Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

forum

Through traffic to be banned in parts of Bristol for ‘liveable neighbourhood’ scheme

//i.pinimg.com/originals/fb/4b/76/fb4b76fcc102a925a6fb0a726f536948.jpg)

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

//i2-prod.bristolpost.co.uk/incoming/article8295503.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/0_East-Bristol-Liveable-Neighbourhood.jpg)

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

If you're new please join in and if you have questions pop them below and the forum regulars will answer as best we can.

Add new comment

94 comments

Avatar
slc | 2 weeks ago
3 likes

Some locals (apart from road.cc regulars) like the scheme. Admittedly in the Beaufort Rd section where the carrot (end of what was pretty unpleasant rat running) is large and the stick (drivers required to take different but ultimately similar route home) is small.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/meet-residents-who-celeb...

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to slc | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

slc wrote:

Some locals (apart from road.cc regulars) like the scheme. Admittedly in the Beaufort Rd section where the carrot (end of what was pretty unpleasant rat running) is large and the stick (drivers required to take different but ultimately similar route home) is small. https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/meet-residents-who-celeb...

I think it's fair to say that there's more congestion along Blackswarth Rd and Church Rd now, but it's early on and people are still adapting.

Beaufort Rd seems transformed now from being a major rat-running route to a quiet road running alongside the cemetery that is ideal for walking along rather than breathing in all the fumes from Church Rd.

If Marsh Lane gets converted (I haven't seen if they've managed to do it yet), I bet that will completely change the nature of that road too.

Avatar
slc replied to hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

I have seen long queues on Blackswarth Rd, but they seemed to be dying down towards the end of the last week. I wondered if the queues were essentially due to drivers that that previously turned right onto Beaufort Rd now choosing to turn right at the lights onto Church Rd. Given the volume of traffic coming the other way and the narrow junction, you can imagine the junction capacity dropping from >10 vehicles per green light to 2 or 3.

Avatar
slc replied to hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

Marsh lane was unchanged on Friday - I don't think the contractors have been back since the protest.

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
4 likes

Article on the BBC - "thousands" demand halt:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6296300l05o

Quote:

Whilst many of the measures were yet to be completed, those that were elsewhere had been welcomed. In St George, through traffic was now blocked from accessing Beaufort Road, a notorious rat run.

Sabrina Fairchild, who lived nearby said: "It was never this quiet before, it was constant traffic. It has created more of a community feel and made it a nicer place to live."

Avatar
levestane replied to hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
1 like

Quote:

... a notorious rat run.

Talking of rat runs.

Avatar
brooksby replied to hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

Also from that article:

Quote:

Melissa Topping said "there's a lot of people round here on low incomes who need their cars for school runs and work"

Avatar
brooksby replied to hawkinspeter | 2 weeks ago
3 likes

And finally: I wonder how many of the "more than 3,000" signatures on that petition are actually locals, who live or work there (and are not just people who drive through, or Conservative councillors in Sunderland or something…).

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to brooksby | 2 weeks ago
0 likes

brooksby wrote:

And finally: I wonder how many of the "more than 3,000" signatures on that petition are actually locals, who live or work there (and are not just people who drive through, or Conservative councillors in Sunderland or something…).

Those who have no connection with the area shouldn't be heeded - but the views of those who use a road as a means of getting from A to B, even if they are simply passing through, seem perfectly legitimate to me.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to Dnnnnnn | 2 weeks ago
2 likes

Votes for rat-runs then!

I certainly think councils should be aware of flows.  Of course with cars because "traffic" and space-inefficiency the "why" of that journey is important.  These shouldn't be necessarily judged the same as e.g. pedestrian and cyclist "desire lines".  It's more "we had to drive (as did everyone else did too), so we had no choice but to cut through the residential streets".

That just says "we're in motor dependency", which is hardly news.

There's also the "I'm in the car - shops are 200 metres in that direction, so I'll drive there and back".  We have to decide do we want more of the same (and can we afford it)?

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to chrisonabike | 2 weeks ago
0 likes
chrisonabike wrote:

Votes for rat-runs then!

I'm unclear how simply considering the views of people who travel through an area is voting for rat-runs. No need to explain though.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Dnnnnnn | 1 week ago
5 likes

Dnnnnnn wrote:
chrisonabike wrote:

Votes for rat-runs then!

I'm unclear how simply considering the views of people who travel through an area is voting for rat-runs. No need to explain though.

Well, a large amount of traffic going along e.g. Beaufort Rd would be people not living in St George but merely travelling through the area and aiming to avoid the traffic along Church Rd (the parallel main road A420). They may well want to vote against the scheme as Beaufort Road no longer allows them to use it like that - i.e. rat-running. I live in a side road that connects Church Rd and Beaufort Rd and previously quite a bit of traffic along our road was just people rat-running - it's so much quieter now which is appropriate as these are residential roads (also very narrow with parking along both sides).

Ideally, it's going to be local residents that change their behaviour and walk/cycle instead of just automatically driving to the shops - there's an Aldi, Tesco and a selection of independent shops along Church Rd just a few minutes away.

However, it's local residents that will feel the benefit of the schemes, so people just travelling throught the area are almost certain to not want their choice of routes to be restricted - they want to rat run through our streets.

Avatar
slc replied to hawkinspeter | 1 week ago
2 likes

There wiil be some people outside the scheme that are affected other than being denied rat-runs. Google Maps is now routing drivers down Troopers Hill Rd and along Crews Hole Rd rather than Beaufort Rd/Blackswarth Rd. Neither are any better suited for heavy traffic than Beaufort Rd. Crews Hole Rd has long been a traffic nightmare. Troopers Hill Road not so much, but its gradient means that it is very poorly suited.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to slc | 1 week ago
1 like

Yes.  This is the difficult part of change.  Things are ... different!  Of course we want the kind of change that only makes things better, or only affects other people.

We can't - or at least in the UK, won't - get to the "now everything is how it should be" at once.  Some people will be negatively impacted - possibly those who do not live in the affected area or even travel through it.

In fact that is half of the point of transforming our streets.  The other part - making "alternatives" to driving journeys - often can't even start without reducing traffic levels / claiming space back from the motor vehicle.  Because driving is such a space-inefficient form of transport and it suppresses demand for other modes.

Perhaps some of the places where the traffic is now going instead will start petitioning for similar traffic-reducing treatment?

Everywhere will be "difficult" but I recall traffic at rush hours in Bristol from a couple of decades ago and remember thinking it was the heaviest / slowest I'd experienced in the UK...

Avatar
slc replied to chrisonabike | 1 week ago
4 likes

About 10 years ago, a traffic management scheme with cycle infra was proposed, covering those newly affected areas plus Beaufort Rd. It was not great, really, because it would have been one-way rat-running rather than none, but might have at least cut out the frequent pavement driving. It went though planning and was announced to go ahead, but was then shelved temporarily after objection from drivers to be denied their two-way rat-runs. Temporary became permanant after the money put aside was spent on other things (one of Bristol's many neglected bridges IIRC). 

So we do seem to be getting somewhere.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to slc | 1 week ago
1 like

slc wrote:

There wiil be some people outside the scheme that are affected other than being denied rat-runs. Google Maps is now routing drivers down Troopers Hill Rd and along Crews Hole Rd rather than Beaufort Rd/Blackswarth Rd. Neither are any better suited for heavy traffic than Beaufort Rd. Crews Hole Rd has long been a traffic nightmare. Troopers Hill Road not so much, but its gradient means that it is very poorly suited.

I just played around a little with Google Maps with directions going from Hanham/Warmley toTemple Meads and that didn't choose Crews Hole Rd. The main routes were A420 or Whitehall Rd with only a couple of minutes difference between them.

Avatar
slc replied to hawkinspeter | 1 week ago
1 like

Try Hanham to Brislington.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to slc | 1 week ago
1 like

slc wrote:

Try Hanham to Brislington.

Seems like only a minority of routes go through Crews Hole Rd from my dragging around the start and stop positions.

Avatar
slc replied to hawkinspeter | 1 week ago
5 likes

Good, because it really is a poor choice.

I cycle along it against the rat run tide about once a week, it is white knuckle stuff at peak times.

Part of the LTN scheme involves traffic calming and new crossings on Crews Hole, but later. In my road planning fantasy, that would have happened first (along with congestion charging on Church Road, all funds paying for new bikes for children in Barton Hill).

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to slc | 1 week ago
0 likes

slc wrote:

Good, because it really is a poor choice. I cycle along it against the rat run tide about once a week, it is white knuckle stuff at peak times. Part of the LTN scheme involves traffic calming and new crossings on Crews Hole, but later. In my road planning fantasy, that would have happened first (along with congestion charging on Church Road, all funds paying for new bikes for children in Barton Hill).

Totally agree - that's a very nice route for walking along by the river when you're not forced onto Crews Hole Rd.

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to hawkinspeter | 1 week ago
1 like

hawkinspeter wrote:

I live in a side road that connects Church Rd and Beaufort Rd

I also live in the area and am not against changes, least of all along Beaufort Road. My objection is to suggestions that the views of people who travel through the area shouldn't be considered, and that considering them is somehow "Votes for rat-runs". While I'm here, I also dislike the term "rat-run" for people who are just trying to get to work, etc.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Dnnnnnn | 1 week ago
5 likes

Dnnnnnn wrote:

I also live in the area and am not against changes, least of all along Beaufort Road. My objection is to suggestions that the views of people who travel through the area shouldn't be considered, and that considering them is somehow "Votes for rat-runs". While I'm here, I also dislike the term "rat-run" for people who are just trying to get to work, etc.

The problem is that the number of people travelling through an area can outnumber the residents, so treating it as a democracy is flawed, especially due to our motornormative culture. Yes, there needs to be consideration of traffic flows, but the residential requirement for safety, clean air and reduction in noise pollution needs a higher weighting.

"Rat-running" is an established phrase for people taking smaller side routes to avoid congestion on main roads - maybe it's an unfortunate name as like you say, it's just people being people. I don't dislike the people so much (or at least not the considerate ones), but I do dislike their behaviour.

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to hawkinspeter | 1 week ago
0 likes

I'm not arguing for a plebiscite - that's no way to run a representative democracy. But considering the views of those affected by significant changes is.

Avatar
slc replied to Dnnnnnn | 1 week ago
2 likes

Fair enough, people driving through have a stake. A reasonable decision by BCC, if not my own preference, would have been to modify Beaufort Rd and others to be safe for that purpose. I am not sure how, but I suppose double yellow lines and pedestrian crossings would feature.

I think we are saying 'rat running' where we could equally well say 'dangerous driving'. I don't mind people driving along the streets where I live. I do object to them mounting the pavement or driving at excessive speed for the conditions, and doing these things daily.

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to slc | 1 week ago
1 like
slc wrote:

I think we are saying 'rat running' where we could equally well say 'dangerous driving'

I take "rat running" to be taking shortcuts through streets which aren't really suitable (at least when lots of people do the same thing). Dangerous driving is more how you drive, rather than where - albeit if lots of people choose unsuitable routes at the same time then it'll likely encourage more dangerous driving (mounting kerbs, unsuitable speeds, etc.). There's definitely some of that round here and it does need to be addressed.

Avatar
slc replied to Dnnnnnn | 1 week ago
3 likes
Dnnnnnn wrote:

..Dangerous driving is more how you drive, rather than where - albeit if lots of people choose unsuitable routes at the same time then ...

Ok, let me have another go at articulating this. Sometimes it is the location and volume of traffic that is dangerous, rather than what we usually think of as individual driver behaviour. Crews Hole Rd and Beaufort Rd at times experience such volumes that crossing the road is dangerous, yet there are no crossings to mitigate that danger. We tend to think of this situation as something that should be managed by road design, since individual drivers are not likely to reduce speed sufficiently to share the road with pedestrians. But it *is* the decision of motorists to participate in these dangerous conditions so dangerous driving in experience, if not Dangerous Driving in law

Avatar
brooksby replied to Dnnnnnn | 1 week ago
2 likes

Dnnnnnn wrote:

I'm not arguing for a plebiscite - that's no way to run a representative democracy. But considering the views of those affected by significant changes is.

A plebiscite? Is that like when you start a petition calling for a new general election because you don't like the result of the last one?

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to brooksby | 1 week ago
3 likes

Something Something Brexit... ? (sorry)

Anyway I think they should try calling them "loveable neighbourhoods".

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to chrisonabike | 1 week ago
2 likes

chrisonabike wrote:

Something Something Brexit... ? (sorry) Anyway I think they should try calling them "loveable neighbourhoods".

I like that, though I usually revert to calling them Liverpool Neighbourhoods to practise the accent

Avatar
slc replied to hawkinspeter | 1 week ago
1 like

Lavable neigbourhoods? Could be handy on bins day

Pages

Latest Comments