This is the first time that Stokes Croft has anything vaguely resembling positive coverage, so it's worth a read.
Sadly, it's flawed. As we've stated before stokes croft is not Bohemian.
Yes, it does have a flower shop, so the "A revolution must have flowers" quote is correct -yet the author of the article completely omits the adjacent retail outlet, Slix -the food of the revolution, or how this so-called revolution will impact the paid-sex industry of the area.
For claims that the croft is gentrified, we are pleased to reassure people that the coloured paint is, literally, a thin layer of paint over the cracks. Nor did the article mention the familiar sound of the A38 -the sirens- or the fact that for many of the residents, Alcoholism is in fact a career choice. there was lots of praise for the Post Office, : "the lovely folk at the post office". Yet the article implied that walking and cycling were the way to get around. Regular readers will know that the cycle lane is for short-stay visitors to the post office, while the recommended transport for the area is in fact a van.
On the topic of stokes croft vans, can we ask the driver of the red van turning right into Ashley Road at about 4:30pm today, monday Jul 2, what did that female pedestrian in the grey jacket do that merited you getting out and trying to start a fight with her? Pedestrians can damage your paintwork if they hit your van or wingmirrors, so we are sure that whatever she did it was deserved.
We were just suprised, watching it from our own van, that the first road-rage incident of the evening rush hour was starting that early on in the evening. Usually the fights don't kick off until after 5pm.
It's lovely to see a company -here Films at 59- taking on an idea like "shared space" and embracing it.
Here on a weekday we can see them doing it perfectly.
The white van X548DJR over the yellow lines and the buildout mark the entry to the zone Further on, the paveparked car LD07NYF, the van KU59DLJ that's claimed the driveway and the white vanRD04NXU half up on the pavement rounds it off -this area is shared with pedestrians and cyclists -we hope they appreciate this sharing! The cycle logo on the floor shows this is national cycle route 4 -introducing cyclists to the shared space concept -and the forced swerve makes them slow down for the shared zone The way they've managed to remove all visibility acts as a lovely piece of traffic calming, as even cars have to slow down. Congratulations, Films at 59, for this selfless action.
The last time we had some coverage of this shared space area, there was a blip in traffic with a referrer of some server in the films at 59 domain -as if someone saw the coverage, agreed that having one van block the pavement made it harder for other vans to drive up it, and raised the issues with their colleagues.
Clearly the "shared space" approach is the solution to this problem.
"were you the idiot driver of the grey van who on Wed Feb 1 was swearing at me down at Muller Road because all the way down Romney Ave he hadn't been able to pass me, because I didn't get out of the way of traffic?"
"If you were, can I point out that I was doing 30 mph, so you had no justification to pass me, and as I was following a car doing the same speed about three bike lengths in front, you had nowhere to go anyway."
"I hope you enjoyed the long traffic jam on Muller Road with no bicycle in your way to get upset about"
We have looked at our van and no, it doesn't look grey, more a white with a brown layer on top, "dirty!" written on the back. (that's our brand, incidentally).
We understand the grey van driver. We don't think bicycles should be on the road, so the fact that you were there -and the fact that he couldn't get past- made it very frustrating. If you had cycled slower and stayed to one side he would still have hated you, but a bit less.
That's something the advocates of "vehicular cycling" don't understand. They think if you imagine that you are a car, and position yourself appropriately, you will recognised as a vehicle and made welcome. Not so: you will just become an arrogant cyclist who doesn't know their place -and deserves the abuse they get.
It is your very presence that is the issue, not just your positioning.
"was this the famous Bristol Traffic Van? It drove out of Ashley Road after the light changed to block the traffic heading north to Cheltenham Road. Many of the drivers on Stokes Croft were somewhat unhappy about this, as the junction was already blocked and the driver ended up even stopping cars heading south from getting through"
No not us. It says Lloyds Pharmacy prescription delivery on the side, while ours clearly says "pornography delivery"
It's important to remember that our white vans are the lifeblood of the city. This is why we think the government should treat us like farmers, airlines and buses and give us tax free or tax discounted fuel.
You can tell we are important in a number of ways
We are in a rush
We are on the phone a lot
Here you can see FP54DYU doing both at the same time while finally escaping from the tangle of streets in Montpelier, here on Brook Road, where you can make the most of the 20 mph limit in a road with no wingmirrors to bump against.
It's surprisingly hard to text one handed, so we hope the audience is impressed.
"Hello, is the Bristol Traffic white van the one with the registration number S56JCW? -that is Shithead-56-Jesus-Christ-Wanker to use the phonetic alphabet the van deserves?
I was waiting by Muller Road at 18:15 on August 16 for the pedestrian crossing lights to change so I could get to Boiling Wells Lane when this white transit van drove past and the passenger shouted something like "you fucking cunt" at me" as they carried on over to the M32 approach traffic jam
Not us.
We checked on askmid and yes, S56JCW is registered to a Ford Transit 80; our kind of vehicle. First registered in Preston, incidentally.
We don't recall abusing your anyone on a bicycle today.
We checked which number plates were taped to the back of the van today and no, not that number.
If they were abusive, they probably had a good reason.
Probably they were resentful of the way you hold them up on the way to the M32 traffic jam, or just pointing out that if you didn't have enough money to own an S-reg transit van, you must be very poor indeed and probably an anarchist criminal looter.
If you had issues with the van passenger for pointing this out, you could have chased them to the queue for the M32 and got beaten up. Why complain to us?
There is a web site, 101 Wankers, which documents the harassment a woman gets while cycling round London -she thinks she's being persecuted for riding a bicycle. Not so, if she walked round more she'd recognise we proposition women on foot too. The big difference between Bristol and London is it's smaller, so that one day the van S56JCW is going to meet the same tax-dodger and then the van driver and passenger can give the cyclist the beating they clearly deserve.
Even so, such drive-by abuse does let down the team. There's a bike lane in Muller Road they could have swerved onto, got up onto the pavement and then come after the cyclist. Must try harder.
Round the back of the school, there's a walking only dropoff area, where the kids can learn to walk round paveparked vans by going on the road.
Then at the end of Wellington Park it meets Whiteladies Road and comes to a timely end
Where things return to normal: 30mph, pinch points, pretend bike lanes with tax-earning vans temporarily parked on the associated yellow lines
On the other side, in Redland, they have painted some bicycles on the road of the sustrans "route 4"
These may encourage cycling, but at least they encourage the cyclist to stay far enough out to avoid damaging vehicles, such as the mini WR57XBX corner parked on the double yellow lines. Incidentally, this road may be one that voted against becoming an RPZ. And well they should, as the enforcement of parking rules would remove such parking opportunities.
We were worried that you were tarnishing the long fought image of the white van man. With your fleet of 35 clearly identifiable vehicles, we feared that they were too small to assert your position on the road and your near tree hugging business was too contentious to make a mark on normal society.
How delighted we are to have been proven wrong, and you are really just plumbers at heart. It is not the size of the van that matters, it is how you drive it that really counts.
Take this example. Posh people in Stoke Bishop don’t want to give up their cars – they want to feel better by installing solar panels to heat their swimming pools. So your driver is quite right to force this tax dodging cyclist out of the way in this quiet residential street on the way to a very important client no doubt.
Maybe the use of your horn could have been better. It was early but these tax dodgers really do need to know their place and it was probably time for Quentin to wake up and get in the 4x4 to school anyway. Transits have better horns, another good reason to consider bigger vans.
But we salute you Gregor Heating. Keep up the good work installing renewable energy for the rich tax payers of Bristol, and well done for treating a carbon free form of transport with the contempt it deserves.
The tax-dodgers are complaining about Shared Streets this week -that they really mean "streets mostly for cars and vans". Exactly. Given a choice between a pedestrian area and a shared street, we'd go for the shared street. Once you get a hang of the chicanes they can be quite fun.
Southwell Street, our unofficial logo, is being "improved". We know that, as the vans to do it are parked there this week. Expect photos soon. But before that, the plans.
As people will recall, the concerns by the non-drivers about this area were
uphill pavement turned into NHS parking, possibly illegally.
no way for bicycles to get through except on the pavement
the pavement was blocked to give priority to staff cars
both dead ends were used as short stay parking for vans
Overall then a van-and-staff friendly area, with pedestrians as an afterthought, and one of those deliberately created bike/walker conflict zones to divide the opposition, all on the premier walking route from Gloucester Road to Bristol University, and hence full of students. By creating such conflict we could discourage people from trying to do this.
We were initially worried, then, when this draft plan hit our inbox, "a shared space".
Then we saw some emails from Ben Hamilton-Baillie, who we thought would approve of this fusion of walking and driving. Yet he seemed unimpressed
Most residents in Kingsdown feel, as I do, pretty insulted to be presented with a sketch of such pathetically poor quality for Southwell Street.
If the UHB really believes that Southwell Street and other streets in and around Kingsdown can be treated with such contempt, we should not give them any support. I have seen work experience students aged 16 produce more intelligent work than AECOM’s output for UHB. I only hope the hospital trust is not having to pay them fees as well....
Finally, we saw this video from a tax-dodging pavement cyclist who encounters the designers, and provides some feedback.
At 00:10 the Ginster delivery van does a U-turn without indicating, at which the troublemaker engages in discussion with the driver about, that and the fact that it isn't making any beeping noises. Well, the lorry pays more road tax, and isn't of a size where it needs the beeps. That shuts them. Remember that lorry though.
At 1:02 they execute the highly illegal "pavement bypass" option, so endangering pedestrians.
At 1:16 they meet the a hi-viz'd person planning the traffic calming area -and say to them the plan sucks, because painting a bit of pavement, whether it's in coloured paint or some cobbles down the middle of the road is utterly meaningless. They mutter on a bit, and we think their key point is that taking one pavement off for car parking and closing the other off for safe car park access is somehow wrong.
At 1:38 the cyclist, who is standing in the middle of the "person on the road" lane is actually forced to wheel their bike backwards to let a car out of the staff carpark. This shows to us how the "shared space" design will have no effect on our daily lives, so may as well be permitted. There is a risk of some benefit to people trying to cycle here -as they won't be quite so discouraged by having to hop on and off the pavement, but if we block the bollards with vans often enough, they'll be discouraged differently.
At 1:48 the troublemaker demands some of the pavement back. We'd hoped to have some good news there, but based on the building work it looks like these people have got their way. Somewhat. Wait until tomorrow for the specifics there.
At 2:02 they express concern that the dropoff area in front of the hospital is chaotic, and it will remain so. Well, that's why it's called a dropoff area, isn't it? If people were expected to do dropoffs and pickups on St Michael's hill, there'd be an area there instead.
at 2:20 their rant finishes and they finally head off, presumably to the relief of the site team. They then proceed down a road that clearly has room for parking all down one side, yet lacks it. And there are an oddly large number of pedestrians, given the effort the NHS has gone to here to discourage walking.
At 2:43 you can see some people trying to cross Horfield Road. Notice the wide five-junction crossing here. It's a dangerous exposed crossing and people shouldn't attempt it, not when there is a zebra crossing further up the road, as the video shows at 3:07. If people aren't prepared to cross the road where a crossing has been provided, well, it's like people on bicycles not using the bike lanes.
At the zebra crossing they do a U-turn, and at 3:08 show what is paveparked over yellow lines round the corner: Ginster delivery van HN58LVK. Purely because Southwell Street doesn't support through traffic, that van had to do a 180 degree turn in a narrow drop-off street, turn right up St Michael's Hill, right again on to Myrtle Road, then onto Alfred place. One U-turn and two right turns -not just a philosophy for the coalition government, it's costing the company money. The DfT puts a financial cost on critical business motoring, and its clear that closing this road has tangible costs to that key part of the economy: the white van.
Therefore, although the proposals don't take much away from us, they don't deliver what we need, either -the removal of the gate and the re-instatement of Southwell Street as a van-friendly rat-run!
We are pleased to have another photo from "TH", who is rapidly becoming out city-centre correspondent, today with another "Bearpit Incident", this one being rated as "minor" in the international Bearpit Incident Scale.
Apparently the Snap-on van was trying to cut into the road running into Park Row, when the car which was following the markings on the road went ahead and followed the markings on the road, forcing the van to cancel its plan. The van driver is apparently making their views known to the driver of the car.
No, this is not the Bristol Traffic van. Furthermore, the tactic of staying the right hand lane all the way from the end of the M32 to this roundabout is effective as it is the least congested, especially at the bearpit roundabout itself. but you should start to cut in earlier, once the lights from newfoundland way go green, then stay in the right of the two lanes past the bus station -so avoiding any waiting buses. You should only swerve into the left hand lane after passing the bus station.
This is one of the problems of driving like a local in Bristol: you have to know the real solutions to every junction, not what is painted on the ground, which are merely hints for tourists.
A tax-dodging troublemaker emails us this video to say "Is this white van DK04TBX that nearly ran me over on June 10 in its rush to get to Kellaway Building Supplies on Shaldon Road yours?"
Here is the response composed by our lawyers
Askmid says this vehicle is a VW Transport T30TDi. As the Bristol Traffic Team's white van is a Ford Transit at least ten years older, we deny responsibility.
We think all criticism of this van is unfounded, as by accelerating past the bicycle before cutting over it, it left plenty of room.
By indicating its intent to turn left while it went past the bicycle, the cyclist had plenty of time to take evasive action.
Kellaway Building supplies plays a key role in supplying everything a white van in the building trade needs apart from copies of the Sun and cans of Red Bull. As the Bristol Traffic van is a key part of the Bristol sex industry supply chain, Kellaway Building Supplies rarely appears in our list of destinations, apart from when meeting the needs of an individual with an obsession about loft insulation. A superinjunction prevents us identifying the specific board members of one of our local football teams.
Field Operative "TH" emails this photo of trouble on Bond Street South, outside the new Future Inns Hotel/Phoenix Court BCC Offices heading towards the Underpass in Temple Way at 5:00pm 10th May.
Delivery driver in the Mercedes Van ends up with a Peugot 207 cutting across him. The 207 lost his passenger mirror in the process.
Just to add to the situation, the Bus Driver thinks he can follow other cars by mounting the Central Reservation kerb to pass...
Not enough room - One sandwiched 207!
We express our sympathies to WN60ZXD, and welcome them to now owning a Montpelier-style vehicle. We must remind FirstBus drivers, especially that of WX05RVK that their vehicles are wider than cars, and when they go up on raised pavements and reservations, the vehicle tilts a bit too.
To stop this problem in future, we propose an awareness course for car drivers, teaching them that vans have a tendency to pull out without warning, and that buses not only have blind spots, they may not be fully aware of the width of their vehicle. Just as London has a "don't undertake lorries that come up behind you at ASLs" campaign for cyclists, we propose a "don't get stuck where a FirstBus bus tries to drive over a central reservation to get past your collision with a van". We believe that such an awareness program would be more cost-effective and beneficial than a "how wide your bus is" course to FirstBus drivers.
A quick hello to Van Hire Bristol who added a comment to our co-existence post, the one that showed a white van turning into Cotham Hill without bothering to look, because the driver knew that mostly only people on bicycles come down the hill, and any pedestrians crossing at that point are students and therefore liabilities on the state.
Whoever it was that posted the comment made some well informed comments showing their mastery of the the English language, and their complete failure to read the bit where we warn that anyone posting adverts will be publicly criticised, along with ignorance of the nofollow attribute hence the fact that adding comments to a high page-ranked site like ours does nothing for their own ranking:
Hey I like the post very much. This is really a very good post with very good information.
Thanks a lot for sharing the post very much. You know what I like the title of video very much which insist to watch the video to me. :)
Keep sharing such stuffs.
Well, we don't care whether you like the title or whether you think it's a really good post with very good information, and we shall keep sharing such stuffs without being asked. What we want to know is this? Is the white van YB06BDO one of the Van Hire Bristol fleet?
Furthermore, if we rent a van from you:
Does it automatically come with pre-insurance cover for running over bicycles and pedestrians?
Will you be upset if comes back with scratches and blood on the bumper?
Does it have a tow bar to provide audible feedback when reverse parking (crunching sounds)
What driver training will you provide showing us how to drive and park such vehicles, especially while texting?
Regarding the comment itself, a few more questions
Did you actually pay somebody to write such an atrociously badly written comment?
What did they promise in return?
Did they read the warning notice before they commented, and did they understand the consequences of their action, namely that they consented to have your site discussed in a posting all of its own?
How does it feel to have a web page making fun of you (as promised in the comment form) come back ahead of you in searches?
Given that some people may view the video as portraying a mildly negative opinion of white vans in the city -despite our own view that they are an essential part of the national economy- do you feel that it is wise to have your brand associated with such incidents?
Did you ask the person who promised to boost your page to read the pages first? Will you request this in future?
Have you asked your outsourced SEO agent about nofollow tags and the fact that they mean that none of our google pagerank (5) transfers to yours (0) -and that the comments have at best no effect whatsoever?
Are you aware that because Google own blogspot, there is the possibility that at worst they will use the URLs in postings downgraded as spam to actually penalise such sites in their search engine?
Have you a way of asking for your money back?
Remember, the Bristol Traffic project is a data gathering and datamining organisation that views Google and Yahoo! as strategic partners; Game Theory and Graph Theory key branches of mathematics to model traffic movement around cities. We do not yet see any value in strategic or tactical alliances with Van Hire Bristol, whoever you are, so will be forced to block any further attempts to add comments to our site.
Thank you for your participation in the Bristol Traffic Project.
Some of the cyclists think that if there are enough of them on our roads the rest of society will suddenly welcome them, it will suddenly become safer, and that everyone will happily dance around singing Dutch songs. Well, we have some bad news there
The increase in the number of people cycling, combined with the rises in petrol's costs, merely makes us angrier and more resentful
It's not enough they aren't paying to use the roads, they hold us up. The more bicycles, the more we get held up. We can experiment with this by secretly instrumenting cyclists and then collecting the videos, and seeing if conflict increases or decreases over time.
Here we see white van YB06BDO being held up by a bicycle as it turns into Cotham Hill from Aberdeen Road. It stops. What does the rider have to complain about? At least this driver wasn't on the phone.
He stopped, polite discussion followed. None of this road-rage stuff. A friendly city. Why do they complain so?
What with the 20 mph zone and all, some people may think that Monty no longer welcomes vans.
Not so!
First, we are pleased to show the first ever double parking event recorded in Montpelier.
We didn't know it was technically possible, but with the BMW in the yellow line area and the van FH02EKZ up on the pavement, we have reclaimed Picton Street!
Round the corner, Picton Square.
Can you see that? A missing bollard. Finally it can be used again for short stay parking, instead of a wasteland for pedestrians. Today HY08UOK is celebrating this shared space.
Meanwhile, over in Montpelier St Werbughs, the council van RF58NRZ is showing others how to park on a corner with double yellow lines. The chosen parking option allows for excellent visibility and does not hinder the progress of other large vehicles.
The van BK58CNV chose a bad day to park on the double yellow lines on the ASL on Bath Buildings, hence the ticket on the windscreen.
The road was closed while a 30T load got delivered by HGV, and PCSOs were manning the junctions to make sure nobody tried to turn into the road. With the police by the van for a number of hours, eventually one of them was bound to notice it and ticket it.
YA55VDY is a cult van to us. Never seen to park legally, instead encountered driving up onto pavements, sounding its horn at pedestrians to get out of the way. A delivery van's delivery van.
Yet what should we see on our travels round the city than this very van outside the Star And Garter pub, Montpelier
That's right. The famous van, parked kerbside, on a road with no yellow markings. No wheels on the pavement.
This is a shocking site, and makes us question the entire delivery model of Medina dairies "avoid refrigeration by driving fast and parking close to the shops".
Fortunately, we have evidence that the van driver's colleague who has the Dovercourt Road delivery knows what to do with the van LK08LDN
When given a choice between parking legally in a gap four times the length of your vehicle or double parking, go for the easiest option.
After last week's shocking photographs of militant cyclists trying to reclaim their cycle paths, it was reassuring to see some of the city's van drivers striking back
Who is up on the bike paths of Abbeywood Today, making it clear what the North Fringe cycle paths are for? The white van FY04UYB
On the back, Adien, whose web site states their sustainability goals:
We will ensure that procedures and attitudes are in place to deliver an incident free working environment for our employees and those who come into contact with our operations.
We will endeavour to minimise the impact we have on the environment by use of sustainable material and processes.
Well, parking this far in ensures no driver-side wing mirrors will get clipped, so they pull that off, though the risk that a cyclist or push chair may try to get past on the other side -5 or 10 cm further in would have sorted that out.
As mentioned before, we are conducting an experiment to make sure that this area remains van friendly. "Trust, but verify", as they say.
South Gloucester Council have denied responsibility for enforcing the double yellow lines on this, so we checked to make sure that Filton police are on message, that they know the war on motorists has been lost. I think we can conclude from the fact that the Filton police hotline has an answering machine at the end of it that yes, some government changes have made their way to that part of the system.
We have won the war! Nobody will stand in our way!
