Are pedestrian barriers a vital safety tool or unnecessary blight?

By Kent and Sussex Courier | Monday, January 23, 2012, 07:00

PROTECTING pedestrians from traffic is more important than making Tunbridge Wells look pleasant.

SAFEGUARD: The pedestrian barrier in Victoria Road, Tunbridge Wells TWPl20120118B-004_C
safety implications: James Scholes is concerned

That was the view of councillors when faced with a bid to de-clutter the streets by removing roadside safety railings.

They said protecting people from traffic was more important than ridding the town centre of unsightly pedestrian railings.

Kent County Council has identified areas where it wants to pull up railings including Mount Pleasant Road, Vale Road, High Street, Meadow Road and Grove Hill Road.

It follows the Government's drive to make the country's streets more attractive by stripping away signs and railings.

The Courier has previously reported on residents' anger at the proliferation of road signage, particularly in Pembury Road which once featured 47 signs in a single mile stretch, and Camden Road, where No Entry signs doubled up.

Borough councillors were split on the issue at the Joint Transportation Board meeting on Monday night.

A county-wide study of the railings – usually in place to stop people straying in to the road or protect them from moving lorries and buses – has been carried out by KCC.

Former borough council leader, and county councillor Roy Bullock said: "They have been put up to protect the public."

He flagged up the "notorious" London Road and Nevill Street where heavy lorries regularly used to mount the pavement.

"A pedestrian actually died in that particular area before the fencing was put up there," he said.

He warned safety railings should not be removed simply to "reduce clutter on the high street".

"That should not be the reason to remove a railing," he said. "Is it carrying out a function to protect young people and the elderly or is it not?

"I don't want to see the wholesale reduction of that protection. Guard railings should be de-coupled from street clutter, because this is about safety and access."

He agreed with the removal of some, including those outside the Camden Centre and those opposite the exit and entry to the Royal Victoria Place shopping centre.

Borough councillor James Scholes said "I shudder to think of the safety implications" if barriers outside King Charles the Martyr Church were removed. He said the congregation "spilled out" on to the pavement.

But borough councillor Peter Bulman said: "I think this idea is eminently sensible. I find guard railings offensive and I feel they don't actually add much to safety.

"I think we should do all of this as planned, although I understand the need to consult."

The board agreed to create a working group to consider the report, make site visits and gather local opinion.

Chairman Roger Manning said borough councillors for the rural wards should not be on the group.

"If you are stuck in the middle of a field, you haven't got much to contribute, have you?" he said.

Re-post Write a story

Ads by Google

Comments

Hello jacobrichter.

There are only 55 unitary authorities in England, bringing together all local authority services under one roof. Typically, they are quite densely urbanised areas centred on large towns or small counties where division into districts would be impractical. I'm not sure if the three towns you mention would fit that model?

My own experience suggests that the four linked functional areas provided by KCC, as a non-metropolitan county, that seem the most unsatisfactory for TW, as a non-metropolitan district, are: highways, passenger transport, transport planning and strategic planning. Arguably, they are also the things that are at the root of most complaints by residents. TWB has the added disadvantage of being right at the edge of its county, which ranks as the ninth largest in size, and sixth in population, in England. Geographically, TWB closely interlinks with East Sussex, particularly in terms of highways and transport, whilst having no say in that county's planning or service provisions, albeit that a huge amount of commuting and other traffic from East Sussex is destined to and through our town and its overloaded roads. And back in the other direction, of course. Without such through traffic, most of our congestion problems would disappear. The obvious solution is some kind of ring road or by-passes. The problems are cost and Nimbyism. A simple example of the latter is Forest Road, Hogs Hall Road, Bunny Lane, which together (with widening of the latter two) could form the simple basis of a 'quadrant' of such a ring road, taking traffic way from Eridge Road, Frant Road and much of Pembury Road. Sadly, many rich and powerful folk live along and off Forest Road!

In the past, there have been minimal consultations and co-operation between TWBC, KCC and ESCC on the above four functional areas. This and the other things mentioned above are the main cause of our present woes. My understanding is that the current TWBC cabinet are working hard to rectify this. However, it does require the full co-operation of the two counties, both of whose priorities lay elsewhere, ie. towards other more central and opposite-sides-to-TW parts of their domains (ie. West of Lewes; East/North East of Maidstone), and furthermore not helped by their county towns being miles away from TW, along stretches of inadequate East/West A roads. This is made worse by the fact that current proposals for the new Local Enterprise Partnerships do not appear to include a Kent/East Sussex link-up. Indeed Kent is focusing, yet again, on its North East side, with proposals for Kent/Medway and, even, Kent/Essex! East Sussex's focus will undoubtedly be towards its South, in particular, the Hastings/Eastbourne 'deprived' areas.

Therefore, my own opinion is that, from TW's point of view, efforts would better be put into forming a West Kent/East Sussex LEP, being a far more natural linkage. This is the only way the problems arising from our borough's unfortunate geographic location will stand any real chance of being overcome. So: should we all send many, many letters to KCC and TWBC, then?

Finally, please let me know how your 'railings' issue progresses.

By Jayaydee at 09:05 on 06/02/12
Report
Jayaydee: Thank you very much for the info and kind comments.

This is going off topic, but do you think a unitary authority of TW, Tonbridge, Sevenoaks (SevTon Wells?) would avoid these types of problems? It would free us from KCC, which in my mind would be good. It might even save money - although I'd pay more not to have KCC.

By jacobrichter at 09:37 on 04/02/12
Report
You will now note my other id. But please use jayaydee, in future.

By johndn at 14:48 on 03/02/12
Report
Sorry sarpatnw? What name? What are you talking about? I'm not a councillor, if that's what you mean, either past or present?

I agree that railings are relatively small beer in the greater scheme of things but if someone's upset about them and doesn't feel they've been consulted or given good customer service from either KCC or TWBC, then that must be corrected. Which is why I'm trying to assist jacobrichter to get satisfaction or at least an explanation and apology. He appears to deserve it.

Exactly what past planning decisions do you mean?

Athough you're no longer in the town, are you still in the borough? Perhaps we can work together to see if we can do something positive? I meant what I've said here and elsewhere about this current cabinet and its leader. They really are different than previous ones, not least in their battle to make this a Councillor controlled council, not otherwise. Have you read:

http://tinyurl.com/7mpl64n ?

More on this to come, I feel?

I'm genuinely sorry if we got off to a bad start. Perhaps we can both now rectify that?

By johndn at 14:45 on 03/02/12
Report
I forget what Jaydee. I know it was something annoying enough for the name to stick in the mind. Long time since I've been in the town. Suffice to say many of the councillors have been "In Situ" for far too long and familiarity breeds contempt. Not to mention a whole host of lousy planning decisions which is why TW is as gridlocked as it is today. Railings are the least of the problems really. :)

By sarpatnw at 13:04 on 03/02/12
Report