Listed issues, most recent first:
We consulted on our proposals for Cycle Superhighway 9 in autumn 2017. The route is an important part of the Mayor’s Healthy Streets Approach, which aims to make London greener, healthier and more pleasant through encouraging walking, cycling and the use of public transport.
We have published an analysis of the responses and our response to the issues raised here. The feedback we received was valuable in helping us to further improve the scheme.
In response to feedback received through the consultation, we are now carrying out a further consultation on two parts of the route:
- Kew Bridge and Kew Bridge Road (High Street Brentford to Wellesley Road)
- Duke Road and Duke’s Avenue’s junction with Chiswick High Road
We would like to hear your views on these further proposals. A map of the areas where we are carrying out further consultation can be found below.
Other than the two sections identified for further consultation, we will be progressing our plans for the route as outlined in the Response to Issues Raised report. No further consultation is planned on the proposals for the route except for the two parts of the route above. We will carry out local engagement on the rest of our proposals later in the process. We are intending to proceed with our proposals subject to formal approvals.
Following feedback from respondents and the Mayor’s announcement of a new brand for London’s growing network of high-quality cycle routes in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, this route will no longer be called a Cycle Superhighway. We will work closely with our borough partners on the most appropriate wayfinding for this scheme.
Kew Bridge and Kew Bridge Road (High Street Brentford to Wellesley Road)
The main change we are proposing is to provide a segregated two-way cycle track on the south side of Kew Bridge Road and South Circular Road. Previously we proposed with-flow segregated cycle tracks and a bus lane on Kew Bridge Road, the South Circular and also between Wellesley Road and High Street Brentford (including Kew Bridge junction).
This change provides full segregation for cyclists throughout this section and removes the requirement for two bus stop bypasses we proposed on the north side of Kew Bridge Road. The change also addresses concerns raised about cycle safety at Kew Bridge junction, Green Dragon Lane and Lionel Road South.
We are also proposing a second southbound traffic lane on Kew Bridge to make the junction operate more effectively and to maintain bus journey times in the area.
In summary, our proposals for this section of the route include:
- A segregated two-way cycle track on the southern side of Kew Bridge Road and South Circular Road
- Improved cyclist access between Capital Interchange Way and Wellesley Road
- Improved pedestrian and cycle crossings at Kew Bridge junction
- A new pedestrian crossing across Kew Bridge Road at High Street Brentford
- Creating an additional southbound traffic lane on Kew Bridge
- Changes to bus stops at Kew Bridge Station
- Changes to bus lane operating hours reverting them back to the original hours of operation
- Parking bays on South Circular relocated to accommodate the cycle track
A map of the proposals for Kew Bridge and Kew Bridge Road to Wellesley Road can be found below.
Duke Road and Duke’s Avenue’s junction with Chiswick High Road
The main change we are proposing is to ban the right turn out of Duke Road onto Chiswick High Road for all traffic (except cyclists) in response to safety concerns. Traffic would be able to use Annandale Road to exit east onto Chiswick High Road instead. We previously proposed to reduce Annandale Road from two lanes to one at its junction with Chiswick High Road. We are now proposing to keep two lanes on exit at this junction to facilitate traffic that may be redirected from Duke Road.
We are also proposing to maximise pavement space outside Our Lady of Grace and St Edward Church, in response to local concerns. This will require the reduction of eastbound traffic lanes on Chiswick High Road from two to one.
We proposed four additional pay and display bays on the west side of Duke’s Avenue. Following feedback from the consultation and our discussions with Our Lady of Grace and St Edward Church we are no longer proposing these bays and will instead retain the existing single yellow line as this will provide more opportunity for parking for Church services. Additionally, one proposed space on the eastern side of Duke Road opposite Bourne Place has been removed to ensure vehicles can exit this junction.
In summary, our proposals for this section of the route include:
- Duke’s Avenue converted to entry-only; Duke Road converted to exit-only with a banned right turn, addressing collisions involving vehicles turning at Duke Road
- The eastbound approach to Duke’s Avenue would be reduced to one lane
- Changes to parking and loading on Chiswick High Road, Duke’s Avenue and Duke Road
- Maintaining pavement space outside the Catholic Church, extending pavement space elsewhere where possible and planting new trees
The segregated two-way cycle track on the southern side of Chiswick High Road has been retained.
A map of the proposals for Duke Road and Duke’s Avenue junction with Chiswick High Road can be found below.
How would the proposals affect journey times?
We have carried out detailed traffic modelling on the proposals to understand how our proposals might affect journey times for general traffic, buses, cyclists and pedestrians.
Despite the sophistication of our traffic models, all traffic modelling is only ever indicative; it is intended to give an idea of where the impacts of changes in journeys are most likely to be felt. It assumes that drivers have perfect knowledge of the network and will always choose the quickest route available
We have undertaken traffic modelling on the proposed changes to the scheme, which has indicated the following:
Kew Bridge section
This section has undergone extensive design changes following feedback from the previous consultation, including concerns about the impact on journey times through the junction. The new design changes the ‘with flow’ cycle track into a bi-directional cycle track and provides additional capacity north and southbound on Kew Bridge. As a result, three approaches to the junction will have either an increase in green signal time or an increase in lane capacity, which leads to improved journey times on bus routes 237 and 391 in both directions and bus route 65 east bound compared to the previous designs. One approach to the junction will see a reduction in green signal time which as a consequence, has a minor negative impact on journey times for the 65 westbound bus route.
Duke’s Avenue section
The design changes at this location have been made to protect trees and retain footway space outside Our Lady of Grace and St Edward Church. There is no longer a right turn lane, but there is space in front of the stop line for up to two right turning vehicles without blocking vehicles travelling east, including buses. As the predicted traffic volumes are low, this junction is expected to operate effectively and the design change is predicted to have minimal impact on overall bus and traffic journey times.
Detailed results of our traffic modelling can be found below.
We are subject to the general public sector equality duty set out in section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, which requires us to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations by reference to people with protected characteristics.
Our autumn 2017 consultation set out how we had due regard to the duty and can be found here.
We have updated our Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) for the proposed changes. The EQIA completed for this scheme shows positive impacts for black and ethnic minority groups, females, disabled cyclists, and cyclists under 25 and over 65 years of age. Positive impacts have also been identified for disabled pedestrians, as the scheme proposes a number of improvements to pedestrian facilities including enhanced crossing facilities, increased pavement widths and new pedestrian crossings.
Some negative impacts have been identified where pavements are proposed to be cut back or shared use is proposed, however we have ensured that they are appropriate for number of pedestrians in the area and that they allow two wheelchair users to pass safely. Shared use areas would be provided only where there is sufficient space for pedestrian and cyclists. Some negative impacts have also been identified where we are proposing to install bus stop bypasses. We recently agreed therefore to include zebra crossings at all bus stop bypasses. The crossings would have tactile paving and would be raised to footway level to create a flush surface.
Public drop-in events and have your say
We will be holding public drop-in events at which staff involved in the project will be available to answer your questions:
- Wednesday 6 February 2019 (17:00 to 21:00), Clayton Hotel Chiswick, 626 Chiswick High Road, W4 5RY
- Saturday 16 February 2019 (11:00 to 15:00), Museum of Water and Steam, Green Dragon Lane, Brentford, TW8 0EN
You can let us know your views on these proposals by taking part in our online survey below.
Have your say
We would like to know what you think about our proposals.
Please give us your views by completing the online survey below by Tuesday 26 February 2019.
Alternatively, you can:
- Email us at email@example.com
- or write to us at FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS
You can also request paper copies of all the consultation materials and a response form by emailing firstname.lastname@example.org, or writing to FREEPOST TFL CONSULTATIONS.
Have your say
Brent Council write:
As part of our sustainable transport policy, we are progressively improving key walking routes to schools and making them safer for all road users such as children. This documents outlines our proposal to improve pedestrian access to Harlesden Primary School in Minet Avenue.
Why are we proposing this change?
As a part of the recent expansion programme for Harlesden Primary School the school entrance
was relocated from Acton Lane to Minet Avenue. Brent Council has received many complaints
from the school and parents in relation to their concerns about the safety of pupils trying to access
the school due to congestion and obstructive parking. In addition there have been a number of
accidents reported by the school involving school pupils and motor vehicles in the section of Minet
Avenue between Acton Lane and the gated closure outside the school.
Brent Council also receives regular complaints with regards to vehicles driving through the
emergency services access gate that was installed to reduce traffic and improve safety in Minet
Avenue by the school.
What are the proposed improvements?
The scheme proposals are shown in the attached drawing. In summary the proposals
The introduction of a Pedestrian and Cycle zone in Minet Avenue between Acton Lane
and the existing gated closure, between 8:15 to 9:15am and 2:30 to 4:00pm. Residents
of this section of Minet Avenue will be issued with a permit (free of charge) and will be
exempt from the proposed restrictions together with emergency services vehicles, blue
badge holders and permitted delivery vehicles.
Introduction of timed “Pedestrian and Cycle” zone signs and a CCTV camera to help the
enforcement of this area to improve safety of children and all pedestrians.
The introduction of school keep clear marking outside the two new accesses of the
Parking bays outside the school will be amended as shown on the plan to facilitate the
Brent Council write:
As part of our sustainable transport policy, we are progressively improving key walking routes to schools and making them safer for all road users such as children. This documents outlines our proposal to improve pedestrian access to Wykeham Primary School in Annesley Close.
Why are we proposing this change?
In 2017 Brent Council introduced a number of road safety improvements in roads around the
Wykeham Primary school. This was in response to concerns raised by the school, local ward
councillors and residents submitting a petition to Brent Council. Although we have installed a
number of improvements to stop the obstructive parking on footways and Carriageway, and to
reduce congestion in Annesley Close. The situation had not improved and drivers continue to
obstruct the Carriageway and the Footways during the school peak hours at am and pm.
The proposals we have introduced include the installation of Pedestrian Guard rails, Street trees
and the installation of the School Keep Clear marking.
What are the proposed improvements?
The scheme proposals are shown in the attached drawing. In summary the proposals include:
The introduction of a Pedestrian and Cycle zone in Annesley Close from its junction with
Aboyne Road and the turning circle, between 8:15 to 9:15am and 2:30 to 4:00pm. The
Permit holders within the proposed zone (Annesley Close), Emergency Service Vehicles,
blue badge holders and permitted delivery vehicles would be exempted from the
Introduction of timed “Pedestrian and Cycle” zone signs to help the enforcement of this
area to improve safety of children and all pedestrians.
Howland Street is closed to motor traffic from Thursday 31st for several weeks. Cyclists will still be able to use it except for 2 days, probably 7th and 8th Feb, when it will be completely closed. On these days use the signed diversion via Grafton Way and Whitfield Street or walk through.
Maple Street cycle lane closed for a few days from January 29th, cyclists will need to use the main carriageway.
The cycle parking dimensions look good, almost lifted straight out of the guide. Main issues are: garden gate doors are only 90cm, the Sheffield stands are affixed with only M12 bolts, and the cycle shelter doors are not lockable.
Construction of 9 dwellings and new access Land to the rear of 10A, Rosemary Road, Waterbeach, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, CB25 9NB http://plan.scambs.gov.uk/swiftlg/apas/run/WPHAPPDETAIL.DisplayUrl?theApnID=S/0193/19/FL South Cambridgeshire Application reference : S/0193/19/FL
Cycle path on southbound side of Eddington Avenue has been closed for no apparent reason since August 2018. Obstructive signs tell cyclists to dismount or use the road.
Last year a new path was built by Sustrans linking an existing bridleway to Rufforth. Great, right? Sure, *unless you dare to cycle on a non-conventional bike and/or have a physical disability*! Because what's this we have here? It's a barrier that makes it impossible for people with a physical disability and/or on a non-conventional bike to get past! Sustrans claim that the Council is responsible for this barrier, and the Council have said that those responsible "have been informed". Will action be taken? Will the 15-20% of York residents who have a physical disability be able to use this new path funded with their taxpayers' money? We shall see.
Another signed cut-through for cyclists, another barrier that is ableist, discriminatory and a massive hassle even for able-bodied cyclists on conventional, diamond-frame, relatively light bikes. If you don't tick both those boxes then your options are:
1. Lift your bike over the barrier. Here's hoping you're not on a cargo bike, trike or heavy city bike!
2. Reverse back along the path if you're coming from the north/Malton Way and try to find a different route that isn't blighted by barriers.
3. Take the road. Don't like cycling alongside motorised traffic? Tough!
And here's what the Council needs to do - follow the example of more enlightened cities (pretty much any city in Scandinavia, the Netherlands, Germany etc etc etc) and remove the barriers!!
This cut-through is on a key, signed, cycle route from Clifton Moor Gate, supposedly allowing cyclists to avoid the busy routes. But cyclists seeking to make use of this cut-through have to contend with not one, but two barriers, both apparently installed to impede cycle traffic or at the very least force to cyclists to walk (because all cyclists can walk without problem, right?!). The older barrier is a fence-type one which greatly narrows the space available to pass through. Apparently that wasn't enough to stop those pesky cyclists, as a concrete bollard has been installed maybe 0.5 metres from the metal barrier, in front of the greatly narrowed space. In short, only able-bodied cyclists with conventional bikes have any hope of getting through, and even then, it's a struggle. These barriers need to be removed.
There are visibility and bottleneck issues on this route, it has been suggested.
Alterations and repairs to The Tivoli https://idox.cambridge.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=PL6CJGDXIXZ00 Cambridge
Retrospective permission for the erection of a bike store. 6 Wilberforce Road Cambridge CB3 0EQ
Cambridge Application reference : 18/1952/FUL
Proposal from Lib Dem councillors for a zebra crossing.
A list of carpenters, cleaners, electricians, plumbers and other tradespeople who can attend jobs in Cambridge without needing a car parking space (for example those arriving by cargo bike) would be a useful resource.
It could be used by people who cannot offer car parking, or those who would prefer to choose someone who can arrive by sustainable transport.
Erection of detached three bedroom dwelling and associated works at 11 Hinton Avenue, Cambridge 11 Hinton Avenue Cambridge CB1 7AR https://idox.cambridge.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=PKYV2ZDXIU500 Cambridge Application reference : 19/0015/FUL
Erection of a single-storey two-bedroom dwelling. Land To The Rear Of 89-91 De Freville Avenue Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB4 1HP https://idox.cambridge.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=PIFYUZDXHQ200 Cambridge Application reference : 18/1805/FUL
The London Borough of Sutton's revised Air Quality Action Plan, draft for consultation (6 December 2018 to 6 February 2019). https://sutton.citizenspace.com/environment/draft-air-quality-action-plan-consultation/
Get Sutton Cycling produced a short film in 2017 "Air Pollution in Sutton: how it affects you and how cycling can help" https://getsuttoncycling.org.uk/2017/10/05/the-video-you-cant-afford-to-miss/
Cambridge City Council through the Environmental Improvement Programme (EIP) have allocated funding to improve the streetscape by increasing the number of trees along on Chesterton Road. We have identified a number of potential locations for new trees as shown on the 2 maps below.
Currently we have funding available for a smaller number of trees then shown on the plans below. We wish to prioritise a number of these trees for the first phase of works. We would hope to be able to plant further trees when and if we get additional funding.
This consultation gives local residents and stakeholders an opportunity to comment on and rate the potential tree location options put forward.
All the potential locations will need to take into account highways infrastructure and underground utilities services, which may affect the locations currently being considered.
This consultation will end at noon on Friday the 15th of February 2018.
Stanhope Street is closed for installation of a new water main. Cyclists can divert via Augustus and Varndell Streets (short and easier than walking through).
Stanhope Street is closed at Robert Street for installation of the new water main. Cyclists can walk around the closure.
- Removing the existing access into Tweeddale Road from Wrythe Lane. It is proposed to create new access from Thornton Road across the green space. This will help to reduce vehicle conflicts and provide better pedestrian routes.
- Converting the closed section of Tweeddale Road to grassed area as shown on the plan in green hatch lines.
- A raised table is proposed at the new entry into Tweeddale Road to provide a level crossing for pedestrians and to help with slowing down traffic speeds.
Proposed landscape works to form accessible paths to the front of Fitzwilliam Museum https://idox.cambridge.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=PL0SJLDXIV100 Cambridge
From January 17th until early 2020 Park Village East will be closed to motor traffic at the northern end for Thames Water to install a new 42 main. This is due to HS2 construction. It is currently possible to cycle through and the good news is that the road is temporarily two-way with effectively a modal filter at the north end! I wonder if we can persuade Camden to make the arrangement permanent.
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/
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.
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.
Redesign of Grey Street to remove the danger of cars reversing (blind) out parking bays into middle of the road.
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.
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.
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).
Proposed route along the rail corridor through Cambridge, part of which is in the Cambridge Local Plan.
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.
Surface, drainage and width issues.
Planned for upgrade as part of CEC 'family network'
Was an issue 5 years ago (and before)
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.
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.
There is a campaign for a cycle route between Bar Hill and Cambridge, also connecting Dry Drayton, Madingley and Coton to North-West Cambridge.
Currently cycle provision for these villages is poor. Bar Hill has lower rates of cycling than other villages that are closer to Cambridge.
The campaign site is: http://www.bhddmadcycle.com/
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.
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.
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 !
This contraflow infrastructure is hazardous for several reasons: the path is very narrow - realistically around 0.5m wide, the cyclists is riding in the gutter, at risk of being doored and catching wing mirrors. What caught me out was a vehicle travelling North and turned right to access an entrance. Our sight lines were blocked by parked vehicles in parking bays to the right of the cycle path. Until this situation is addressed cyclists will continue to be vulnerable along this section of the road.
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.
Southern stretch of Kew road is a busy road, wide enough for cycling provision, but none is provided - southbound has protection of a bus lane for a stretch but north bound has no protection for cyclists at all. This frequently leads to pavement cycling as per the photo.
The Fountain Roundabout is a major barrier to cycling around New Malden. It's a large, multi-lane roundabout with no cycling facilities (and poor pedestrian crossing provision too). Lying just to the south of New Malden High Street it's key to unlocking short journeys by bike to the town centre.
To investigate options to provide a safe, continuous route from St James Barton Roundabout to the top of Park Street.
Marlborough Street/Upper Maudlin Street/Perry Road/Park Row (known as the Scope Route) is the most desirable route for cyclists from the east of the city to the University, the Triangle, Clifton etc but is heavily trafficked with little cycle provision.
Research has identified three key perceptions that deter people from taking up cycling: lack of personal safety; inconvenience; poor image. Experience from countries in northern Europe shows conclusively that in order for cycling to become a mass activity attracting all ages and abilities these perceptions have to be tackled and potential cyclists must believe they will feel safe, valued and normal. Facilities are needed that form a coherent network, separate cyclists from fast, high volume traffic and offer them a high degree of priority and convenience both on main routes and local roads. The purpose of Bristol's 'Design Cycling' work programme is to create a network and that is convenient, safe and provides speedy access all over the city. A network which a 12 year old would feel comfortable using.
Part of the 2013 Bristol City Council LSTF proposals.
The cycle path crosses the soutbound exit from the M53 at Cheshire Oaks. The exit is light controlled for traffic as they enter the roundabout. This provides a safe time for cyclists to ride across the sliproad. However the lights are not visible to cyclist on the path and there is no light provided to advise cyclists when they can cross.
This makes it very difficult and dangerous for cyclists to know when they can safely cross. This would require no physical change to the road layout simply a new light to show cyclists when to cross.
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 surface of this path is awful. It is very pot-holed, and it creates issues for cycles and pushchairs. And for people with visual impairments, it creates hazards as well.
It also needs the white lines changing/removing to avoid further serious injury - Someone has told me that they saw someone slip on the line and break their hip. The white lines are raised and have been repainted - they are slippy for cycle wheels. There is also concern that the white lines would be slippy for pedestrians when wet.