Skip to main content

Norwich's congestion madness

On the second day of the ‘January’ sales, my girlfriend and I took the bus into the city. I was shocked and disgusted that it now costs £2 to get a single on First from where I live (just inside the Outer ring road) to the city centre. No wonder the bus was mostly empty.
Cycling into town next morning, on the third day of the ‘January’ sales, I was struck by the even more dire traffic levels than there had been the day before. The entire central area of Norwich was gridlocked.
It is desperately urgent that, with the coming of the long climate crisis, we sort out our transport system. We simply must find ways of encouraging people out of their cars, and onto buses and bikes.
But this will obviously never happen while the bus system in cities like Norwich is run by profit-grabbing private companies.
The appalling congestion that I have witnessed and that many many others have been caught up in, sometimes for hours, over the past few days, must be the last of its kind. This is why, in 2008, with unitary status at last in sight, I will be pressing very hard for serious money to be put into Norwich’s buses. We must have a Quality Bus Contract, and we must build the Norwich Cycle Network. Anything less is really an insult to those of us who want to use our cars less, and of course to those of us who don’t have cars. We need to provide genuine choice: as my girlfriend remarked to me, it is sheer madness to have buses which, if 2 or 3 of you are travelling on them together, do not deliver any saving, compared to simply phoning for a taxi instead!

Comments

Antony said…
This really demonstrates the difference between us Cllr Read. When I saw all this (yes, on foot!) I thought it was the queues from the car parks at Chapelfield, Rose Lane, St Giles etc that were causing the build up. My first reaction was the need for more car parking spaces and a better road system.Have a great new year, Cllr A Little (Con)
John said…
There are no cycle lanes travelling into Norwich from Sprowston, and buses have to drive on the pavement in Sprowston Road when they meet oncoming traffic because of parked cars.
Norwich City Council has never shown any interest in improving access to the city centre from suburban Broadland.
Antony said…
However I do agree with you regarding the cost of buses. It can't be right for, as a group of 4 people, for it to be cheaper to get a taxi than take the bus.

The answer has to be lower bus fares rather than taxing the taxis though! NCC has, I believe, made it more difficult for taxis generally but we should be making the carrot sweeter rather than the stick bigger.
Rupert said…
On car parks: if you build car parks, people will park in them, and that will only INCREASE pressure on the roads.
You cannot carparkbuild your way out of congestion.
Unknown said…
do you have any statistics of congestion in norwich?

Popular posts from this blog

Post-Growth: A new vision for a fairer and more sustainable Britain

More on why 20's plenty -- without need for any further 'trials'...

There are a number of reasons for setting a default speed of 20mph throughout the 'unclassified' road network in residential parts of a city such as Norwich. Most important perhaps is that of driver recognition as to what the speed limit is. If you have 20 mph as the default then you not only establish this limit clearly, but you also adjust the driver's recognition as to what is the "normal" speed in such residential areas. The most important aspect is that drivers set 20 mph as the norm with those 30 mph areas or roads being seen as 50% faster, rather than seeing 30 mph as the norm with 20 mph as 33% slower. The psychological adjustment of normal speeds in residential areas is key to the success of reducing speeds and therefore danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore any trial, pilot or whatever, that only implements 20 mph in a tiny proportion of the city is not modelling 20's Plenty in any realistic manner.   When considering the val...