Madgelene College (at Cripps Court) wish to remove a cycle shed in order to build a timber furniture store. The design and access statement, justifying this, says that few of the racks are used.
Listed issues, most recent first:
Madgelene College (at Cripps Court) wish to remove a cycle shed in order to build a timber furniture store. The design and access statement, justifying this, says that few of the racks are used.
External works including pedestrian access ramp, alterations to bin storage, covered cycle parking, staff and visitor car parking etc.
8 cycle racks shown in the ground floor plan. A retail unit is likely to have some effect on traffic.
An application to demolish 191 and 193 Mill Road (opposite St Phillip's Church and replace with 6 studio units and a retail unit. It's a conservation area.
Other than two sheffield stands in the train station there is no secure cycle parking available in Buxton. This is discouraging people from travelling to this tourist hotspot by bike.
The proposal is to install two bollards on the corner of Hemingford Road in order to prevent cars from mounting the pavement. The pavement here (as with much of Mill Road) is not that wide. A build out was considered but it was felt that this would create pinch point of cyclists.
(Scheme 16, page 29)
Two speed cushions are proposed in order to reduce speed and make it safer for pedestrians to cross.
The proposal is to put in double yellow lines and no waiting restrictions at this entrance to the Tins.
EIP's from the East Area Committee. Two schemes proposed here, one at the Riverside end of the Tesco path, the other near Stanley Road. For the first, double yellow lines are suggested, for the second, double yellow lines and residents only parking.
Scheme 3, page 5.
Not sure if this is something or nothing but in the East Area Committee agenda (EIP Appendix B) there's discussion of Coleridge Community College (Parkside Federation is probably the right name now) installing bollards on the verge.
(Scheme 6, page 11)
How St is Walthamstow's artery. It carries way too much motor traffic for its size. Many bus routes run through it. Recent improvement plans are looking ok, but are as usual a mixed bag.
This is a general, over-arching issue for discussion of helmet-related and cycle safety promotion strategic matters in Cambridge that periodically (and continually) arise.
Bermondsey St is being used as a rat run not just along its length but also across at Tanner St. Through traffic should use the A100, Tooley St or Borough High St.
Could be a good mode filter project
CN Letters 30 July 2012:
"If the Lady whose bottom was smacked by a passenger in a green Ford KA as she cycled along Cambridge Rd, Shelford, towards Trumpington at 11 am on July 25, would like to do anything about it, please get in touch with me via this newspaper. I was following and have the details of the car" (Name withheld in CN)
CCC to local police
"CCC would like to encourage the local police force to get in touch with the informant and take the necessary steps. Such behaviour is degrading, it is extremely dangerous, potentially life threatening, and must not be allowed to become a local custom. We look forward to read in the newspaper that the necessary steps have been taken and that such behaviour will be punished, including revoking of driver's license."
Upgrading the narrow footpath into a wider route usable by cyclists has been a long term priority for the Godalming Cycle Campaign. This route is a key link for pedestrians and cyclists between Farncombe/Binscombe and Godalming.
This year the Waverley Local Committee has dedicated funds to construct the path, which will run over land currently owned by Jewsons.
Major development for around 140 dwellings. Godalming Cycle Campaign has written to the developer requesting matters to be taken into consideration to ensure that the development improves access around the site for cyclists.
Some changes to the junctions nearby have been proposed.
The Addenbrooke's site is a poor cycling environment in so many ways. A full set of proposals for change are needed.
Created by David Earl // 1 thread
Expansion of the site by 510 vehicles
Martin Lucas-Smith // 2 threads
Large gyratory, which needs removal and replacement with cycle-friendly measures.
Cycle parking is required at Bekesbourne railway station. The issue photo is evidence of this.
From the EIP programme for the South Area Committee, a proposal to put in a signalised crossing. (The report mentions Fulbrooke Road (which is in Newnham and not part of this patch) but I think it means here instead.) It's likely to get South Area Transport Corridor funding. No more details given.
Parcels either side of Spine Road's junction with Long Road, and one along eastern edge of housing, west side of proposed secondary school site.
Official deadline 19 July
Cycle parking in lean-to's in rear gardens, access via narrow rear alleys, while cars are in front, across driveway. Site far behind Esso, Aldi and modern factory building. Deadline 25 July
"... office development adjoining Unex House (Savills), providing 5 storeys of B1(a) office space (4688m2) and two storeys of associated parking spaces (3102m2). Providing a total of 7790m2 gross internal floorspace of development. | Car Park Unex House 132 - 134 Hills Road..."
The proposal is to retain the CB1 café and reconfigure the two upper floors to include 10 studio flats.
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
The current layout of the pedestrian crossing at the junction of Winchester road and Vermont close forces cyclists out of the cycle lane and into the flow of traffic. This is a risky maneuver and relies on the patience of the car driver behind the cyclist. A possible solution would be to be extend the cycle lane through the chicane, with give way markings so that pedestrians have right of way.
Southampton Cycling Campaign has received many reports of local cyclists having accidents on the cycle path outside the Dominos Pizza outlet at the southern end of The Avenue.
A recent incident was reported in the Southampton Echo, http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/10475081.Cyclist_hurt_in_road_crash/
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.
There is a loading bay in the cycle contraflow cycle lane, which means that the cycle lane is blocked for cyclists as soon as a vehicle is parked there. This means that cyclists have to pull out into the path of oncoming buses, thus making the NCN route unsuitable to young children or inexperienced cyclists.
Redesign of Grey Street to remove the danger of cars reversing (blind) out parking bays into middle of the road.
Here is an ambitious plan for a Bicycle Boulevard from Shoreditch to Fitzrovia, along Old Street, Clerkenwell Road and Theobalds Road, open only to bicycles, buses and motor traffic for local access only.
a. It is now the most cycled route in London, showing that it is the desired EW route.
b. It is of variable width, therefore trying to accommodate bikes, buses, and through traffic in a consistent and safe way is impossible. In other words, a compromise will be a botch job.
c. There will not be mixing of buses and bicycles: bicycles will have a dedicated two way cycle lane on the South side of the street.
d. The Boulevard stops being a mega- EW-rat-run. Motor traffic will have to use Pentonville/City Road.
Created by Gregory Williams // 1 thread
The A2 is a hostile environment for cycling. Cyclists should be directed away from using the A2 towards existing safe alternatives (e.g. RCR16) and the current A2 cycle signs should be removed.
We have a tandem which fits in all the spaces on trains in Scotland (as far as I know), but we are prohibited from taking it on any except the East Coast line trains. I've been writing to various officials - elected and otherwise - and contributed to the recent review of the Scotrail franchise, but am not getting much joy. No one seems to think it is a big deal. But, for my family, with 2 kids aged 5 and 1, and no car, if we don't go by tandem and train, we can't go anywhere much. The tandem is not a luxury but a practical transport solution. Does anyone else want to join in and make this more than a one-woman issue?
(another related issue: even once the kids can ride their own bikes, we won't be able to use trains much since most only allow 2 reservations).
Proposed route along the rail corridor through Cambridge, part of which is in the Cambridge Local Plan.
While some painted "cycle lane" does exist northbound, there is woefully little provision for cyclists considering the huge number that use this section of road each day, a large number of whom are those who work at the General Hospital and other nearby health centres. Southbound cyclists have no real provision of space at all, save a graduated stopline, where cars turning right often try to pass right-turning cycles on the inside. Dale road itself is extremely narrow by winchester road, with almost no pavement space for pedestrians.
Cyclists heading northbound on Winchester road must beat traffic off the line at Dale road to get to the painted centre of Winchester road. North of the traffic light at The Range, the cycle lane is almost non-existent, placing cyclists between 2 lanes of heavy traffic, and cyclists have to stop and wait in this dangerous area in order to turn right onto Wilton road. Furthermore, the road surface, especially at this part of Winchester road, is currently deplorable.
Surface, drainage and width issues.
Planned for upgrade as part of CEC 'family network'
Was an issue 5 years ago (and before)
Garratt Lane at Earlsfield station sucks massively for cyclists, and is a jarring interruption to the Wandle Trail (Sustrans route 20). It would be great to extend the riverside path underneath the railway to avoid this dangerous stretch of road.
Six inch high ridge near left side of north bound lane on the south side of the bridge forces cyclists too close to the kerb or into the path of motor vehicles. Issue reported via CTC pothole reporting site. Resurfacing required.
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/
I've visited Riverside to Waterbeach with William Rayner of county cycling team. He's revising signage here and providing it along the St Ives corridor, with the old NCN 51 being renamed Regional Route 24 (blue patch). We've decided finally to continue to sign NCN 11 from Riverside Bridge to Waterbeach Station, and he's looking at suitable (hopefully temporary) wording to advise to follow NCN 51 to Bottisham for destinations beyond Waterbeach, which will hopefully eliminate misrouting those from outside the area.
Our inspection of existing signs showed that only one new signboard was provided on completion 5 years ago of Riverside Bridge. Signboards still send people via Green Dragon. Sustrans considers signage is an important part of any route project.
The intention is to sign Milton Country Park as a destination, not as part of the route, removing route signs within the park, and probably retaining Coles Road as the signed route through the village, though it would be much preferable to have improvements past the shops and the village green, pubs etc.
Retaining the route to Waterbeach as NCN will help keep the gap in people's awareness.
I am planning to contact again the landowner of the missing link between Bottisham Lock and Fen Road, Lode with a suggestion for a low-level route, southeast side of the Bottisham Lode floodbank which is the route of the public footpath, where signs forbid cycling. It might be considered more visually acceptable. All parish councils are for the route, including the one of which he is a member.
The A14 is a very hostile, dangerous road for cycling.
Improvements to it, as well as broader changes to the national framework for cyclist crossings of major roads, are needed.
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 !
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.
Is this really the best that Edinburgh can do for the flagship national cycle network route 1 to get it to cross Clerk Street? You have to go through a pile of bins, on to the pavement to get round a barrier and then try and judge it right to cross the road, or use the nearby pedestrian crossing.
Southern stretch of Kew road is a busy road, wide enough for cycling provision, but none is provided - southbound has protection of a bus lane for a stretch but north bound has no protection for cyclists at all. This frequently leads to pavement cycling as per the photo.
Created by Andy Allan // 2 threads
The Fountain Roundabout is a major barrier to cycling around New Malden. It's a large, multi-lane roundabout with no cycling facilities (and poor pedestrian crossing provision too). Lying just to the south of New Malden High Street it's key to unlocking short journeys by bike to the town centre.
To investigate options to provide a safe, continuous route from St James Barton Roundabout to the top of Park Street.
Marlborough Street/Upper Maudlin Street/Perry Road/Park Row (known as the Scope Route) is the most desirable route for cyclists from the east of the city to the University, the Triangle, Clifton etc but is heavily trafficked with little cycle provision.
Research has identified three key perceptions that deter people from taking up cycling: lack of personal safety; inconvenience; poor image. Experience from countries in northern Europe shows conclusively that in order for cycling to become a mass activity attracting all ages and abilities these perceptions have to be tackled and potential cyclists must believe they will feel safe, valued and normal. Facilities are needed that form a coherent network, separate cyclists from fast, high volume traffic and offer them a high degree of priority and convenience both on main routes and local roads. The purpose of Bristol's 'Design Cycling' work programme is to create a network and that is convenient, safe and provides speedy access all over the city. A network which a 12 year old would feel comfortable using.
Part of the 2013 Bristol City Council LSTF proposals.
The cycle path crosses the soutbound exit from the M53 at Cheshire Oaks. The exit is light controlled for traffic as they enter the roundabout. This provides a safe time for cyclists to ride across the sliproad. However the lights are not visible to cyclist on the path and there is no light provided to advise cyclists when they can cross.
This makes it very difficult and dangerous for cyclists to know when they can safely cross. This would require no physical change to the road layout simply a new light to show cyclists when to cross.
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.
• 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.
The surface of this path is awful. It is very pot-holed, and it creates issues for cycles and pushchairs. And for people with visual impairments, it creates hazards as well.
It also needs the white lines changing/removing to avoid further serious injury - Someone has told me that they saw someone slip on the line and break their hip. The white lines are raised and have been repainted - they are slippy for cycle wheels. There is also concern that the white lines would be slippy for pedestrians when wet.