20mph pilot proposal for Blackburn's Witton park area

8:00am Sunday 24th February 2013 in Blackburn

ROADS boss Dave Harling has promised to look at creating a pilot 20 mph zone without humps or chicanes around Witton Park.

The move comes as a response to a petition from 115 residents in ten streets concerned about speeding cars.

Coun Harling, Blackburn with Darwen council’s executive member for highways, revealed that a long awaited report by officials on the effectiveness of imposing 20 mph speed limits without physical traffic calming measures would be presented to senior councillors next month.

The petition came from the Witton Park Residents Association.

It asked for the lower speed limit for Cartmel Road, Grange Road, Grant Road, Selous Road, Franklin Road, Markham Road, Nares Road, Vardon Road, Nansen Road, Speke Road and the adjacent back alleyways.

On Thursday, the request was considered for the second time by the council’s planning and highways committee.

After checking traffic flows and speeds on the relevant streets, officers recommended that the request for the new 20 mph limit be refused.

But Meadowhead ward councillor Carl Nuttall called on his colleagues to reject their advice.

He said: “We have been talking about introducing more 20 mph limits and the need for a pilot area to trial them.

“This would seem to be the ideal area and opportunity to run a pilot. I think we should refer this petition back to the highways department to look at this.”

He was backed by Sudell Liberal Democrat councillor Paul Browne and his Bastwell Labour colleague Shaukhat Hussain.

Committee chairman Jim Smith agreed and said: “Let’s refer this back to Dave Harling and his team to have another look at as a pilot scheme.”

Coun Harling said last night (FRI): “Certainly we will consider it. My concern would be whether this is too small an area.

“What we are talking about is a pilot for 20 mph zones without physical traffic calming measures such as road humps and chicanes as we have used previously.

“We will be producing the report we promised last year on this for the March meeting of the executive board.

“As a principle, we think 20 mph zones are effective, but the question is how effective they will be using only speed limit signs and not physical measures.

“We have to consider these things against the council’s tight financial position.”

Comments (14)

8:33am Sun 24 Feb 13

burner says...

No problems there. You simply would find it very difficult to REACH 20 mph on those short, narrow streets with so many parked cars and frequent junctions. . . . NOTE, it does NOT include the two main roads ( as the headline would like you initially to believe in order to seduce you into reading this DULL article ). . . "adjacent back alleyways " . . . have you SEEN them, they are barely 2 feet wider than a car . . . motorway speeds there, eh ? !!!!!!!
No problems there. You simply would find it very difficult to REACH 20 mph on those short, narrow streets with so many parked cars and frequent junctions. . . . NOTE, it does NOT include the two main roads ( as the headline would like you initially to believe in order to seduce you into reading this DULL article ). . . "adjacent back alleyways " . . . have you SEEN them, they are barely 2 feet wider than a car . . . motorway speeds there, eh ? !!!!!!! burner

9:52am Sun 24 Feb 13

lostforwords says...

What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.
What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all. lostforwords

10:00am Sun 24 Feb 13

happycyclist says...

lostforwords wrote:
What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.
Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.
[quote][p][bold]lostforwords[/bold] wrote: What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.[/p][/quote]Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate. happycyclist

11:01am Sun 24 Feb 13

buckoff says...

happycyclist wrote:
lostforwords wrote:
What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.
Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.
There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker.
[quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lostforwords[/bold] wrote: What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.[/p][/quote]Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.[/p][/quote]There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker. buckoff

12:14pm Sun 24 Feb 13

s_smith says...

buckoff wrote:
happycyclist wrote:
lostforwords wrote:
What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.
Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.
There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker.
Given that most browsers have a spell check function in them, I find that surprising. Poor grammar though is a sign of laziness and ill-education, not mental impairment.

But that is by the by for this particular discussion.

Why on earth does this area need a 20mph limit? The only people who will be in there will be residents, therefore why on earth should good money be spent on pacifying residents when there is no significant accident problem in that area? If you don't believe me, take a look on crashmap - two slight injury accidents in the last five years - the last one in 2010.

When the councils budgets are being stretched to breaking point by cuts, why do councillors insist on such money-wasting schemes which will have NO value for money for either the Borough at-large or indeed the residents of that area?
[quote][p][bold]buckoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lostforwords[/bold] wrote: What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.[/p][/quote]Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.[/p][/quote]There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker.[/p][/quote]Given that most browsers have a spell check function in them, I find that surprising. Poor grammar though is a sign of laziness and ill-education, not mental impairment. But that is by the by for this particular discussion. Why on earth does this area need a 20mph limit? The only people who will be in there will be residents, therefore why on earth should good money be spent on pacifying residents when there is no significant accident problem in that area? If you don't believe me, take a look on crashmap - two slight injury accidents in the last five years - the last one in 2010. When the councils budgets are being stretched to breaking point by cuts, why do councillors insist on such money-wasting schemes which will have NO value for money for either the Borough at-large or indeed the residents of that area? s_smith

1:36pm Sun 24 Feb 13

woolywords says...

All things considered, this is a complete and utter waste of much needed funds. For some time now there has been a 20 mph speed limit in the Infirmary area of the town and to date, it has made little or no difference.
Some will recall that residents of Mosley Walk were provided with yellow jackets and a speed gun in an effort to reduce speeding motorist in their landscaped streets, this has proved to be a failure.
Or better yet, consider the efficacy of the matrix sign on Manxman Road, where drivers were deliberately racing to achieve a ridiculous speeds.
My advice would be to forget the idea until such times as when the Courts will penalise speeding drivers into submission.
Those of you with a love for such things and an Android phone, can download an App called Speed Gun from Play store. It's fairly accurate but cannot be used as evidence, yet.
All things considered, this is a complete and utter waste of much needed funds. For some time now there has been a 20 mph speed limit in the Infirmary area of the town and to date, it has made little or no difference. Some will recall that residents of Mosley Walk were provided with yellow jackets and a speed gun in an effort to reduce speeding motorist in their landscaped streets, this has proved to be a failure. Or better yet, consider the efficacy of the matrix sign on Manxman Road, where drivers were deliberately racing to achieve a ridiculous speeds. My advice would be to forget the idea until such times as when the Courts will penalise speeding drivers into submission. Those of you with a love for such things and an Android phone, can download an App called Speed Gun from Play store. It's fairly accurate but cannot be used as evidence, yet. woolywords

1:37pm Sun 24 Feb 13

burner says...

s_smith says, " Why on earth does this area need a 20mph limit? "
.
Dead right. There is no through route here to avoid the Buncer Lane lights - the system of no-entry streets solved that problem years ago.
.
This is a none issue .
.
& btw, this comments format does not allow spell-checker ( it's not on a Word program ) you have to rely on your own intelligence . . . and s_smith is correct there, too . . . . . as is happyc. Any point is better made if it is well-constructed, understandable and makes sense.
s_smith says, " Why on earth does this area need a 20mph limit? " . Dead right. There is no through route here to avoid the Buncer Lane lights - the system of no-entry streets solved that problem years ago. . This is a none issue . . & btw, this comments format does not allow spell-checker ( it's not on a Word program ) you have to rely on your own intelligence . . . and s_smith is correct there, too . . . . . as is happyc. Any point is better made if it is well-constructed, understandable and makes sense. burner

1:41pm Sun 24 Feb 13

woolywords says...

buckoff wrote:
happycyclist wrote:
lostforwords wrote:
What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.
Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.
There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker.
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer inwaht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas thought slpeling was ipmorant.
[quote][p][bold]buckoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lostforwords[/bold] wrote: What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.[/p][/quote]Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.[/p][/quote]There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker.[/p][/quote]Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer inwaht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? Yaeh and I awlyas thought slpeling was ipmorant. woolywords

2:35pm Sun 24 Feb 13

Dave_P says...

lol at the grammar police.. if you use firefox this works even in these sort of comment reply boxes "British English Dictionary 1.19.3"

as to the speeding issue, it has all been covered above.. but my guess is Mr Harling is trying to generate local votes or good will for his future political career
lol at the grammar police.. if you use firefox this works even in these sort of comment reply boxes "British English Dictionary 1.19.3" as to the speeding issue, it has all been covered above.. but my guess is Mr Harling is trying to generate local votes or good will for his future political career Dave_P

3:34pm Sun 24 Feb 13

burner says...

Excellent shot, woolywords . . a point well made. BUT, were it not grammatical, it would be nigh on impossible to read or even be ambiguous and your argument could be lost.
.
LOL :)
Excellent shot, woolywords . . a point well made. BUT, were it not grammatical, it would be nigh on impossible to read or even be ambiguous and your argument could be lost. . LOL :) burner

5:06pm Sun 24 Feb 13

s_smith says...

Getting this back on topic slightly, I am appalled that our elected leaders could be so irresponsible in this regard.

I have had a check around on standards and some estimated prices; even this small project would cost around £10,000. All to pacify some noisy residents with an agenda which isn't anything to do with road safety and it is disgusting that Cllr's Nuttall and Smith are so quick to reject officers advice, particularly on this non-issue, when the publicly available information is quite clear - it doesn't need anything doing down there.

And if traffic queuing at the Buncer Lane traffic lights is a problem, solve THAT problem, not throw money at a symptom which wont go away - lets face it, the rat-runners aren't going to abide by the new speed limit if they are already driving though there irresponsibly as it is.
Getting this back on topic slightly, I am appalled that our elected leaders could be so irresponsible in this regard. I have had a check around on standards and some estimated prices; even this small project would cost around £10,000. All to pacify some noisy residents with an agenda which isn't anything to do with road safety and it is disgusting that Cllr's Nuttall and Smith are so quick to reject officers advice, particularly on this non-issue, when the publicly available information is quite clear - it doesn't need anything doing down there. And if traffic queuing at the Buncer Lane traffic lights is a problem, solve THAT problem, not throw money at a symptom which wont go away - lets face it, the rat-runners aren't going to abide by the new speed limit if they are already driving though there irresponsibly as it is. s_smith

6:14pm Sun 24 Feb 13

happycyclist says...

buckoff wrote:
happycyclist wrote:
lostforwords wrote:
What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.
Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.
There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker.
I wasn't having a go at the spelling. In fact I wasn't having a go at lostforwords for anything. I was offering a bit of advice as to how he/she could improve their communication. Get off your high horse.
[quote][p][bold]buckoff[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]happycyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lostforwords[/bold] wrote: What Burner said plus 115 people on 10 streets Um take off the 5 or 6 on each street sign anything put in front of them. All of a sudden it's a none issue.Spend the money somewhere else or better still don't spend it at all.[/p][/quote]Learn some English grammar, dude. You'll reach out to so many more people who will be able to understand what you're saying rather than dismissing you as illiterate.[/p][/quote]There is to many prats on here that think there so perfect! Have you not thought for one minute people writing on here could be dyslexic, or have learning difficulties? And people like me that have that thing called old git. (and grumpy) Just read and move on your acting like a school bully. Not everyone can spell or use spell checker.[/p][/quote]I wasn't having a go at the spelling. In fact I wasn't having a go at lostforwords for anything. I was offering a bit of advice as to how he/she could improve their communication. Get off your high horse. happycyclist

11:39pm Sun 24 Feb 13

jack daniels says...

As soon as you get two cars turning right from spring lane, you start to back up traffic. A better, staggered system, would help but maybe I'm asking for too much
As soon as you get two cars turning right from spring lane, you start to back up traffic. A better, staggered system, would help but maybe I'm asking for too much jack daniels

10:36am Mon 25 Feb 13

ladysal says...

It would actually make more sense if the area to be included involved areas slightly closer to town: West View / Selborne St / Hawkshead St and the estate on the other side of Redlam (Lansdowne Street / Cavendish Place & surrounding area). All built up, lots of kids around and because the roads go somewhere, some are used as rat runs. But that would be sensible....
It would actually make more sense if the area to be included involved areas slightly closer to town: West View / Selborne St / Hawkshead St and the estate on the other side of Redlam (Lansdowne Street / Cavendish Place & surrounding area). All built up, lots of kids around and because the roads go somewhere, some are used as rat runs. But that would be sensible.... ladysal

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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