34 replies to this topic

[Matt]

See attached proposals for Moor Lane to replace to previous measures.

I wrote to all residents up from the Station to Burley Woodhead in January, and received 100+ responses. These proposals took longer than I had hoped, but they should take into account the responses received.

The aim is to reduce speeds (90%+ of drivers on Moor Lane are driving at illegal speeds, in both directions), whilst also making life easier for pedestrians and avoiding severe bumps such as those on Moor Road.

 CON-2C.pdf   551.12K   42 downloads
 CON-3C.pdf   564.54K   27 downloads

All feedback welcome.

Regards,

Matt

[Sebastian-Smythe]

Matt, on 23 November 2010 - 10:58 AM, said:

See attached proposals for Moor Lane to replace to previous measures.

I wrote to all residents up from the Station to Burley Woodhead in January, and received 100+ responses. These proposals took longer than I had hoped, but they should take into account the responses received.

The aim is to reduce speeds (90%+ of drivers on Moor Lane are driving at illegal speeds, in both directions), whilst also making life easier for pedestrians and avoiding severe bumps such as those on Moor Road.

CON-2C.pdf
CON-3C.pdf

All feedback welcome.

Regards,

Matt

I can only go by similar signs in Ilkley and other areas.
There are those who take notice and more often there are those who don't.

If it works then good for you....................

[Grumpy]

It must be somewhat demotivating to do all that work, ask for comments, and get little response.

However might I suggest that if 90% of motorists are exceeding the speed limit then there must be something wrong with the speed limit, and it is this that needs fixing first. I dont believe that our motorists are generally careless or drive in a dangerous manner. Most motorists are experienced and drive well within their own and their cars limits.

I would have thought most motorists would have expected a 40mph limit, certainly beyond Scalebor. We are talking about a country lane here, with very few entrances onto it, not a row of terraces or a school area.

It seems from the second drawing that you are proposing more speed bumps/cushions. If so this is almost as mad as the chicane.

If the Council have got spare cash slushing around why dont they cut the rates rather than chuck it away like this.

Sorry but you asked for feedback

[Flas# #arry]

If people are breaking the law by speeding, then the police should do some speed checks and fine a few people. If there had been a lot of accidents on this stretch or complaints from residents then they would do that anyway.

If it ain't broke don't fix it. I pay a huge dollop of council tax, I don't want it wasting on stuff like this, we are all tightening our belts, wasting money like this is an insult to all of us that pay these taxes. I've only ever seen one collision on this stretch and that was 15 years ago.

The chicane under the railway bridge will be a log jammer if the A65 is ever blocked between Burley and Ilkley.

[blunt pencil]

I think you are spot on Flas#. The proposals cost money and is it really a priority for Burley.

The speed humps currently on Moor lane/ Station road are a total pain, wreck my suspension and are nothing but an inconvenience.


How come these were even installed. I do not recall a single accident on this road. I think its a waste of public money, that could be better spent on policing.

I witnessed another waste of time and money yesterday - The "community speedwatch" on Bradford road, down from Menston to Burley.Okay, there was a member of the community pointing a speed gun on the straight satretch of road before the garage. Lots of signs and plenty of warning to slow down. And then a fully waranted Police officer standing at her side, getting rather cold. Oh, and a police car parked on the other side of the road. WHAT a waste of resource. The policeman should be out doing something useful, and if he has a car then he should surely be driving around either to a crime, or preventing a crime - by being visible.

If there is accident history on Station road, then i thought thats what cameras are for. And before Bradford council say "we got no money" can they explain why they are digging up Canal road in Bradford to put in, approximately SIX cameras.

Is this how public services are going to survive - by putting up naughty taxes to string the general public even more.

I think -

Dig up the humps
Leave well alone
Do something more productive
Stop wasting our money

[djohnson]

Grumpy, on 25 November 2010 - 06:58 PM, said:

However might I suggest that if 90% of motorists are exceeding the speed limit then there must be something wrong with the speed limit..........I would have thought most motorists would have expected a 40mph limit,

Now don’t get me wrong here I’m one of the most ‘enthusiastic’ drivers you’re likely to meet however 40mph up Moor lane? Really? It’s poorly sighted, poorly lit, has a number of entrances which lack visibility both for those on the road and those emerging and has narrow pavements which are not consistent down each side forcing all pedestrians to cross. In my humble opinion 30mph is about right and the forward visibility on most parts of the road does not support 40mph.
I don’t believe 90% are exceeding 30mph. A few are but not that many.

[Grumpy]

djohnson, on 27 November 2010 - 05:33 PM, said:

Now don’t get me wrong here I’m one of the most ‘enthusiastic’ drivers you’re likely to meet however 40mph up Moor lane? Really? It’s poorly sighted, poorly lit, has a number of entrances which lack visibility both for those on the road and those emerging and has narrow pavements which are not consistent down each side forcing all pedestrians to cross. In my humble opinion 30mph is about right and the forward visibility on most parts of the road does not support 40mph.
I don’t believe 90% are exceeding 30mph. A few are but not that many.

Well my approach is that anyone who drives slower than me is a stupid doddering road hog, whilst anyone driving faster is a dangerous lunatic.

The first post said 90% were exceeding the limit. I am sure that is factual and based on surveys. I occasionally look at my speedometer and I wouldn't claim that I'm always below 30 mph on Moor Lane. But I'm not doing something daft like 70mph. The speed I automatically adjust to is what experience has taught me is be safe based on 40 years and several hundred thousand miles accident-free driving experience. And as I drive behind other cars on Moor Lane they mainly seem to make the same judgements. I suspect hardly any exceed 40 and by Scalebor the average will be closer to 30 than 40.

So whilst you think a 30 limit is about right, it is clear that the vast majority of motorists dont. All that a 30 mph limit achieves is to potentially brand responsible citizens as criminals. And spending money to enforce this, by cameras and more bumps, is simply wrong especially at this time.

[blunt pencil]

Very, very true. Motorists are taught to respond to road conditions. And all the signs, humps and cameras will not stop bad judgement. I would say that on a blind bend, then of course you slow down. Where its straight, then you would speed up (sensibly).

The posts on here do raise one important point. The lack of pavement up moor lane shold be addressed. Why not provide pavements both sides, to allow pedestrians to safely walk up the road. By the very nature of a pavement, it provides a buffer and viewing portal to those coming out of the side roads. After all, its they who should stop and look - and if they cant safely judge the main road, they should exercise caution before they pull out

[Matt]

djohnson, on 27 November 2010 - 05:33 PM, said:

I don’t believe 90% are exceeding 30mph. A few are but not that many.

Cynicism is always understandable when presented with a round number and no evidence, I should know better!

I asked Highways to undertake a survey after the road had been resurfaced, this was done earlier this year. It's fair to say I was surpised by the results: almost nobody does 30mph or less - in fact, on some days the number doing 30mph was lees than the number doing over 50mph.

I do have a hardcopy of the survey results somewhere and, when I have time to dig them out, I'll post them.

Interestingly, people were speeding at all times of day and in both directions. It's not slightly speeding, for the nature of the orad it's people going really very fast, over 40mph. If you made the speed limit 40mph (which I'm not in favour of) most people would still be speeding anyway.

I've personally put a lot of effort into trying to minimise the negative impact on motorists whilst getting thr speed down consistently. As a result, we have a scheme that has, in total, only ONE round top hump - but even then the profile of this humps will be less severe than the ones on moor lane. Further up the road, twe're using a vehicle activates sign to remind people of the speed limit.

Feedback from station users and residents / walkers using Hag Farm road helped greatly - the speed table by hag farm road will encoarge speed reduction and also highlight the junction and make it safer for both pedestrians and vehicles turning in/out of hag fram road. We had to find another £10k for that, but it's a huge improvement on a bump and much easier on cars as well.

Would I rather have a nice smooth road? Of course. But at 50mph, someone hit by a car is probably dead. At 30mph they are probably not. The road is well used by pedestrians, including many school kids, and it hits the one place where everyone crosses the road to go to the station or wait for the school bus. This scheme will save a life one day, and I'm not going to wait for someone to die in order to demonstrate that. We need to remember than anyone walking down from Scalebor park has to cross the road twice to stay on the pavement.

I do understand the frustration. I don't like bumps either and as far as concievably possible they've been designed out. That's why we've spent 6 months consultaing residents and re-working plans. Re funding, the funding has been found and allocated to do this. If we didn't do this, we couldn't just use it for something else and nor would we get lower taxes. It would just be spent somewhere else!

Everyone wants lower traffic speeds without speed calming measures. I only wish that were possible. It's not.

Matt

blunt pencil, on 28 November 2010 - 11:09 AM, said:

The posts on here do raise one important point. The lack of pavement up moor lane shold be addressed. Why not provide pavements both sides, to allow pedestrians to safely walk up the road.

Agree with that. You may have spotted the new footpath that was installed from wynches up to the top of Moor Road a few years ago. That was to attress this very problem. The built-out under the railways bridge should (when combines with slower traffic coming down Moor Road) make it safer to cross the road under the bridge. I'd love to have a proper pavement on both sides there, but it can't be done due to thw width of the bridge.

I'm also looking at improving the lighting where the steps come down from the Station.

Finally, I'm having a number of discussions with the Care Trust about opening the path through their site to Scalebor Park. So far, they don't seem to get the point (they say someone may hurt themselves and sue them; I'm more consecerned about someone getting hit by a car. For a health trust it's not very enlightened, but they don't seem willing to listen. I hope in due course they prove me wrong.

So there are some things we have done, can do, and are doing. The narrow nature of the road is the constraint.

Matt

[blunt pencil]

Good reply Matt. Cant argue with it. Its just a pity that the very nature of speed humps introduces potential for damage to cars with lower profile tyres, etc. And acts as no deterant if you have a large 4 x 4.

How come Moor lane was singled out for this survey and consultation ? I would suggest the bend entering into the village (by the Malt) gets much more traffic and much more speeding.

[Matt]

blunt pencil, on 28 November 2010 - 02:10 PM, said:

How come Moor lane was singled out for this survey and consultation ? I would suggest the bend entering into the village (by the Malt) gets much more traffic and much more speeding.

Moor Lane used to have a series of hard humps, which were paid for and installed by the developer of Scalbor Park. Unforunately the developers clearly struggled calculating the width of cars, and the humps installed were too narrow to affect most vehicles. So if you had a small car they were brutal and you went 20mph. If you had a 4wd they actually had less impact the faster you went over them.

So there was a known problem going back some time - I recall discussing in to 2003/4.

When we got some funds for Moor Lane to be resurfaced, councillors were asked if we wanted the bumps replacing 'as is' at the same time. This would have been fairly silly, so we opted instead to develop a new proposal (this is it). It's taken about 2 years longer than I would have liked, but that is the reason it was possible to do something. We then found some extra funds to change the proposed round top hump (Moor Road style) by Hag Farm Road to a speed table (10x the cost, or something like it).

Main Street is different - not least baause anyone not forced to slow down by the bend at the Malt / St Marys is not going to be slowed by speed calming either (I do wonder about some better signage to warn of the bend, but am reluctant to add to the clutter). At the other end, the constant presence of parked cars on a narrow road creates quite effective speed calming. In the middle the junction with Station Road and the two much-abused mini roundabouts do slow traffic as well. In effect, car parking and the nature of the road tends to make speeding much less severe.

If people want to discuss Main Street speeds, I'm up for the debate and will be happy to ask for a survey of current speeds (there was one done a few years ago as I recall). However, I would not support speed bumps (or tables etc.) on Main Street. I would much rather rip up some more double yellow lines and slow traffic down with more parking - if only the professionals will let me

Matt

[Grumpy]

Well I suppose it depends where the survey was carried out. The 30 limit starts at the top of Moor Lane. I would guess people drive faster at the top end than between the village and Scalebor. And I dont believe on any day there are more doing 50 than under 30 anywhere near the end of Hag Farm or the railway. So where was the survey carried out?

I love the phrase "We then found some extra funds"

[Matt]

Grumpy, on 28 November 2010 - 05:51 PM, said:

So where was the survey carried out?

Highways did say where when we discussed it - probably because I asked the same question. I don't know recall exactly where, but I think it was about half way up.

[appropriatebridge]

Burley has an infamous reputation well beyond village boundaries because of the preponderance of speed bumps through Burley Woodhead and Station Road. Nobody likes them, they present discomfort and they do cause damage to suspension over a period. There is a viable footpath from the village to the moor so pedestrians are not at risk with the possible exception of where they have to cross at Scalebor where perhaps a speedbump might be justified. I am not aware of any accidents involving damage to people or vehicles since the previous speed bumps disappeared unless someone (Matt?) confirms otherwise - who/when?

However, before reaching for the sledgehammer to crack the proverbial nut, why not try just the electronic warning signs first. I believe they are very successful in other areas - Eldwick for instance and I have seen press reports in the past confirming such signs do work. This would save expense in these cash strapped times. If the signs alone do not work then alternatives including speed bumps could be looked at but let us at least try the least cost and least misery option before going in with all health and safety guns blazing.

[blunt pencil]

Very true appropriate. I think thats the other concern - The "health and safety guns" which was addressed by Lord Young, before he started displaying the Tory doctorine. This is not about health and safety. Maybe this is about keeping a few posh houses happy.

I am sure if a traffic speed survey was done on every road in the UK, it would be found that some people break the speed limit.

If money is being thrown about and we would "just loose it" - then lets have more traffic surveys. How about surveying the roundabout approaches each side of the bypass. I think most drivers dont know what the dotted lines are on the bypass (apart from something to aim at).

Why has Moor Lane been singled out

[Burleylass]

As a regular driver and perestrian up Moor Lane I have no doubt that the figures quoted by Matt are correct - most people speed up (and down) Moor Lane as soon as they are out of the chicane. I fully support the need for measures and as speed bumps were not a popular option and speed cameras not possible, what is proposed seems a good compromise. I agree that there will always be some selfish so and sos who ignore the signs and believe that they know best (previous posts)but for the vast majority that may not be aware of the speed limit or who have inadvertantly crept above it the signs will help as they appear to in Ilkley.

[Burleylass]

Sorry, I had not seen Matt's post of 1.11pm yesterday before I replied. What he says is completely spot on - nobody wants bumps or anything else but it is totally necessary. It doesnt surprise me at all to read the figures Matt quotes in that post- people drive at ridiculous speeds regardless of the conditions or whether they are passing pedestrians on the very narrow pavement. I for one am very grateful that Matt has put a lot of time into trying to resolve this issue as it is only a matter of time before there is an accident which could be a fatality at present speeds. What is the problem with slowing down everyone - adds 10 seconds to your journey time? I woould rather that than someone be killed.

So thank you Matt and thanks also for your efforts in getting the Care Trust to allow passage from Scalebor Park. This would be a great result as it would mean that you would not need to cross the main road and as many school children walk up and down each day this would greatly improve safety for them . Please keep on with that one as well!!

[blunt pencil]

I dont agree any more.

First question: Why was Moor lane singled out for these calming measures over all other local roads

Second question: Why not have a salt bin on Moor land and by the station, as in this weather the pavement needs it - surely people slipping is more of a foreseeable risk

[Grumpy]

[quote name='Burleylass' date='29 November 2010 - 11:24 AM' timestamp='1291026263' post='5704']
there will always be some selfish so and sos who ignore the signs and believe that they know best

So what you're saying is that the majority (in this case the drivers) are selfish and believe they know best, whereas someone like yourself would like to (unselfishly of course)impose your minority views on others because you know you know best?

[Grumpy]

Burleylass, on 29 November 2010 - 10:39 AM, said:

thanks also for your efforts in getting the Care Trust to allow passage from Scalebor Park. This would be a great result as it would mean that you would not need to cross the main road and as many school children walk up and down each day this would greatly improve safety for them

How would any child from Scalebor get to school without crossing the main Rd, even if there was access through the care trust?

A short cut would clearly be useful and possibly permit a couple more minutes in bed on a morning.

You would have thought someone in the Property department of the care trust,no doubt seeking to get the best disposal proceeds, might have wanted to be on good terms with local councillors. In any event presumably the access can be gained through a Section 106 agreement-albeit in the future.