Road reason

A blanket 20mph speed limit on all of Bristol’s residential streets will be in place by 2015 (full story and debate here).This is a very good decision. For me the case for 20mph limits is that residential roads are for living not driving in. See here for why 20mph - http://tinyurl.com/bptjkoh
Many of the Mayoral candidates have been advocating it and are backing the decision because they know that its popular with the public. In the 2010 British Social Attitudes Survey 71% of people asked were in favour of 20mph speed limits on residential roads - http://tinyurl.com/cx2r2ca.

Some persist in saying that here is no logical or proven reason for 20mph limits in residential areas  but in fact there's plenty of research around. See this analysis of the effectiveness of 20mph speed limits from the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (http://tinyurl.com/bqbdogs) for instance. Those opposing 20 mph limits seem to be driven by something other than the evidence and reasoning upon it - see the debate on this story on The Post website here - with even more here - for plenty of examples of abuse, avoidance, denial, misinformation and misunderstanding...

Some repeat myths in their comments eg saying that air pollution would be worsened. Actually 20mph limits will NOT increase air pollution, as shown here  http://tinyurl.com/7gp2j89 and are a key feature of a more sustainable approach to urban living. The key is that the streets involved in this decision are residential streets ie people live there. Living there need not and most often does not exclude driving there of course but lets not forget that cyclists and pedestrians and not just motorised vehicles use roads and that all sorts of community activities can and should happen on residential streets if they are safe enough - and this brings me to another reason why I say streets are for living (by which I meant primarily for living) and that is that if the speed limit is 20 mph, in the unfortuneate event of a collision the people involved are much more likely to live than to die.

Some still argue that roads/streets, even residential ones, are primarily for cars and not pedestrians, cyclists and a range of activities, potentially. However, many of the roads/streets in Bristol were there long before cars were owned and used on a widespread basis and some go back even before the invention of the car. Mass car ownership did not take off in the UK until the 1950's and many things have happened on the roads/streets before and since. A good proportion of Bristol's roads/streets were never designed for cars. Roads are simply thoroughfares, routes, or ways on land from place to place - and in residential areas and in cities serve a wider purpose, including easement. Even where they were/are specially designed for car use why should we not choose, with general agreement, to adjust and manage that, especially in residential areas, so that the balance favours human beings not motorised machines running at a speed likely to kill or cause serious injury? See http://tinyurl.com/2vd7pq and also http://tinyurl.com/cgphzz7.

Others say introducing 20mph limits is a waste of money, can't be enforced and everyone will ignore it. They seem to have forgotten the evidence eg from RoSPA on their effectiveness. 20mph limits have saved lives where they have been introduced in Hull, London and elsewhere. See here. No-one has been able to dispute this evidence in the two lengthy online debates I've taken part in.

Soundwalk: free event, Arnos Vale, 28 May, 10am to 12 noon

Noise and air quality expert Steve Crawshaw will be leading a soundwalk on 28th May, 10am to 12 noon at Arno's Vale. He hopes it will lead to greater protection for quiet areas in the city. It's also a good opportunity to experience Arno's Vale in a new way. More details on Steve's blog http://bristolnoise.blogspot.com/2011/05/research-activity-soundwalk-and-mapping.html
Both images can be clicked on to see an enlarged, more readable version and for details of how to book a place at this free event lead by an expert.

Environmental Law Foundation: air and noise pollution meeting in Bristol 6 Oct

The Environmental Law Foundation invites you to a free public meeting with local experts.

Air Pollution, Noise Pollution
· How does it affect you?
· Does it matter?
· What needs to be done?

Speakers:
Simon Tilling, Solicitor at Burges Salmon, expert in noise pollution

Neil Morgan, Associate Director of Innovative Acoustics

Steve Crawshaw, Air Quality Officer at Bristol City Council

There will also be Q & A sessions after each presentation, your chance to ask questions of the speakers

THIS IS A FREE NON-POLITICAL EVENT !!!

Date: Wednesday 6 October
Time: 6.15pm to 7.30pm
Venue: Trinity Centre, Trinity Road, Bristol, BS2 0NW
Contact: Peter Wiggins on 020 7404 1136 or scp@elflaw.org

This event is part of E.L.F.’s ‘Know your Rights’ project to raise awareness of environmental rights.

* If you are interested in attending, please do get in touch

If you have an environmental concern and would like an event or workshop to help your group, please let us know.

This event is brought to you by the Equality & Human Rights Commission and the Sustainable Communities Project funded by the Communities & Local Government through the Empowerment Fund

Animal welfare

Had an email announcing the launch of the International Fund for Animal Welfare election manifesto today (copy below). I was asked to consider posting my views so I sent this statement...As a Green I stand for improving animal welfare, whether wild or domestic animals, at home and abroad. I’m for a significant reduction in animal exploitation for commercial purposes, for habitat protection and help for all animals suffering distress.

I’ve always been a very strong supporter of all IFAWs work eg on phasing out commercial whaling, on reducing ocean noise pollution, on enforcing the EU ban of commercial trade in seal products, on protecting UK seals more effectively, on supporting elephant and tiger conservation, on combating the internet wildlife trade and on effective enforcement of the law banning fox hunting.

I’d also stress that Greens want: all animal experiments replaced with more reliable non-animal alternatives; an end to factory farming, and an end to the promotion of factory farming abroad; the encouragement of low meat consumption. We would: ban live animal exports; end the genetic treatment of animals; ban bloodsports; end badger culling; and ban the use of animals in circuses

_______________________________________________

Dear...

In your role as a candidate at the next election, I wanted to make you aware of the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) election manifesto launched today.

The manifesto sets out IFAW's vision of the responsibilities and challenges that face the next UK Government on key animal welfare issues. The manifesto looks at areas such as whaling, commercial seal hunting, trade in endangered species and hunting with dogs, and makes recommendations in these policy areas.

You can read the foreword and summary of recommendations here.

Or you can view the whole manifesto on IFAW in Action’s election website or by clicking the report image on the right.

A hard copy will also be sent to you in the post in the next few days.

In the coming weeks, we will be asking our supporters to contact you and other candidates in their constituency to seek candidates’ views on animal welfare and conservation issues.

We will also post candidates’ responses on our website. We would be very grateful if you would consider posting your views (and specifically on areas such as whaling, commercial seal hunting, trade in endangered species and hunting with dogs). You can do so on the form at the link below:
http://e-activist.com/ea-campaign/clientcampaign.do?ea.client.id=15&ea.campaign.id=6016

I am sure you appreciate the depth and strength of public feeling in these areas. I hope, therefore, you will take the time to view our recommendations and post your views on our site.

Yours sincerely,
Robbie Marsland
Director, IFAW in Action

The Highways Agency’s billion pound traffic gamble

New roads (like the planned south Bristol 'link' as its now been rebranded) dont produce the claimed benefits and actually cause new problems according to research unearthed by the Campaign for Better Transport (see extract from report 'The Highways Agency’s billion pound traffic gamble' below). Little or no joined up (systems) thinking is what I consistently find when I ask questions at meetings about transport issues - many millions of pounds are ineffectively spent as a result.

The Highways Agency reviews its trunk road schemes, one year and five years after they open, to assess how accurate original forecasts were.

These reviews have shown that forecasts are wrong and forecasting is not being improved. The Agency’s forecasts underestimate the effect on traffic, air quality, noise and greenhouse gas emissions. They also fail to predict the economic impact and whether schemes will be good value
for money.

Until the Highways Agency makes some major changes, spending on new roads will remain a very expensive gamble.

Full details here:

http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/system/files/HA-billion-pound-gamble.pdf

Invest in stronger regions and local communities rather than subsidise Bristol Airport expansion

Letter objecting to the application to expand Bristol International Airport sent today:

The forecasting process that is behind the planning application to expand Bristol International Airport (ref 09/P/1020/OT2) is highly inaccurate and in any case the wrong approach to take. Projections of passenger numbers look increasingly ridiculous in the light of both economic and environmental contexts. Government is in denial as they persist with their forecast figures for more flying, modified only slightly. Generally the air travel industry is, in contrast, more realistic: in the last year or so numbers using UK airports fell by 6.4 million (13%) according to Civil Aviation Authority figures; the head of easyJet, Andy Harrison, told journalist and campaigner George Monbiot that ‘there was no point in expanding airports outside the south-east because the demand wouldn’t materialise’.

The forecasting process and plans for airport expansion are hopelessly out of tune with environmental targets. In the Climate Change Act the UK sets a target of reducing carbon emissions from 1990 levels by at least 80% by 2050 – this reduction cannot be achieved if we keep expanding air travel. Such legislation, if it is to mean anything in practice, means we should be backcasting instead of forecasting, that is plan out how to achieve the scenario that is necessary and desirable by working back to determine the actions we need to take from now. Bristol airport flights already produce a ‘city scale’ half a millions tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions which we should be reducing eg by refusing planning permission to expand airport capacity.

Bristol International Airport already has significant negative impacts on people, the economy and the environment. Noise levels and noise event frequency should be cut from current levels. Parking in the green belt for cars is already significant, money lost to the region is high as many more people take their money abroad to spend than arrive here to spend (£700 million per yr is lost in UK as a whole), traffic levels on local roads are already at far too high a level. All of this points to refusing planning permission for airport expansion and moving to a different, green pattern of economic and social development focussed on building strong regions and local communities.

Many in the industry feel the 13% drop in numbers using UK airports is not just a short term trend and that expansion plans are thus not viable. Airport operator BAA has delayed its plans for a second runway at Stansted for example. British Airways, easyJet and Ryanair want BAA reduce the £900m Gatwick upgrade because they have serious doubts about the business case. National and regional government has been attempting to accelerate any natural trend for people to fly more despite its warm words on fighting climate change. In the past ten years government agencies have spent £80m on helping private enterprise to increase the number of flights. The South West Regional Development Agency has spent £19m on extending the airport terminals at Bristol and Bournemouth, aircraft parking at Exeter and airport works at Plymouth and Newquay. This has encouraged people to fly – and at the same time government have allowed train travel to become far too expensive and lacking in the most efficient technology. Its time this pattern of subsidy for air travel is reversed and with the South West Regional development Agency saying ‘The relationship between high growth sectors in the region and air travel appears to be weak’ and with their board agreeing not ‘to make any further investment in airports for the purpose of increased passenger capacity’ perhaps they are on board for another, greener pattern of development now.

The economics of expanding air travel are dubious eg in 2007, before the airline crisis began, total air transport turnover in the UK was £20bn. Aviation accounted for 0.78% of total business turnover, a smaller proportion than the machinery rental sector, according to government statistics!! The chief executive of the International Air Transport Association was quoted in The Guardian as saying, “Business habits are changing and corporate travel budgets have been slashed. Video conferencing is now a stronger competitor.” This comment is in tune with building a more sustainable future – be part of this by refusing the application to expand Bristol International Airport.

How green is the proposed new Bristol City stadium design?

Saw this Evening Post report about how the proposed new Bristol City football stadium would be 'sunk into the ground' to minimise impacts. Subject to the full details, which I've yet to see, this is likely to be a good aspect of its design as visual intrusion, noise pollution and possibly light pollution would be cut. I made an enquiry to find out more via Trimedia (ashtonvale@trimediauk.com) who are dealing with a lot of the consultation/PR for BCFC and I was told the stadium would be sunk 3 metres into the ground. They also sent me further design information, which I'm looking over, and I sent the email request below for asking about a wide range of green design features/principles:

____________________________________________________
Thanks for this - I'll look over the attached information asap. I'd be grateful if you could establish which of the following you feel are a part of the BCFC new stadium plans:

*abiding by the concept of compensation for loss of green space in the green belt;

* a thorough ecological assessment of the whole area, at various times of the year;

*walking, cycling and light rail transport links;

*an unobtrusive external colour;

*use of ecological footprinting to measure impacts;

*permanently protected nature reserves around the stadium, designed to maximise biodiversity;

*aiming to be a carbon neutral stadium;

*avoiding any 'sprawl' in design;

*being an example of sustainable design (see examples below) - promoting sustainable economic activity, the latest energy efficiency, renewable energy and sustainable transport technologies.
Examples of football clubs who have used or attempted to use green principles, designs and technologies (this would fit well with Bristol's green capital ambitions and compensate to a degree for the loss of green space):

Dartford FC – living grass roof, solar electricity and heating, rainwater collection and low noise and light pollution design.

Ipswich Town – carbon neutral scheme.

Renewables in football clubs information.

Middlesborough – solar roof and wind turbines project.

Man City – community involvement, transport and waste initiatives (wind turbines were planned but sadly now abandoned).

Many thanks for your help.

Yours sincerely
Glenn Vowles

Tesco submit revised plans to build car park over Friendship Inn garden

Tesco just dont give up when they want it all their own way. I'm told that they have submitted revised plans for building a car park over the Friendship Inn pub garden. This means that the planning committee will look again at the issue, possibly as early as 3 June. They were stopped from getting their way in January and again in April but here we go again...

There are some uncertainties here at present. We have elections in June which means the make-up of the planning committee handling this may change (will they really be meeting on 3 June, as currently scheduled, with elections on 4 June??). I've not seen the revised plans and have not received a letter from the council yet detailing the planning committee meeting that will consider them.

Not surprised about a revised plan being submitted by Tesco. Its what the planning committee meeting on 1 April ended up deciding they would enable, at literally the last minute. Labour Cllr Sean Beynon, currently the planning committee Chair, was very keen on the original plan, supported by unelected officers (!) even though every other councillor thought it was very poor. My feeling is that he and officers manipulated the committee meeting of 1 Apr into deferring the decision subject to Tesco revising the design rather than refusing permission (nothing to stop Tesco submitting a revsied plan even if they were refused planning permission first time though).

Several councillors trashed the car park design (going against officer opinion, who advised very badly) and expressed the view that this was entirely the wrong place for a car park after their site visit on 1 Apr. I will be reminding the committee of this and outlining all the reasons why: road safety; noise; air pollution and local health; climate change and congestion
issues...

20’s Plenty For Us: Cutting speeds with no speed bumps

Large groups of us used to kick a ball around or race our bikes around the block in 1960’s and 70’s Knowle. Kids playing in the street is a much rarer sight now, not least because our roads are much busier. The current default speed limit of 30mph in areas where people live was set in 1934 when there were 1.5 million motor vehicles. Now there are a massive 33 million!!

Road traffic in the UK is the single biggest cause of premature deaths for boys and the second biggest cause for girls age 5-15. Every year in Bristol 500 people are killed or seriously injured on the roads, the burden falling hardest on the poorest, with 24 of every 100 child pedestrian casualties being in the most deprived neighbourhoods compared to 1 in 100 in the least deprived. At 20mph a pedestrian knocked over stands a 90% chance of surviving. At 40mph they stand a 90% chance of dying. 20mph in residential areas is clearly fast enough, and the new "20's Plenty For Us" initiative in the area is aiming to make this a reality.

Compare our residential street speed limit of 30mph with the speed limit in Northern European towns. Our limit is 60% higher than the 18.5 mph (30 kph) limits that they have for streets where people live. No wonder perhaps that 92% of pedestrian deaths are on urban roads in the UK and at 21% we have a higher proportion of pedestrian deaths on the roads than any of our European neighbours.

In Hilden, Germany, the setting of their 18.5 mph (30 kph) limit in the early 90's was the foundation of them encouraging cycling and walking. In fact now 23% of in-town trips are made by children and adults using bikes instead of cars.

Something has to change to bring us into the 21st century. Adults lead more sedentary lives in part because they spend more time in their cars. Children lead less active lives in part because we worry about the dangers posed by road traffic. The growth of physically inactive lifestyles in industrialised countries has led to what many are calling a major public health crisis. Preventable illnesses associated with inactivity and obesity include stroke, heart attack, certain cancers, diabetes, and depression.

Around 40% of people in the UK report being bothered by noise from traffic, nearly double the figure from the 1970’s. Children living near busy roads suffer significantly higher rates of asthma and West of England Partnership figures show that over 100,000 Bristolians live in areas where air quality is considered to be potentially damaging to health.

Cars travelling too fast in residential areas have helped to create social degradation. Neighbours across the road from each other don't talk to each as often as they used when I was kicking a ball about with mates, because a gulf is created by cars speeding past. As far back as 1969 Prof David Appleyard found that community was eroded on San Francisco streets with busier traffic.

A study by Kevin Leyden in 2003 found that people ‘living in walkable, mixed use neighbourhoods were more likely to know their neighbours, participate politically, trust others and be socially engaged, compared with those living in car-oriented suburbs’. Research on Bristol’s streets by Josh Hart at UWE showed that motor vehicle traffic is responsible for a considerable deterioration in residential community, measured by average number of social contacts, extent of perceived ‘home territory’, and reported street-based social activity. Several studies show that people whose homes had windows facing busy streets were more often depressed.

20's Plenty For Us was formed in order to work for the implementation of 20 mph as the default speed limit on residential roads in the UK, in place of 30mph. The balance is shifting towards roads and streets as public spaces for people rather than just motors – safer, cleaner, healthier and more civil. Quality of life would be better, with less noise, lower pollution, greater child mobility, walking, cycling and talking encouraged, better general wellbeing.

The Bristol 20’s Plenty group was recently launched to help build improved quality of life in local communities. 40 neighbourhood champions are already in place, including myself in Knowle. The target is 100 champions so if you want to be involved either as a champion yourself or as part of a team then phone us or send an email (champions@20splentyforbristol.org.uk.) or check out the national and local websites for up to date news, reports, articles, action packs, support and resources (http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/ http://www.20splentyforbristol.org.uk/).

20mph is an idea whose time has come, with growing numbers of cities doing it, including Portsmouth, Oxford, Norwich, Leicester, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. Islington has just decided to become the first London Borough to implement an authority-wide 20mph limit where people live and Hackney look set to follow. Transport for London is making funds available for all London Boroughs to set a 20mph default. Bristol will be piloting 20mph in some residential streets in the south and east of the city soon and so getting the council to go the whole way is deliverable – which is why 20’s Plenty are working in communities, urging people to talk to their councillors!

Research has shown that the vast majority of the public, over 80% in polls, would like 20 mph on residential roads. After all its where people live!! The Parliamentary Advisory Council on Transport Safety found that 70% of drivers want it too. Recent changes in Dept of Transport guidelines have relaxed the recommendations and in many residential areas 20 mph limits may be set without any physical measures at all – which means the cost of the change is small.

Portsmouth City Council has now created 1200 streets with 20 mph – and they did it with only 6 traffic orders, in just nine months without any speed bumps at a cost of £475,000, the cost of about two sets of traffic lights. Speeds have already reduced by an average of 3mph and the whole community has a collective commitment to sharing the roads better. The cost of 20mph in Bristol is likely to be approx £1.5 million as we are bigger than Portsmouth but this is a tiny amount considering that if a person is unfortunate enough to be hit by a car at 30mph they are likely to die whereas at 20mph they are likely to live! Further information:

email - champions@20splentyforbristol.org.uk.

Contact: Steve Kinsella 01934 838624 The Old Forge Kingston Bridge, Clevedon, BS21 6TX

http://www.20splentyforus.org.uk/

http://www.20splentyforbristol.org.uk/

Tesco/The Friendship

Statement about the Tesco application 08/04903/F to build a car park on The Friendship pub garden which I have submitted and plan to read out at the meeting of the relevant planning committee (Development Control South and East) this Weds 18 Feb:

The applicant here is Tesco and that sets the context which determines the meaning of the application. The paper petition and my e-petition, http://epetitions.bristol.gov.uk/petition.php?id=231
outline exactly why very, very large numbers of local people feel very strongly and say no to this planning application. They see the big picture and ask that the committee does this too. They know the area best and fully appreciate the detrimental effects.

With just text and a scale drawings to go by it must be very difficult for the committee to fully appreciate what the area in and around The Friendship is like now and what it would be like if Tesco’s plans come to fruition. I recommend that you visit the area before making a decision on this application.

I believe that if you visited the area you would agree with me, a current Knowle resident who lived for several years directly opposite the pub garden, that these words in the Design and Access Statement ‘…the proposal is successful in providing safe and convenient access….’ is in fact false. Cars turning into and out from the car park have no proper view if turning right due to the high wall and a highly restricted view if turning left. Additionally the car park design does not facilitate good flow in and out. Cars will be parked near the car park as well as exiting driveways. The close proximity of the proposed car park exit and entrance to the brow of Redcatch Hill and the Redcatch Rd and Friendship Rd turnings presents a significant additional hazard over the present situation.

Applicants Tesco seek to ‘…maximise the accessibility of the site through providing increased car parking…’ (Design and Access Statement). Increased parking capacity for cars means increased traffic flow on roads that are already increasingly busy. This means an increase in all that comes with more traffic, including additional: accident risk; noise; air pollution; climate change; light pollution (car lights and car park lighting); congestion, delay and stress.

Several mature trees with good biodiversity value will be removed if plans proceed and replacement trees take many years to establish. The green area will be lowered. The wildlife value of the area will decrease and can’t recover to its current level therefore. This is in opposition to the new local biodiversity policy.

Local quality of life and sustainability will decrease if this car park is built. This is in opposition to local policies aimed at creating a green city. It is in opposition to the new Climate Change Act with its tough carbon emissions target.
___________________________________________________________________

Update (25 Feb) - had official confirmation in writing that we have successfully persuaded the committee members defer the decision and to visit the site before deciding (visit will take place on the morning of 1 April and the planning application will be decided on that afternoon at the council house). This is good news as far as it goes. We have further work to do illustrating to the councillors on the committee just why this planning application should be refused. Tesco also have time to rethink and replan, as appropriate, between now and 1 April. You have to smile at the date this is all happening on!!

Bristol Airport expansion plans: flying into trouble

Bristol Airport has revealed its expansion plans. I've made a few contrbutions to the online debate, including commenting here on a local newspaper blog.

By expanding air travel we are encouraging money flow out of our economy - the difference between what Britons flying abroad spent in other countries and what visitors to this country spend here produces an £11 billion a year deficit! Its important at all times but especially in a recession, that people spend money supporting their own economy.

There are huge subsidies to the airports industry hidden in government funding for regional development, roads and airport infrastructure. The UK economy loses around £9 billion a year in taxation because aviation fuel is tax-free and all aviation transactions are VAT-free.

The most frequent flyers are in the top 10% of income-earners. They benefit most from the current tax concessions. In a typical year: less than 50% of the population flies at all; the poorest 10% hardly ever fly; of those that do fly, only 11% come from poorer backgrounds; even on budget airlines, 75% of the trips are made by the upper and middle classes.

Aviation is a very rapidly growing contributor to climate change. Planes are very heavy users of fossil fuel. The way that jet engines burn fuel produces nitrous oxides and high level clouds - tripling climate change impacts. Flying contributes 3.5% of climate changing emissions world-wide now, rising to perhaps 15% by 2050 on past trends. If expansion plans continue aviation emissions will scupper Government targets on climate change in the Bill that only recently became law.

Ecosystems, buildings and people’s health are at risk across the country. Air pollution around airports will continue to rise. Expansion is also generating more car traffic and invariably new or wider roads are proposed and built – adding to impacts in both construction and use.

The noise experienced by people living around airports or under flight paths will grow. There is no prospect of significantly quieter planes coming on-stream over the next 30 years. Already people under the flight paths to the busiest airports have to endure a plane every 90 seconds. They say it is 'like living under a sky of sound.'

The impact of aviation expansion on poor people in the developing world will be devastating unless we act. These are the people who: are worst affected by the changing climate; have few rights; have little choice about where they live; who are the least likely people on the planet to set foot aboard an aeroplane!!

The Government has said that it expects the number of passengers using UK airports to nearly treble by 2030. To meet this demand means new runways are needed at Stansted, Heathrow, Birmingham, Edinburgh and most likely Glasgow. Many of the country's other airports would see significant expansion, such as that proposed for Bristol. Government has provided a charter for the aviation industry and developers to proceed with airport expansion despite its new legislation on climate change, with a target of cutting emissions from 1990 levels by 80% by 2050!!

Further information:

http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/aviation.html

http://www.neweconomics.org/gen/z_sys_PublicationDetail.aspx?PID=261

http://www.planestupid.com/?q=reasons

http://www.nobristolairportexpansion.co.uk/questions.php

http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/index.php

Bristol's tranquil places

I've now contributed both a general statement and a list of specific suggestions to the new Bristol City Council consultation on traffic noise. There is also an interactive map where people can add notes on their favourite quiet areas and indicate where/how places could be quieter. Photos and video can be added too. I've added some observations about some places I frequent. The more people that contribute to the consultation and map the better.

The idea is to build a map of valued quieter spots eg green spaces, in the city. The noise consultation will feed into the noise action plan for the city and help in developing a noise strategy for Bristol. Its worth noting that actions needed to lower noise pollution will also help create safer streets and will contribute to tackling air pollution and climate impact eg through speed reduction, encouraging walking and cycling and (hopefully) using shared space principles. This is the way to go to achieve better health, wellbeing and quality of life.

Shared Space - a relatively new name for a concept emerging across Europe. It encapsulates a new philosophy and set of principles for the design, management and maintenance of streets and public spaces, based on the integration of traffic with other forms of human activity. The most recognizable characteristic of shared space is the absence of conventional traffic signals, signs, road markings, humps and barriers - all the clutter essential to the highway. The driver in shared space becomes an integral part of the social and cultural context, and behaviour (such as speed) is controlled by everyday norms of behaviour.

Bristol City Council: adopt and enact a noise strategy

You may be aware that I've previously expressed concern over the lack of focus on noise pollution in the environment and called for a noise strategy similar to London's to be adopted in Bristol. Many just dont realise the damaging health and wellbeing impacts of noise. A short while ago I contributed to the current Bristol City Council consultation on noise and I will now send in the list of more specific suggestions below:

*Reduce noise through better planning and design, ackowledging that growth in Bristol’s population, housing, air travel and traffic presents great challenges

*Seek to make the most of redevelopment and refurbishment eg through high density, mixed-use developments with quiet outdoor, green spaces

*Establish a Bristol award scheme to promote excllence in relation to design and noise

*Encourage quieter transport eg walking, cycling, electric vehicles

*Build noise reduction into day-to-day traffic management and integrating noise considerations across all council policies – cutting speeds, reducing congestion, reducing stop-start driving where appropriate, smoothing traffic flow, allocating street space better

*Protect existing quieter spaces eg open, green spaces

*Create quieter spaces like: open, green spaces; home zones; 20mph areas; pedestrianised areas

*Seek funding for developing targeted traffic noise reduction projects and for experimentation with fuel cell buses, hybrid-electric buses

*Extend support for the encouragement of smoother and thus quieter, safer, cleaner and cheaper driving eg via driver training

*Maximise the use of noise-reducing surfaces across all roads where they would be effective, primarily faster roads, along with less disruptive and better reinstated streetworks

*Where impacts are highest, protect wider areas from road and other noise using appropriate noise barriers (if/where the issue cannot be immediately tackled at its source) and investigate the integration of photovoltaic power generation into barriers

*Seek the cessation of night flying across the city via lobbying

*Lobby for a national noise strategy which was promised years ago and has not been delivered
and request that councils be given a remit to tackle traffic noise, as is the case in many EU countries.

More information on noise: Defra Bristol City Council

20 mph for Bristol: go for it!!

Bristol gets 20mph speed limits on roads.

Reduction in accident frequency and severity*, lower air pollution**, quieter and safer places... 20mph is a great idea! But lets have all residential areas covered, especially around schools, lets also lower speeds on other roads - and lets make sure that 20mph is enforced properly! I hope Bristol City Council goes well beyond tinkering with this green idea.

*At 20mph a pedestrian you knock over stands a 90% chance of surviving. At 40mph they stand a 90% chance of dying. http://www.greenflag.com/help/saferdriving_speed.html

**Most energy is used in accelerating and braking, which happens more frequently in cities . Driving in any particular gear consumes more energy per mile the faster you travel. Driving steadily at 20 mph is more efficient and thus cheaper and cleaner. http://drivingefficiency.org/driving_gently.pdf

Get your objection to the Tesco plan to build a car park over The Friendship pub garden in Knowle submitted now!

I sent the following objection to the Tesco plan to build a car park over The Friendship pub garden (see photo) on Redcatch/Axbridge Rd in Knowle today. I urge others to object similarly (you can do so online here or by writing to the case officer Jo Edwards, Bristol City Council, The Council House, College Green, Bristol, BS1 5TR). Neighbour consultation letters were sent out on 16 Dec and planning consultation ends on 6 Jan 2009. Its a busy period with Christmas and New Year so get your objections and comments on the plans in as soon as possible and before 6 Jan!! You could also write to Tesco on this issue via Juliette Bishop, Corporate Affairs Manager, Tesco Stores Ltd, Ground Floor, Unit 5, Greenways Business Park, Bellinger Close, Chippenham, Wilts, SN15 1BN, or e,mail juliette.bishop@uk.tesco.com

As a Knowle resident I am very strongly opposed to the Tesco plan to build a car park on the pub garden. I don’t want to experience: loss of amenity; a less attractive area; a less green area; more accident risk; more traffic congestion; poorer air quality; more noise pollution; health impacts; bringing a Tesco Express in The Friendship a step closer. I’m happy to join with many other locals who feel as I do and ask you to refuse planning permission or at the very least delay to allow discussions between all interested parties on what sort of shopping facilities are necessary and desirable for Knowle, consistent with the thinking behind Neighbourhood Partnerships.

Building a car park over the pub garden will have a detrimental visual impact and loss of amenity for all neighbouring residents, those regularly in the area and of course local wildlife. The pub garden is a large, pleasant green space with plenty of trees and shrubs and a lot of potential. Better use can be made of this space than a car park, which cannot be built to attract customers on foot at a time when the city has the aim of becoming a green capital of course!

The proposed car park will also impact negatively on road safety on an already increasingly busy road. Cars would be turning in and out of the propose car park onto Redcatch Rd/Axbridge Rd where they currently don’t, adding to accident risk. Cars turning into and out from the car park would inevitably cause some additional traffic congestion to build up, worsening air quality and increasing noise pollution locally and adding further to climate change. This all impacts on our health, wellbeing and quality of life.

I call on you to bear in mind that this planning application has obviously been made by Tesco because of their publicly stated intention to establish a Tesco Express in The Friendship based on existing permissions. Disquiet about this is significant, amongst both local people and the many and varied existing shops locally, with two mutually supportive petitions opposing Tesco’s intended move signed by many. There are very strong concerns about Tesco: further impacting the local area beyond car park effects, with large, very inappropriate delivery lorries; increasingly dominating the local economy; monopolising trade; causing loyal and longstanding local businesses to become unsustainable as time passes; cutting shopping choice, cutting competition, increasing prices as time passes; increasing dereliction as shops close.

There are very strong concerns that when considering such planning applications no-one at the council is considering what kind of neighbourhoods and community locals need and want – this is more about keeping and improving Knowle’s variety of shopping provision than opposition to Tesco plans per se. I hope therefore that good sense among those making planning decisions prevails and that broad considerations are accounted for along with precise factors.

Loving the car

Interesting to see the online critical responses to letter writer Philip Gannaway. He is concerned about what he calls ‘anti-car rhetoric’ (Soapbox: ‘Learning to love the motor car’, Post 5 Dec).

He would acknowledge I hope that there are many positive reasons for seeking a society with low car use, not least our health, safety, security, stability and quality of life.

The Council and Government should invest heavily in sustainable transport methods as a matter of urgency.

He would acknowledge, if he believes in reason and the real world (terms he is keen to use in his letter), that the best available science says that we must urgently make very large cuts in carbon emissions from cars. The damage done to our climate would, with other measures, then be lower, enhancing the security and stability of life on into the future. Bristol’s carbon emissions are six times the sustainable level, a large proportion of this due to car use.

With car use lowered road safety would be increased. Thousands are currently killed and tens of thousands injured every year.

Fewer cars on the roads means cleaner air, which means lower lung damage and much improved health, especially for children. Tens of thousands die prematurely each year due to toxic air pollution.

Towns and cities more focussed on walking, cycling and public transport would be more tranquil and less stressful places to live. The quality of our lives could thus be enhanced.

We devote so much time, money and land to the car too – why not free up a lot of this and put it to good use in other ways?

Transport concerns in Knowle and elsewhere in Bristol

Questions to the Bristol City Council Cabinet meeting of 27 November submitted today – for Cllr Mark Bradshaw, Member for Sustainable Development (which encompasses transport and planning I believe). They relate both to Knowle and to wider issues.

Speeding concerns in Knowle

Residents in the Wootton Park, Callington Rd and Airport Rd area of Knowle have raised concerns with me about frequent speeding, road safety issues, and high levels of both air and noise pollution. This part of Knowle is included in an Air Quality Management Area and is a noise pollution hotspot according to the council’s excellent work on noise mapping. Cutting speed limits will cut the frequency and severity of road accidents and cut air and noise pollution.

1. Will the council commit to gathering further information on speeding, road safety, air and noise pollution in and around these three roads, including gathering information on accidents and near accidents from local residents?

2. As part of any review of speeds on A roads what consideration will the council give to

a)reducing the 40mph speed limit on Callington Rd and Airport Rd to 30mph
b)reducing the 30mph speed limit on Wootton Park to 20mph
c)cutting speed limits in general across the city wherever it is appropriate eg on M32 (or parts of it), in order to improve air quality, cut carbon emissions, cut noise and improve road safety

South Bristol Link: Road Traffic Impacts.

1. Given that the only reference in the consultation documents to altered traffic levels created by a 'road' option between Hengrove and Long Ashton, is that it "may increase traffic on King Georges Road", has any traffic modelling been done that might offer a bit more certainty to the West of England planners, and might give consultees a more realistic picture of what they’re invited to comment on?

2. If one of the road options is chosen, thus creating a de facto South Bristol Ring Road, what is its likely impact on

a) traffic levels along Airport Road/ Callington Rd/Wootton Park
b) total vehicle miles (compared with 'do nothing', or the public transport option)
c) air quality in the vicinity of Callington Rd, Wootton Park, Airport Rd and the South Bristol Sports Centre

Whitchurch to City Centre Cycleway

Can you confirm to what extent (if any) the Cycling City budget will be used to fund property acquisition along the line of the proposed Callington Road Link (the disused railway cutting between Tesco Brislington and Arnos Vale) as part of the proposed Whitchurch to Centre cycle route ?

I will report any responses received on this blog.

Road safety issues: Callington Rd/Wootton Park, Knowle

'A new road would attract more through traffic along Callington Road and Airport Road. When that gets too choked up (bad enough already isn't it?*) it'll be back to the Phase 3 plan...' says Stockwood Pete (Green campaigner Peter Goodwin) in an excellent post about the South Bristol Ring Road on his new blog.

*I've recently been approached by Knowle residents just off Callington Rd for help in campaigning for lowering the existing speed limits (the existing 40mph to 30mph and existing 30 mph to 20 mph near homes) and having speed/safety cameras installed. I'm fully supporting them and have initially helped them to get some supporting information and useful contacts.

Worries about accidents/safety, air pollution and noise are high amongst residents of Wootton Park in particular. My information is that at present they have got little or no support that satisfies them from the police and local Lib Dem Councillors Hopkins and Davies. I'm due to post another and more detailed blog entry about this after I've spoken to locals again for the latest but for the moment thought I'd log my involvement. There is some demand for a petition and media campaign....

Motoring: cheaper now than in 1988 ! Sure helps to explain ongoing climate change, road deaths, air pollution, congestion, parking chaos...doesn't it.

The RAC's annual report on motoring shows that '...it now costs 18% less in real terms to buy and run a car, including fuel costs (and 28% cheaper excluding fuel costs), than in 1988.' (see reports here and here). This is despite the large and rapid recent rise in fuel prices, though figures I dug up on the history of petrol prices show that even these aren't that unprecedented. I've long been pointing out that motoring has become cheaper not more expensive and made the point again in the recent debate online about residents parking (in fact seeing the RAC figures reported today sent me hunting through my archive of old news clippings - thus the two scanned illustrations in this post). Contrary to the facts most car owners (60% according to the RAC) think motoring costs have risen, though their view has probably been skewed a lot by sudden fuel cost increases.

Cheaper motoring is why we have more people than ever owning a car and more two car and three car households. One report on the RAC pronouncements says '...the number of households with a car has grown 39% over the past two decades from 14 million to 19.5 million. The number of households with two or more cars has almost doubled from 4.3 million to 8.4 million, and the number of drivers has increased to 33.7 million from 26.1 million.'

Not only has motoring become cheaper but at the same time travelling by bus and train has become very much more expensive (by around 50% in real terms has been reported - see here for an example). The fall in the cost of motoring is not news to me. The rise in the cost of public transport isn't either (I remember quoting a 50-70% rise in bus/train travel costs from the Dept of the Environment graph, scanned in here, when campaigning in the 1990's for instance).

It should be no surprise to anyone, given this key incentive to own and run a car (along with key factors such as cheap flights...) and disincentive to take the bus or train, that we are continuing to fail to address: climate change; air pollution; noise pollution; land take for roads; congestion; parking chaos; deaths on the road...and more. Carbon dioxide emissions are 1-2% higher now than when the current Labour Govt came to power, they plan to build hundreds of miles of new roads, plan to widen motorways and are seeking a delay in meeting the latest EU air quality requirements.

People are still highly attached to their cars. The govt see this of course and are wary of upsetting voters (Gordon Brown may abandon or delay the planned 2p rise in fuel duty just before the Glasgow East by-election for instance). Few issues stir people up, as recent debates and demos show, more than the cost of fuel or the cost of parking...Seems to me that far too many people (politicians and the public) are not facing the truth either about the reality and urgency of issues like climate change or about what the cost of their motoring is or what it should be. The incentives are upside down - we need much cheaper public transport and much more expensive motoring.

How noisy are the different parts of Bristol??

Really interesting article in today's local paper on noise mapping in Bristol ('Map shows the way to peace and quiet', Bristol Evening Post, 6 May, 2008). Some great work has been done by Steve Crawshaw and colleagues in the council's Environmental Sustainability Unit. I look forward to further work that may follow, such as on a noise strategy and a noise action plan - we really would have a much better quality of life with a less noisy environment and lets not forget that very often work to tackle noise (eg lowering speed limits in key places) will help to tackle other problems like air pollution. To find out more about noise issues you could do worse than look here and here to get you started.