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 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.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 3 threads
Elizabeth Way is wide. Currently cycling is permitted on the pavements.
This should be changed to have dutch-style cycle tracks, achieved by narrowing the road slightly and narrowing the pavements (which are very wide and not heavily trafficked, so this would not disadvantage pedestrians).
This would give a safer cycling environment, and improve the pedestrian experience.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 10 threads
Milton Road, like other main roads in the city, is a mix of typically bad bits of cycle infrastructure. There is considerable scope, possibly within the City Deal funding, to rework the whole streetscape to Dutch standards.
Meeting with Leeds City Council to discuss possible remedial works due to high casualty rates.
Created by Katja Leyendecker // 1 thread
The (draft / emerging) 1Core Strategy seems to hint at a bus loop (Policy UC7) and a motor vehicle "ring road" (Policy UC9) too. It mentions pedestrian routes but there's no mention of cycle routes. See attached photo. (I didn't mark up the map, as it might become a tad too messy)
The "ring road" is just like Scott / esde84 described before http://newcycling.org/space4cycling/part2 (in comments)
The photo in the attachment is from "Newcastle Proposals Map" listed here http://onecorestrategyng-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/examination_library (not sure how long thi link will stay live, link rot may happen)
Created by Matthew // 2 threads
On 1 January 2026, historic routes in England that aren’t properly recorded will be lost to the public forever. We are looking for people to volunteer their time to help us identify and register these routes before it is too late.
Created by Shaun McDonald // 1 thread
It would be much safer to have cyclist priority on the slip roads here as is done in The Netherlands http://www.flickr.com/photos/smsm1/10046288016/ , or even the following example from Britain: http://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/photos/good-cycling-facility-of-the-week/good-cycling-facility-of-the-week-14th-november-2013-0
The slip roads also need to be narrowed to slow motor vehicle speeds as does the turning radii of the roundabout.
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 Mark A // 1 thread
A dropped kerb at this point would improve the route that people can take to cycle between Bear Flat and the city centre - making it easier to use Calton Gardens to avoid the section of footpath on the alternative via Holloway and St Marks Church.
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.
Created by HankChief // 0 threads
There needs to be a ramped access to the school grounds at this point to replace or bypass the 6 steps currently there.
This would not only improve access to the school but also improve connection between the East Craigs Path Network and North Gyle and the only toucan crossing on the A8 in Edinburgh on Dechmont Road.
Created by Roy Russell // 0 threads
This is a good location for "No Entry except Cycles".
The existing Traffic Order allows cycling past the No Entry sign.
The existing "cycle bypass" over the footway, which was rarely used, has been obstructed and largely destroyed by the adjacent building site.
The simplest solution is to add a supplementary plate "Except Cycles" under the No Entry sign.
Where the quite good segregated cycle lane joins The Ride, DfT advice was certainly NOT followed. As per DfT advice, when cycle lanes are merged with the carriageway, it should be done via a length of dropped kerb that is flush with the carriageway and the cycle lane shouldn't be joined at a 90 degree angle to the road.
Here, the cycle lane runs parallel to the road for a short distance before it loops around a large boulder specifically placed to force cyclists around and then finally joins the road at a 90 degree angle.
The kerb, though dropped, is far from flush and creates a risk for cyclists joining the track from the road.
This junction between the road and the track should be scrapped and redone according to DfT guidelines.
Created by Paul James // 0 threads
All the sideroads between Richmond Circus and Manor Circus are a danger to cyclists on the cycleway.
There is no warning to motorists that there will be crossing cyclists and the building angles make it hard to see if anything is coming.
Turning traffic from the A316 can have an obscured view of the cycleway due to foliage.
Decrease corner radii.
Make road hump more pronounced.
Make cycle surface colour continuous across roadway.
Add markings across roadway.
Add warning signage.
Move give way lines back to before cycleway or add additional give way lines.
Created by Simon Redding // 2 threads
The railway path from Sheffield down through Staveley & Poolsbrook stops at Arkwright Town. Since an opencast / landfill was south of this point, there is no trace of the former railway line to join to the trails at Sutton Spring Wood. This is an important local link.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 1 thread
The route on the east side of the A167 past Crossgate Moor and Framwellgate Moor crosses a number of roundabouts. The cycle-path leads you across the roads very close to the roundabout, via the central refuge in the middle of the road. Some of these roads have two lane entry to the roundabout. Crossing both lanes at once is tricky as you have to have an eye on whether the traffic is about to move out onto the roundabout. If you have a longer vehicle, such as a bus, waiting, then the route to the refuge is blocked. There are no road markings to warn motorists that cyclists might be expected.
The route is probably going to be improved as part of the Great North Cycleway. If these roundabouts are to be made safe enough for children to use, major alterations will be required. (The route goes past Durham Johnston School so should be available to children.) The route should cross further from the mouth of the roundabout, preferably on a different-coloured surface, maybe raised.
Created by SamGW // 1 thread
The Road between Great Wilbraham and Fulbourn is very well used by Cyclists, runners and walkers throughout the year. It is a single track road with a 60 MPH speed limit. A bicycle path here would encourage more people to cycle to Fulbourn and Cambridge. The path would significantly improve safety for cars, pedestrians and cyclists.
Created by Steve Crapper // 1 thread
This planning application is a revised version of a previous application that would have infilled the disused railway beneath Buttermilk lane bridge, preventing the disused railway becoming a vital new greenway between Bolsover and Poolsbrook country Park (extending the existing Stockley Trail)
The revised application has changed from infill to ramps, but this forces an unnecessary road crossing, when an underpass is perfectly feasible
please object on this basis if you are able . our campaign has created a Facebook page called "build the Stockley Extension"
Bolsover
Application reference : 18/00178/FUL
Created by Robin Heydon // 2 threads
The Landbeach Parish Council would like the bridgeway from Landbeach to Cambridge to be upgraded to a cycleway.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 4 threads
London Cycling Campaign has reorientated its policy towards a 'Go Dutch' approach.
This aims to learn from best practice abroad rather than continuing with the 'hierarchy of provision' that, in 20 years in the UK, has arguably failed to deliver meaningful change.
This is an overarching issue for conceptual discussion of this issue.
Created by Andrew Woodward // 0 threads
Pinch point outside Courtlands on Sheen Road. Despite resurfacing, pinch point has not been addressed. Because of the poor road layout vehicles frequently encroach into the cycle lane. At off peak times the wide road encourages speeding - vehicles often approach this pinch point at 40mph.
Created by Stephan Matthiesen // 1 thread
The chicane at the west end of the Magdalene Glen path interrupts the flow when going uphills, particularly unpleasant for people with weak knees. It also forces cyclists uphills often to stop and start when there are other people going through, as it's not wide enough to pass.
It doesn't serve any useful purpose at it is on the top of the slope where cyclists are very slow anyway. As it's uphills, there is little danger that e.g. kids run out onto the wide pavement of Duddingston Pk South. Cyclists from the West are slow at this point anyway as they turn into the path.
Created by Shaun McDonald // 0 threads
The traffic lights at Eagle Street were timed such that travelling eastbound you would always get caught at the second set unless you were extremely fast setting off. After discussions with the council and it brought up at the Sustainability Forum by Cllr Smart, it was fixed to increase the length of time that those lights were green, and was great as you always knew you could get through the second set of lights without having to wait unless you just went through the earlier ones just before they went red.
However over the past few days the signal timing has changed back to the older timing where the probability of getting through the second set is virtually nil. In an ideal world they would be phased such that the first set would go green, then the second set would go green several seconds later at the point where you would be arriving at them, rather than having them change to green almost at the same time.