Bottom: Junction of Fleetgate and Newport Street.

governing the no waiting restrictions on Fleetgate with a view to relaxing them somewhat. It seems that this was a political gesture of support in the absence of any budget.

In December 1988, the first plans were received from the consultants and unsurprisingly reflected the conservation bias of the Civic Society. The suggested materials were yorkstone pavements and kerbs, with granite setts and blacktop highway surfaces. On the long straight and narrow highway a dog-legged entrance with a plateau and rumble strip at the northern end was suggested. This would slow traffic entering the street to a crawl. Half way along its length at a T junction there was to be a chicane, raised plateau and rumble strips accompanied by bollarded pinch points. Off-street parking bays were to be incorporated narrowing the highway. Finally, there was to be a third plateau and pinch point at the southern (exit) end. The opportunity to enhance the streetscene with planting, railings and seats was also taken at both the entrance and midway junction. There was a general agreement in principle to these suggestions.

The difficulties of pulling all of these organisations together is given by two notes on the file made at that time. A memo from the Borough Solicitor to the Development Services Officer asked “who in fact is co-ordinating the project?”. A second note to the Borough Engineer from the Head of Local Plans offered him “a hand onto the tightrope” of the negotiations. The use of an’ outside agency like UK2000 remained anathema to many local authority working practices.

Notwithstanding this, the scheme moved inexorably on. The County advised strongly against the use of yorkstone owing to likely breakage and future maintenance costs. ‘Heritage’ paving or ‘Cairnstone’ would be safer (and cheaper). The dog legged junction designs, too tight to take buses were straightened somewhat. The chicanes and plateaux likewise were considered too draconian and received the same treatment. The summer slipped by without the County coming up with working drawings. The financial year 1989/1990 also slipped by.

Having agreed the extent of the ET contract work, UK2000 sought

clarification of the use of yorkstone paving and granite setts for the rumble strips on three occasions in early 1990 and cautioned repeatedly about the loss of character should traditional materials not be used.

In February 1990 the County announced that it was on site. Yorkstone paving, granite setts for the rumble strips and blacktop in the highway areas were laid. New traditional street furniture and lighting standards were introduced. The scheme was hailed a great success and was undoubtedly a vast improvement to the previously degraded environment. Fears remained that the traffic still moved too quickly over the straightened, chicaned plateaux. The rumble strips created a lot of surface noise in an inhabited area. The County agreed to a review once the scheme had settled down.

POSTSCRIPT

It is now two years since the scheme was completed. Many of the empty premises have filled with tenants. The parking

problems have been largely resolved with the off-street parking bays, although capacity is sometimes inadequate. Several bollards at the chicanes which snapped off following collisions have been replaced Small ‘areas of the yorkstone paving have cracked through poorly parked vehicles forcing traffic over the low kerbs.

Finally a letter received from the County Council in January this year stated that as a result of the monitoring, the chicanes and plateaux appear to have been successful in reducing average traffic speeds (with the admitted exception of the local rally lads), and that whilst the rumble strips do create noise it is not considered to reach a nuisance level. In view of this the steering group need not be reconvened. So it follows that everything must be all right then?

Rob Lawton

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not coincide with those of either authority, or any of the other organisations mentioned within it.

CONTEXT 41

15