Transport Corridor Funding
On a bi-annual basis, the funding for S106 projects is to be reviewed with Area Committee recommendations going to Cabinet for final approval.
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:
On a bi-annual basis, the funding for S106 projects is to be reviewed with Area Committee recommendations going to Cabinet for final approval.
This is a change of use application to turn Mickey Flynns from a snooker hall to shops, financial services and a café.
Created by Richard Moss // 1 thread
Planning application for 5 retail units - cycle parking required.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
Change of use for the former Joshua Taylor building to provide 12 residential units over three floors.
Created by Andy Allan // 0 threads
There's no bike parking outside of the parade of shops at the top end of Leigham Vale. The only options are the railings on the railway side of the road, or the handrail outside the post office.
There's plenty of space outside the front of the shops, and it would be good to have some near the garden centre.
Created by Jim Chisholm // 1 thread
The possibility of a new cycle/walking route from Whittlesford station in part using funds from proposed adjacent development (Relocation of Welches transport depot from Stapleford/Shelford
The platform which is c 264m long extends beneath A505 overbridge.
Longest trains are 240m (12 coaches). This route was investigated some 10 years ago.
Greater Anglia say a route is not possible. I regard this as a stuck rather than locked door.
It may be possible with the use of a fence to take over all of last few metres or to have half (if half cyclist dismount signs may be needed)
As a very last resort to may be REQUIRED for those with bikes to walk.
I can see no reason why a walking route cannot be permitted.
Any 'risk' crossing A505 at grade must be orders of magnitude greater than using end of platform!
"Anyone who uses the racks in St John's Street, Trinity Street, and King's Parade, may have seen notices about filming this week. They're suspending cycle parking for Wednesday and Thursday 'due to the nature of the filming'. The mind boggles" (Bev)
The suspension notice (elevation, lifting?) says "We have been working with Cambridge council to achieve this. " This phrase probably means that the production company has negotiated a location fee with the city council for filming on Cambridge streets, and to film "bike free". If it is correct that the CCC represents Cambridge Cyclists, and in so far as our constituency bears the impact of this "suspension", we would be well placed to receive some compensation for the inconvenience forced upon local cyclists. 1000 £ or 2000 £ could buy us a lot of bike badges (pins), including blue ones of course
http://www.cambridge.gov.uk/ccm/content/business/licensing-and-permissions/filming.en
citycentremanagement@cambridge.gov.uk
Created by Gregory Williams // 1 thread
Inconsiderate parking of cars on the shared-use RCR15 Viking Coastal Trail cycle path at North Foreland. This has completely blocked the path to cyclists and pedestrians. The photo clearly shows a pedestrian trying to get past the parked vehicles.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
Two 5 bed houses, five 4 bed houses, internal access road plus car and cycle parking.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 0 threads
Poor-quality cycle parking at Geography.
Created by Andrew Clegg // 0 threads
Parking does exist (at the back of the car park), but it's not obvious. The vast majority of people just leave their bikes propped against the wall near the door.
The bike parking which exists is rather bizarre heavy plant pots with a bike symbol and loops to lock your bike to. The positioning of the loops is awkward and having a plant in the way doesn't help.
As this shop is on NCN 8, it would be really good to see them welcoming cyclists with a prominent sheltered bike parking area with proper stands near the door of the shop.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
A new shop front for a Co-op store with an ATM to the side elevation.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
The installation of one stand in the boundary of M&S facing Market Hill Square.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
Madgelene College (at Cripps Court) wish to remove a cycle shed in order to build a timber furniture store. The design and access statement, justifying this, says that few of the racks are used.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
External works including pedestrian access ramp, alterations to bin storage, covered cycle parking, staff and visitor car parking etc.
Created by cobweb // 1 thread
8 cycle racks shown in the ground floor plan. A retail unit is likely to have some effect on traffic.
Created by cobweb // 0 threads
An application to demolish 191 and 193 Mill Road (opposite St Phillip's Church and replace with 6 studio units and a retail unit. It's a conservation area.
Other than two sheffield stands in the train station there is no secure cycle parking available in Buxton. This is discouraging people from travelling to this tourist hotspot by bike.
Created by cobweb // 0 threads
The proposal is to install two bollards on the corner of Hemingford Road in order to prevent cars from mounting the pavement. The pavement here (as with much of Mill Road) is not that wide. A build out was considered but it was felt that this would create pinch point of cyclists.
(Scheme 16, page 29)
Created by cobweb // 0 threads
Two speed cushions are proposed in order to reduce speed and make it safer for pedestrians to cross.
The proposal is to put in double yellow lines and no waiting restrictions at this entrance to the Tins.
Created by cobweb // 2 threads
EIP's from the East Area Committee. Two schemes proposed here, one at the Riverside end of the Tesco path, the other near Stanley Road. For the first, double yellow lines are suggested, for the second, double yellow lines and residents only parking.
Scheme 3, page 5.
Created by cobweb // 0 threads
Not sure if this is something or nothing but in the East Area Committee agenda (EIP Appendix B) there's discussion of Coleridge Community College (Parkside Federation is probably the right name now) installing bollards on the verge.
(Scheme 6, page 11)
Created by Gerhard Weiss // 1 thread
How St is Walthamstow's artery. It carries way too much motor traffic for its size. Many bus routes run through it. Recent improvement plans are looking ok, but are as usual a mixed bag.
This is a general, over-arching issue for discussion of helmet-related and cycle safety promotion strategic matters in Cambridge that periodically (and continually) arise.
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
Created by Hester Wells // 1 thread
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/
Created by David Green // 1 thread
My employer is planning to relocate from central cambridge to the Cambridge Business Park (near Waterbeach). There is currently no decent cycle (or footpath!) access to this business park which avoids riding along the A10. I am a confident cyclist but I am not looking forward to riding to work along sections of the A10.
Are there any plans for cycle route construction which the campaign can, perhaps, help accelerate?
Created by Sarah Wood // 0 threads
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.
Created by Simon Nuttall // 19 threads
The Reach Fair ride takes place on the early Bank Holiday Monday (May Day) in May.
The web page for it is:
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/events/rides/
The planning overview is summarised:
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/events/rides/timeline.html
I've created this issue to help plan this event.
Created by HVS // 2 threads
The A41 ring road cuts across a useful quiet route north-west out of Chester, which is an alternative to the traffic-free Greenway (which is unlit, and slippery in icy conditions). Crossing the A41 during busy periods - e.g. when commuting at rush-hour - can be a slow and potentially very dangerous process, especially after dark. A better crossing for cyclists and pedestrians, or a lower speed limit on the A41 (or both), would be very helpful here.
[Original version of map was wrong; I've now updated it.]
As the bridleway crosses Milton Road, it swaps sides of the busway, so most pedestrians and cyclists want to cross diagonally. However the toucan crossing only protects people crossing Milton Road. It doesn't stop busway traffic.
This is confusing and dangerous. When the road traffic stops at red lights, and the Toucan crossing turns green, it feels very safe to cross the busway. Yet buses can come from three directions (busway west, busway east, Milton Road south) at speeds of 30 mph.
Cyclists in particular are tempted to cross diagonally from north west to south east. Last week I saw a near accident.
Created by Sarah Wood // 0 threads
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.
Created by Andrew Woodward // 0 threads
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.
Created by Kevin Ablitt // 1 thread
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 !
Created by Eric Booth // 2 threads
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:
SOUTH
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.
NORTH
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.
Created by Rosie Downes // 5 threads
Transport for London's public consultation on Cycle Superhighway 1 is open from 16 February to 29 March. The LCC office has set up this thread to facilitate discussion of the proposals.
Created by WildNorthlands // 1 thread
Brook Hill roundabout is a major barrier for cyclists in West Sheffield. The traffic is fast and as it is a three-lane spiral roundabout with the exit roads (except Bolsover St) having two lanes there is a lot of lane-switching by motorists. This makes the risk of a collision very high, and for less experienced cyclists it is simply a no-go area.
Many of the buildings adjacent to the roundabout belong to the University, and have been built up to the curtilage, so there is no space to expand the pavements and make them shared use.
One alternative for cyclists coming from the Walkley/Crookes area via Bolsover St is to use Tower Court, but this area can be very congested when the University is in session, with several thousand students using the Arts Tower and Library.
The council has signed an alternative route via Weston St and the Netherthorpe Rd tram subway, but this involves a drop in height of about 100 metres and subsequent climb up again, plus the negotiation of access barriers in the subway, so is not really sensible.
Meanwhile on Upper Hanover Way, a cycle crossing was severed when the tramway was installed, although cyclists still use the crossing. A proposed alternative crossing is stalled as it is too expensive.
What can be done about this knotty problem?
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The permeability gate between Hooper Street and Kingston Street is obstructive as it only allows passage in one direction at a time.
Given the ever-increasing amount of cycling in areas like this, it's time to get this replaced with a simple bollard arrangement that would allow two-way passage whilst still enable the emergency services to unlock for access in an emergency.
Created by Andrew Woodward // 1 thread
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.
In particular:
• 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.
Created by Rosalind Lund // 1 thread
further to the piece in newsletter 128, I wonder if any thought has been given to the difficulty of turning right into Emmanuel Street if you are coming towards the town centre from St Andrew's Street? We go fairly often to the Arts Cinema and this is the obvious way for us to go home, but it is impossible to turn right on the correct side of the bollard at present as it is designed only for left turning cycles coming out of town. There is, however, nothing to suggest that such a right turn is illegal.
Created by Shaun McDonald // 0 threads
The entrance to Dock Street should be turned into a continuous footway with pedestrian and cyclist priority over turning vehicles akin to this Danish junction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcnmLU1ClTo
This would improve sight lines for pedestrians too as the dropped kerbs are away from the junction, and it would also go with the pedestrian desire line as many tend to cross closer to the junction than the dropped kerbs. It would also slow down the vehicles entering the narrow street.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
There's a very poor dogleg right-angle with barriers at the entrance/exit from the West Cambridge site to Clerk Maxwell Road.
This should be turned into a wide splay with good visibility.
Over the past couple of years of regularly cycling between Waterbeach and Cambridge on NCN11 I have noticed that the path between Waterbeach and Baits Bite Lock is in really bad repair and is getting gradually worse. I have been in touch with the council to ask them to repair it, and they told me that as far as they are concerned the path is only a footpath, and they have no obligation to maintain it to a standard suitable for bikes. Sustrans tells me they have no responsibility for maintaining that section of the route, and that the council should be responsible for it.
It seems absurd to allow the path to fall into total disrepair, but at the moment it doesn't seem like anyone recognises any obligation for its upkeep.
I am happy to go out occasionally with some secateurs and chop off the more annoying bits of greenery, but the path needs resurfacing and that feels a bit beyond me!
Does anyone have any experience with this sort of problem? Have they come across it on other sections of the NCN?
Martin Lucas-Smith // 11 threads
Major planning application here - c. 10,000 homes
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 Shaun McDonald // 1 thread
Many cyclists won't cycle to Harwich International from the Ipswich direction due to the roads. There really should be a high quality cycle route for this to continue the cycle journey from The Netherlands, where you can ride of the ferry and on to quality cycle infrastructure. The fact people choose the train is not a good sign.
This issue is the overall goal, and needs to be broken down into smaller sub issues of smaller more specific projects or improvements that can work towards this goal.
Meeting with Leeds City Council to discuss possible remedial works due to high casualty rates.
Created by PurpleSue // 2 threads
I watch in wonder and amazement as the new cycle lane alongside the A41 from Mostyn lights to the zoo is completed - with lamposts in th emiddle of the path - not to mention a three legged road sign which I am sure will make passage impossible.
I will investigate more and take photos....
Created by chdot // 1 thread
Longstanding issue about 'optimum' design, particularly to reduce conflict caused by vehicles turning from Teviot Pl due to signal phases.
Created by JonC // 0 threads
Our club (South Herts CTC) had to cross the A505 to get back into Hertfordshire on Sunday and we took a route between Litlington and Therfield which involved 500 m along the A505 and a right turn at the roundabout west of Royston.
I was quite surprised there was no cycle route to help cyclists here. It was a Sunday so at least there were fewer heavy vehicles than normal, but the speed of some cars coming up behind made it tricky to change lanes on a bike when turning right at the roundabout.
Since then I have studied other ways of crossing the A505 (using Google Streetview) and can't find any easy crossing points near Royston. I see it is the boundary between Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire, which complicates matters (although it looks like the A505 road is in Herts).
To the east, I've used the B1368 crossing at Flint Cross, which is also a nightmare. To the west the crossing at Slip End does at least have a central refuge. It seems little or no thought was given to cyclists when the A505 was constructed.