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 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.