We got a leaflet through the door from the council because we're reasonably close to two of the local primary schools, and a secondary, that are part of the extension into formal consultation of no-drive areas (coincidentally one of the roads being closed at certain times is Hamilton Drive, where the parking attendant was assaulted by a driver).
Anyhoo, the photo attached is of the streets closing, which are those more or less directly beside the schools and (arguably*) most residential. The big main road through won't have the ban - which I can understand, while at the same time, knowing the schools, and having cycled, walked and driven through at dropping off and picking up time, it's chaos, and you can forget about using the bike lanes and ASLs on the main road at these times.
There was a little list (of two items) that confused me in the document however. They note that other streets might be subject to more parking (hence us getting it, though I think we're a little too far away to be affected, we don't quite make it onto the map), and it states:
"To mitigate the impact of this, we will be introducing measures ahead of the scheme launch, as required, including:
- White Access Protection Markings across driveways; and
- Cutting back of hedges."
Two things strike me. At dropping off time the white lines won't make a difference, and likely not even at picking up (I was just waiting for a minute guv), and apart from anything it won't stop people parking in such a way around the white markings to make access ridiculously difficult; and.... how does cutting back of hedges help mitigate the impact of people parking in the streets around?
I'm all for the move, I just think sometimes the way things are worded and presented is a little... odd....
Untitled by Anthony Robson, on Flickr
posts
