Church Street debacle

[grim reaper]

Oh dear, oh dear.
Not only does Church Street look abysmal, despite the upheaval to the few businesses down there, the disruption to transport and the astronomical financial outlay for so little return, I do believe the 2 pedestrian crossings are NOT legal, unless the design legislation has been amended.

The crossing surface ought to be alternate black and white 'strips'. What we have appears to be fawn setts, no doubt left over from someones drive!
How much to rip out and design to spec, or paint it black and white?
As fred would say;
only in Hartlepool under the torlab mob. 

[Nice]

I wondered about the colour scheme for the crossings as well - never seen the likes before

[fred c]

Where's the 'Clerk of Works' when you want one ?........I have no idea who signs off on council contracts, especially multi million pound contracts, but the quality of finish in Church Street and the Seaton Carew Fountain and play park areas leaves a lot to be desired.

It isn't knit picking, simply a question of.....If you hired someone to pave your drive of lay out a grassed area and they ended up like the above examples, you would refuse to pay the money until the job was done properly......Have the Re-Gen Guru and The Dear Leader taken a serious look at the state of both projects....... Somebody needs to 

[Inspector Knacker]

I love driving down to stare in bewilderment and ask myself how all that time, money and wind from the clique resulted in something worse than the original.
The idea was you take a street with a good mix of shops and make it better. They chose the path of giving a bars/ fast food drag a regrettable makeover of dubious taste, so inevitably nothing would change, except the pavements would  show the weekend grease quicker.
Not so much a makeover, more a make under.
They haven't got a clue.
So, if ever you fancy a re-modelling of your area in a brutalist 1950's Eastern Bloc form of 'architecture' these people are the experts.
They have the mindset of those who have to leave their mark, but as the are lacking in any form of original thought, they simply rebrand that which was their before or replace a paved area with 'their paved area'. They want to re-invent the town in their own image. Trouble is, they're just not anywhere near up to it and never will be.

[grim reaper]

Apropos, Church Street boulevard;
Of course, it could be that the 'dear leader' thought the stark 'black & white' would be anathema to those with certain medical issues.
To save ripping it out afterwards, he has designed a new colour scheme for pedestrian crossings and has applied to the government for a patent and expects the scheme to be rolled out across the UK.

It may be funny if it wasn't so serious and costing us council tax payers so much of OUR hard earned cash.
Surely, his day of reckoning isn't too far in the distance.
WHO is voting for these inept idiots? 

[Inspector Knacker]

Surely, his day of reckoning isn't too far in the distance.
WHO is voting for these inept idiots? 

Nobody votes for 'them'. They get elected because out there are thos who blindly vote for the Party, like their dad did and his dad did etc etc.
If it wasn't for the Party label, they'd come third if they stood unopposed.

[kevplumb]

As Churchill might have put it
Never before in the field of political conflict
Has so much been wasted by so few

[mala]

The Zebra, Pelican and Puffin Pedestrian Crossings Regulations 1997 do allow for this in point 8 but driving down there recently it is not ideal especially at night with the new spotlights street lighting blinding you

PART II
ROAD MARKINGS
Road markings
6.  Subject to the following provisions of this Part of this Schedule—

(a)within the limits of a Zebra crossing the carriageway shall be marked with a series of alternate black and white stripes;
(b)the Zebra controlled areas shall be marked with give-way lines, a line of studs and zig-zag lines,
of the size and type, and generally in the manner, shown in the diagram at the end of this Part of this Schedule.

Number of studs and stripes
7.  The number of studs and stripes may be varied.

Limits of the crossing
8.—(1) If it provides a reasonable contrast with the white stripes, the colour of the surface of the carriageway may be used to indicate the stripes shown coloured black in the diagram.

(2) The white stripes may be illuminated by retroreflecting material.

(3) Subject to paragraph (4) each black and each white stripe shall be of the same size and not less than 500 mm nor more than 715 mm wide as measured across the carriageway.

(4) The first stripe at each end may be up to 1300 mm wide and, if the traffic authority consider it appropriate in relation to a particular crossing having regard to the layout of the carriageway or other special circumstances, the other stripes may be not less than 380 mm nor more than 840 mm wide as measured across the carriageway.

Studs
9.—(1) The studs may be omitted altogether.

(2) If studs are provided—

(a)they shall be coloured white, silver or light grey;
(b)they shall be either—
(i)circular in shape with a diameter of not less than 95 mm nor more than 110 mm; or
(ii)square in shape with each side not less than 95 mm nor more than 110 mm long;
(c)they may illuminated by retroreflecting material;
(d)if they consist of a device fixed to the carriageway, they shall—
(i)not be fitted with reflecting lenses;
(ii)be so fixed that they do not project more than 20 mm above the adjacent surface of the carriageway at their highest points nor more than 6 mm at their edges;
(e)the distance from the centre of any stud to the centre of the next stud in the same line shall not be less than 250 mm nor more than 715 mm and the distance between the edge of the carriageway at each end of a line of studs and the centre of the nearest stud shall be not more than 1.3 metres; and
(f)the two lines of studs need not be at right angles to the edge of the carriageway, but shall form straight lines and, so far as is reasonably practicable, shall be parallel to each other.
Zig-zag lines
10.—(1) The pattern of the central zig-zag lines may be reversed or, on a road having a carriageway not more than 6 metres wide, those lines may be omitted altogether so long as they are replaced by the road marking shown in diagram 1004 in Schedule 6 to the 1994 Regulations.

(2) Subject to sub-paragraph (4) the number of marks in a zig-zag line shall not be less than 8 nor more than 18 and a zig-zag line need not contain the same number of marks as any other zig-zag line.

(3) Each mark in a zig-zag line shall be coloured white and may be illuminated by retroreflecting material.

(4)  Where the traffic authority is satisfied that, by reason of the layout or character of any roads in the vicinity of a Zebra crossing, it would be impracticable to lay out a Zebra controlled area in accordance with this Schedule—

(a)the number of marks in any zig-zag line in that area may be reduced to not less than 2; and
(b)the length of any of the marks may be varied to not less than 1 metre.
Give-way line
11.—(1) The give-way line shall be coloured white and may be illuminated by retroreflecting material.

(2) The angle of the give-way line in relation to, and its distance from, the edge of the crossing may be varied, if the traffic authority is satisfied that the variation is necessary having regard to the angle of the crossing in relation to the edge of the carriageway.

(3) The maximum distance of 3 metres between the give-way line and the limits of the crossing shown in the diagram in this Part of this Schedule may, if the traffic authority think fit having regard to the layout or character of the road in the vicinity of the crossing, be increased to not more than 10 metres.

Discolouration or partial displacement of markings
12.  A Zebra crossing or a Zebra controlled area shall not be deemed to have ceased to be indicated in accordance with this Schedule by reason only of the discolouration or partial displacement of any of the road markings prescribed by this Schedule, so long as the general appearance of the pattern of the lines is not impaired.

PART II
DIAGRAM

[ReturntoZenda]

Don't let Dirk hear you criticise church st !! He's so protective of it, you'd think it was his money. You negative nellies.

[WhatTheHeck]

I wondered about the colour scheme for the crossings as well - never seen the likes before

I drove along Church St from Mainsforth Terr early evening last week, sun streaming down, the crossings seemed to meld into the surrounding surface, very hard to see.

[Johnny Bongo]

I wondered about the colour scheme for the crossings as well - never seen the likes before

I'm only surprised that the stripes weren't red and blue- in order to reflect the Labour / Conservative alliance in the Council chamber!

[Topcat]

My main concern is when entering Church Street from Church Square the wall that is built around the statue partly blocks the view of the crossing at that point. If a child was running across the road  there they would be impossible to see and would be run over.That is an accident waiting to happen if I ever saw one.

[Truthache]

I agree with Topcat about the visibility of the crossing.  I am not sure if the height of the wall has been increased or not, but I certainly needed extra caution to make sure there wasn't a child or wheelchair user crossing from the right.

[WhatTheHeck]

Drove down yesterday, lot of activity around the Shades, doors open, guy in Hi Vis with clipboard examining the facia.

Also heard a rumour, from a local trader, that HBC have bought the premises, anybody able confirm this ?

[fred c]

WTF In hell we would this lot do with a wrecked pub, spend a fortune on refurbishing it so they can justify the Church Street Vision....?