Safer roads, more cyclists and easier to walk around the area. All good stuff and the City Council hopes that its plans to put a 20mph speed limit on Southville's streets will help achieve this. On the surface it seems like a winner, but when you think about it there seems to be some major flaws in its objective to: '...make walking and cycling around these areas safe and more attractive thereby encouraging more people to walk and cycle around their own community.The Council are spending £35,000 on two schemes in the city. This involves putting up 20mph signs in every street... and that's about it. No plans to enforce the new limits and no traffic calming measures. It is also not imposing the 20mph zone on the area's busiest roads - the ones that are the most tricky to cross and if your a cyclist probably the most dangerous to ride on! They also tend do be the ones by shops and schools.
On its own website the Council says the scheme will work best on roads where the average speed is 24mph. So in these difficult financial times its proposing spending all this money to reduce speed (if anyone takes any notice of the signs) by 4mph. Do we really need hundreds of new street signs in the area for a flawed scheme, where let's face it, in the narrow streets with parking on both sides it's pretty difficult to go much above 20 anyway.
If the Council really wants to get more people cycling and walking here's some suggestions on how it could work in Southville.
- Save the money on all these signs and put in some proper traffic calming measures. Including pedestrian crossings where people actually cross the road.
- Stop people parking right up to the junction or even across it! The majority of accidents and near misses I've seen in Southville are because motorists views are blocked as they try and come out of junctions. A few double yellow lines around the corners at junctions would alleviate this.
- More walking? Then let's give the pavements back to pedestrians. Stopping cars parking at the junctions would help. Encouraging people not to park on pavements would also help as would unblocking pavements of wheelie bins left out all week. In some cases vulnerable people - the blind, those in wheelchairs or with walking aids, and mums pushing prams -are forced onto the road because of these blockages.
So come on Bristol City Council don't impose all these signs on the community when it will have no or little effect. If you want more people to walk give them unblocked pavements and proper crossings. If you want more people to cycle, bite the bullet and invest in some proper cycle lanes. If you want drivers to slow down, put traffic claming measures in the area's busiest roads.
Posts
Morning Tony
ReplyDeleteThe 20mph pilots are going ahead in the two outlined areas.
I am certainly open to ideas on which roads are included or excluded, how the signing arrangements are implemented and how fast we should roll the scheme out to cover the whole of Bristol.
I suspect that you are in a minority in not wanting enforceable 20mph residential areas. Enforcement does need a certain number of signs and I would like to keep numbers and size of signs to an absolute minimum.
There are Traffic Regulation Orders which are needed to enforce the 20mph, and I suspect there may be streets where such enforcement (or even physical traffic calming) is necessary.
All three of your suggestions are already happening.
There is new legislation which allows our enforcement officers to issue fixed penalty notices or even tow away vehicles parked across dropped kerbs.
It is, as you say, crazy that cars obstruct the corners so pedestrians cannot cross. The problems are particularly severe for parents with buggies and for people in wheelchairs and mobility scooters. This MUST change.
And the police are already tackling obstructive pavement parking in parts of the City that have requested it. I suggest you talk with your local police or attend your local PACT meeting and raise it as a priority.
Traffic calming and proper cycling lanes are expensive and there is a real challenge finding space for the latter. These are happening and there is scope for more. Talk with your local councillors - these are all soluble, without scrapping 20mph as you request.
Jon
PS. I think the cost quoted in the press release was £350K not the £35K as printed in the Evening Post. I have asked how that figure has been arrived at. There are costs of informing and involving public, then the formal TRO consultation, the TROs themselves, and installing signs, but I can't see that as £350K.
Ah! This old chestnut again. We've had 20 mph zones here in Redfield for 10 years now, along with all the associated traffic calming measures and street furniture, including signs which say you're leaving a 20 mph zone and entering, um, a 20 mph zone. Total lunacy, but apparently all in accordance with the regulations.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately and to our annoyance and despair, the signage makes not a jot of difference to the speed of 90% of motorists, either on the 'rat-run' side streets or the main road, where, alarmingly, a lot of traffic still travels at around 40 mph and sometimes a lot faster.
The brickwork chicanes are almost always driven across, rather than around, the contraflow systems force cyclists onto the pavements, gutters or into oncoming buses and other traffic.
There are so many cars and so little enforcement that drop-down kerbs, zig-zag lines, bus lanes, cycle lanes, yellow lines, speed bumps and pavements are routinely parked on.
I've come to the conclusion, after a decade of first hand experience, that the 20 mph zones here, are in practice, worse than useless, not only lulling pedestrians and cyclists into a dangerous false sense of security, but degrading the meaning and regard for laws / regulations in general.
If, after 10 years of living in a 20 mph Home Safety Zone, with signs designed by local school children announcing, 'Think! 20 Is Plenty', the majority of traffic still travels at dangerously high speed and those same school children - or rather, by now, their offspring - have to wait for ages at the side of the road in the aforementioned Home Safety Zone, before dashing across, it really hasn't worked.
Everyone here - residents, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists passing through - knows that it hasn't worked, either to their convenience or disappointment.
Why would Southville be any different ? Would it be properly enforced there ?
Don't bother - you'll save a few quid and maintain some semblance of respect for the law.
"and mums pushing prams -are forced onto the road because of these blockages"
ReplyDeleteDads pushing pushchairs too. I often don't leave the house when it's bin day in our area as I know the combo of wheelie bins and some seriousley idiotic pavement and drop kerb conrner parking make getting anywhere near impossible.
+ @ Anonymous
ReplyDeleteI live in Redfield too and totally agree. Only thing you missed is when the traffic calming does actually slow people then they make up for it by putting their foot down in between, often out of frustration or aggression to scare people into giving way at the chicanes.
I often cycle Victoria Avenue contraflow and I get frequent looks of dissaproval from oncoming drivers speeding towards me looking at me with scowls to tell me I'm going the wrong way, when I'm not. They usally brake right at the last minute when they realise there's no way for me to get out of their way due to bumper to bumper parking on both sides. A typically terrifying part of everyday cycling in the area, which is already supposedly a 20mph zone.
Hi Tony
ReplyDeleteLiving Streets' Bristol branch strongly supports 20mph zones are are pleased the council is going ahead with the pilots. However, we feel strongly that the majority of the excluded roads should be included - the pilots are a weak test if confined to side roads. The lack of physical changes to encourage motorists to stick to the speed limit is concerning too.
Enforcement will need to be tackled but for now let's persuade the council to include roads like dean Lane (and others in the East Bristol pilot like Ashley Hill and Sussex Place)
As regards pavement obstruction, there are local Living Streets supporters working on this, do you want putting in touch?
Steve Meek
Living Streets Bristol
livingstreetsbristolATgmail.com
20mph limit is fine as a starting point - but the signs are not going to make that much difference although there is evidence that speeds are reduced and that's all to the good. What would really make the difference is instead of putting up all those signs at the entrances to the area and then all the repeaters to follow the principle of 'filtered permeability'.
ReplyDeleteThis would involve a structured set of street closures through the area allowing free movement of walkers and cyclists, but not of cars. If you want to move from one side of Southville to the other you'd have to go out and round. And you couldn't cut through.
Think Stackpool Road, North Street, Dean Lane, Merrywood Road, Raleigh Road. Put trees in the build outs as well.
Could we get our 'village green' up by the school and Southville Centre?
And yes, of course more enforcement of parking restrictions and keeping the pavements clear.