if there are humps there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie_shef Posted February 18, 2008 Share Posted February 18, 2008 i'm with you guys completely. I loathe these new style ones and think the disadvantages and potential disadvantages of them fair out weigh any advantages But really, what was wrong with the old design of speed bumps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.