Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Sorry, Peter: I must have missed that one
Oh, it’s not your fault at all. I know it’s there, but can’t even find it when clicking on the Forum links. It’ll likely appear after an hour or so.
I created a forum post about that this morning, but it takes ages to show up.
‘Miracle’ no one was hurt after car smashes through shop in posh Surrey villageThe salon has been forced to close temporarily
One customer wrote back: “This is a miracle that no one was hurt and that the car went into an empty shop instead of either in a full shop or carry on down the road where goodness know who would be around and maybe in danger. Thank you God.”
So, if God has the agency and desire to ensure that a shop was empty to avoid casualties, why didn’t they use their divine power to hit the brakes and just avoid the collision entirely? Or was the collision utterly unavoidable (motornormativity) and God had to focus on damage limitation?
“No more cars” as in no additional cars, or none at all? No-one is saying the latter (sadly).Pinch-points like this where cars try to concentrate remind us how staggeringly inefficient and space/ resource hungry cars are. Public transport (bus, boat), with its currently meagre 4 arrivals a day at Trelissick can be stepped-up and the headcount increases rapidly as you go to 6 to 8 etc. Each car brings 2-4 people, each bus 20-40. The locals would benefit from a more frequent no 493 bus service to Truro.
The NT seems to have the capital to throw at a bigger parking “solution”. But it could reduce the on-site parking at Trelissick and instead (revenue, of course) lay on a more frequent bus service (your park & ride). In Dartmouth/Kingswear, there’s a tourist “circuit” by train and boat – there are options to develop something like this between Falmouth and Truro.
But the NT continues to pursue a largely pro-car policy, flinging money and space at providing ever more parking, neglecting active travel alternatives. A policy that excludes many would-be visitors, and also has no future.
“No! More cars”
What a load of lemmings! Rushing to motor-geddon, complaining about all these people driving to the shops getting in the way of me driving to the shopsThe people causing traffic jams complaining about the traffic jams
Mea culpa! I’m looking after someone’s cat while she’s away at Christmas, and cats are warm-blooded cold-blooded killers. Am I the guilty man?Yes
Thanks for this. Mogg Street is often used as a rat-run by motorists (and cyclists, to be fair) who want to avoid the Mina Road mini-roundabout, so this will be interesting…
I’d say that Mogg Street is more likely used by cyclists who opt for the bridge over the M32 rather than the underpasses as opposed to trying to avoid Mina Road.
I reckon the worst part of Mina Road are the loose bricks in the road surface, though the mini-roundabout can be tricky when vans park too close to the corner and block your view.
Good link- usual Bingo comments with malevolent thicko NIMBYs pretending to care about the disadvantaged, disabled etc. On the same page is the enlightening “Man dies after being found seriously injured in Bristol“- this is about 99% probability a hit-an-run, but the death is described by the police as ‘not being suspicious’. This roughly translates as ‘somebody driving a vehicle has killed somebody else, but that’s not deemed to be as serious as somebody not driving a vehicle killing somebody else. The police statement wording implies that their ‘investigative enquiries’ were completed by about 5:50am- I hope this is not true.To be fair, the anti-EBLN petition was started by Melissa Topping who is a disabled resident of Victoria Avenue (I haven’t seen if they’ve done any changes to that, but it already had traffic calming bumps).
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/news-opinion/thousands-sign-petition-entitled-motorists-9784209
Not much of note – seems to be a selection of comments for and against
Look how permeable this area is to motor traffic (even with lots of fairly “narrow streets”)!And the entry from the massive busy urban motorway onto Mina road is nuts! Talk about a hopeful “drop anchors” (there’s also a really skinny cycle path emerging from the left here too).
Yeah, that Mina Rd junction is fun. It’s worse coming down Mina Road and trying to join the cycle path (to get across the M32 roundabout underpass which is a muggers’ paradise due to all the blind corners). You have to get over to the right hand side of the road whilst avoiding traffic coming from the M32 as well. The traffic isn’t usually moving fast though as they’ve just negotiated the roundabout and Mina Road has a 20mph limit.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Le79YvW2KYyQC8d86
I quite often go that route to one friend’s house and the roundabout subway is one of the few places where using a bell (or calling out “ding ding”) is handy due to the the blind corners and oncoming cyclists/scooterists. There’s also times when the underpass gets flooded
How is St Werburghs going to have a school street outside it? The road outside it is the main road – other than the motorway – to get out of the city centre to points north (St Werburghs, Eastgate, Eastville, etc).Maybe they’ll prevent traffic on Glenfrome Rd at drop-off and pick-up times. Apart from the M32, it does seem to be the only road that goes in that direction.
Autonomous car smashes into
Autonomous car smashes into Bristol traffic lights on Muller Rd:
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/car-smashes-bristol-traffic-lights-9798448
If only there was a way to make traffic lights more visible
All good – it’s stuff like this which ought to be “just do it already” and which should be “quick wins” (because has zero effect on motor traffic when it’s not vital). As we’ve seen even “slam dunk” stuff like this can become a battle though!Also perhaps “nothing to see here” but to my eye curious language: “… temporary barriers” but ” … The permanent schemes encourage …” – suggesting that maybe even temporary barriers erected for a short period twice a day might be seen as a big change and subject to being removed if “it causes congestion” etc.
I’m actually wary of changes that have little impact – because these tend to be “window dressing” set out so we can say we have one thing when in fact the status quo is unchallenged.
Example: my building is actually on a signed “home zone”. It’s a cul-de-sac leading to a car park – street goes nowhere else. Some “engineering” has been done – the street is signed 20mph and it narrows to a single lane in several places, plus the required double-yellows and signs are everywhere. But the home zone sign means nothing legally and of course people carry on as normal, paying little attention to parking restrictions or speed limits.
I’ve not seen children playing in the street.
Ninja children
Related topic of “School
Related topic of “School Streets”:
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/more-bristol-schools-added-list-9798050
Two more schools in Bristol will become official ‘School Streets’ this autumn term. Ashton Gate Primary School in Southville and St Werburgh’s Primary School in St Werburgh’s have joined 11 other schools in Bristol to introduce School Streets.This means the streets outside these schools are classed as walking, cycling, and wheeling zones, restricting car use with temporary barriers put out across the road at drop off and pick up times at the start and end of the school day. The permanent schemes encourage families to walk, cycle, wheel or scoot to school or park further away from the school and walk the last part of the journey.
Councillor Ed Plowden, Chair of the Transport and Connectivity Committee, said: “I am delighted to welcome two more schools to the Bristol School Streets programme. This scheme provides lots of benefits for local communities, including reducing traffic outside school gates, improving road safety for pupils, reducing air pollution, and boosting the number of children walking, wheeling and cycling to school.”
the thousands of existing “LTNs” which have quietly existed in the UK for decades
I think this is one of the issues with some recent LTNs – they have been created as relatively large-scale, high-profile programmes of change that are likely to generate opposition. On one hand, there’s clearly a rational case for comprehensive, integrated changes (and I think that might have been what funding was available for) – but I do wonder if a more incremental, “boiling the frog”, a street or two at a time, might have been more politically astute in some cases.Also, I think there’s the problem that if the changes aren’t high-profile programmes, then there’s lots of complaints that the residents weren’t informed and even with the well publicised EBLN, there’s still that complaint.
The real issue is that the Tories have deliberately politicised traffic management which has done absolutely nothing to help apart from poison rational discussion of strategies. With the “War on the Motorist™”, any detrimental change is going to get people riled up and then thinking of as many excuses as possible to oppose the change and repeating false tropes (e.g. increases pollution).
