St. Bart's UnSafe Routes to School

In the depths of last winter we became aware of West Berkshire Council's plan to make alterations to Enborne Rd with the aim of making it a safer environment for children to get to their school. We supported the council's aim but were surprised at the details on the proposal since they appeared to us to make the road a less safe place. We submitted comments to WBC during the public consultation many of which, we later learned, were echoed by the comments of local residents. The comments were ignored and the design left unchanged despite the admission by the WBC officer responsible that the scheme would increase the risks for cyclists. The scheme was passed unchanged and construction began in spring.

We felt that three major elements of the scheme required major revision because of the potential we saw for them to increase in danger to the very road users they were intended to protect:

Enborne Rd Carriageway Narrowing

Our comments claimed the proposed road narrowings on Enborne Rd west of St Bart's school would not achieve their aim (of reducing road speeds), and would, in fact, only act as an endorsement for on-street parking which causes significant difficulties for pedestrians trying to make progress along Enborne Rd – we have been proven correct. On street parking has increased, many locals viewing the build-outs themselves as a form of protection for their cars parked around them. This, of course, causes greater problems for cyclists as they are forced even more into the centre of the carriageway. Given that the road narrowings are unlikely to be removed in the short term, Spokes proposes the narrowings are augmented with advisory cycle lanes to give motorised road users the message that they may meet cyclists at these narrowings. Such road markings will heighten the impression of a narrow carriageway which should aid the speed reduction objective.

Buckingham Rd Mini-roundabout

We submitted comments which claimed that installing a mini roundabout would not protect the school children trying to cycle and walk along Buckingham Rd, trying to pass Fifth Rd - we have been proven correct, the scheme is now successfully conveying cars at greater speeds into and out of the mouth of Fifth Rd.

Enborne Rd Central Pedestrian Refuge

More than the other aspects of the scheme, we were concerned about the proposal to place a central pedestrian refuge in the centre of Enborne Rd a short way west of The Lion public house. We wrote:

“The children walking to school, whom safe routes to school are supposed to protect, do not cross the road here, they generally cross the road in the immediate vicinity of the school at a natural desire line, a pedestrian refuge placed some way away is unlikely to change this behaviour.

However, the most dangerous aspect of this proposal is that it will force vehicular traffic towards the edge of the carriageway and into the road-space which is often occupied by cyclists - in fact the introduction of an island will make it impossible for the driver of a motorised vehicle to pass a cyclist safely, and this imposed conflict will increase the probability of collisions - accidents.

A more significant question, though, is to whom is this measure intended to provide benefit? The road users it seeks to protect are pedestrians, and school children in particular, yet few pedestrians need to cross the road here. The place where pedestrians need most protection from vehicular traffic is at the junction of Enborne Road with Buckingham Road, yet all that is proposed at this place is a waiting restriction.”

Brake HARD! This motorist realizes at the last moment that there’s a cyclist in front passing the island, a common occurrence.

It gives Spokes no pleasure at all to be proven 100% correct about poor designs. Spokes members have reported instances of unsafe manoeuvres being performed by motorists in misguided attempts to overtake cyclists whilst approaching the installation.

The risks the central island creates could be reduced through the use of a marked cycle lane past the island, as in this example where signing shows motorists that cyclists are to be expected on the carriageway at the approach to a central island.

Moreover, walking school children, amongst other pedestrians, continue to cross the road where they feel it is safe and convenient - not WBC - opposite the school, where visibility is much better and walkers need only cross the road once – the very place where Spokes indicated would be ideal for a pedestrian crossing. Surely the highways engineers understand “desire lines”?

We urge WBC to review their unsafe installations with a view to removing the central pedestrian refuge before the occurrence of our worst fears, an incident with serious consequences.