Thursday, October 31, 2013

Watch and learn, Holland

From Dave Hembrow's exemplary blog, fairly representative images of Dutch kids dicing with death. The width, surfacing, and segregation from motor vehicles of the cycling infrastructure (even allotmenters are forbidden from driving and parking here. Yes, seriously!) are all well and good, but consider if you will the disturbing lack of helmets, garish hi-viz and even, in the case of the lad nearest, safety socks. The Dutch hate their young.




Northumberland Transport Planners have a much better grasp of how to keep children safe. Consider Morpeth's Blue Riband stretch of designated cycling infrastructure, the Whorral Bank cycle track.





You don't need me to tell you that no kids will be coming to grief on their bikes on this shared-use, bi-directional, cycling and pedestrian facility any time soon.


Sunday, October 27, 2013

Bert wronged?

Bert's displeased, feels his identity is too thinly disguised, and that he's getting too rough a ride, on the pages of this blog. Possibly, or it may be that Bert's become habituated to the uncritical, soft-soap fluffings that pass for press coverage in the Morpeth Herald; that being deferentially stroked by the pre-warmed, fur-mittened hands of the Herald's stenographers has come to seem normal to him, no less than his due.

During their campaign, eager to demonstrate that their concerns were widespread and not exclusive to a raucous saloon bar of boomer-generation car-dependents with an overweening sense of entitlement, Lights Out! launched a “survey”. The Herald helped, of course, circulating copies of the questionnaire to their readership with the paper, while Lights Out!ers worked the high street, from stalls festooned with their banners, placards and insignia. Impossible to mistake them for reputable, neutral opinion pollsters; overtly a pressure group agitating.

Have you ever, on spotting a chugger in hi-viz tabard, pursued him or her, perhaps crossing a street to do so, waiting until he/she finished pitching to his/her current mark, in order to say “I just want you to know that I am resolutely indifferent to the fate of the Sumatran Woolly Rhino; so chug on that, pal!”? Me neither. I mention it because there was no mechanism in place for recording numbers of people declining to be part of this self-selected claque. Nor was there a mechanism in place to prevent claqueurs filling in multiple questionnaires over the months this was happening. I witnessed a woman, hands full of shopping bags, half turned to go, giving verbal responses over her shoulder to, er.. Bill who was filling in the form for her. I tuned in at the question - and I paraphrase - “do you come to Morpeth less often now the universally detested lights are causing insufferable delays to hard shopping families?” “I do try to avoid that junction” was her nuanced, hedging reply. “We'll call that a 'Yes'” said Bill, ticking. It may be that my fleeting observation coincided with the sole instance of a respondent's answer being falsified, but that seems improbable.

Perhaps mistrustful of those they were trying to mobilise, fearful that if given free rein too many would express their objections with undiplomatic variants of “Oi Morpeth, get out of my way; can't you see I'm Driving here!?” the leadership helped shape responses with a vetted framework of pre-approved areas of potential concern. Pedestrian safety, street scene aesthetics, other road user safety and congestion. Worthy, considerate stuff. Of course, anyone really concerned about these issues would limit their personal car use within Morpeth to the essential minimum, but we'll let that slide for the moment.. 

Circa 2,000 questionnaires were filled. That represents about 4% of Morpeth and catchment's population, based on the old Castle Morpeth District Council boundaries. 

The Herald gave Councillor David Towns (Con) generous platform to trumpet this shabbiness as a “very comprehensive and statistically reliable” survey proving “95% of people dislike the lights”, without so much as arching an editorial eyebrow, let alone challenging him with “knock it off Towns, you insult us and our readership with this shameful bollocks.”

Robert Mugabe, who's never achieved better than 93% of the popular vote, is sending his electoral team over to learn from Lights Out!, while Father Patrick O'Shaughnessy has gone one better - a very comprehensive and statistically reliable survey of his congregation last Sunday proving that no fewer than 100% of people believe in God.

Why does this matter? Because Bert and Clarence, with the tireless support of the Herald, surfed this brackish wavelet of car user resentment to seats on the Town Council, and that's bad news for anyone hoping to see the town develop along less car-shafted lines in future. The Morpeth Neighbourhood Development Plan, currently in consultation, offers the usual blandishments about increasing active and sustainable personal transport modal share, much as did the last Morpeth Town Plan and every County Council Full Local Transport Plan in this new millennium. This can't be achieved without in some situations de-prioritising the narrow self-interest of the carred and, as we've seen, the carred will fight and fight dirty to defend the priority to which they've become accustomed.

So back to Bert's disquiet about this blog. It's true that Fiats Medea, Nero, Herod and Chronos haven't cropped up in our occasional chats. Nor have Fiats Mellitus, Infarction, Hypertension and Infanticide. They don't exist: I'm merely riffing. However we did exchange views on the trials of Josie, Bert opining that an able-bodied adult using a single-occupant car for a within-Morpeth commute of 1.3 miles was sensible, as it rains sometimes. I must apologise, then, for having overlooked the rubidium exoskeletons of Morpeth car users.

On a darker note, when the Herald begrudgingly added - as a footnote to a front page spread protesting the indignities suffered by drivers at the hands of “over-zealous” Parking Enforcement Officers - mention of the verbal assaults and death threats being dished out to PEOs, Bert was unable to condemn this pre-meditated thuggery (yes premeditated: police officers are largely immune to this sort of shit because empowered to visit uncomfortable consequences on the perpetrator; PEOs aren't; drivers know this and pick their targets), sided with the drivers and muttered about their deserving lee-way and leniency and periods of grace. No harm in being loyal to your constituents or knowing on which side your political bread is buttered I suppose, but I worry about this Faustian pact Bert's struck for advancement, and for his soul.

Saturday, October 26, 2013

Appeasement

Reversals plural I said, last blog, because there's also this

Not enough that the town centre has been reamed out in the interests of through traffic, now car users are poised to externalise the full cost of their consumption of public space. No longer need they make even a token contribution in the form of a parking permit costing a fraction of the cost of provision. 

£713K is the figure given for the cost to the County Council of this perverse incentivising in Morpeth alone. County wide it's millions. I'm guessing that's worked out on the basis of annual cost of provision rather than the market value of all those acres of town centre land were they freed up for purposes other than storing idle machinery. (see earlier blog) 

Call me old-fashioned and out of touch, but in times of swingeing austerity doesn't it better become a Local Authority to maximise revenue from the monetisable assets it holds? 

For perspective, £713K a year would sustain circa ten small branch libraries. How might Senrug's laudable objectives be furthered by an annual £713K? £713K invested intelligently in Morpeth's transport infrastructure year on year would effect an explosion in active and sustainable transport modal share. But none of this is of concern to Ken Brown, who we should thank for his candour in not giving a damn, if nothing else.

Still, it's an ill wind, and my disquiet may be mollified by venal personal gain. The daily commute back and forth into Morpeth must qualify me for a chunk of this personal transport subsidy. It's unthinkable – given the avowed policy commitments of Northumberland County Council and Morpeth Town Council to grow active and sustainable transport alternatives to the private car – that car user snouts will be the only ones allowed at this trough. How those of us who make our journeys other than by car will receive our hand out in lieu of free parking hasn't been announced. Having to present at the Town Hall with cycle clips or bus ticket would be a bit of a chore. In all likelihood a sub-group of the Town Council's Planning and Transport Committee is right now cross referencing DVLA database and Electoral Rolls to target car free households to which cheques will be posted for all driver age inhabitants. I promise to spend my share in Morpeth or, if you don't trust me, will cheerfully accept vouchers redeemable only in Morpeth shops.

One lesson to be taken from the recent coup in Morpeth is that you can't appease the car, any more than you can appease cancer. You can't negotiate terms with a malignant melanoma, offer it tenure there under your shirt, tapped into your blood supply and assured of free nutrients and oxygen, on condition it keeps the noise down and doesn't shorten your life. You'll wake up next morning to find it's been busy spinning like a Catherine wheel, sparking secondaries into your vital organs, into your blood and lymph and brain and bone, into your very marrow. Cut car users some slack, waive the requirement that they be preceded by a man walking with a red flag on condition they play nice, say, and you'll wake up to find one parking on your face, shouting at you to "lower your bloody cheekbones, can't you see I'm in a car here?" and demanding you subsidise him for the privilege.

Saturday, October 12, 2013

Full of passionate intensity.

Grim news from the Morpeth salient of The War Against The Motorist. Reversals on all fronts. Here the political wing of the livid rump (and if "livid rump" puts you in mind of a baboon's arse that can't be helped) of car users that are 'Lights Out!' celebrate victory in the Skirmish of the Traffic Lights. Whether squatting to scent mark his territory with some pungent driver scat, or simply crumpling to the ground as his driver's paunch gets the better of his enfeebled driver's legs ("Hurry up and take the bloody photo, then lift me back into my car!"), someone should relieve that guy of the Champagne while he does it.

Would you buy a failed town centre transport infrastructure from these people? Tough, you just did, at eye-watering cost.

Phil Jones, the consultant brought in to conduct the “review”, has been a disappointment. Here's Phil sharing a breakfast TV sofa with Chris Boardman and sounding as credibly progressive about active-travel enabling infrastructure as one could wish:


Here Phil's brief – I have it from a trusted source – was to deliver a recommendation that the lights be removed, and to deliver it after the local elections. A charade or holding exercise, designed to limit damage to the electoral hopes of sitting County Councillors. The same source says Phil's been on £750 per day plus expenses to go through the motions - for what's it been; a year? - until called upon to announce the pre-determined recommendation. Whatever happened to reducing traffic speed and volumes, Phil?

You know, if told what to say and when to say it I dare say you or I could've done that job for a fraction of the fee.