Cyclists in towns need to be able to go everywhere

Cyclists in towns like Newbury and Thatcham ride everywhere, along all roads and across all junctions. Although cycle schemes which aim to "funnel" cyclists onto particular routes do have a value, they will never remove the need for cyclists to be able to use all parts of the road network.

The reasons why cyclists need to be able to use all the standard road network include:

1. The start and end of almost all cycle journeys is on the standard road network
2. The standard road network frequently offers the most direct and convenient route.

So all of the road network must be suitable for cyclists. In particular, it is essential that junctions on the standard road network are suitable for cyclists. Diversionary routes will never be enough. Junction design should take into account that the main direction of cycle flow may be different from the main direction of flow for motor vehicles.

Reduce the speed and volume of motor traffic

The most effective way of providing for cyclists is to reduce the speed and volume of motor traffic. Traffic speeds can be reduced by:

1. Greater enforcement of existing speed limits
2. Changing social attitudes to speeding, so that speeding becomes socially unacceptable in the same way that drink-driving now is.
3. Reducing existing speed limits.

Traffic volume can be reduced by:

1. Provision and promotion of other means of transport: public transport, park-and-ride, - and cycling.
2. Land use policies which reduce the demand for travel.
3. Bans and restrictions on motor traffic - and not just in shopping streets.

Provision for cyclists means more than just cycle facilities

Cyclists need more than just cycle facilities. They need a cycle-friendly road environment. Because cyclists need to be able to use the entire ordinary road network, the entire ordinary road network needs to be suitable for cycling. This means that roads and road schemes should always be designed with the needs of cyclists in mind.

This is not technically difficult, and need not necessarily require extra money. It simply means avoiding features of road design which cyclists find difficult, unpleasant, or dangerous, and replacing them with more cycle-friendly equivalents. 

• Avoid high-volume, high-speed roundabouts and circulatory schemes. (e.g. the junction of Newtown Rd with St Johns Rd and Andover Rd). Consider using traffic signals instead.
• Avoid multi-lane roads, especially lanes that join on the left and left-turn-only lanes.
• Avoid measures which make the road so narrow that cycles cannot be overtaken safely, particularly when designing traffic calming schemes and when extending the pavement into the road.    

Go for quality rather than quantity

When cycle facilities are to be provided, we believe it is more effective to spend a given quantity of money on a smaller number of high-quality schemes rather than on a larger number of lower-quality schemes.

The West Berkshire area already has a large number of low-quality cycle facilities. Many simply represent a waste of money. We do not want our local councils to waste any more. In particular, most shared-use footway schemes are unsuitable and of poor quality, and as a result are poorly used.

It would be a mistake to aim for "x km of cycle routes" each year, since this would encourage quantity at the expense of quality.

Cycle routes should be capable of being cycled on

Remarkably, many "cycle routes" cannot actually be cycled on for their entire length. A cycle route which requires a cyclist to dismount is not a cycle route. (For example, the route to avoid the pedestrianised Bartholomew Street route actually crosses the pedestrian zone itself, so a dismount is still required, and Sustrans’ own National Cycle Network Route 4 requires cyclists to cross the high-speed hazardous Hambridge Rd carriageway from shared-use footway to canal-side path unaided).

In addition to be being capable of cycled on, a good cycle route should be physically convenient to use. This means that:

1. Cycle routes must have a smooth road surface (which need not always mean tarmac).
2. The cyclist should not be asked to dismount at places along the route. (e.g. National Cycle Route 4 requires cyclists to dismount at the junction of London Rd and Lower Way).
3. The route should have suitable gradients, curvatures, widths and visibility to accommodate a steady pace of 30km/h and to allow two bikes, or a bike and a pedestrian, to pass easily. 4. The route should require as few stops, turns and awkward manoeuvres as possible.
4. A good cycle route should be capable of attracting cyclists to use it, and a convenient cycle route will be more attractive than an inconvenient one.

Some cyclists will always prefer to use the road

It should be recognized that there will always be cyclists who will prefer to use the road rather than an off-road cycle facility.

The provision of a cycle facility should never compromise such cyclists. In particular, provision of an alternative route for cyclists should never be regarded as an excuse for rendering the original road or junction unsuitable for cyclists.

Cycleways should be as convenient as the main carriageway

(By cycleway we mean a segregated cycle path alongside a road, possibly shared with pedestrians).

Where cycleways are provided alongside roads, the cyclists using them should have the same (or greater) priority at junctions with side roads as is enjoyed by traffic using the main carriageway. Cyclists should not be penalized for using a cycleways. This means that cycleways alongside roads must have priority over side roads. This can be reinforced by continuing the cycleway across side roads at a raised level.

Cycle lanes on the carriageway (as opposed to cycleways) should simply continue straight across a junction with a side road, to emphasize their existing priority over side roads, and perhaps be further emphasized by surface coating.

Cycleways alongside roads can be valuable if they are of high quality, but can be useless if they are not

Shared paths with pedestrians have additional requirements

Consider personal security on quiet cycle routes

Maintenance matters

Cyclists are more sensitive to a poor road surface than the occupants of motor vehicles or pedestrians. This means that standards of road maintenance are particularly important to cyclists.

A poorly-maintained road surface is at the very least uncomfortable, and can be dangerous. A pothole or badly-filled trench can be enough to throw a rider off their bicycle, possibly into the path of a following motor vehicle.

Particular attention should be paid to the edges of the carriageway, since this is where cyclists ride for most of the time. Unfortunately this is also the part of the carriageway where most of the hazards tend to be - in particular, sunken or badly- maintained drain covers.