TrustNews Dec 20

A Practical Vision for Winchester High Street

A Vision for Winchester High Street was proposed by Stephen Harte in the June issue of TrustNews, and he elaborated it in the September issue with contributions from Richard Baker and Arthur Morgan. Peter Liddiard then wrote with several comments and questions which are reproduced below with responses from Stephen (assisted by Richard) in italics. I was very grateful for Peter's thoughtful response and l have spoken with him and expressed my appreciation and gone through the points he raised.

 

I was not intending to be pedantic and resolve everything, as issues are complex and we look to the authorities (Councils and others) to do that with the community. Paramount in the proposal is the need to achieve a fully pedestrianised High Street. That is a red line!

 

ltem 1 of the article says that making Sussex Street two-way would get major traffic out of Upper High Street and reduce traffic at the top end of the High Street. I cannot see how it would reduce traffic in the High Street. Please explain.

 

Traffic coming up St Georges Street which wants to go west up the Romsey Road without going up the top part of the High Street would need to turn right along Jewry Street, left along City Road, left along Sussex Street and right up Romsey Road. With south- and north-bound traffic on Sussex Street (i. e. making it two-way) means traffic does not need to go along the upper High Street.

 

The article suggests that an improved High Street would connect the city's Cultural and leisure facilities. It does not, and cannot. The city's cultural and leisure facilities are uch more widespread.

 

Yes, there are widespread cultural and leisure facilities in the City. Pedestrianising all of the High Street creating a linear plaza from the Broadway to Westgate would mean that major attractions, not all but probably most, would be in a pedestrian zone directly accessed off the High Street, i.e. the Guildhall, Cathedral, City Museum, College, Great Hall, Westgate Museum, and Military museums.

 

If the eventual aim is to pedestrianize the upper part of the High Street below the Westgate, one has to address how traffic and deliveries would access Staple Gardens, the Law Courts and St Clement's Street.

 

Deliveries and access are major issues which need to be studied in detail. We can learn from how other cities have achieved access and deliveries where pedestrian priority is necessary.

 

I agree that a visually strong entrance to the barracks is needed, but l can't see how. Once one goes up Romsey Road, the barracks have a fine entrance; the problem is that it is not visible from the High Street, and is accessible only along a narrow footpath to Romsey Road.

 

The Barracks and their military museums do need better promotion. A museum pass might be one way of giving access to the Peninsula Square museums by coming through the Great Hall and up the steps from the Queen Eleanor Garden. A platform lift could be provided for disability access. The other suggestion is to make a strong link from the High Street to Trafalgar Street through into Gar Street and the Barracks. There may be another way of creating a path to pass behind the Law Courts where there is the open landscape area and keeping to the boundary up to Peninsula Square. No doubt contentious and would need detail.

There is no George Street. It is St George's Street. True. Editor's oversight.

 

In section 4 it is stated that only essential traffic should be able to turn left at the top of St George's Street. How do you define essential, and how do you stop non-essential traffic from turning left?

 

'Essential' may be defined as public transport and emergency services. This would need detailed analysis. I am suggesting ways of managing traffic but not a final solution which the authorities need to agree on.

 

If non-essential traffic is prevented from turning left out of St George's Street, how do residents and visitors get to St Cross, Winchester College, etc?

 

This is linked with the point above. Either traffic has to circumvent the City by other routes, or access must be allowed from St George's Street to Southgate Street.

 

I do not understand what you mean by "the lower end of George Street (sic) could be one way as far as Parchment Street". Is St Georges Street not going to be one way throughout its length, as it is now?

 

'One way' should have been 'one lane' as far as Parchment Street then two lanes for traffic to turn south or north along Jewry Street. However, traffic could be one lane the length of St George's Street and still turn left or right at the traffic lights.

 

I do not understand what is meant by traffic lights managing a two way system alternating as one way from Southgate Street along Jewry Street.

 

To establish a pedestrian area in Jewry Street outside Barclays Bank, only one traffic lane is proposed between St George's Street and Southgate Street with through use of traffic lights to control alternate use of the one lane by north- and south-bound traffic.

 

The article suggests altering the traffic flow to the Broadway to the north side of King Alfred's statue. I think this would be a mistake, for lots of reasons. A much better solution, in my view, would be to leave the traffic flow much as it is, but make the whole of the area in front of the Guildhall, all the way to King Alfred's statue, a pedestrian priority zone, with the area in front of the Guildhall having high spec paving laid out to a formal pattern.

 

I agree about the area in front of the Guildhall as a high spec paved area giving pedestrian priority. I proposed that the Abbey Gardens (south) side of King Alfred's Statue could be a pedestrian area and traffic two-way on the north side of the Statue. This is an area integral to the arrangements being developed for the Central Winchester Area Regeneration, bus routes, local and national and the location, if any, of a bus station/bus hub.

 

It might be worth exploring some of the other issues for visitors/pedestrians in Winchester:

The bridge on Bridge Street by City Mill is lethally narrow. A solution to this urgently needs to be found:

- widen the bridge (rebuilding the parapet in a new location)?

- put a pedestrian bridge alongside the existing bridge? - change the traffic to single way alternating, controlled by traffic lights, enabling the footway to be extended in width?

- establish a second bridge crossing point for pedestrians a little further south?

 

I agree. Richard Jobson of Design Engine has produced a creative design for attaching a pedestrian bridge on the south side of St Swithuns bridge. A traffic system to alternate traffic so only one lane is in use at a time would reduce the wear and tear on the bridge and create more pavement.

 

The footpath along the weirs arrives at a very tight spot on Bridge Street – there needs to be ready access to the footpath along Water Lane.

 

I agree that a better pedestrian link is needed between the Weirs and Water Lane.

 

A footpath/cycle-way needs to be established to the new Leisure Centre and Park & Ride.

 

Pedestrian routes between the city centre and the new Sports Centre at Bar End are poor. There is the potential for a route between Wharf Hill and the Handlebar Café, and a new easterly footpath connection north of the Recycling Centre to Bar End Road could be considered.