Woodmill residents made a deputation to the Council and handed in a 100-strong petition opposing the idea - that could be back on the agenda - of introducing traffic lights at Woodmill Bridge — at an estimated minimum cost of £100,000.

A budget for traffic lights is apparently being considered for inclusion in the capital programme for the year after next.  The deputation against lights was made by the Woodmill Action Group at the full council meeting on November 18, 2009, and the petition was signed by over 100 people - almost all of the local residents in Oliver Road, Mead Crescent and Woodmill Lane, west of the bridge.

The Group says the Council is still considering putting in lights even though they say “no discernible benefit would arise as a result”.  They claim the eventual cost could be double the Ł100,000 figure. They also claim that even the City's own traffic management officers advise that lights would actually reduce traffic flow, thereby increasing journey times, queue lengths and pollution levels.

The issue became somewhat confused when temporary lights were installed out of necessity to accommodate much-delayed  repair work on the Bridge. At this time Bitterne Park councillors said that 2,500 people  responded to a survey and 80% of these wanted to see permanent lights introduced on the Bridge. But the design and distribution of the consultation survey, including the online version, was criticised by some who attended a meeting to discuss the issue in November 2007.

“If you ask drivers who come through here if they’d like lights, by and large they’ll say that they would because they view the Bridge as a place that’s in the way from where they are to where they want to get to,” said one Woodmill resident who spoke at the meeting.

In the end the decision was taken leave the Bridge as it was — without traffic lights - and monitor the situation. And that is how it has remained.

The full text of the deputation is reproduced below. If anyone would like to write an article for the website making the case for installing lights on the Bridge, please contact us.

Deputation by
Woodmill Residents
to 
Southampton Full Council Meeting

18th November 2009

Good afternoon,

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to address the Council this afternoon.

I am here to voice concerns of residents living near Woodmill bridge, who are worried about the prospect of permanent traffic lights being installed.

Woodmill is Southampton's forth road bridge over the Itchen.

The bridge is used by cars, vans, bicycles, pedestrians, school-children attending the Activity Centre, and even the occasional deer making it's way down the green corridor from Itchen Valley Country Park.

It is a busy and unique place, that may become even busier if plans to move the Swaythling Youth Club to the Activity Centre, are approved.

In 2004 the northern bank of the road across the river at Woodmill needed repair. For nearly four years residents and drivers alike had to put up with temporary traffic lights that caused long queues, day and night, and made the bridge about as pedestrian friendly as the Blackwall tunnel.


So you will understand that the idea of installing permanent lights on the bridge is a controversial one.

There are residents on the east of the river some of whom want lights, and there are residents living close to the bridge, who almost universally, do not.

We all know the frustrations of being stuck in traffic queues. The commuter's plight is our plight also.

The longer that cars have to wait, the worse the air quality becomes.

We all seek the same things; to make the bridge as safe and efficient a place as possible.

For us the bridge is a place around which we live;
a place we cross to walk to the shop or the park,
a place where children explore nature, where mums push prams,
dog walkers exchange “hello”s
and canoeists for reasons best known to them, hurl themselves into freezing water.

We all use the bridge, and we all realise that there are competing demands made of it.

We just feel that some people have been mislead into thinking that traffic lights will improve matters.

They will not.


Both the Traffic Flow and Accident Reports for Woodmill indicate that traffic flow has remained relatively constant at about 10,000 vehicles per day for the last 19 years, with or without traffic lights.

The basic constraint is the single track section of road.

The City's own Traffic Management officers advise that lights would actually reduce traffic flow, thereby increasing journey times, queue lengths and pollution levels.

Even if lights did increase flow locally, drivers would still end up  at the next set of lights on the junction with Swaything High Road, or at the double mini roundabouts at the junction with Manor Farm Rd.

Lights will not help anyone, they will in fact, actually make matters worse.

The most efficient system, given the limitations of the road itself is the 
give-and-take system that's been in place for as long as anyone around here can remember.

This system allows three or four cars to cross in both directions at once, using a passing place in the middle.

Research undertaken by ourselves shows that the system adapts quickly to changing demand, easily managing to deliver twice the volume in one direction than the other, and able to reach a 'free flow' state within 30 seconds of a queue clearing from one side or the other.

Most importantly, it is difficult for cars to speed across the narrow section of the bridge, as they need to give way to the cars they meet in the middle.

If drivers keep their speed below 20mph, they keep eye contact with pedestrians and accidents are avoided. And this is just what happens under the current system, particularly at busy times.

So the current system is safe, efficient, and in-line with current best practise.

If lights were installed experience shows that cars speed over the bridge and jump lights after they have turned red, endangering pedestrians and delaying the queue at the other end, who have to wait on green.

Even options offered by city officers to local residents in 2008, to mitigate some of the problems with lights, have since been withdrawn.
Firstly:
Intelligent lights, which turn green as cars approach, cannot be installed on the bridge, due to the long cycle time (of 2 ˝ minutes) and the heavy traffic flow.
And secondly:
The lights can not be turned off at night, as this would apparently 'confuse drivers'.

So, for those living close to the proposed lights, life would be made intolerable by night-time queues, and particularly by the boom-boom-boom of in-car entertainment systems in the early hours of Saturday and Sunday mornings.

It therefore appears that the only justification for traffic lights is for the ‘clarity’ given to drivers looking for priority.

And that 'clarity' may, in fact, work against safety.

As stated in Stroud Council's Better Streets:
“Traffic lights are only necessary where streets are designed for vehicle speeds above 30 mph. They do not necessarily reduce accidents. Uncontrolled junctions encourage lower speeds and greater caution, and can reduce delays to vehicles and pedestrians. Across Europe, many traffic lights are being removed at busy intersections with positive results.”
Concerns expressed by the Woodmill Activity Centre over the safety of those in their care, as they cross the road outside the centre, could be met by the provision of a “lollipop” and high visibility jackets. Staff could use them to ferry children across the road in safety, without the need for the expense of a pedestrian crossing.

Local Government finances are very tight, while the city's roads are in a dreadful state.

Yet, the council is apparently still considering budgeting Ł100,000 to install lights, when no discernible benefit is to be had, and the eventual cost might be more than twice that sum.

We are astonished that this proposal has resurfaced, there being so many other projects to which this budget could be usefully applied.

There are significant downsides to spending the money in this way including....
    Commuters will actually take longer to get to and from work
Traffic queues will be longer
Pollution levels will be higher
Pedestrian safety will be compromised by speeding cars and vans
And the bridge will become a threatening place that cyclists and pedestrians will be deterred from using.

Whereas a decision not to install lights will bring benefits including...
The freeing up money to mend some of our broken roads
The retention of a safe and efficient system that is, in fact in-line with current best practice.
And demonstrating that council decisions are based on policy and fact.


With our increasing awareness of the impact of vehicle pollution on health, and the promotion of alternative forms of transport, does this proposal not fly in the face of the Council's transport strategy to encourage the development of cycling and walking and attempt to reduce congestion and traffic volumes?

Should we not be spending our limited resources on making our roads safer for cyclists, installing pedestrian crossings and cycle lanes, rather than encouraging yet more 24hr traffic queues and helping to ruin a small gem in Southampton's crown?

The residents here at Woodmill are united against these plans and I therefore present to you this petition signed by over 100 local people (that is nearly the whole of the local population) calling on the council to resolve this matter.

Once again, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to raise this with you.