A dropped kerb with and footway extension to 'facilitate' cycle route.
Listed issues, most recent first, limited to the area of Cyclenation:
A dropped kerb with and footway extension to 'facilitate' cycle route.
A proposal to install lighting on the mid points of the footpaths on Parker's Piece.
Proposed new cycle path beside Westwood Road. This closes a gap in the cycle path network in Thanet.
A proposal to light the Gough Way cycle/footpath with solar- powered, directional cats eyes. The footbridge will be upgraded soon, so this is the next step. The route is well used.
A proposal to put in a new cycle path on the southern side of Lammas Land. The comment next to this in the report dismisses it because of the access road. They feel the loss of green space outweighs the need for it.
This could be important given the traffic calming work that was approved for the section of road outside the rugby ground.
Recently near Petts Wood station there has been a similar junction where the main flow of traffic is round the corner, whilst being a crossroads, which has been changed to a mini roundabout which slows the traffic more and makes it easier for cyclists. http://osm.org/go/0EEBtsaNj-?m
I'm wondering if the same can happen here.
From the West/Central Area Committee agenda, a proposal to resurface the track from South Green Road to the start of the Grantchester Meadows path. They will consider whether to adopt this on 1st March.
In the Environmental Improvements Programme for the West Area Committee, (1st March) they are considering whether to adopt the proposal to ban right turns from Newnham Croft Street.
A colleague asked if the gate from Downing to the Downing Site was open again, since he needed to go to Pathology. I said it wasn't, but why didn't he take the route I take, down Norwich St, Panton St, Tennis Court Road. Answer, "because I fell off my bike there, those speed humps are dangerous, and if you go slowly enough not to fall off, it's really slow".
Now I find that worrying. I go my way to avoid the awful traffic jams at the junction by the Catholic Church. I think most people would consider it a safer route. But if some cyclists are being put off going that way, and instead taking the zoo that is Regent St in preference, well, I don't think the traffic calming is doing the job intended.
Too late to fix this here, but we must make it a priority that any future traffic calming in the city or South Cambs doesn't inadvertently act as an anti-cyclist measure and force cyclists onto the much busier main roads which I'm sure everyone would prefer them not to use if there's a better a and quicker route. But if the traffic calming, that was presumably done, in part, to improve cycle safety, has failed, this is a waste of money. The speed humps on Bateman St, unless you do a slalom, you have to cycle over and the ones on Norwich St are viscious. I've just got good at taking them at speed as I've had plenty of practice.
New station that will serve the northern part of Cambridge, specifically the Science Park - but also by extension through the guided bus, villages to Northstowe.
This provides a good opportunity to construct another section of the Chisholm Trail (especially a link over the river and on to Newmarket Road). We must also ensure that any footbridge provides facilities for those with bikes AND that there is adequate cycle parking.
The Times is running a campaign for cycle safety.
How can we best capitalise on this in Cambridge?
Speed limit reduction from National Speed Limit to 30mph on this narrow section of road which forms part of National Cycle Route 1.
Phase 2 of the River Dour Greenway will connect the existing portion of the River Dour Greenway cycle route with National Cycle Routes 1 and 2 on Dover's seafront. It'll also connect to Regional Cycle Route 17.
Created by Gregory Williams // 1 thread
The Oyster Bay Trail phase 2 will close a gap in the cycle network between the existing Oyster Bay Trail at Swalecliffe, Herne Bay and Reculver, the Viking Coastal Trail around Thanet, and the Crab & Winkle Way between Whitstable and Canterbury.
Created by Gregory Williams // 1 thread
This proposed cycle path will remove the need to climb a hill when following the Great Stour Way to reach Canterbury city centre. It'll also increase the proportion of traffic-free path used for the route and remove some areas of potential conflict with other road users due to parked cars.
Completion of this section of the riverside cycle path will allow students to cycle virtually traffic free from the Parham Road Student Village into Canterbury city centre. Making this route cycleable will allow the existing and proposed developments at the Parham Road Student Village to fulfil their car-free objectives.
The pedestrian crossing joining the pavements here are frequently blocked by parked cars.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
This development (a clear case of squeezing a quart into a pint-pot) has no cycle parking.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
This attractive, car-free development - heavily used as a cycling and walking route - has gradually turned into an ugly car park in recent months following the temporary removal of enforcement. The County Council are proposing partial re-regulation of parking.
An article in today's Cambridge News about the new shops in Orchard Park isn't encouraging reading.
The headline says it all. They are proposing shops that will probably only act as "corner shops" so people will all drive along the A14 or Kings Hedges Road to Milton Tesco.
This seems on the face of it, to add to the general anti-cycling design that Orchard Park has had since the first bulldozers went into action. I don't know what others think, or what can be done about it. Presumably a too large supermarket isn't wanted there, as then it would become a magnet for people outside of Orchard Park to drive to, unless, but this is not a suggestion that is possible, it had virtually no car parking, just for the disabled, but lots of bike parking, and good smooth pedestrian paths to all the houses.
A 20mph limit in residential areas of Cambridge would vastly improve safety and enable more people to cycle. What extent should it cover and how can we achieve it?
Martin Lucas-Smith // 2 threads
Planning application here which may be of interest.
The Local Plan is being reviewed - which will be a big process over the coming two years. It's important that cyclists engage with this and ensure that deficiencies, such as lack of cycle parking, are fixed.
There was a Sainbury's lorry delivering to the front of the St Andrew's Street store today despite signs saying there is no loading at any time on posts nearby. Sadly I didn't have camera. So my question is 1) Are they allowed to do this? and 2) if not, should we make a fuss (assuming it's a regular occurrence?)
[Originally submitted by another user, just transferring this to be a full issue so it has a location]
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
The current layout of the pedestrian crossing at the junction of Winchester road and Vermont close forces cyclists out of the cycle lane and into the flow of traffic. This is a risky maneuver and relies on the patience of the car driver behind the cyclist. A possible solution would be to be extend the cycle lane through the chicane, with give way markings so that pedestrians have right of way.
Southampton Cycling Campaign has received many reports of local cyclists having accidents on the cycle path outside the Dominos Pizza outlet at the southern end of The Avenue.
A recent incident was reported in the Southampton Echo, http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/10475081.Cyclist_hurt_in_road_crash/
There is a loading bay in the cycle contraflow cycle lane, which means that the cycle lane is blocked for cyclists as soon as a vehicle is parked there. This means that cyclists have to pull out into the path of oncoming buses, thus making the NCN route unsuitable to young children or inexperienced cyclists.
We have a tandem which fits in all the spaces on trains in Scotland (as far as I know), but we are prohibited from taking it on any except the East Coast line trains. I've been writing to various officials - elected and otherwise - and contributed to the recent review of the Scotrail franchise, but am not getting much joy. No one seems to think it is a big deal. But, for my family, with 2 kids aged 5 and 1, and no car, if we don't go by tandem and train, we can't go anywhere much. The tandem is not a luxury but a practical transport solution. Does anyone else want to join in and make this more than a one-woman issue?
(another related issue: even once the kids can ride their own bikes, we won't be able to use trains much since most only allow 2 reservations).
Disused railway tracks on St Peters Dock provide short section of road surface that is dangerous to traverse from East to West by bike.
If you are avoiding crossing the tracks then you are forced into oncoming traffic.
If you cross the tracks, you are then potentially trapped between parked cars and the railway tracks, which can be dangerous.
The tracks are very slippery when wet or icy, and sections are often hidden underwater because there is poor drainage after heavy rain.
Ideally the tracks are totally removed, or the surface covered with concrete or tarmac.
Redesign of Grey Street to remove the danger of cars reversing (blind) out parking bays into middle of the road.
Proposed route along the rail corridor through Cambridge, part of which is in the Cambridge Local Plan.
The A2 is a hostile environment for cycling. Cyclists should be directed away from using the A2 towards existing safe alternatives (e.g. RCR16) and the current A2 cycle signs should be removed.
Here is an ambitious plan for a Bicycle Boulevard from Shoreditch to Fitzrovia, along Old Street, Clerkenwell Road and Theobalds Road, open only to bicycles, buses and motor traffic for local access only.
a. It is now the most cycled route in London, showing that it is the desired EW route.
b. It is of variable width, therefore trying to accommodate bikes, buses, and through traffic in a consistent and safe way is impossible. In other words, a compromise will be a botch job.
c. There will not be mixing of buses and bicycles: bicycles will have a dedicated two way cycle lane on the South side of the street.
d. The Boulevard stops being a mega- EW-rat-run. Motor traffic will have to use Pentonville/City Road.
While some painted "cycle lane" does exist northbound, there is woefully little provision for cyclists considering the huge number that use this section of road each day, a large number of whom are those who work at the General Hospital and other nearby health centres. Southbound cyclists have no real provision of space at all, save a graduated stopline, where cars turning right often try to pass right-turning cycles on the inside. Dale road itself is extremely narrow by winchester road, with almost no pavement space for pedestrians.
Cyclists heading northbound on Winchester road must beat traffic off the line at Dale road to get to the painted centre of Winchester road. North of the traffic light at The Range, the cycle lane is almost non-existent, placing cyclists between 2 lanes of heavy traffic, and cyclists have to stop and wait in this dangerous area in order to turn right onto Wilton road. Furthermore, the road surface, especially at this part of Winchester road, is currently deplorable.
Garratt Lane at Earlsfield station sucks massively for cyclists, and is a jarring interruption to the Wandle Trail (Sustrans route 20). It would be great to extend the riverside path underneath the railway to avoid this dangerous stretch of road.
Surface, drainage and width issues.
Planned for upgrade as part of CEC 'family network'
Was an issue 5 years ago (and before)
I've visited Riverside to Waterbeach with William Rayner of county cycling team. He's revising signage here and providing it along the St Ives corridor, with the old NCN 51 being renamed Regional Route 24 (blue patch). We've decided finally to continue to sign NCN 11 from Riverside Bridge to Waterbeach Station, and he's looking at suitable (hopefully temporary) wording to advise to follow NCN 51 to Bottisham for destinations beyond Waterbeach, which will hopefully eliminate misrouting those from outside the area.
Our inspection of existing signs showed that only one new signboard was provided on completion 5 years ago of Riverside Bridge. Signboards still send people via Green Dragon. Sustrans considers signage is an important part of any route project.
The intention is to sign Milton Country Park as a destination, not as part of the route, removing route signs within the park, and probably retaining Coles Road as the signed route through the village, though it would be much preferable to have improvements past the shops and the village green, pubs etc.
Retaining the route to Waterbeach as NCN will help keep the gap in people's awareness.
I am planning to contact again the landowner of the missing link between Bottisham Lock and Fen Road, Lode with a suggestion for a low-level route, southeast side of the Bottisham Lode floodbank which is the route of the public footpath, where signs forbid cycling. It might be considered more visually acceptable. All parish councils are for the route, including the one of which he is a member.
Six inch high ridge near left side of north bound lane on the south side of the bridge forces cyclists too close to the kerb or into the path of motor vehicles. Issue reported via CTC pothole reporting site. Resurfacing required.
Our campaign for safer walking and cycling to/from NWCambridge now has a petition and a first video (of five) summarising our position.
See our new video summarising our petition:
I’d be delighted if you could promote this to your networks. Time is of the essence because a Senate House discussion is coming up [3 Nov 2015], and I will report the number of signatures on our petition there. (But signatures after the date will still be useful.)
Anyone is welcome to sign the petition; we ask people to use the Comment field to let us know if they are University Member / University employee / City resident / SouthCambs resident / etc.
For twitter purposes the recommended hashtag is #EddingtonSafety and there is an @EddingtonSafety account too.
Thanks very much
David J C MacKay FRS
Regius Professor of Engineering,
Cambridge University Engineering Department
Girton resident and parent.
Cambridge Cycling Campaign Member
Motorised vehicles currently use the rat run through Milner Street to avoid the fraffic lights at Grove Lane/ St Helens St.
This is part of NCN 41 , any extra traffic passing through here detracts from the cycling experience and is negative for residents.
Cyclist comments are needed now !
The A14 is a very hostile, dangerous road for cycling.
Improvements to it, as well as broader changes to the national framework for cyclist crossings of major roads, are needed.
Sustrans route 4 coming from the canal path on its main route into Bath city centre has a high level of traffic conflict and the need to filter between two tight lanes of traffic with a large proportion of LGVs coming down the A36 Beckford Road.
The right turn from Sydney Place southbound into Great Pulteney Street is signposted as no right turn as well as being route 4, and has no refuge to turn from.
It should be possible to route the path through Sydney Gardens as the Darlington Place/Sydney Place westbound/Great Pulteney Street junction has been improved to increase pedestrian flows.
Some non-cycling residents are also concerned about cyclists using the pavement in this area too.
Castle Street cycle lane is a contraflow cycle lane on a one way street in Sheffield. It has been here since March 1997 and allows cyclists enter the city centre from the network of cycle paths on the East, avoiding some big arterial routes with no cycling provision.
For the past 15 years this cycle lane has been plagued by Hackney Carriage drivers parking illegally on this cycle lane, blocking cyclists access and forcing them into oncoming traffic. This has been the case for over a decade.
There is a taxi rank on the pavement side of the cycle lane, taxis often fill up this rank and overflow, parking in the cycle lane, blocking the way for cyclists.
There are several pedestrian refuges along the road particularly at the western end of the road. The refuges cause a pinch point for cyclists. The road marking confuse priorities between those using the on road cycle path and other traffic.
Is this really the best that Edinburgh can do for the flagship national cycle network route 1 to get it to cross Clerk Street? You have to go through a pile of bins, on to the pavement to get round a barrier and then try and judge it right to cross the road, or use the nearby pedestrian crossing.
Prince St bridge is an anarchic pigs ear. I like pigs and fond of a bit of anarchy but it's getting beyond a joke. Of course it will all be sorted out properly in due course but we could live with this for years. Here's a quick fix:
1. Move south vehicle stop line back 10m behind tramlines
2. Remove all bollards unless one or two kept in line with centre of bridge with arrows right for cars
3. Widen cycle lane from bridge to Festival way turn so suitable for 2-way cycling.
4. Put in Give Way painted line at an angle running from enlarged cycle lane to centre line so southbound cyclists alerted to need to filter across traffic.
1. Remove all bollards
2. Widen cycle lane for 2 way cycling all the way up to the traffic lights with The Grove.
3. Remove 5 bollards on each side of north bound traffic light along with the two set back
4. Paint cycle lane passing behind light and then back onto carriageway making it nice and clear that it's an option for cyclists when lights red or they can carry on (as most will, no worse than now but at least it will be clear that they can treat these as 'give way')
5. There will need to be 'give way' paint to make clear that pedestrians have right of way on the by-pass.
Yes it's muddled but less so than now and makes the desire lines easier. It's also a cheap paint based fix pending the proper job.
I have serious concerns about the safety of this portion of the bike path; arising from its recent re-design. Recently my 10 year old son was in a very close “near-miss” with a car turning off the A316 into Bicester Road; and I believe many more similar incidents are likely occurring. Eventually someone will be seriously hurt or killed on it.
However, the improvement in the track leads cyclists to feel more confident in using it – giving a false sense of security.
• The segregated track makes it particularly appealing for inexperienced and more vulnerable cyclists (such as kids).
• This track design leads to an increase in the cyclists speed.
• The smooth/quick nature of the track leads inexperienced cyclists to believe that THEY HAVE RIGHT OF WAY across side roads.
• There are no markings on the roads to tell drivers coming in or out of side roads that cyclists could be on the track crossing their path.
• There is a particular challenge for EASTBOUND cyclists.
To avoid stopping at every side road, when on the track travelling Eastbound (as per red arrow on photo) approaching roads such as Bicester road, the cyclist has to simultaneously
(a) check to their FRONT/LEFT side to see if a car is exiting the side road
(b) check BEHIND them on their REAR/ RIGHT hand side to see if a car is about to swing off the A316 into the side road (usually at speed) - (as per orange arrow on photo).
This is a hard combination to perform – looking 180 degrees opposite directions at the same time. If you are an inexperienced cyclist, on an apparently safe track, it is very likely that you will not realise you have to be this vigilant and not check adequately for cars.
Hence, my boy rode across Bicester road from the east and was very nearly hit by a car turning off the A316.
(Note that travelling from the west is somewhat easier as both the vehicles turning in from the A316 and those turning out from the side roads are in your front field of vision).
My suggestions for improving this situation are:
(1) Clearly mark the bike track across the side roads so cars are aware there are cyclists approaching from the side.
(2) Ideally, give cyclists priority across the side roads; so making cars slow to a halt and making it more intuitive for cyclists.
(3) To facilitate this, would require some stopping space for traffic coming on/off the A316 to after the bike track crossing
At roads such as Bicester road the bike track could be curved to the south by about 2m before crossing the side road – this curve in the track would
(a) naturally slow cyclists down as they approach the side road
(b) would provide vehicles moving onto the A316 a decent gap so they can separate the concerns of first negotiating the bike track then focus on getting on the A316;
(c) for vehicles coming off the A316 the additional space would give them space to stop and give way to cyclists.
The Reach Fair ride takes place on the early Bank Holiday Monday (May Day) in May.
The web page for it is:
The planning overview is summarised:
I've created this issue to help plan this event.
Cyclist coming from the river come up Friars Lane exit and have to currently route right round Richmond Green because it is one way. Many do not and simply cycle across the green. The path across the green should be formally opened up to cyclists - as a share path with pedestrian priority - or a seperate track provided along the south side of Richmond Green.