Today's most viewed
LISTEN HERE
 Jessica Goyder is the latest musician to put her singles on our site. Listen here
| THE INSIDER
 Get the lowdown inside the corridors of power in Oxfordshire here.
| SEND AN OBITUARY
Send us a tribute to someone who has passed away
| ON YER BIKE
 Get the view from the gutter with cycling group Cyclox in Oxfordshire
|
|
|
|
Residents plead for road closures
More than 300 people have urged Oxfordshire County Council to reconsider closing off roads in Oxford to stop rat-running.
Members of the Highfield Residents' Association in Headington have so far got 350 signatures - two thirds of the households in the area - backing a petition.
People in the area, which includes Lime Walk, Stapleton Road, Bickerton Road and Latimer Road, are frustrated with a "constant stream of rat-runners".
Residents' association chairman Patrick Coulter said they launched the petition after transport bosses told them earlier this year that road closures were not a viable solution.
Mr Coulter said: "We feel the county council has been very negative about our concerns.
"Their own figures have shown that 70 per cent of the traffic is through traffic with people cutting between Old Road and London Road - we shouldn't have to put up with this much."
Members of the residents' association met Ian Hudspeth, the council's cabinet member for transport, in January.
While Mr Hudspeth offered measures to address speed on the roads, nothing was put forward to tackle the volume of traffic and residents now hope the petition will force the county council to act.
At the time, it was said closing roads to prevent rat-running would affect ambulances from the nearby Churchill Hospital. Mr Coulter said: "We feel the ambulance service and the county council needs to be challenged on this, and would welcome the opportunity to sit down and speak with them.
"What we have suggested is putting in the same type of bollards used in the city centre that emergency service vehicles can activate.
"We're not saying we have the ideal solution, we just want the county council to at least explore the possibility of doing something to reduce the impact the traffic is having on our comm- unity."
Mr Hudspeth said: "We have spent a great deal of time discussing traffic management with residents.
"Since January we have met residents twice and written a number of lengthy letters.
"We have listened to what residents have had to say, considered the potential benefits as well as the problems, and concluded that road closures would not be suitable.
"Although they could bring benefits to Highfield residents, they would have a significant knock-on effect on other nearby residential roads."
6:52pm Tuesday 20th May 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: DanOxford on 8:23pm Tue 20 May 08
Unless you live in the street you're currently driving along, you must be a 'rat runner'.
Sorry to all the NIMBY's in Headington, but I paid for the roads so I'll **** well use whichever best suits me for that journey.
Unless you live in the street you're currently driving along, you must be a 'rat runner'.
Sorry to all the NIMBY's in Headington, but I paid for the roads so I'll **** well use whichever best suits me for that journey.
Posted by: sid, Bicester on 8:36pm Tue 20 May 08
I pay my road tax, therefore I will also use any road I wish to.I grew up on Headley Way and that was one hell of a rat run,the council should start there.
I pay my road tax, therefore I will also use any road I wish to.I grew up on Headley Way and that was one hell of a rat run,the council should start there.
Posted by: joe, - on 8:39pm Tue 20 May 08
OH **** OFF YOU SNOBS. We all pay taxs to use the roads.. are you all determined to pedesteranise oxford completly?
OH **** OFF YOU SNOBS. We all pay taxs to use the roads.. are you all determined to pedesteranise oxford completly?
Posted by: alan page on 10:05pm Tue 20 May 08
Well its nice to know these guys DO ACTUALLY PAY taxes.
The exchequer apparently loses £13,000,000 a year through "creative accountancy".
Gosh wonders never cease. I can see the headlines:
"Corporate Clones Pay Taxes"
Could be as earth shattering as Watergate.
Well its nice to know these guys DO ACTUALLY PAY taxes.
The exchequer apparently loses £13,000,000 a year through "creative accountancy".
Gosh wonders never cease. I can see the headlines:
"Corporate Clones Pay Taxes"
Could be as earth shattering as Watergate.
Posted by: Sid Hunt on 8:40am Wed 21 May 08
Mr Coulter and his cronies really need to acknowledge reality. These roads were built for transportation, closing them only increases the burden elsewhere - to areas that already have the same or greater traffic volumes but the "Highfield Residents' Association" won't give two hoots about that, it's not their problem.
I propose we remove the parked cars that blight the roads cited by "Highfield Residents' Association" and allow traffic to use the roads freely, after all, that is the purpose of these roads.
Mr Coulter and his cronies really need to acknowledge reality. These roads were built for transportation, closing them only increases the burden elsewhere - to areas that already have the same or greater traffic volumes but the "Highfield Residents' Association" won't give two hoots about that, it's not their problem.
I propose we remove the parked cars that blight the roads cited by "Highfield Residents' Association" and allow traffic to use the roads freely, after all, that is the purpose of these roads.
Posted by: Mathew, Oxford on 9:35am Wed 21 May 08
There ia an irresponsible Radio Oxford presenter who is always urging his listeners to use rat runs. He does it to attract listeners and because he long ago abandoned his Headington House to live in the sticks.He causes misery to local people.
There ia an irresponsible Radio Oxford presenter who is always urging his listeners to use rat runs. He does it to attract listeners and because he long ago abandoned his Headington House to live in the sticks.He causes misery to local people.
Posted by: Phil, Oxford on 9:38am Wed 21 May 08
I remember growing up on my street and playing with my friends outside my front door. Friends and family used to linger outside to chat, and generally pass the time of day. All of this helped people along our street belong to a safe community. Traffic respected peoples rights to be on the streets.
I think it must be progress that means that none of this happens any more and streets are no longer a place for people who live on them, but for people who drive through them.
I remember growing up on my street and playing with my friends outside my front door. Friends and family used to linger outside to chat, and generally pass the time of day. All of this helped people along our street belong to a safe community. Traffic respected peoples rights to be on the streets.
I think it must be progress that means that none of this happens any more and streets are no longer a place for people who live on them, but for people who drive through them.
Posted by: Phil, Oxford on 11:16am Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]DanOxford[/bold] wrote:
Unless you live in the street you\'re currently driving along, you must be a \'rat runner\'.
Sorry to all the NIMBY\'s in Headington, but I paid for the roads so I\'ll **** well use whichever best suits me for that journey.[/quote] It is for excatly this reason that barriers are needed down these residential streets.
I pay tax as well and equally have a rights to live on a safe street.
DanOxford wrote:
Unless you live in the street you\'re currently driving along, you must be a \'rat runner\'.
Sorry to all the NIMBY\'s in Headington, but I paid for the roads so I\'ll **** well use whichever best suits me for that journey.
It is for excatly this reason that barriers are needed down these residential streets.
I pay tax as well and equally have a rights to live on a safe street.
Posted by: Sid Hunt on 12:23pm Wed 21 May 08
But, Phil, where would you stand to talk these days and who would you talk to? The footpaths are obliterated by road vehicles parked on them or cyclists hurtling along them. The community has long been in decline due to other influences such as multiple occupancy homes and the associated turnover of transient tenants. How many homes had cars when you were growing up?
"Residential streets" is an arbitrary term, how many streets are there in Oxford which do not have residents? How do you regard London Road, Old Road, Headley Way, Morrell Avenue, Marston Road, etc? As they also have residents shouldn't these roads also be closed? Perhaps the 'rights' of these residents are not as worthwhile as those belonging to the "Highfield Residents' Association". I live on a road far busier than any of the roads highlighted in this report - where would the traffic go if this was also closed?
How are the "residential streets" you refer to made safe by the proliferation of vehicles belonging to the residents? [If the Road Traffic Act were applied all of these vehicles would be ticketed for causing obstruction to the highway.]
Also, if these roads are closed to general traffic are the residents going to pay to maintain the roads and associated services? I don't see why my taxes should fund your private roads.
But, Phil, where would you stand to talk these days and who would you talk to? The footpaths are obliterated by road vehicles parked on them or cyclists hurtling along them. The community has long been in decline due to other influences such as multiple occupancy homes and the associated turnover of transient tenants. How many homes had cars when you were growing up?
"Residential streets" is an arbitrary term, how many streets are there in Oxford which do not have residents? How do you regard London Road, Old Road, Headley Way, Morrell Avenue, Marston Road, etc? As they also have residents shouldn't these roads also be closed? Perhaps the 'rights' of these residents are not as worthwhile as those belonging to the "Highfield Residents' Association". I live on a road far busier than any of the roads highlighted in this report - where would the traffic go if this was also closed?
How are the "residential streets" you refer to made safe by the proliferation of vehicles belonging to the residents?
Also, if these roads are closed to general traffic are the residents going to pay to maintain the roads and associated services? I don't see why my taxes should fund your private roads.
Posted by: Phil, Oxford on 1:37pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Sid Hunt[/bold] wrote:
But, Phil, where would you stand to talk these days and who would you talk to? The footpaths are obliterated by road vehicles parked on them or cyclists hurtling along them. The community has long been in decline due to other influences such as multiple occupancy homes and the associated turnover of transient tenants. How many homes had cars when you were growing up?
\"Residential streets\" is an arbitrary term, how many streets are there in Oxford which do not have residents? How do you regard London Road, Old Road, Headley Way, Morrell Avenue, Marston Road, etc? As they also have residents shouldn\'t these roads also be closed? Perhaps the \'rights\' of these residents are not as worthwhile as those belonging to the \"Highfield Residents\' Association\". I live on a road far busier than any of the roads highlighted in this report - where would the traffic go if this was also closed?
How are the \"residential streets\" you refer to made safe by the proliferation of vehicles belonging to the residents? [If the Road Traffic Act were applied all of these vehicles would be ticketed for causing obstruction to the highway.]
Also, if these roads are closed to general traffic are the residents going to pay to maintain the roads and associated services? I don\'t see why my taxes should fund your private roads.
[/quote] Sure, but it does not have to be that way. As a student I lived in such an area you describe (multiple occupancy / transient tenants) but where a sense of community existed. However that was in Holland, where the streets were designed for people and where the private car did not dominate. In no way was this area private - people were to be seen on the streets, a large part of the reason why was because the private motorist did not hurtle through demanding their right of way above every other road user. There are many ways to change our streets to be more people friendly, one of those ways can be to restrict the traffic.
Sid Hunt wrote:
But, Phil, where would you stand to talk these days and who would you talk to? The footpaths are obliterated by road vehicles parked on them or cyclists hurtling along them. The community has long been in decline due to other influences such as multiple occupancy homes and the associated turnover of transient tenants. How many homes had cars when you were growing up?
\"Residential streets\" is an arbitrary term, how many streets are there in Oxford which do not have residents? How do you regard London Road, Old Road, Headley Way, Morrell Avenue, Marston Road, etc? As they also have residents shouldn\'t these roads also be closed? Perhaps the \'rights\' of these residents are not as worthwhile as those belonging to the \"Highfield Residents\' Association\". I live on a road far busier than any of the roads highlighted in this report - where would the traffic go if this was also closed?
How are the \"residential streets\" you refer to made safe by the proliferation of vehicles belonging to the residents?
Also, if these roads are closed to general traffic are the residents going to pay to maintain the roads and associated services? I don\'t see why my taxes should fund your private roads.
Sure, but it does not have to be that way. As a student I lived in such an area you describe (multiple occupancy / transient tenants) but where a sense of community existed. However that was in Holland, where the streets were designed for people and where the private car did not dominate. In no way was this area private - people were to be seen on the streets, a large part of the reason why was because the private motorist did not hurtle through demanding their right of way above every other road user. There are many ways to change our streets to be more people friendly, one of those ways can be to restrict the traffic.
Posted by: Angela, Headington on 2:27pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Mathew[/bold] wrote:
There ia an irresponsible Radio Oxford presenter who is always urging his listeners to use rat runs. He does it to attract listeners and because he long ago abandoned his Headington House to live in the sticks.He causes misery to local people.[/quote] That wouldn't be Bill 'I have an eyesore of a house with a manky shark in the roof' Heine would it?
Mathew wrote:
There ia an irresponsible Radio Oxford presenter who is always urging his listeners to use rat runs. He does it to attract listeners and because he long ago abandoned his Headington House to live in the sticks.He causes misery to local people.
That wouldn't be Bill 'I have an eyesore of a house with a manky shark in the roof' Heine would it?
Posted by: Sid Hunt on 5:29pm Wed 21 May 08
Comparing Holland with Oxford is rather like comparing apples with hedgehogs. Whilst in Holland, if you lived in an area designed to not rely on motorised transport then one wouldn't really expect to see motorised transport. Oxford was built long before the present traffic demands and has not evolved to accommodate increasing traffic or provided viable alternatives.
Perhaps a way to alleviate this would be to become like Holland: re-design the area i.e. demolish the existing and re-build to remove the reliance on personal motor transport by providing reliable, clean, frequent, cost-effective public transport and dedicated non-motorised traffic lanes. Change the general attitude of 'need' toward personal motorised transport (Holland has 6.8m cars, England has 32m cars) - this would, of course, encompass the 'get orf my land' brigade in Haute Headington. Are these residents willing to dispose of their own vehicles to restrict / reduce the traffic?
BTW, motorists are not "demanding their right of way above every other road user", they just want to use the roads.
Comparing Holland with Oxford is rather like comparing apples with hedgehogs. Whilst in Holland, if you lived in an area designed to not rely on motorised transport then one wouldn't really expect to see motorised transport. Oxford was built long before the present traffic demands and has not evolved to accommodate increasing traffic or provided viable alternatives.
Perhaps a way to alleviate this would be to become like Holland: re-design the area i.e. demolish the existing and re-build to remove the reliance on personal motor transport by providing reliable, clean, frequent, cost-effective public transport and dedicated non-motorised traffic lanes. Change the general attitude of 'need' toward personal motorised transport (Holland has 6.8m cars, England has 32m cars) - this would, of course, encompass the 'get orf my land' brigade in Haute Headington. Are these residents willing to dispose of their own vehicles to restrict / reduce the traffic?
BTW, motorists are not "demanding their right of way above every other road user", they just want to use the roads.
Posted by: Phil, Oxford on 6:08pm Wed 21 May 08
[quote][bold]Sid Hunt[/bold] wrote:
Comparing Holland with Oxford is rather like comparing apples with hedgehogs. Whilst in Holland, if you lived in an area designed to not rely on motorised transport then one wouldn't really expect to see motorised transport. Oxford was built long before the present traffic demands and has not evolved to accommodate increasing traffic or provided viable alternatives.
Perhaps a way to alleviate this would be to become like Holland: re-design the area i.e. demolish the existing and re-build to remove the reliance on personal motor transport by providing reliable, clean, frequent, cost-effective public transport and dedicated non-motorised traffic lanes. Change the general attitude of 'need' toward personal motorised transport (Holland has 6.8m cars, England has 32m cars) - this would, of course, encompass the 'get orf my land' brigade in Haute Headington. Are these residents willing to dispose of their own vehicles to restrict / reduce the traffic?
BTW, motorists are not "demanding their right of way above every other road user", they just want to use the roads.
[/quote] So you agree that change is needed somewhere. Doing nothing will not allow for change.
I mentioned Holland to illustrate that there is another way than allowing our city to become increasingly gridlocked. Quieter residential roads allow people to feel much safer on the roads. Who knows people might even walk or cycle the few miles to the local shops if the roads are not so busy with cars.
Even with more cars per head of population than in England the Dutch manage to leave their cars at home for most of their journeys. Making a residential street better places to live for the residents by restricting traffic is just one of many measures that can help reduce car dependency.
Sid Hunt wrote:
Comparing Holland with Oxford is rather like comparing apples with hedgehogs. Whilst in Holland, if you lived in an area designed to not rely on motorised transport then one wouldn't really expect to see motorised transport. Oxford was built long before the present traffic demands and has not evolved to accommodate increasing traffic or provided viable alternatives.
Perhaps a way to alleviate this would be to become like Holland: re-design the area i.e. demolish the existing and re-build to remove the reliance on personal motor transport by providing reliable, clean, frequent, cost-effective public transport and dedicated non-motorised traffic lanes. Change the general attitude of 'need' toward personal motorised transport (Holland has 6.8m cars, England has 32m cars) - this would, of course, encompass the 'get orf my land' brigade in Haute Headington. Are these residents willing to dispose of their own vehicles to restrict / reduce the traffic?
BTW, motorists are not "demanding their right of way above every other road user", they just want to use the roads.
So you agree that change is needed somewhere. Doing nothing will not allow for change.
I mentioned Holland to illustrate that there is another way than allowing our city to become increasingly gridlocked. Quieter residential roads allow people to feel much safer on the roads. Who knows people might even walk or cycle the few miles to the local shops if the roads are not so busy with cars.
Even with more cars per head of population than in England the Dutch manage to leave their cars at home for most of their journeys. Making a residential street better places to live for the residents by restricting traffic is just one of many measures that can help reduce car dependency.
Posted by: Sid Hunt on 6:16pm Wed 21 May 08
Do you think that barricading roads will achieve positive change? Those proposing that course of action are hypocrites whilst they continue to clog the very roads they complain of.
Do you think that barricading roads will achieve positive change? Those proposing that course of action are hypocrites whilst they continue to clog the very roads they complain of.
Posted by: DanOxford on 6:24pm Wed 21 May 08
This is just NIMBYism- pure and simple.
So these residents are wealthy enough to live within the ring road and cycling/ walking distance of local facilities and bus routes. Good for them- the rest of us have to drive from A to B.
Barriers simply displace traffic to other streets.
I've been to Holland and one of the most striking differences is the lack of trams in Oxford. And canals. And- actually it's incomparable, and no amount of putting barriers across the roads and hanging tuilips off them is going to change that.
This is just NIMBYism- pure and simple.
So these residents are wealthy enough to live within the ring road and cycling/ walking distance of local facilities and bus routes. Good for them- the rest of us have to drive from A to B.
Barriers simply displace traffic to other streets.
I've been to Holland and one of the most striking differences is the lack of trams in Oxford. And canals. And- actually it's incomparable, and no amount of putting barriers across the roads and hanging tuilips off them is going to change that.
Posted by: non-driver, oxford on 1:04am Thu 22 May 08
If the residents of these streets are prepared to give up their cars, then I agree with what they propose. If - as I suspect - they simply want everyone else to drive *their* cars somewhere else, then I'm with Dan and Sid. So Headington residents - are you giving up driving?
If the residents of these streets are prepared to give up their cars, then I agree with what they propose. If - as I suspect - they simply want everyone else to drive *their* cars somewhere else, then I'm with Dan and Sid. So Headington residents - are you giving up driving?
Posted by: Phil, Oxford on 9:26am Thu 22 May 08
What’s wrong with NIMBYism, or taking an active interest in your community? If you are not interested where you live then few others will be.
It’s a shame that my kids may will have to be kept inside without supervision and be unsafe from using my street due to speeding traffic. I guess I should be glad that a few people can cut a few seconds off their journey.
What’s wrong with NIMBYism, or taking an active interest in your community? If you are not interested where you live then few others will be.
It’s a shame that my kids may will have to be kept inside without supervision and be unsafe from using my street due to speeding traffic. I guess I should be glad that a few people can cut a few seconds off their journey.
Posted by: Liz, Oxford on 11:29am Thu 22 May 08
Not In My Back Yard - Well it is already in my back yard
I am not against cars or car drivers I just don’t accept that we have to just put up with domination by traffic.
I am certain any parent would stand up and defend the rights of their children and elderly people when they and their environment is being intimidated and threatened by traffic. If there is and acceptable answer to this why shouldn’t people ask for it.
Sharing the burden of to many cars on the roads also includes the motorist taking their share, which can involve it taking a little longer to arrive at their destinations.
Not In My Back Yard - Well it is already in my back yard
I am not against cars or car drivers I just don’t accept that we have to just put up with domination by traffic.
I am certain any parent would stand up and defend the rights of their children and elderly people when they and their environment is being intimidated and threatened by traffic. If there is and acceptable answer to this why shouldn’t people ask for it.
Sharing the burden of to many cars on the roads also includes the motorist taking their share, which can involve it taking a little longer to arrive at their destinations.
Posted by: VB, Oxford on 2:16pm Thu 22 May 08
Phil & Liz make very valid points about taking an interest in our local environment but are missing the point made by many others, that is, if the County Council back YOUR roads being blocked, where does it end? I live just off of Wood Farm Road, an estate road which cuts out the busy Old Rd / Slade / Windmill Rd junction so is also a constant rat run, it is also dead straight and fairly wide so speeding cars are a contant nuisance. Will the council then back this being blocked? My family live along London Road, Headington & Hollow Way oxford - will these also be blocked so THEIR children don't have to stay inside? They run a very big risk allowing certain areas to demand the blocking of roads from commuters but not others. As another local community who are fighting for safer roads (by way of Traffic lights from Wood Farm onto the Slade) I wish you well but you must understand the caution the Council are proceeding with.
Phil & Liz make very valid points about taking an interest in our local environment but are missing the point made by many others, that is, if the County Council back YOUR roads being blocked, where does it end? I live just off of Wood Farm Road, an estate road which cuts out the busy Old Rd / Slade / Windmill Rd junction so is also a constant rat run, it is also dead straight and fairly wide so speeding cars are a contant nuisance. Will the council then back this being blocked? My family live along London Road, Headington & Hollow Way oxford - will these also be blocked so THEIR children don't have to stay inside? They run a very big risk allowing certain areas to demand the blocking of roads from commuters but not others. As another local community who are fighting for safer roads (by way of Traffic lights from Wood Farm onto the Slade) I wish you well but you must understand the caution the Council are proceeding with.
Posted by: Up the hill on 2:41pm Thu 22 May 08
Phil & Liz:
It's always going to be someone's backyard isn't? If speeding traffic is an issue get the police involved. If it is simply that others have the temerity to encroach on your dominion, why should you expect your 'inconvenience' to become another's?
You should also consider that just about all of us are in the same situation and your insistence that you take precedence simply adds to the existing burden endured by others.
Phil & Liz:
It's always going to be someone's backyard isn't? If speeding traffic is an issue get the police involved. If it is simply that others have the temerity to encroach on your dominion, why should you expect your 'inconvenience' to become another's?
You should also consider that just about all of us are in the same situation and your insistence that you take precedence simply adds to the existing burden endured by others.
Posted by: Phil, Oxford on 4:51pm Thu 22 May 08
VB and Up the Hill,
You have both missed my points that when streets are safe for everyone to use then people can get out of their cars for local journies and walk / cycle.
For instance many people drive their kids to school because the local roads are congested.
So it's not just displacing traffic - making our streets more suitable for people reduces traffic.
VB and Up the Hill,
You have both missed my points that when streets are safe for everyone to use then people can get out of their cars for local journies and walk / cycle.
For instance many people drive their kids to school because the local roads are congested.
So it's not just displacing traffic - making our streets more suitable for people reduces traffic.
Posted by: Maria, Oxford on 5:51pm Thu 22 May 08
I wonder how many of the people wanting these heading roads closed to traffic use Divinity Road and the surrounding roads as a cut through. There is semi permanently someone leaning on their horn because the road is too narrow for cars to pass - I wonder is the Divinity Road Area Resident Association wanted to get Divinity Road closed off would all the Highfield residents support us or moan because their cut through had been blocked?
I wonder how many of the people wanting these heading roads closed to traffic use Divinity Road and the surrounding roads as a cut through. There is semi permanently someone leaning on their horn because the road is too narrow for cars to pass - I wonder is the Divinity Road Area Resident Association wanted to get Divinity Road closed off would all the Highfield residents support us or moan because their cut through had been blocked?
Posted by: Sid Hunt on 6:13pm Thu 22 May 08
" You have both missed my points" – you do not even acknowledge the points made by others.
" when streets are safe for everyone to use" – but you don't want everyone using 'your' street.
" making our streets more suitable for people reduces traffic" – what is wrong with people using the footpath?
Are you going to be our shining light and take the lead by leaving your car at home? When I say 'at home', is the car parked off the public highway or is it left on the footpath or the road? I would be interested to know but I have noticed your reticence when it comes to responding to questions.
If you accomplish the blockading of your street to make it safe will you also intern your vehicles so as to not endanger other people-friendly streets where residents might be having a tea party on the mini-roundabout?
" You have both missed my points" – you do not even acknowledge the points made by others.
" when streets are safe for everyone to use" – but you don't want everyone using 'your' street.
" making our streets more suitable for people reduces traffic" – what is wrong with people using the footpath?
Are you going to be our shining light and take the lead by leaving your car at home? When I say 'at home', is the car parked off the public highway or is it left on the footpath or the road? I would be interested to know but I have noticed your reticence when it comes to responding to questions.
If you accomplish the blockading of your street to make it safe will you also intern your vehicles so as to not endanger other people-friendly streets where residents might be having a tea party on the mini-roundabout?
Posted by: VB, Oxford on 8:35am Fri 23 May 08
Phil. At no point have I missed your point at all. As I mentioned, we are also a community looking to improve the safety of our streets, we are just not so arrogant in Wood Farm that we want no other commuters to utilise the very roads they pay to use. Perhaps you should take example from our community and fight for traffic calming or traffic lights if you're worried about speeding cars & road safety...Or will this cause you and your ilk too much inconvenience when YOU are leaving your streets in your vehicle to Rat run through other peoples residential roads??
Phil. At no point have I missed your point at all. As I mentioned, we are also a community looking to improve the safety of our streets, we are just not so arrogant in Wood Farm that we want no other commuters to utilise the very roads they pay to use. Perhaps you should take example from our community and fight for traffic calming or traffic lights if you're worried about speeding cars & road safety...Or will this cause you and your ilk too much inconvenience when YOU are leaving your streets in your vehicle to Rat run through other peoples residential roads??
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
