Having just received a crumpled letter (no envelope) from Wirral Council, about changes to the speed limit on Barnston Road. All comments can be responded to via email. No contact telephone number on the letter. So, I telephoned them to say that not all the elderly residents on Barnston Road, would have a computer, and therefore would be unable to make their opinions know. Various sections visited whilst on the end of the phone. Press button this and press button that etc.If anyone wishes to make a comment to the council regarding any issues, they can go to any library where they will get assistance.
Bad, bad, bad service. After waiting 10mins, I still had not been connected to any human voice to which I was hoping to speak, the music was driving me mad and that woman who sounds as if she's just about to drop off to sleep continues to pulsate down your ear. Plus, for myself the website given on the letter allowing us to make any comments, is not working either.

I suppose it all a way of securing the changes they wish to make and spending the money they don't have without any hullabaloo. Well, I haven't finished yet !

Go get em Granny

Yes, I have. If the system is not in place to deal with us, then the next option is to contact our MP. and let them deal with it. So that is what I have done.

It's a ridiculous idea. Reducing Barnston road from 40mph to 30mph will result in a backlog of traffic due to the Arrowe Park roundabout having three exits, traffic coming along past Landican cemetery have 3 set of lights on that stretch now and once getting to Thingwall roundabout the stretch of traffic backwards is a bloody nightmare at times.
Once on Barnston Road, 40 mph will allow people to cross as there is enough space between the traffic, if it's reduced to 30mph it will result in a constant stream passing along without any opportunity to cross over. I suppose they will then spend more money (they haven't got ) on installing traffic lights at various points thus creating more car fumes and pollution which I thought we were supposed to be reducing, not increasing.
This is all down to one 'wanna be' person who came knocking on doors at the run up to the election. Haven't seen him before or since and he lives elsewhere. Yeh ! He's got his name in lights for the wrong reason. Why try and fix something that isn't broken. 3 accidents on the stretch in question in the last 15 years, and 2 of those were drunk.
As you can probably tell, the blood pressure must be soaring today.
We wait and see what response I get from our MP. Margaret Greenwood.

oh dear Granny--you will be resorting to the coffee and cream cake de-stressing programme like me. Agh maybe that's why so many coffee shops have opened up to deal with all of us jibbering idiots..

I remember the cow crossing lights getting installed on Barnston Road, saw them get used a grand total of once. Loads of cost and noise about them needing to be installed.

No speed limit changes are going to stop the plethora of drunk and/or speeding drivers going through the hedges, they even had to fill in a large ditch behind the hedges to reduce the risk of death. Garden walls seemed to be the target of choice in later years.

The speed limit reduction towards the Heswall end was brought on by one boy being slightly knocked by a car because he walked on the road when the car was coming - that was many moons ago.

after reading this post I honestly think Granny is complaining about nothing and is more of a nimby.

while I don't defend the council for other matters, but lets be honest in this day and age most folk have the internet in one way or another and if they don't and really want to complain they will find away, Granny you seem to have the internet, maybe let the local's logon to your machine to register their complaint, but lets be fair a reduction in 10mph to save lives makes sense, and I welcome that on any public road any were.

Be afraid Mr Reader, be very afraid.

Mr Silentreader, as you would appear to come from Wallasey you don't have a clue about what you spout.

If the council want to contribute anything, then put a crossing up so the elderly can cross to the bus stops. That would be far more effective. Traffic seldom speeds along this road, and 30mph will not stop those who do. In fact it will probably lead to more speeding.
Ironically, the place where the speed limit is already 30mph has many an accident or near misses. Explain that, Mr clever clogs.

No deaths on the stretch of road in question in 15 years so it's impossible to reduce them.

I suggest from your post, that you are a member of our council and I will not tell you why I think that, you simply made a comment that was a give away. I too worked for a council.

You should be more careful.

OMG Granny the ULTIMATE insult calling poor old Silentreader a COUNCILOR strong insults indeed! LOL

No, I'll re-phrase that, to an 'employee of our council'. Even so, if I made comments about where he lived and how his road should be laid out , he'd probably tell me to mind my own business as I have no experience of what goes on there. So the same applies

I don't live in Barnston but I use the road in question daily. Are you suggesting I have no experience of what goes on there?

Life's too short Granny, there's more important things to waste your time and effort on than a reduction in a speed limit and not even a big reduction.

The reduction in speed will not affect myself, but do you know how many elderly people live on Barnston Road, now without a voice due to the new procedures within the council, where they don't want people telephoning them . You may drive along Barston Road on a daily basis but do you know how many cross to walk their dogs down the lanes for example - on a daily basis. ???? Not simply the residents of Barnston Road, but those who live off Sparks Lane, Pensby Road, and all surrounding areas in the locality.

If you have no real concern for those who surround you, then you live a very sad life.

Not forgetting the horses and riders who come up from Thingwall Lane.

Have to agree - the traffic 'calming' measures along Arrowe Park road (in between Woodchurch and Thingwall Corner) have caused traffic issues not quelled them - with the reduction in speed to around 30mph where the limit is 40mph - causing the deadheads to speed even more when the road straightens... a number of accidents including a fatal - at the Warrens Lights have occurred in the intervening period since introduction....so not much safety value

I've been watching the Council's traffic measures quite a bit over the last year. From what I have seen, money becomes available and they just have to come up with ways to spend it - usually its not particularly well thought out.

Whenever I have asked them for the statistics (eg traffic and accidents) for why they made decisions they can't come up with them - everything just seems to be done on a hunch.

In the past they have also done things because they were "fashionable", good examples of this were the bus lanes, some of them are the most ridiculously planned out locations you could think of. Two of those are the top of Singleton Ave in Birkenhead where the majority of traffic is given a few feet to change lane and the other being on the way up to Arrowe Park roundabout where they introduced a left bus stop lane for a bus that is about to turn right now having to cross over an extra lane of traffic on a busy road.

Then there are the most stupid of cycle lanes that are still popping up.

Wirral councils traffic ideas are like a 3 year olds with play doh.

Were the roundabout was near Arrowe Park is now a disaster, takes twice as long to get through the lights as it ever did when roundabout was there no matter which way I am traveling.

Roundabout at the end of New Ferry by pass (port sunlight end) is another complete lottery, if you are trying to get on the housing estate or go to the walk that opened 12 months ago you can fit two and a half cars in the section, a red light stops you and cars traveling from Brom who are accelerating to join by pass often have to swing to avoid collisions.

Lastly the 2 sets of lights by Magazine Road in Bromborough. They are about 25ft apart, if you are in the 1st 3 cars you cant see what color your lights are, your eyeline is drawn towards the other's (normally the natural position). I have seen about 10-20 cars go when 1st set changes.

I think the idea of more crossings has been tried.

I'm pretty certain that Liscard and its immediate feeder roads have got more crossings (including traffic lights with a pedestrian phase) than bus stops. A bus stop, e.g. St.Albans Rd, can have more than one stand.

Likewise, parts of King St have a large amount of crossings that seem equal or outnumber the bus stops.

Looking to a bigger picture as to the cause of deaths and serious injuries on our roads (KSI), the Institute of Advanced Motorists issued a press release just a couple of weeks ago, based on police finding. It makes for interesting reading, as follows -

09 September 2015

The Institute of Advanced Motorists (IAM) has revealed that nearly 18,000 pedestrians were injured in an accident involving a vehicle in the last full year with analysis available.

The charity is calling for an even greater focus on pedestrian protection to make cars safer and raise awareness of the risks.

The figures come from a Freedom of Information (FOI) request made by the IAM, Britain’s biggest independent road safety charity, asking for details of the most common pairs of contributory factors reported together by the police attending the scene of an accident in 2013.

Police can record up to six contributory factors from a list of 77 for each incident to explain why they think a crash took place but the top two give the most obvious reasons for the incident. The statistics come from an analysis of the most recent full year data covering the whole of 2013.

Last month the IAM reported that ‘failure to look properly’ and ‘failure to judge other person's path or speed’ was the biggest pairing of factors when it came to vehicles in accidents. And now the pairings of factors listed by police for all pedestrian casualties in accidents can be revealed.

‘Pedestrian failed to look properly’ with ‘pedestrian careless, reckless or in a hurry’ were named as factors in 4,100 casualty accidents, or 23% of the overall total putting them clearly at Number 1.

The remainder of the factor combinations listed are as follows:

2. ‘Pedestrian crossing road masked by stationary or parked vehicle’ with ‘pedestrian failed to look properly’ - 1,961 casualties (11%)
3. ‘Pedestrian failed to judge vehicle’s path or speed’ with ‘pedestrian careless, reckless or in a hurry - 1,204 casualties (7%)
4. ‘Pedestrian crossing road masked by stationary or parked vehicle’ with ‘pedestrian careless, reckless or in a hurry’ - 1,013 casualties (6%)

The IAM Manifesto makes a number of suggestions on how to protect pedestrians, including making road safety education part of the national curriculum, making pedestrian safety a bigger factor in vehicle design and a long-term engineering programme to deliver safer roads in the UK.

Sarah Sillars, IAM chief executive officer, said: “Pedestrian fatalities are rising faster than any other group right now so it is vital that drivers are more sympathetic and aware of pedestrians when they make their journeys. There is no need to blame any party when it comes to how to reduce the numbers of people killed and injured on our roads – all road users need to look out for each other and ensure we minimise the impact of our own and others unpredictable behaviour."


ENDS

So, factors 1, 2, 3 & 4 add up to 47%, and are all pedestrian errors. We don't know about 5 onwards, therefore up to 53% is from other causes, which can still include pedestrians, speed, drink mechanical failures etc.

No amount of crossings, limits and cotton wool will stop that happening.

Pedestrian fatalities are rising faster than any other group because they're all walking round with their eyes on their phones and their ears blocked with headphones.