An older post included for its relevance to current schemes being considered for filtering options e.g. Tavistock Place / Judd Street / Lansdowne. SE)
The Ranty Highwayman)
BUT IT’S GOING TO COST A FORTUNE!
SATURDAY, 15 JUNE 2013
A TECHNICAL QUESTION IN THE OFFICE QUITE OFTEN TURNS INTO A WIDER DISCUSSION, DEBATE OR INDEED A RANT. WHAT STARTED AS A QUESTION ABOUT HOW TO BUILD A SMALL ACCESS TO A SITE ENDED IN ROW OVER SPENDING MONEY CIVILISING NEIGHBOURHOODS WHERE THE DRIVER BECOMES THE VISITOR.
Many people are aware that the roads system in the UK is pretty much set up these days to service motor vehicles. Many people are happy that the roads system is geared towards vehicles and feel that motoring-related tax should be hypothecated to spending on roads (I am not going anywhere that one). But there are many people who are fed up with car-dominated neighbourhoods and realise that something needs to change and this is where the debate headed. I am not anti-car, they are a great tool, but I want to see things reworked to put walking, cycling and indeed public transport on a more equitable footing.
The question developed into a debate about my suggestion that we didn’t need to build a site access like a road junction, it could be a simple dropped kerb to send a message to drivers that they were crossing the pedestrian’s domain.
I went on to show some colleagues images on Google Streetview of how other countries had taken the simple concept much further and applied it to junctions serving much larger areas.
It doesn’t take long to find what I mean on the outskirts of Amsterdam where the footway and indeed cycle track continues with priority and those driving into and out of an access serving a residential area are expected to give way to them.