| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Bert
Advanced Member
484 Posts |
 Posted - 13 Jun 2009 : 15:35:39
|
I note from the News page (13th June), the Minutes of Angmering Parish Council Highways Committee Meeting of 28th May 2009.
Do my eyes deceive me ??
Traffic Issues:- "Other suggestions for reducing traffic through the village, were installing a 'no right turn' on the by-pass."
I had to check if it was April fool's day, but no, I assume this was a serious suggestion by a member of the committee.
So someone thinks it a perfectly sensible suggestion to stop traffic coming into the village via Water Lane, off the by-pass, when travelling south from the A.27 roundabout, including all of us who live in the village, and require access via this obvious route.
There may be some drivers who still use Angmering as a "cut through," but I doubt it is a high percentage. If I did not live in the village, I would continue down the by-pass and along the A.259, I would certainly not go through the pinch points to access the A259 via Water Lane, the village centre and Station Road.
Angmering is rightly or wrongly, quite a highly populated village, many residents drive, we need to get in and out, to and from each direction. It is unavoidable that the village will therefore attract quite a lot of traffic.
If there are sensible suggestions as, how to reduce the amount of drivers who use the village as a "short cut" that's great, but blocking off access from the by-pass is not one of them.
|
|
|
neil
Forum Owner / Moderator
United Kingdom
2623 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2009 : 17:37:12
|
The councillor who suggested this daft proposal obviously cares little for the businesses in the village centre that would suffer as a result of cutting off through traffic from the by-pass.
Do not these councillors understand the importance of maintaining our shops or did they become councillors so they can exercise control over other people's lives?
Perhaps it would be a good idea if we had a statement form each councillor as to why they joined the APC - it would have happened if they had to be elected by the parishioners! We could then monitor their performance against their stated joining criteria. Fat chance of that!
Many of them accuse some Forum members of hiding behind anonimity, but how much do we know about these people who represent us and make decisions that affect our lives? |
 |
|
|
Mr Angry
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
1272 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jun 2009 : 20:58:24
|
Oh dear.
To the councillor who had this brainwave - please, just go! |
Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis |
Edited by - Mr Angry on 13 Jun 2009 21:06:56 |
|
|
|
Commuter
Senior Member
United Kingdom
166 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2009 : 10:37:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Angry
Oh dear.
To the councillor who had this brainwave - please, just go!
Sorry, Mr A - a bit too thought police like for me. If a question of the type 'how can traffic in the village be reduced?' (and it does need to be reduced as plenty of people do still cut through rather than using the bypass)is asked it seem reasonable to suggest that an OPTION is to close the right turn. This is NOT an option I would support but a group of elected people should have the freedom to consider ALL possibilities. So, the councillor in question has my support - not for the implementation of the idea itself but for doing his or her job properly in raising it. |
Commuter |
|
|
|
Angmeringite
Senior Member
152 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2009 : 11:02:54
|
| Very well said Neil! And MR.A |
|
|
|
BRAM
Advanced Member
373 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2009 : 11:29:57
|
| Whilst Commuter is correct in saying that all options (no matter how ludicrous) should be considered (and discounted where clearly inappropriate) by duly elected representatives, as Neil points out the majority of APC are not elected but co-opted. APC has shown to date that unfortunately, despite common sense arguments & public opposition over issues affecting villagers, they push through their own agendas at the expense & detriment of local taxpayers. |
|
|
|
Mr Angry
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
1272 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2009 : 12:35:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Commuter
Sorry, Mr A - a bit too thought police like for me. If a question of the type 'how can traffic in the village be reduced?'
That question wasn't raised - the subject was police enforecement.
"(2) Speeding - The Committee noted email from Sergeant Carolyn Kendall regarding the difficulties of enforcing 20mph speed limits in the village. The office will contact the PCSO to see if the mobile SID is available again. Other suggestions for reducing the traffic through the village, were installing a ‘no right turn’ on the by pass and returning Dappers Lane to two way traffic."
'Other' suggestions for reducing traffic? Well I don't see any initial suggestions, so how can there be 'other suggestions'
Reducing traffic and reducing speed are two different things.
It's pathetic - read the minutes from that highways meeting in full here http://www.angmeringparishcouncil.gov.uk/assets/20090528.pdf
I know that every single thing said is not noted, but there were 8 councillors present and still the office were to take this further with W Sussex. Well I hope we get to find out what they said about it.
What's the difficulties of enforcing 20 mph speed limits anyway?
|
Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis |
Edited by - Mr Angry on 14 Jun 2009 12:40:30 |
|
|
|
derekdainton
deleted
579 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2009 : 13:00:32
|
| On the plus side, one of the 'other suggestions' was re-opening Dappers Lane as a two-way road. With the closure of the Woodmans Arms turning getting into Angmering from the West has always been an unduly lengthy procedure. |
|
|
|
Mr Angry
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
1272 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2009 : 17:16:27
|
Agreed, but I don't know if it could cope. Also imagine what would happen if you could not access the village from the bypass AND they made Dappers lane 2 way.
Traffic from the North AND the West would be using Dappers lane.
Anyway, I can't see either happening - just such a stupid suggestion that it needs flagging up.
|
Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis |
|
|
|
Mr Angry
Advanced Member
United Kingdom
1272 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jun 2009 : 23:26:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bert
If I did not live in the village, I would continue down the by-pass and along the A.259, I would certainly not go through the pinch points to access the A259 via Water Lane, the village centre and Station Road.
How's about if you lived in the Dell, Bert (assuming you don't - maybe you do) Bypass or village?
|
Non Impediti Ratione Cogitationis |
|
|
|
rogp
Junior Member
United Kingdom
30 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2009 : 10:48:28
|
| Absolutely potty idea, couldn't agree more with Neil and Mr Angry, sending village traffic down to an already congested area of road,where we currently have a single carriageway joined at both ends by dual carriageway. You really couldn't make it up, surely somebody in the meeting must have said something to prevent this idea getting any further, WSCC are likely to implement it if the pinch points are anything to go by. |
|
|
|
Rosebud
Average Member
United Kingdom
88 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jun 2009 : 19:44:59
|
| I've e-mailed highways on several occasions about the speeding traffic. Not had a reply! Then e-maied WSCC chief executive and al he says is he wil chase highways for me. Still nothing from highways! Next e-mail will be to our ocal MP! Any bets as to whether I get a reply? |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
