Tank clears bike lanes - not suitable for Brewery Bridge in Stroud?

Remember Cllr Sarah Lunnon's 'Pedestrians on Pavements' campaign (POP) and the plonker award to cars parked on pavements in Stroud - see here. Well Mayor of Vilnius is a little more dramatic and takes out Mercedes parked in a bike lane - with a tank. See film here. Joking aside it sometimes takes such a statement to get folk to wake up?

Photo: Tulip earlier this year - nothing to do with this blog entry but looks nice!

Greens are still trying to sort the dire new Brewery Bridge in Stroud - see campaign here - Sarah Lunnon wrote in a blistering attack on the proposals in Stroud Life while the Town Council are also seeking answers. It does seem the Glos County Highways are sometimes a law unto themselves and totally ignore locally democratically elected bodies. Well Sarah has also written to theCommisioning Director with responsibility for Highways to draw a number of concerns to their attention.

These concerns centre on two areas, the incremental difficulties added to using the junction on foot or by bike and the lack of thought in the design process given to this sensitive gateway area. Here is some more detail:

Vulnerable Road Users

When the plans for the bridge where first submitted for consultation with the Stroud Pedestrian and Cycle Forum maybe three years ago, major reservation were voiced about the lack of improvement for pedestrian using the junction (although a new underpass provides one route from Cainscross Rd to Wallbridge this was not accepted as a direct useable pedestrian route). The Pedestrian and Cycle Forum made repeated and sustained responses to the plans and continued in their response that the proposed work made the junction incrementally more difficult for vulnerable road users.

The main response to these concerns and concerns raised by a District Councillor for a neighbouring ward was that any changes to make the junction more pedestrian friendly would detrimentally affect the vehicle flow and that the usage of the junction by pedestrians and cyclist was so low that there was no call for any major improvements. However one only has to be present the  morning and  afternoon when students attending Marling and the High School are walking to and from railway station to see there are significant peaks in pedestrian crossing  this junction, along with gradually increasing number of  local employees cycling and walking into Stroud

Given these responses, and the views of the local residents who have formed an action group because their views have not been taken into account, why was the carriageway outside the Stroud and Swindon building extended. This action has resulted in the area of green spaces being leased to Stroud Town Council to mange being substantially reduced in area, a zebra crossing extended meaning the pedestrians now have to spend more time in the carriageway and the area of black-top extended by even more.

Public Realm

The restoration of the Stroudwater Canal has been undertaken to act as a major regeneration project for the Stroud District, the point  where the canal intersects most closely with Stroud Town centre is at the junction of Merrywalks and Rowcroft. This means that pedestrians in Stroud who wish to visit this major regeneration project, or canal users who wish to use the services of the town will use this area. As a gateway to Stroud this is a sensitive area, as recognised in the Public Realm Strategy adopted by the County Council.

Why then has the area been treated only as a road junction with the design process, signage and lighting being undertaken for a highway junction, the benefit of the road user and no thought been given to the visual impact of the area, eg, large directional sign on the remaining green open spaces, multiple signage on pathways, disproportionally high and bright lighting schemes.

Way forward

We now request that an independent body with experience in reconciling the use of public places for vehicles and pedestrians is commissioned to undertake a study of the junction and provide some simple, easy to implement measures that will improve safety of junction for pedestrian and cyclist  and provide a public realm that benefits the gateway to Stroud Town and the Canal and enable vulnerable users of the junction better access. We would recommend Ben Hamilton-Baillie Associates based in Bristol.

Maybe we do need a tank to make a statement?

Stroud against the gyratory

BBC pic of new bridge under construction

There has been much debate in the local papers about the approach to Stroud at Wallbridge - where the new Brewery Bridge is due to open very soon. This point should encourage access into the town and not be a racetrack acting as a dangerous barrier to the future development of Stroud. Greens have long supported the local pressure group, Stroud Against the Gyratory. By closing the temporary road once the new Stroud Brewery Bridge is open, a pleasant public space could be created that would encourage people to slow down and relax rather than pass through.

As County Cllr Sarah Lunnon (Stroud East) said to press in response to the latest suggestions to support keeping both bridges open: "We need to ensure safe access into Stroud, build beautiful places, not scare people away. All over country small towns with big fast roads in the centre just wither and die. I don't want to see that happen to Stroud."

The current set-up is very unpleasant for pedestrians and cyclists, and there doesn't seem to be much improvement once the new bridge is open. I like many others think that if we close the current temporary road and revert to the old system it would greatly improve the experience of entering Stroud. There is also news that a restaurant is to open in July at the old hotel by Cheapside - we could create a wonderful peaceful space that people would be drawn to: would you rather eat a meal and have a coffee looking out over a square and canal or with cars racing past right in front of you? Closing the road can surely only enhance that area -  and bring more jobs.

GCC: letter to scrutiny re 20 mph

Today Glos County Environment Scrutiny committee meet at Shire Hall - I can't be there due to work commitments - but in any case am not allowed to speak. However I have written the following letter which I sent last week to councillors on that committee - I have also spoken with our local county councillor Tony Blackburn who is supportive - and also with Green County councillor Sarah Lunnon who has put in a proposal to that meeting to set up an inquiry into 20 mph.

BBC Glos are also doing a piece this morning - were going to have a radio car in Ruscombe this morning at 7pm but it will be in Slimbridge with a headmaster there - but still covering the 20 mph story with the Forest of Dean towns who have just got their 20 mph zones.

I have also written a 10 page report "20: Why we need it." This report was published on this blog in tiny font here and yesterday on my blog there was the 500 words about 20 mph for The Citizen. I am really hoping that this time the County will listen.

Photo: we want more than '20 is Plenty'

See the County Council agenda and papers here.

To: Letter to members of the Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee at Gloucestershire County Council:

You will be aware that Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish and Randwick Parish are seeking a 20 mph limit across all their residential areas. This has widespread support within the community and already close to 300 residents have signed a petition. Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish Council is willing to make payments to assist with implementation of traffic calming.

On 14/07/2010, the Environment Scrutiny Committee is due to hold a welcomed discussion on the issue of 20 mph zones. The County Council papers note the experience of Portsmouth but appear to be recommending a 'bite by bite' approach which is more costly and misses some of the wider benefits of a 'Total 20' approach. Indeed a 'Total 20' approach does not appear to be discussed in the papers. This is where a 20 mph speed limit is set for for all residential roads (unless the LA determines otherwise) and it offers huge benefits in both cost and casualty terms.

More Councils (e.g. Portsmouth, Oxford, Norwich, Leicester) are making all residential areas 20 mph, rather than adopting the more expensive zone approach to 20 mph. This approach is well-established in countries such as Germany and Norway, where the evidence is that drivers benefit from consistent speed limits on residential and arterial roads. I welcome the moves in Newent to make the whole town 20 mph - an important step in changing the culture of speed in Gloucestershire.

In a time of recession, we need to take extra care of public funds. However, the cost and enforceability of 20 mph are not the significant issues that many once thought. I enclose a report with more details but in brief:

Costs and Benefits:

• Over the first year in Portsmouth, speeds on faster roads were reduced by 7 mph with an initiative that is 50 times cheaper than conventional road humps. The key to this achievement was based on “ownership” of the initiative: most drivers now themselves live on a 20 mph street and therefore also “own” the benefits.
• Some Parish Councils will make significant payments towards costs of some traffic calming measures.
• 20 mph is proven to cut casualties (a pedestrian struck at 20 mph has a 97% chance of survival, at 30 mph - 80%, at 35 mph 50%).
• 20 mph has been shown to increase the number of people walking and cycling. Research shows this can reduce congestion, cut CO2 emissions and improve the sociability of neighbourhoods (this would benefit Whiteshill, where the Main Road divides the community as traffic travels too fast to enable safe crossing).

Enforceability: Several councils (e.g.Oxfordshire, West Sussex) have challenged the interpretation of DfT's national guidance: "Mean speeds should be used as the basis for determining local speed limits." These councils say that community benefits should outweigh concerns that more motorists might break the law. In Surrey, the Chief Constable has said that in future the police will not object to speed limits proposed by local communities. In Portsmouth, the police now take a targeted, educational approach to enforcing the speed limit: regular violators can opt to attend a road safety presentation instead of receiving a £60 Fixed Penalty Notice.

The Speed Limit Review ( DfT Circular 01/2006) requires the review all A and B roads by 2011. This guidance includes the principle that 'The needs of vulnerable road users must be fully taken into account to further encourage these modes of travel and improve their safety.' This would be better accomplished if a 'holistic'� approach could be taken to the road network. The use of a 'Total 20' approach that sets all residential roads (apart from those which are arterial) at 20 mph has significant benefits:

• It combines the A & B road review with residential roads.
• It enables a consistent and clear decision making process for the community.
• It maximises the effect of any speed limit campaigns
• It helps to develop a collective community commitment to lower speeds.
• It provides a cost effective method for implementing all changes to speed limits

In addition, the latest revision to the guidance on local speed limits (Speed Limit Circular, Dec 2009) encourages all local authorities to introduce 20 mph speed limits into:
• streets which are primarily residential in nature
• town or city streets where pedestrians and cyclist movements are high e.g. around schools, shops, markets, playgrounds etc.,which are not part of any major through route.

I attach some background notes and also recommend the 20s Plenty website with information on local authorities:
http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/

I hope that the evidence presented here will encourage the committee to consider in more depth the benefits and possibilities for widespread implementation of 20 mph. All the best - Philip

Cllr Philip Booth, Stroud District councillor for Randwick, Whiteshill and Ruscombe ward

20: Why we need it

Below is my 10 page report '20mph: Why we need it' which was hurriedly thrown together in response to the news that councillors at the County will be discussing this issue on Wednesday. I also sent a covering letter which I will post on this blog on that Wednesday morning ahead of the meeting. You will need to increase the font size to read but wanted to publish it all here so folk can see the arguments which have been made many times on this blog - I can send a pdf if you email me - sadly below doesn't include the photos of the original.

20: Why we need it

By Cllr Philip Booth, Stroud District councillor for Randwick, Whiteshill and Ruscombe ward. These notes were adapted from the Living Streets ’20 mph Policy Briefing’ to support Parish Councils request for 20 mph across the whole ward. 10th July 2010

Introduction

Streets are where we live, play, work, and socialise – they should be safe, attractive and enjoyable places for everyone. The current default speed limit for built up areas is 30 mph. Yet half of drivers admit to regularly “driving significantly above” the current 30 mph speed limit in built-up areas (1).

20 mph makes sense. The road safety statistics speak for themselves. If you are struck by a passing car in your street at 35 mph there is a 50% chance that you will be killed (2). This is a shocking fatality rate, which has an impact not just on those involved in collisions, but creates a wider fear of traffic speed that in turn adversely affects how we use our streets. At a traffic speed of 20 mph, the pedestrian survival rate is immediately increased to 97% (3).
This paper looks at 20 mph and how it cuts casualties along with the other benefits like increase walking and cycling. It considers why 20 mph zones are a less good way to go and notes issues of costs and enforcement with the example of Portsmouth who have a citywide 20 mph.

The framework is in place across the UK for local authorities to implement 20 mph local limits cheaply and easily. With an expected constraint on finances in the future then “value for money” of any intervention will be a key consideration. As the “Total 20” approach with speed limits costs 51 times less than 20 mph zones, then for any given expenditure a “Total 20” approach will deliver far wider benefits to residents. For the same expense as engineering a 20 mph zone for 250 houses and 500 people then over 25,000 could benefit from a 20 mph speed limit in their road.

Benefits from a Total 20 scheme would be :-

· Demonstrates Council commitment to making streets safer and improving quality of life
· Reduces Road Danger for all road users
· Encourages a shift to walking and cycling
· Reduces emissions
· Increases mobility for children with consequent gains in health and self-esteem.
· Increases inclusion and access for those without motor vehicles.
· Reduces noise.
· Reduces congestion due to “School run” motor vehicles.
· Increase social cohesion.
· Consistently sets speed limits
· Creates a commitment to sharing the roads more equitably.
This paper includes: 1. Cut casualties. 2.Encouraging more walking and cycling. 3. Improving Sociability. 4. Positive impact on emissions and traffic flow. 5. 20 mph is in line with existing County Council policy. 6. Limits vs. zones. 7. Making 20 mph a reality. 8. Portsmouth Case Study: achieving 20 mph the logical way. 9. Brief history of traffic calming in Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish. 10. Notes
1. Cut casualties

Reducing motor traffic speeds on our streets is the single biggest measure which will make them safe and vibrant places.

1.1. Chances of death or serious injury are dramatically reduced when speeds are reduced from 30mph to 20mph. While good progress has been made on reducing road casualties across the UK, no one should be satisfied when the equivalent of 60 classrooms full of children were seriously injured or killed on our roads last year.

1.2. There are stark road safety benefits with a 20 mph limit. Firstly, a pedestrian struck at 20 mph has a 97% chance of survival. At 30 mph the figure is 80%, falling to 50% at 35 mph 10. Children are the most vulnerable type of pedestrian, and they stand to benefit greatly from lowering the limit to 20 mph. This has been shown to reduce child pedestrian deaths by 70% (see figure 3.3 from WHO report above) (4).

1.3. World Health Organisation (2004) World report on road traffic injury prevention. Chapter 3, page 9 notes: “The speed of motor vehicles is at the core of the road injury problem. Speed influences both crash risk and crash consequence.”

1.4. Hull City Council has introduced 20 mph zones on a quarter of its roads. Figures comparing the three years before the speed limit was changed with the three after show there has been a 74% reduction in the number of crashes involving child pedestrians, and a 69% reduction in child cyclist crashes. The overall number of collisions in Hull has been reduced by 56%, and there has been a 90% reduction in serious or fatal injury collisions (5).

2. Encourages more walking and cycling

2.1. Better atmosphere: 20 mph helps create an environment in which pedestrians feel confident about crossing the road, children can play outside their homes and it is quiet enough to hold a conversation. A study from the Commission for Integrated Transport in 2001 found that where cities have 20 mph speed limits covering between 65% and 85% of the street network, they are transformed “from being noisy, polluted places into vibrant, people-centred environments.” (6)

2.2. Walking and cycling increased: A 20 mph speed limit in built-up areas allows for the safe mixing of motorised and non- motorised modes of transport, and makes it easier for pedestrians and cyclists to enjoy the same direct and safe routes for their journeys as motorists. Research into traffic calming undertaken in Glasgow found that walking levels increased in traffic-calmed neighbourhoods (7). It is worth noting there are huge health benefits to more walking and cycling.

2.3. Best practice: As Atkins report on integrated transport schemes: “The one critical success factor underpinning best practice in all case study areas was the introduction of area wide 20 mph zones (8).”

In Europe there is also evidence that lower speed limits encourage walking and cycling. The 20 mph approach is increasingly adopted in European countries where rates of walking and cycling are much higher and casualty rates for sustainable road users much lower than in the UK (9).

The use of 30 kph (19 mph) speed limits for roads in residential, shopping and other "mixed use" areas is nearly universal in Germany. In Hilden, a town of 50,000 people near Dusseldorf, a 30 kph speed limit was introduced over most of the road network to improve safety and quality of life and to avoid the expense of providing a comprehensive network of cycle lanes. 60% of trips to the town centre are now made on foot or by bicycle (10).

In Munich, with a "pedestrian friendly city" policy, 80% of the road network has a 30 kph limit. Some residential areas have even lower limits. In Graz, Austria, over 80% of the network has 30 kph limits. Cycle usage increased by 17% while cycling casualties fell. Munich also has very low casualty rates for vulnerable road users. Munich exemplify best practice because they have stabilised or reduced the use of the car, despite increasing levels of car ownership (11).

Photo: Whiteshill School children being escorted along road

2.4. Impact of increased traffic: The 30 mph speed limit was introduced in 1934 when there were just 2 million cars in the UK. Today there are over 28 million. There is now roughly one car for every two people in the UK. From a ‘crossing the road’ point of view, 30 mph was a far more appropriate speed in the 1930s than it is today. The relative rarity of a car on the street meant that crossing it in good time before one appeared was a simple matter. With today’s increased car use, sufficient gaps in 30 mph traffic are much harder to come by. We’ve almost taken it for granted that stepping out onto the street is a risky business: something to be rushed, fearful for our safety. A 20 mph speed limit immediately puts people first by ensuring that traffic is travelling at a speed slow enough to adapt to pedestrian presence.

3. Improving Sociability

3.1. Heavy traffic damages communities – and the speed of traffic plays as great a role as its density. Research from Basel in Switzerland has shown that the sociability of streets increases as street traffic speeds decrease. For example, the number of people saying they ‘linger’ in their street increases from 24% in a 50 kph (31 mph) street to 37% in a 30 kph (19 mph) street (12). Meanwhile, research from Bristol in the UK has shown that residents on busy streets have less than a quarter of the local friends that those living on similar streets with little traffic have (13). At 20 mph, even a heavily-trafficked street instantly becomes easier to cross, less noisy, and more sociable.

3.2. The Institute of Public Policy Research’s report Streets Ahead confirms the link between poverty and children’s road safety: it shows that children in the poorest 10 per cent of society are three times as likely as children from the richest 10 per cent of society to be pedestrian casualties. Overall, child pedestrian injuries are four times as likely in poorer area, than in richer areas. All of the wards in Hull are amongst the third most deprived in the country and this has been a strong incentive in reducing speeds in the city.
4. Positive impact on emissions and traffic flow

There are wider benefits of 20 mph. Contrary to some reports based on test-track conditions, research, again in Germany, showed that driving at a steady 30 kph (19 mph) will actually reduce vehicle emissions as braking and accelerating between junctions and other obstacles decreases(14). It is very much an environmentally friendly traffic speed.

Additionally, traffic flow is smoothed by reducing the “bunching” effect at junctions. Some local authorities have already pioneered this approach to traffic management. The London Borough of Camden has linked the traffic lights on Camden High Street to build in a natural “green wave” of 20 mph: travelling faster than this will simply result in the next set of lights the driver approaches remaining red.

5. 20 mph is in line with existing County Council policy.

The County has many policies that could be partly met by 20 mph:

- The Corporate Strategy has aims of Making our communities safer, Supporting communities and vulnerable people, Ensuring every child thrives and reaches their potential, Making transport work and Managing our environment and economy. A 20 mph in residential areas ticks all these boxes.

- LTP targets (and to a lesser extent GH targets) are to be focused on all the Government’s shared priorities of accessibility, congestion, safety and air quality and the local priorities of maintenance and quality of life (which includes dealing with the impact of freight). A 20 mph would impact positively on all these targets.

- Plus GCC has specific policies re Walk to School, Safer Routes to School, reduce car use, cut carbon emissions, key performance indicators (KPIs) relating to killed and seriously injured levels and much more!

6. Limits vs. zones

Implementing 20 mph does not necessarily entail the use of physical traffic calming which, while effective (15), is costly and can be unpopular. This is where a crucial distinction between zones (requiring traffic calming) and limits (requiring only signage) needs to be emphasised. Living Streets, note the benefits of traffic calming, but argue that a piecemeal zonal approach will be both time consuming and expensive, particularly considering the current economic climate. Additionally, poorly designed traffic calming can cause discomfort to cyclists and bus users.

6.1. 20mph: not just outside schools. Living Streets have concerns about only targeting 20 mph around specific streets. While this can be a welcome first step, 20 mph is the only civilised speed for all streets where people live, work, play or go to school. The onus should be on local authorities to take 20 mph as a starting point for all streets in built-up areas – and demonstrate why a street should not enjoy a 20 mph, rather than why it should. Indeed research in Gloucestershire a few years ago demonstrated casualties don’t occur just outside schools.

6.2. Changing the speed culture: an authority-wide approach across built-up areas would also remove confusion for drivers by avoiding a situation of constantly changing speed limits. This approach would save the expense and clutter of extra signs or engineering. In this way, 20 mph will become the assumed default speed limit across our villages, towns and cities.

Photo: 20 mph zone in Uplands, Stroud where vehicles cannot exceed 15 mph anyway due to narrowness of road: such zones do not make financial sense and add to unnecessary road paint and signage.

6.3. Road designs: Unfortunately, many of our streets built since the 1930s have been engineered for a 30 mph or greater speed limit. For example the radii of side streets are often not harsh enough to deter vehicles from turning in at inappropriate speeds, and carriageways are wide with long uninterrupted sightlines more akin to motorways than places for people. It is no surprise therefore that criticism of 20 mph in such streets focuses on the lowered speed limit not being ‘realistic’ for drivers. So while there is no doubt that the way a street is designed plays a significant role in the speed at which drivers feel is appropriate, wholesale street redesign projects cost millions of pounds and can take years to be realised.

6.4. 20 mph default: Living Streets recommend changing the default speed limit across whole areas, in order to make the quickest and most cost-effective strides towards 20 mph across our villages, towns and cities. DfT plans to strengthen guidance on this although this does still not go far enough.

6.5. Compliance: If, following the introduction of a lower speed limit, there are ongoing concerns about localised compliance, these can be addressed through targeted enforcement or design features (16).

6.6. Displacement: The benefit of a “Total 20” approach is that the only displacement that is possible is from residential roads which may be used as short cuts or “rat runs”. If anything, traffic is displaced onto arterial roads. However, for cyclists and pedestrians then the lower speeds on residential roads make them more attractive than arterial roads. This is a different effect from that produced by local 20 mph zones which may well create displacement to adjacent uncalmed residential roads. If a “Total 20” approach is taken that excludes arterial roads then this will have minimal effect on journey times. As each home is within 1/3 mile of such a road then the maximum increase in time for that 1/3 mile is 20 seconds (the difference in time for 1/3 mile at 20 or 30 mph).
Photo: Gateways at Standish that help slow traffic

6.7. Traffic calming measures: Living Streets note many measures that are cost-effective ways of signifying to drivers that 20 mph is the appropriate speed: removing guardrail and street clutter from the pavement, installing planters on the roadway, removing the centre line and other road markings, and innovative parking bay layouts, to name but a few.

7. Making 20 mph a reality

7.1. The default speed limit for built-up areas should be reduced. In practice this would mean that the assumed speed limit for all streets in built-up areas would be 20 mph: highway authorities would have to demonstrate that there was a clear strategic need for specific streets to have a 30 mph (or greater) speed limit, while ensuring the safety of vulnerable road users.

7.2. Costs: Some Parish Councils are open to considering part payment towards 20 mph zones in their areas. There will also be significant cost savings in reduced casualties and an impact on cutting CO2 and congestion as more people will feel happier to walk and cycle. Living Streets argue that the 20 mph limits approach is cheap and easy to achieve. It is an important first step in stating what constitutes a civilised speed for our streets. If there are concerns about compliance, they can be met via a targeted enforcement approach at specific hotspots following implementation. Local police forces are now saying they will enforce new 20 mph speed limits: Thames Valley Police in Oxford were the latest to state this in April 2009 (17).

7.3. Challenge of Gloucestershire’s priority assessment process: The revised system is based on the ability to obtain measurable benefits in terms of LTP and local targets and our key service KPIs. The total score generated by the system is then divided by the cost to give an indication of priority.

The general principle of the system is that the priority assessment score is as follows

Priority Score = [effect on target] x [number of users] all divided by [cost]

All schemes should be placed into one or more of the LTP categories (see below) and prioritised against a single set of criteria that will take into account all associated GH and LTP > targets.

• Maintenance – subdivided into Bridges, Footways, Drainage, Principal Roads, Non-Principal Roads and Street Lighting
• Quality of Life
• Safety
• Accessibility
• Congestion and Air Quality

This will mean that although a scheme might be focused towards accessibility, it will also be able score additional points for benefits to other targets. I.e. a scheme intended to provide a safer route to school may also have significant benefits in terms of footway condition. In order that the score for any scheme is not unduly influenced by its subsidiary benefits, a factor will be applied to targets relating to its principal purpose. i.e. a maintenance scheme will receive most of its score from maintenance related targets but could gain additional points for cycling benefits.

While this will give a clearer indication of benefits this method looking at schemes individually would appear to not include a change in approach like 20 mph in all residential areas. Changing the culture on our roads could have a huge impact on reducing casualties and carbon.

8. Portsmouth Case Study: achieving 20 mph the logical way

In March 2008 Portsmouth became the first city in Britain to have a 20 mph limit on almost all residential roads – in effect a default speed limit throughout the city, with exceptions for important arterial roads only. The initiative began in a neighbourhood forum, before being taken up by councillors, and finally being put into action by council officers. The entire cost was a mere £500,000. Prior to this, they had been planning to spend £2 million on ten targeted 20mph zones over five years (18).

8.1. Process: To achieve 20 mph, Portsmouth followed Government guidance in Local Transport Note 01/06, Setting Local Speed Limits. The signed-only limits approach, as opposed to costly traffic-calmed zones, became easier in 1999, when the Road Traffic Regulation Act (Amendment) Order 1999 (SI 1999 No. 1608) removed the need for secretary of state approval for 20 mph limits. However it wasn’t until 2006 that Government guidance became positive enough for an authority, in this case Portsmouth, to feel it could take such a bold city-wide step.

Portsmouth City Council felt then that they could only roll out the speed limit on roads where the average speed was already 24 mph or less – even though this is just a “recommendation” in the guidance. It helped that the city is characterised by densely populated, narrow terraced streets, where speeds were naturally low already. According to their own publicity, “The 20 mph limit was proposed for roads where the average speed was already 24 mph or less. We have installed prominent 20 mph signs where drivers enter the new speed restrictions, as well as 'repeater' signs as reminders. It has been found elsewhere that this method reduces speeds by 3-4 mph. Road humps are not part of the scheme, although if speeds do not drop on particular roads, then residents will be consulted again to see if they want additional measures. In most cases the 20 mph limit will be self-enforcing and further speed enforcement measures will not be needed.”(19)

8.2. Enforcement: The police decided to take a targeted, educational approach to enforcing the speed limit. For example in locations where regular violations were taking place, they stopped speeding drivers and gave the option to them of attending a road safety presentation instead of receiving a £60 Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN). According to the police, “Those taking part in the presentations were asked to fill out feedback forms to evaluate their experience, and many agreed that the 20mph zones were a good idea in Portsmouth, and that the information they had seen and heard was of use and would make them drive more responsibly in future.” (20) Nevertheless 50 FPNs for breaking the 20 mph speed limit were issued in Portsmouth from June 2007 to May 20088.

8.3. Results: In the first year it has been shown that whilst the speed of vehicles on roads where previous speeds were low did not drop appreciably, the reduction on roads where previously the average speed was 24-29 mph dropped by 7 mph. There is also the fact that by introducing this across all residential roads in the city the driver ownership and benefit was widely spread and all streets had a consistent speed limit associated with either being primarily residential or an arterial road.

8.4. Conclusion: The Portsmouth case demonstrates how a default limit can be successfully implemented on an authority-wide basis.

9. Brief history of traffic calming in Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish

The letter below is a copy of the recent letter sent by the Parish Council in response to being informed that they will have to remove their ‘20 is Plenty’ signs. In the eyes of many the ’20 is Plenty’ scheme was only ever seen as a step to try and reduce traffic speeds to make a mandatory 20 mph more acceptable.

Similarly the Parish have sought other measures like Gateways in an effort to reduce speeds. They have even offered payment towards schemes but this has not been accepted. We now await the outcome of this scrutiny meeting.
Photo: ‘20 is Plenty’ stickers on recycling boxes in Whiteshill and Ruscombe.

Date: 21st June 2010

Dear Jo Walker, Director, Highways Transport Services and Waste

Traffic Speed in Whiteshill and Ruscombe,

I understand that Councillor Tony Blackburn will be raising the issue of traffic speed and safe pedestrian access to Whiteshill School at the July meeting of the County Council Environment Scrutiny Committee and thought that some background information may be of use to you. I understand from John Kay, The Gloucester Highways Stakeholder Manager for our parish that you will also be discussing a draft County Policy on the use of 20mph limits which he said he will use to evaluate the application of such a limit to Whiteshill.

Whiteshill and Ruscombe is a ribbon development along what was described by Highways as an "informal route for traffic between Stroud/Cainscross and Gloucester" in their 1998 proposals for traffic calming along the Plain Whiteshill (which has been implemented). The Main Road in Whiteshill was widened in the 1960's in such a way that for most of the village there is only a pavement on one side of the road and this changes whichever side of the road it is on in several places. There is limited section of pavement in Ruscombe. The roads are for the most part a series of bends; this restricts the number of drivers going above 40 mph but historic surveys carried out in 1998 and 2004 and the Parish council in 2003 show that a significant number of motorists exceed the 30 mph limit.

The basic problem as confirmed by Halcrow in their 2004 report on possible sites for School crossings is that there is nowhere in the centre of the village where there is a clear view of the road in both directions to allow a driver travelling at 30 mph to safely stop if there is a pedestrian in the road. Locals know this and have been requesting a 20 mph speed limit since 2000. We have been repeatedly told that for various policy reasons we could not have a general 20 mph limit but that the School area could be an exception and in 2003 (Parish Council Minute 131/08/03) John Lindsay the then Traffic Manager for the area said that Whiteshill School would be added to the list for trial sites for a 20 mph zone. We are still waiting for this to be done!

We were told by our last Stakeholder Manager John Roberts that we could not have a 20 mph limit as the traffic speed was too high and the road too bendy to implement traffic calming. He suggested that we implement a voluntary 20 is plenty scheme as an alternative. We agreed to do this at the Parish Councils expense and after considerable discussion with John Roberts on the designs of the signs implemented the scheme using highway quality signs. The police confirmed that this scheme greatly reduced the number of cars exceeding the 30 mph limit. Unfortunately, John Key is now of the opinion that the signs although made up of components of standard signs do not conform to the regulation for road signs and has had them removed. He says that he will consider the case for a 20 mph zone for Whiteshill once the County has a confirmed policy for their introduction. However a scheme will need to be drawn up and any work will have to be assessed for cost effectiveness. This is worrying as we already know that additional traffic calming cannot be implemented and as we fortunately have a low incidence of major accidents a simple cost benefit analysis will not be convincing.

This approach overlooks the fact that people use their common sense and don't allow their children to walk to school, the playing field, the village shop, the village hall or the Scout hut and end up driving them around the village as it is not safe to cross the road. I understand John Kay’s position and it would be appropriate if there was not the history of past reports. We do not need more expensive studies to tell us what we already know. The evidence from the 20 is plenty scheme is that a mandatory 20 mph limit will reduce the traffic speed.

All the Parish Council is asking for is permission from Highways for us to change the existing 30 mph signs for 20 mph ones (with additional repeaters as required by law) at the Parish Councils expense. If for some reason you feel that you cannot grant this simple request that will cost the County Council nothing (we would not expect an increase in police enforcement of the new speed limit) can you at least implement a school 20 mph zone as proposed by John Lindsay in 2003 and 2004 that is also being promoted by Councillor Tony Blackburn.

As mentioned earlier the need for a crossing was accepted back in 2003 but a suitable site could not be found for one. The notion of an implied crossing was put forwards in 2007 and supported by David Drew the then MP for Stroud, Neil Carmichael our current MP and Councillor Stan Waddington. As I understand it to be effective an implied crossing has to be a clearly defined change in the carriage way that looks like a dedicated pedestrian crossing point. What we actually got is two strips of brown non skid surfacing spaced nearly thirty foot apart within a yellow zigzag school no parking zone. This looks more like a couple of badly filled trenches rather than a crossing point. I think the problem stems from the lack of a pavement on both sides of the road opposite of the school.

In practice the school crossing lady escorts the children from a pavement to the entrance to the school which is off of a small back street which has no pavement. It appears to have been beyond the imagination of your consultants to produce a scheme that embraced this practice. However even a well defined crossing will not overcome the problem that the crossing lady faces of traffic approaching the area too fast. There are flashing school lights before the bend in front of the school but there is no warning of a crossing. I am sure that this problem could be overcome by the addition of repeater lights on the downhill side of the crossing point. Although if a general 20 mph limit proves effective in slowing traffic down (I am not expecting that they will travel at 20 mph) the need for advance warning will be reduced.

I apologise for such a long letter but things have been going on for a long time. To summarise the need to do something about the traffic speed and safety of the school crossing point has been accepted for some time and the Parish Council would welcome any action which could improve the situation.

Yours Sincerely

On behalf of Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish Councillors

Mrs Helen Dunn,
Clerk to Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish Council

10. Notes

(1) The RAC Report on Motoring 2007 reported that 73% of drivers thought that speeding in built-up areas was “very serious”, yet 47% admitted to doing (2) http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advice/driving/speed_policy.htm
(3) http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advice/driving/speed_policy.htm
(4) DCFS (2007) The Children's Plan-Building brighter futures. The Department for Children Schools and Families: The Stationery Office
(5) PACTS (2007) Beyond 2010-a holistic approach to road safety in Great Britain.
(6) Commission for Integrated Transport (2001) Study of European best practice in the delivery of integrated transport
(7) Morrison, D., Thomson, H. and Petticrew, M. (2004). An evaluation of the health effects of a neighbourhood traffic calming scheme, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 58, pp. 837–840
(8) Atkins, WS (2001) European Best Practice in the Delivery of Integrated Transport, Summary Report, London: Commission for Integrated Transport.
(9) Atkins, W. S. (2001) European Best Practice in the Delivery of Integrated Transport, Summary Report, London: Commission for Integrated Transport.
(10) Groll, L (2005) "Traffic calming as a fundamental element for a successful bicycle promotion" "Streets Ahead" conference 12 November 2005, Warrington.
(11) Atkins, WS (2001) European Best Practice in the Delivery of Integrated Transport, Summary Report, London: Commission for Integrated Transport.
(12) Daniel Sauter & Marco Hüttenmoser (2006) . The contribution of good public spaces to social integration in urban neighbourhoods.
(13) Joshua Hart (2008). Driven To Excess. Available from www.driventoexcess.org
(14) Dr. Carmen Hass-Klau (1990), An Illustrated Guide to Traffic Calming p3
(15) http://southwarklivingstreets.org.uk/effectiveness-of-traffic-calming-measures/
(16) Living Streets Policy 01/09, Naked Streets, available from http:www.livingstreets.org.uk
(17) http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/4308526.Police_will_impose_planned_20mph_limits/
(18) London Assembly Transport Committee (2009) Braking Point
(19) http://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/living/8403.html

Traffic guru comes to Stroud

Stroud Civic Society is holding an illustrated talk by Ben Hamilton-Baillie on Thursday January 28th at 7.30pm in the Congregational Church Hall, Stroud (see here).

Photo: Sarah Lunnon advocating Shared Spaces approach in Stroud

This talk will be well worth it indeed to anyone interested in our roads and public spaces - Ben is one of the leading experts in developing a new approach to our roads - he kindly endorsed my report 'Better Streets for Stroud' written in 2005, came to a conference seminar that I helped organise at the District Council and is also a member of the consultant team which drew up the the Public Realm Strategy for Stroud. It is his views and thoughts that Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish also have in mind when considering the Parish. I hope as many as possible can attend this important event.

Here's what Stroud Civic Society wrote about their event: "There has been a revolution in thinking about streets and traffic. Ideas about 'shared space', where people and vehicles negotiate their interaction, have overturned years of traffic segregation. Instead of just being conduits for traffic, streets are being reclaimed and resurrected as part of a civilised public realm. Ben Hamilton-Baillie is the leading exponent of integrated street design in the UK. He is both a passionate advocate and a witty and entertaining speaker and has been involved in schemes ranging from historic medieval villages, like Dunster, to major metropolitan streets like Exhibition Road in South Kensington."

See also my article 'Green Streets are Naked Streets' here. Lastly here is a useful brief video featuring Ben with some of the ideas about Shared Spaces.

Westward Road Traffic calming

I am delighted there are plans to calm traffic in Westward Road, Ebley, but I have just written to the current consultation on them, to note my concerns about the specifics of those draft plans.

Photo: Pic of Ebley Mill (just off Westward Road) yesterday

I welcome the proposed wider pavements and narrow roads that slow traffic but would prefer build outs or other methods rather than the proposed speed cushions. Yes I know speed cushions do slow traffic and have been shown to reduce casualties - but they are unpopular. Indeed I know the Parish Council, who I've emailed, is also unhappy about speed cushions.

I would much prefer a Shared Spaces approach to be developed. See my report, "Better Streets for Stroud District" from a long while back here. Indeed if you accept a Shared Spaces approach then cushions can be viewed as counter-productive, as people look at the cushions and not at the child about to run into the road.

I have asked about what work has been done to consider alternatives to cushions in view of the local objections. I hope improvements to the draft plans will be possible or is this just a meaningless consultation?

20 is Plenty comes to Whiteshill and Ruscombe

This week the '20 is Plenty' signs have gone up around the village and the stickers for recycling boxes are being delivered with the latest edition of The Warbler.

Photos: taken earlier this week

Many will know I have long advocated 20 mph limits - see the article below printed in this blog for the first time but originally in The Citizen/Echo's community blog back in March this year - clearly this '20 is Plenty' is not mandatory and already I can see it is being ignored by some - have some even noticed??? A waste of time? More signs to litter our countryside?

No. Sadly the way it works is that if we want to go for a mandatory 20 mph then we need to get speeds lower - this voluntary scheme has been shown to lower speeds in other areas by a small amount - our hope is that this is a step towards getting a mandatory 20 mph.

Anyhow big thanks to the Parish for helping get this done - and for the idea re stickers for the recycling boxes - hopefully every recycling day there will be a reminder to everyone to go 20 mph. It is also worth mentioning that Randwick Parish are in hot pursuit and are planning their own '20 is Plenty' scheme....Feedback welcomed on what folk think about it all......anyway here is that old article...

Communities want streets not transport corridors

A warm welcome to this Community Blog. I am sure it will grow into a useful and interesting place for comment, debate, information and indeed a celebration of our Five Valleys. I applaud Stroud Life for making this space available to the community.

Cartoon: courtesy of local artist Russ

One issue I'd like to kick off with is the need for 20 mph zones in all urban areas. Too many of our communities have been blighted by traffic - to such an extent that many now see it is normal to have roads that are little more than what some have described as 'traffic sewers'.

On Saturday I joined six Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish councillors to consider sites for '20 is Plenty' signs in the Parish. These signs are advisory rather than mandatory and some see them as a waste of time as so many drivers ignore them. However they are one of the first steps communities can take towards shifting opinion about traffic speeds and getting mandatory 20 mph zones.

In Whiteshill Village, the Main Road is so busy, that many parents don't allow their children to cross the road to the playground. At no point is a crossing suitable. We have also seen an increase in traffic using the village as a short cut after many used it when the A46 was closed last year. Speed gun tests by the Parish Council show many people are travelling at the speed limit but 30 mph is too fast on those roads.

Sadly current policy is that unless the vast majority of cars are already travelling at 20 mph or less on the road then you can't have a 20 mph zone. It is considered too costly to enforce/police. This leads to absurdities like in Springhill (see photo left) where a 20 mph zone was put in with road paint and ugly signs on a road that I doubt anyone can drive along at over 15 mph. A waste of money which could have been better spent on traffic calming measures on roads that really need it.


20 mph: the arguments are overwhelming

When a pedestrian is hit by a car at 40 mph they only have a 15% chance of surviving, at 30mph, 55%, but at 20mph the chance of survival increases to 95%. This is more than sufficient justification for a default 20 mph in urban areas. Amazingly even a 1 mph drop in average speed is estimated to reduce accidents by 6% in urban areas.

Research shows that 20mph limits are a critical success factor in promoting walking, cycling and public transport as alternatives to the private car. This means less CO2 emissions and healthier residents.

20 mph limits help create 'living streets' as this is the speed at which drivers can have eye contact with other users of the street. It is the speed at which pedestrians feel more confident about crossing the road, children play outside their homes and it is quiet enough to hold a conversation. Research has also found that residents of busy streets have less than one quarter the number of local friends than those on streets with little traffic. Increasing motor traffic has impacted on people's sleep and health and forced people to make adjustments to their lives to shield against in some cases nearly constant noise, pollution, dust and danger outside their front doors. Shockingly four times as many poor children as rich children are killed on Britain's roads.


20 mph is just the start: we need a new approach to traffic

In going around the Parish on Saturday it was obvious that we did not need to put signs up at some points in Ruscombe or side roads in Whiteshill, as vehicles would be hard pressed to go more than 20 mph. Indeed any additional road paint and signage would be unnecessary urbanification of the village.

In 2005 I co-authored a report, 'Better Streets for Stroud District' that looked at how to reduce dangers on our roads. It focused on a radical new approach, now known as 'Shared Spaces', that has been shown to reduce accidents rates, reduce congestion and is good for communities. It is based on 20 mph speed limits but also is about removing traffic lights, guard rails, signs, humps and road markings.

The approach is based on the view that it is only when the road is made less predictable and less certain that drivers will stop looking at signs and start looking at other people. In other words, instead of relying on the street system for security, drivers are forced to use their reactions. This helps explain why research in the County found that accidents with children did not occur more outside schools - when schools are busy cars tend to drive more carefully. See my article, 'Green Streets are Naked Streets', that I wrote for Resurgence magazine with more info here.

Shared Spaces has produced some astounding results where it has been implemented, but I'll save my enthusiasm for another time.The good news is that the original report led to a seminar at Stroud District Council and a growing understanding of how the approach could revolutionise traffic engineering approaches. The County is already trialing some of the ideas, but it is early days and we still have not created the political will to introduce blanket 20 mph zones.


Time for a change

The World Health Organisation rightly regards the 1.2 million annual road traffic deaths not as 'accidents' but as a 'predictable and preventable' result of fundamental structural problems. Quite rightly there is outrage whenever terrorist bombings kill even one person, let alone a hundred. Yet we are turning a blind eye to the deaths of nearly 3,000 people and 248,000 casualties on Britain's roads every year.

Photo: Looking for suitable locations for '20 is Plenty' signs in Ruscombe then approval will be sought from Highways

Britain's record for child safety is amongst the worst in Europe and we have discouraged cyclists and walkers from our roads. We are long overdue the time when all our all our urban areas are automatically 20 mph. The equivalent 30kph limit is almost universal in urban areas in Germany and the Netherlands.

Communities across the Five Valleys like Whiteshill, Randwick, Chalford, Nailsworth and more are trying to cut speeds. Every councillor from all parties I have ever spoken to about traffic has been concerned, especially in the context of schools and children, and yet progress towards a safe road transport system is painfully slow.

In my correspondence with the County Council there seems little appetite for change in Gloucestershire, but other Councils are starting to make the necessary changes. Hull City Council has reduced child pedestrian injuries by 75% in its 20mph zones while Portsmouth is implementing a 20mph limit Traffic Management Order for the whole town. Norwich and York hope to follow. But we also need the Government to end the bureaucracy associated with the creation of such zones.

The government must also end it's huge road building programme, which their own research shows only leads to more traffic. We should reward responsible motorists by abolishing the Road Tax, which provides no incentive for less polluting travel choices. Instead shift the responsibility onto fuel duty. Money can then be invested in good alternatives to driving.

Gloucestershire has seen a 17% rise in traffic between 1997 and 2006 - five percent higher than the national average. The forecast is 5.7m more cars on British roads by 2031. We know we can't go on like this. Traffic is destroying our communities, our health and our environment. I welcome the moves by Parish Councils and others to shift thinking so that 20mph should be the default in urban areas. We urgently need better road designs and enforcement, but most of all we need leadership to make it a reality.

Cashes Green Hospital site gets go-ahead

I have a number of disappointments about this exciting project - it is great that last Tuesday it has got to this point after so very long - indeed I must have attended 6 or 7 consultation events and submitted views many times on the design and layout and more.

Photo: Entrance to Cashes Green Hospital site

However you will see my two main comments re allotments and traffic below - sadly it seems they were overruled - this is despite a last-minute petition that failed to sway councillors who voted in favour of the development of 78 homes at the former Cashes Green Hospital site in Stroud. For me the allotment issue is crucial - however the project remains exciting as it has 50% affordable and will become the country's largest Land Trust.]

Another comment is that once again councillors are having to determine an outline planning permission on such a large site - the argument being that we were awaiting a developer to come on the scene. However I have seen too often where the illustrative plan bears no resemblance to the final development. Let us hope this really is the showcase plan it has been billed.

Stroud Life report Cllr John Marjoram (Green Trinity) saying at the meeting that to grant permission would be a tragedy. He said Cainscross, where the hospital has lain derelict for 15 years, had taken enough development. "I don't think it will enhance the Cainscross community."

Cainscross Parish Council had also objected that the dense social housing suggested at the old hospital was a lost chance to upgrade the area's facilities.

Two key comments re outline planning permission

1. Opposition to the proposed reduction of allotments at the Cashes Green Hospital site.

I would like to note my concerns about the reduction of size in the area of allotments compared to the original site. Cainscross Parish has the highest density of housing in Stroud District and according to research by the Stroud Valleys Project the least number of green spaces. While I welcome the move to 50% affordable housing I consider we should be seeking to protect the whole allotment site from development.

I understand the community and the Parish Council have sought to protect these allotments and indeed provided support for Policy RL9 in the Local Plan which ensures these allotments are again available to people.

2. Concerns about the increase of traffic relating to the development of the Cashes Green Hospital site.

As you will know the community have been involved in a very lengthy consultation process with various bodies. However one consistent concern relating to this development has been the additional traffic it will generate. There are several key concerns:
- the speed of traffic at certain times of day on Cashes Green road up through to Randwick which includes the school
- concerns that the additional traffic will exacerbate the divide between communities on one side of the road and the other
- concerns that the additional volumes of traffic will reduce the level of cycling and walking

I have in the past argued strongly for a Shared Spaces approach to this development and am disappointed this has not been developed more. I hope nevertheless that this significant development is an opportunity to develop a plan that will reduce dangers from vehicles and encourage a more pleasant neighbourhood that supports more walking and cycling. I note at present the Highways report is not available so hope that you will consider these points when making your recommendations.

One key factor in creating 'living streets' is a 20 mph - as you will know this is the speed at which drivers can have eye contact with other users of the street. It is the speed at which pedestrians feel more confident about crossing the road, children play outside their homes and it is quiet enough to hold a conversation. Research shows that 20mph limits are a critical success factor in promoting walking, cycling and public transport as alternatives to the private car. This means less CO2 emissions and healthier residents.

We should also note again the well reported fact that when a pedestrian is hit by a car at 40 mph they only have a 15% chance of surviving, at 30mph, 55%, but at 20mph the chance of survival increases to 95%. This is more than sufficient justification for a default 20 mph in urban areas. Amazingly even a 1 mph drop in average speed is estimated to reduce accidents by 6% in urban areas.

All good reasons to seek a mandatory 20 mph, however I note that just putting up signs does not go far enough. Further measures would be needed. I hope that Highways will be able to consider what those measures might be. They could include on-street parking areas, possible narrowing of the road, changes to road surfaces for safer crossing areas and more.

I do not consider that it is satisfactory to increase the level of traffic on this road without taking some significant measures. Any increase in traffic will impact negatively on residents living on that road and using it to walk and cycle. Too often it is neighbourhoods that are poorer that end up with measures that do not go far enough. It is a shocking fact that four times as many poor children as rich children are killed on Britain's roads.

Future Stroud - Public Realm Strategy

OK I've had posts this last few days on Random Stroud and Strange Stroud well here is Future Stroud - tomorrow is the last day to give in your comments on the Public Realm Strategy.

Photo; Stroud Saturday from Woodruffs cafe

The Strategy is worth a look - download it from here. I personally give it a very warm welcome. There is much to applaud but as always delivery is key. We have had many exciting schemes before but they don't translate into reality. This has a better chance as it is put together by various stakeholder groups. The plans include many suggestions like knocking down the wall at the top of the High Street to open up the top part to more pedestrian traffic and banning cars from George Street.

Some quick observations I made:

- the work with the Cycle and Pedestrian Forum has highlighted the importance of strong pedestrian and cycle linkages and the need for good facilities like undercover racks. However cycling does also not find its way into the Executive Summary of the Strategy for the public realm. The importance of increasing walking and cycling should not be underestimated particularly in a world of rising energy costs that is already impacting on the use of cars. I have some concerns that the Action Plan does not allow for these measures re cycling and walking to be borne in mind at each step and given the priority they need.

- while fountains and additional lighting can play an important role in creating public spaces I would wish their maintenance and energy costs be borne in mind. I have seen too many fountains not gushing due to vandalism or costs of repair.

- would like to emphasis the importance of trees. Stroud is lacking in trees.

Infact the report raises many of the issues I covered in two reports back in 2005 - Better Streets for Stroud District - they are still worth a read as they also look at a Shared Spaces approach to managing traffic.

Cycle strategy coming together

A busy, busy week - yesterday Green councillors meeting and an evening of Budget training for councillors, tonight a Ruscombe Brook Action Group meeting, the next couple of days there are evening scrutiny meetings....plus of course work which is also too busy at the mo...but more of all those meetings in a while but wanted to cover in this post the District's plans for a cycle policy...

Yes at last things are coming together and the Council has been talking to various community groups - you may have heard former Green Town councillor Sheila Booth (no relation!) on Stroud FM last week talking about the Stroud Valleys Cycle Campaign - I've not seen the policy documents yet - councillors are being treated to a Policy Panel next month on the issue - a chance to present and discuss ideas and hear from others - lots of talk about improved cycle facilities, places to lock-up bikes, better joined up cycle routes and more - one issue however that seems to have been missed from discussions is the 20 mph so I've emailed officers and some others in the hope that it wont be missed from the agenda....

Re Cycle Policy Panel

......I wanted to note that I applaud moves to improve cycling across the District. One factor that I have learnt plays an important role in encouraging cycling is a 20 mph. Indeed as I am sure you know, research has shown that 20mph limits are a critical success factor in promoting walking, cycling and public transport as alternatives to the private car. They help create 'living streets' as this is the speed at which drivers can have eye contact with other users of the street and is the speed at which allows more cyclists to feel comfortable about using roads.

In addition to that there is plenty of other evidence about the benefits of 20 mph: Britain's record for child safety on the roads is the worst in Europe. When a pedestrian is hit by a car at 40mph they only have a 15% chance of surviving, at 30mph, 55%, but at 20mph the chance of survival increases to 95%. In addition to less casualties research shows lower traffic speeds can mean reduced air and noise pollution, less fuel use and less congestion.

I consider that we need a default 20 mph in all our all towns and villages. Hull City Council has already reduced child pedestrian injuries by 75% in its 20mph zones while Portsmouth is implementing a 20mph limit Traffic Management Order for the whole town. I consider this should be one of the long term aims of any Cycle Policy and that the District should encourage the County to take a lead in this area.

All the best - Philip

Another issue re cycling policy is Shared Spaces - now I've discussed this at length before so wont cover it again here - but for those who are unfamiliar I strongly recommend my report from a few years ago - "Better Streets for Stroud District" here - and my article in Resurgence here. Not sure why text has gone bold and wont go unbold - anyhow we are a way off having a Shared Spaces approach across the District but things are moving in the right direction....anyhow enogh for now - more of cycle policy as it develops...

See also posts on Bike Week success, the Nailsworth to Stroud cycle path and the on-going need to try and get a serious cycle path along the canal (see here) - if the canal ever gets developed - the economics are increasingly not stacking up but I'll save that debate for another post - at least the 300 or so folk who cycled Stroud to Chalford this year in a mass protest seem to have woken the District Council to act - it seems the intention for a cycle strategy has been around for years but always a greater priority came along - now it is happening and we need to ensure it is the best possible.

20 is plenty and Shared Spaces update

Moves to calm traffic across the ward have had a bumpy ride as regular blog readers will know. Last night in an effort to help create new impetus I organised a meeting of representatives of the two local Parish Councils to look at ways they could perhaps cut costs and share some of the work in terms of getting a 20 is plenty scheme implemented as a first step.

Photo: County money wasted on implementing a 20 mph scheme on a road off Folly Lane where no one can drive more than 15 mph tops

It was a useful meeting that identified the next steps towards achieving a 20 limit - still a way off. Both Parishes have already done lots of work to make it happen including speed checks. I particularly liked Randwick Council's idea to put large 20 stickers on the recycling boxes, to make a fortnightly advertising blitz, to maintain awareness. Also Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parishes proposal to look at pace car window/bumper stickers with the 20 speed symbol.

In the meeting we also discussed some of the 'Shared Space' approaches to traffic calming - Whiteshill and Ruscombe have already consulted on this approach. See also this great website, 'Roadwitch', looking at traffic calming here. I know I have plugged this before but it is worth a look - like the rope across the road!

And talking of Shared Spaces I heard again from Acocks Green Focus Group. They wrote: "Remember us? We are the group who endorsed your excellent "Better Streets for Stroud" report."

I did indeed remember them - they contacted me soon after I'd written the 'Better Streets' report - and now have a good website to push their message - however unlike here there is some resistance to a Shared Space approach - despite the evidence of reduced casualties etc. One of the things that group was after, was to visit a scheme in place - sadly things are also moving very slow here and we still have no scheme in place locally - we have supportive Parish, Town and District Councils and even the County has shifted following a workshop/seminar on the topic. However last summer the floods in Glos have meant ££££m extra in costs for Highways so virtually every scheme and proposal is on hold while they repair etc.

However Stroud have now produced a public realm consultation - with proposals - it is a positive step in right direction (could go further) - a possible (much hoped for and needed) transport interchange and the possible canal regeneration project which will impact on town - these factors have to work together. It seems we have to wait more.

Meanwhile 5 miles down the road in Stonehouse they have another more formulated Shared Spaces proposal with model - excellent stuff for a busy high street - congrats to all of them for a great piece of work - indeed I made that point a week or so ago when I was at a County Council meeting looking at community safety issues - however it is also on hold as no funding at present.

So no visit from Acocks group - I suggested Shrewsbury would be a better bet for a visit and of course Kensington.

Call for Town to rethink on considerate driver scheme

So far 76 Whiteshill and Ruscombe motorists who are plagued by speeding through traffic are keen to sign up to a new "considerate driver" scheme to try and combat the problem. The scheme would mean they'd promise to drive within the speed limit in their home area, therefore slowing down the visiting traffic behind them.

Photo: Headline about Whiteshill when A46 was closed

Chairman of Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish Council John Rogers has written to all the parish and town councils in the Stroud district, suggesting other places also try the idea. He wrote: "We suffer from a problem that I am sure you are familiar with - the common practice of people driving through communities at speeds just below the level where speeding tickets are issued. As most village layouts are not suitable for 30pmph traffic this practice is both dangerous and detrimental to the quality of life in our communities."

Everyone tends to see their streets as belonging to their community but visitors see the same streets as just part of the highway. The considerate driver scheme seeks to address that by reminding drivers that villages they drive through are just like their own communities - in effect considerate drivers would act as pace cars, slowing down traffic behind them.
Town Council not convinced

I read in the local press that Stroud Town Council had not supported the 'considerate driver' proposals put forward by Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish. I was not involved in putting those proposals together but fully support their initiative, so have written to them noting I would welcome an understanding about why the proposals were not accepted. Here is some of my letter:

The proposed scheme looks similar to the 'Pace Car pledge' that was originally developed by 'Mental Speed Bumps' author David Engwicht. In many other countries the 'Pace Car pledge' is used in cities and towns as a kind of treaty between neighborhoods; we will act as a guest in your neighborhood if you act as a guest in ours.

Comment from 'Less Traffic.com': "Pace Car drivers pledge to drive within the speed limit, stop to let pedestrians cross, walk when they can, and do something to their car to make others smile. They turn their car into a 'mobile speed bump'. (One that gets out of the way of emergency vehicles!). When enough people join, traffic is effectively calmed city-wide. Pace Cars calm drivers rather than streets. The Pace Car is now operative in many cities. To date it has not flourished in any (that we are aware of) because these program have lacked creative mechanisms for enlisting Pace Car drivers. A good product is useless unless you have good a 'product distribution network'."

Whiteshill and Ruscombe Parish already have 76 people (around 10% of their ward) willing to sign up and I know of some areas that are working with schools to introduce a scheme. This would hopefully get around the problems of enlisting? See more on Traffic Tamers here.

The cost of just one speed bump is huge and does, in my view, little to help - this scheme is part of how we can change the way we think about communities. I would love to see a wider project looking at ideas like this - supporting local schools 'walking buses' and other ways of street 'reclaiming'. How can we engage communities? Maybe one way forward would be for Parishes to meet to discuss this issue as it seems to me each ward has very similar problems around traffic? Thoughts welcomed - all the best - Philip

See award winning article on Shared Spaces: "City planning as if people mattered" by Philip Parker:
http://www.theecologist.org/peopleplanning.asp
See more re Pace car concept here:
http://www.lesstraffic.com/Programs/Pace%20Car/Pace%20Car.htm
One example from Sustrans:
http://www.saferoutestoschools.org.uk/index.php?p=cs50


Frequently Asked Questions - Pace Car
Will my car really make a difference?
Yes. We only need a small percentage of vehicles acting as Pace Cars to slow traffic city-wide. This starts a positive cycle. People feel more comfortable walking or cycling, which reduces traffic levels, making streets even safer, meaning even more people can walk or cycle.
Does the Pace Car provoke road rage?
No. Many people who sign up to the Pace Car Program were already acting as unofficial Pace Cars. They report that incidents of road rage decrease when they badge their car as a Pace Car. Instead of the driver behind thinking they are stuck behind some 'idiot' who doesn't know how to drive, the Pace Car sticker lets them know that there is a purpose for why the car is being driven within the speed limit.
What happens if I accidentally speed?
Take a breath and slow down. The Pace Car pledge is a declaration of intent, not a legally binding contract or new religion where you will be stoned if you break the 'rules'! Kicking the speed habit can be hard work. Allow yourself more time to get places so you won't be so tempted to speed.
Do I only act as a Pace Car in my neighbourhood or on all streets?
On all city streets. The Pace Car is a kind of treaty between neighbourhoods: you respect the quality of life in our neighbourhood and we will do the same for you. The Pace Car promotes a new civility and mutual respect on our streets.

Questions taken from Less Traffic.Com

Nominated for County Environmental hero award

It was very nice to be surprised this last week by news that I had been nominated for the Environmental section of the County's Pride of Gloucestershire Community award. However the article that covered the story made quite a few mistakes - I note some of those mistakes in brackets in green in the article which is printed below - but first I want to return to the whole issue of 'environmental heroes'.....

Many will remember the criticisms and pages of press coverage over Al Gore and Jonathon Porritts' air miles. It is easy to shoot down a 'green hero'. To me, as I said at the time, such debates are a distraction from focusing on the real need ie that our Government must grasp the urgency and need for radical changes.

I said in one news release: "Green campaigners constantly risk accusations of being hypocrites. Yet life is full of grey areas and being pure and virtuous is never as easy, nor perhaps even as desirable, as it might appear. We have seen climate change campaigners like Ken Livingstone and Al Gore similarly have their CO2 emissions challenged. It seems that if you can smear the person, then you can also undermine the message. Such smears can damage: prominent people who might support green causes don't speak out for fear of having their supermarket bills fished out of their bin. Indeed every time a 'green hero' is shot down in flames, we all feel that little bit more cynical about our politicians and leaders. Meanwhile greenhouse gas emissions continue to soar. As Climate Change author Mark Lynas wrote: 'Being a purist may be comforting, but it is unlikely to change the world.'"

I have said before that I could be living a greener lifestyle, but this misses a key point. For me, individual actions to tackle climate change are great but will never go far enough. We must have government action to help us change behaviours and ensure those on lower incomes don't loose out. Yes of course people need to take responsibility - but it is the Government that must take a real lead. Individual actions to tackle climate change are great but will never go far enough. The present rate of growth in air traffic is unsustainable - hence Green challenges to airport expansions like at Staverton and Bristol. The truth of it is that we must cancel all airport expansions: individuals stopping flying is great but will not be enough - but by stopping flying they are at least raising awareness.....we urgently need laws that make the polluter pay for their damage and 'green' choices to be made easier: travelling the same journey by train would have meant 17 times fewer CO2 emissions than flying. A weekend in Prague should not be cheaper than a weekend in Bournemouth.

As the IPCC and others have said we have only a matter of a handful of years in which to act. We need radical changes. All credit to Jonathan Porritt, Al Gore and others who are trying to get the message across to us. We can still avoid catastrophic climate change - but as I've said before this is a time for all of us to be heros. It's possible for each of us to dramatically reduce the emissions for which we are responsible without massively reducing our quality of life - indeed see my post earlier this morning that points out that it is our economic growth that is making us more unhealthy.

Here's something I wrote before: "What is needed is for individuals and communities to decide to act on the advice that is available and get the politicians to act as well. We need emissions cuts of 90 per cent by 2030, yet our emissions are still rising, £30 billion is being spent on more roads, aviation subsidises continue and massive airport expansions are planned. We can create a green, fairer future of greater employment, healthier food, stronger communities, warmer homes from better insulation and self-sufficiency in energy instead of fossil fuels from unstable countries. We must tackle climate change but also build resilient communities that will cope with the coming challenges. If enough people lead the way then the politicians will be forced to follow."

03 April 2008 The Citizen PHILIP'S A MAN WHO REALLY CARES ABOUT OUR ENVIRONMENT

When it comes to environment issues Philip Booth really puts his heart and soul into the matter. And now the Stroud district councillor and head of the local Green Party (I used to be leader of the District Council group but Cllr Sarah Lunnon has taken over after my work commitments meant a squeeze on time), has been nominated for a Pride of Gloucestershire Community award. Stroud parish councillor Jane Godsell has nominated Philip for an award in the environmental hero category which is sponsored by Cory Environmental and recognises people who work to change the damage caused to the environment by our modern society. Mrs Godsell said: "He is a real environmental hero!"

Originally a member of the Gloucester Airport Action Group (I wrote a letter protesting at the Airport expansion 5 years ago and have campaigned since then but it is only in the last year that this Gloucestershire Airport campaign has got off the ground and while I have supported the campaign there are many others who deserve mention re the Airport) which aimed to reduce air pollution, Philip has continued to dedicate himself for many years now to the environmental campaign. (Not sure why they lead with the Airport that is just one campaign - they could equally have mentioned others like the Safe Water Campaign, Shut Oldbury, ID cards or whatever)

Mrs Godsell said: "Philip has done an amazing amount in the district to encourage environmental awareness, both as an individual and as district councillor."

Philip aims to set a good personal example by walking (Not sure where that came from - yes I do walk a bit and more recently since my health has improved but I would not list this as the main example). He said: "We could all do more but we first need political change in order to make it easier for us to take individual action."

In this regard he has campaigned extensively for lower speed limits, better public transport systems and cleaner streams. And his tireless work has paid off. The Ruscombe Brook Action Group, which works in conjunction with Severn Trent Water, has dramatically reduced the incidents of sewage in the brook.

Philip has also raised the profile of local environmental concerns by putting up daily posts on his online blog. The blog now has more than 2,000 visitors a month. Mrs Godsell added: "He e-mails residents with information which he thinks may be of interest to them and is always willing to take up an environmental issue on behalf of residents."

Con Booth is currently promoting a 'Shared Spaces Scheme' which encourages car sharing in order to cut road congestion. He said: "There is a long way to go but the dramatic shift towards more environmentally friendly attitudes over the past two years is encouraging."