Consultation watch!

Cut and pasted from pdf press release:

Sustrans press release

For immediate release

BATH AND NORTH EAST SOMERSET COMMUNITIES INVITED TO SHAPE THE FUTURE OF CYCLING

Using an innovative new website and a series of public events local residents will be able to share their ideas for new and improved cycling infrastructure. These ideas will help build the future of cycling in Bath and North East Somerset.

This work comes as part of a Sustrans project to design a new ‘Strategic Cycle Network for Bath and North East Somerset’ which the council have committed to invest significant future funding into developing. This recommendation will form part of the council’s ‘Transport Strategy and shape their vision for cycling’.

The website allows users to suggest their ideas for brand new or improved cycle routes over a map of Bath and North East Somerset.

Ian Barrett, South West Regional Director for Sustrans commented:

“I’m delighted to have this opportunity to work closely with the communities in Bath and North East Somerset and our partners at B&NES Council.’

“This project will ensure that we can reflect the demand for high quality cycle routes throughout the area and will create an ambitious vision for a network that will give more people the option to walk and cycle for every day trips.”

Users are invited to highlight specific points on the map that they feel should be improved or draw extended routes, all of which can be annotated to provide detailed suggestions.

Cllr Nigel Roberts, Bath and North East Somerset Council Cycling Champion added:

“Cycling represents a significant part of the Council's transport strategy, this audit is an important way of getting the views of cyclists and those who would like to cycle but currently don't.”

Sustrans will also host a series of public drop-in events through February to give people an opportunity to share their ideas in person.

These events will run from 1PM till 8PM on the following dates:

• 17th February Brunswick Room at the Guildhall, Bath.

• 20th February Millenium Hall, Chew Magna.

• 24th February Hollies Council Chamber, Radstock

• 28th February Royal British Legion, Keynsham

  The new interactive website is online at http://www.sustrans.org.uk/banescycling.

ENDS
For more information contact: Press Office 0207 7807 231 E-mail: press@sustrans.org.uk
Notes to editors

Sustrans is the charity that’s enabling people to travel by foot, bike or public transport for more of the journeys we make every day. It’s time we all began making smarter travel choices. Make your move and support Sustrans today. www.sustrans.org.uk

 

WGC Consultation (requires easy registration) No mention of safe cycling provision.

The proposal fails to address access from the east side of town and does nothing to improve safety on the fast gyratory road system adjacent the north of the site.

Beware of the loaded questions. Non residents can contribute. Ends March 10th

http://consult.welhat.gov.uk/portal/planning_policy/wgc_town_centre_north_spd/wgc_tcn_spd

 

 

Consultation on improvements around Kings Cross, London. 

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/streets/kingscross

Very disappointing! Closes on 24th March.

More details on Cyclescape.

A major project to change the roads in this area of Camden.

http://www.wearecamden.org/westendproject/

Tottenham Court Road and Gower Street (currently one-way in opposing directions) will be made two-way for all traffic, but with motor traffic excluded from TCR.

It's a bold scheme, and does represent an improvement for cycling, although I guess from an Embassy perspective we would have to question how genuinely inclusive it is. Proposals for Gower Street are just armadillos outside a 1.5m cycle lane on a road that will be pretty busy; for Tottenham Court Road it's sharing with buses (and possibly taxis) on what will be a very busy bus corridor, akin to Oxford Street. Not suitable for all, by any means.

Consultation closes Friday 18th July.

Hi,

The bank (RBS) which owns one side of North Street in Brighton is funding a scheme to make the area more pleasant to be in, with the aim of attracting more shoppers and attracting retailers who won't go bust immediately and leave the shops empty.

They have engaged Urban Movement to draw up plans, which can be downloaded from http://www.brightonbusiness.co.uk/htm/ni20140606.524392.htm

There were some consultation workshops today, but there isn't going to be a wide public consultation before it goes to the Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee of the council on July 1st. If it's agreed there, then there'll be a formal TRO consultation. They hope to start doing the work this autumn.

As the plans stand, there's no provision for cycling at all. This is a road which carries a huge volume of bus traffic, both ways, and where the shops have no rear access for loading. It's also the main route for emergency vehicles through town. It's not pleasant to cycle on at the moment and these proposals would make it marginally better by moving bus stops so that the buses don't have to stop directly opposite one another. But I don't think this proposal could be described as making a welcoming environment for cycling.

Does anyone have any ideas for things we could suggest?

 

Here's a biggy! http://wales.gov.uk/consultations/transport/active-travel-design-guidanc...

It looks quite good and even refers to the Crow Manual but I am not a specialist!

The Draft Bristol Cycling Strategy, available to download here.

At first glance, more promising than most (although that's not saying much). 

Consultation open until the 11th of August.

Couple of Cambridge Consultations at the moment, eerily similiar. I think there may be some kind of shared space zsar advising the council.

 

Tenison Road consultation http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/info/20051/transport_projects/469/cambridge_city_projects/4

3rd July to 11th August

In summary: a fantastically expensive local scheme, which ignores the elephant in the room that is Cambridge train station through-traffic. It cannot achieve it's aim, and is taking cash from other local improvements to do so.

 

Fen Road

http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/fenroad 21st Jul - 1st Sept

Area 3 Option D doesn't look too bad (have only skimmed so far). Other options seem to think that cyclists sharing space with trucks on a road with years of known serious speeding problems will improve things.

 

Chishold Trail / Chesterton Train station foot and cycle bridge

http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/info/20051/transport_projects/62/cambridge_science_park_station/2 by 28th July

 

Odd one this. Bridge is essential to Chisholm trail and access to new train station. This consultation mostly seems to be a bridge yes/no exercise: questions of colour and choice of functionally identical ramp options are irrelevant. Still important to respond to say yes bridge, as there is some local rumbling about damage to the Common.

Would advise anyone reponding to push for pedestrian/cycle separation, wide as possible bridge.

Double post. Seems to happen to me a lot on this forum.

I put the background on cyclescape as http://www.cyclescape.org/threads/1399 but I'd welcome any help with https://pad.riseup.net/p/bug-thi-response which closes on 21 July.

 

CS5 Inner: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/cs5-inner?cid=fs153

Oval Triangle: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/betterjunctions/oval/consult_view

http://www.norwich.gov.uk/YourCouncil/Consultations/CurrentConsultations... closes tomorrow (Wed 23 July). My comments (hope they're OK but I'm not going to get time to respond after this):

I lived in Norwich for years and still ride there occasionally to reach destinations for work and leisure. I have cycled for about 30 years but I do not enjoy riding in Tombland and Palace Street. They are on core desire lines for many journeys and rather awkward to avoid, so I welcome the general idea of improving this area.

However, I am disappointed that a narrow two-way cycleway with centre line is being proposed. This seems to be based on the discredited idea of dual provision: abandoning "experienced cyclists" to keep suffering the road (probably now with added "use the cycleway" abuse from motorists?) and a slower dangerous cycle track for everyone else. I utterly reject the implicit idea that "experienced cyclists" wouldn't use a decent cycleway if it was built and I urge you to show some ambition. I thought this was being funded by a grant with "Ambition" in its name?

As you know, a single 2.5m bidirectional track is too narrow to allow cycles to ride sociably side-by-side or overtake safely while passing oncoming cycles. A centre line is likely to become slippery when wet and riding on the right "salmon-style" makes it difficult for cycles to move safely to/from the all-traffic lanes if relative speeds/flows mean that would be a good move.

The best practice, illustrated on page 17 of Making Space For Cycling (available from www.MakingSpaceForCycling.org ) is for protected cycleways on each side of a road. There is definitely space for this on Tombland and if there was the will to reallocate space a little more on Palace Street, there would be room there too. In the current design, the biggest beneficiary seems to be pedestrian space (23% of space is reallocated to them) which seems a little odd for a project funded by a cycling grant when there is an obvious need for a bit more space for cycling than in these initial designs.

I think some attempt should be made to facilitate cycle access to/from Wensum Street and thereby to Anglia Square or to Colegate towards Marriott's Way. The FAQ calls this "the main route for both buses and cycles", so I'm surprised that turns to/from the cycleway are impossible in the proposed design.

I guess that riders may be meant to use the pedestrian crossings to leave the cycleway to turn down Wensum Street, which seems likely to surprise both walkers and motorists and therefore be an avoidable safety hazard. Riders not familiar with the area will probably not realise the turn into Wensum Street is impossible until beyond the courtesy crossings and bump down the kerb near the new T junction, which is a riskier movement. This would be remedied by the solutions described in Making Space for Cycling.

Cycles making the right turn into Palace Road should be protected primarily by a west-side cycleway continuing on the same level over a smooth-radius perpendicular crossing of the mouth of Wensum Street with priority, possibly combined with a pedestrian courtesy crossing, while riders continuing down Wensum Street are merged onto the all-traffic lane. Of course, in the interests of keeping traffic flowing, people should be allowed to ride salmon-style on the right around the corner if they wish and an opportunity to cross Tombland further south presents itself.

I agree with the cycleway being at an intermediate height but some drawings show frequent "rumble strips" of cobbles across the cycleway, while the rest of the surface seems to be some sort of small-block paving. Unless the aim is to deter most people from using the cycleway as some sort of "look, we built it and they still won't use it" demonstration, the cycleway should be a suitably-coloured Hot Rolled Asphalt 55/10, Asphalt Concrete 10 or something similarly smooth.

The bollards shown in some drawings appear too high to be positioned that close to the cycleway and would be a pedal-strike crash hazard. They should be moved further away or an alternative protection that can't hit pedals used.

The southern end of the cycleway appears to terminate on a shared-use surface at a corner of a non-perpendicular T-junction, with cycles needing to look through about 240-degrees simultaneously to see whether they need to give way to walkers or motors. That would be a dangerous junction layout. The cycleway should merge/demerge to/from the all-traffic lanes as an advisory cycle lane, with markings directing motors to give way.

There seems to be an error in the "What the area could look like" sheet where the "Cycle track" percentage is not included in the "Traffic movement" percentage. I hope you would agree that cycleway riders are vital to keeping traffic moving around Norwich and present them as such in future.

I hope that you will incorporate these comments to produce something a bit more ambitious and more useful to all cyclists.

The first of the new 'Quietways', in Southwark. 

Details here - http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200431/street_improvements/3571/quietway_2

Not especially inspiring, and could certainly do with removal of some of the things that make it needlessly difficult, like an excess of humps, and some narrow barriers that are being retained.

Closes in stages, but the earliest deadline is 25th August. 

Show your support for these segregated cycle lanes through central London. Big businesses are fighting against them. If the cycling groups don't rally their support, TfL may lose the roadspace for cyclists battle

 

North-South: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/northsouth

East-West: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/eastwest

 

 

A whole series of consultations for Stockport town centre.  (Beware: They are all quite depressing.)

If the embassy is able to put together a response (please, please, please!!!) it would be wonderful.  Closing deadline is 17th October 2014.

http://www.stockport.gov.uk/services/business/keyregenerationprojects/to...

701:  Puffin crossing converted to Toucan crossing, with a short bit of shared-use pavement.
702:  Puffin crossing converted to Toucan crossing, with a short bit of shared-use pavement.
703:  A new 3m central reservation, converting a road which is currently very hostile to cycling to a dual carriageway also hostile to cycling.  Described as a measure to "enhance cycle provision"(!)
704:  Some new 20mph limits.

402:  Multi-stage Toucan crossings galore, between bits of shared use pavement.  ASLs retained.

201:  Puffin crossing converted to Toucan crossing, with a short bit of shared-use pavement.
202:  ASLs everwhere; multi-stage crossings; A Toucan crossing with a bit of shared-use pavement; A one-way street converted to two-way with a strange cycle lane crossover bit at the Booth Lane / Mercian Way junction.
203:  Shared cycle/foot path - could be ok, but there aren't many details given.
204:  Toucan crossing converted to multi-stage, with a bit of shared-use pavement.  Long central median added, wasting lots of space.
205:  A fairly large 20 mph zone.

901:  Some new lighting in the park.
902:  Shared-use pavements, retaining existing ASLs.
903:  Widened roundabout exit for buses (but will also make it easier to drive through more quickly.)  New toucan crossing and shared use pavements.
904:  New Toucan crossing with some bits of shared-use pavement.
905:  Footway narrowed to make space for an extra lane.

101:  Entry to roundabout widened to add an extra lane.
 

...I'm still working through the rest of it, but it's not good so far...

Camden consulting on extending the Royal College Street scheme across Camden Road, up towards Kentish Town. 

Similar type of proposals as original RCS scheme, with 'light segregation' in the form of armadillos. Some issues, I suspect, but an interesting approach to get across Camden Road.

https://consultations.wearecamden.org/culture-environment/royal-college-...

Consultation closes 3rd October 2014.

The 'upgrade' to CS2, which, with CS2x, should form a segregated route (of varying quality) all the way from Aldgate to Stratford.

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/cs2-upgrade

Should have been properly the first time, of course. Plenty of detail to quibble about, but a big step in the right direction. 

Consultation closes 2nd November.

TfL "improvement" of pedestrian and cycle facilities at a roundabout in Richmond upon Thames.

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/streets/a316-manor-circus

The design fails on many levels, but criticising it on its own terms, the idea is to put in staggered toucans instead of the current straight-over zebras. The "pandas" that are in the offing as part of TSRDG 2015, may be a better solution for active travel. Indeed. some have already appeared

http://deceasedcanine.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/panda-crossing.html

Consultation runs from 2 Oct 2014 to 30 Nov 2014

Hello. Hackney council have a ten-year transport plan up for consultation until Friday. You can read it here. The cycling plan is one of the daughter documents and that is here. It is nearly 100 pages long and quite a lot to take in. I read it and then blogged about it where I've picked out some relevant bits here. Please do reply to the consultation if you have the time. If you don't have the time to read it then he things to concentrate on are, I think..... The council plans to use the hierarchy of provision on all roads in the borough. They should not use it for main routes that are shared with buses and lorriesThe plan confirms that most people cycling are seriously injured or killed on the main roads in the borough. Their plan of prviding "clear space for cyclists" is too vague, it must be protected space, as demanded by the LCC centrally. Agree that the council need to look at each main road on a case-by-case basis (two way tracks might work somewhere like Victoria Park Road, for example, but not the A10)The council look to building 4.5m wide bus lanes for people cycling to share with buses. Cycles and buses must be separated on main roadsHackney should lobby TFL for protected routes on their routes, such as the A10 (the road with the highest number of KSIs in Hackney)The proposed West End - iCity corridor along Old Street and Hackney Road must have protected lanes.

A bit last minute, but I've been asked to share Northamptonshire's consultation on transport strategy in three towns - Kettering, Corby and Wellingborough.

http://www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/en/councilservices/Transport/TP/Pages/Town-Transport-Strategies-Consultation.aspx

Not much concrete stuff in there on cycling - if anyone is local or interested, consultation closes on 27th October.

Suffolk County Council have released preliminary plans for reworking of the busiest junction in Sudbury, Suffolk.

The plans were put to an unelected body called the Sudbury Steering Group which, of course, has no cycling campaigners in it's make up and over the course of a two hour meeting deemed themselves capable and able to recommend two of the options as suitable to be taken to the next stage which is traffic modelling.

There is no public consultation on these plans as it is deemed too expensive to carry out, indeed only after I hassled the officials of the group were these plans published. You can see the plans http://www.babergh.gov.uk/assets/Uploads-BDC/Economy/Economic-Developmen...

Note that the low quality images in the pdfs show almost no cycling infrastructure at all and the text merely mentions shared paths and Advanced Stop Lines. The Suffolk County Council Cycling Strategy (sic) supposedly adheres to https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/manual-for-streets which states that shared paths should be avoided where there are high levels of pedestrian movements, yet most of the paths on these junctions fail this criteria being very busy most of the day.

Sudbury has little in the way of existing cycling infrastructure and a traffic system which everyone agrees is broken. Furthermore a 2009 study revealed that the potential for modal shift in Sudbury is huge, 40% of peak hour car trips are less than 2km and 60% less than 5km. Their report concludes one major element of the solution to Sudburys traffic woes is modal shift.

But whilst SCC are delighted to spend £21 million in Ipswich improving junctions, adding cycling infrastructure (albeit apparantly substandard) they have stated there is no money to spend on similar improvements in Sudbury, and as the lack of consultation on this junction shows they wish to avoid a debate about it as well.
I have the support of local Green, Lib Dem and Labour politicians but the Tories rule the roost here.

So how do we get SCC and/or the unelected Steering Group to enable proper peer review of the plans and ensure that Sudbury gets high quality cycling Infrastructure and not just shared paths which by their own standards fail to meet standards? We will keep up the press and social media pressure but we really need a massive policy change by the County Council and they seem to happily ignore any criticism.

Hackney Councils Wick Road consultation ends on Friday. I've written about it here and Rachel Aldred has here with the consultation available here. Would be great if as many people respond as possible.