| Andover Rd Update |
Nov 2006 |
Spokes received proposals for cycle lanes between St John's roundabout and Buckingham Rd in October, we objected two two major elements. Firstly we objected to an overly complex design of toucan crossing combined with shared-use footway at the junction of Buckingham Rd. Secondly we objected to the width of the cycle lanes which, at their narrowest point we're only 1m wide - a whole 50cm narrower than the minimum recommended in Gov't guidance. WBC sent us revised proposals which removed the toucan crossing proposal, but persist with the narrow, and in our view dangerous, cycle lanes. We hope they can be persuaded to reconsider. You can find our letters to WBC on our consultations page,
Andover Rd, Old Newbury Hospital Sep 2004 |
|
Spokes, once again, finds itself indebted to the vigilance of a
local councillor for the reporting of information on a proposal to
alter the highway around the re-development of the old Newbury Hospital
site on Andover Rd.
When Spokes inspected the application it found no indication of any
highway works, and found grounds to comment on the scheme only on the
basis of lack of cycle parking provision. However, information received
suggested that a shared-use footway was being proposed for the highway
outside the development paid for by developer contributions. Spokes was
unable to obtain from the council any details about this, and thus
wrote to WBC objecting in principle to any provision which seeks to
reduce the priority and safety of cyclists by placing them in conflict
on the footway outside a development intended for aging and elderly
residents. |
|
| Greenham Road / St John's Road Roundabout |
Aug 2004 |
Without any warning the shared usage facilities through the underpasses of the Greenham Road roundaout have been removed. There are a number Spokes members whom regularly use the underpass and many other cyclists besides. Pat Tanner has written to the papers, Tony Vickers to the Council as well as an official letter from Spokes.
Spokes are asking the Council to account for the removal of the cyclists access to the underpasses and what the plans are for this area. Check back here for an update, due shortly.
| Cold Ash Chicanery |
Aug 2004 |
Any of you who have cycled through Cold Ash are likely to have come across the chicanes that adorn Cold Ash Hill. There are some very short cycle lanes that are often debris filled on the left side of the small traffic islands, and then a giveway sign. The giveway sign can be obscured by the debris, but the cycle lane leads to a false impression that the cyclist may have actually been put first and have priority.
In their current form the chicanes put the cyclist in danger from oncoming traffic that is negotiating the chicane, but also traffic going in the same direction. Spokes is providing consultation to the Council on its current proposals to improve the chicanes.
| Private Members Bill on Child Cycle Helmet Compulsion |
Apr 2004 |
We are all aware of the economic, health and environmental benefits of increased levels of cycling in West Berkshire, but Spokes believes that this bill will be counter-productive in any attempt to promote cycling.
The Government's own advisory board − the National Cycling Strategy Board (NCSB) − are against this proposal, as are the Cycle Touring Club and pro−cycling groups across the nation.
Spokes' agrees with the NCSB that "arguments which seek to present cycling as an inevitably dangerous or hazardous activity... risk prejudicing the delivery of those very benefits to health and the environment which cycling can deliver, and server to confuse the public of West Berkshire about the wider social and economic advantages if cycling".
Spokes promotes and supports the use of helmets by cyclist as a defensive cycling measure − and most amongst us and our families regularly use helmets − but we can not support compulsion by law. We note that Steven Norris considers this Bill to be an extremely unhelpful piece of legislation, and urges the DfT not to support it and to ensure that it is widely proposed. This is also the view of Spokes.
Take Action: Write to our local MP, David Rendel, and ask him to oppose Eric Martlew's Private Members' Bill which seeks to make cycle helmet wearing compulsory for children.
| St. Bart's Safe Routes To School |
Mar 2004 |
Spokes applauds the council in their attempts to address the safety issues associated with movements of vehicular traffic on roads surrounding St Bartholomew's school.
However, Spokes has grave reservations about the details of the proposed schemes, and extreme doubts that they will achieve the stated aim of safe routes to school for pupils of St Bartholomew's School.
The schemes do little to control the speed of motorised traffic, which is a particular problem on Enborne Road. The schemes do not address the safety of children cycling to school − and, in fact, seek to introduce street furniture likely to make the road-space less safe for pedestrians and cyclists.
We raised a strong objection to the Council and cllr Sally Hannon (Highways and Transportation) over this scheme. Safe Routes to School schemes are meant to start at the classroom level − to get the children involved; to promote and encourage how they think it will be possible to walk and cycle more often to school. Instead the Council have determined how children currently get to school and then to attempt to make that route safer!
Link to full article
The Lower Way cycle route, which was partly funded by Sustrans, is a good example of the problems that can arise when there is no consultation with local cyclists
Link to full article
| Newtown Road South |
Jan 2004 |
In January 2004 Spokes learned of the plan to introduce a shared-use footway cycling facility in Newtown Rd between St John's Rd and Monks Lane. Unfortunately WBC failed to consult Spokes on this scheme. By the time we heard of it (through the fortune of a local councillor informing us) the design was already fixed and the project was moving to implementation. Urgently Spokes sought a meeting with WBC to view and appraise the plans, and subsequently met with the engineer responsible for implementation. At the meeting it became apparent that the plans looked every bit as poor as we could have expected, and indeed in our view the scheme looked unsafe. Spokes expressed concern that:
- use of the shared-use facility required cyclists to cross the road where the facility changed between footways, between the east and west sides of the highway.
- the shared-use was to be constructed on a steep hill, the steepest section being placed on the east side of the road which has the most driveways.
- cycling down the hill (northwards) on the shared-use facility would be dangerous (a term we use with great reservation) owing to:
- the crossing of side roads at which the cyclist does not have priority (whereas the carriageway cyclist does!),
- crossing of many driveways, some of which have poor entrance visibility,
- the high velocity which a cyclist attains whilst travelling down a steep hill, and
- lack of separation from pedestrians.
- cyclists are placed at an inconvenient end point to rejoin the carriageway at both end of Newtown Rd, and in particular at St John's roundabout. And, most importantly:
- the scheme would reduce the safety and convenience for those cyclists who choose to remain on the carriageway.
The project engineer agreed with many of our concerns and told us that many residents, past whose property the shared-use footway would pass, had expressed extreme concern at the plan. We also pointed out that the shceme directly contradicted the statements on cycling saftey and proirity in the council's own Local Transport Plan. West Berkshire council ignored Spokes and the local residents and went ahead and implemented the scheme. Having appraised the route since its construction, Spokes finds that the implementation is as bad as we had anticipated, we cannot recommend or advise the use of this facility to cyclists, and in particular, we advise northbound cyclists to avoid using the shared-use facility for their personal safety.