On-street Parking in Cambridge City
Issues surrounding the effect on-street car-parking has on road space, pinch points, car-dooring, interruption of cycle lanes etc.
This section lists issues - problems on the street network and related matters.
Issues always relate to some geographical location, whether very local or perhaps city-wide.
You can create a new issue using the button on the right.
Listed issues, most recent first:
Created by Hester Wells // 5 threads
Issues surrounding the effect on-street car-parking has on road space, pinch points, car-dooring, interruption of cycle lanes etc.
New potholes have opened up around the drain covers on the eastbound A1214. They are on the "Straight On Lane" at the roundabout with Ropes Drive.
Created by Alistair // 0 threads
When exiting the cyclepath to join Anson Road you need to see the roundabout clearly (especially to see southbound A14 traffic turning left to join Anson Road. A large tree has overhanging branches which block the view. It's worse when it has leaves.
Created by Kevin Ablitt // 0 threads
To carry on towards Colchester Road or bear right into Belvedere Road is OK but if you are approaching the junction from Belvedere Road and wish to turn into Cemetery Lane northbound you must come right up to a blind corner and make a sharp turn into a narrow kerb edged cycle facility. This is quite a dangerous manouevre to carry out. It would have been better to have a lane entering the wide oad marked with stop lines and no-entry as it is further back from the blind turn. In fact some people may be tempted to do this, but it is both dangerous and illegal. Both the danger and the temptation to carry out an illegal manouevre could have been excluded at the design stage.
Created by MikeH // 0 threads
The contraflow on Museum St is not my favourite bit of cycle route, but given that it xcan be a busy and tricky bit, the white lines where it crosses Westgate St should at least be in good order, but they're not. An easily fixed problem you would think?
Created by Matthew Phillips // 1 thread
The main routes into the Arnison Centre are understandably pretty busy with cars and involve negotiating roundabouts. The quietest route in for bikes is via Abbey Road, the entrance in the middle of the south of the site, as used by the buses. However, the road is currently one-way. It would be good if it could be made an official entrance and exit for bikes. It lands you closest to the large rank of cycle racks outside Sainsbury's. There is sufficient width on Abbey Road to allow for cycle lanes to help connect with Newton Hall and Pity Me.
The County Durham Plan envisages another large supermarket and car-park being built immediately to the north of the Arnison Centre, across the other side of the main road, as part of the large housing development proposed. DBUG has objected to this as part of our response to the plan, as providing more local shops would encourage walking and cycling whereas these proposals will just further entrench shopping by car. The proposals appeared to include cycle access to the new housing site via an upgraded path to the west of the Arnison Centre (shown as a footpath currently) but failed to address access to the shops by bike.
The Arnison Centre could do with more cycle racks dispersed round the site, outside each of the shops. At present there is a very large number of racks, but they are all outside Sainsbury's.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 1 thread
The Durham City Integrated Transport Approach document, part of the proposed new County Durham Plan, states that it is the Council's intention to relocate the bus station in Durham and to remove the A690 roundabout by the railway station, converting it to an ordinary junction with lights.
The document can be viewed at http://durhamccconsult.
limehouse.co.uk/file/2679025 and the relevant sections are 3.49 onwards. The document mentions improving the area for pedestrians but neglects to consider the potential for cycling infrastructure improvements in the area.
The DBUG response to the County Plan (available at http://community.dur.ac.uk/m.e.phillips/cycling/DBUGResponse.pdf ) devotes a section to this matter (see pages 21 to 23).
Opportunities for better cycling infrastructure include:
* restricting vehicle access to North Road and allowing two-way cycling
* linking the station to neighbouring cycle lanes
* better connection to Framwellgate Peth and the north of the city
* remodelling the Milburngate roundabout also
* removing through traffic from the portion of North Road beyond the viaduct
We need to lobby not just for immediate cycling needs to be taken into account in the design for the new road layout, but also for future possibilities by bringing forward design of strategic cycle routes through the city, otherwise we risk losing a very rare opportunity to transform provision at a key city-centre junction.
According to the document, construction will commence in the 2014/15 financial year, with a timescale of 18 months. This means the plans must already be fairly fully developed.
Created by John Shead // 1 thread
When busy, crossing this junction is hazardous when negotiating with northbound vehicles at speeds of up to 40mph.
No indication is provided to motorists that there will be conflict.
A speed table with dragons teeth markings needs to be installed.
Created by Alex Oldman // 1 thread
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.
Created by Andrea Bredel // 1 thread
this is one of many cycle lanes here in Ipswich that go on and off the road several times. This is very awkward for cyclists as they need to be very careful when getting back onto the road and most probably confuses drivers as well.
Created by Ned Harrison // 1 thread
Holywells Park has a section of cycle route 51 running through it, linking South East Ipswich to the centre with a pleasant and safe route down to the waterfront.
During Winter, the park is closed at dusk, sometimes as early as 4, meaning that just when the roads are most dangerous (dark and wet) cyclists are forced onto steep and busy routes either along Cliff Lane or up Bishops Hill.
The closures are largely at the request of the Park Friends group. I've spoken to them, and their concerns seem to be largely about what might go on after dark. It's not clear that there is any evidence for this, nor that the current situation of locking the main gates but leaving others would do anything to deter misbehaviour.
Keeping it open as a cycle route would ensure a legitimate presence in the park, and help provide less confident cyclists in the area with a safe route to and from town.
I'd propose either locking later, or for a trial period leaving the park unlocked.
Created by MJR // 1 thread
Discovered that this junction is "due for upgrade in the 2014/15 financial year. The budget for the traffic signal upgrade programme is essentially aimed at a like for like replacement scheme with new equipment. However we try to accommodate low cost improvements that can be implemented at the same time. ... There is scope to implement an advanced cycle stop line on Hospital Walk, although there would not be sufficient carriageway width for a lead in lane."
This is one possible way to improve westbound connectivity from the Walks and Chase through Millfleet to the town centre and southbound Route 1. The increased distance (compared to Broad Walk) is offset by light traffic, a 20mph zone and a potentially easier crossing - but at the moment, the lights make bikes exiting Hospital Walk wait a long time and then it lets hardly any out before turning red again.
Created by Shaun McDonald // 0 threads
Considering that this is very close to the National Cycle Route 51, I'm wondering why it's basically impossible to get to, on a bicycle without going on a major trunk road roundabout?
Cyclists may not be their target market, however service stations can be useful on longer cycle rides for food supplies. Also hotels can prove useful if a longer journey, touring, or realise your too tired on an overnight ride, such as the nearby Dunwich Dynamo.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 1 thread
Coming out of Durham down Shincliffe Peth on the A167, there is a pedestrian refuge at the foot of the hill, by the turning to the cycle-track which skirts the bottom of Maiden Castle hill-fort. You are expected to negotiate a 180 degree turn to access this track, at the same time as avoiding speeding cars and the pinch-point of a refuge. In the other direction, cyclists have to be cautious of using the refuge as the width of it is not sufficient to accommodate a tandem or a cycle with trailer or child tag-along attachment. Visibility is poor when crossing the road from north to south.
Improvements might include moving the 30mph limit to the foot of the hill, introducing speed cushions or a raised junction table. If the speed were reduced, the central refuge would not be needed and some of the difficulties might be avoided, but that may not be the best solution at this site.
Speed of the traffic is the main issue here, both for cyclists and the pedestrians who use the popular footpaths.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
From the bottom of Shincliffe Peth, past Houghall College, there is a shared use pavement on the south-west side of the A177, as can be seen from the map. However, if you are proceeding south-east towards Shincliffe, it is unclear what you are supposed to do at the point shown in the photograph. It is easy enough for cyclists coming the other way to leave the road as indicated, but going south-east should you cross to the other side of the road, or continue along the increasingly narrow footway, which is not really wide enough for pedestrians and cyclists to share? There is certainly no signage further along the path to suggest that cyclists are supposed to be there.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
On the north-east side of the A177 there is a short stretch of pavement cycle route which ends abruptly as shown in the photograph, with no dropped kerb back onto the road.
The purpose of the sign and the route are unclear. From Google Streetview you can see that there is a path leading into the sports grounds: http://goo.gl/maps/ELHci -- if that is the destination of the cycle path then why does it have an "End of cycle route" sign, if the user is intended to continue into the grounds?
Even if that's the intention, a dropped kerb would be handy as cyclists may have taken to the pavement not realising that the route was going to finish again so soon.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
The picture shows Framwellgate Waterside, part of the national cycle network route through Durham which also connects with a major route to Newton Hall and the riverbank paths. Yet as a car driver you could be completely unaware that this is a major cycle route as there is no obvious cycling provision. Cyclists can be unsure whether they are meant to be on the road or on the footway by the river.
At the far end of the shot, the road disappears under the Gates shopping centre, where are located two car parks with a capacity of over 450 places. Despite this we have on-road car parking all along this stretch of road. Providing a fully-segregated bi-directional cycle path of decent width instead would send a much stronger signal that cycling is being taken seriously as a mode of transport. If the parking really is required, then when the passport office site is redeveloped the road should be shifted across to make more room for dedicated cycle infrastructure.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
In the area round Crossgate, the older section of Durham City to the west of Framwellgate Bridge, there are a number of one-way streets which make cycling inconvenient. In most cases the streets have been made one-way primarily to make it easier to provide car parking on narrow residential streets or to reduce through car traffic.
These streets should be reassessed, and where possible opened up to bicycles in both directions.
Some restrictions are particularly pointless, such as the one in the photograph. In theory, if a cyclist descends South Street, the only lawful option is to turn left and pedal up Crossgate. Just beyond the no-entry sign pictured is a two-way stretch of North Road that leads from Framwellgate Bridge to Milburngate, from which cyclists could access the National Cycle Network routes to Pennyferry Bridge and local routes beyond to Newton Hall.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
This section of NCN 70 from Claypath down to the side of Leazes Bowl roundabout has cyclists and pedestrians on separate halves of the path, rather than shared-use. This has the advantage that cyclists are more likely to be able to freewheel quickly down the hill without upsetting pedestrians. However, the cycle portion of the path is higher than the pedestrian side, with a kerb. As the path is not particularly wide, if you meet a cyclist coming the other way it is quite tricky to pass safely.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
This stretch of footpath / cyclepath by the foot of Maiden Castle hill-fort is narrow and tends to be very muddy. It's an extremely difficult site as the river banks had to be reinforced here recently. Whether any improvement is possible is hard to assess. In the meantime, it offers the full off-road biking experience on your way to work, should you so wish! There is a case for creating a through route on the other side of the river to avoid this stretch. See http://durhamuniversity.cyclescape.org/issues/897-improvong-route-from-university-to-belmont
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
Like the roundabout at the bottom of Potters Bank, the roundabout at Whinney Hill, the approach to Durham City from the south-east, is designed for high speeds and has no provision for cyclists. The new cycle lane up Shincliffe Peth ceases when it reaches the roundabout.
From the photograph, taken in the autumn, you can see from the leaves on the road how little of the width of the roundabout is actually required by cars and lorries. This would seem a great opportunity to try a Dutch-style urban roundabout, with a wide cycle lane all round the outside and cutting the entering traffic down to a single lane. The curves could be tightened to reduce speeds and to give pedestrians more direct crossings of the roads.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
Yes, most of the vehicles in the photograph are parked! Despite appearances they are not blocking a dedicated red-tarmac cycle path: there is in fact no particular cycling provision on Front Street. The width of the road, however, would lend itself to a wide bi-directional route being provided, segregated from the road and pavement and with priority over side-roads, with car parking spaces being retained in most cases. This would give an excellent direct route for cycle commuters from Pity Me and Framwellgate Moor, to the proposed Aykley Heads business park, the railway station, and the city centre. There may be parts of the route, such as by the Front Street shops, where this might not be possible, but on-road lanes could be provided. Currently much of the middle of the road is given over to white hatching and right-turn lanes. Some cycle parking by the Front Street shops would be good: there's plenty of car parking on-road but nowhere to lock up a bike.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
Where the on-pavement cycle lane comes to an end, the road markings which continue the NCN 14 and 70 on-road are worn out and patchy. The design of the lane to take you southbound onto the pavement is poor, because the adjacent parking means that the traffic is usually driving straight over the top of the dedicated cycle lane in the middle of the road.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
The exit from this retail park car park has two lanes. There are no road markings warning drivers to expect cyclists on the shared-use pavement which is part of NCN 14 & 70. This section of pavement was recently rebuilt. Why could we not have a raised table at the exit, giving priority to cyclists and pedestrians here? Why does the through-route for cyclists have to give way to the car park exit? While the shared use pavement is welcome, the lack of priority is what tends to lead to experienced cyclists taking to the road instead, as it can actually be safer as well as quicker. If cycling infrastructure is more dangerous or slower than the road alternative, it is not worth installing.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 0 threads
By the Tesco superstore off Dragon Lane, the road junction was recently rebuilt. On the west side of Dragon Lane is a shared-use pavement which forms part of NCN 14/70. While cars travelling north on Dragon Lane can go straight across on a single phase, cyclists are expected to dismount, and cross with pedestrians at a two-stage crossing. The object is to maximise the flow in and out of the Tesco superstore car park, which is the only purpose of this junction. Designing the junction to give greater priority and convenience to cyclists and pedestrians would help shift the balance back to sustainable living.
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
Created by Eric Booth // 1 thread
There's an online survey around three options for this problem junction. Open to 30th November. http://www.the-bear-pit.org.uk/19.html
Identified in Times Survey of problem junctions for cycling http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3392986.ece
Various issues in Cambridge regarding bus driving and cyclist interactions. Work needs to be done to deal with this.
(This is actually a city-wide issue, but I've marked this as the bus station for now.)
Created by Peter Lawrence // 2 threads
Please sign my change.org petition http://chn.ge/1epSzpK
Accident CC-23012014-0561 (Incident logged by the Cambridgeshire Police)
Leaving Zoology Department 18.15 walking east on Downing St, north side on 23 January, 2014. Car stopped in Downing st just west of Corn exchange road junction, obscuring the light. Lying on the road was a road sign warning cars of road works further left in Corn Exchange St, a needless warning. This 1 metre road sign had been placed on the pavement, occluding it seriously and had been, presumably, knocked over and left lying on the pavement with its black and invisible legs raised up about 10cm from the surface and its reflective surface tilted away (see picture). I tripped over the road sign in the dark and fell forwards injuring my face and forehead; the metal cut into my right leg. My glasses are destroyed, the leg of the sign tore my shoes.
I was taken to Addenbrookes and treated there. I left there ca 20.30 with head injuries and abrasions and now have an impressive black eye and surround.
I am seeking redress. I am exploring legal action against the County Council whose idiotic health and safety rules (for drivers, not for the rest of us) say that drivers should be warned in advance of even highly visible roadworks (in a 20mph area) and the company responsible for placing such a flimsy and dangerous sign right in the middle of a narrow pavement. Also am anxious that in general people who leave road traffic signs occluding the pavement or creating dangerous obstacles there, should be held responsible and penalised. I see these road signs often as I walk around Cambridge, they should be on or above the road, not blocking the pavement in my opinion.
The next day the same road sign, with my blood still on it, was back in the middle of pavement waiting to be knocked over again and even now forcing pedestrians to avoid it by diverting on to the roadway. I attach a photo of it taken on Friday the day following my accident with a diverted pedestrian on the right.
It was again fallen on the ground waiting to kill someone on Saturday night, presumably following the afternoon storms.
Created by North Devon Cycling Forum // 0 threads
Removal of difficult barrier on cycle path NCN3 ending on Rose Lane; hardly possible to pass by bike, let alone trikes/tandems/mobility vehicles;
note this is NCN!!!
Created by jpennycook // 1 thread
Outline planning application for the erection of up to 95 dwellings with public open space, landscaping and sustainable drainage system (SuDS). Demolition of garages to form a vehicular access point from Bow Drive and replacement garaging. All matters reserved except for means of access
Land At Goddards Farm Goddards Lane Sherfield-on-Loddon Hampshire
"Whilst there are no cycle routes currently in the vicinity of the site, the topography of the
surrounding roads make them generally conducive to encourage cycling. These provide
connections for cyclist from the development site to the wider area."
Basingstoke
Application reference : 17/02190/OUT
Martin Lucas-Smith // 2 threads
This junction has a new cycle lane over a widened pavement. This looks like very substandard infrastructure, encouraging pavement cycling, that should never have been approved by the County Council.
Created by Andrew Woodward // 0 threads
The towpath from Richmond to Teddington lock is currently unappealing and dangerous. These photos were taken in May and the path is a lot worse after in winter or after a spring tide.
It is sufficient for people on mountain bikes who do not mind getting muddy, but not easy for children, older people, less confident cyclists, pedestrians with buggies, cyclists on cargo bikes etc to navigate - basically all the vulnerable road users who would most benefit from avoiding the busy, fast moving traffic on the narrow winding Petersham Road.
I take this route to work and I have to plan for the fact that I will get covered in mud every morning, and take it very slowly because it is so bumpy. I have seen pedestrians and those with child buggies climbing over the flood wall and walking on the grass on Petersham field in order to avoid this path. When I have my child in the bike seat I get off and walk the section between Ham House and River Lane that is pictured as I don't feel safe.
With a bit of thought this path has the potential to be an excellent car-free cycling and walking route that would tempt people out of their traffic jammed cars on Petersham Road.
See also the discussion at http://www.cyclescape.org/threads/811
Created by Hugh McClintock // 1 thread
Comments welcome please on this consultation about barriers on rights of way.
Pedals believes that any kind of barriers should be avoided as far as possible, especially those of the A-frame design. If access controls really are needed they should take the form of bollards (or staggered bollards) rather than barrier.
Message of 22 Feb 2016 from John Lee, Nottm City Council
Morning all
Some of you will recall taking part in its preparation.
We are in the process of reviewing the attached Policy. The policy was in response to complaints about the design of barriers the council have used on rights of way to deal with motorcycles and users safety. Although barriers help deter illegal use some designs were causing problems for disabled citizens, mobility scooters, double buggies and cyclists. When deciding whether a barrier is the best solution for a particular problem/location, the policy has helped provide a consistent approach.
As part of the review do you have any comments on the policy, for example is there anything else the policy should include so the rights of way network is kept free from unnecessary obstructions and is accessible by all? Please forward onto any contacts who may have an interest.
Please could I have your comments by Monday 21st March.
Regards
John Lee
Public Rights of Way
Traffic and Safety
Development and Growth
Nottingham City Council
Loxley House
Station Street
Nottingham
NG2 3NG
Tele: 0115 8765246
Mobile: 07976 794880
www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/rightsofway
Created by Paul L // 1 thread
This path is included in the Richmond Cycle Map and leads to a toucan and is a useful link from Hampton to the quietish Lower Hampton Rd towards Sunbury but is marked "No Cycling".
There is little pedestrian traffic but ideally it could be made wider.
Created by ken thomas // 2 threads
Installation of 17.5m single stack pole base station and associated works
Telcommunications Site Off Caldy Valley Road Great Boughton Chester Cheshire CH3 5PR
Application reference : 17/00266/TEL
No drawings or details are shown on the planning website.
A recent drawing seen for the project shows the cabinets blocking half the available width of the cycle/footpath. Such siting is not acceptable on a recently developed cycleway designed to specific standards.
Created by Lewisham Cyclists // 1 thread
Overview
The Mayor of London’s aim for 2041 is for 80% of all trips in London to be made on foot, by cycle or using public transport.
LB Lewisham is working on initiatives to help reach this target by gearing towards a “Healthy Streets” approach as set out in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy (2017) which encourage people to use their car less. This will help reduce the amount of dirty air in London, encourage active travel and tackle congestion on our already clogged up roads.
(for more information on the Mayor’s Transport Strategy and the Healthy streets approach follow the link below)
Mayor of London's Transport Strategy
As part of the Healthy Streets approach the borough is working on building a comprehensive “Quietway Network” so residents can choose cycling and walking as a convenient transport choice.
This consultation is seeking comment on proposals to upgrade the existing cycle route that runs through Blackheath Common as part of the TfL funded Quietway programme to encourage more people to walk and cycle. The proposals include three new crossings over:
All feedback from the consultation will be used to inform the final proposals ahead of construction works in Spring 2019. These improvements will form part of an extension of Quietway Route 1 which currently connects Waterloo and Greenwich
Created by Andrew Woodward // 1 thread
Dear RCC - I have written because of a junction which is a frequent danger spot to cycle through. It is the junction where Dukes Avenue and Tudor Drive intersect with the A307 Upper Ham Road and Richmond Road.
1. The painted arrows in the middle of the junction suggest that turning traffic should pass on each other's left. This creates a serious blind spot for oncoming traffic and for the cyclist turning. Traffic code 181 suggests vehicles can pass either way but highlight that left to left is the more dangerous for this reason. 90% of the time motorists pass according to how the arrows are painted leaving a cyclist who is turning blind to oncoming traffic. The 10% of the time when a vehicle decides to turn right to right this puts them head on with a vehicle who may have decided to pass left to left. Very dangerous for a cyclist in either situation, there does't seem to be a safe way to tackle this junction as what ever you do.
https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/road-junctions-170-to-183
2. Recently I was waiting to turn right on this junction (left to left position) when a motorist behind me undertook me to place himself to my left blocking oncoming traffic to pass on my left and therefor forcing them to drive at me and pass on my right. Simply because he didn't want to wait behind me until the coast was clear that I could turn.
3. Needless to say the ASL's at this junction are almost completely ignored.
I hate cycling past and turning at this junction. Is there any way it can be improved to become safer for cyclists? A short head start (green light for cyclists) would be ideal but I doubt this will ever happen.
Google Streetview shows the problem nicely: http://goo.gl/maps/8gdo2
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
Fulbourn/Cherry Hinton Eastern Access is one of the five City Deal 'cross-city improvements' schemes.
"The growth of housing and employment sites in the Cherry Hinton and Fulbourn Road area, such as the expansion of the ARM headquarters will put further pressure on local roads. Improving the cycleways on Fulbourn Road would enhance cycle access to the city centre and contribute to the completion of the cycleway network in this part of south-east Cambridge."
Created by Gerhard Weiss // 0 threads
Superhighway 3 on cable street is also a rat run. Cell 1 marks the area bounded by 'logical' cell boundary streets. There should be no through motor traffic within this area
Created by North Devon Cycling Forum // 1 thread
Surface of Tarka Trail Braunton-Barnstaple needs replacing long-term; wobbly sections developing
Created by MB // 1 thread
TFL are thinkingof closing this 'rat run' to motor vehicles & have put out a consultation here:
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/streets/coleparkroad
They are keeping it open to cyclists - but are proposing (I think) an awkward right- angled turn for cyclists to get in & out of the cul-de-sac. Can we suggest a better layout?
Consultation closes on May 10th 2013
Created by George Britton // 1 thread
The developer, Inland Homes, is preparing an application to build new homes on the roundabout site of the Ham & Blackbird pub.
Plans reported in the local newspaper talk of 62 units (1-bed apartments), with a cafe/bar commercial area.
This is an extremely busy junction, providing access between the centre of Farnborough and the station. The current cycling provision is poor/non-existent cycling in multiple sections.
Another significant factor is the big parking expansion underway at Farnborough Main station, which will release approx. twice as many cars onto the roundabout every weekday evening…
There is a public exhibition of the proposals.
Details:
Venue - St Peter's Church Parish Hall, 60 Church Avenue, Farnborough, GU14 7AP.
Saturday 22nd February 2014, 1130 am to 4pm.
Created by Dawes Jaguar // 0 threads
Cycling is banned on Victoria Common, but it represents the sort of environment in which people love to cycle. In the short term the paths should be made shared use, but longer term it would be sensible to create cycle paths through the park.
Created by Rob Earl // 0 threads
Better access to NEPN than through St Mark's Park which involves an uphill, narrowing road approaching a blind bridge. Requires stopping in traffic to negotiate parked cars and kerb.
Created by WilliamNB // 0 threads
When Chapel Street was recently renovated and resurfaced, new on-carriageway cycle lanes were painted. Sadly (predictably?) these lanes end just when they are most needed.
The fact that the lane ends, when cycling in a northernly direction, is in itself an annoyance.
The manner in which it ends is stupid beyond belief:
A yield sign has been painted at the end of the lane. This means, to remain perfectly within the law, cyclists riding in the lane must yield to traffic traveling in the same direction and may only proceed when there's no traffic approaching from behind.
It is legally possible to avoid having to yield by leaving the cycle lane before it ends and by riding on the main carriageway.
Created by Shaun McDonald // 1 thread
Overview
Transport for London (TfL) is working with interested parties - including cycling and road safety organisations - to review and improve cycling provision at major junctions across London. Please see www.tfl.gov.uk/betterjunctions for more information.
Why We Are Consulting
As part of this work we are developing proposals to improve safety at the junction of Tower Bridge Road and Abbey Street.
What we’re proposing and why
We are proposing to ban the left turn from Tower Bridge Road into Abbey Street to reduce the potential for conflict between cyclists and left-turning vehicles. Traffic counts show that fewer than 4 vehicles per hour make this turn at peak time.
We intend to ban the left turn towards the end of December 2012 and will advertise the changes to the Traffic Order in November.
Other planned changes at the Tower Bridge Road/Abbey Street junction
We are also developing proposals for more substantial improvements for cyclists and pedestrians at this junction, including improved pedestrian crossing facilities. More information will be available early next year, once these proposals have been developed further.
Earlier this year we marked-out Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs) in green and put blind spot safety mirrors on the signals at the junction so cyclists are more visible to vehicles turning.
Please click here to view map for further information on the proposals.
Have your say
Please give us your views by completing the online consultation form below by 14 November 2012.
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/betterjunctions/tower-bridge-abbeyst
Created by MikeF // 0 threads
When cycling along western park road towards mutley. On sections that have speed bumps without the traffic islands/bollards, car/taxi drivers dangerously position their cars (across both lanes) at speed to avoid the speed bumps. Friday & Saturday nights is the worst time with the taxi's.
Created by Stefano B // 1 thread
New TFL survey on the proposed Wembley to Willesden Junction CS.
Have your say - Healthy Streets improvements between Wembley and Willesden Junction
Transport for London (TfL) and the London Borough of Brent are working together to develop Healthy Streets improvements between Wembley and Willesden Junction. These changes would make it easier and safer to walk, cycle, and use public transport in the area. Making the area safer, greener and reducing car travel. In this area, every year, people are seriously injured, some fatally. This cannot go on, and the Mayor has set a target to reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on London’s roads to zero by 2041. Toxic air quality and high levels of physical inactivity are also contributing to premature deaths and poor health, especially in children. Together we want to improve this, particularly around schools. We know to achieve this some compromises will have to be made especially how much we use cars to travel. We want to create a better environment for everyone who wants to travel to and around the borough. So we are inviting local people to tell us how they currently travel around the area and what changes they would like us to make that would help and encourage more people to choose active travel options in the community.
Have your say - Your feedback at this early stage of planning will be used to help design future proposals which would be consulted on in late 2020/early 2021.
Please complete the following survey by 22 March 2020 to help us better understand how you travel and any travel issues or priorities in the areas of Wembley Central, Tokyngton, Stonebridge, Harlesden, and Kensal Green. Please email wembleywillesdenjct@tfl.gov.uk if you have any questions, comments or suggestions.
Created by Sam Saunders // 0 threads
The south-west bound advisory cycle lane, marked with dotted lines and with a small traffic island to funnel cycles into it (creating a pinch-point) seems to be regularly used a car park. If the parking is being encouraged or allowed, the island and the markings should be removed to allow the hazard to be more clearly seen. Preferably, the parking should be disallowed and a mandatory cycle lane should be installed.
Created by Charlie Halliday // 1 thread
Proposed changes to Elles Road crossing creating a corral style refuge and improving sight lines by removing vegetation.
Proposed changes to centre of roundabout to create cycle paths.