As for 20mph zones outside schools let’s ask the DfT what they think “It is of doubtful benefit to have a short length of either a 20 mph speed limit or a 20 mph zone outside a school.”

As for the switchback what’s been stopping anyone from assigning a 50mph limit to it using section 84 of the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984?

I’m not disparaging your work, I just like evidence before making decisions.

Anyway, I just want pick up on your points. I think the Wyre Forest Retail & Leisure Study [WFRLS] is open for interpretation. It does say the “…overriding strategy… …should be one of maintaining its localised shopping function” [para.10.18, p. 111] and “The Carpets of Worth site… …is not ideal in terms of its linkage with the primary shopping area” [para.10.19, p.111]. However, the decision has been made and this is all academic now!

Regarding the petrol station, I wasn’t thinking along the lines of competition, I’m thinking of the dynamics of a petrol station. By their very nature they attract vehicles and you can’t deliver petrol in the back of a Ford Transit. They attract traffic and probably traffic extra to the super food store (both customers and deliveries). If a petrol station is a ’standard part’ of a super food store, then it follows that I could apply for planning permission to convert a corner house in some quite residential neighbourhood into a small hairdressers and then erect a massive petrol station next door because it is a ’standard service customers expect’ and under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 a hairdresser is classed as A1 the same as a supermarket or super food store.

Looking through the results again I’m reminded that a worse-case scenario for the left-hand lane of Mitton Street (pm) is 2 cars in 2006 and 9 in 2016. Difficult to reconcile when we often get queues that stretch down York Street and Lion Hill to reach into Mitton Street. I also have to query why there isn’t any PICADY data for Mitton Street in appendix E?

Likewise if the flow (p9) from Worcester Road to Severn Road is 1,988 (max. capacity 2,400) and the forecast from Severn Road to Lion Hill is 1,100 (proposed max. cap. 1,800) where have the other 800 vehicles gone? Presumably down Severn Road, traffic lights permitting, except the forecast there is for 476. So we’ve lost 400 vehicles somewhere?

Was it? I thought it could be considered. It definitely was not zoned for a petrol station.

Have I blogged about this?
Check out The Wyre Forest Agenda to find out!

Jamie says: The policy for the Carpets of Worth site includes the following,

“…uses including retail….subject to the provisions of the Retail Strategy”.

The council’s subsequent retail survey showed a shortfall in bulk food outlets in Stourport. As for the petrol station, such a facility is a standard part of the supermarket service customers expect. Refusal on the grounds that the council wished to restrict competition in petrol sales would not stand up at appeal.

With regard to the recent vote and provisos does the TIA report deal only with the extra traffic on the roads as presently laid-out or do they also postulate on the effect additional crossing points would have?

Jamie says: Retail development was deemed “acceptable, subject to the provisions of the Retail Strategy”, the Strategy subsequently being informed by a council-commissioned survey that there was a shortfall in bulk food purchase opportunities in Stourport.

The TIA takes into account the road network as proposed by the county council and approved on Wed 5th March. The volume of traffic used in the model takes account of the Lichfield Basin site, where development is underway, but not the remainder of the Carpets of Worth site, for which there are at present no active proposals.

Jamie says: When reported, potholes are inspected and graded. Therefore, one pothole might be filled in on one visit, while its neighbour remains untended for weeks. My particular concern remains those potholes for which repeated filling is clearly not sufficient.