This post invites you to answer: How safe are the roads in Chandler’s Ford?
This week, 17-23 November 2014, is Road Safety Week. Chandler’s Ford Today wants to find out if you have any concerns about the safety of roads in Chandler’s Ford.
We’ll pass your feedback on to the Chandler’s Ford Parish Council.
Road safety campaign: Look out for each other
The Road Safety Week is a campaign by Brake, a national road safety charity. Its aims are Stopping the carnage; Supporting the victims.
The theme this year is Look out for each other, to help stop the five deaths and 61 serious injuries that happen every day on UK roads, and particularly to protect people on foot and bike.
Brake are asking drivers to “protect people on foot and bike by going 20 or below in communities, looking longer and taking it slow at junctions and bends, and giving people plenty of room.”
New road markings on Hursley Road
Now we have new road markings on the Hursley Road and Hiltingbury Road junction. Does it mean the junction is now safer?
20mph on Winchester Road near Thornden School
Recently Chandler’s Ford resident Terry B posted a question on Streetlife, a brilliant social network for the local communities.
“Have you seen the NEW 20mph signs near Thorndon School flash to slow traffic down, a good idea, but there is no end of the speed limit.
So if you exceed this speed, would it legal if a fine was issued?”
A conversation by Terry B on Streetlife about Winchester Road, Chandler’s Ford
This is a good question. Many local residents have responded with good points. Some people think what we need is common sense, not conflicting traffic warnings. You can follow the engaging conversation about SO53 road safety in this thread.
Parking problem on Hiltingbury Road
Similarly, three weeks ago, local resident Ray S raised a question about the parking problem on Hiltingbury Road.
“On Hiltingbury Road people are parking both sides blocking the traffic and causing congestion. They always parked on one side which was okay, but now sometimes both sides and very close.
I think it is a accident just waiting one day to happen. Is anybody else feeling the same?”
A conversation by Ray S on Streetlife about Hiltingbury Road, Chandler’s Ford .
So, how can we make the roads in Chandler’s Road safer?
Road safety should mean that all road users are safe. Ask yourself: “Am I a sensible driver, cyclist, pedestrian, or jogger?”
I would love to hear your suggestions and pass on your feedback to the Parish Council.
Subscribers of Chandler’s Ford Today include a few local councillors and civil servants from Eastleigh Borough Council, so I’m quite sure your voice will be heard.
Please leave your comments in the comment box.
1) Do you support the speed limit in certain areas in Chandler’s Ford to be reduced to 20mph?
2) Do you think cyclists should cycle on the pavements in Chandler’s Ford? (Every morning when I walk to work, I have to avoid many cyclists who cycle on pavements.)
3) What is your view on the verge parking problem in Chandler’s Ford?
4) How safe are our roads in Chandler’s Ford for disabled and wheelchair users?
I welcome many more suggestions or solutions that you may have.
http://t.co/noOt7U71GP How safe are the roads in Chandler's Ford?@Brakecharity @clerkcfpc @EcoEastleigh @EastleighBC pic.twitter.com/oeR7L0NhDh
— Janet Williams (@cfordtoday) November 20, 2014
@cfordtoday @Brakecharity @clerkcfpc @EcoEastleigh @EastleighBC it depends very much on the quality of driving! pic.twitter.com/TCjprPl7m2
— Si Kulzanworx (@Cyclestrian) November 21, 2014
@cfordtoday @Brakecharity @clerkcfpc @EcoEastleigh @EastleighBC moral of story: look, look again, take your time + give plenty of space.
— Si Kulzanworx (@Cyclestrian) November 21, 2014
@Cyclestrian @cfordtoday @Brakecharity @EcoEastleigh @EastleighBC When did this happen?
— Chandler's Ford PC (@clerkcfpc) November 21, 2014
@clerkcfpc @cfordtoday @Brakecharity @EcoEastleigh @EastleighBC in 2008 – it's on crashmap (Hiltingbury Road near schools)
— Si Kulzanworx (@Cyclestrian) November 21, 2014
Related posts:
I support the reduction to 20 mph in certain areas but with one proviso. It has to be enforced. The current speed limit is not enforced and until such time as it is, I can’t see the point of a cut. The good drivers will reduce. There has to be a way of targeting the bad ones who simply don’t care.
With the exception of paper delivery boys/girls, the occasional postman on a bike and young children, cyclists should ride on the road AND obey all the rules of the road as motorists should do. I appreciate there are stupid cyclists and stupid drivers but I’ve seen both go through the red traffic lights at the Hursley Road/Hiltingbury Road junction. I’d have less of a problem with cyclists on the pavement if they slowed down (I’ve had near misses on the corner of Hursley/Hiltingbury Road) AND dismounted for pedestrians the way they are supposed to do.
I’ve no real comment on verge parking as nobody does it on Hursley Road – well at least they don’t for long or they will get their vehicle smashed up. It’s one of the few advantages of living on a major road!
The biggest safety improvement would be for drivers/cyclists to slow down as appropriate, not go through red lights and please, please, please could someone give pedestrians longer to cross the road at traffic lights. I’m reasonably healthy and I get to about the half way mark with my dog when the “beeper” stops. Knowing that traffic could then come hurtling at you makes you feel vulnerable. Someone should remember we can’t all race across the pedestrian crossings!
Excellent comment – thank you Allison.
Most mornings I have to give way to cyclists as they cycle on the pavements on Hursley Road. If I don’t, I would be the one who is injured. Sometimes I’m ok, but sometimes I get pretty annoyed as I didn’t feel safe on pavements. When cyclists cycle on the pavement on Hursley Road, they think they are superior – from their aggressive manners, and they way the zia-zag across the road. The hotspot is the railway bridge junction and the Co-op on Hursley Road.
I spoke to a few teenagers and asked them to wear a helmet. They told me they didn’t have to as they have excellent skills in cycling. I then asked them if their mum / dad let them leave home without a helmet, fully aware that their children were cycling to school and zig-zagging on the road. I think perhaps some parents simply don’t worry about it as they trust their teenage children, or possibly it is impossible for parents to impose safety rules (or any rule) to teenagers.
From the collage above you could see that this morning I gave way to at least 3 young cyclists (non of them wore a helmet).
The traffic light outside Park Surgery on Hursley Road encourages you to be a fast walker! I agree the beeper there perhaps should last longer, as that area is full of elderly people, who may need to cross the road to get to Lloyds Pharmacy quite frequently.
If the amber lights / green man start to flash after you have started to cross the road, you still have priority. That’s the law and no driver should be forcing you to walk faster. In fact I would say that even if the lights have stopped flashing, any courteous driver should wait for you to finish crossing in safety. Drivers seem to think that a green light means “go”. No it doesn’t. A green light means “go if it is safe to do so and your exit is clear”.
I don’t see a problem with cyclists on footpaths if they feel safer there. However, they should remember that pedestrians have priority, and must ride accordingly. if there are pedestrians they should slow to a walking pace or get off and walk.
Unfortunately, although Eastleigh is quite good for cycle paths there are some notable exceptions. The road between Fryern and Thornden is one – and a route that I imagine is popular with school children. Oddly, there is a cycle path from Otterbourne to Thornden. It just peters out at the school, for no discernible reason.
Then there is the cycle lane in Woodside Avenue – no physical segregation form the dual carriageway, just a painted road surface. I won’t use this cycle lane, but use the footpath because I deem it to be safer.
The road markings at the junction in Hursley Road go against the Highway Code advice to pass rear to rear when turning right. That way both drivers can see oncoming traffic. Unless the lights have a right filter (and they don’t appear to). this seems more dangerous.
Ruby,
Please could you elaborate on your last point (though you have many valid points!) as I don’t seem to understand it.
“The road markings at the junction in Hursley Road go against the Highway Code advice to pass rear to rear when turning right. That way both drivers can see oncoming traffic. Unless the lights have a right filter (and they don’t appear to). this seems more dangerous.”
Are you referring to the Hursley / Hiltingbury Road junction?
Yes, that junction. It is generally safer for cars to pass driver-side to driver-side, and so go round the back of each other. That way, both drivers can see oncoming traffic. Passing the other way means that both vehicles block the view of oncoming traffic.
I suppose that the purpose of the markings is to encourage vehicles to wait in the centre of the road, and so leave room for traffic going straight on to pass on the left. However, when I drove through the junction yesterday, a car turning right was half-out of the “box” (towards the left) and so not achiving this at all. Is this becuase the boxes are in the wrong place (e.g. not leaving enough room to turn or putting the turning vehicle too close to oncoming traffice) or the driver was oblivious to them?
Hi Ruby,
To answer your question about that junction on Hursley Road / Hiltingbury Road, you may need to read this thread on Streetlife: Streetlife | Traffic lights – Hursley Road / Hiltingbury road / Baddersley Road
Some local residents feel that the box was a ‘bodge’ job and that drivers have ignored the markings. They think it is difficult to park the car inside the box. Some people suggest a mini roundabout instead. What is your view?
Hi Ruby,
The Highway Code has reminded people of this rule today: If you've started to walk across the road and traffic wants to turn into it, you have priority – traffic should give way.
I hope all drivers read this message and give way.
I fully support any ‘intelligent’ measure that is designed to improve road safety generally and specifically in built up areas i.e. 30mph zones.
Two years ago I was convicted of speeding in a 30 mph zone (I was clocked at 34 mph in Leicestershire). I was offered the option of a speed awareness course instead of the fixed penalty and points which I readily accepted.
Maybe others have experience of this course as well but for me it really opened my eyes regarding the big difference that a small increase in speed can make to the seriousness of an accident – particularly in collision with a pedestrian. In some ways, it would be a good course for ALL drivers to go on but of course that is impractical.
Simply put, understanding that respect for existing speed limits and accepting that your journey time might be extended by a few seconds or a couple of minutes may make the difference between life and death for a small child or an unfortunate pedestrian.
Thank you Nick for sharing your speeding story (as some people would consider it too ’embarrassing’ to reveal it), and the ‘speed awareness course’. A few of my friends have also taken the course.
I think the Highway Code has summed up the message well: Do not treat speed limits as a target.
However, other factors also contribute to a risk to pedestrians and cyclists. In Chandler’s Ford in particular, irresponsible parking in the neighbourhood (including family car, mini vans, and delivery vehicles) is commonplace. Emergency services won’t be able to reach certain areas due to the way cars are parked on some roads.
Another Dept of Transport publication I have (something like “know your road signs”) has a more accurate description of the speed restriction signs. It is something like “the maximum permissible speed where road conditions allow”.
Re the 20 mph debate. I have been told that one advantage of the limit isn’t so much the speed reduction, but that it makes drivers more observant. They think “there must be a reason for the reduced speed, I’ll keep an eye out”.
A 20 mph limit was imposed over most of Whitchurch (the Hampshire one) earlier this year. Some residents were in favour; others against. The vicar addressed the controversy very well in the parish magazine: 20mph – The Vicar’s Letter.
I do not understand the 20 mph rule by Thornden School. The road is good, bus stops have pull-ins, it is well lit, traffic turning right into Thornden has a marked-off central lane and most important there is absolutely no need for anyone to cross the road there as an underpass is provided.
Is it a legally binding 20mph limit or just advisory?
The number one rule should be that the roads are for everyone to use. We must allow everyone the proper use of them; that means allowing pedestrians time to cross and it means allowing space for cyclists though this is difficult on narrow roads. We are too much focussed on whose right of way it is rather than who needs us to be more careful.
Wheeling yourself in a wheelchair, or pushing one, is made difficult by heavy cambers. It’s not so bad for prams and pushchairs as they are light.
Our road officers should walk the footpaths with a wheelchair and a colleague. They would then realise how often street signs and furniture partially block the path. Add everyone’s bins on collection day and trees and hedges that are allowed to grow out from front boundaries and then cars parked on verges. Walking on the road in the gutter then becomes the easy option.
Mike you’re the fourth person I know who has in the last few weeks mentioned the camber of pavements for those in wheelchairs. As someone who has rarely needed to push anyone in a wheelchair it wouldn’t have occurred to me. Can’t be just a local issue either – there does seem to be a need to consider new guidelines for planners to improve this sort of thing as and when pavements are redone. Found this article raising it as a national issue: BBC News – ‘Dangerous’ pavements a hazard for wheelchair and scooter users.
Two issues I have found around is the need for more suitable crossing points on some of the main roads and educating cyclists to have lights on both front and back of their bikes in the dark. Perhaps police could take the bike like they do with uninsured drivers and only return it when they turn up with some lights to fit on it!
We have had a load of 20mph sections around Eastleigh town put in recently not that you get much chance to do more than that anyway – personally if it’s a busy / through road 20mph sections around schools are good idea.
Dan,
According to the Highway Code, cyclists have to be responsible for themselves and other road users.
Unfortunately, there are far too many irresponsible cyclists in our local areas who give other responsible cyclists a bad name. Some cyclists don’t have any light on their bike at night.
Several points to this old thread (I missed this last year):
There is no evidence that enforcing cycle helmets makes people safer (from cycle helmets). This is why wearing a helmet should be a personal informed choice, even for teenagers.
Cycling is not dangerous in itself and in the Netherlands, where injury rates are much lower than here, no one wears a helmet. If you (or a school) wants to make children wear one then you might also want them to wear a helmet as a pedestrian or even the occupant of a vehicle: several peer-reviewed studies suggested that this would help reduce head injuries. Having said that, if you ride fast or off road or are accident prone then I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend one.
On the contrary there is a lot of evidence that 20mph area speed limits do save lives and improve quality of life for local residents. When are we getting 20mph in Chandler’s Ford? Journeys will not take anything like 3/2 as long as simple maths suggests because most time in local areas is spent at junctions / slowing / accelerating. 20mph would help reduce pavement cycling: this usually happens when people (or their parents) are too afraid of hostile roads to ride on them.
Totally agree on pavements. They are in an awful condition and poorly maintained/swept/deiced.
Why do irresponsible cyclists give other cyclists a bad name? Do speeding drivers give all other drivers a bad reputation? Sounds like bigotry!
Hiltingbury / Hursley road junction: this needs a diagonal pedestrian crossing so that pedestrians do not have to push the button and wait twice. These lights help to reduce through traffic in Hiltingbury so please do not increase traffic flow here.
20 or 30 mph limits? I would rather be hit by a car at 20 than 30 but 10 would be better still. Where should this argument end?
Not sure about the evidence. Much of it is not independent, the money for the investigation being provided on the premise that slower would be proved better. Many of the studies seem to have small numbers and are statistically weak.
Some places 20 is too fast at certain times but not at others. Road safety has improved over the years but I think the next big problem will be silent electric cars. We rely on our hearing so much for safety.