Category: Environment

More than 1,000 streets in Manchester become 20mph zones

From the Manchester Evening News

Over 1,100 streets, covering 111 miles, are included in the scheme aimed at making streets safer

A third of Manchester's roads have become twenty mile an hour zones. Over 1,100 streets, covering 111 miles, are included in the scheme aimed at making streets safer.

The 20mph limit could eventually be extended to all residential streets if this initial stage proves successful and more funding can be found.

Some of the roads affected are already signposted as 20mph zones – but these are not legally enforcable. The changes the council has got permission for are under traffic regulation orders, which change the legal speed limit for the road permanently.

The huge project, over two years in the making, has been paid for using £500,000 of public health funding.

Alongside improving street safety, it is hoped the new 20mph limit will encourage more children to walk to school, make streets more pleasant to live on and cut air pollution.

It'll be interesting to see how this scheme performs. It'll certainly be the largest 20mph scheme in the near vicinity. Personally, I'm very much a supporter of reduced speeds but they're so dependent on driver consent (regardless of penalties). If drivers accept the reduced speeds, it'll make a real difference to the environment and more importantly on health. It's very much a development I welcome and will be watching with a great deal of good will.

Very disappointed that the High Court has confirmed the decision of the Planning Inspectorate allowing the incinerator to go ahead at Barton. I'm disappointed but not totally surprised. The legal grounds presented in argument always seemed shaky at best and centred around the sustainability of a wood waste supply.

There is a finite supply of wood waste but had the appeal been won, it would be difficult to see any future plant being developed no matter what the technology.

My main argument against this plant is that we live in an overly polluted area. The site of the Barton Plant is adjacent to the M60, one of our busiest motorways. We've allowed a shopping mall to be built there that's almost impenetrable to any mode of transport except the car; certainly pedestrians and cyclists are deterred. The Environment Agency accepts that as a consequence, primarily of road transport, the pollution levels exceed the allowable levels all the way along the M60 here. Yet we're not allowed to challenge the ludicrous decision of the Environment Agency to still permit the plant to operate at Barton.

And now we're being subjected to a rogue's gallery of Conservative candidates protesting how disappointed they are with the decision. This is the same Conservative Party that destroyed the buses, privatised the railways and built places like the Trafford Centre. Is it surprising the system is so rigged that we must not try to tackle air quality? We can tiptoe round the edges and ask how much wood-waste they can get their hands on. But don't whatever you do suggest that the Tory way of travel is affecting our health. Because it is.

So has the process of opposing been worthwhile? Absolutely – in my view it's been a coming of age. There's been an exponential growth in awareness of  environmental consequences and far more readiness to fight the next battle.

Cameron's yard-dogs have been blaming everyone during the floods. They've been smearing and leaking about the Environment Agency; they've been pointing the fingers at Councils, even Conservative run Councils; and they've been desparately dredging for reasons to blame anyone.

The Tories were right to be worried as there's a devastating piece in the Guardian today pinning the blame squarely at Cameron. The article explains:

• Changing demand has led to increased Maize production for animal feed
• The nature of Maize means that:

   

  • Farmers have been ploughing land that was previously untilled and switching from spring to winter sowing, leaving the soil bare during the rainy season. And thanks to a wholesale change in the way the land is cultivated, the water – instead of percolating into the ground – is now pouring off the field.
     
• Labour saw it coming. In 2005 it warned, "increased run-off and sediment deposition can also increase flood hazard in rivers".
  ​
• Labour turned this advice into conditions attached to farm subsidies. Ground cover crops should be sown under the maize and the land should be ploughed, then resown with winter cover plants within 10 days of harvesting, to prevent water from sheeting off.

So why isn't this happening in Somerset?

"Because the current government dropped the conditions. Sorry, not just dropped them. It issued – wait for it – a specific exemption for maize cultivation from all soil conservation measures."

 

"It's hard to get your head round this. The crop which causes most floods and does most damage to soils is the only one which is completely unregulated."​

​​

​