Our stated purpose was to learn what people in Easton feel about the proposals and we will endeavour to report everything as fully as we can with regular updates to this page.
As of 10am on Tuesday 28th November 1,074 people had completed our survey.
This is how the responses stack up at this time:
Note: this is not a live update but a screenshot taken at intervals from the survey admin area.
The following are a range of comments submitted with the survey replies. These have not been edited (other than anonymising) and are reproduced in the sequence in which they arrived. We have decided not to reproduce comments from a small number of respondents whose postcodes indicate that they live outside the Easton area. This is not intended to silence people but simply to keep the list to a manageable length and specifically reflect the views of residents.
“I live on Church St. The closure of High St to traffic will cause absolute chaos unless it is made a one way circle either down GAW and up High St or vice versa. There are no passing places on either road. No consideration has been given to people trying to get out on a Mon morning with refuse lorries collecting – and more importantly to the mosque traffic on Fri lunchtime which will cause even more road rage and damage to cars than usual. It is a RIDICULOUS proposal.”
“These DO NOT forbid driving. They have been formulated to address pinch points and worries of residents. Enforcing current parking regulations (at the corners of roads) is an EXCELLENT idea and is long overdue.”
“Bad parking on pavements. Difficult for wheelchair and pram users.”
“I agree entirely with the rest of the proposals but feel that speed bumps AND a one way sytem isnt at all necessary and will actually cause a huge amount of congestion, we have businesses, a school and 3 places of worship who will all be negatively affected by increased congestion. My road is a nightmare for speeding and for parking and it affects pedestrisns cyclists vehiles as it is, please dont make it worse by making it all one-way.”
“Compulsory road use/highway code testing for cyclists. Consultation with those who live in the streets surrounding the proposals.”
“I was given many chances to consult the plans and do agree with some of the proposals. I think the aim is to try and make less people cut through easton rather than make life difficult for people actually living here. I am fully in support of the rosemary lane closure. I live very near there and often hear noisy cars driving very fast down this road, who clearly are just cutting through to Stapleton road. It is not much if a detour to go down to the bottom of Robertson road and there is rarely a build up of traffic here. As to the suggested closure of high street I think this road could do with being made one way, and perhaps mivart street could be made one way in the opposite direction. The knock on effect to greenbank avenue west, church street etc would then not be as drastic. I am also in support of extending yellow lines round corners as people often park very close to corners making driving difficult, and crossing the road becomes much more dangerous. As to the other suggestions I am not as familiar with those stretches so feel unable to comment. I am disappointed that the easton voice views the changes so negatively, as I think the intention is to improve the experience of living in easton. I do however agree that emergency access needs to be maintained to all areas and this should be a priority consideration.”
“I think it’s generally accepted that there are too many cars and other vehicles on our roads. These are really only minor changes being suggested that will hopefully have a positive impact on the welfare of cyclists, pedestrians and children walking to school etc. We all have to deal with change, don’t just focus on your own little world…”
“Rosemary lane is my most direct route out of Easton. High Street is a massive problem but I don’t think the proposal will fix this. One way traffic flows have potential to help issues on high st, but a balance of traffic must be carefully considered.”
“Ridiculous and unfounded measures. Clearly there have not understood or taken into account traffic flow which actually keeps things moving and keeps it safer and less polluted. They are forcing traffic down routes that are narrow already roads where you have to pull in to allow car in opposite direction to pass. This plan will create bottle necks where now at least the traffic moves. Funny that one big development scheme has just been allowed in appeal to go ahead and the developers Geberator surveyed the area and stated that the roads and through routes around the chocolate factory can sustain a load more traffic and parking! Yet here is the Local Authority validating it is not to apply these plans to our streets. No joined up thinking at all and there are key places that need double yellow or single yellow and not every corner. For instance outside Millpond school there needs to be a single yellow line so cars can only park in one side of the road. On Barrow Road before the big Yellow there needs to be yellow lines so no parking at all for a very narrow two way bendy road. I have not had any information about these plans, nothing through my door, no notification of a consultation period. No idea at all! Who actually drew this up ? They need their senses seeing to or should not have a job! They have no idea what residents vehicle patterns are . The route to Fishponds Road is definitely 90% used by residents and you have a school! This will have a negation be impact on the whole area and is slot of trouble for Robertson Road. This will not help traffic flow st all. Washington Avernue similarly ridiculous idea poor residents who live at the top! This will definitely not increase safety. Key educational centres, community centres, cultural and religious centres , community cafes and hubs will be negatively impacted. Rip it up and CONSULT!!!!!”
“I live at the bottom of High Street. I think the proposals do not take into account the reality of the area. We have a number of businesses nearby, including the gym and local restaurants and cafes, which means that traffic increases and parking becomes more difficult at certain times. It’s already very difficult to park near where I live, and it can already be problematic getting in and out of Easton. I often do not use my car at weekends, walking wherever I want to go, but I need a car for my job (social work) and cannot do my role without it. I think the proposals do not take into account the needs of long-standing residents, and represents a proposed way of living in the area which does not take into account the real lives of its inhabitants.”
“The main problems seem to stem from people using Easton as a ‘cut through’ from church Road to the M32 and vice versa, rather than from local residents. My other concern is the speed at which some people drive at. Introducing speed bumps or similar traffic calming measures and making some of the roads one way would reduce people’s speed as people ‘cutting through’ would have to take greater care.”
“I think the effort made to consult was enormous and whilst I recognise the changes will be difficult, I am happy to make changes to my lifestyle to reduce pollution and car use in this area.”
“I am really concerned about how I get in and out of the area that I live in. I try to cycle but it’s difficult as I have ME and a disabled son so I do need to drive. Easton is so split already. I feel that a wider consultation would be useful and that actually a police presence or traffic wardens could alleviate some of our problems. Easton has an anything goes attitude which is cool sometimes but not when people are overly selfish and behave in an anti social way wether that’s driving, parking, speeding, aggressive driving etc.”
“I first heard about the proposals a year ago in a meeting with Bannerman rd parents. We were trying to calm traffic around the school after an accident. The council have concentrated a lot on plans to calm traffic specifically around schools to help children cross safely and a couple of the main closures around Bannerman school and May Park will hopefully do that. Crossing every morning under the all hallows bridge is a total nightmare with visibility. Yes there is a concern that a turning circle will be created and this may be the case to start with but hopefully in time as residents get used to it this will be avoided. I think that parking enforcements could be stronger in Easton for parking on pavements etc but this would mean some streets in Easton would have to have double yellows all down one side as the streets just aren’t wide enough and this, like the yellow lines on every corner would seriously limit parking options. Equally on that if they do start enforcing parking rules in Easton that means lots of fines which many here will not be able to afford so again not an ideal solution. I think you’re right about so many of the things they are trying to help with these plans are to do with selfish drivers without a care to others, and it is hard to know what will actually stop some of these motorists actually behaving like that. I guess I feel that there is never going to be a perfect option with any big changes like this, but I strongly feel that there were many many consultations held in different parts of Easton throughout the year so to say they did that wrong is simply not true.”
“We only have one car. I need that car to drive to Cheltenham and back three times a week. I can barely park outside the house as it is. I am worried about the yellow lines around junctions. I can see how this will improve vision for everyone, but that means about 6 cars won’t be able to park on our road. Where will those cars go? I don’t believe having these restictions will make people get rid of those cars and cycle. On our road the majority mount the curb to park safely, even on bin day. We all do our best. From what I understand, traffic calming measures on Co-operation Rd to Devon Rd will slow the traffic going around the corner. This is of course a good thing, but I think it means more people will just speed down our road instead – Tudor Rd. It will infortunately just re-direct the speeding cars down a road with more pedestriations and cars. I am in favour of anything outside of schools that reduces speed, but I think this should be the councils focus – not engineering a situation where people have to get rid of cars. They won’t – I’ll still need our car to drive to Cheltenham for work. Of course I walk, bus or train it everywhere else into Bristol. My partner still needs our car to transport musical equipment to gigs – this doesn’t fit on a bike!!! I’d love to hear from the council about where they think all these cars will go 🙁 ”
“I personally saw and engaged in at least 3 consultations around this, the first one being nearly a year ago. My perception is that they went above and beyond in their consultation of residents. My children go to bannerman road school, there have been many occasions where children have been so close to being hit by cars on their way to school, and one child who was hit and was incredibly close to losing both his legs from the accident. This proposal addresses not only this issue but also is actually doing something to make a change and make a huge impact that living in a highly congested part of the city is going to have on our children. Reducing the amount of cars that run through Easton, as upsetting as that might be for some and as inconvenient as it maybe is going to have a huge and positive impact on the future health and daily safety of our children. Air pollution is an issue, rat racing is an issue, and for me this proposal starts to address both those things.”
“I need to travel with my toddler twice a week to brislington for childcare then on to fishponds for work, public transport is not viable. I’m concerned about not being able to park outside the house as I often have lots to carry along with my toddler. I also have elderly parents with mobility issues who like to visit often and I’d be concerned about parking for them.”
“Double yellow lines have been put in on the corners of roads in Redfield already and have been put significant pressure on parking. If they want to reduce vehicle ownership, graded permits are probably a better option. I don’t feel they have made the roads safer, if anything road users can now drive around corners more quickly. One way streets also need to be carefully managed as they mean cars can ultimately drive faster down residential streets, therefore manking them less safe for pedestrians and cyclists. I am all for encouraging increased cycle and pedestrian use, but good, reliable public transport needs to also be an option. The routes in Bristol simply aren’t sufficient/varied enough for people to use to commute to work.”
“Access in Easton is already very difficult, I think closing Road and making certain roads one way only will make the process even harder. I cycle, I don’t drive but often I get a pick up with equipment for work purposes and drivers have often complaint how bad is finding a way into Easton. I think the Council should do something about Mivart Road, make it one way or put speed cameras. There are very dangerous and fast drivers coming down that road. I almost got knock over a few times. I agree partly with one-way traffic, for instance, Chelsea rd, but not the other roads.”
“I don’t think it is fair to make drastic changes to the roads in Easton without consulting the local residents. In some cases the new proposals would be helpful but in other ways they would actually make life for local people in Easton harder and not easier. For example, parking and commuting to work. I am a teacher who needs to leave my house early to get to work on time, cycling is not an option for me and I know many others who would be in similar positions. The new proposals simply do not take everyone’s needs into consideration.”
“I believe these measures will not address the issues they are purported to address and as such are a waste of resources and funds. I also believe that they will push traffic onto other routes, creating dangerous rat-runs on other residential streets and causing greater congestion and therefore higher pollution in other surrounding parts of Easton. I believe that these proposals are at best short sighted and at worst a cynical attempt by some residents to use ‘green-washing’ to serve their own selfish ends with no regard for the social, environmental and financial cost of other people within Easton and beyond. I can back up all my assertions with facts and can also suggest more fitting solutions to meet the plans purported aims. Cycle routes in my area of Easton are consistently blocked by wheelie-bins/cars parked on double yellow lines (e.g. opposite Peri-peri chicken, Stapleton Road) and some major cyclist ‘arteries’ have been severely neglected. (Waverley street for one – leading to St-Werburghs bridge over M32) These costly proposals all seem to focus on improving the quality of life (house-prices?)for people in the already gentrified ‘enclave’ of Greenbank and not on the more deprived areas of Easton. This unfortunately cynical view is evidenced by the lack of consultation given around this proposal, it’s contradictory and hypocritical nature and the emotive, manipulative an misleading content it uses to support itself.”
“I think the objections made by Easton Voice are ridiculously shortsighted.”
“The cost of nearly half a million pounds seems terrible value for money when you look at what it actually buys. Instead of making residential streets harder to drive on how about making surrounding main roads more free-flowing. The proposals do little to improve cycling experience and will have the net effect of cars driving further and causing more pollution, accidents, noise etc. The only proposals that I would support are more drop kerbs for pushchairs/wheelchairs; more bike racks outside shops; improvements to bike path such as sloped access from Devon Road Bridge. If you really want to increase bike usage you could just buy 1000 local residents a nice new bike for the same money!”
“The level of traffic in Easton and the number of cars on our streets is a nightmare. The pollution they cause is both unpleasant and deadly. I am fully supportive of the changes, even if they inconvenience me as a car owner. These are relatively modest changes to the road system in a community where the entire landscape and infrastructure is dominated by cars. It is time others’ needs are considered. The potential benefits to our wellbeing is well worth the inconvenience of these changes. It is rare that change is welcomed as those who will be inconvenienced are vocal about that they will lose, whilst the benefits are yet to be seen and so much more difficult to conceptualise. The smoking ban is a case in point – there was widespread opposition when it was introduced in Ireland, but that opposition vanished after its introduction when people suddenly understood the benefits they’d not been able to appreciate before. One of my personal concerns is the speed at which some drivers use the roads in Easton. Your response dismisses the proposed traffic calming and safety proposals on the basis that the cause of poor driving is bad driver behaviour. If you’ve got a better idea for how we can improve driver behaviour I’d love to hear it, but in the meantime I’d much rather that the proven traffic calming measures proposed by the council are introduced. These changes will not solve all the problems with traffic in Easton, but they will solve some. Whilst I share some of your concerns that these changes may cause some other problems, I firmly believe they are a step in the right direction and that we should be pushing for more rather than less action from the council.”
“Driving and parking around Easton is already difficult and I don’t believe that the proposed changes will be effective in improving this situation – rather, I think that they will make it far harder. I’m also very concerned about the impact that it will have on the time taken by the emergency services to reach people in the area. And I particularly object to the proposals that will force us to leave the area and travel around the perimeter simply in order to reach the other side! Easton isn’t a wealthy middle-class area, but that doesn’t mean that we should be treated as guinea-pigs, or used to raise funds for the rest of Bristol.”
“Can’t wait for the proposed changes. Vehicle ownership in BS5 is at a ridiculously high level & traffic volume is unsustainable. Make our streets safer & our community cleaner. Close off the rat runs & bring back pedestrian/cyclist priority.”
“I am disabled and travel to Easton quite a bit going to various Committee Meetings, shopping, mixing within the community. These proposals will stop me and my family from going to Easton if these proposals are carried out. BCC needs to look at these issues better than what they are. If you want to encourage safety and people to use their cycles why not turn footpaths half pedestrian and half cycling. Take a leaf out of Milton Keynes book and create what they have and that is a system called “Redways” which is used by cyclists and pedestrians very well. They same system could be adopted here and work very well without closing roads and one way traffic which will cause a bigger nightmare to Bristol as a whole, create more congestion and possibly more accidents. I totally oppose to these plans.”
“I cycle to work but I also have very young twins so absolutely need to use a car as it is really really hard to get them around on public transport on my own. I don’t think these measures are going to ‘solve’ the car problem. And I am concerned that it will be exacerbated. I live on Britannia Road what could be described as a ‘through road’. My concern is that cars already travel up to 60 mph on my street. And with the fact that there will be ‘no way in’ via chelsea, all hallows and st marks road, drivers will be forced to come into Easton on congested longer routes, increasing speed and anger on the streets. Particularly my street in which lots of children reside. These proposals are only going to make congestion worse, anger and speeds greater. And make the streets even less safe than they are now. I would urge for speed restrictions like bumps and cameras to be installed if this plan is to go ahead (although I MASSIVELY object to this plan in it’s current form). The emphasis of this plan should not be about forcing people out of cars, but actually finding ways to slow and ease traffic to make Easton safe and accessible.”
“It is absurd to take a government grant simply because it is available, and then to create a reason to spend it. It is a gross misuse of the taxpayers’ money and should be condemned utterly. If this plan fails (as it will) then more ratepayer’s money will be required to rectify the situation and that is not additional money. It will be an additional burden on the whole of Bristol. Of course, the project is financed by fining Easton residents for parking in the wrong place because there is no-where else to park, the burden of costs will again fall on the poor. A terrible idea all round. Thank you Easton Voice for making this whole shambles plain.”
“This is not a solution. Its just moving traffic onto the less affluent areas of Easton. I am fully opposed to this is as it will make my area busier and more polluted than it already is. I personally do not have a problem moving around these areas at the moment and the only time they’re blocked is if a delivery lorry or a bus happens to come along. Please reconsider this seriously!”
“I support the majority of the proposed changes, but would oppose the closure of High Street and the narrowing of what are already extremely narrow roads. Personally I don’t think either of these proposals fit with the aims of the project.”
“I can see the downsides but think overall they would result in safer cleaner streets and peoples would adapt.”
“I am completely against road closures, I visit a lot of grocery shops in Easton and have a lot of friends whom I visit regularly, I am disabled as are many of my friends who live in the area. The bus service within Easton is very poor- by restricting access- I’m Worried I won’t be able to see my friends as regularly as we do now. I am Unable to cycle or walk distances due to artiritis in my knees.”
“Thanks for putting this site together – I both disagree and agree with many of the arguments that are raised in it, but it’s very much appreciated that you’ve created the space to discuss them. In short, I’d say that I do remember a cycling group (possibly via the Cycling Ambition fund) being present in Easton a while back. So certainly there was an effort to reach out for at least a short while – possibly not long enough. At the time I completely agreed with the need for some ideas about how to improve general safety for pedestrians/cyclists (especially being a cyclists/pedestrian/parent myself). Generally speaking I feel Easton is OK for cycling, walking and driving around – EXCEPT for the junction by High Street / St Marks and the station bridge (as in nr. Alawaha / No.12 etc). In my opinion there should be no public parking around that area at all… for me it’s the biggest / most dangerous congestion area, which appears primarily caused by terrible parking. And it’s worth noting that in a lot of cases it’s not even residents that are the problem, it’s huge delivery trucks that turn up for the various local shops on that junction. Obviously that’s essential – but it might be a wise idea for them to remove all the parking space and dedicate it to unloading vehicles. What often happens in they park in the MOST stupid places, i.e. on the corner leading under the bridge. This creates an absolute hazard for everyone – pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. I personally don’t see how making that a one-way lane is going to solve that problem – So I agree that they’ve not properly thought that out. Ultimately that is the major concern for me with Easton traffic flow. I do see the how the proposals seem, somewhat arbitrarily, to penalise a large number of people. I do also believe that it would be better to see more car-free spaces, more cycle & pedestrian priority spaces and better build infrastructure to support that. If the local government is going to somewhat withdraw personal vehicle space, they should commit to making public transport more reliable, regular, diverse and European!!”
“I experienced life in Easton during road closures. In that time I witnessed increased driver aggression, increased waiting times to exit Easton and increased arrival time of Emergency Services resulting in 9 cars and 5 houses being damaged during a high impact fire. Easton has multiple entry and exit points. Since when does reducing choice of exit benefit traffic flow, pollution levels and wellbeing? I need to see robust evidence to under pin these proposals to change my current experience and knowledge on this matter. NOx emissions are increased in idle traffic. Where are the pollution monitors and evidence to show Easton will have legal levels with the new proposals?”
“The railway embankment already acts as a “Great Wall of Easton”. There need to be more means of breaching it, especially on foot and/or by bicycle.”
“We have to address the safety concerns around Easton roads, but focusing on creating safe crossing routes would be much more sensible and less discriminatory. These proposals seem very poorly thought out and evidently lack input from many elements of our community.”
“I am VERY pleased that Rosemary road will be closed. I live on Emlyn road with two small children. Cars use Emlyn /Rosemary road as a cut through to Stapleton road/fishpond. The speed at which some users use the road is terrifying. Lots of young children use these roads as route to School both Whitehall and Maypark and Rosemary park, if cars are allowed to continue to use these roads as they do it is only a matter of time before a very serious accident happens. I have personally seen two near misses involving children on these roaads. I believe that closing Rosemary road and the calming measures on emlyn road will make the area much safer for children. Please keep these changes.”
“I live on High Street. I’ve been here for 30 years. I cycle to work every day. Cycling is by far the best way for me to get around. I have a car, but I keep it in a garage in another part of Bristol. I quite like the proposals for High Street, as there would be a reduction in through traffic, and the paved area at the end of the street looks quite attractive. However, High Street, Church Street and Greenbank Avenue West surely need to be one-way. One-way streets would mean a longer drive for some people to get to outside their houses, but the certainty that no-one can come the other way would more than make up for that. Road rage incidents in High Street happen about once a fortnight, that I am aware of (there was one outside my house last weekend).”
“The proposed measures seem completely out of touch with the actual reality of living in Easton. It seems ludicrous to close many of the areas proposed as this would cause terrible traffic jams and massively increase pollution through build up of traffic at other junctions, Easton is a community which strives for inclusion and greater integration and so the idea of dividing Easton further is very concerning and disheartening, I believe if this proposal was to be implemented it would serve to cause more issues than it attempts to solve. Further I believe that this proposal, is not in harmony with what the majority of those living here in Easton and those who work at a grass root level towards the aim of making Easton a cohesive and peaceful community would recommend or wish for.”
“I think the proposed road closures will just create ‘rat runs’ on other streets. I think it would make more sense to have a fully thought out one way system since nearly all streets in Easton are double parked so that two vehicles can’t pass anyway. It is this overcrowding that causes gridlock, dangerous driving and road rage incidents. This alone already puts me off driving, unfortunately with two toddlers cycling is not a viable alternative.”
“Much of the dangerous traffic I have experienced in the area is through-traffic which these proposals are trying to address. In a perfect world through traffic would stick to main through routes designed for that purpose but sat navs and a general increase in quantity of cars on the road have made areas like ours subject to speeding, congestion, inappropriate parking and aggressive driving through much of the day. There is no solution that reverses this trend while also filtering to allow for residents use alone, compromise must be made in order to enjoy our streets as an extension of our homes, as we once did.”
“I think that the plans are courageous in that they are strategically trying to tackle road safety in particular. I support the measures because they are designed to slow traffic down and/or improve visibility particularly as I’ve observed so many near misses on/close to Greenbank Road. I appreciate that the proposals will not be popular with everyone and it may be that the plans are subsequently revised because of concerns but my hope is that whatever comes out of this will improve everyone’s awareness and responsibility about speed/safety.”
“I have briefly attended “something” in our local park, but wasn’t consulted or made aware of these changes. I would like safer streets, BUT would like my opinion to be valued also. I do not feel I’ve been addressed properly or listened to.”
“This will make my life especially difficult whilst trying to take my children to school in Montpelier and then getting back to work in Easton. Also, one of the roads due to be closed is the one I live on. I think making it one-way is a better option to stop all the road rage and vehicles being hit.”
“I think the proposals are a decent step towards making our streets safer. I’d like to see further measures including better cycling provision and banning pavement parking. Easton’s a residential neighbourhood less than 2 miles from the city centre; most journeys don’t need to be made by car. In fact, most of us don’t need to own a car at all; I and my young family do just fine without one. We need to break cars’ dominance over our streets and reclaim them for active travel and children’s play.”
“Everyone who lives here knows how it works. People from outside are very impressed by tolerant behaviour of local drivers. Funding available great but please dont use it for the sake of it ie dont try and fix what isnt broken then leave us to get on with it.”
“These road changes will make a huge impact to are day to day lives. If Rosemary lane was to be closed the only two ways to access the road would be from May park school which is always busy during pick up and drop of times and may trees practice which again is always busy. This has in the past caused traffic and made reaching Rosemary lane difficult. Also this restricts us in accessing are local mosque making it twice as difficult to access. Closing the road will mean the end of the road being used for parking and this will distroy the beauty of the seneic park / green space we have. I’ve lived in Easton all my life and have never seen an issue with the traffic flow and don’t see how closing Rosemary lane will make a difference.”
“Parking on corners in Easton is ridiculous and makes it very dangerous coming out of roads because there are often vans blocking a corner meaning you have to pull all the way out into the street in order to see if anything is coming. So I would welcome yellow lines around road junctions. Very long, straight streets, like Robertson Rd, could do with traffic calming measures but I don’t find that people speed down the littler side streets that much.”
“Brilliant – such a step forward in promoting healthier methods of transport, providing a cleaner, safer future for us all.”
“As an Easton resident of 12 years, with 2 small children at a local primary school, I can clearly state that proposed changes will greatly improve the safety and quality of life of the youth in the area in particular. I have had many near misses and witnessed the danger that come from excessive and unnecessary car use in the rat runs around where we live. I look forward to an improved system.”
“The Rosemary lane closure will have a very bad impact on the flow of traffic on the junction of Stapleton Road and Robertson road. Since the last traffic light system was changed, the lights do not allow enough cars to pass before it changes.The closure of Rosemary lane will cause further congestion.
Also perhaps the council should have considered the way the RPZ were implemented as Easton on this side of Easton way has felt the overload of people/ builders etc parking their vehicles along school roads around doctors surgeries to walk to the centre, as they have previously parked on Pennywell road. A much wider road!
Closing roads, altering layouts are being considered from the wrong decisions made previously.
Do the people in city hall think that the entire Bs5 area is not worthy of RPZ and or to limit the amount of HMO’s therefore cut down on people in one shared house with 7 rooms to let therefore up to 7 cars. Think carefully and consult all of the Bs5 area.”
“When i get home from work after 10pm, finding somewhere to park is hard enough. Adding more double yellow lines is just going to make things worse. Cycling is not an option as I do shift work and need to drive as part of my job. This is stigmatising people who can’t afford houses with driveways. This is white, (mostly) male, middle class people pushing their agendas onto the rest of us. I thought the trend now was to reduce pollution by REMOVING speed bumps?”
“Its long time that changes to the road system were implemented. I realise that the changes won’t suit everyone but although it might be misplaced trust you would assume that traffic planners dont look at roads or corners in isolation. With that said, although some of the changes might be unpopular with some people and cause some inconvenience I believe that they will benefit the larger community. We are having yellow lines at the top of our road which will create a scarcity of parking, but I would rather that inconvenience than the current danger that parking vans on corners presents. You can’t please everyone, in Easton that amounts to nothing ever getting done.”
“I have lived in Easton for 17 years on Greenbank AVE west and our street is used as a cut through with NON resident drivers avoiding high Street (as high Street is usually blocked with cars meeting eachother in the middle). Our street is therefore used regularly as a short cut ( which drivers generally drive faster than normal). In the last 3 months there have been at least 6 incidents of parked cars being hit. At least 4 incidents of road rage with people seriously threatening each other outside our house. There are now quite a few young children in our street and I am backing the plans for high Street to be closed at the bottom end as this will prevent cut through drivers using our road and high Street as a short cut and racing down our street causing damage to property and endangering people in the street.
I realize that some of these measures will effect people in different ways but if you study the proposed plans they will have the effect of fewer non residence driving through Easton as a short cut .
We should be happy that steps are being made to limit traffic in Easton generally. I say this as a driver myself who drives in and out of Easton every day but am happy to alter my route if it helps traffic generally.”
“I agree with all of the proposals to help ease traffic within a very densely populated area, making it safer and cleaner for the local children and families.”
“I’m new to the area so can only really comment from a selfish perspective as I don’t yet know the intricate needs of the community. I was not a resident here during the public consultation period. Our road takes many of the cars which are ‘cutting through’ the Greenbank part of Easton to get to Fishponds Road. These cars are not local and they do not have the interest of the community at heart. They simply want to get to Fishponds road as quickly as possible. Therefore they speed down narrow streets and endanger the lives of any children or pets crossing these roads. The proposed road closures will direct traffic to the Robertson Road lights. These lights will slow them down (especially if there is greater traffic there), and they will no longer seek to cut through Easton in order to save time. This can only be a good thing. I can see how parking will be difficult if the proposed Yellow lines measures are carried through but this would be a price worth paying for the traffic calming measures from my personal perspective. Thanks for asking!”
“I was not consulted about this. It will not benefit me or my family and will seriously reduce ease of movement/ mobility for disabled elderly people. A disgusting attempt to get grant funding whilst disempowering local residents.”
“Thank you for canvassing opinions in a meaningful way. When I recently met with a local counsellor at Easton Cuminity Centre to express my concerns, I was told that there had been overwhelming support for these proposals in the local area. I found this to be perplexing to say the least as the majority of people I spoke to were opposed to the changes or were not aware of them. Also as the doors opened at the community centre for the last community meeting there were a number of very angry people waiting to discuss the proposals and top of the list was how poor the consultation had been.
As a community nurse who needs a car to carry out my job the proposals could negatively impact upon my working day with additional time needed to complete journeys and an inability to park a reasonable distance from my home at the end of shifts etc. As an area that is diverse and has a number of mosques/ churches Friday’s and other important days sees a significant increase in traffic. This was so bad recently that it took me half an hour to get from Robertsons road to Kingsley Road. Changes that will ultimately increase traffic on roads close to roads closed or one way systems could have catastrophic impact for emergency services.”
To reduce the page maintenance we have suspended reporting every comment for a while – though we will continue to update the ongoing totals at the top of the page. The comments reported above are a fair representation of the broad spread of views that continue to be expressed. We will review how we report all responses in due course. To restate: our aim is to gather and listen to the views of as many of Easton’s residents as we can reach. We have no wish to supress or silence anyone’s opinions. We just want all in the community to be able to have their say about these plans. Thanks for visiting the site.