There is a Surrey County Council (SCC) project called Farncombe
Local Streets Improvements. It is currently at Informal Engagement stage, which
runs until March 15th.
It proposes imposing 20mph speed limits throughout
the Farncombe area, even on main thoroughfares. As well as many instances of
raised tables and junction narrowing, and several of carriageway narrowing.
There is a project description and questionnaire at [[1]]. This
is a summary of my response.
About myself
I have lived in Godalming for 40 years. My home is at the
top of the hill, on Twycross Rd near Frith Hill Rd. I am a car driver and
pedestrian. At the age of 72, a car is essential to my quality of life.
I am a regular customer of several businesses in Farncombe
and Binscombe. And I like to walk frequently in Broadwater Park.
I have a degree in mathematics. And I have acquired, over
decades, much expertise in environmental matters. I am known for my strong and
principled opposition to net zero. I am strongly against all political policies
that harm or restrict car drivers. I am also campaign manager for my local
branch, Godalming and Ash, of Reform UK.
Political context
I am well aware of the “Local Transport Plan 4,” published in
2021 by Surrey County Council (SCC). The policies in that plan showed up its promoters
as hostile to the needs and desires of everyone who drives a car in Surrey.
I am also aware that Tory-controlled SCC chose to join UK100,
a strongly pro-net-zero group of councils. I am aware of the WHO’s “Vision
Zero” road safety scheme, being pushed on us by the Liberal Democrat caucus on
SCC. As to Labour, they have recently approved the roll-out of “15-minute
cities” by local authorities across the UK. And Godalming Town Council, with
ten Liberal Democrats, three Greens, three Labour and two Tories, has swallowed
the deep green nonsense whole.
It will not surprise you, then, to learn that I am very
strongly opposed to all schemes such as the Farncombe local streets “improvements.”
If you live, work or shop in Binscombe, Farncombe, or Charterhouse south of
Charterhouse School, and you agree with me, I urge you to submit your own
response by March 15th.
The “early engagement” phase
I took part in the “early engagement” phase of this project
in autumn 2024. I gained the impression that the whole exercise was biased
towards highlighting perceived issues that could then be exploited to “justify”
anti-car policies, and lowered speed limits in particular. I also noticed that
the questionnaire allowed multiple submissions from each individual.
Area Wide
Proposals
Here are my responses to the “area wide proposals” recently published.
20mph speed limit
In my view, the current 30mph limits in Farncombe are
already perfectly adequate.
Here is the map of the proposals. Every road coloured red or
gold is to have a 20mph speed limit slapped on it. These include roads vital to
every journey I make, including those to Farncombe and to Godalming.
Moreover, two of these roads, Farncombe Hill and Frith Hill
Rd, are extremely steep. And 20mph speed limits have been shown not to work
well on steep hills.
Since speeds around Farncombe are already very slow, the
effect of a 20mph limit on speeds in central Farncombe would be minimal. So,
there would be no gain from 20mph speed limits for people in Farncombe itself,
yet a big loss for people in neighbouring areas. This is not in any sense a
benefit to the people. The entire 20mph proposal should be ditched.
Raised tables and
speed bumps
In most cases, raised tables cause more trouble than any
benefit they might bring. And speed-bumps can also cause more trouble than
merely repeated strains on cars’ suspension. I also have a friend who recently suffered
almost £700 worth of damage to the underside of his car going over a broken speed
bump outside Loseley Fields school.
I would advocate removing all the obstructive hardware from
our roads, and treating drivers as responsible adults.
Narrowing of junctions to “calm” traffic
Narrowing of junctions can make sense for pedestrian safety in
certain places where the side road is unusually wide, or where the pedestrian route
is heavily used. But in most places, it will have a negative effect. Junction
narrowing looks particularly inappropriate on roads which are also bus routes.
Vehicle activated
signs to encourage drivers to slow down
The most likely effect of such signs is to make drivers
angry at being treated as if they were naughty children instead of responsible
adults.
Improvements to
accessibility through consistent dropped kerbs and tactile paving
Generally, this is a good idea. But it needs to be
cost-justified in each case.
Pedestrian
wayfinding
I don’t think this is of any benefit in a place the size
of Farncombe.
Detailed issues
The full version of my response covers a large number of
issues I found while looking over the detailed maps. Many of the proposals will
have negative impact on those who need their cars in order to get to and from the
Farncombe area. They are particularly damaging to people who live higher up the
hill, and thus walking to and from Farncombe is not a sensible option.
There is far too much junction narrowing and carriageway
narrowing in these schemes. I see these as making what should be a simple road
into an obstacle course.
I have responded to many individual points via the
consultation website.
To sum up
Most of the proposals will have negative impact on those who
need their cars in order to get around the Farncombe area. Yet they will not
lead to any benefits for people in Farncombe itself. They are not improvements,
but the exact opposite. With just a few exceptions, all the proposed changes
should be scrapped.
As campaign manager for Reform UK in the constituency which
includes Farncombe, I shall be urging all our candidates, members, and
supporters to fight against these proposals with everything they have.
And to voters: If your car matters to you, only one party will stand up for you. And that’s Reform UK. Vote Reform UK in the West Surrey elections on May 7th if you want to keep your freedom to drive.
No comments:
Post a Comment