Gets Your Goat! worst driving traits

Gets Your Goat! worst driving traits

Author
Discussion

blueg33

35,576 posts

223 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Tyre Tread said:
blueg33 said:
Tyre Tread said:
And to protect their alloy wheels wink
Not convinced smile I reckon about 90% of the cars I look at as I wander around have kerbed alloys
I understand your pessimism but here's why I believe it to be the case.

Before about 1980 you rarely saw a car mount the pavement except where absolutely unavoidable.

Since the widespread introductiojn of alloy weheels it has become commonplace.

Ah, but is there a connection? Well, take a look at the way many, if not most vehciles are parked on the kerb. Do they just about run the car up onto the pavement or do they park mostly on the pavement.

Take a look at whether the majority of cars that are parked on the pavement allow 2 cars to pass in opposite directions by them doing so. Generally the answer is no so there is little to be gained for the parking nehicle or for the pasing traffic by placing 2 wheels on the pavement.

Perhaps its just bad judgement on the part of the person parking? If that were the case then a good number of cars would be parked 12 inches from the kerb when, in reality, that is rare.

I suppose it could be that a good proportion of people are that bad at judging the width of their car that the only way they know they are close to the kerb is to mount it. If that were the case then surely they would mount and de-mount with the front wheel as many people used to do to ensure they were close to, but not parked on, the pavement?

I may be wrong but it gets my goat that parking on pavements is so widespead when it serves no purpose, damages cars and infrastructure and greys the line between what is and isn't acceptable when driving a car.
I do agree, parking on the pavement where its not necessary is annoying


crosseyedlion

2,170 posts

197 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
Tyre Tread said:
blueg33 said:
Tyre Tread said:
And to protect their alloy wheels wink
Not convinced smile I reckon about 90% of the cars I look at as I wander around have kerbed alloys
I understand your pessimism but here's why I believe it to be the case.

Before about 1980 you rarely saw a car mount the pavement except where absolutely unavoidable.

Since the widespread introductiojn of alloy weheels it has become commonplace.

Ah, but is there a connection? Well, take a look at the way many, if not most vehciles are parked on the kerb. Do they just about run the car up onto the pavement or do they park mostly on the pavement.

Take a look at whether the majority of cars that are parked on the pavement allow 2 cars to pass in opposite directions by them doing so. Generally the answer is no so there is little to be gained for the parking nehicle or for the pasing traffic by placing 2 wheels on the pavement.

Perhaps its just bad judgement on the part of the person parking? If that were the case then a good number of cars would be parked 12 inches from the kerb when, in reality, that is rare.

I suppose it could be that a good proportion of people are that bad at judging the width of their car that the only way they know they are close to the kerb is to mount it. If that were the case then surely they would mount and de-mount with the front wheel as many people used to do to ensure they were close to, but not parked on, the pavement?

I may be wrong but it gets my goat that parking on pavements is so widespead when it serves no purpose, damages cars and infrastructure and greys the line between what is and isn't acceptable when driving a car.
I do agree, parking on the pavement where its not necessary is annoying
My ex used to do it constantly, purely for the reason that she didn't feel she could parallel park. Perhaps its related to the fact people seem to have less and less interest in the act of driving and laziness?

T1berious

2,242 posts

154 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Where to start?

Inconsiderate parking, don't start me on people who partially block someones drive.

As previously mentioned, someone that makes no effort to acknowledge you've stopped to allow them to pass.

Drivers that are completely disabled by roundabouts. WTF? Clear? Go please, Not clear? then stop and wait until it is safe to proceed. How hard? It's almost like they use a timer and once it reaches zero they go regardless of who's approaching from the right. just mental.



Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Tyre Tread said:
Then simply park only on one side smile
That simply isn't possible sometimes, there's just not enough room for a streets worth of cars to be parked on one side of the road. Where I live most of the houses have a driveway and dropped kerb which reduces the available space for parking on the road, but the driveways themselves are so narrow as to be unusable for many cars (and I'm talking average sized cars, not SUVs or people carriers).

I not saying parking partly on the pavement is ideal, and clearly there are people who take the piss, but done with consideration it seems like an reasonable compromise (and the local police agree).

Ideally the pavements would be narrowed a little on both sides which would immediately fix the problem, but that's an lot of money for a council to spend when they have such a pressing need to buy pointless sculptures for town centres, "improve" road systems to discourage traffic, fit hundreds of speed bumps and all the other essentials.

Tyre Tread

10,525 posts

215 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
Tyre Tread said:
Then simply park only on one side smile
That simply isn't possible sometimes, there's just not enough room for a streets worth of cars to be parked on one side of the road. Where I live most of the houses have a driveway and dropped kerb which reduces the available space for parking on the road, but the driveways themselves are so narrow as to be unusable for many cars (and I'm talking average sized cars, not SUVs or people carriers).

I not saying parking partly on the pavement is ideal, and clearly there are people who take the piss, but done with consideration it seems like an reasonable compromise (and the local police agree).

Ideally the pavements would be narrowed a little on both sides which would immediately fix the problem, but that's an lot of money for a council to spend when they have such a pressing need to buy pointless sculptures for town centres, "improve" road systems to discourage traffic, fit hundreds of speed bumps and all the other essentials.
On page 11 of this thread Tyre Tread said:
There is no excuse for parking on the pavement unless it is specifically permitted in that location (I accept some places it is unavoidable to some degree).
It would appear we largely agree. smile

Pan Pan

1,116 posts

126 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
blueg33 said:
Pan Pan said:
It is true that there is existing housing/buildings, which were built before vehicles were even dreamt of. Indeed some parts of London, were designed and built with only sedan chairs in mind, resulting in tiny alley ways between large houses, such was the designers wish even then, to cram as many dwellings into a given space to maximize their profits. (but who in their right mind would actually want to live in such crappy conditions, with narrow dark streets or alleys between buildings?) The current crop of Design guides also allow vernacular features to be used, which then allows developers `interpretation' to cram as many dwellings into a given site as they can. Government density requirements were a dream come true for many of them. But this could just be the price of living in a small, cramped, overcrowded island such as the UK where people actually go to court over the rights to a few millimetres (in some cases)of ground.
But there is no excuse whatsoever for modern housing developments to be built without adequate visitor parking spaces. Do the designers believe that the only people requiring parking on such a development will be those who will live in the dwellings? do they not realize that at some point others will wish to visit those people in these dwellings, Do they not realize that at some point others will wish to deliver, goods and services (including emergency vehicles) which use vehicles which must be parked in these places, in some cases as close to a particular building as possible.
Some of my relatives live in such new estates, where the only option when visiting them, is to park
partly on the pavements (Which I might add, unlike the roads are completely empty for most of the time) if blocking the poorly designed (But again still in accordance with the local design guide)roads is to be avoided.
You really dont understand deveklopment at all. PPG3 and PPS 3 were a nightmare and not a developers dreak come true. Its hard to sell houses where there is only one space per house, and sales rates are fundamental to development cashflow.

Further, increased densities, where they do increase GDV usually result in a higher land value which doesnt go to the developer it goes toi the land owner.

In essence from about 2003 to 2011 house builders were forced to build product that they didnt want to build and that people didnt want to buy. This contributed to the recession because new stock was hard to sell as the market dropped. People dont really want to buy 3 storey terraced townhouses with tiny narrow gardens where 25% of the floor space is taken up with stairwell.

You can also thank HRH Price of Wales with his "Flagship" Poundbury which convinced many planning authorites that dragging design back tio the 18th century was a good idea.

Back on topic - parking is mainly an issue because people part without thinking of the impact on others
No, it just means the design of the estate is not fit for purpose. Do designers really not understand how the majority of the public choose to move around these days?

Tyre Tread

10,525 posts

215 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Pan Pan said:
No, it just means the design of the estate is not fit for purpose. Do designers really not understand how the majority of the public choose to move around these days?
I think the point is that you're aiming your gun at the wrong party.

jogger1976

1,251 posts

125 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
ADM06 said:
I dislike

  • Dawdlers, especially dawdlers on slip-roads, trying to merge with 70mph traffic whilst they're doing 40mph
  • Obeyers of the new, pointless 50mph limit A roads
  • Poor indicating, especially those who indicate to change lane without finding a gap first
  • Vans/people carriers/faux by fours in the outside lane blocking visibility
  • Those who cut the corner when turning right
  • Those who ignore the parked car rule. Especially those who take ages to get back on their side of the road.
  • Door swingers
I would agree with all those points.........except number 2. If the limits 50mph, then that's what it is, no matter how pointless you, me or anyone else thinks it is. Maybe I need a woosh parrot, but it just seems a bit strange to dislike people for obeying road traffic laws. confused

blueg33

35,576 posts

223 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
People who think indicators are a substitute for mirrors, especially on the motorway

swisstoni

16,850 posts

278 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Waiting at a roundabout for a car that never comes past because it's turning off before it gets to you BUT NOT INDICATING.
You have to wait just in case they really are coming past your junction.

Just so simple.

ADM06

1,077 posts

171 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
jogger1976 said:
I would agree with all those points.........except number 2. If the limits 50mph, then that's what it is, no matter how pointless you, me or anyone else thinks it is. Maybe I need a woosh parrot, but it just seems a bit strange to dislike people for obeying road traffic laws. confused
A lot of roads that were NSL have been changed to 50. There was no reason to do this and I had no say in it. If anything NSL was too slow already.

Ahimoth

230 posts

112 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
And some of us don't want to risk licenses we need for work by doing a speed that keeps you happy.

On that note, just now pulled out into a clear 50mph road could see several hundred meters, had not got more than 500m (doing a shade over 50) when a car is approaching me at probably over 80. Then he sits hard on my bumper until the next set of lights, where he pulled alongside and all four 20 year olds gave me the middle finger.

rambo19

2,737 posts

136 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
People who think indicators are a right of way.

ADM06

1,077 posts

171 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Ahimoth said:
And some of us don't want to risk licenses we need for work by doing a speed that keeps you happy.

On that note, just now pulled out into a clear 50mph road could see several hundred meters, had not got more than 500m (doing a shade over 50) when a car is approaching me at probably over 80. Then he sits hard on my bumper until the next set of lights, where he pulled alongside and all four 20 year olds gave me the middle finger.
That's never happened to me.

Nobody does 50 on the local 50 road anyway. They do 40, then they brake mid corner to 30.

Ahimoth

230 posts

112 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
What's never happened? You've never been tailgated by someone unhappy that you're not doing 30mph over the speed limit?

ADM06

1,077 posts

171 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
I've never had a car full of people give me the finger, and I drive a lot of miles.

Cliftonite

8,406 posts

137 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
ADM06 said:
I've never had a car full of people give me the finger, and I drive a lot of miles.
Perhaps you are not driving badly enough?



ADM06

1,077 posts

171 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Perhaps I should step up my game and start ignoring my mirrors n st.

Paul Holywood

74 posts

117 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Tonight was foggy, my rear fog lights on, then why the f#%c did two separate drivers overtake me and pull in front flashing there fog lamps
I was paranoid and pulled over just to find my lights are on, coz its foggy..!

Cliftonite

8,406 posts

137 months

Wednesday 26th November 2014
quotequote all
Paul Holywood said:
Tonight was foggy, my rear fog lights on, then why the f#%c did two separate drivers overtake me and pull in front flashing there fog lamps
I was paranoid and pulled over just to find my lights are on, coz its foggy..!
If there is a car behind you, the driver of which can see you, do you really need rear fog lights lit?

At least two drivers thought you did not!

They dazzle!