Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Newbury News _ Will this sort out our traffic?
Posted by: Bofem Jan 7 2011, 05:26 PM
I think most of us are aware that WBC wants to ban buses in Northbrook Street, scrap the taxi rank in the Market Place, and sundry other bits and bobs to address town centre traffic issues.
This is to be http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=5172
They seemed to have missed me off their http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=5173, but did ask some 'interest groups' and here's what they said, with the WBC response on the right.
What do you all think?
Posted by: Iommi Jan 7 2011, 05:41 PM
Higher taxi fares when leaving the rank.
Posted by: Cognosco Jan 7 2011, 06:07 PM
This is to be http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=5172
They seemed to have missed me off their http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=5173, but did ask some 'interest groups' and here's what they said, with the WBC response on the right.
What do you all think?
More experimental tinkering? Only way to solve main problem is new bridge and road over the river Kennet somewhere. Especially with all new housing being planned. Any suggestions?
Posted by: user23 Jan 7 2011, 06:20 PM
They built another bridge over the Kennet ten plus years ago.
The only cost effective way to reduce traffic is for people to use their cars less. There's two main methods to achieve this:
1) The local government to do it and introduce a congestion scheme. This is something no politician will dream of suggesting just before an election.
2) People to use public transport more, something most won't do because however much they moan about being stuck in a traffic jam partly of their creation they prefer it to standing at a bus stop.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 7 2011, 06:27 PM
The only cost effective way to reduce traffic is for people to use their cars less. There's two main methods to achieve this:
1) The local government to do it and introduce a congestion scheme. This is something no politician will dream of suggesting just before an election.
2) People to use public transport more, something most won't do because however much they moan about being stuck in a traffic jam partly of their creation they prefer it to standing at a bus stop.
There's a third: use the Internet, supermarkets and retail parks as much as you can.
And a fourth: if you live within a mile of the town, walk you lazy feckers!
A fifth: spend more time in pubs than shopping.
Posted by: gardeb Jan 7 2011, 07:28 PM
I hope buses are banned from Northbrook Street as soon as possible together with all traffic, including cyclists to make the whole area much safer. At the moment it looks fully pedestrianised but just as you start to think like that a bus bears down.
Discouraging motorists from Newbury will probably add to the speed of its demise since from rural areas there is no sensible ammount of public transport. Despite what the greens may think we do enjoy using our cars even though the government and council see the motorist as a cash cow.
Posted by: Darren Jan 7 2011, 07:41 PM
Ban buses for the town centre.
Make those lazy pensioners walk further to get their tins of cat food. The exercise will do them good!! 
Posted by: Bofem Jan 7 2011, 08:38 PM
I was thinking this the other day while stuck in traffic on A4 between Newbury and Thatcham. Mostly, it's two lanes all the way, so WBC want to turn that into a bus lane. There are 7 buses an hour between the two towns.
Persuading people to dump the car, walk to a bus stop, wait in the rain, sit next to some ropey strangers, then walk to work/shops/whatever at other end needs a lot of persuasion....I can afford not to do it. But for how long?
Car-sharing would be much more achievable. Incentivised rather than penalised, people always respond better. So instead of a bus lane, it could be a multiple occupancy lane, like they have in Holland.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 7 2011, 09:15 PM
Thatcham to Newbury? Push-bike.
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 8 2011, 09:41 AM
I know I've said it before but this really grates on me.................
We were told ten or more years ago that the by-pass would "sort out our traffic".
Posted by: GMR Jan 8 2011, 11:08 AM
This is to be http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=5172
They seemed to have missed me off their http://decisionmaking.westberks.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=5173, but did ask some 'interest groups' and here's what they said, with the WBC response on the right.
What do you all think?
So long as cyclists are still allowed to ride through Northbrook street then I'll go along with the ban on buses etc. We've got to get our priorities right
Posted by: GMR Jan 8 2011, 11:08 AM
I do.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 8 2011, 11:20 AM
But that would be to assume the by-pass was built for Newbury. As we should know, it wasn't.
Think what it would be like if the by-pass wasn't built! At the end of the day, Newbury's traffic is nothing like as bad as it used to be.
Posted by: Cognosco Jan 8 2011, 11:22 AM
To include a trailer for the weekly shopping? Somewhere to park the Push-Bike and Trailer? Extra seating for the baby and toddler? No chance stick to the Chelsea tractor!
Posted by: Iommi Jan 8 2011, 11:25 AM
Er, it would be cheaper to have no car and get a taxi once a week, or use the car out-side of rush hour. All other times, push-bike.
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 8 2011, 11:43 AM
Agreed - but that's what we were told.
The moral being - you cant build your way out of this problem - other solutions have to be found.
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 8 2011, 11:59 AM
Thatcham to Newbury - Seven buses an hour according to a post on this thread. Why not use the bus?
Posted by: Chesapeake Jan 8 2011, 12:23 PM
Discouraging motorists from Newbury will probably add to the speed of its demise since from rural areas there is no sensible ammount of public transport. Despite what the greens may think we do enjoy using our cars even though the government and council see the motorist as a cash cow.
I agree, I also think that buses should be baned from Northbrook Street. As a mother of 2 children it is a nightmare. It looks like it's pedestrian only even to a small child as people are walking all over the area all the time and to a child this means there is no traffic and then a BL**DY great big bus comes along! I am not an engineer but where I used to live in London the main shopping street was flly pedestrianised except for emergency access. At either end of the main street there were bus stop "areas" and car parks so this meant easy access. I think that Newbury could adopt the same with a few alterations.
I also think that the bridge across the canal by Camps should be either widened to take two way traffic (if they could keep it's rather pleasing aesthetics) or an additional (twin) bridge built to keep the flow of traffic moving. I'm not an architect but I am sure this could be possible.
Posted by: Chesapeake Jan 8 2011, 12:28 PM
Sorry for the second post but I also think that by making Northbrook Street pedestrian only and placing additional car parking and bus stops at either end it would increase the footfall for businesses in the town centre and the market place.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 8 2011, 12:45 PM
Great! Get rid of the buses and now we have bloody feral kids to contend with!
Posted by: betsy Jan 8 2011, 12:56 PM
Persuading people to dump the car, walk to a bus stop, wait in the rain, sit next to some ropey strangers, then walk to work/shops/whatever at other end needs a lot of persuasion....I can afford not to do it. But for how long?
Car-sharing would be much more achievable. Incentivised rather than penalised, people always respond better. So instead of a bus lane, it could be a multiple occupancy lane, like they have in Holland.
Love to know where you get 7 buses an hour between Newbury and Thatcham? Most I can find is 4 and of these only 1 goes around the area I live in.
Posted by: GMR Jan 8 2011, 01:54 PM
How about we keep the buses and get rid of the 'feral kids'?
Posted by: user23 Jan 8 2011, 03:16 PM
We were told ten or more years ago that the by-pass would "sort out our traffic".
The more roads you build the more people will use their cars. That's just how it works.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 8 2011, 03:24 PM
Yet more people than ever before use trains! Prices are going up there as well.
Posted by: Chesapeake Jan 8 2011, 04:01 PM
Are you suggesting that my children are "feral"????
Posted by: On the edge Jan 8 2011, 07:16 PM
Its not more car use its more cars. Always amazes me that no one, least of all those responsible for the infrastructure have actually noticed that Newbury and its environs have experienced massive growth since the by pass was opened. This should have been anticipated, planned for and delivered - after all its no massive surprise - we spend thousands creating 'local developmentr plans'. However,for the past 20 years our local Council has been stuck in a time warp - assuming Newbury is just a quaint old market town. All those new houses mean all those new cars...
Posted by: user23 Jan 8 2011, 07:19 PM
Posted by: Turin Machine Jan 8 2011, 07:39 PM
yeah sure, I thought the idea of a towncentre was that people could go there to buy things, not much use if you have to carry everything home is it.. Its alright for those people who are young fit and only interested in going to mackie D's but what about the elderly, infirm and disadvantaged, what are they supposed to do ? or don't they matter anymore ?
Sure lets have a nice pretty town centre full of feral kids and beggers but no shops ! What is this great desire for pedestrianisation for gods sake. O, and if you can't see or hear a dirty great red bus trundling down the road I suggest you stop listening to your ipod and start paying attention. Selfish buggers !
Posted by: On the edge Jan 8 2011, 08:00 PM
That's a pretty good summary. We had no choice about the development - Councillors pandering to the local Ned Ludd tendancy hasn't helped!
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 8 2011, 08:26 PM
The more roads you build the more people will use their cars. That's just how it works.
Exactly!
Posted by: On the edge Jan 8 2011, 09:36 PM
Errr no. Its more people, if we hadn't had to build all those new houses, traffic levels would have reduced when the bypass opened and stayed reduced. The A34 itself had a traffic increase, occassioned by releasing the pent up demand for Southampton docks access to the North. The only time a road generated traffic was the M1 - when it opened, it became a tourist attraction for a short time. Do you honestly know anyone locally who has increased the number of car trips they make simply because the by pass has opened? I do know several people who have recently moved here bringing their cars with them. I also know a couple who now use a car because the local bus service has reduced its already poor service. The self generation of traffic story is an urban myth,
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 8 2011, 11:30 PM
Nope, if you create the space then it will be filled.
Like the M25 - now a traffic jam most of the day but where was all the traffic before it was built?
Posted by: On the edge Jan 9 2011, 08:23 AM
Like the M25 - now a traffic jam most of the day but where was all the traffic before it was built?
Stationary round the then North and South 'circulars' and in railway waggons. The traffic was always there. Just that the planners 'understated' the volume for political reasons. The engineers knew it was too small even before the first sod was cut. One can understand the reasons for this - can you imagine what the nay sayers would have done if they'd planned for reality - an 8 lane motorway?
By way of example - if we had a proper transport link with Basingstoke, the traffic on the existing cart track would increase significantly as people took up the opportunities the proper link would provide. Like jobs but hey who wants them!
Posted by: dannyboy Jan 9 2011, 12:29 PM
bollocks
Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 9 2011, 01:27 PM
Not necessarily complete rubbish:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1344361/Six-cruise-ships-docked-port-Southampton-time-50-years.html?ito=feeds-newsxml
and
http://www.dpworldsouthampton.com/aboutus/terminalHistory.htm
Doubtless these two facilities have some impact on the A34 traffic patterns.
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 9 2011, 01:29 PM
I agree, the new A34 will have seen increased useage due to the fact it is a superb link between the midlands / north and the south coast.
Posted by: On the edge Jan 9 2011, 01:36 PM
[quote name='dannyboy' date='Jan 9 2011, 12:29 PM' post='3
bollocks
[/quote]
What an intelligent well considered response - get out much these days?
Posted by: Cognosco Jan 9 2011, 01:53 PM
Not a politician then Danny? Man of few words - but at least straight to the point - no ambiguity with that then!
Posted by: GMR Jan 9 2011, 01:55 PM
Is this a medical problem of yours then? Or are you actually complaining or boasting?
Posted by: dannyboy Jan 9 2011, 02:29 PM
The A34 always was the N-S link between Southampton & Portsmouth and the north of the UK. The Newbury by pass is simply a missing link. The road was & is part of a pan-european road network, the A34 being part of the link from Scotland to Portugal. The building of the Newbury By Pass simply shaved 30 mins off a truckers journey to the docks. Oh, and was hijacked for political ends.
Posted by: dannyboy Jan 9 2011, 02:31 PM
Not a politician, or a wanna be either. If I was I'd be unable to give a direct answer to a question.
Posted by: betsy Jan 9 2011, 06:01 PM
Make those lazy pensioners walk further to get their tins of cat food. The exercise will do them good!!
Just a point Darren! I am a pensioner and proud of it. I am not and never have been lazy. Paid all my taxes, worked and brought up two kids so don't lump us all together. I may be a bit slower now due to illhealth etc. but I need the buses and incidentally- I don't have a cat!!
Posted by: Darren Jan 10 2011, 07:31 AM
Just a point. The
icon indicate it was not a serious comment. 
Posted by: Darren Jan 10 2011, 07:44 AM
On a good day. Sunday evenings that would be 2 hours or more. It was often quicker for traffic to go M40, A404(M), M4, M25, M3, M275 than to sit in the queues.
Posted by: dannyboy Jan 10 2011, 10:51 AM
which is why Sunday evening is such a popular trucking day!
Posted by: On the edge Jan 10 2011, 02:54 PM
To a transport logistics manager half an hour is big money and so the pent up demand. The 'by pass' itself didn't generate traffic - lets send a few lorries out simply because the A34 is now running.
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 10 2011, 03:47 PM
Yes it did - just like every road building scheme.
Otherwise why are we now bleating on about Newbury's traffic? (Which by the way seems to me to be no worse, and in some cases better, than most other medium to large towns and cities.)
The by-pass created a gap and it was filled.
Anyway - we are 15 years too late to be having this debate except the lesson to be learnt that you cannot build your way out of this problem unless we tarmac over most of the country.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 10 2011, 04:13 PM
Otherwise why are we now bleating on about Newbury's traffic? (Which by the way seems to me to be no worse, and in some cases better, than most other medium to large towns and cities.)
The by-pass created a gap and it was filled.
Anyway - we are 15 years too late to be having this debate except the lesson to be learnt that you cannot build your way out of this problem unless we tarmac over most of the country.
I can assure you that the traffic queues these days are nothing like as bad as they used to be. As proof, just look at the size of the jams through town if the by-pass is closed for any length of time.
Through-traffic volume was growing, and the by-pass was built to cope with it. A need for a by-pass is and was a no-brainer.
The complaints about jams in Newbury have been the result of the works that have been going on lately.
Posted by: blackdog Jan 10 2011, 06:34 PM
Otherwise why are we now bleating on about Newbury's traffic? (Which by the way seems to me to be no worse, and in some cases better, than most other medium to large towns and cities.)
The by-pass created a gap and it was filled.
Anyway - we are 15 years too late to be having this debate except the lesson to be learnt that you cannot build your way out of this problem unless we tarmac over most of the country.
People bleat about the Newbury traffice because some people need to bleat. In reality the traffic in town is nothing like as bad as it was pre-bypass.
However, traffic levels are rising - because we have more houses, more businesses and more cars than we used to have. The bypass may be partly to blame because its building meant that the local roads were then able to cope with the development of more houses, offices and industrial units (though they may well have been built anyway).
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 10 2011, 08:38 PM
Then why this thread?
If traffic queues are not as bad as they were pre by-pass and the works that are causing any jams are only temporary, what is the problem?
Posted by: Iommi Jan 10 2011, 08:47 PM
Short memories.
Posted by: user23 Jan 10 2011, 09:17 PM
If traffic queues are not as bad as they were pre by-pass and the works that are causing any jams are only temporary, what is the problem?
Posted by: spartacus Jan 10 2011, 10:49 PM
The thread started as a comment on the traffic plans for the town centre area..... 'Thread drift' has taken us into commenting on the bypass, feral kids, the trans-continental road network and danny's gonads.....
The truly astounding thing about a thread discussing the traffic plan for the town centre though, is that in three pages of waffle nobody has mentioned the other 'B' word - Bollards...
The proposal to completely remove buses and taxis from the pedestrian zone should be strongly opposed by all posters on here.... With the bollards no longer pinging up and down like Jack-in-the-Boxes whenever taxis go through there will be no more instances of 'confused' or mentally incapable drivers banging into them at regular intervals... In one swift move it will scrub out 70% of the Newbury forum traffic!
One point I think needs clarification though is why the need to open up the 'Pedestrian Zone' to traffic from 5pm? Yeah, I know it'll relieve traffic flow on the A339 etc, but if maintaining a safe area for pedestrians is so important during the day and traffic is banned when when pedestrian movement is relatively low, why allow vehicles into the area when the numbers of pedestrians is at it's peak?
If traffic can operate safely in the busy, bustling hours of 8am-9.30pm and also now be deemed to be safe enough to use the area from 5pm when vehicle numbers will be high and office workers will be spilling out onto the streets then why have a Pedestrian Zone at all?
I'd argue that it's a luxury that Newbury cannot afford. With the removal of traffic from Parkway Bridge apart from buses and taxis then daytime traffic is confined to the SINGLE CROSSING over the Canal/River. A Pedestrian Zone may be aesthetically pleasing n all that, but it restricts Newbury traffic too much.... Other towns have them but other towns aren't split in half by rivers like Newbury
Still.... somebody must have thought transforming the Market Place into the Dead Zone throughout the week was a good idea at the time... Perhaps I'm missing the point.....?
Posted by: Iommi Jan 10 2011, 11:20 PM
Newbury high-street is usually dead at 5:00 pm.
Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 11 2011, 12:35 AM
West Berkshire Council has the Newbury Vision as a standing policy for developing the town area through to 2025. There are parameters that limit the scope of the works, including the development of a road infrastructure that accommodates The Vision without any major road building. In particular, without an additional river crossing. My feeling is the conflicting demands are very difficult to accommodate. I don't like the proposals, but unless the whole concept is amended then for the next 14 years these are the sort of tinkerings that will be presented.
Interesting article in the local paper for Slough recently - they have installed rising bollards in their High Street and the local Member was quite clear there would be no sympathy for tailgaters stuffing their cars into the posts......
Posted by: Iommi Jan 11 2011, 12:39 AM
Yes. While we don't have a 'west circular', we will be forever tinkering.
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 11 2011, 05:08 PM
The sub heading was "Will this sort out our traffic?"
I presume this meant Newbury.
Subsequent posts have stated that there is nothing to sort out with the by-pass and the end of road works.
Most towns are built on rivers and they have to be crossed.
It's the way they evolved by the need for water.
Admittedly, many have more crossings.
So we have built one crossing to the West and now we need another?
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 11 2011, 05:09 PM
And your proposed destructive route for this road?
(Sorry, made an assumption there.
Perhaps you can do it without destroying houses or countryside?)
Posted by: Iommi Jan 11 2011, 05:12 PM
(Sorry, made an assumption there.
Perhaps you can do it without destroying houses or countryside?)
When did I propose a route?
Posted by: Iommi Jan 11 2011, 05:19 PM
We don't need one, but it would help to make Newbury Town more pedestrian friendly without impacting on traffic flow across the town.
Posted by: blackdog Jan 11 2011, 05:32 PM
An eastern ring-road/bypass passing between Newbury and Thatcham would be of more use - diverting a lot of traffic out of the town.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 11 2011, 05:38 PM
I'm not sure how an east circular would help Newbury Town centre. We kind of have one already.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Jan 11 2011, 06:15 PM
I drive around Newbury quite a lot for work and very rarely find the traffic heavy, even at peak times.
I think the officer's comments on the use of Parkway were interesting - people prefer to sit in heavy parkway traffic rather than use the 339 which is almost always moving freely, an observation which I'd agree with. There appears to be something of a cultural thing here which I guess is historic which I don't understand as I've only lived 15 years.
I don't use the highstreet that much, but I would like it to be pedestrianised all the time for the reasons made in other posts. I think it would be a good idea to have the market square pedestrianised all the time too, though it is a dismal place most of the time, though that's partly due to the taxis.
The one bit of town where traffic is ridiculous is the Tesco roundabout and entrance to the trading estate, and I wonder if this is all part of the WBC plan to blight out-of-town shopping, because the whole thing appears to have been very badly planned if indeed it was planned at all.
Posted by: Strafin Jan 11 2011, 06:22 PM
I chance Park Way quite often. Sometimes it's clear and it saves crawling up the A339 at the start of the ruch hour jam. However get there too late and you can sit there for ages. It's a risk I'd say not a choice.
Posted by: user23 Jan 11 2011, 06:48 PM
I think the officer's comments on the use of Parkway were interesting - people prefer to sit in heavy parkway traffic rather than use the 339 which is almost always moving freely, an observation which I'd agree with. There appears to be something of a cultural thing here which I guess is historic which I don't understand as I've only lived 15 years.
I wonder why people still use the bridge day after day?
Posted by: Strafin Jan 11 2011, 07:27 PM
I've just explained why I do, I am guessing you have selective reading on again User?
Posted by: Iommi Jan 11 2011, 07:36 PM
I wonder why people still use the bridge day after day?
Perhaps there are parts of the road system you cannot see on your journey that might explain it. Like big queues at the Robin Hood East bound for instance.
Posted by: user23 Jan 11 2011, 07:38 PM
It's not hard to find a quick route of of town at that time of day.
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 11 2011, 08:11 PM
You didn't - that's why I'm asking.
You suggested we need a "West Circular" - you cannot have this without a route!!
Posted by: Iommi Jan 11 2011, 10:22 PM
You suggested we need a "West Circular" - you cannot have this without a route!!
I said the absence of one would mean that we will be constantly tinkering with the road system. I realise, of course, that this would now be very hard to achieve. I understand that plans were considered in the 70s, but the council didn't go through with it.
Posted by: Strafin Jan 12 2011, 06:48 AM
Same old story with the bridge at Thatcham Station, an opportunity to have one built was dismissed at the time as unecessary, now we're told building one would be impossible.
Posted by: Biker1 Jan 12 2011, 05:57 PM
Almost nothing, these days, is impossible in the civil engineering world.
Just http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-12102741 at the massive railway bridge they have just wheeled into place over the Caversham Road in Reading.
I think you'll find that the holding factor here is, as usual, money and who will need to cough it up in order to bring about this bridge.
Network Rail and the Council being the two biggest players.
Here I go again but if the by-pass had been built to the East this would not be a problem.
Posted by: blackdog Jan 12 2011, 06:40 PM
The A339 can only be regarded as a central route these days as it will be the only in-town route (10-5) in a few month's time
An eastern route would enable traffic to and from Thatcham, Hambridge Road/Lane and the Racecourse to get north to the M4 or south to Basingstoke/Tot Hill without passing through the Newbury bottlenecks (A4/Hambridge Rd, A339 roundabouts).
A western route is already in place (the A34), though the addition of an interchange on the Enborne Road might do some good.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 12 2011, 07:34 PM
Yes, good point, and something I have considered as well.
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 12 2011, 08:01 PM
An eastern route would enable traffic to and from Thatcham, Hambridge Road/Lane and the Racecourse to get north to the M4 or south to Basingstoke/Tot Hill without passing through the Newbury bottlenecks (A4/Hambridge Rd, A339 roundabouts).
A western route is already in place (the A34), though the addition of an interchange on the Enborne Road might do some good.
I agree that the interchange at Enborne Road is a good idea. But can the road into town handle the increased traffic?
Posted by: blackdog Jan 13 2011, 06:06 PM
Residents wouldn't like it but most of the road is pretty good or could easily be made so - the junction with Newtown Road/Bartholomew Street would be the biggest problem. I wouldn't have thought it would make a huge difference though - not like an eastern ring road. But it would be a lot lot cheaper.
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 13 2011, 09:29 PM
I guess the reason people wouldn't be too happy is that the amount of traffic would be hugely increased. Never rule it out, would be interesting to see how it could work.
Posted by: Paul Thompson Jan 14 2011, 01:45 PM
Banning private vehicles from park Way is crazy because once again we are left with only the A339 for cars to cross town and this is normally packed during the rush hour and now will be overly busy all day.
All it will take is a minor bump and chaos will ensue.
WBC should either continue to allow private cars across the Park way bridge or provide an alternative. Locals should not have to use the by-pass to cross town and go miles out of their way through Wash Common and Speen.
Posted by: dannyboy Jan 14 2011, 01:59 PM
All it will take is a minor bump and chaos will ensue.
WBC should either continue to allow private cars across the Park way bridge or provide an alternative. Locals should not have to use the by-pass to cross town and go miles out of their way through Wash Common and Speen.
During rush hour you can drive down Northbrook St.
Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 14 2011, 03:26 PM
All it will take is a minor bump and chaos will ensue.
WBC should either continue to allow private cars across the Park way bridge or provide an alternative. Locals should not have to use the by-pass to cross town and go miles out of their way through Wash Common and Speen.
The A339 is not the By-Pass........ Or have I misunderstood?
(It happens)
Posted by: Darren Jan 14 2011, 04:16 PM
http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=15629
So the buses are out, but security vans and Royal Mail can stay. Will another set of bollards be placed in the Northern entrance to Northbrook St to stop vehicles just driving round?
Posted by: Bofem Jan 14 2011, 10:04 PM
Good point. It's always worth checking what WBC do in the name of the "Vision" with http://www.westberks.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=3388&p=0.
How many things can you spot where we got the opposite of what we wanted?
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 15 2011, 08:30 AM
I await to see the impact of this.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 15 2011, 08:52 AM
What do you mean, this happens now!
Posted by: Iommi Jan 15 2011, 08:53 AM
What do you mean; this happens now?
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 15 2011, 09:04 AM
What do you mean; this happens now?
What I meant was, I wait to see what impact it has on Norhbrook Street. I would have kept the pedestrian zone until 6pm, and I did make that point at the NRA meeting this week.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 15 2011, 09:06 AM
Why 'till 6? That seems, if you would excuse me, daft?
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 15 2011, 09:22 AM
The shops open to 5:30 or 6pm. If the street suddenly fills with traffic, would you shop there? Let's hope I'm wrong, and that we don't see too much of a difference, but that is my concern. I can't see the harm of taxi's parking in the Market Square after 6pm either.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 15 2011, 09:28 AM
Well rush hour starts to build up at around 4:30pm, yet in my experience, Northbrook Street is 'dead' at that time. Personally, whether traffic exists in Northbrook Street or not doesn't make any difference on my decision where to shop. Maybe I'm being chauvinistic, but I wouldn't expect to see 'housewives/husbands' with young kids in the highstreet at 5:00pm either. I really doubt pedestrianisation has made any real difference on the consumers choice to shop in town or not.
Taxies will want to wait in the busiest places in town. Historically, the north end of town is a graveyard and an unpopular place for taxies to wait.
Posted by: user23 Jan 15 2011, 09:33 AM
Taxies will want be where the crowds are.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 15 2011, 09:57 AM
Not when I've been down there it ain't, certainly 'busy' is an exaggeration in any case. You have to get the WH Smith before 5:25 for instance.
Posted by: user23 Jan 15 2011, 10:23 AM
Posted by: Strafin Jan 15 2011, 11:14 AM
I walk up from the Clock Tower to about the Millets mark at about 17:30 - 18:00 and it's always very quiet.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 15 2011, 11:27 AM
You must walk slow, or are you a man of the road?
BTW - 'dead' should read: not busy, or quiet; as it certainly is, even on a Saturday.
Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 15 2011, 11:43 AM
Picture this - 'Heathcliffe' User and 'Cathy' Strafin meeting in the middle..................
Posted by: Darren Jan 15 2011, 05:46 PM
I find it strange that vehicles serving a vital public service like buses are banned, along with the multitude of private delivery companies. Royal Mail and private security vehicles are allow in. Hardly fair.
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 15 2011, 06:44 PM
The real test will be how the junction at the new hotel copes, and what effect is felt by the Robin Hood.
Posted by: Iommi Jan 15 2011, 09:33 PM
Yet you would rather there was no relief (via Northbrook St) at rush hour?
Posted by: Richard Garvie Jan 15 2011, 10:57 PM
Well, I'm just concerned about the effect it will have. Hopefully I'm wrong!!!
Posted by: dannyboy Jan 16 2011, 05:37 PM
Wait to see?
You can see it now - just pop along to Northbrook Street at 8:45am.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)