There was a wide-ranging discussion of issues surrounding a proposed 20mph zone through the village at a second meeting with county council consultant Colin Davis and local councillors.
Those attending the ‘virtual’ meeting were Mr Davis, county councillor Dr Pete Sudbury, district councillor Sam Casey-Rerhaye, the chairman of the parish council Gordon Rogers, and councillors Steve Brown, Peter Rose, Sally Duff and Liz Yuille.
Mr Davis said there had been an encouraging response from councillors and the public to the first meeting. He said the community could play a role in the proposal, helping with design, landscaping, planting, local building contractors and after-care. More details concerning insurance issues will be discussed at this Friday afternoon’s ‘virtual’ meeting.
Mr Davis said the character of the village was also an important factor. He said the aim was keep costs down because the county council would be short of money, post Covid-19.
The proposed new Didcot to Culham Science Park road and river crossing would act as a kind of bypass for Long Wittenham but traffic would still use the village as the Ladygrove estate continued its expansion.
During the discussion Mr Davis asked for more details of the Community Hub plans for a new school, village hall and homes off Didcot Road. He was also interested in the proposed new cycle and pedestrian path linking Long Wittenham with the Barley Mow car park.
Mr Davis also wants to hear about the difficulties cyclists face in the village and which areas in particular prove a hindrance. If traffic was slower would it encourage more cycling including children?
We want a 20 mph limit through the village which will not be monitored but more Important to me living by the triangle is the heavy lorries which we can follow up but not sure OCC will do this even when photos provided . They haven’t even bothered to reply to the two emails sent by myself. So what hope of enforcement of a 20 mph limit !!! (I rest my case)
Even when the bridge is done ,traffic going to Oxford will still come through the village.What has always baffled me is how other villages have traffic calming that works when Long wittenhams never has.The chicanes should never been put in we should have had speed humps instead.
If they want proof of how slower speeds would benefit the village they need look no further than the main playground in the village. To get to it you either have to cross at the blind corner at Fieldside or blind corner at the East end of the high street, then a double blind corner towards Bodkins.
No surprise the playground is usually deserted except by people who drive there. So many times tried to cross the road with a pushchair and kids in tow only for someone to barrel around the corner.
Problem with the cycle path is that unless the traffic lights are moved back as proposed by Tom Bowtell then there still won’t be a safe pedestrian route to Clifton Hampden, as there is not space for both traffic and pedestrians between the Barley Mow and the bridge.
Traffic flows in the largest volumes along the easiest and quickest routes. Anything we do to slow down people’s journey times if they venture through LW will encourage them to seek alternative routes. So I agree this is needed, not only for safety purposes, but also to reduce the amount of traffic. It costs almost nothing to implement, so let’s hope the council just gets on with it.
I fully support the reduction to 20 MPH. As someone who lives right on top of a speed bump the noise from those speeding over the hump is annoying as well as dangerous. The safety of the residents crossing the road to get to the park hopefully will be improved