Feedback Report

Page Park Staple Hill –

Proposed 20mph speed limit

Purpose of the Report The purpose of this report is to feedback the results of the recent consultation on proposals to install a 20mph speed limit on roads in the vicinity of Page Park

Background To compliment improvements to Page Park, it is proposed to reduce the speed limit to 20mph on minor roads around the park. This approach is in line with guidance from the government, which is encouraging local authorities to introduce 20 mph speed limits or zones, in residential areas being used by people on foot or bicycle. Department for Transport guidelines indicate that a 20 mph speed restriction could be introduced without accompanying traffic calming measures should average speeds be less than 24 mph. Speed recordings on Park Road (south of South View) and South View indicate that on average, vehicles are travelling at speeds less than 24 mph. The purpose of the scheme is to reduce traffic speed in the roads around Page Park, which will improve road safety for vulnerable road users as well as making walking and cycling to Page Park more attractive. The proposed scheme is to reduce the speed limit from 30 mph to 20 mph along Park Road, South View, Hill House Road and Haythorn Court.

Consultation Public consultation was undertaken between 17 June and 18 July 2017. Letters advising of the consultation were delivered to all properties fronting onto the proposed speed limit. In addition coloured notices were erected on lamp columns, posts and railings in prominent positions around the park.

Details were also entered onto the Council’s consultation website. Emails advising of the consultation were sent to the local councillors, Friends of Page Park and emergency services.

Feedback from the Consultation The drawing showing the proposals on the online consultation was viewed a total of 148 times. There were 79 individuals and organisations who completed the questionnaire and a further 8 who responded by letter or email. Overall there was support for the proposals with 57 in favour, 21 against and 9 other.

The responses to the individual questions are summarised over the page:-

72%

27%

1%

Question 1: Do you support the scheme as a whole

YES NO DON’T KNOW

YES 72% (57No) NO 27% (21No) DON’T KNOW 1% (1 No) SHOULD BE EXTENDED 48% (38No) IS ABOUT RIGHT 34% (27No) SHOULD BE SMALLER 18% (14No) Those who wanted the speed limit extended wanted the following roads included:- Park Road (20No) Hill House Road (7No) Broad Street (5No) The Hawthornes (1No) North View (1 No) Clarence Ave (1No) Gerrish Ave (1 No)

48%

34%

18%

Question 2; Do you think the area covered by the scheme should be

extended, is about right or should be

smaller

SHOULD BE EXTENDED IS ABOUT RIGHT SHOULD BE SMALLER

Who responded? Resident inside the affected area 37 No Resident outside the affected area 33 No Commuter 5 No Local councillor 3 No Other 3 No

Other comments A full list of comments and the engineer’s response is provided in the questionnaire responses section.

Future Programme The initial consultation was carried out to inform the local residents about the proposed 20mph speed limit and to ensure that their comments and concerns are considered at an early stage. In view of comments raised, a further mini-consultation will now be undertaken on extending the scheme northwards to include:- Park Road as far north as Salisbury Gardens, Hill House Road as far north as Burley Avenue North View and adjoining roads including Chesterfield Road as far as Salisbury Road. Once this additional consultation is complete, the next stage will be for South Gloucestershire to formally advertise a Traffic Regulation Order with the proposal. This involves the preparation of legal documents, placing notices in the local paper and along the affected roads and publishing details on the Council’s website, giving people an opportunity to formally object to or support the proposed scheme. Depending on the outcome of the advertisement, it is anticipated that works will commence on site shortly after the Traffic Regulation Order has been signed and sealed which is anticipated to be in early in 2018. However, if objections are received during the advertisement stage, South Gloucestershire Council will be required to report objections to the Director of Environment and Community Services for a decision on how to proceed.

Additional Information and Council response

1. The limitations of scheme budget and scope prevent major expansion of the scheme beyond current proposals. However, in view of the comments received a further consultation will be undertaken on extending the scheme northwards to include:-Park Road as far north as Salisbury Gardens, Hill House Road as far north as Burley Avenue North View and adjoining roads including Chesterfield Road as far as Salisbury Road. Limitations of scope and budget mean that we cannot implement physical traffic calming measures at the present time. However, the requests for traffic calming are noted and will be taken into consideration should any future investigation scheme be undertaken.

2. The inclusion of Mangotsfield Road and Broad Street in particular would require physical traffic calming measures in order to reduce average speeds to those required for implementation of a 20mph speed limit.

3. Enforcement of the speed limit will be undertaken by the police who already enforce 20mph speed limits in response to community concerns.

4. The 20mph speed limit will be signed in accordance with national regulations. At each entry point into the limit there will be terminal signs on both sides of the road accompanied by a ‘20’ roundel applied to the surface of the road. 20mph repeater signs will be placed at regular intervals throughout the area covered by the speed limit. The existing 30mph electronic speed reminder sign will be replaced with a 20mph speed reminder sign.

5. Speed data on these roads has been recorded using calibrated automatic traffic counters operating over a 7-day period. Although average speeds on the affected roads are below 24mph the maximum speeds are well above this level. Monitoring of ‘sign only’ 20mph speed limits, introduced in the past, has shown that they are particularly effective at reducing high end speeds.

6. The World Health Organisation’s Pedestrian Safety: a road safety manual for decision-makers and practitioners summarises published research on the science of road safety for those on foot. It uses case studies from around the globe. A distinguished peer review group have carefully studied the evidence. The report says:- “One of the most effective ways to improve pedestrian safety is to reduce the speed of vehicles” and in particular, reducing speed limits. Specifically listed as a proven intervention is to Implement area-wide lower speed limit programmes, for example, 30 km/h” (20mph)

7. Those who didn’t agree with the scheme were given the opportunity to do so in question 1. It is recognised that some of those who asked for a smaller scheme in question 2 didn’t agree with any scheme being introduced. We will consider offering a further option in question 2 in future consultations.

Questionnaire and written responses

Comments received at Consultation

(Note comments have been reproduced as submitted so include

all spelling and grammatical errors uncorrected)

Officer’s response

Park Road Cars accelerate when turning into Park Road from Salisbury Road. The slight turn in the road along with cars parked makes visibility a problem. There have been 2 major crashes at the bottom end of the road in recent years that could have been avoided through lower speeds.

See note 1 above

Park road is used as a rat run by vehicles bypassing north street. Vehicles travelling at excessive speed are a daily occurence. Several collisions have also occured due to speed

See note 1 above

I feel that Park Road is used as a bit of a rat run & the speeds you have recorded are incorrect. Also many large lorries have been using the road despite there being a weight restriction near page park which is clearly marked at each end of the road. I believe that to make a difference speed bumps & 20mph on the whole road are the only viable option.

See note 1 above

To ensure people adhere to a 20mph restriction I feel the whole Road needs to be 20mph with speed bumps around the park itself. I know it is a bus route but other large vehicles seem to be ignoring the weight restrictions & may think twice when faced with speed bumps as well.

See note 1 above

The new speed limited needs to be the entire length of the Park Road. There have been several accidents over the years in the stretch of road the proposed 20 mph. The 20 into 30 will only encourage cars to speed up into a pinch point at the top of the hill by north view. Cars already use this part of the road as a racetrack

See note 1 above

I believe that the speed limit should include the entire length of park road. The speed at which cars drive past our house at all times of day is to fast. We have had incidences of cars hitting parked vehicles, clipping wing mirrors of parked vehicles. In 2015 a driver crashed into the car and front garden of a neighbour at the bottom of the road she was driving in excess of 70mph! I am not comfortable with the roads overal safety when both walking to school or to the park with my children. I would also welcome other tragic calming solutions. Sleeping policemen, curb extensions, chicanes, speed cushions, two way calming measures. Having these in place would make the road a safer environment for all residents and potential visitors to the area. There are a lot of families with young children and elderly residents that regularly walk to our wonderful local shops and ameinaties.

See note 1 above

The speed in which vehicles drive the whole length of Park Road is in excess of 30mph. I m concerned that once drivers see they can increase their speed up to 30mph, it will encourage them to speed up. The road passed my house has numerous parked car. Children do ride their bikes and scooters to and from the Park. I personally would like the 20mph speed limit to be put in place the whole length of the road.

See note 1 above

Living on Park Rd the average speed before the section bordering page park is easily 35mph + with some going much faster than this. I would advocate a 20mph speed along the whole of Park Rd and Hill house Rd i.e from Broad Street to Salisbury Rd. Park Rd is a massive cut through to avoid Staple Hill lights and I have been concerned about speeds for some time. There is a large elderly population mixed with young family's children. There is also A LOT of learner drivers. I would advocate traffic calming speed bumps similar to those found on nearby Station Rd as a simple 20mph sign will do nothing as 90% of people don't obey these anyway. I would certainly not advocate one way priority speed calming measures which I always feel causes massive delays and irritation such as those found in Emerson's Green.

See note 1 above

20 mph limit should extend all the way down Park Road along with traffic calming.

See note 1 above

I would welcome a speed camera being used to monitor this on Park Road, especially in the direction from Staple Hill heading towards Downend. Cars go excessively fast as they come up Teewell Hill to get through the traffic lights and accelerate even more as they are on a straight road (Park Road). As a parent with 2 young children it is very concerning. Cars also go through red lights on the crossroads at the top of Teewell Hill, often when there is a green man. It is really unsafe for the many families using the Park.

Once the 20mph speed limit has been installed in the police camera team can be asked to look at mobile camera enforcement. A static camera at £50,000 is beyond the budget available for this scheme

I live South of South View on Park Road. The statement states cars on average travel less than 24mph south of South View, but I feel this isn't correct. Cars slow down where the road narrows at the junction with North View as it becomes very tight with park cars, but they then accelerate once past the junction. People race down the road and there are often near misses with one big accident in the last 18 months. We've had several wing mirrors clipped. There are lots of young families living on Park road and like to use the park / access staple hill high street, but are fearful of the traffic. I feel a minimum of 20mph down the entire street should be implemented.

See note 1 above.

I THINK PARK RD SHOULD HAVE A 20 MILE SPEED RESTRICTION FOR THE WHOLE ROAD AS IT IS EASY FOR CARS TO GO FAST AND CHILDREN USE THIS ROAD TO WALK TO THE PARK. I THINK IT WOULD ALSO SLOW CARS PRIOR TO THEM REACHING PAGE PARK

See note 1 above.

The area the speed limit covers should be longer to include the whole of park road. People drive too fast along this road and we need to minimise the risks to our families. I have witnessed multiple car accidents along this road

See note 1 above.

in the five years I have been here.

I live at bottom end of Park Road and cars and vans etc regularly drive more than 30mph. It is very dangerous and speed bumps need to be put in.

See note 1 above.

The speed limit should be extended to the whole of Park Road. Many motorists use Park Road as a cut through road to avoid traffic lights on Broad Street and many often drive at or beyond the current 30mph limit. It is often frightening the speed at which some vehicles go on this residential road. I have 2 young children and they cross the road daily for school and visits to the park. Can we not use this opportunity to calm the traffic on the entire road? Including speed bumps to encourage this.

See note 1 above.

Could the speed restriction zone be extended to the entire length of Park road.

See note 1 above.

Whoever came up with the idea needs their heads examining! Park Road is a very busy road at the best of times, especailly early mornings and during the afternoons when people are making their way to and from work and using as a rat run to get back into Downend. Many children and those with pushchairs use the road often and when you have cars drivng up and down road fast as well as articulated lorries and vans, its a very dangerous place. Not only that but the number of people who park their vehicles either on the road or on the paths when they have enough room on driveways is worse than ever. Where i live is just before a bend in the road and when cars are parked either side its impossible to see whats coming the other way. Im surpised no serious accideng has happened. Also, the number of learner drivers using the road has increased which only adds to the problem. To have the same speed limit in a built up area as that on a main road like Downend is ridiculous and funny how this is only being considered because of a cafe being built in Page Park. The trouble is, the people coming up with these ideas and making these decisions have either no idea whats its like to live in the areas or have a simple thing called common sense.

Noted

The entire length of Park Road (and possibly other surrounding roads) should be subjected to the proposed 20 mph limit. I have been a resident of Park Road (same address) for 33 years - the actual speed of traffic is, I believe, frequently in excess of the current 30 mph limit. I remain unconvinced that traffic calming measures will contribute to the overall good. This is because recent reports indicate that areas currently subjected to such measures, have significantly increased levels of traffic-related pollution due to the constant deceleration/acceleration of vehicles. it also appears in recent reports, that there are considerably more premature deaths in the UK attributable to traffic-related pollution, than there are to road traffic accidents, and for this very reason, I understand that a number of councils are now facing (or have already faced) the considerable expense of removing such measures. This is clearly not in the interest of the residents who have to fund such ill-conceived schemes.

See note 1 above.

Needs to include Park Road, Hill House Road and Gerrish Ave See note 1 above.

Supportive of the scheme but skeptical this will be respected without enforcement. Particularly along Park Road.

See note 3 above

I would like to see the 20mph zone on Park Road extended north as far Salisbury Road. The road has parked cars on both sides, which mean it is narrow in places and it can be difficult and dangerous to cross the road as a pedestrian due to the speed of cars being too fast. The pavements are also quite narrow which means sometimes you can be walking very close to the road with cars passing at speed right next to you. Driving up this road is made more difficult by drivers coming in the opposite direction not slowing sufficiently where there are parked cars causing narrowing of the road, which means there is a higher risk of accidents. Accidents have occurred on this stretch of the road for this reason. I feel a 20 mph speed limit would be beneficial in reducing this risk and make this residential road far safer for pedestrians and drivers alike.

See note 1 above.

The 20mph limit should stretch the entire length of Park Road. Full width speed bumps should also be implemented along the entire length of Park

See note 1 above.

Road. This road is used as a major route for commuters and the average speed is far in excess of 30mph (not the 24mph where your survey was taken). Drivers frequently speed up and down the road at over 40mph as it provides a major route from the ring road (via Station Road) through to Downend / Bromley Heath / Frenchay and the City Centre (via Fishponds Road). Rush hour and Saturdays are, without fail, interrupted by horns beeping and tyre's squealing as bottle necks are created by parked cars at random points along the road. I have also had the wing mirror knocked off my car on 3 separate occasions over the last 12months, purely due to the speed and nature of the traffic along this stretch. This is a built up residential area, with the houses fronting the narrow pavements having only very short driveways / front gardens. Many families with young children live along this road,, a lot of pedestrians use it to walk to the park, plus with 2 nearby Secondary schools and a number of Primary schools many children use this route to walk to and from school. To not fully recognise this danger, and not implement proper speed restricting measures would be incredibly irresponsible. Traffic calming measures have recently been introduced on Coniston Road, Patchway due to it being a 'ret-run', this Road does not have the bottle necks created by parked cars on either side, plus the houses have a much greater distance from their front gardens to the road. North Street, in Downend is 20mph, this Road is no more busy than Park Road and does not have the bottle necks created by parked cars as it is largely double yellows. The suggestion to put a 20mph limit just around the park is ridiculous, it will create confusion, will largely be ignored and will not deal with the dangerous nature of Park Road. Surrounding roads are also used to gain access to Park Road (e.g Buckingham Place and Sailsbury Road) and form park of this dangerous rat-run, they should also be restricted to 20mph. Unfortunately drivers tend to care more about protecting their cars than the vast numbers of children that use these pavement to walk to and from school. Something needs to be done before a serious accident occurs and I would be grateful to receive acknowledgement of my statement and confirmation of what measures will be put in place.

North View Recommend area is expanded to cover North View to protect children accessing the grassed play area area in North View and the former school playing field which is accessed via Mayflower Court. This would then have the additional benefit of increasing safety at the junctions with Park Road and Hill House Road where parked vehicles restrict view.

See note 1 above.

Hill House Road

It could possibly be extended further north along Hill House Road and Park Road, perhaps up to North View. Related to this consultation, the signalling at the junction on the SW corner of Page Park would benefit from review, particularly the conflict between vehicles heading north from Teewell Hill and those seeking to turn west from Park Road - the former tend to run the light given the setback distance between the light and the junction, leaving those seeking to turn right into Broad Street to still be in the junction when the E/W lights go green.

See note 1 above. Any modifications to this junction to separate out the movements would require a full re-equip at a cost of approximately £150,000. In addition separating out the movements is likely to make Park Road more attractive as a through route which runs slightly counter to this scheme.

Hill House Rd is used like a race track,the speeds some people use this Road are frightening.This needs to stop before someone is killed.

See note 1 above.

I think that the 20 mph limit on Hill House Road should be extended to the entrance of The Willows Surgery. This is because of the volume of traffic to the surgery and the parking which extends along Hill House Rd.

See note 1 above.

Mangotsfield Road/Broad Street

The biggest safety issue is on Mangotsfield Road in the part alongside the park. Why has this been excluded from the proposal?

See notes 1 and 2 above

Could be continued right around the park, to include Mangotsfield Road See notes 1 and 2 above

This should also be along Broad Street for the length of the park due to Retirement Housing built in the past and also more recently. Also the whole length of Hill House Road as there is also open green space that used to be the playing fields of the now non-existant Downend Lower School further along.

See notes 1 and 2 above

As there is a play area on the broad street side of the park, albeit a supposed teenage area, would it not make sense for the area of broad street from teewell hill traffic lights to Hill house road junction to be a 20 mile limit as well?

See notes 1 and 2 above

There is no mention about broad street which has two old age pensioners facilities, also the cycle track from which cyclists and walkers come up white lodge road across broad street to the park, another nightmare is at the traffic lights on broad street and park road due to vehicles being parked both sides of the road, especially by the side of the old bus depot which causes traffic chaos as this is on a very awkward bus route. There should be double yellow lines from the traffic lights, (broad street) to at least albert road to alleviate the problem, i have lived in south view for 40 years as far as i'm a where there has been no serious accidents so please, no speed bumps as i think they cause more accidents (no problem with the 20mph speed limit)

See notes 1 and 2 above Installation of double yellow lines is beyond the scope of this scheme but your request has been noted.

Clarence Ave Under your proposal, Clarence Avenue is a 30mph rat run between 2 20 mph zones, as is West Park Road. This is plain crazy.

See note 1 above

The Hawthornes

Map not easy to read? Would really need to include THE HAWTHORNES. The amount of speeding cars has increased over the years, kids playing , old people crossing road, pets in general being run over? 30-40 seems to be the limit here.

See note 1 above

I am not sure why you would be contacting residence in The Howthornes, because the controls are suggesting our side of the park. Now if you were to the stretch of Broad Street from Hill House Road to Teeweel Hill including the Hawthornes, this would cove all those eldly peoples flats along this stretch who would love to find it easy to cross over to the park to relax.

See notes 1 and 2 above. When we carry out consultations of this nature we do tend to consult a slightly larger area than just the roads directly affected as we recognise that people living nearby will also want to comment. It also helps us identify whether we are doing too much, whether we have got it about right or whether, as in this case, we are not going as far as people would like.

White Lodge Road

Lots of cycle traffic between the park and the Bristol/Bath cycle track goes up/down white Lodge Road, and you've just spent money on a traffic island so that cyclists and pedestrians can cross Broad Street from White Lodge Road in order to access the park I think you should consider including White Lodge Road in the reduced speed limit area as surely it must carry more cycle traffic than any of the other roads currently identified?

See note 1 above

General comments If we are doing this for vulnerable individuals safety then the reduced speed limit should apply to all roads alongside the park otherwise it makes no sense to only apply it to three out of four.

See notes 1 and 2 above

The area should be larger as a lot of children will walk to the park.

See notes 1 and 2 above

Lots of cyclists, dog walkers, schoolchildren and joggers, boot camp exercise people use the park - drivers need to be so careful. It needs very obvious signs everywhere and on the road as well.

See note 4 above

Sooner the better!. Noted

My first thought was that, if Sth Glos has funds for something that as a walker and motorist I've never found a problem, a more pressing job would be to repair the dangerous pavements in the area.

The council have decided to prioritise the scheme and have made the funds available. The majority of respondents not only support the scheme but want us to go much further.

Firstly, this seemed a refreshing stance to the local community. As we live directly in front of Page Park, on Park Road number XX to be precise...but, comparing the costings, I cannot condone.. So, it's a NO from us! Please ask Mr Boulton of scrutiny committee to peruse.... How on earth can this road adjustment cost that much? I am an experienced builder from ground works to topping out. I would be prepared to do it for, far less, not just for my children!

The cost of the scheme includes the cost of consultation, legal advertisement and preparation of the legal traffic regulation order. Inevitably this adds significantly to the cost of scheme.

It would be a good,idea also for local residence safety, and my grand children safety,when they visit, to restrict the number of learner drivers in these areas, also north view, where my grand children play near green. There are far to many learner drivers in north view, and surrounding areas. Can be at least up to 6-8 learners at one time in north view. They are continually up and down street, all through the week, And also weekends. And residents unable some times to get into there drive. They can cause accidents. Please there are hundreds streets in Bristol, why do they have to go to specific areas, learners will go all over Bristol when they pass there test not just up are streets.

There is no legislation available to restrict learner drivers from using the roads around the park.

You have measured speeds in the roads proposed for a 20mph limit and found the speeds to be “below 24 mph”. So why spend public money when you will achieve only what is already the case? At this time when ordinary working people have to count every penny and justify every expenditure why does South Glos Council propose to spend the local tax payer’s money to achieve what is already being achieved?

See note 5 above

I regularly witness cars exceeding the speed limit, worst when the park is busy and there is limited space to park

See note 3 above A parking review is beyond the scope of this scheme

This is a great idea. My only concern is how this will be enforced as there are many vehicles who already ignore the existing speed limits.

See note 3 above

Lots of cyclists, dog walkers, schoolchildren and joggers, boot camp exercise people use the park - drivers need to be so careful. It needs very obvious signs everywhere and on the road as well.

See note 4 above

The area should be larger as a lot of children will walk to the park. See note 1 above

Page Park attracts 800,000 visitors a year this is confirmed by counters which have been in place for several years as part of the Heritage Lottery Project. The improvements being made to the park will attract even more people. I have lived in South View for 26 years and have seen many near accidents of dogs and children running out of the park and into the road and with traffic speeds these incidents could of proved more serious. Being a straight road we do get some cars and other vehicles traveling at high speeds along the road. It is as important to have speed limits around parks as it is to have them outside schools etc.the dangers are the same. The roads immediately around the park are all bus routes. On busy days theses roads are doubled parked leaving space for only one vehicle to get through. This causes considerable problems for drivers and busses. So yes to add 20mph speed limits but there needs to be investigation on creating passing points along South View and Hillhouse Road especially. Someone did visit and decided passing points were not needed but on busy days traffic does not flow and as a resident it is very difficult to get the car out of the Drive.

Thank you for your comments. A parking review to introduce passing places is beyond the scope of this scheme

If average speed is 24mph what is point? 20 limits have little evidence to show benefits, Bristol are reviewing that its been overdone.. There is too much road furniture in general... Surely with £ tight there are far better things to spend money on... I am

See note 5 and 6 above

Councillor and Advanced Driver.

Given the average speed of traffic is less than 24mph anyhow isn't this just a waste of money?

See note 5 and 6 above

The statement and reasoning is that traffic speed limit needs reducing in line with advice. You go on to say that the current limit of 30mph is being adhered to and in fact the average speed is 24mph. That being the case the limit is appropriate and to go to the expense of this consultation and no doubt implementation, is a waste when we need to be watching every penny of public funds. There appears no history of accidents and in the main the area is used by residents so their self control is understandable rendering this a waste of time. Further more your questionnaire is wrong as it leaves no choice to disagree totally in question 2.

See note 5, 6 and 7 above

There's no need for 20mph there's been no accidents & people drive sensible according to road conditions

See note 5 and 6 above

I fail to understand the current fascination with 20 mph zones, particularly in areas where the surveyed speed is around 24/25 mph, or below. If that is the average speed, why are you going to all of the expense of removing signs, removing road markings, and replacing them with new ones. It seems to me that the Council would be considered more favourably, by many, if they spent the doubtless thousands of pounds it is going to cost, on other local projects to benefit the council tax payers of the affected areas. I suppose you will put forward the usual argument that there will be fewer accidents. How many accidents have there been, and what proof do you have that there will be less? Perhaps you should listen to Bath and Bristol, where there is some evidence that there has been an increase in accidents, in areas where they have arbitrarily implemented similar speed limits. Or perhaps you will ignore anything that is contrary to your beliefs, like George Ferguson did when he destroyed the Bristol streets, and increased pollution. Even the choices in Question 2 suggests that you are going to do it regardless of any feedback.

See note 5, 6 and 7 above

Unless there are permanent speed cameras monitoring the restricted roads what is the advantage to cyclists and pedestrians without installing traffic calming measures. Vehicles will not adhere to a 20mph limit just as they do not adhere to 30mph, 40mph, 50mph, 60mph and 70mph limits.

See note 3 and 5 above

I object to the validity of the speed data. The main reason vehicles have an average speed of 24mph along Park Road (between Broad St and Clarence Ave) is due to the poor road surface. On the side with houses the road is basically unusable for the first 3 foot from the kerb due to potholes, failing road surface and frequent sub standard repairs. This forces cyclists and cars into the centre of the road, closer to oncoming traffic. The Council has ignored 10's of requests I have made, over the last 9 years (as well as others from the community) to resurface the road. This represents an artificial lowering of traffic speed. Resurfacing Park Road completely as opposed to reducing the speed limit would improve safety for all road users and pedestrians by reducing stopping distances, improve traffic flow by restoring the full carriageway width and reduce noise.

See note 5 above. Your comments about the surface of the road have been forwarded to the team responsible for prioritising carriageway resurfacing.

About time

Thank you for your comments

Good scheme. Long overdue. Thank you for your comments

No accidents in the surrounding area, grow up on North View and regularly used these roads enroute to the cycle path, never once had any issues. I don't think it's a deterrence based upon the speed limits. Slowing the roads down isn't an adequate solution to making walking and cycling more attractive, people don't go to Page Park to cycle, if so, they're children with

Reducing speeds should making walking and cycling a more attractive means of getting to the park.

parents who've driven there. You're opening a new cafe, which is going to increase volume of traffic, which will naturally slow traffic down anyway.

how do you intend to moniter/enforce this. Speed readings will be taken a few months after the scheme has been implemented and compared with those taken before. See note 3 above.

Supportive of the scheme but skeptical this will be respected without enforcement. Particularly along Park Road.

See note 3 above

Haythorn Court where we live is a cul de sac. Many vehicles use the space in front of No. 5 as a turning circle. We would like a cul de sac sign at the junction with Hillhouse Road.

I appreciate your concern about the lack of any indication that Haythorn Court is a cul-de-sac. It is the council’s policy to incorporate such signs into a street nameplate. This policy ensures that sign clutter is kept to a minimum and reduces the number of signs that the council has to maintain. Your comments have been forwarded to our StreetCare maintenance team so that they may order the appropriate signs when the current nameplate signs are due for renewal.

There is the possible risk of a child running out of the park and on to the road so the proposed reduced speed limit may well reduce the severity of any collision with a motor vehicle.

Thank you for your comments

Seems reasonable area for the requirements. Its around the immediate park area which all that is requied.

Thank you for your comments

1. The proposal is to impose a 20mph limit to part of Park Rd and part of Hill House Rd so we will have the same ridiculous situation we have in North St where you don't know what speed you should be doing where. 2. These roads are on bus routes and will make public transport all the more unreliable. 3. The number of parked cars around the park precludes speeds anywhere near 30mph. This is a complete waste of money and resources.

See notes 4 and 5 above. The introduction of 20mph speed limits in other areas has made speeds more consistent with less acceleration and braking. This makes bus journey times more reliable

The questions are slanted towards getting the answer you want. Anyone with common sense would drive slower in residential/park areas without unenforceable speed limits being imposed. Men walking in front of vehicles with flags springs to mind.

The questionnaire allows us to gauge whether or not there is support for the scheme and if so whether we have got the size of the scheme right.

It will enhance safety of park users if the 20 mph restrictions are implemented.

Thank you for your comments

seems like a good idea Thank you for your comments

If current average speeds are below 24mph the 20mph zone will not make a difference. Parked cars, road layout and a very visible park is keeping traffic speeds low. Most of the park gates are already well sited so access to the park is easy. The main gate has an existing crossing that compensates for heavy traffic. There are surely other areas where a 20mph zone would provide more benefit.

See note 5 above

Please make it very clear to drivers where the 20mph and 30mph start and finish on split roads. Other roads in South Glos and Bristol which have both speeds are not always clear. Markings on the road are good but the 20mph signs on the lampposts are very tiny and then there is nothing after you come out of 20mph. We have to guess we are in 30mph zone. The good

See note 4 above.

news is that I drive at 20m,ph all the time to avoid being ticketed

To ensure people adhere to a 20mph restriction I feel the whole Road needs to be 20mph with speed bumps around the park itself. I know it is a bus route but other large vehicles seem to be ignoring the weight restrictions & may think twice when faced with speed bumps as well.

See note 1 above

The reason that I protest against the 20 mile hour limit is, that it is rare to be able to do 30 with the amount of parking around the park. This is not used as a fast road where drivers are able to brake the 30 mile limit that is set, due to the amount of cars parked around the roads with resident parking and people visiting the park. Also, I can't see how this would possibly make cycling any more attractive. This is money that could be far better spent on sorting all the roads with pot holes etc. damaging cars and making it dangerous for cyclists who have to suddenly pull out in front of a car to avoid the damaged road, or catching their wheel/s forcing them off the bike.

See note 5 above

I do not wan't speed restrictions in the area, and I detest the ones with speed humps, already in place, as they damage my car, as they have not been thought out well at all. Example : 3 humps one in the middle, with cars parked either side, stupid idea. Forcing cars to go in the centre. I have seen so many close accidents about to happen due to this. And if you don't go towards the centre, you damage your car. I do not agree to this in any way or form. Its a waste of our money. 30 mph is a reasonable speed along these roads. And as you have discovered the average already is below 24 mph, therefore it is a complete waste of time and resources.

See note 1 above

Suggest new rails on walls surrounding park which will leave correct exit points

Installation of railings is beyond the scope of this scheme

I oppose this proposal entirely. I'm a cyclist. I have never found this area busy or with speeding traffic. 30mph is adequate, and not being breached according to your own data. The state of the road surface is more of an issue (for cyclist safety). Perhaps you could devote the money to this instead Prefer that this scheme not proceed.

See note 6 above

Do you have a record of previous traffic accidents in the areas affected by the 20mph limit?

The roads in question do not have an accident history. However, even without accidents, higher speeds can be a deterrent to walking and cycling

If we are doing this for vulnerable individuals safety then the reduced speed limit should apply to all roads alongside the park otherwise it makes no sense to only apply it to three out of four.

See notes 1 and 2 above

I do not agree with the need for this unnecessary spending of our money when all that is really needed is for a crossing point (? pelican crossing) across Broad Street near the older retirement homes opposite Hillhouse Road. There is absolutely no reason for putting a lower speed limit on the side roads, especially Haythorn Court as this is a no through road, and not of any great length. This appears to me to be bureaucracy gone bonkers. Where has the need for this come from? Have there been a lot of accidents in the immediate area? I haven't heard of any. People use this park all the time, and have done so for many years without anyone deciding we need the speed limit reduced on roads that aren't long enough (where you have marked), for someone to get up that amount of speed anyway. Have you been to the park? I use it most days. The improvements made/being made will not increase usage by that much.

If Haythorn Court was excluded from the limited, 30mph terminal signs would have to be erected at the entry to the cul-de-sac. This would make the scheme more expensive and give encourage drivers to speed up as the enter the cul-de-sac. See note 6 above