Category Archives: Transport

Transport in Woodbridge – of all sorts

Traffic in the Thoroughfare

thoroughfare-smaller
Thoroughfare residents join, Caroline Page and Woodbridge Town Councillors Gillard and O’Nolan to hand out information about the Thoroughfare TRO

Traffic in the Thoroughfare is governed by a TRO (traffic regulation order) made in 1995. This means that the current regulations have been in place for 21 years. They are  now very out of date.

Additionally, many people have either genuinely forgotten the terms of the TRO, are newcomers to the area and do not know the terms, or are now electing not to abide by them.

(The situation has been made worse in the last decade by the Traffic Management Act 2004 which abolished Traffic Wardens and gave their powers to the police. The police have always had a lot on their plate an have not adequately replaced the dedicated Traffic Wardens we had before. A future change may allow Suffolk’s District Councils  finally  to take  over these powers  but this will take a couple of years ).

There is little point complaining about the terms of the current TRO- it is the status quo agreed by long retired councillors and officers and we have inherited it. A TRO is Highways law.

The – admittedly confusing – signage which is up at the start of the Thoroughfare is the only one permitted by the Highways Act to cover the current terms of the TRO. It has  been up for a long time, is accurate although wordy, and does not explain by itself why more and more people are electing to ignore it.

Changes  to what happens in the Thoroughfare cannot be made without changing the TRO. Clearly this needs to happen.

However making a TRO is basically making a small law, and this cannot be done without a public consultation, and a significant expenditure by SCC. In order to use public money to best advantage then,  it is sensible to look at how the current TRO is working so we can see what bits need replacing. And everybody’s interests have to be considered:  the needs of residents, traders, disabled persons, pedestrians as well as motorists,  all need to be considered – as do the laws of unintended consequences.

Eg The Thoroughfare is not pedestrianised 24/7 so a fixed barrier not appropriate, – and anyway what about emergency vehicles?  Rising bollards for pedestrian hours would produce difficulty for the delivery patterns of some traders, and who would operate them when they came up and down. Would we have to employ someone?  How about disabled access? The current disabled access was designed in the days when Woodbridge had a half-day closing on Wednesdays – who here remembers this? What is the situation of the Thoroughfare’s residents, and their needs – not just access, but removals, deliveries,  ambulances etc. On top of this, drivers seem genuinely to have a greater sense of entitlement than in the past, and a lack of will to walk any distance from their car.  I have been calling for solutions, but solutions are genuinely not as simple as people might think.

(The only people who do not need consideration are those who are simply asserting a right to drive down  the Thoroughfare between 10-4, without belonging to one of the TRO-exempted categories. During this time it is – according to the 21 year old TRO – a Pedestrianised area…)

I have set up a Woodbridge Thoroughfare Working Group to look at usage,with a short-term and a longer term aim. Short-term is to raise awareness of the current law. (As I said, this isn’t a matter of opinion or choice – we are lumped with it).  The police have committed to enforce this more fully.

Longer term, when we have worked out what kind of changes to the TRO would most benefit all users, we will be able to put some  proposals to public consultation.

The Thoroughfare Working Group group, incidentally, is apolitical (but cross-party for elected members: I represent the County Council,  Conservative Geoff Holdcroft  represents the District Council, and Green Eamonn O’Nolan represents Woodbridge Town council). The other members are: local police, local Highway Officers, Thoroughfare residents and Thoroughfare traders.

If you have personal concerns – come and talk them over face to face at my monthly surgery in Woodbridge Library.  My December surgery is on 17th December. 9-11am as ever

What’s happening in Woodbridge (& Suffolk) – November 2016

Woodbridge has wanted 20 mph zoning for years but my work over the last year has been required to make it possible
Woodbridge has  been asking for  20 mph zoning for years .

Speed calming and the Thoroughfare have been top issues for Woodbridge  over the last weeks as I’ve been working with like-minded people  from a number of fields to try and produce a global scheme to calm and improve traffic conditions across the town.  Other issues of importance include Suffolk Norfold Devolution, now about to got to a final yea or nay vote,  and the throrny question of the new telecoms boxes at the Sandy Lane junction,

Proposed 20mph zone & Thoroughfare calming in Woodbridge   I have recently been working on initial – ambitious – proposals for speed calming in Woodbridge. These include :

  1. a) the outline of the whole-town speed calming and 20mph zoning which Woodbridge Town Council will be discussing later this evening and which will hopefully be the foundation of a document that can finally be put before Suffolk County Council’s Speed Limits Panel and
  2. b) the reforming of the Thoroughfare Working Party to try and tackle the continuing issue of the Thoroughfare, in relation to the roads around it.

I am grateful for the assistance and expertise of Nigel Barratt in examining the roads usage round the town in order to work on these issues.

I am hoping that the ‘Walkers are Welcome Woodbridge’ initiative will be supported by these proposals, and that they might link in with issues as diverse as the air quality work at Melton Hill, the passage of school children to school,  and the rat-running from Wilford Bridge along the Ipswich Road – producing really joined up planning for traffic and tourism.

Conservatives lose their majority on Suffolk County Council  With a LibDem win at the Hadleigh byelection last month, the Conservatives finally lost their precarious hold on Suffolk County council and are now a minority administration. The balance of power is now:

Conservative 37 – Labour 15;  LibDem 8; UKIP 10; Green 2; Independent  3

Suffolk County Council’s vote on devolution deal – 23 November  Suffolk County Council – together with all district councils – will be voting on the Suffolk Norfolk devolution deal at the end of the month.  For the county council, this is:

  • The extraordinary County Council on 2pm 23rd November
  • The extraordinary Cabinet on 5.30pm 23rd November (or following the extraordinary Council meeting if later)

with the orders currently scheduled to be laid before Parliament on 24th of November.

The deal requires the 2017 election of a Norfolk & Suffolk Mayor, and the formation of a “super-authority” in which all councils from both counties  would be represented equally.

This authority would have a budget of £100m to spend on an inflated governmental requirement for  240,000 new homes ( far more than required locally so presumably aimed at London overspill)  for the next five years and would have new powers (but little new funds) to fund the required  infrastructure programmes needed to support the development the deal requires.

Although Suffolk’s County Council and all its district & borough councils backed the principle of this devolution deal in the summer, in  Norfolk the reaction was much less positive – four of the county’s seven districts (including Norwich City Council) voted to reject the deal .

New Telecoms boxes update   After I raised the issue of the 5 telecoms boxes in Sandy Lane on both social media and BBC Suffolk, EE finally got in contact with the Suffolk Highways Officers. We are now in hope that the issue can be rectified  without legal proceedings becoming necessary.

Parents urged to Have Their Say on New School Admissions Policy Suffolk County Council is seeking views from parents and carers on the proposed school admissions policy for the 2018/2019 academic year. There are proposals to make minor changes to the admission arrangements for schools in Suffolk and the policy aims to ensure school places are offered to children in a fair way.  The consultation will run until Tuesday 13 December 2016.

Dutch Kitchenware Cold Callers   Suffolk Trading Standards warn that they have had reports about (specifically Dutch) salesmen cold-calling door-to-door in Suffolk. They say these appear to be people who have targeted other areas in Britain.

The caller is typically a man selling knives, saucepans and cutlery sets that he claims that he has had left over from a trade fair. His story is that he needs to get rid of the products quickly because he is returning to Holland later in the day and cannot take them back through customs.

Although the products are described as being reasonable quality, trading standards are concerned that consumers may be paying over the odds and there are no customer rights. As ever they are concerned that undue pressure is put on elderly and vulnerable people.

Suffolk Trading standards ask that if anyone becomes aware of these (or other) salesmen operating in their area,  to please contact  via 03454 040506. They also remind Suffolk residents of the door stickers they supply to discourage cold callers.

Firebreak training in Hollesley Bay    In late October I spent an afternoon at a ‘Firebreak’ passing-out parade at Hollesley Bay prison. This is a practical but inspirational programme taught by the fire brigade (Essex, not Suffolk, on this occasion) – and the first time ever this programme has been delivered in a prison!!

Outcomes were outstanding: 12 hard-to-reach prisoners of very different ages and backgrounds had worked together to become a team, learned the cooperative and practical skills needed in firefighting, got a serious qualification, and all reported they have gained a lot from the course.

This was resoundingly echoed by guards and instructors. I very much enjoyed watching the presentation drill, and talking to the participants and instructors afterwards.

Most interesting of all, the training started to introduce the subject of ‘restorative justice’ and met with such success that the team was returning to the prison to run some sessions specifically on this, with the same prisoners.

Huge plaudits all round: to the Shaw Trust for funding it, Essex Fire Brigade for delivering it, and of course, Hollesley Bay for having confidence to go ahead with this pioneering training in the first place

New Telecoms Cabinets in Sandy Lane – and Twitter!

The 5 new Telecoms cabinets blocking the sightline at Sandy Lane junction. As you can see , some are as tall as I am. Under the Telecoms Act, such cabinets count as ‘permitted development’ but telecoms companies are supposed to consult with local highways authorities. SCC did not approve these installations – and would not have done so if they had been consulted!

 

New telecoms cabinets installed on the corner of Sandy Lane and Ipswich Road have been causing  anxiety to Woodbridge residents and Suffolk Highways officers alike since they were  unexpectedly installed over the summer.

Drivers report that visibility to the right coming out of Sandy Lane has been severely affected.  The eastern cabinet is also far too close to the road edge and to passing traffic, could cause cyclists to be squeezed between cabinet and vehicle – and indeed may get hit by something if left as it is.

capture-_2016-09-30-01-11-01_resized
A screen grab from Google Maps shows what the junction looked like until the new cabinets were installed in August.

For the last month it has  been impossible to get any response from EE and TMobile (who Highways inform me are the principal companies concerned) so yesterday I took to Twitter to  give the matter the oxygen of publicity and today I spoke about the cabinets on Radio Suffolk’s Breakfast Programme.

Interestingly, this seems to be was what was needed to get things going. EE are now in communication – and tell me they are ‘investigating the matter with the company who installed the cabinets.’

I am  hoping the matter can now be satisfactorily resolved.  Woodbridge residents shouldn’t be expected to have to choose between road safety and a 4G signal

Cycle-paths die in Suffolk’s free market

20160923_083928_resized_1
It is impossible to cycle along this cyclepath. SCC has not maintained it for 2 years

Since Conservative-run Suffolk County Council divested its Highways maintenance services to the efficiencies of the private sector , its not only the roads that are in bad repair. Cycle paths abutting the A12 are in a  disgraceful state of disrepair, and many can no longer be used for cycling. This forces vulnerable cyclists back on the A12 amidst the fast traffic and HGVs – a situation the cycle-paths were specifically created to remedy.

Last week  I discovered for myself that the A12 cycle path between  Woodbridge and the Ufford turnoff is not only overgrown, but in places it has actually disappeared.

Travel was a choice between walking our bikes on the ‘cycle path’ or cycling on the A12. We chose the former as safer – but the damage to my own bicyle’s inner tube and front tyre was irreparable because of the thorns and brambles across the path.

Unfortunately we will  have no option but to cycle this route tomorrow. Does my disabled companion – who has catastrophic epilepsy – take her chance on the A12, or add an extra half-hour to an hour to her thirty-minute journey  battling through the jungle where a cycle path used to be?

It is not a choice Suffolk Highways should be offering her, me, or any other cyclist, in this, the self-described ‘Greenest County.’

I have  written to the Cabinet member for Highways and the Deputy Director of Highways Operations asking for their assurance that they should abandon this policy of wilful neglect and restore these paths to a usable condition immediately.

Not only is the path overgrown, somebody has kindly left an enormous pile of thorns across it. Gee, thanks
Not only is the cycle path overgrown, somebody has kindly left an enormous pile of thorns across it. Gee, thanks

Park & Ride Update

Anxious passengers at Ipswich P&R discuss its future
Anxious passengers at Ipswich P&R discuss its future

After deciding – once again – to cut a public transport subsidy, SCC’s Conservative administration have decided to honour their commitment to Park and Ride services by trying to make the Ipswich Park & Ride self-supporting!

The dream is to get the bus companies that operate alongside it to take over P&R services: Ipswich buses at the London Road end and First at the Martlesham end. (Many of us have used this system for years. It is called “catching a bus”).

The buildings in the carparks will no longer be ticket offices but will be offered to retail companies.

At the London Road End this plan seems comparatively simple: the 13 bus runs along the same route and Park & Ride tickets can already be used on it out of hours. There are, however, problems for users to the east. I was told, as LibDem Transport Spokesperson, that the 64 & 65 are the services which will become Park and Ride buses at Martlesham. However the Labour spokesperson has been told it would definitely be the 66. Asking the Cabinet Member for disambiguation, he had no idea whatsoever. We now hear it hasn’t been decided. The choice is important: neither service is ideal: the 66 service is slow and goes round a lot of houses. The 64/65 start out as far as Aldeburgh and Leiston and can often get deleayed.

In all, I am not sure how successfully this scheme will work, or whether it is a fudge to extend the operation beyond the forthcoming elections cobbled together by an administration which does not personally use buses.

Suffolk residents need the park& ride to help deal with the increasing congestion in Ipswich. The administration  requires it to be income generating. Of course, there is no reason why it should not be both if properly run. This administration has never shown much sign of wishing to run it properly.

The best way to make the P&R more income-generating would be to make it more responsive to demand and that would be to provide a speedy service for commuters to reduce the morning rush hour. This our local buses do not do.

At the moment I cannot see any very compelling reason why people should now drive to the P&R from Woodbridge rather than getting on the same bus in Woodbridge – especially as they will be able to use their bus passes in Woodbridge but will pay to sit on the same bus if they board it at the Park & Ride!
We will wait and see as more details emerge.