Pedestrian underpasses and safety/desirability

[Bletchleyite]

Regarding the subways in Chester city centre, closing the The Bars and Fountains Roundabout subways won't happen. They're the only way for pedestrians to traverse what are two busy junctions in a timely and safe manner because neither have any pedestrian crossings. It'd be easy to counter argue "just put pedestrian crossings in then", but that'd be an answer to a question which hasn't been asked. Those subways need tidying up, but I'm firmly of the view closing them would be a poor move.

I don't know, I really don't like using it and if they just put in two crossings I'd use those instead (there is a way to do it at street level already but it's a considerably longer walk unless you just jump the barriers and walk across anyway). The problem with it is that it's too small - only about 7-8 foot square if that - and so if anyone scares you down there you can't get away. It also has a problem with homeless people living in it, some of whom are quite aggressive (and if they'll be aggressive to 6'4" brick outside lavatory me I hate to think what they might do to a slight woman or a child). I don't have an issue with the wide, short, open style of underpasses used in Milton Keynes where getting away from an assailant would be fairly easy, but it would cost an absolute fortune to change that into one similar.

The only way I could see of making it not unpleasant would be to post a police officer or private security there 24/7 to eject any loiterers, which I suspect would rapidly cost a lot more than a couple of pelican crossings.

I suspect while people may not be shouting for that there are people who won't use it at some times of the day or at all, and thus won't go to Chester by rail.

Of course you could add the crossings and leave it open and let people use which they prefer, but I suspect it'd overridingly be the crossings on the level.

 

[Lewisham2221]

I don't know, I really don't like using it and if they just put in two crossings I'd use those instead (there is a way to do it at street level already but it's a considerably longer walk unless you just jump the barriers and walk across anyway). The problem with it is that it's too small - only about 7-8 foot square if that - and so if anyone scares you down there you can't get away. It also has a problem with homeless people living in it, some of whom are quite aggressive (and if they'll be aggressive to 6'4" brick outside lavatory me I hate to think what they might do to a slight woman or a child). I don't have an issue with the wide, short, open style of underpasses used in Milton Keynes where getting away from an assailant would be fairly easy, but it would cost an absolute fortune to change that into one similar.

The only way I could see of making it not unpleasant would be to post a police officer or private security there 24/7 to eject any loiterers, which I suspect would rapidly cost a lot more than a couple of pelican crossings.

I suspect while people may not be shouting for that there are people who won't use it at some times of the day or at all, and thus won't go to Chester by rail.

Of course you could add the crossings and leave it open and let people use which they prefer, but I suspect it'd overridingly be the crossings on the level.

On a recent (very brief) visit I noticed signs suggesting the pedestrian walking route from the station to city centre be via the canal side. I didn't try it, so don't know how ideal it is, but it certainly looked preferable to the underpass.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On a recent (very brief) visit I noticed signs suggesting the pedestrian walking route from the station to city centre be via the canal side. I didn't try it, so don't know how ideal it is, but it certainly looked preferable to the underpass.

I've never done that but might give it a try.

 

[Russel]

Birmingham used to have underpasses dotted all around the city centre, I'm glad most of them have now gone.

These days, walking around Birmingham at street level can sometimes feel a little risky in places.

 

[Joe Paxton]

Many pedestrian underpasses in London have gone in the past twenty or so years, in favour of street level pedestrian crossings.

 

[Russel]

Many pedestrian underpasses in London have gone in the past twenty or so years, in favour of street level pedestrian crossings.

Funny you should say that, yesterday I saw an old photo of Tower Gateway that showed the entrance to an underpass just after the stairs down from the platforms, it looks like it was filled in around 2010 but I don't recall ever noticing it myself.

 

[edwin_m]

Nottingham has also got rid of quite a few underpasses including those that made Maid Marian Way allegedly Britain's ugliest street. For the sort of inner city roads that had them, adding pedestrian crossings also helps with traffic calming.

 

[lachlan]

In Bristol at the Bearpit they added pedestrian crossings but kept the underpasses. I still used the under passes as it was faster, but they aren't very pleasant

 

[sprunt]

Nottingham has also got rid of quite a few underpasses including those that made Maid Marian Way allegedly Britain's ugliest street. For the sort of inner city roads that had them, adding pedestrian crossings also helps with traffic calming.

I assume nothing ever came of the plan to put Maid Marian Way through tunnels at Friar Lane, allowing an uninterrupted pedesdtrian route to the castle? That would have made it a lot nicer.

 

[edwin_m]

I assume nothing ever came of the plan to put Maid Marian Way through tunnels at Friar Lane, allowing an uninterrupted pedesdtrian route to the castle? That would have made it a lot nicer.

No, but the horrible roundabout with four subways got replaced by a much more pedestrian-friendly crossing.

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

 

[Djgr]

I don't know, I really don't like using it and if they just put in two crossings I'd use those instead (there is a way to do it at street level already but it's a considerably longer walk unless you just jump the barriers and walk across anyway). The problem with it is that it's too small - only about 7-8 foot square if that - and so if anyone scares you down there you can't get away. It also has a problem with homeless people living in it, some of whom are quite aggressive (and if they'll be aggressive to 6'4" brick outside lavatory me I hate to think what they might do to a slight woman or a child). I don't have an issue with the wide, short, open style of underpasses used in Milton Keynes where getting away from an assailant would be fairly easy, but it would cost an absolute fortune to change that into one similar.

The only way I could see of making it not unpleasant would be to post a police officer or private security there 24/7 to eject any loiterers, which I suspect would rapidly cost a lot more than a couple of pelican crossings.

I suspect while people may not be shouting for that there are people who won't use it at some times of the day or at all, and thus won't go to Chester by rail.

Of course you could add the crossings and leave it open and let people use which they prefer, but I suspect it'd overridingly be the crossings on the level.

The Bars subways also flood.

Although they date from the 1960s, there was also a lot of redevelopment in this area in the early 90s (I think) but the good people of Chester chose to do nothing with the subways at that time.

 

[Train Maniac]

Friars Passage (i think its called) in Guildford is particularly unpleasant at night. Feels like it goes on forever...

 

[DelW]

Friars Passage (i think its called) in Guildford is particularly unpleasant at night. Feels like it goes on forever...

That's partly because it's so little used. Friary Passage, and the two subways under Park St (the west side of the one-way system), were rendered rather pointless by the failure to provide a pedestrian friendly river crossing to connect them up. I think there was such a proposal originally, (decades ago) but in the end all that was provided was an awkward and indirect route along the side of Friary Bridge. The end result is the regular overcrowding of the narrow pavement on the north side of Bridge St.

A footbridge somewhere near the Electric Theatre connecting to a traffic free route either side might have been more useful than the one at Walnut Tree Close, which itself will be even less useful if SWR succeed in closing the station footbridge to non ticket holders.

 

[stuu]

It depends how they are done. The horrible 1960s ones with their unique aroma and dodgy corners are grim and rightly should be removed. But then they can be done well, e.g. the roundabout west of Harrow town centre is elevated with pedestrian and cycle routes beneath, its all open and no dodgy corners etc.

 

[renegademaster]

The one in croydon between the whitgift center and welsley road tram stop has become a homeless encampment.

While i never really felt unsafe walking through it the tunnel under Norwood Junction is in a really sorry state

 

[507021]

I don't know, I really don't like using it and if they just put in two crossings I'd use those instead (there is a way to do it at street level already but it's a considerably longer walk unless you just jump the barriers and walk across anyway). The problem with it is that it's too small - only about 7-8 foot square if that - and so if anyone scares you down there you can't get away. It also has a problem with homeless people living in it, some of whom are quite aggressive (and if they'll be aggressive to 6'4" brick outside lavatory me I hate to think what they might do to a slight woman or a child). I don't have an issue with the wide, short, open style of underpasses used in Milton Keynes where getting away from an assailant would be fairly easy, but it would cost an absolute fortune to change that into one similar.

The only way I could see of making it not unpleasant would be to post a police officer or private security there 24/7 to eject any loiterers, which I suspect would rapidly cost a lot more than a couple of pelican crossings.

I suspect while people may not be shouting for that there are people who won't use it at some times of the day or at all, and thus won't go to Chester by rail.

Of course you could add the crossings and leave it open and let people use which they prefer, but I suspect it'd overridingly be the crossings on the level.

Please tag me when replying to my posts so I can provide you with a response in a timely manner, I only came across this because I was looking for something else in this section of the forum. Your concerns are valid and I agree with them, but your suggestions to resolve them are only sticking plasters. As a (nearly) Cheshire West & Chester taxpayer, I think the money those solutions would cost to implement would be better spent on trying to get homeless people off the streets and not living in the subways. That in my opinion would be a better, long term solution which will make a big and more cost effective difference.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Please tag me when replying to my posts so I can provide you with a response in a timely manner, I only came across this because I was looking for something else in this section of the forum. Your concerns are valid and I agree with them, but your suggestions to resolve them are only sticking plasters. As a (nearly) Cheshire West & Chester taxpayer, I think the money those solutions would cost to implement would be better spent on trying to get homeless people off the streets and not living in the subways. That in my opinion would be a better, long term solution which will make a big and more cost effective difference.

That would be so if the homeless people were the only issue, but eliminating all street crime (and associated fear of it) is not going to be an achievable aim, so designing street features to mitigate it remains important.

 

[507021]

That would be so if the homeless people were the only issue, but eliminating all street crime (and associated fear of it) is not going to be an achievable aim, so designing street features to mitigate it remains important.

I agree tackling street crime and the fear of it is important, but I'm not convinced it's such a serious issue in those particular subways that it warrants the provision of at-level crossings or employing private security to act as a deterrent, this viewpoint being formed from personal experience and speaking to friends who live the city. Those subways aren't very nice and I can absolutely understand why people feel uneasy using them, or would prefer not to at all, but they're not the street crime hotspots you're suggesting they are.

 

[Recessio]

Many pedestrian underpasses in London have gone in the past twenty or so years, in favour of street level pedestrian crossings.

Along with pedestrian bridges from the "pedway" scheme, they have rather fallen out of fashion with urban planners, it's no longer deemed desirable to route pedestrians through tunnels and bridges just to prioritise traffic flows.

There's a nice pedestrian subway in Mill Hill underneath the A1 Watford Way at the eastern end of Hartley Avenue - because it is next to the University of London Observatory, it is decorated with solar system motifs. Also, because Mill Hill is a nice area, it's generally not full of people.

Compare to the horrendous one nearby at Hendon Central tube station, which was probably a nice high street until they rammed a six lane urban motorway through it and built a horrible pedestrian subway that floods and is often full of very aggressive people living in it.

 

[Via Bank]

Well-designed underpasses that increase amenity for pedestrians and cyclists are to be welcomed. Surprisingly the Green Man Roundabout in Leytonstone is a really good example from the 90s: well-lit, wide underpasses with generous corners and entrances/exits on every arm, well used, lots of green space. It's very similar to the usual Dutch custom.

Compare, for instance, Holland Park or Chiswick roundabout, with dingy, narrow underpasses with leaks and tight corners. It's no wonder subways get a bad rap.

I am concerned that the overall tendency towards surface-level crossings everywhere is mainly a value engineering move. True, it may not be desirable to put people in terrible subways to prioritise motoring… but it's also not really prioritising walking/cycling if people have to wait a long time (often multiple times) to cross a junction. In some places a high-quality bridge or subway would be much better.

 

[Recessio]

Well-designed underpasses that increase amenity for pedestrians and cyclists are to be welcomed. Surprisingly the Green Man Roundabout in Leytonstone is a really good example from the 90s: well-lit, wide underpasses with generous corners and entrances/exits on every arm, well used, lots of green space. It's very similar to the usual Dutch custom.

Compare, for instance, Holland Park or Chiswick roundabout, with dingy, narrow underpasses with leaks and tight corners. It's no wonder subways get a bad rap.

I am concerned that the overall tendency towards surface-level crossings everywhere is mainly a value engineering move. True, it may not be desirable to put people in terrible subways to prioritise motoring… but it's also not really prioritising walking/cycling if people have to wait a long time (often multiple times) to cross a junction. In some places a high-quality bridge or subway would be much better.

The waiting times at crossings really depends on how the prioritisation on the traffic lights is set up though, and is often something that can be tweaked easily to either prioritise pedestrians or traffic. (TfL can actually change traffic light timings on certain red routes to help buses keep to time.)

 

[satisnek]

The waiting times at crossings really depends on how the prioritisation on the traffic lights is set up though, and is often something that can be tweaked easily to either prioritise pedestrians or traffic. (TfL can actually change traffic light timings on certain red routes to help buses keep to time.)

Here in the provinces I have never seen traffic lights prioritised for pedestrians.

 

[lachlan]

The waiting times at crossings really depends on how the prioritisation on the traffic lights is set up though, and is often something that can be tweaked easily to either prioritise pedestrians or traffic. (TfL can actually change traffic light timings on certain red routes to help buses keep to time.)

Indeed - if the lights go red as soon as I press the button, surface crossings are good. If I have to wait, they're bad. I do think we should ban multi-stage crossings though-Pedestrians shouldn't be forced to wait in the middle of a road.

 

[Joe Paxton]

Here in the provinces I have never seen traffic lights prioritised for pedestrians.

You just need to get your highway authority to sign up for The War Against Motorists then...

 

[ScottGallagher]

I remember a very dreary pedestrian underpass at the Junction of Southampton Row /Theobalds Rd in London, not too far from the old tram tunnel entrance. Even had toilets (though chained up and long abandoned) Must have been sealed at least 20 years ago.

 

[Dr_Paul]

I remember a very dreary pedestrian underpass at the Junction of Southampton Row /Theobalds Rd in London, not too far from the old tram tunnel entrance. Even had toilets (though chained up and long abandoned) Must have been sealed at least 20 years ago.

I don't remember that one. There used to be a long gloomy subway under Tottenham Court Road / Charing Cross Road / Oxford Street; the gents was still open (and useful if one had had a few pints), although Soho's junkies would for some reason push their old needles into the holes in the pegboard backing in the traps. The big roundabout at the eastern foot of Westminster Bridge had a maze of subways; they have all gone now as well.

There was a long, dark pedestrian tunnel going east from Liverpool Street Station, going under Bishopsgate. Is it still there?

 

[peteb]

Kidderminster's town centre is cut off from the rest of the town in the east, north, south directions. Only from the west can you access it without having to use a subway.

Crime, whether actual or fear of, is the major disincentive to use the subways after dark or indeed on lighter evenings.

It's a shame that the responsibility for these falls to the Worcestershire County Council who basically doesn't give a fig about the issue. They cite clog ups on the ring road if they were to put pelican crossings in.

Meanwhile the town deteriorates, most shoppers drive in or, due to silly parking prices, shop elsewhere.

But I'm sure with hundreds of thousands of visitors to both the Severn Valley Railway and Safari Park an easily accessible town centre for pedestrians would arrest and maybe reverse the decline.

 

[Dr_Paul]

Kidderminster's town centre is cut off from the rest of the town in the east, north, south directions. Only from the west can you access it without having to use a subway. ...

But I'm sure with hundreds of thousands of visitors to both the Severn Valley Railway and Safari Park an easily accessible town centre for pedestrians would arrest and maybe reverse the decline.

I've always been appalled at the way the Kidderminster Ring Road seems to have been blasted through the town centre. It almost makes the Coventry Ring Road look an aesthetic success by comparison. When I've visited the Severn Valley Railway, I've never been tempted to go up the road to the town centre.

 

[peteb]

I've always been appalled at the way the Kidderminster Ring Road seems to have been blasted through the town centre. It almost makes the Coventry Ring Road look an aesthetic success by comparison. When I've visited the Severn Valley Railway, I've never been tempted to go up the road to the town centre.

That's a pity because there's a really interesting museum of carpet, some good eateries facing the river, coffee shops and a premier Inn in a listed carpet building. But as you infer, all inconveniently out of reach on foot unless you take the underpass. To make matters worse, the "ring road" isn't, it's a horseshoe shape so pushes all through traffic into a bottleneck just where the subway from the station to the town is. So the highways authority fret about "delays to traffic", with the result footfall into the town is greatly reduced. Maybe political change might result in a different view, but I'm not holding my breath!

 

[Dr_Paul]

To make matters worse, the "ring road" isn't, it's a horseshoe shape so pushes all through traffic into a bottleneck just where the subway from the station to the town is.

Of course! I forgot that as I would be driving from Bromsgrove to Ludlow -- A448 then A456 -- and wouldn't need to go all around it. I remember that the roads got badly clogged, and I found it slightly easier to go via the south of the town centre on the A451 and cut across to the A456 on the B4549.