Wide Area 20 mph Limits Encourage Cycling and Walking

From the 20’s Plenty Campaign

Slowing speed limits from 30 mph to 20 mph contributes to increasing the attractiveness of cycling and walking relative to other options. 20 mph increases physical activity and reduces traffic.

With the exceptions of road closures and congestion charging, it is hard to prove that any single traffic intervention results in raising active travel. A choice to walk or cycle is complex, involving factors like distance, route knowledge, safe routes, weather, topography and cycle parking. Yet, it is well researched that traffic speeds are a major barrier to choosing to walk or cycle. Perception of risk is strongly involved in the “how shall I get there?” decision.

Volumes and speeds of traffic are inversely correlated to walking and cycling levels – when one side of the equation rises, the other falls. Interventions that reduce traffic speed and volume are likely to promote walking and cycling and thus result in public health gains.[i] This is compounded by critical mass effects. Where there are more cyclists or walkers, safety increases due to its visibility and popularity, making drivers more conscious of vulnerable road users.

The key prerequisite for sustainable travel is creating the conditions in which walking and cycling are more attractive than car use. Reviews have found methods that pull people toward active travel include increasing the percentage of the local road network where speeds are limited e.g. to 20 mph (30 km/h)[ii] Unsurprisingly, in Europe 30km/h speed limits are the foundation of cycling and walking policies in Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

In Portsmouth, which implemented 20 mph limits on 94% of its roads in 2008, “over 40% of respondents stated that since the introduction of the scheme, there has been a safer environment for walking and cycling; and as a result, around a third of respondents felt that there had been an increase in pedestrian and cyclist activities in the local areas.”[iii]

Health professionals see lower traffic speeds as a foundation for increasing “active travel” leading to a healthier nation. The Association of Directors of Public Health with the National Heart Forum have developed a “position statement” on the benefits of 20mph as the default limit for residential and urban areas.[iv]

It is time to give people a real choice in how they travel by removing the fear of fast traffic from community streets. The authorities of over 6 million people have committed to do so.

More information at www.20splentyforus.org.uk
________________________________________
[i] Jacobsen,PL; Racioppi,F; Rutter,H (2009) Who owns the roads? How motorised traffic discourages walking and bicycling, Injury Prevention, v15, pp369-373.
[ii] Oja,P; Vuori,I (2000) PROMOTION OF TRANSPORT WALKING AND CYCLING IN EUROPE: Strategy Directions, The European Network for Promotion of Health-Enhancing Physical Activity. http://www.panh.ch/hepaeurope/materials/HEPA%20Walking%20and%20Cycling%20Strategy%20.pdf
[iii] http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roadsafety/speedmanagement/20mphPortsmouth/
[iv] http://www.adph.org.uk/files/ourwork/policies/NHF_PositionStatement20mph_2010.pdf

Update on Tilehurst Car Park Charges

Well, a delegation of traders from Tilehurst along with myself and other local councillors presented their petition this evening to the Council’s Cabinet. When you realise that there were 2,200 signatures on the petition which were collected in just two weeks, you will understand the depth of feeling over the proposed new car park charges in Tilehurst. Roger Kent, who owns a shop in Norcot Road, presented the petition and explained the depth of feeling amongst local traders against the withdrawal of the first hour free car parking, and the likely effect on their trade.

Leader of the Council, Cllr Jo Lovelock, responded and offered to retain 30 minutes free parking and to look at ways of refunding shoppers car park charges if they bought a certain amount of goods.

None of us were at all happy with the Council’s new proposal and will be taking up the Council’s offer to discuss the car park charges with Cllr Page, the Lead Councillor for Transport (when he returns from holiday).

In the meantime, the council has agreed to hold back on the new charges until this discussion has taken place.

My advice to the shopkeepers is to hold firm and explain to Cllr Page that doing away with one hour’s free parking is no way to support local shopping centres. We are very proud of our local shops in Tilehurst, and especially of the fact that almost all of them are real independent local traders, not branches of big chains. I will certainly do my best to support them and with 2,200 Tilehurst residents also supporting them I think we have a very good case to put forward.

Well done to the Tilehurst traders for organising the petition.

Today was a victory for local shops in Tilehurst but the campaign is far from over yet.

Cyclists need lights at night

Whilst the above headline is obvious to most people there are an awful lot of cyclists who ignore the need to make themselves visible at night. It is amazingly common to see cyclists on our roads at night riding around with no lights.

Coming home last night I came across the scene of an accident in Hildens Drive by the junction with Berkshire Drive. A young cyclist with no lights had been struck by a car. I have no idea who was to blame for the accident but one thing I do know is that cycling at night without lights is just plain stupid.

We need an education programme to point out the obvious to the lunatics who cycle at night with no lights.

Civilians cannot use speed guns

Just sometimes I do feel totally let down by the police and tonight was one such time. I arrived late at the Tilehurst NAG (Neighbourhood Action Group) at the tail end of a discussion on using speed guns. It turns out that ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers) have ruled that no civilians should be allowed to use mobile speed guns. It means that not only can residents not use speed guns themselves, but neither can local PCSOs. Apparently we need to wait for the already hard-pressed police officers to find time to spend an hour or two tracking speeding motorists. As if they have not got enough other things to do.

As a community we have been trying to help the police tackle what is one of Tilehurst’s three main issues, that of speeding cars (for reference the others are vandalism and rowdy youths). I think ACPO are afraid of ‘civilians’ using speed guns and being involved in an accident but they would all need to be trained up first anyway. I just think that occasionally the police need help to perform their duties and they should be glad that the community actually wants to work with them.

So for the moment we cannot push ahead with our intended use of the speed guns. We had planned actions in various roads in Tilehurst where speeding motorists would have been tracked and then written to by our local police inspector pointing out that they had been caught speeding and the dangers they were causing to residents.

Mow it seems we will need to tyake this battle forward to Westminster and see if we cannot get more sense from ministers on the use of speed guns.

Road re-surfacing in Tilehurst

The good news is that after lobbying from the Tilehurst councillors, Park Lane is to be re-surfaced between City Road and Mayfair. It is included in the list of roads being repaired this summer by the council.

Also included is Tilehurst Road (from Liebenrood Road to Honey End Lane).

Both these roads are in a shoddy condition and it is good to see the council spending some of the extra money (£400k) given by the Coalition Government for road repairs following two severe winters.

Good News for 20mph Campaigners

I was heartened by the announcement on 9 June by Norman Lamb, the Lib Dem Transport Minister, that he was removing a lot of red tape that was holding the implementation of 20mph zones in residential areas. Councils no longer need to wait for Whitehall’s authorisation before implementing 20mph zones and many of the requirements for specific signs and other traffic calming measures have been removed.

This could be very good news for people living along residential roads who seem to have lost control of their streets to the omnipotent cars that speed along frightening young children, old folks and any other pedestrians or cyclists who thought that they had an equal right to use the road.

I believe that 20 mph should be the norm along residential streets and will go some way to allowing non-car users to feel safer in their own neighbourhoods.

I have a question on 20mph zones down for the next Council meeting and I very much hope that the Labour Administration will move ahead with 20mph zones in Reading.

The full announcement is at:

http://nds.coi.gov.uk/clientmicrosite/Content/Detail.aspx?ClientId=202&NewsAreaId=2&ReleaseID=419854&SubjectId=36

Tilehurst Car Parks

It seems that residents still do not appreciate that much of the parking in Tilehurst car parks is actually free of charge.  The charges in Recreation Road and Dunstall Close car parks only apply after the first hour and only between 10:00 and 15:00 Monday to Saturday. To park for free during these peak hours just take a ticket and display in your car window and you will have a hour’s free parking.

The problem is that NCP who run the car park on behalf of the council, do not advertise the fact that the first hour is free or that they only charge between 10:00 and 15:00. After all, what’s in it for them to advertise free parking. However the lack of advertising puts people off using these car parks as people assume that they are going to have to pay and then start looking around for free spaces on the roads behind the shops in Tilehurst.

Tilehurst Roads – Time to Spend Some Money

Over the last couple of months I have reported the poor state of some of our roads in Tilehurst, highlighting Park Lane, Armour Road and Tilehurst Road opposite Prospect Park. All have been badly affected by the severe weather of the last two winters. I did notice some patching along Tilehurst Road and Park Lane but nothing like enough to return those road surfaces to anything like normal.

Reading has very recently been given another £400,000 to spend on road repairs by the government in recognition of the problems caused by severe weather. I will be pushing to see some of this spent in Tilehurst.

Incidentally, the road surface on Mayfair is aslo broken up but only the shallow top asphalt layer, and not enough so council officers tell me, to warrent a major re-surfacing.

Reading’s Red/Green Mix

Well the Greens have now thrown in their lot with the Labour Party in Reading and although they have stopped short of a full coalition, they have now said that they will allow Labour to form a minority administration and run the council. In order to do this they will have to sit on their hands and abstain at Wednesday’s council meeting when the mayor is elected. With Labour on 22 councillors and the Lib Dems and Tories also mustering 22 councillors, the new mayor will be elected on the casting vote of the outgoing mayor, Labour’s Gul Khan, who will break convention and instead of voting in Tory Jenny Rynn (this year’s Deputy Mayor) will vote for a Labour nominee.

From that moment the council will be run by Labour who will continue to use the casting vote of their mayor whilst the Greens sit on their hands and abstain.

The Greens are about to find out that you do not have to vote with Labour in order to support them and that whatever the new council does from now on it will do with the tacit support of the Greens. I confidently expect the new administration to make very little impression on the £200m the council owes and that they will fail to meet the current budget which needs to find £19m of savings this current year in order to meet government targets.

It will be interesting to see if the Greens manage to gain any advantage for Park Ward residents out of their deal with Labour and if so what does that mean for Labour’s Cllr John Hartley, the last Labour councillor left in Park Ward.

For the Lib Dems it will be back to opposition on the council and campaigning on the streets again.

Green Quandary

Last weeks local election results in Reading left the parties in the following state:
Labour 22 seats
Tories 16 seats
Lib Dems 6 seats
Greens 2 seats

No party has an overall majority and the Greens have been left with a choice of propping up a Labour administration or joining a broad coalition with the Tories and Lib Dems.
They have been put in a very uncomfortable place as propping up a Labour administration will tie them into all the decisions that Labour make and there will need to be some tough ones if Reading is to keep within its budgets.

On the other hand the Lib Dem/Tory coalition that prised control of the council away from Labour last May after 23 years has already made many of the tough budget decisions (and also opened up some of Labour’s darker secrets like funding Labour (union) activists from tax-payers money) and has developed a reputation for competance that Labour has lacked over the last few years.

Returning Labour to power will not serve the Greens or the people of Reading who overwhelmingly still vote against Labour rather than for it. It is only our peculiar First Past the Post electoral system that kept them in power for so long.

Joining a coalition and taking part in Cabinet discussions and decisions means that the Greens could look to influence things rather than react to other peoples decisions. Of course this will tie them in to a coalition with other parties but one which actually has majority support from the popular vote cast in Reading.

Sadly Labour have no ideas when it comes to sharing power with anybody else. Their politics are still very tribal and they will only use the Greens to further Labour aims (which equate to hanging on to power as there is no ideology left in the Labour party) rather than work with them.

Getting elected may not have been easy for the Green councillors, but making key decisions over who to support in the council chamber may well prove to be very much harder.