There is evidence that cyclists do not feel safe on our High Street and will cycle on the pavement. Despite very high numbers of young people cycling to school very few cycle on the High Street itself. There is also increasing evidence that pedestrians do not feel that it is safe to cross the street, even at the marked pedestrian crossings – let alone the informal passing places, which have had the distinctive cobbles removed. Yet the majority of drivers do observe low speeds. Only a minority do not and go faster than is really safe to (usually when the road is clear), even if they may be complying with the speed limit.
Ours is not a busy high street, unlike Musselburgh’s, but it is very wide and often clear, which can encourage drivers to go a bit faster than is safe. There is increasing concern that drivers do not stop at the zebra crossings even though this is illegal, or are simply confused, understandable, but hardly an excuse. There seems to be a build up of hostility towards the zebra crossings, but it is difficult to separate the concerns of
1) drivers who simply want priority and to get out of Dunbar as fast as possible from those of
2) pedestrians who may be unfamiliar with the idea of the zebra crossing.
I can’t help feeling that such anger is synthetic, fuelled by facebook gossip and backed up by hearsay and anecdote. The danger is somewhat exaggerated as near misses occur daily everywhere on our roads and anyway speeds are so low here that this would mitigate the seriousness, which I imagine planners and police have taken into account. Until recently, a noisy chorus of people – are these the same people who are also complaining today – were crying out about the confusion created by the informal passing places and argued that the old fashioned cobbles be ripped up as they were a trip hazard.
There is no objective need to reposition the crossings, even less a requirement for unsightly flashing pelican crossings, which will only give the signal to drivers that they do not have to stop at all when it is green and go at the speed limit. That would be dangerous. Consider that the Westport is the principal point where people are most likely to want to cross. Muck around with the “desire lines” and drivers and pedestrians will get confused and accidents will happen. So why not just let drivers get used to the fact that pedestrians might have the right of way? Pedestrians should assert themselves and take control, e.g. politely acknowledge drivers when they stop but stop them when they don’t.
The only strategy for resolving a multimodal conflict should be to favour one mode over another, but it need not be a high tech solution which simply frustrates everyone (imagine waiting for the green man and there is no traffic?). In this case the decision makers have opted to prioritise the pedestrian over the motor car, and perhaps this is what some drivers don’t get.
Maybe a few subtle changes could make it easier for drivers to understand that they should not accelerate out of the box, and only enter it if their exit is clear. Improving sight lines is another, though poor sight lines encourage caution – which should be the default when entering a pedestrian-rich zone. Removing the turning circle and straightening the carriageway would be no bad thing, as this currently encourages silly manouvres.
My preferred option would be to fill it up with a square of cobbles, giving a clear indication that is not appropriate to speed through if unobstructed. A more drastic solution still could be to make the West Port one-way.
Alternatively just remove the controlled crossing altogether, which would give drivers priority again, though I feel this sends entirely the wrong signal – that Dunbar is pedestrian unfriendly and it is better to bring your car
Dunbar High Street today is a relatively quiet and technically speaking an ‘easy to cross’ street. There should be only a few times during the day when crossing the street is only possible at the informal passing places. Try it and see. It is possible that the density of on street parking needs to be reduced and who knows this could make space for trees. This could make it easier for pedestrians to cross just about anywhere. But expect this to attract howls of protest from predictable places. But if drivers could then be able to see pedestrians more clearly, before they jump out from between cars, surely this is a good thing? Maybe cycle lanes should be introduced, I mentioned the safety problem earlier, which would narrow the carriageway for cars and encourage drivers to slow down, just a little bit more.
Further road narrowing at pavement pinch points and concurrently pavement widening (the West Port comes to mind) plus the creation of town gateways (raised or changed surfaces) could certainly be used to influence drivers to take the additional care and provide pedestrians with an enhanced feeling that Dunbar is a pedestrian friendly town, good to walk to and to walk around.
In time we should move to a “shared space” solution, giving pedestrians complete priority. Cars will be allowed to move in and out of the shared space and park relatively freely (hundreds of families live on the High Street after all), unloading bays would be available at intervals (there would be more than 2!), but all drivers would have to make more allowances for pedestrians than before, and one hopes that alongside such a measure fewer will take the car out unnecessarily and we can reclaim our town.
Come to think of it, Dunbar already has a number of natural advantages (e.g. high cycling rates, a fairly well used high street, and a high resident population within walking distance) and should aim to get a reputation for being the safest town in East Lothian for pedestrians and cyclists. And if you think that is plain old fashioned and romantic nonsense, just head for Europe, where even in rural areas you’ll find town centres returning to this model.