Hazard warning over shared crossing plan

Hazard warning over shared crossing plan

Hazard warning over shared crossing plan

First published in News by

PLANS for a new shared space crossing at Ridgeway Farm mimicking the one in place at Regent Circus should be reconsidered according to residents.

The new pedestrain crossing at the Ridgeway Farm village centre would be located next to the new primary school and is expected to see more than 2,000 vehicles passing through during rush hour when completed.

Safety concerns have already been raised during the construction of the raised island pedestrian crossing at Regent Circus, with no obvious right of way or traffic calming measures.

Kevin Fisher, chairman of the Shaw Residents’ Association, said the Ridgeway Farm crossing would be just as hazardous to people in the area.

“The Shaw Resident’s Association wishes to restate its objection to the shared space proposal at the Ridgeway Farm village centre,” he said.

“We are of the opinion that, when applied to junctions with the predicted volumes of traffic expected for this location, the concept and therefore the design is flawed.

“2013 actual traffic volumes suggests this junction will experience 900 vehicles during the morning peak hour, and over 1,200 vehicles during the evening peak hour. It is also reasonable to conclude that, as the Swindon and Wiltshire urban sprawl advances over the coming decades, traffic volumes negotiating this junction will significantly increase.

“As has been demonstrated at Swindon’s Regent Circus shared space, pedestrians will come out second best in terms of priority where right of way is not dictated as with a normal pedestrian crossing, and vehicle numbers are large.

“We believe the merging of so much traffic and pedestrians in a location right next to a primary school is a recipe for traffic chaos or worse. We also believe that, over time, drivers will choose to avoid this junction opting instead to use other, already oversubscribed, rat run routes through Washpool and West Swindon.

“For the above reasons and, because any future redesigns will have to be funded by the public purse, we urge the council to reconsider the ‘shared space’ concept before it is implemented.”

Taylor Wimpey said the design adheres to the vision for the scheme from Wiltshire Council.

A spokesman said: “The shared space proposal for the Ridgeway Farm village centre is a design which we incorporated into our masterplan to adhere to Wiltshire County Coun-cil’s vision for this space.

“The highways layout was designed via a local plan.”

rigorous traffic assessments were carried out to inform the plans.”

Comments (11)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:36am Thu 31 Jul 14

nobody says...

It seems planners do not learn from past mistakes.
It seems planners do not learn from past mistakes. nobody
  • Score: 4

8:49am Thu 31 Jul 14

Richard Symonds says...

I wonder what the authorities will say if a child is knocked down on this excuse for a crossing. It happened in Moredon with tragic consequences.

As the previous commentator noted do they ever learn?
I wonder what the authorities will say if a child is knocked down on this excuse for a crossing. It happened in Moredon with tragic consequences. As the previous commentator noted do they ever learn? Richard Symonds
  • Score: 5

8:51am Thu 31 Jul 14

Richard Symonds says...

Mind you if the Wiltshire planners actually did actually care they would not rip up a perfectly good road to direct all the traffic through the centre of a Housing Estate!! What idiot took that decision?
Mind you if the Wiltshire planners actually did actually care they would not rip up a perfectly good road to direct all the traffic through the centre of a Housing Estate!! What idiot took that decision? Richard Symonds
  • Score: 4

9:39am Thu 31 Jul 14

Wildwestener says...

Richard Symonds wrote:
Mind you if the Wiltshire planners actually did actually care they would not rip up a perfectly good road to direct all the traffic through the centre of a Housing Estate!! What idiot took that decision?
Eric Pickles let the whole, misplaced and ill-conceived plan go ahead so blame him and his property developing cronies over-riding all elements of democracy. Remember, WCC, SBC, all local MPs and residents all around it say the plan is unsustainable generally. Complete joke the whole thing.
These crossings are a nightmare for pedestrians and car drivers alike. Would be funny if it wasn't blindingly obvious that some poor kid will be killed or badly injured there some day.
[quote][p][bold]Richard Symonds[/bold] wrote: Mind you if the Wiltshire planners actually did actually care they would not rip up a perfectly good road to direct all the traffic through the centre of a Housing Estate!! What idiot took that decision?[/p][/quote]Eric Pickles let the whole, misplaced and ill-conceived plan go ahead so blame him and his property developing cronies over-riding all elements of democracy. Remember, WCC, SBC, all local MPs and residents all around it say the plan is unsustainable generally. Complete joke the whole thing. These crossings are a nightmare for pedestrians and car drivers alike. Would be funny if it wasn't blindingly obvious that some poor kid will be killed or badly injured there some day. Wildwestener
  • Score: 4

10:29am Thu 31 Jul 14

Robh says...

Is it still illegal to run people over with a motor vehicle? You'd think it was with the attitude of some drivers.

If you see a person in the road in front of you, you can't just run them down. We have the same problem at the Northern Orbital where buses charge over the pedestrian area without regard for people.
Is it still illegal to run people over with a motor vehicle? You'd think it was with the attitude of some drivers. If you see a person in the road in front of you, you can't just run them down. We have the same problem at the Northern Orbital where buses charge over the pedestrian area without regard for people. Robh
  • Score: 1

12:39pm Thu 31 Jul 14

PJC says...

I've had no problems with the Regent's Circus one. As a pedestrian. If you have a modicum of road sense, you will realise that some highway users won't follow the rules, whether pedestrians, cyclists or motorists, so just be aware and don't have your headphones on, or stare into your phone while crossing the road. And don't assume the traffic will stop!
I've had no problems with the Regent's Circus one. As a pedestrian. If you have a modicum of road sense, you will realise that some highway users won't follow the rules, whether pedestrians, cyclists or motorists, so just be aware and don't have your headphones on, or stare into your phone while crossing the road. And don't assume the traffic will stop! PJC
  • Score: 0

1:09pm Thu 31 Jul 14

maikeru83 says...

I'm struggling to find in the Highway Code any mention of these shared spaces. As far as I can gauge by the Highway Code, pedestrians do not have right of way and should only cross when it is safe to do so. As these raised pavements are not officially recognised crossings, they have no legal standing with regards to road law. Drivers are NOT obliged to stop and let pedestrians cross.
I'm struggling to find in the Highway Code any mention of these shared spaces. As far as I can gauge by the Highway Code, pedestrians do not have right of way and should only cross when it is safe to do so. As these raised pavements are not officially recognised crossings, they have no legal standing with regards to road law. Drivers are NOT obliged to stop and let pedestrians cross. maikeru83
  • Score: 4

7:11pm Thu 31 Jul 14

Cooking_by_smoke_alarm says...

maikeru83 says...

I'm struggling to find in the Highway Code any mention of these shared spaces. As far as I can gauge by the Highway Code, pedestrians do not have right of way and should only cross when it is safe to do so. As these raised pavements are not officially recognised crossings, they have no legal standing with regards to road law. Drivers are NOT obliged to stop and let pedestrians cross.


Pedestrian wanting to cross, give way. Pedestrians (like motorists) are want to do stupid things; be absent minded, have the misfortune of being partially sighted/blind or deaf, why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

20 mph sign on the approach to junction......should be 10 mph then pedestrians may not feel so intimidated.
Slow down. If in doubt, give way.
I believe any and all of the shared areas around town should be 10 mph.

If it was your child or elderly parent/grandparent you'd want traffic to give them priority and to be able to cross safely, not so?...if in doubt, give way. Why does the car always have to be king?

Why this rigid adherence to what the highway code says; Rules yes, but do not follow them if you think that because it stated thus in the highway code one has impunity to do whatever. I am sure it states somewhere about not being a danger to others (including pedestrians).

Just common sense to be wary of others and drive defensively.

Feeding down to The MECA, both roads merge. Previously it was a priority for the Vic Hill direction. Drivers do not look at the road markings or lack of them, but assume that the previous priority still exists now. It does not. A filter system exists now, with the 1st on the junction having priority where the two roads merge.
maikeru83 says... I'm struggling to find in the Highway Code any mention of these shared spaces. As far as I can gauge by the Highway Code, pedestrians do not have right of way and should only cross when it is safe to do so. As these raised pavements are not officially recognised crossings, they have no legal standing with regards to road law. Drivers are NOT obliged to stop and let pedestrians cross. Pedestrian wanting to cross, give way. Pedestrians (like motorists) are want to do stupid things; be absent minded, have the misfortune of being partially sighted/blind or deaf, why not give them the benefit of the doubt? 20 mph sign on the approach to junction......should be 10 mph then pedestrians may not feel so intimidated. Slow down. If in doubt, give way. I believe any and all of the shared areas around town should be 10 mph. If it was your child or elderly parent/grandparent you'd want traffic to give them priority and to be able to cross safely, not so?...if in doubt, give way. Why does the car always have to be king? Why this rigid adherence to what the highway code says; Rules yes, but do not follow them if you think that because it stated thus in the highway code one has impunity to do whatever. I am sure it states somewhere about not being a danger to others (including pedestrians). Just common sense to be wary of others and drive defensively. Feeding down to The MECA, both roads merge. Previously it was a priority for the Vic Hill direction. Drivers do not look at the road markings or lack of them, but assume that the previous priority still exists now. It does not. A filter system exists now, with the 1st on the junction having priority where the two roads merge. Cooking_by_smoke_alarm
  • Score: 0

2:35pm Fri 1 Aug 14

GrumpyLocal says...

Robh wrote:
Is it still illegal to run people over with a motor vehicle? You'd think it was with the attitude of some drivers.

If you see a person in the road in front of you, you can't just run them down. We have the same problem at the Northern Orbital where buses charge over the pedestrian area without regard for people.
........& people walk out in to the road area without concern for the buses.
[quote][p][bold]Robh[/bold] wrote: Is it still illegal to run people over with a motor vehicle? You'd think it was with the attitude of some drivers. If you see a person in the road in front of you, you can't just run them down. We have the same problem at the Northern Orbital where buses charge over the pedestrian area without regard for people.[/p][/quote]........& people walk out in to the road area without concern for the buses. GrumpyLocal
  • Score: 0

2:46pm Fri 1 Aug 14

GrumpyLocal says...

Cooking_by_smoke_ala
rm
wrote:
maikeru83 says...

I'm struggling to find in the Highway Code any mention of these shared spaces. As far as I can gauge by the Highway Code, pedestrians do not have right of way and should only cross when it is safe to do so. As these raised pavements are not officially recognised crossings, they have no legal standing with regards to road law. Drivers are NOT obliged to stop and let pedestrians cross.


Pedestrian wanting to cross, give way. Pedestrians (like motorists) are want to do stupid things; be absent minded, have the misfortune of being partially sighted/blind or deaf, why not give them the benefit of the doubt?

20 mph sign on the approach to junction......should be 10 mph then pedestrians may not feel so intimidated.
Slow down. If in doubt, give way.
I believe any and all of the shared areas around town should be 10 mph.

If it was your child or elderly parent/grandparent you'd want traffic to give them priority and to be able to cross safely, not so?...if in doubt, give way. Why does the car always have to be king?

Why this rigid adherence to what the highway code says; Rules yes, but do not follow them if you think that because it stated thus in the highway code one has impunity to do whatever. I am sure it states somewhere about not being a danger to others (including pedestrians).

Just common sense to be wary of others and drive defensively.

Feeding down to The MECA, both roads merge. Previously it was a priority for the Vic Hill direction. Drivers do not look at the road markings or lack of them, but assume that the previous priority still exists now. It does not. A filter system exists now, with the 1st on the junction having priority where the two roads merge.
So just for the sake of being cool & trendy, the council should slow the traffic down to 10mph through what is a very busy road junction, instead of leaving the perfectly good traffic light system and indisputable road markings in place that everyone understands and accepts as a sensible way to cross the road.
Please bear in mind that it is the pedestrians that are crossing the road, and not the cars/buses/trucks/va
ns crossing the pavement.
Yes the new development needs good access to/from the town centre and a reviewed crossing system could be implemented with larger areas for the public to cross the road, but this whole scheme is just terrible.
Nowhere are there any signs explaining what is happening, the lack of lane markings may be deliberate but currently, as it's still a building site, makes it look like they have just not got round to painting them yet so people assume the old priorities are still in place.
the 20mph sign is too low down and the wrong place for drivers focussed on the road & the now pedestrians to see.
The twins lanes at Vic Rd that used to feed to Princess St now have to condense in to one lane in the space of 50m without any warning & the cobbles are a hazard to cyclists.
It's absurd to suggest this type of scheme being used near a school as it will just contribute to accidents.
[quote][p][bold]Cooking_by_smoke_ala rm[/bold] wrote: maikeru83 says... I'm struggling to find in the Highway Code any mention of these shared spaces. As far as I can gauge by the Highway Code, pedestrians do not have right of way and should only cross when it is safe to do so. As these raised pavements are not officially recognised crossings, they have no legal standing with regards to road law. Drivers are NOT obliged to stop and let pedestrians cross. Pedestrian wanting to cross, give way. Pedestrians (like motorists) are want to do stupid things; be absent minded, have the misfortune of being partially sighted/blind or deaf, why not give them the benefit of the doubt? 20 mph sign on the approach to junction......should be 10 mph then pedestrians may not feel so intimidated. Slow down. If in doubt, give way. I believe any and all of the shared areas around town should be 10 mph. If it was your child or elderly parent/grandparent you'd want traffic to give them priority and to be able to cross safely, not so?...if in doubt, give way. Why does the car always have to be king? Why this rigid adherence to what the highway code says; Rules yes, but do not follow them if you think that because it stated thus in the highway code one has impunity to do whatever. I am sure it states somewhere about not being a danger to others (including pedestrians). Just common sense to be wary of others and drive defensively. Feeding down to The MECA, both roads merge. Previously it was a priority for the Vic Hill direction. Drivers do not look at the road markings or lack of them, but assume that the previous priority still exists now. It does not. A filter system exists now, with the 1st on the junction having priority where the two roads merge.[/p][/quote]So just for the sake of being cool & trendy, the council should slow the traffic down to 10mph through what is a very busy road junction, instead of leaving the perfectly good traffic light system and indisputable road markings in place that everyone understands and accepts as a sensible way to cross the road. Please bear in mind that it is the pedestrians that are crossing the road, and not the cars/buses/trucks/va ns crossing the pavement. Yes the new development needs good access to/from the town centre and a reviewed crossing system could be implemented with larger areas for the public to cross the road, but this whole scheme is just terrible. Nowhere are there any signs explaining what is happening, the lack of lane markings may be deliberate but currently, as it's still a building site, makes it look like they have just not got round to painting them yet so people assume the old priorities are still in place. the 20mph sign is too low down and the wrong place for drivers focussed on the road & the now pedestrians to see. The twins lanes at Vic Rd that used to feed to Princess St now have to condense in to one lane in the space of 50m without any warning & the cobbles are a hazard to cyclists. It's absurd to suggest this type of scheme being used near a school as it will just contribute to accidents. GrumpyLocal
  • Score: 1

1:07pm Tue 19 Aug 14

GrumpyLocal says...

........and so it begins!
http://www.swindonad
vertiser.co.uk/news/
11418111.Pedestrian_
hit_near_Regent_Circ
us/?ref=mr
........and so it begins! http://www.swindonad vertiser.co.uk/news/ 11418111.Pedestrian_ hit_near_Regent_Circ us/?ref=mr GrumpyLocal
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree