Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
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).
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.I somewhat agree.
When the changes were first proposed and consulted about (sometime around 2020 if my memory serves), I thought they were going to just make Beaufort Rd one-way which would have made quite a big difference to it. I was then frustrated over the years since when they hadn’t made any changes whatsoever when they could have just made a single change there to see how it works.
However, now that Beaufort Rd doesn’t allow through traffic, I think that’s probably better for the residents along there (and for us on the side roads too).
My main concern is the potential impacts for less mobile and disabled residents. Less mobile residents may simply be unable to walk/cycle and there is an absence of any viable public transport in Bristol meeting their needs.LTNs seem to have real adverse impacts for disabled/less mobile residents. If so, then I cannot support them.
Are there any rigorous impact assessments that would reassure us on this?
LTNs shouldn’t be designed to prevent vehicle access to streets, but simply to prevent rat-running by the use of bollards/planters/bus gates to restrict one end. This means that residents can still use their vehicles as before, but may have to change their route as one end may be blocked.
Whether it has an adverse impact depends on the specifics of the implementation, but in general, with less through traffic, it should end up being easier for disabled people to gain access and face less danger when getting to/from their vehicle.
A specific problem raised in the East Bristol trial is that one disabled resident requires a large vehicle (to fit their wheelchair) and claims that the access to their street is through a narrow street that isn’t big enough.
Another problem raised is that the main road is now busier, but other trials have shown that it can take a couple of months for motorists to adjust their journeys and other LTNs end up showing reduced traffic and pollution in surrounding areas.
I don’t think that you’ll find “rigorous impact assessments” as these kinds of schemes are all unique and their success/failure depends a lot on the behaviour of individuals. Similarly, you don’t get ‘rigorous impact assessments’ when new roads are built.
https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/fury-bristol-residents-complain-gridlock-9794171
There is anger among residents of a Bristol suburb who claim that they are suffering ‘gridlock’ as a result of a multi-million-pound ‘liveable neighbourhood trial’. Campaigners are arguing the trial has caused emergency vehicles to get stuck, caused accessibility issues for disabled residents and harmed local businesses in East Bristol.Residents claim that the trial has brought traffic to a standstill at busy times, created unsafe roads and increased pollution. Councillors have debated the project but there are so far no plans to scrap it.
Over 5000 people have signed a petition urging Bristol City Council to halt the ‘liveable neighbourhood’ trial that represents an investment of some £6m. It is taking place in the St George, Redfield and Barton Hill areas of the city.
It aims to promote active travel and has involved some road closures. Known as a Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) project, it involves adding bus lanes, cycle gates and other means of promoting sustainable travel.
However, some protesters claim the trial has caused issues for emergency vehicles. Resident Ben Staples, 32, said: “There’s multiple incidents where police, fire and ambulances are all just stuck in traffic because all of the traffic has been forced onto roads that can’t cope with that level of traffic which means people can’t pass. They physically cannot move out of the way for these vehicles.”
It’s news to me that emergency vehicles are getting stuck in traffic.
If that’s a real problem (I have my doubts), then one solution would be to change some of the big planters into bus/emergency vehicle gates.
Of course, what we actually need is for people to make fewer journeys by car and that’s the point of the EBLN trial – to see how we can shape people’s behaviour by making it slightly more awkward to travel by car.
Soay sheep are also awesome – and another an island breed originating from up north! Although Wikipedia says that – like motor vehicles – their numbers keep increasing until they crash. But perhaps that just reflects the lack of Soay wolves?Well, on Lundy the only predators are the humans, and they’re far more likely to buy some farmed non-Soay lamb from the pub than try to chase a Soay down the cliffs.
I think he must have the ones which change colour with temperature there – some of them are more like spotted or striped Galloways than belted.We might be wanting to lean more on our “heritage” or less “improved” breeds in the future as the climate changes (or becomes less predicatable). Possibly in Scotland / Ireland ones that are even more waterproof would be useful?
For cold tolerance though I particularly like the Hebridean sheep. They look witchy and appear to be able to live off snow.
That’s an awesome looking sheep.
At the risk of this laser-focussed forum thread drifting off-topic, my favourite sheep are the Lundy soay sheep (apparently there’s some living wild around Cheddar Gorge too). Very hardy and agile – they look like goats when they run around the cliff edges.
chrisonabike wrote:
I do like a belted Galloway, the mint humbug of the cow family.I’d forgotten to reply to this comment.
I visited some friends in Northern Ireland, and one of the wife’s brothers lived next door and kept a very small herd (10, I think) of Belted Galloways as they’re tough enough to live up on the mountains most of the year with their doubled coat keeping them warm. He was very proud of the two calves:
I forgot to mention that I
I forgot to mention that I was surprised at mentions of people (presumably pro-EBLN) commenting that the anti-EBLN people should move to the countryside as that’s where cars are welcomed! I thought I held fairly strong views against the all-conquering motor car, but now I think I’m just a moderate as I can’t subscribe to that.
It’s a tricky problem with the scheme causing problems for disabled people – ideally they would benefit greatly from reduced traffic through their roads. Maybe a road or two could be converted from using planters to some kind of blue-badge gate?
The council debate is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTbSPFs4-XI&t=2s. Starting at 42.00 ish.Thanks.
I made the effort to listen to that section and there were some valid points raised such as the problems with Crews Hole Rd and the Blackswarth/Church Rd junction that both pre-date the EBLN scheme. Also, the acknowledgement that our (privatised) public transport options are shit.
I think the important point is that this kind of change is going to have negative and positive effects, so we really should let it run for the months trial to see what actually happens. I’m not convinced by the argument that the local shops will be killed by this due to less foot-fall, but time will tell.
I agree that they should update the various EBLN scheme literature to reflect the issues that some people are facing and provide the proposed date for the trial to be evaluated (i.e. 6 months time) along with the criteria for failure/success. I don’t agree that the trial needs to be halted immediately which was the main point of the petition.
4000 strong petition leads to council debatehttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0j1gzxwqp5o
Tweaks ahead apparently. 10p on just leaving it as it is, with Avonvale Rd still open to all traffic.
The change.org petition is at > 5000, maybe the 4000 have BS postcodes.
You could well be right. Personally, I think Avonvale Rd is just a disaster for having two way traffic. So many drivers think the traffic calming chicanes are basically a game of chicken and then there’s all the side roads with poor visibility for vehicles joining Avonvale from them.