As a Balham resident, I'm still reeling that allegedly £1m was spent on this 
crossing when we have had one outside Balham station for over four years! It 
is said to have cost £100k to create.

The media has totally ignored the fact, despite e-mails and calls, with the 
exception of a tiny piece in Metro and a short letter in tonight's Standard. 
Seems they are scared of upsetting the Mayor.

Some (balanced) views here: 
http://www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm?method=news.detail&id=83381

Ian

--

Ian F. wrote:
> As a Balham resident, I'm still reeling that allegedly £1m was spent
> on this crossing when we have had one outside Balham station for over
> four years! It is said to have cost £100k to create.

The money was presumably spent on demolishing walls and moving kerb lines, 
lighting poles and camera poles, rather than on redoing the road surface.

> The media has totally ignored the fact, despite e-mails and calls,
> with the exception of a tiny piece in Metro and a short letter in
> tonight's Standard. Seems they are scared of upsetting the Mayor.

I don't think Boris has been Mayor long enough to be responsible for the 
scheme, BICBW.

> Some (balanced) views here:
> http://www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm?method=news.detail&id=83381

There's been one in Burnt Oak since approximately 2001, which might be the 
oldest one in London. Here's a 2004 discussion...
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.transport.london/browse_thread/thread/cf49f67a30217d1e/d6eef9d821b556c8?hl=en&q=burnt+oak+diagonal+crossing+watling+avenue#d6eef9d821b556c8

On 3 Nov, 20:47, "Ian F."  wrote:
> As a Balham resident, I'm still reeling that allegedly £1m was spent on this
> crossing when we have had one outside Balham station for over four years! It
> is said to have cost £100k to create.
>
> The media has totally ignored the fact, despite e-mails and calls, with the
> exception of a tiny piece in Metro and a short letter in tonight's Standard.
> Seems they are scared of upsetting the Mayor.

There is no need to have a cow. The Balham crossing is probably as
scary and useless as the Oxford Circus one. They are both just
cosmetic. The diagonal crossings are dangerous and totally unnecessary.

On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 14:32:47 -0800 (PST), Offramp 
wrote:

>The diagonal crossings are dangerous and totally unnecessary.

Why? [genuine question btw]
-- 
Paul C

"Offramp"  wrote in message 
news:e951e23a-f97b-4448-a331-3d9c7d21befb@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On 3 Nov, 20:47, "Ian F."  wrote:
> As a Balham resident, I'm still reeling that allegedly £1m was spent on 
> this
> crossing when we have had one outside Balham station for over four years! 
> It
> is said to have cost £100k to create.
>
> The media has totally ignored the fact, despite e-mails and calls, with 
> the
> exception of a tiny piece in Metro and a short letter in tonight's 
> Standard.
> Seems they are scared of upsetting the Mayor.

There is no need to have a cow. The Balham crossing is probably as
scary and useless as the Oxford Circus one. They are both just
cosmetic. The diagonal crossings are dangerous and totally unnecessary.
===============

Well I went to try it out this evening and found the whole thing shut down, 
fences all round the crossing, and Oxo Station shut; all for someone to turn 
on a few lightbulbs.
Bah, humbug.

MaxB

On 3 Nov, 22:35, Paul Corfield  wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 14:32:47 -0800 (PST), Offramp 
> wrote:
>
> >The diagonal crossings are dangerous and totally unnecessary.
>
> Why? [genuine question btw]
> --
> Paul C

I can't see why either.

There would be three clear phases.  I couldn't make any sense of the
old phasing at Oxford Circus (and never will now), but I generally
just crossed when there seemed to be a gap, because I couldn't work
out what was going on.

"Ian F."  wrote in
news:7lbj81F3c9k2lU1@mid.individual.net: 

> As a Balham resident, I'm still reeling that allegedly £1m was spent
> on this crossing when we have had one outside Balham station for over
> four years! It is said to have cost £100k to create.
> 
> The media has totally ignored the fact, despite e-mails and calls,
> with the exception of a tiny piece in Metro and a short letter in
> tonight's Standard. Seems they are scared of upsetting the Mayor.
> 
> Some (balanced) views here: 
> http://www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm?method=news.detail&id=83381
> 
> Ian
> 

The BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8337341.stm) are quoting 
£5 million, as does the localgov link.

I've no idea how you would go about spending £5 million on removing some 
railings and installing coloured paving - that can't sound like value for 
money to anybody, even the contractor who installed it!

Also I do hope it doesn't cost £5 million to remove because, having seen it 
for the first time last week, it doesn't look safe to me (it is too easy 
for pedestrians to get too close to the buses, even if they are only going 
at walking pace, and remember this is currently a junction where bendi-
buses turn).  

David

On 2009-11-03, Offramp  wrote:
> On 3 Nov, 20:47, "Ian F."  wrote:
>> As a Balham resident, I'm still reeling that allegedly £1m was spent on this
>> crossing when we have had one outside Balham station for over four years! It
>> is said to have cost £100k to create.
>>
>> The media has totally ignored the fact, despite e-mails and calls, with the
>> exception of a tiny piece in Metro and a short letter in tonight's Standard.
>> Seems they are scared of upsetting the Mayor.
>
> There is no need to have a cow. The Balham crossing is probably as
> scary and useless as the Oxford Circus one. They are both just
> cosmetic. The diagonal crossings are dangerous and totally unnecessary.

I can remember when I was about 12 and diagonal crossings were
introduced at a couple of city-centre intersections. They were called
"scramble" crossings, and I think they are still there - 48 years later!
There are actually quite a lot scattered around the world. The idea is
that they are good for places with high pedestrian traffic.

(The city in question was Brisbane, in Australia).

E.

David Jackman <pleasereplytogroup> wrote on 03 November 2009 23:09:39 ...

> having seen it for the first time last week, it doesn't look safe to me (it 
> is too easy for pedestrians to get too close to the buses, even if they 
> are only going at walking pace, and remember this is currently a 
> junction where bendi-buses turn).  

Given that we don't have kerb-edge doors to protect passengers on the 
streets of London, how is that different from any other light-controlled 
crossing in London?  Since all the traffic now stops for the pedestrian 
phase, it should be safer than before.

-- 
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

Richard J. wrote:
> David Jackman <pleasereplytogroup> wrote on 03 November 2009 23:09:39
> ...
>> having seen it for the first time last week, it doesn't look safe to
>> me (it is too easy for pedestrians to get too close to the buses,
>> even if they are only going at walking pace, and remember this is
>> currently a junction where bendi-buses turn).
>
> Given that we don't have kerb-edge doors to protect passengers on the
> streets of London, how is that different from any other
> light-controlled crossing in London?  Since all the traffic now stops
> for the pedestrian phase, it should be safer than before.

In the Oxford Street area, pedestrians do not accept the idea that some 
phases are not for them.