Like many, I have significant concerns over the council’s proposals for Strathbungo. But rather than rant, I would like to present a radical alternative approach that could be better for both pedestrians and motorists. Let me explain.
Firstly, note this is a personal opinion, not an official policy of The Strathbungo Society. Secondly, I am making a few basic assumptions:
- I am not discussing the bin hub issue here
- The residents’ parking permit scheme is probably inevitable, though it might need tweaks
- The pavement parking ban is inevitable, because it is the law
If you have gone through the council consultation’s questionnaire already, you will have seen questions about a “Home Zone”. This is at our instigation, so I had better explain what a Home Zone is, and why I think it is a better option.
The council solution
The council’s solution is simple and logical. If cars are moved off the pavements, the roadway becomes too narrow to admit an emergency vehicle, and so there is only space for parking on one side. So paint parking bays on one side, and ban parking on the other.
This creates three problems.
Firstly, it halves the number of parking spaces in Strathbungo, at the same time as a paid parking permit system is introduced. So you will pay for a permit, but still find you have nowhere to park.
Secondly, it will encourage residents in the Gardens to convert their front gardens to parking. This has its disadvantages; it’s bad aesthetically and environmentally, increases flood risk, and reduces the number of parking bays further, which leads to yet more conversions. It’s a major UK problem. If you don’t believe me, read this RHS piece on Greening Grey Britain.
Thirdly, it doesn’t actually make it safer for pedestrians, which was the supposed purpose of the legislation in the first place.
What’s the problem?
Let’s use Marywood Square as an example. It’s the narrowest street (excepting Moray Place) at 6.1 m wide, with 1 m wide pavements. This is how it looks currently:
Marywood Square currently
Everyone parks on the pavement and so vehicles can pass, but the pavements are barely usable. Everyone just walks in the road. So what happens if pavement parking is banned?
Marywood Square if pavement parking is banned. Emergency vehicles can not pass.
The road is now too narrow for a large vehicle to pass. Here’s the council solution:
Council proposal for Marywood Square – parking bays one side, no parking on the other
The pavements are now unobstructed, but still only 1 m, when the minimum should be 1.5 m. (With hedges obstructing it, it’s even narrower in practice.) The traffic lane is now approx. 4 m, wider than any normal traffic lane, even a motorway lane. A rushed delivery driver might hit 30 or 40 mph, something that is impossible in the current configuration, and all inches from you, the pedestrian. If you have a child in your hand, one of you will be walking in the roadway, sharing it with the 30 mph van driver. That is not safe. At the very least, both pavements would need to be rebuilt to at least 1.5 m wide, which is not in the plans.
What do residents do currently? The vast majority walk in the road, as confirmed by our survey. You are more visible, have more room, and it’s safer.
Home Zone
So here’s an alternative – a Home Zone. This was introduced in legislation in the early 2000s, and allows a shared space where pedestrians have priority. It was intended for new housing developments, where pavements are absent and the road surface is shared. An example is the Polnoon development in Eaglesham.
Polnoon Estate, Eaglesham, an example of a modern Home Zone
It hasn’t really caught on, and was never intended for the likes of Strathbungo anyway, but it might be just what we need. It relies on the assumption that we abandon the pavements, and all walk in the roadway. While this seems counterintuitive, it is actually what we have all been doing for the last 20 years in Strathbungo, but it gives us the addition of legal priority over cars. Cars would park on the pavements, and we would walk in the road.
Here’s how Marywood Square might look:
Marywood Square as a Home Zone. The pedestrian in the roadway has priority over cars
There is parking both sides, and the narrower roadway will encourage lower speeds, while still wide enough for emergency vehicles (which are approx. 2.5 m wide), and plenty of space to walk. Cars would have to give way to pedestrians, who are clearly visible. It’s much like today, but the pedestrians have priority. It even allows car owners to charge an electric vehicle from their house, as the cable is not a trip hazard if the pedestrians are in the street. It meets the pavement parking regulations, as the pavement (the roadway) remains unobstructed.
Blocked gates
One concern in Marywood Square is thoughtless motorists blocking front gates, a frequent complaint. This needs to be avoided, so some loss of parking bays will still be necessary, but fewer than in the council plans. The street plan might look like this, where the grey front paths are separated by green hedges:
Bird’s eye view of Marywood Square, with pairs of parking spaces between pairs of gates.
This provides space for pedestrians to easily step aside if cars approach, leaves front gates free, allows car charging from the house, and even potentially on-street charging, and parking meters, in the road between spaces (blue box). Loss of spaces is reduced from over half to under a third.
The Gardens
The road is still too narrow for parking both sides, but the pavements are wider at 1.75 m. However, uncontrolled pavement parking often obstructs the pavements and many walk in the road.
The Gardens currently. Uncontrolled pavement parking often narrows the pavements.
The council proposal is for marked parking bays down one side of the street, and banning parking on the other.
Council proposal loses parking on one side of the street.
A Home Zone would permit limited pavement parking in marked bays on both sides of the street, preserving 1.5 m pavements, but also giving pedestrians priority in the road if they prefer.
A Home Zone allows pavement parking to a degree, but leaves 1.5 m of pavement and still gives pedestrians priority in the road if they prefer.
Electric charging is a little more difficult, and would require in-street charging, or channels to take cables under the pavement, such as the one shown. The Scottish Government is currently working to standardise such solutions, which would be cheaper than dropping a kerb and paving a front garden. (See https://www.transport.gov.scot/news/cross-pavement-charging-pilot/)
Example of cross pavement charging infrastructure.
Queen Square
The road is wider at 6.6 m, and the council plan no changes to parking arrangements, other than marked bays. However, the pavements are still only 1 m, and designating the road part of a Home Zone would also give pedestrians priority in the roadway, where most currently walk.
Regent Park Square
The road is 6.25m, the same as Marywood, but the kerbs are high so there is no pavement parking currently and the roadway is too narrow. Rather than banning parking on one side, lowering the kerb on one or both sides would allow pavement parking, and pedestrians use the roadway, as they generally do now, but with priority.
Regent Park Square with pavement parking on one side. The kerb might need lowering to accommodate this.
Concerns
The council has concerns that they might be liable if there were an accident, and that blind people (and the RNIB) might object, but we have been walking in the road for years with no known accidents and I don’t believe the pavements (as they are currently) are a safe place for a blind person to walk either, given the hedges, narrowness, and state of the surface. The council also objected to allowing cars to encroach on the pavement in the Gardens, saying they needed to preserve 1.75 m in case anything else encroached on the pavement to reduce it to under 1.5 m at any point – a surprisingly strict interpretation given they seem to think 1 m pavements are fine elsewhere.
Consultation
We first suggested a Home Zone to the council when we got wind of their proposals in the summer. They were not at all keen, so it is a pleasant surprise it even gets a mention in the council survey. The survey suggests it as an option for the Squares and Moray Place, however I feel it makes more sense to designate the whole of Strathbungo, from Regent Park Square to Carswell Gardens, and all of Moray Place as a unified, low-speed, pedestrian-first space, with clear signage at the four entry points.
If you agree this is a better option, please make it clear when completing the survey that you support a Home Zone, and (in the free text) that it should also include the Gardens.
Feel free to add your own comments below.
Many thanks for this detailed and well laid out analysis of the impact of a Home Zone vs the Council’s preferred resolution.
This approach to community living is the future and already exists in many parts of Europe. I think it enhances the spirit of the Bungo and with the introduction of ducting for EVs it will be future proofed.
I have endorsed it in my response to the Council.
My only additional thought would be dedicated bays at intervals for delivery vehicles to pull in to undertake their deliveries.
Thank you for your extensive work on this very comprehensive and clear analysis of the benefits of designating our area as a Home Zone. This makes complete sense and you have covered points of concern… for me anyway e.g. loss of front gardens and the environmental impact of that. You have also highlighted that the installation of cross pavement charging cables is cheaper than dropping a kerb and paving a front garden and would also save the gardens. More pressure on the council to consider this would be good.
Thanks you for the detail and clarity of this proposal. I think it is a practical, reasonable and safe solution,
An excellent and well thought out proposal. Areas like this exist all over the Netherlands where they have very few road traffic accidents.
It would maintain the community feel of strathbungo whilst limiting the need to convert gardens into parking spaces and . We need a solution to balance safety, community and modern family life and I think you may just have suggested the best compromise.
This is a fantastic post, and I fully agree. We’ve been using the roads practically as a home zone anyway, and this designation would formalise it. I hope we can give this idea traction with the council.
Could just ban cars altogether. That would be a real conservation zone.
You clearly don’t have a shift-based job, out-of-city elderly-care responsibilities and small kids to shuttle about… Doing that would force normal working people out of Strathbungo and turn it into a wasteland of wealthy retirees and home-workers who can afford not to need to drive.
Glasgow doesn’t have the reliable 24/7-365 public transport infrastructure of Amsterdam, Berlin or Copenhagen – and given our age of chronic ambient austerity and George Square’s general lack of imagination and financial genius it’s unlikely to afford significant investment in my lifetime. They can’t even afford to clear the drains or fix potholes, let alone build us a Metro…
No cars on the streets would also make the speeding delivery driver/boy racer problem worse. Unless you are planning a gated community?
Hear hear. As a compromise though, they could ban all pavement parking; introduce a permit system (with a significant cost increase for second car permits); introduce traffic calming measures to mitigate risks associated with speeding road users; and, make changes to local planning policy to minimise opportunities to convert gardens into parking spaces. Car drivers are the most pandered to and subsidised constituency in this country. The sooner we have meaningful, hostile, practical measures put in place to reduce car use, the better.
Fully agree with the Home Zone approach and designated space for pedestrians to step aside when cars approaching . Signage stating Pedestrian Priority would be helpful for delivery drivers & visitors to the area .
Sounds really good. Maybe some examples from the Netherlands would add weight. Probably also worth a consultation with disability groups ie Sense.
A great article and I fully support the Home Zone as a solution, primarily for safety in keeping traffic speeds down in the same way the current usage does.
It is interesting to see the dimensions. If the gardens pavement width was reduced a little to get the same width road as Queen Sq (which allows parking both sides, without parking on the kerb) and still have a pavement over 1.5m (1.575/6.6/1.575). Seemingly satisfying everyone…
This would in reality make pavements wider than they are now, as folk tend to park more than 175mm (or 7” which is less than a car tyre) onto the kerb.
Excellent post. I agree this seems the best way forward. It is a much closer working solution to how pedestrians and cars currently co exist in Strathbungo. The reduction of car parking spaces will create huge issues for residents, local business and visitors with significantly less than half of existing spaces. The increased road width will encourage higher speeds making more dangerous for pedestrians, particularly with existing narrow pavements.
The council notes its proposals aim to benefit all road users to reduce congestion , improve traffic flow and manage limited road space to ensure fair access for residents, businesses and visitors. None of these aims will be achieved by their current proposals with the actual outcomes the exact opposite of their proposed aims .
I am in complete support of your Homezone proposal for Strathbungo. It seems to formalise the current arrangement in Marywood Square and provides a solution to prevent entrances to houses from being blocked.
I strongly believe that the Council option will have the unintended consequence of an increase of vehicle speed creating greater risk to pedestrians.
Would it be worth consulting with the RNIB to seek their opinion. They may agree that given the restrictions the Homezone proposal is safer that the Council proposal.
Excellent planning .
Clearly presented
If things must change then I support these proposals
Also, if residents were encouraged to better manage their front hedges there would be more room on some stretches of pavement
I give my full support to your home zone idea. Brilliant suggestion! Thanks for all the time you have taken to lay it out for us here – and tonight at the AGM.
So, what you are saying to the Council is: we don’t want anything to change, but we’ll put a sign up and call it a Home Zone. Instead, you could ask the Council to do it properly, or not at all. If pedestrians have priority on the roads, then there is no need for pavements, as at Polnoon Estate. Remove the pavements, resurface across the whole width, move the street lights back to the garden boundary line, and mark out parking bays on both sides close to the garden boundary line. That will leave plenty of width for cars and pedestrians.
Thank you for this thorough and well-presented proposal.
Homezone approach seems like a natural formalisation of how many of us already live in Strathbungo and should extend to the wider community so pedestrian and drivers experience one clear approach everywhere.
I’d love to see the Council take this seriously and apply it consistently – this is a low-speed shared zone for all residents and visitors.
The narrow lanes are a necessity to keep the traffic slow for children, older residents and anyone walking or cycling.
I’d also encourage consultation with RNIB – shared spaces need to be safe and inclusive.