[hawkinspeter]

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/through-traffic-banned-parts-bristol-8295492

This should be introduced towards the end of this year as an experimental trial – I wish it could happen sooner as it covers where I live. We had questionnaires about it during lockdown, though I think that was just about making Beaufort Rd (by the cemetery) one way to motorised traffic.

Topic

[chrisonabike]

slc wrote:

slc wrote:

Madness, isn’t it? Busses into the centre are not too bad, except at peak times when they crawl along on traffic. There are shops of all shapes and sizes within a few minutes walk, and a railway station.  I’m sure many are discouraged from cycling by the heavy traffic, but bikes are still a common sight.

It would be interesting to have the numbers on how often those vehicles get used and what kind of trips (for comparison with other places).  Perhaps some are kept “because we need a car” but actually used rarely?  I wonder if a start could be made by providing some kind of localised long-stay residents’ (multi-storey?) parking (as e.g. they’re doing here).

In the UK it’s clearly going to take lots of different interventions to break the cycle of “need a car to get to places because it’s expected and amenities aren’t as close as I need and I can’t get there by cycling or public transport because too many private motorists…”

And for best impact these should be coordinated also… but that’s really hoping!

slc wrote:

Waste collection works through a combination of amazingly skilled refuse truck driving and bins all over the pavement one day a week.

I’m either amazed that they can get through with (presumably) a full sized waste truck, or amazed that she could not.  Although as you say the bin crews will have plenty of practice.

Time for some kei utility vehicles…

[slc]

Madness, isn’t it?
Madness, isn’t it?

Busses into the centre are not too bad, except at peak times when they crawl along on traffic. There are shops of all shapes and sizes within a few minutes walk, and a railway station. I’m sure many are discouraged from cycling by the heavy traffic, but bikes are still a common sight.

Waste collection works through a combination of amazingly skilled refuse truck driving and bins all over the pavement one day a week.

[chrisonabike]

Still not quite sure how she

Still not quite sure how she could get it in before but not after (but even in the old photos they had narrowed things – but again minibus-sized vehicles got through).

Where she said she had to reverse in – was it here?

On the fence about this one.  It’s unfortunate if it’s really an issue * – it’s harder for people with disabilities, and getting things like modified vehicles is even more of a fight (especially if you don’t have an income or a low one because disability etc.)

OTOH sometimes it’s just not realistic to fix it for absolutely everyone.  Sometimes – because “people” – the only way more equality could be achieved is by all those at the front of the queue to proactively move aside (good luck…).  And then when a change which affects the more comfortable is proposed from “on high” there’s sudden “selective concern” for the handful of people with more difficulties.  Who’ve been ignored or elbowed aside up until that point **.

No doubt it would be (much?) less convenient for her but if it’s beyond the wit / budget to sort this one out more directly perhaps someone could find a garage / designated space for this large, holiday vehicle somewhere that is accessible?

Of course – if it’s a designated space I do wonder about the chances of her returning and finding it unoccupied.  But again – that’s not really the fault of street improvements (and I do wonder how well it worked in the past for her anyway).  Perhaps the protestors could organise a rota to police her disabled space when she’s away?

* I also wonder if it’s not just “other people blocked the space with their vehicles – which is a problem but not the “fault” of street treatments really.

**  “We can’t have cycle paths here because there’s old Mr. Smith who’s blind and that would be a danger to him” say people living alongside an urban motorway…

[chrisonabike]

I’ve not been keeping up with

I’ve not been keeping up with this, but I’ve just had a look on Streetview (latest images mostly from 2023 around Victoria Road) plus maps.

What immediately stands out is:

a) These are relatively “narrow streets” but by no means tiny, except that…
b) … they’re absolutely choked with parking (both sides) *.
c) How does waste collection work?  By effectively having 3 lanes of motor vehicles (two parked and a central area) the houses that do have front yards barely have enough space for a wheely bin (never mind a bike shed)!  Garages almost absent and in the current situation there’s no space for them.
d) Public transport?  The whole area south of the A420 (not super-wide) seems similar.

Also – I didn’t look through exactly what was changed but just from the maps it looks like (c.2023) there are already a couple of effective LTNs, because entry points have been narrowed (e.g. by build-outs which despite signs don’t look attractive for cycling – not sure I’d relish counter-flow cycling here…), several streets are one-way and some potential connections between them are too small / blocked off for cars.

Presumably there was still some “permiability” which allowed others to cut through though?

Overall impression is it is in fact a bit like one of the NL residential areas – except that there are far more parked motor vehicles.  That makes the space ugly and unpleasant – there’s no space for e.g. mini street gardens and it’s hard to imagine kids playing here.  Presumably all the vehicles reflect the fact that public transport is largely absent or inconvenient (perhaps blocked by queued traffic)?  And maybe the distributor roads are so busy they’re not attractive for cycling?

*  FWIW there are a number of camper-van / stretch-transit sized vehicles visible and even a minibus.

[brooksby]

hawkinspeter wrote:

brooksby wrote:

But IIRC her van is the size of a Sprinter or a small bus, so completely inappropriate for an urban environment anyway. She’s just been lucky so far.  Not too much sympathy, I’m afraid (although she seems to have become the poster child for “liveable neighbourhoods negatively impact upon the disabled “).

I think she should continue having access for her van though. Is the problem actually the size of the roads or is it the pavement parkers? Without having looked at the details, I would have thought that it shouldn’t be too difficult to amend the scheme so that blue card holders can gain access to Victoria Ave.

A lot of those streets are terraced houses with narrow footways and cars parked each side, aren’t they?  I get what you’re saying about blue cards, but still stand by my belief that a van as big as hers is not appropriate as an everyday driver for someone who lives in the city.

[hawkinspeter]

brooksby wrote:

But IIRC her van is the size of a Sprinter or a small bus, so completely inappropriate for an urban environment anyway. She’s just been lucky so far.  Not too much sympathy, I’m afraid (although she seems to have become the poster child for “liveable neighbourhoods negatively impact upon the disabled “).

I think she should continue having access for her van though. Is the problem actually the size of the roads or is it the pavement parkers? Without having looked at the details, I would have thought that it shouldn’t be too difficult to amend the scheme so that blue card holders can gain access to Victoria Ave.

[brooksby]

But IIRC her van is the size

But IIRC her van is the size of a Sprinter or a small bus, so completely inappropriate for an urban environment anyway. She’s just been lucky so far.  Not too much sympathy, I’m afraid (although she seems to have become the poster child for “liveable neighbourhoods negatively impact upon the disabled “).

[hawkinspeter]

Disabled woman left in tears

Disabled woman left in tears over Liveable Neighbourhood as residents demand apology:

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/disabled-woman-left-tears-over-10045126

Melanie Topping’s disability accessible camper van was in for repairs when Bristol City Council’s contractors created a ‘modal filter’ near her home in Redfield, so Thursday lunchtime was the first time she had attempted to reach her home and the designated parking spot outside it in the vehicle.

There has long been a one-way and no entry system near her home at the end of Victoria Avenue, and previously she has been able to drive her large, specially-adapted camper van down other streets further to the east to get onto Victoria Avenue.

But the East Bristol Liveable Neighbourhood scheme has now closed off those routes to her and the one access road connecting Church Road to Victoria Avenue is too narrow for her large vehicle to fit.

She attempted it and failed on Thursday, so had to reverse through the no-entry sign to reach her home. The experience left her shaken and angry. When asked how she was feeling after finally pulling up, she said: “I don’t have any other words for it, unfortunately, other than rude ones, I’m afraid.

“I shouldn’t have to do this to get to my home, this isn’t right – not when we’ve been pointing this out since July 2023. I shouldn’t be left in this situation at all.”

[slc]

Bristol could do with being a

Bristol could do with being a bit more like Liverpool, at least in the housing costs department. So I for one welcome our new square-nurse merging overlords.

[brooksby]

“No true Barton Hill-ite…”

“No true Barton Hill-ite…”

[hawkinspeter]

Bmblbzzz wrote:

Good for the Scousers. But meanwhile back in Bristle… 

Yul Brynner was a lifelong liverpool fan who didn’t wear aftershave

<singing>

Yul never wore cologne

</singing>

[Bmblbzzz]

hawkinspeter wrote:

slc wrote:

Bristol’s low traffic bullies have gone too far (according to a spectator article)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bristols-low-traffic-bullies-have-gone-too-far/

Though not so far as Bristol’s high traffic bullies (screenshot)

I don’t remember this happening:

Almost two years ago, following a packed public meeting in which people voiced their concerns about longer journey times and the effect on local businesses, the council suspended its plans for the LTN. Subsequently, it ran a second consultation on the scheme which yielded 760 objections and 427 responses in support.

This bit strikes me as odd as surely those are all valid reasons to implement the Liverpool Neighbourhood:

Hearing councillors and officials talk, I also noticed how the reason for the scheme changed: sometimes it was to do with tackling ‘congestion’ and ‘pollution’; at other times, it was presented as a fix for ‘climate change’ and achieving ‘net zero’.

Sorry, but that opinion piece is a bunch of horse-shit.

 

Good for the Scousers. But meanwhile back in Bristle… 

[slc]

Agreed, there was no

Agreed, there was no supension. There were various modifications of the plan, and a long time before the Beafort Rd and Crews Hole Rd one way plan was shelved then forgotten. The supposed second consulation sounds like the (one and only, and always required) statutory consultation. I can see why someone uninvolved might mix that up with the earlier non-statutory co-design etc exercises , but the writer claims to have followed along. But hey, it is The Spectator, where truth is just a fusty old concept like marmalade or sock supsenders.

[hawkinspeter]

slc wrote:

Bristol’s low traffic bullies have gone too far (according to a spectator article)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bristols-low-traffic-bullies-have-gone-too-far/

Though not so far as Bristol’s high traffic bullies (screenshot)

I don’t remember this happening:

Almost two years ago, following a packed public meeting in which people voiced their concerns about longer journey times and the effect on local businesses, the council suspended its plans for the LTN. Subsequently, it ran a second consultation on the scheme which yielded 760 objections and 427 responses in support.

This bit strikes me as odd as surely those are all valid reasons to implement the Liverpool Neighbourhood:

Hearing councillors and officials talk, I also noticed how the reason for the scheme changed: sometimes it was to do with tackling ‘congestion’ and ‘pollution’; at other times, it was presented as a fix for ‘climate change’ and achieving ‘net zero’.

Sorry, but that opinion piece is a bunch of horse-shit.

 

[slc]

Bristol’s low traffic bullies

Bristol’s low traffic bullies have gone too far (according to a spectator article)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/bristols-low-traffic-bullies-have-gone-too-far/

Though not so far as Bristol’s high traffic bullies (screenshot)

[Author]

Replies