Policy Bash: Policy Points

NB These are DRAFT NOTES ONLY and are currently being developed


With regards CEoGB Helmet Policy, it was decided that ‘Pro-Choice’ was the wrong wording due to the close connection with other, more emotive campaigns.

Although we understand why people feel compelled to wear bicycle helmets in today’s roads environments, we are an evidence led organisation opposed to compulsion. We strive to create a cycling [and walking] environment where the wearing of safety equipment is deemed unnecessary.


Overall, we support the enabling of utility cycling and increased subjective safety for all bicycle riders

We support the concept of shared responsibility

We support the concept of Network –

Prioritisation of cycle traffic over motor traffic

We encourage the creation of a strategic route network
Main desire lines with high quality provision (‘Quality Cycle Corridors’) and minor roads

We support the designing out of conflict between transport modes
Aim for Duty of Care – the more nice the transport mode, the greater the responsibility

Permeability: Eliminate rat runs
One way streets with proper contraflow cycling - increase cycle and pedestrian access, restrict the access/egress points for motor vehicles
Oppose gyratory networks

Sustainable safety (explain with ref to strict liability and duty of care)

The more ethical the mode of transport, the greater the priority it is afforded

Bus lanes - motorcycle access? Adds complexity of movement
Bus lanes - should they be removed to fit bicycle infrastructure? Will that reduce capacity on the roads?

We support one standard of infrastructure / facility for ALL bicycle users
They must be safe enough for kids, good enough for racers

E-bikes? Mobility scooters? Emerging technologies
Transport integration - bikes on public transport / private transport
national bike hire - ovfiets
bike hubs (Manc / Leeds / Haywards Heath)
We support brompton hire at rail stations
We support proper consultation and 'localism' (parents' groups, pedestrians ,  biz)

Shared use
eg pedestrianised shopping areas
In favour of cycling in ped areas as long as it is for access only. There must be a clear, marked, quality through route network elsewhere.

Purpose of street needs to be established

the visually impaired don't like - remedial work suddenly required
still v wide at northern reach so feels fast
Need to reduce capacity. It was felt that the concept seems to have been carried out in reverse order where the treatment was carried out with a hope of traffic volume and speed reduction when it should have been vice versa thereby not causing so much damage to the expensive materials used.

New Road, Brighton - works because access/capacity has been seriously curtailed

Shared space as a political libertarian pet - the deregulation of space
The difficult questions about priorities for shared space / the wider environment:
1) traffic reduction
2) networks for pedestrians/cyclists
3) function of place

TRUNK ROADS - decent universal cycle provision.

The following points were raised:
There are many bridleways and footpaths that have been basically severed by the dualing of trunk roads to the point that they have become motorways in all but name. It was felt that a consistant segregated network along major trunk roads would help link off road routes.
An example was given - A24 (Worthing) where it is impossible to cycle unless an experienced cyclist and even then it is a far from pleasurable experience (70mph dual carriageway with 60mph sections with speed cameras at junctions). It cuts through the South Downs providing the potential for a flatter cycle route linking a seaside town to the South Downs Way as well as the towns & villages north of the Downs. At the moment, it is very unpleasant for anyone wishing to cycle north from Worthing unless it is over the Downs on a mountain bike.
Highways Agency occasionally approaches local cycle campaign groups to consult on creating some sort of route alongside their dual carriageways but these are usually barely converted pavements and would be a quality unfit for purpose.

A decent segregated route could have the width to take a van wishing to carry out maintenance work to either the cycle route or the main carriageway.