Mount Pleasant House development
Mount Pleasant Halls - the redevelopment of Mount Pleasant House as accommodation for St Edmund’s and Darwin Colleges.
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 Roxanne (CEO) // 2 threads
Mount Pleasant Halls - the redevelopment of Mount Pleasant House as accommodation for St Edmund’s and Darwin Colleges.
Anon // 2 threads
Early in February I came across some changes to the layout of the road.
There were notices up explaining that it was an experimental scheme, intended to stop lorries parking. 500 metres of the road had been made one way southbound and one lane plus the parking bays bollarded off.
The cycle route between Maidstone and the Medway Towns via Bluebell Hill used that 500 metre stretch northbound. I saw that as a problem.
Don’t worry I was told, the scheme isn’t complete yet.
Returning in March I discovered that the adjacent footway has been marked for shared use by equestrians, pedestrians and cyclists. Some blue signs have been added but the path remains cracked, potholed and broken and it is around one metre wide. It's also rapidly becoming overgrown.
There are design manuals for cycle facilities. They recommend a width of three metres for two way traffic. They also recommend that, where space is available, cycle facilities should be on the carriageway.
KCC say they considered cyclists and equestrians at the earliest stages of the design and that a minimum level of provision was made as the scheme is temporary.
I don’t know why KCC haven’t done the job right but I do know the situation may become permanent unless cyclists campaign against it.
The consultation period ends on 15 July, please take some time to object to the scheme in its present form.
http://consultations.kent.gov.uk/consult.ti/ChathamRoad/consultationHome
Related FOI here: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_kent_county_council_chatham
Created by Tim Steele // 1 thread
Not sure why these signs are here. This isn't Route 51 or Route 11 and you can't turn here in any case.
Created by Tim Steele // 1 thread
Some route 51 signs have appeared here, although it's not on route 51
Created by TonyNorwich // 1 thread
The Norwich Northern Distributor Road has been given the go-ahead by Secretary of State for Transport.
The decision letter (see below) contains an extra-ordinary statement about “cycle proofing”.
I understood we are waiting for the UK Cycle Proofing Working Group to publish details of what the term will mean and how it will be applied.
However, we have the Government’s “Reponse …” of March 2015
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/417706/consultation-response.pdf
1.17 page 10
The Group has already devised a clear definition of cycle proofing for stakeholders and interested bodies to note, as follows;
Cycle proofing is a process which over time ensures that the built environment generally, and roads specifically, are seen to be safe, convenient and pleasant for cycle use by people of all ages and abilities.
Cycling proofing involves:
consideration of the extent and quality of existing cycling conditions on urban and rural networks of roads, streets, junctions, crossings, off-highway cycle-routes and public transport networks; and
identification and prioritisation of measures to improve cycling conditions in the context of all transport and other infrastructure schemes and programmes, including planned road maintenance works, new developments and the creation or management of rights of way and other off highway
routes; its aim is to progressively create comprehensive and coherent transport networks for cycle
use
I have set out the document trail below:
Planning portal site
Secretary of State’s Decision Letter
para 36
36. The Secretary of State has considered the Examining Authority’s assessment of the effects of the NDR project on non-motorised users at ER 4.473-485. With regard to the
suitability of the provision that would be made for cyclists, the Secretary of State agrees with the Examining Authority that the applicant has taken a reasonable approach to cycleproofing the project (ER 4.480).
Examining Authorities report
Effects on non-motorised users (NMUs) 4.473
Norfolk County Council response:
“However, the extensive provision of new facilities for NMUs as part of the scheme, together with mitigation for any adverse effects, is sufficient evidence that the applicant has taken a reasonable approach to cycle-proofing the scheme.”
In evidence to the Inquiry NNC submitted the following:
The Norfolk County Council (Norwich Northern Distributor Road (A1067 to A47(T))) Order
6.1 Environmental Statement: Volume I
Page 788 Non-Motorised Users
And then page 790 Table 1.17 Permanent impact of the NDR for the NMU network
Note only one of the works is “Beneficial”, while some are even “adverse” – is this what “Cycle-Proofing” will mean?. These assessments are subjective judgements by the developer - no objective evidence is provided.
The NCC further state:
12.6.12 Traffic increases for some rural and radial routes within the Norwich area would result in some localised adverse impacts for NMUs due to potential increases in community severance. This is because some NMUs may be deterred from making their existing journeys where roads with traffic increases would need to be crossed or where existing footways, cycleways and bridleways run adjacent to roads with traffic increases. Locations include:
# Traffic increases on Holt Road as it passes through Horsford;
# Traffic increases on North Walsham Road as it passes through Crostwick;
# Traffic increases on the Buxton Road where it passes through Old Catton (affecting the Spixworth cycleway); and,
# Traffic increases on Wroxham Road.
and at 12.6.13
In addition, some slight increases in journey times for NMUs would be experienced as a result of the proposed junctions included within the NDR,
such as at Cromer Road. This would be particularly relevant for cyclists, where navigating junctions may deter some users from making their journeys.
Does this meet the requirements of Government policy to increase cycling? It seems to me that those cynics who saw the Governments announcements on cycle proofing and cycling policy as hot air and headline grabing were right.
Is there is anything that can be done ?
Created by Sarah Wood // 0 threads
At certain times of day it is difficult to cross the road and connect the cycle and pedestrian routes between Southwood and the Cove Brook Greenway
The Greater Anglia franchise is due for renewal in October 2016 and the process has already started. It is quite unsusal to have a station serving such a large number of passengers with access on only one side o the tracks. This situation leads to many more and longer car journeys along Mill Road, Cherry Hinton Road and Hills Road.
There is an existing access via (non-residential) Clifton Road to the east side of the station and there is vacant land. We need to argue the case for an eastern entrance to the station, along with cycle parking and pedestrian access. There is a mainly empty car park on the other side of the tracks. We should also try to include a link from the Carter bridge to the new cycle park.
Interested parties
3 shortlisted franchises
local MPs
Minister responsible (Clare Perry MP)
Created by Jon G // 1 thread
The road outside the Barmy Arms pub, Twickenham Embankment, used to be closed to motor traffic by a single line of posts with cycle logos painted on the road between two of these, clearly showing there is a cycle route there.
Recently this has been replaced with two lines of posts about 3m apart and there are no cycle route markers. This is leading pedestrians to reasonably assume that the area between the posts is for pedestrians only and to stand there in groups with drinks from the pub, creating conflicts with cyclists trying to ride through the area. The existence of the cycle route should once again be indicated by signs or painted cycle symbols.
Created by Jon G // 1 thread
The Embankment, Twickenham is a two-way street. Many driver sseem to think it is one-way Westbound. Even the Cyclescape map wrongly marks it as one-way! It needs signage clarifying it is two-way, to avoid motorists being obstructive or abusive to cyclists lawfully riding Eastward along it.
Created by Jon G // 1 thread
Bell Lane is two-way. Most drivers using it go Northward and many seem to think it is one-way that way. It needs signage clarifying it is two-way, to avoid motorists being obstructive or abusive to cyclists lawfully riding South along it.
Created by Jon G // 1 thread
Cricket Lane is a dead end and therefore two-way. Since an exit from a car park was built leading into it, many drivers seem to think it is a one-way street from the car park. In fact it is used by cyclists going in both directions between High St and Bushy Park.
It needs signs clarifying that it is two-way, as drivers are being obstructive or abusive to cyclists legitimately using it.
Created by David K // 1 thread
At present this is a footpath but it could be widened onto the land owned by Network Rail in order to allow a shared use path.
Created by Richard Taylor // 1 thread
Proposal for three new pedestrian and cycle access points to Cambridge Business Park. The proposals are being made in light of the plans for an new station nearby.
Representations from companies with premises on the business park - Redgate and Autonomy - have expressed concerns about security and the potential for people to try and park on the business park and then get on a train.
The proposals are for the new accesses to be gated to restrict general public access.
The proposals include a connection to the potential cycleway along the line of the disused railway.
Cambridge Business Park Cowley Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB4 0WZ
Cambridge
Application reference: 15/0919/FUL
Created by Violinist John // 1 thread
Noticed this a couple of weeks ago. As you will see the sign is incomplete and misleading given that the place to see all the details is the end of Ferry Lane waiting to join High Street. High Street at this point is both Route 51 and Route 11.
Major points:
Left turn to go to Impington on Route 51 - I think not.
Abbey and Fen Ditton to the left when you could just go back across Green Dragon bridge.
No directions to Histon, Milton, Waterbeach probably others.
Also the lack of any idea where route 11 goes to the right.
This appears to be one of a number of new signs that have recently appeared. If anyone has seen any more let's get the info out there and try to get them fixed.
Created by Iain Lane // 1 thread
Some new lamp posts have been installed on the pedestrian side of this split ped/cycle path. This reduces the effective width of the path and creates conflict.
Created by Katja Leyendecker // 0 threads
Council is planning changes on parts of Heaton Road
http://www.newcastle.gov.uk/parking-roads-and-transport/cycling/strategic-cycle-routes/improvements-heaton-road
Discuss your thoughts and ideas here!
Created by Roxanne (CEO) // 3 threads
Relocation of the existing liquid nitrogen (LN2) tank, Denios unit and cycle parking facilities.
Department Of Chemistry Lensfield Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB2 1EW
Cambridge
Application reference: 15/0988/FUL
NOTE:
Introduction of two tiered cycle parking to maintain the same number of parking spaces.
Richard G // 1 thread
A new research institute is planned for the Addenbrookes campus, plans are due to be submitted within a few weeks
There has been a exhibition of the overall plan & I have concerns about the cycle parking provision
Just wanted to report a collision on 1/6/15 at about 1700 between myself and a car in Cambridge.
Travelling South on Trumpington Road, turning into Fens Causeway I was hit by a car travelling North at the roundabout. There are three lanes of traffic heading north, the outmost car gave way correctly but the car in the second lane for whatever reason chose to accelerate onto the roundabout and hit me square on. I heard the noise of a revving engine, turned and watched the car drive straight into me. I felt the bonnet of the car as it hit and heard the sound of the impact, have a vague recollection about spinning through the air then hitting the tarmac. Although I was wearing a helmet it didn't help as I landed on my right buttock, back and leg.
Fortunately there were several witnesses including medically trained people who left their cars to help; the driver of the car involved remained in his car.
The police took about 25 minutes to arrive and the ambulance about 10 minutes after that.
I have nothing but praise for everyone who stopped and helped, the police, the paramedics and the A&E staff at Addenbrookes. The driver of the car knows what I think of him as I was quite vocal when he tried to get involved. He apparently told the police that I had 'cut the corner' of the roundabout. I'm not sure what he meant by this, nor was the police officer.
I count myself very lucky. Although I've been off work since the collision, I have no broken bones - just serious bruising, a lot of pain in my back and hip which I'm assuming will go away eventually. The ironic thing is that I'd been cycling from Melbourn to Hills Road since the previous week up and down the A10, and had decided to try a different route over Chapel Hill as I thought it might be safer.
I'm curious though, does this junction not have a history of collisions? I can recall seeing at least one there myself in the past. What is the recommended route for cyclists travelling this route?
I took the advice of the Campaign website and contacted Cycleaid for legal advice. I'll report back the outcome as things progress if anyone is interested.
BTW not sure how to draw a route on the map AND mark the collision point, so I've just done the latter.
By-election for the Romsey Division in June 2015
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The University has published initial plans for a Masterplan for the West Cambridge site, which will see further extension towards the M11.
https://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2014-15/weekly/6387/section6.shtml#heading2-11
Created by Robin Heydon // 1 thread
Extension to foodstore
ALDI Unit 1 157 Histon Road Cambridge Cambridgeshire CB4 3JD
Cambridge
Application reference: 15/0914/FUL
Created by Shaun McDonald // 1 thread
There is a footpath linking London Road to Columbine Gardens and Lupin Road, which has a series of barriers. Removing the barriers, ensuring there are dropped kerbs are on Columbine Gardens and Cowslip Close. Signs need to be added to sign post the route to the town centre, London Road, and appropriate other places.
This would mean that there would be direct link from Chantry on to London Road and into town along a potentially safer route than Gippeswk Avenue/Birkfield Drive.
Created by Rosie Downes // 1 thread
First consultation on the main scheme: 26 May to 31 July 2015
Second consultation on amendments to the scheme: 22 February to 20 March 2016
Created by Shaun McDonald // 1 thread
The A92 here has some very fast traffic. Considering this is the flagship National Cycle Route 1, and there is already a cycle path of part of the way between these 2 junctions. It would be much better if this cycle path was continued to the next junction, with some crossing aid in the form of traffic lights, bridge or tunnel. This would open this part of the route to a wider range of participants, as it would be significantly safer.
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
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.
Created by Richenda // 1 thread
Apparently TfL commissioned "...to explore the opportunity of a pedestrian river crossing ....". They may not think bikes should also be included, but they should!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/luxury/travel/4162/a-garden-bridge-across-the-thames.html
http://www.gardenbridgetrust.org/index.html
Created by Andrew Woodward // 0 threads
Railway footbridge should have a ramp/trough added to make it easier for cyclists to cross the railway. This would then create a quiet north/south route to Marshgate school as an alternative to Manor Road.
Created by TonyBeaumont // 1 thread
Out side the royal orthopaedic hospital up top 30 cars are parked in the cycle lane every day. Cyclists are forced out into the traffic lane of the A38 over a distance of about 1/4 mile.
Created by HVS // 3 threads
The A5117 at this point has some sections of non-protected cycle lane, but they are not continuous, and they disappear at a number of pinch points. The road carries a lot of very fast moving heavy traffic, and is dangerous and unpleasant to cycle on. It would be a useful route for people travelling by bike to or from Stanlow Refinery, Cheshire Oaks, the University of Chester at Thornton Science Park, and Ince & Elton villages, but is currently only used by a tiny number of very brave and confident cyclists. This situation could be improved by making the cycle lane continuous along the whole route.
Created by Andrew Woodward // 0 threads
Pinch-point at zebra crossing where cyclists are forced to share space with traffic that is often speeding. Cars try to squeeze past cyclists or brake suddenly.
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 Fraser Stephens // 1 thread
RAISED AT PUBLIC MEETING 10-04-2014
The infamous missing link in the Llanfoist-Brynmawr cycle path (route 46) is a huge barrier to its safe use by children as well as those who find the steep section of the diversion route impossible to climb.
The service entrance to the motorway services now has priority over the shared use path which runs parallel to the main road.
I have contacted both Hampshire County Council and Test Valley Borough Council about this change in priorities, but neither has responded beyond a cursory "we have received your email".
This is yet another example of through traffic being de-prioritised simply because it is on a cycle (or shared) path, rather than on a road.
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 Frenchie // 0 threads
This is one of the prime candidate for a cycle contraflow in Newcastle City Centre. Currently one way for all traffic from Percy Street to Strawberry place. Allowing cyclists down from Strawberry Place to Percy Street would improve permeability and connectivity for cyclists. Note: not a lot of traffic, space not an issue, short uphill section so speeding not an issue.
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.
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 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 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 chdot // 1 thread
Longstanding issue about 'optimum' design, particularly to reduce conflict caused by vehicles turning from Teviot Pl due to signal phases.
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 // 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.
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 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 Andrew Woodward // 1 thread
Providing a cycle-friendly surface on the path from Meadlands Drive to the road serving the German School and the Polo Club would improve cycling access to Strathmore and Russell Schools and help provide a better quiet route from Meadlands Drive area towards Richmond - providing more/better options for avoiding the busy Petersham Road.
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 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.
Meeting with Leeds City Council to discuss possible remedial works due to high casualty rates.
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.