What would you do here?

It looks like a street at least as wide as Groningerstraat in Assen. That looks like this:

Junctions can be done like this:

It’s possible to have a good mix of different things which make up a direct route, with the style changing as the amount of space changes, as seen in the first video here:

Attempting to put in segregated facilities on a street that narrow with so many junctions, parked cars, bus stops and so on is bound to result in the sort of rubbish that give cycle facilities a bad name. Poor cycle facilities are not a step in the direction of good infrastructure but actually make conditions worse for cyclists by reallocating space from pedestrians and cyclists to motor vehiclres (which is why traffic engineers are so keen on them) and force cyclists into dangerous positions.

I see the usual advocates of segregation at all costs have popped up and suggested door-zone cycle paths and half width gutter cycle lanes. If this site is to have any credibility whatsoever in advocating good quality cycle infrastructure  then it really does need to take a strong line against the c***p.

What you need to be looking at first are measures at the top of the mode hierarchy. You should challenge the policy of exempting any A roads from the 20mph limit - it is hardly the A19 and exactly the kind of mixed use environment that benefits most from speed reduction.

Next you need to look at junction treatments. The roundabout at the junction of front street needs a much bigger island with a narrow circulating carriageway to reduce traffic speeds. The roundabout at Beech Road could be ammended to sontinental geometry:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/165240/244921/244924/TAL_9-97/

or just use google maps to look at the shape of roundabouts in NL:

http://g.co/maps/gxehm

It needs the approach arms to be single lane and perpendicular (rather than tangential). A single lane circulating lane. All this acts to slow down the traffic and is just as nescessery for pedestrian and cycle-paths crossing the entry and exit arms as it is for cyclists on the carriageway. 

The traffic light junctions look to be fairly cycle friendly, with ASLs but without the dangerous kerk hugging approach lanes that encourage cyclists to overtake on the wrong side and get left hooked by turning traffic.

Next you need to look at road space reallocation - and without reallocating space any cycle facilities are bound to be worse than useless. And I don't mean reallocating space from pedestrians either.

Removing on-street parking is the obvious first step, and an absolute precondition to any form of segregation. You should never ride in the door zone - ie anywhere within 1.5m of a parked car - and therefore never place or advocate a cycle lane or path that requires cyclists to endager themselves by riding in the door zone. There simply isnt the width on that road to allow for 2m for a parking bay + 1.5m buffer + 2m for the absolute minimum needed for a one-way cycle facility and still leave enough space for two-way motor traffic. Even if you do take out the parking you have to ensure that any restriction will be enforced. If someone parks in a cycle lane then the cyclist has to give way to following traffic before they can get past bus stops present the same problem but it depends how frequent the service is.

Only when you have reduced the speed limit, treated the junctions, and cleared the road of parked cars should you start to contemplate segregated facilities - and only if you can allocate sufficient space - ie at least the 2m in each direction that cyclists need to make progress. I would imagine that the only way of achieving this would be to remove the centre line and paint a continuous 2m wide advisory cycle lane along each side of the road.  Wide vehicles passing each other on the main carriageway would have to temporarily encroach the cycle lane, but that is much much better than reducing the cycle lane width thus reallocating road space from cyclists to motors.

You should certainly not contemplate a 2-way cycle facility on one side of the road. These are very much more dangerous than with flow paths as cyclists are approching the junctions from an unexpected direction.

But one section of that road has a school & park on one side, and houses on the other: a fast straight road (because of the parking restrictions) with potentially lots of kids crossing it looks quite dangerous. A 20 mph speed limit at least round the school, backed up with road surfacing has got to be the first priority. That then eliminates the need for  elaborate segregation and should also benefit local residents. 

Otherwise it does look quite tricky along some of its length & it might make a good example to consider at the policy bash