Trial lane closure on Leicester's Newarke Street

“I drive through here every morning.

Last Monday (and this morning) traffic was backed up around the Holiday Inn to St. Augustine Road. All-in-all this only added about 10 minutes to my morning commute.

By the end of last week, most commuters seemed to have adapted to the change and there was little difference. Perhaps adding only a couple of minutes to my journey.

I think that any work to connect the city for pedestrians and cyclists is a good thing. Especially in areas visible to drivers.

Also, I have to commend the council for empirically investigating this change. It would be interesting to see the data they collect on this. Perhaps I'll put in an FOI request...”

“Daveb – how can it possibly mean more lane shuffling for drivers if there are less lanes? If anything it will simplify flows and improve the situation for drivers as well as pedestrians. But, as I say, the trial will demonstrate this. If it works, great, if it doesn't, there's no harm done – it's just a trial after all. Where's the harm in trying something different, particularly in a situation that doesn't work very well as it is currently?”

“@ DaveB0360

it's NOT to do with bottlenecks of pedestrians, it's to do with making Leicester a nicer place for people. Disuading car traffic is clearly the point. There is more life on streets with fewer streets.

there used to be three lanes past the Magazine untila few years ago. The council narrowed the road. Traffic still flows. It'll be fine.”

“Whichever way you look at it, this will increase the bottleneck potential for traffic and force a lot more lane shuffling for drivers which, in turn, increases the potential for accidents.

Planners..start using common sense principals instead of bizarre statistical methods to determine what's needed.

Bottlenecked pedestrians do not present a hazard to health like bottlenecked traffic does.....and in any case, I use this route several times a day for the last 8 years and I've never yet seen a pedestrian 'crush' that warrants the need for wider pavements.

Whoever dreamt this latest crazy proposal needs to be sent back to nursery and cared for.”

“Phreakdown – great comment. Unnecessarily wide roads like this in towns and cities encourage high speeds and cause accidents. Well done to the City Council for attempting to do something to address this.

Balders999, just because a pavement might (just) be wide enough to accommodate pedestrians doesn't automatically make it an adequate environment for pedestrians to use. This road is horrible, dominated by traffic, polluted and, as phreakdown rightly points out, dangerous. As a driver, you only regularly use the three lanes because there are three lanes provided. If this is reduced to two lanes, frankly, I don't think you will notice any major difference to your journey. The trial will show whether or not this is correct.”

“My apologies, I was referring to the inside lane, not the far lane, to avoid any confusion.”

“The far lane is never used by anyone who regularly drives down that road. The reason for this is linked with the fact that cars are allowed to park just round the corner, closing the lane anyway. When the cars dart in from this lane, seeing that there is parked cars in their way it can get very dangerous. Removing a lane on this stretch of road, will not actually make much difference.

Judging by some of the comments on here, many people don't regularly use this road, and if they do, they drive with blinkers on.”

“@upthcity - I live and work within 5 mins walk of this street.

It's horrible. The council monitor pollution at their Welford Road offices at the top of this street for a reason.

It can also be dangerous. two years ago a driver mounted the pavement and killed one pedestrian and critically injured another - and alos knocked over the statue og John Biggs.

big wide 3 lane roads like this do nothing for the city or the people who live in it other than encourage car traffic.”

“Do the people opposing this want to undo all the pedestrianisation that is currently extant throughout the city? Shall we allow all and sundry to drive up and down Gallowtree Gate? Park outside WH Smiths while they pop in for a paper? Think it'd be better if cars and buses could drive up Humberstone Gate and High Street? Remember what it was like when we could? When there was far less traffic?

Coventry is very convenient for car drivers and there's abundant parking.
York has tiny pedestrianised lanes and little parking.

Which would you describe as the more attractive town centre? And which do you think receives more shoppers?”

“I use this road and pavements regularly and have done the maths (Google Earth). A pavement on the car park side is 3.59m (avg) will accomodate a flow of 294 people per minute and on Magistrate side is 2.73m (avg) wide will accomodate a flow of 223 / min. Along the length, the capacity of both sides is approx 2260 people. The road has 1 bus lane and 2 lanes from Welford Road and 3 lanes from Southgates and Vaughn Way entering it and has 3 lanes exiting it along Welford Road. Simple maths says that if you tunnel a crowd (of vehicles in this case) it will get stuck at some point or another. (Oh and slow down emergency vehicles to LRI)

The only sticky point for pedestrians is the crossing at the widest (worst) point (the corner). Re-model that rather than reduce traffic flow on a major inner ring and you will increase flow for pedestrians, make it safer and keep traffic moving. So I guess my question has to be, what is the real reason for this idea, because it isn't pedestrian access to the 'old town'.

As a pedestrian driver, I do not need a wider pedestrian route on this perfectly wide enough pavement, I have never needed to swerve to avoid a collision with another pedestrian but I regularly use one of all three lanes depending where I am going on the other side.”