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 SallyEva // 2 threads
Mina Road would be no entry, apart from cyclists, from the junction with Ivy Church Lane. This will prevent northbound traffic entering from Mina Road onto B203 Dunton Road, to prevent stopping on the hatch markings at the junction with the A2 Old Kent Road. This movement can cause congestion and a road safety risk to all users.
Motor vehicles would not be able to use Bagshot Street and Mina Road for access onto the A2 Old Kent Road. The scheme would improve conditions and safety for local residents and cyclists. The reduced amount of traffic will create a safer environment.
Road users who normally would use Mina Road to access the A2 Old Kent Road would need to use Bagshot Street, Albany Road and Shorncliffe Road. The parking and loading bays on the northern side section of Mina Road would remain unchanged.
Created by Heather Coleman // 1 thread
I've noticed a few of these around Cambridge where there's a "no through road" sign but it's a through road for cyclists and pedestrians. As there's a post already, if the council had a ready-made stock of plates saying "except cycles", "except pedestrians", a single operative could affix the plate below the sign to made it correct. It is highly deceptive and not serving those using non-motorised transport if they go the long way round not realising they can get through a quicker route.
Created by Gregory Williams // 0 threads
Much of the route of the former Elham Valley Railway has not been constructed on. This would make an ideal long-distance cycle path.
Created by Donald Noble // 0 threads
It would be useful to have signage at this location to show the route onto the cycle path. Coming north along Lochend Road from the A8/Airport it is not clear that you need to head into the treatment works access road to see the path leading onto the main cycle path.
Created by M Stanley // 1 thread
Leeds City Council are proposing major changes to the gyratory. The stated aim is to increase motor vehicle capacity at the junction which will in turn allow the removal of general motor traffic from areas of the city centre such as city square.
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 David Earl // 1 thread
It is intimidating to use this roundabout because of the high shrubbery in the middle. It is supposed to slow traffic down but my subjective feeling is that it doesn't
Anon // 1 thread
Wandsworth Council in TMO 1644 propose removing the contra-flow segregated cycle track at the eastern end of Putney Embankment to allow a hoarding to be built around the Thames Tideway tunnel construction site. The track will be re-opened when the work is complete, but this could take at least a year. It is proposed that eastbound cyclists join the Upper Richmond road by the Dukes Head pub and then continue on this road. Wandsworth Cycling Campaign objected to this on the grounds that the Upper Richmond Road is extremely heavily trafficked and the proposed diversion involved cycling past a row pf parking bays . This would be very difficult and hazardous for the mix of cyclists using the Thames Path of which this forms part. We asked that the parking bays be temporarily removed and replaced by a 1.5 to 2 m cycle lane separated from the motor traffic by wands or similar. For west-bound cyclists using the narrow lane left on Putney Embankment past the work site, we asked for the installation of 'Do not overtake cyclists' signs.
Created by Caroline Page // 1 thread
Significant domestic car parking in the advisory cycle lane of westbound lane combines with heavy traffic jams to obstruct/block westbound passage to cyclists in rush hour. Generally there is a section of this route where pavement pushing is unavoidable
Created by Angela Dyer // 1 thread
Proper surface on the link from Butterfield Lane to Holyrood Crescent
Created by jpennycook // 1 thread
Just to the south of the junction with Sullivan Road, there is a low hanging branch at decapitation height. It is hard to see at night.
Created by TMiles // 0 threads
A short section of cycle path allows cyclists to skirt around the traffic lights when turning left from Westgate into Oxford Place.
However the section ends abruptly in front of on-street car parking and the cyclist is forced to give way to other traffic in order to join Oxford Place.
It should instead lead smoothly into a cycle lane that runs the whole length of this street.
Created by Gipsy Hill // 2 threads
Introduction:
Quietway7 links a cycle route from Elephant & Castle (E&C) with Crystal Palace, and was routed by TfL to be via Dulwich Village, West Norwood (Thurlow Park Road), Gipsy Hill and then Crystal Palace (via Farquhar Road).
The route from E&C southbound is in Southwark (to Dulwich) then is in Lambeth (Turney Road, Rosendale Road/Thurlow Park Road, Hamilton Road, to Gipsy Hill), then goes back into Southwark (from Gipsy Hill to Crystal Palace). Southwark had their part of the quietway consultation approved.
Lambeth delayed their decision to June 2017, and was then subsequently “called in” as there was widespread concerns from both the local community and cycling groups for parts of the route. Cycling groups unanimously objected to the proposed design along Gipsy Hill by: Southwark Cyclists, Lambeth Cyclists and Wheels for Wellbeing. 70% of respondents objected to the the design on Gipsy Hill. Gipsy Hill is a busy Local Distributor Road and bus route. Gipsy Hill has “insufficient road width” for a segregated track. The original proposed design meant motor vehicles “will encroach on the advisory cycle lane” to allow oncoming motor vehicles to pass.
Gipsy Hill Options:
There are alterative options to avoid Gipsy Hill. Southwark Cyclists have supported the design option to follow LCN23 downhill all the way along Dulwich Wood Avenue and then using the other side of Long Meadow (so not using Gipsy Hill), with a new track behind the bus stop.
See navy dashed line on sketch attached (mauve was the proposed Q7 design, red is LCN23)
This design is quieter and safer than using Gipsy Hill, and avoids the proposed dangerous junction Gipsy Hill/ Dulwich Wood Avenue, near the rail station. This integrated design also allows greatest cycle access to local amenities, schools, shops, and parks in Dulwich, West Dulwich and West Norwood. There is interest and outline support from Southwark to explore this option.
Next Steps:
Lambeth are now actively progressing engagement and revised designs for their part of the route, with a new consultation process due in September. There is potential for an improved option at Gipsy Hill, but this is likely to need new additional funding from TfL.
Suggested, to let local Gipsy Hill Ward Cllrs (Lambeth) and College Ward Cllrs (Southwark) and local cycling groups know your views.
Background:
Lambeth proposal that was called-in, see reports:
- Quietway 7 - Elephand Castle to Crystal Palace - Decision Report – 12 June 2017
- Appendix B - Quietway 7 - details designs (Gipsy Hill pages: 23, 46-49)
http://www.cpneighbours.org/gipsyhillquietway/
Thurlow Park Ward Cllr updates:
http://thurlowparklabour.org/post/162548844962/quietways-engagement-next-steps
TfL Quietway 7 Programme (Elephant & Castle to Crystal Palace) - Proposed changes in Lambeth - West Dulwich area
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/lambeth-q7-wd/
LCN23 Map:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2707#map=17/51.42643/-0.08336
What are Quietway?
London Cycling Design Standards, Chapter 1 (page 15):
Quietways “..are aimed at new cyclists who want a safe, unthreatening experience.” The key principles for Quietways include:
o Routes should be on the quietest available roads consistent with directness;
o Routes should be as straight and direct as possible;
o where they have to join busier roads, or pass through busy, complicated junctions, segregation must be provided;
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/lcds-chapter1-designrequirements.pdf
Created by Anna Langley // 2 threads
This intersection needs a right turn light for bikes turning from St Andrew's Street into the Downing Street contraflow lane.
Doing so feels unsafe with buses coming up from behind, and little opportunity to get across the intersection.
I'm considering setting up a 38 Degrees petition on the matter, but wanted to see if this issue had been campaigned on before.
Hungate Bridge at the Navigation Road end is heavily bollarded on one end people on bikes and variants and people on foot are forced into a narrowed corridor by bollards. Yet, the width of he route is not restricted on either side.
It is unnatural and unnecessary. It brings people on bikes and variants into contact with each other and with people on foot or in wheelchairs, etc. It seems to be 'traffic-calming'. To my mind this undermines active travel messages and initiatives by making movement more complicated and fraught for all users.
Created by John Metcalf // 1 thread
"Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) has recently undertaken a feasibility report to investigate cycle links to the new Verulamium Park (Ver Park) Route link to NCN 6 from the King Harry Lane area. We have looked at ways to improve the cycling and walking environment; particularly where this would improve the continuity of cycle routes and the movement of people via active modes around your area. A section of shared use cycle route has been recently provided by the developer Linden Homes and the intention is to extend this facility to Abbey Avenue and northwards towards The Ramparts via an upgraded traffic signal crossing point into Verulamium Park.
The proposals include the following:
· Upgrade the existing traffic signal controlled crossing near Verulamium Park access to a Toucan Crossing,
· To provide improvements to the footway areas on both sides of the traffic signal controlled crossing to make it both suitable for pedestrians and cyclists, and linking into the new section of shared use footway/ cycleway that the developer has recently provided.
· To the south of the new roundabout, on the western side, the existing footway will be widened from 0.9-1.1m to 2.5m to continue the shared use route towards Abbey Avenue.
To upgrade the existing uncontrolled crossing at King Harry Lane jw Abbey Avenue by increasing the widths of the existing pedestrian refuge to widths that can accommodate both cyclists and pedestrians.
This option has been carefully evaluated and full consideration has been given to the likely effects that it may have on residents.
Please find attached a plan which shows details of the proposed scheme for Ver Park Highway Link (Cycleway/ Footway).
At this stage we are intending to implement the proposals during the next financial year, 2014/15.
As such we are now finalising the design and we are interested in hearing your views or any comments you may have regarding the proposals"
Initial comments by John Metcalf
Overall to be welcomed as better than what is there already. But, it could be improved?
1. Traffic entering Abbey Avenue is likely to be going too fast for a safe crossing for those walking or cycling. This is a rat-run to avoid the King Harry roundabouts. Therefore tighten the radii of the junction and make a raised crossing (on a hump). Do we want a Tiger (Zebra for walkers and cyclists) crossing?
2. The crossing of the new roundabout exit into King Harry Park is hazardous. It needs to be upgraded with a humped crossing (and a Tiger?). Is this sufficient or should there also be measures to slow down the traffic entering and leaving King Harry Park.
3. The best solution would be to upgrade the ROW footpath from the toucan crossing of King Harry Lane to Rowlatt Drive
Created by Jack Thurston // 1 thread
Cycle Route 46 from crosses the old stone bridge across the River Usk between Abergavenny and Llanfoist. There are good, safe and direct cycle paths on either side of the bridge, but the bridge itself is very hostile for cycling, and walking. It is on the A4143 and there is heavy often fast traffic most times of the day. The footway is very narrow and only on one side of the bridge. Although short, this is a difficult section to negotiate, especially for inexperienced or young cyclists.
Created by DB // 1 thread
I am cycling on the snakey trail every day, and there is a high risk that somebody falls into the Cherry Hinton Brook one day. The path and bridge is really too narrow and many people are taking it both ways.
Route proposal for the link from Prospect Road/Verulamium Park to the start of the Alban Way.
The route is a shared, wide, pavement with a width around 3 metres- in line with minimum width for a shared route.
Documents are available at http://www.stalbans.gov.uk/planning/Planningpolicy/greenring/hccsiteb.aspx
Please have a look at the thread on this as there are a few point which STACC will bring out, you may want to consider these in your response.
Please return any comments to Clare Martin via phone, email or post.
Please also contact Clare if you have any further queries about the proposed works.
Clare Martin
Project Engineer, Integrated Transport Planning
Highways
Postal Point CHO317
Hertfordshire County Council, Leahoe Annexe, Pegs Lane, Hertford, SG13 8DN
t: 01992 658478 Comnet / Internal: 58478
email: Clare.Martin@hertfordshire.gov.uk
Created by Shaun McDonald // 1 thread
Planning application: http://planningpages.midsuffolk.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_MSUFF_DCAPR_92778
There are concerns about no or too little improvements for walking and cycling along Paper Mill Lane with the increase in traffic caused by the development.
Created by t1mmyb // 0 threads
This shortcut is technically pedestrians-only, but forms a useful link from the environs of Bath Spa station (Widcombe) to Holloway, a dead-end for motor vehicles and therefore a quiet, if steep, climb to Bear Flat, Wellsway and beyond.
Dropped kerbs, barrier/chicane removal etc. would make this route usable by parents with cycle trailers, people on cargobikes and the like.
It was slated as a piece of work to be done by Bath & NE Somerset, but there's been no news lately.
Created by Alex Jenkins // 1 thread
Following recent engagement on the Liveable Streets programme in the Bow area, we are planning to trial some changes to the road layout. These changes are based on suggestions made by local residents and stakeholders.
This trial will help us understand the effects these changes have on the road network and allow residents and businesses to experience the positive impact reduced traffic has on the local area.
During the trial we will be running several events and activities to take advantage of the reduced number of motor vehicles passing through the Bow area, and encourage local journeys to be made by sustainable modes such as walking and cycling. Keep an eye out for more information on these.
Please note that as a part of our preparation for the trial we have consulted with the emergency services, bus operators and Transport for London to ensure they can deliver their services using the changed road layout.
Created by Guy Hill // 1 thread
If it is not bad enough in a cycle city that the Great Northern Road, the new road to Cambridge's main train station and cycle parking, does not have a segregated and safe cycle paths, the new development is now being proposed which will prevent a segregated cycleway from access to the Station a Devonshire road.
Does anyone agree that there should be a segregated cycle access to the country's largest cycle park?
Created by cobweb // 0 threads
Permission given for 286 homes. Concern was raised in 2010 about the positioning of the 715 cycle parking spaces.
Created by Fraser Stephens // 0 threads
RAISED AT PUBLIC MEETING 10-04-2014
The A4143 heading up towards the Hospital is plenty wide enough for a dedicated cycle path on one side or the other (we suggest the west side). This is often a busy and fast road. (Note this this would also solve the safe cycle access to the climbing wall and softplay.)