EX LIBRIS JAN 08

IT’S TRANSPORT STUPID
Northern Rock, missing government discs, England out of Euro 2008 – what a start to the Christmas season! But what really gets us going in Reading? There were the plans for a replacement to the Hexagon on Hills Meadows. That was no good,- wrong place. Why? Traffic chaos stupid! Let’s change the traffic flow around the town. How about a one-way IDR? Now that really got the good burghers of Reading going. In Caversham there have been several attempts to float the idea of a one–way system though the village. How many remember the Triangle action group, the final mass meeting at a packed Baptist Church in central Caversham, the recognition of the strength of feeling against the proposal and the Council’s complete change of heart – at the time?
THE IDR
With this in mind Caversham and District Residents Association (CADRA) has drafted a submission for the commissioner investigating current and projected transport issues in central Reading, including access to the town centre. The main feature of the CADRA response is that it recognises the existing grave problems we face in Reading over traffic management. These may be summarised as follows:
1 Restricted River Thames crossings
2 Cemetery Junction bottleneck sometimes reaching Reading Bridge and through into Caversham.
3. There is no good road linking west Reading to the town centre, causing major rat-runs. One, via Portman Road, creates additional traffic in Caversham Road.
4. There is no north Reading by-pass or equivalent.
5. The West side of the IDR in particular provides a good north-south route past Reading but goes through the centre of congested Caversham.
6. The Thames, the railway lines and the Kennet create added ‘severance’, making road links difficult outside the town centre.
A PERSONAL VIEW
I will not go over the advantages and disadvantages of the one-way system. I am sure readers of this journal will have formed their own opinions some time ago and followed the debate avidly.
However I have to admit I was not 100% opposed to the one-way system. I had my reservations but I also attended briefings and other meetings where the complexity of the issue left me puzzled. I was not the only one. Pat Baxter, Reading Council’s traffic guru, clearly stated that the one-way idea was not the best, was not even a good, option, but it was the least bad solution to Reading’s traffic problems.
With such an enthusiastic endorsement of the proposed plan I trust the commissioner takes on board CADRA’s submission. CADRA does have a traffic specialist on the committee; he works in London, not Reading.
Here is a further extract from the CADRA document.
We consider that all of the following options should be studied by the Commissioner so that some selected alternatives can be put forward for public consultation.

1. Road Building – 3rd Thames Bridge and Cross Town Route
The Cross-town route from the A329M into Reading should be reviewed. Again a single carriageway (one lane in each direction) plus pedestrian and cycling provision may be most appropriate.
2. Traffic management measures, junction improvements and restrictions
e.g. Removing right-turns on Caversham Road would reduce congestion and improve safety.
3. 20mph zones etc traffic restraint
These would be mainly in housing areas that are adversely affected by inappropriate traffic. At present there are small 20mph areas by schools and it may be appropriate to enlarge them.
4. Walking
5. Cycling
At present Reading has a low level of investment in cycling infrastructure with low cycle-growth targets. This is despite government policy to boost cycling. The number and location of cycle routes within the town centre is low and has generally reduced in the last decade. It is difficult to make many key cycle journeys in the town centre without making long detours and/or dismounting for long sections.
6. Buses, Park and Ride and Limited-stop.
Reading Council are generally progressing this but there are substantial improvements still required. Additional measures could include: further bus lanes and bus-gating, park and ride combined with limited stop buses from outer areas such as Woodcote. School bus services such as those from Caversham to Sonning Common and Henley could be combined with inbound commuter routes to provide more services and avoid empty running. Many people see the cost of tickets as a disincentive.

7. Cordon restrictions
Traffic restraint measures including signal controls or tolling could reduce traffic coming into Reading from outer areas. These could be similar to bus-gates.
8. Area Action Plans
Packages of local measures outside the town centre area could help local travel, often assisting more sustainable modes or reducing specific traffic problems.
9. Soft measures – travel plans, publicity
Publicity and travel plans have been used successfully elsewhere. Personal and workplace travel plans can be substantially expanded. Sutton in south London has arranged visits to 70,000 residents to help them consider more sustainable transport

Our preferred option would probably include improvement to the following areas:

• Walking
• Cycling
• Buses
• Traffic management
• Soft measures.
• The provision of a third Thames bridge and the cross-town route may also be desirable, but considerable further information on these proposals and their effects is required.

Various local measures were identified in the North (and other) Area Studies. Unfortunately little work has been carried out since the study. Now is an opportunity to do so.

We would like to see a new package of traffic measures developed and the public consulted on them.
This is just a summary of the document. It appears in full on the CADRA website. By the time you read this, the document will have been modified and sent to the commissioner. Nevertheless, CADRA welcomes comments. If you act quickly, you could still send comments to the commissioner who has asked for people to consider the following questions:
• How do transport issues in Reading affect your journey to work or your business?
• How does traffic and transport affect the environment of Reading now?
• What impact will increases in traffic over the next 10 to 15 years have on the economy and environment of Reading?
. Like me, you may have some reservations about the one-way scheme but may have come to the view that it was after all the best option, but possibly needed adjustments. Here is your chance to express your views.

GOM

However I do have a reputation to maintain, at least with my wife, as a grumpy old man. I certainly have one moan. It is about cycle lanes, or rather those who don’t use them. I notice that the increased provision of cycle routs is one of the proposals in the CADRA document. Excellent idea. I cycle wherever possible and certainly Reading is not best endowed with these havens of safety for cyclists. However, I was driving back today along Richfield Ave. This has an excellent cycle way its full length. Ahead of me was a cyclist, helmet, reflective clothing, lights… the lot. But he was cycling on the road, forcing cars to swerve as they passed.
My personal plea is to make it illegal to cycle on the road where cycle paths are in place. This sort of road use is not only selfish, it is also dangerous and hinders those of us making a case and pleading for more dedicated cycle routes. Yes, they may be slower, they may be less convenient than whipping straight across a roundabout, but with rights there come duties and certain inconveniences. It’s traffic, stupid!