Our response to the ‘Cycleway between Sutton High Street and Colliers Wood – proposals in the St Helier area’ informal consultation

Our response to the informal consultation ‘Cycleway between Sutton High Street and Colliers Wood – proposals in the St Helier area’, as submitted to Sutton Council on 3 November 2019, is detailed here. The response is also available as a pdf document (4 MB): Sutton to Colliers Wood Cycleway (St Helier area) consultation response from Get Sutton Cycling.


This response to the Cycleway between Sutton High Street and Colliers Wood – proposals in the St Helier area informal public consultation (9 October 2019 to 4 November 2019) has been prepared by Charles Martin on behalf of Get Sutton Cycling. Get Sutton Cycling represents the London Cycling Campaign in Sutton.

Summary of response 

There are many positive elements in the detail of the Cycleway project in the St Helier area (Figure 1), a project that will provide investment for local improvements so that residents and visitors can enjoy a cleaner and healthier environment.

The constructive aspects include:

  • the retention of separate walking and cycling paths on both of the traffic-free links (i.e. partial separation on the link between Robertsbridge Road and Wrythe Lane, and full separation on the link between Wrythe Lane and Rosehill Park West/Grennell Road). The benefits of the segregated approach are clear from the feedback to the recently opened New Malden to Raynes Park path in Kingston (Go Cycle project).
  • the proposal to establish 20 mph speed limits on residential roads in the Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area. It would, nevertheless, be useful to have evidence in support of the claim, given in the introduction to the Cycleway consultation, which suggests that a 20 mph maximum speed limit will result in a reduction in the volume of non-local through traffic in the area. To ensure that non-local through traffic in the area is reduced, a ‘low traffic neighbourhood’ approach is recommended. It is noted that ‘Stavordale Road area – speed reduction measures’ is a Local Implementation Plan (LIP) funded scheme for 2019/20, carried forward to 2020/21.

Despite these positive elements, there are some aspects associated with the proposed Cycleway project in the St Helier area that could benefit from a review. For example, it would be welcome to see:

  • provision of high-quality links to connect the Cycleway with St Helier Hospital and the David Weir Leisure Centre [1]. Although the route alignment passes within a few hundred metres of both of these important amenities, it is disappointing to note that no provision for links to these key destinations are proposed.
  • a new, updated, design for the proposed the crossing at the Bishopsford Road (A217), that would reduce the likelihood of conflict between pedestrians, cyclists and motorists, and offer a facility that anticipated a significant increase in cycle flows on the Cycleway alignment.
  • the opportunity being taken to ‘future-proof’ the junctions at Bishopsford Road and Wrythe Lane by incorporating an element of high-quality cycle provision along sections of these busy roads in the vicinity of the Cycleway intersections.

With the publication of new cycle route quality criteria (TfL, May 2019), there is now a requirement for all new cycle route proposals to be assessed against a number of interrelated Cycle Route Quality Criteria. These interrelated criteria help determine whether the proposed interventions will result in conditions that create an environment that is appropriate for cycling to be mixed with general traffic. Consequently, it would be very helpful for quality criteria assessments to be reported by the council as part of all future consultations. 

SuttonToColliersWoodCycleway_StHelierArea_01_Route

Figure 1: Plan of the Colliers Wood to Sutton Cycleway, St Helier area section (LB of Sutton)

St Helier section of Cycleway | OpenStreetMap

St Helier section of Cycleway | Google Streetview

St Helier section of Cycleway | Streetmap

Full consultation response

1: Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area – proposed 20 mph speed limit zone

SuttonToColliersWoodCycleway_StHelierArea_02_StavordaleRoad_20mphSpeedLimit_crop

Figure 2: Plan of Stavordale Road area – proposed 20 mph zone (LB of Sutton)

Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area | OpenStreetMap

Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area | Google Streetview

Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area | Streetmap

Do you support the introduction of a 20mph speed limit zone? 

Yes

Please use this box for any additional comments on this proposal

The introduction of 20 mph speed limit for the Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area (Figure 2) is welcomed. However, it would be useful to have evidence in support of the claim that a 20 mph speed limit, in isolation, will reduce the volume of non-local traffic passing through the area, particularly on Robertsbridge Road (noting that bus S1 is routed along this road). It is likely that Robertsbridge Road is used by non-local traffic so as to avoid traffic signals at the Middleton Road intersection with Bishopsford Road and at Rose Hill roundabout. Through motor traffic is more likely to be discouraged by taking a ‘low traffic neighbourhood’ approach to the area [2]. As a minimum requirement, and in addition to signage, physical speed reduction measures such as full-width, sinusoidal, profile speed humps (suitable for buses at low speeds) need to be provided to reinforce the 20 mph speed limit. 

It is noted that ‘Stavordale Road area – speed reduction measures’ is a Local Implementation Plan (LIP) scheme for 2019/20 and 2020/21 [3], and therefore it is presumed that the proposed 20 mph zone will be funded from the LIP rather than from the Cycleway budget. 

Although it is recognised that the route alignment of the Cycleway only includes a short section of Robertsbridge Road (around 10 metres or so), and that traffic levels here are relatively low in absolute terms (although inappropriately high, in relation to residential population), additional interventions to facilitate safe and comfortable cycling along the length of Robertsbridge Road, and so provide a far better link between the David Weir Leisure Centre and the proposed Cycleway, would be appropriate.

The carriageway width on Robertsbridge Road is constrained, kerbside parking is extensive, there are few passing places, and speed-cushions (which can de-stabilise cycles) litter the carriageway. (On the latter point, full-width speed humps with a sinusoidal profile would be preferred). The consequence of all this is that there is potential for conflict between those cycling and those driving, including the propensity for motorists to drive towards, or tailgate, cyclists.

Options to improve on this situation include the construction of a two-way cycle track adjacent to the east side of Robertsbridge Road. There is plenty of space for this, given that the east side of the road is ‘St Helier Open Space’. It is recognised, though, that for a cycle track to be constructed here some realignment of the fencing adjacent to the leisure centre would also be necessary. The footway on Robertsbridge Road (noting that a footway only exists on the west side of the road), would benefit from improvements too, as there are several sloping vehicle crossings here that have excessive crossfall gradients.

Alternatively, the installation of a bus gate at some point along Robertsbridge Road would ensure Robertsbridge Road was returned to its residents. Depending on the location of the bus gate, other filtering in the area may also be necessary. Re-routing the bus along the parallel Bishopsford Road (arguably a more appropriate road) would be an obvious option to avoid the requirement of a bus gate on Robertsbridge Road. 

To complete access to the David Weir Leisure Centre, the provision of a vastly upgraded walking and cycling path, preferably in the form of a ‘walking and cycling link’ (Figure 6), would make a welcomed replacement to the existing narrow, poorly accessible path that currently links the arena with Robertsbridge Road and the surrounding area (see Figure 3). It is rather ironic that access to the former Sutton Arena, renamed to celebrate the successes of David Weir at the London 2012 Paralympic Games, can still be so difficult for users of non-standard cycles.

It is unfortunate that neither the consideration for the installation of a bus gate on Robertsbridge Road, or the construction of an adjacent cycle-track, either of which would facilitate an improved link with the David Weir Leisure Centre, have been included as part of this project or at this stage of the consultation.

Our recommendations for the Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area:

  • In addition to introducing a 20 mph speed limit zone for the Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge area, consider taking a ‘low traffic neighbourhood’ approach
  • Monitor, and report on, traffic flows on Robertsbridge Road before and after the introduction of 20mph (to quantify any reduction in traffic volume)
  • Consider methods of delivering a high-quality link between the Cycleway alignment, within the Stavordale Road / Robertsbridge Road area, and the David Weir Leisure Centre (to include a ‘walking and cycling link’ (Figure 6)) between Robertsbridge Road and the arena entrance (Figure 3)
SuttonToColliersWoodCycleway_StHelierArea_03_RobertsbridgeRoad

Figure 3: View of path linking Robertsbridge Road (near Stavordale Road) with the David Weir Leisure Centre. This is closest access point to the David Weir Leisure centre from the proposed alignment of the Sutton to Colliers Wood Cycleway (photo 30 January 2019). Open Street Map | Google Streetview
The guardrail barriers had been installed in late 2018, early 2019, following concerns expressed by a local resident relating to the possibility of children running from the recreation area out on to the road (Robertsbridge Road, essentially residential, but used as a cut-through). To resolve this issue, and at the same time improve access by cycle, the path could have been redesigned as a ‘walking and cycling link’ (Figure 6). Unfortunately, this was not considered, and the easy option of simply installing chicane barriers was signed off by the St Helier, The Wrythe and Wandle Valley local committee. At least the waste bin, which had been located on the path (just in front of where the left hand barrier is located in this image) was moved to one side!

2: (a) Bishopsford Road – New signalised crossing to provide a safer crossing point; (b) Between Bishopsford and Newstead Walk – New path to link to the new crossing point 

SuttonToColliersWoodCycleway_StHelierArea_04_BishopsfordRoad

Figure 4: Plan of proposed signalised crossing for Bishopsford Road (LB of Sutton)

Bishopsford Road (Malmesbury Road and Newstead Walk) | OpenStreetMap

Bishopsford Road (Malmesbury Road and Newstead Walk) | Google Streetview 

Bishopsford Road (Malmesbury Road and Newstead Walk) | Streetview

Do you support the new crossing on Bishopsford Road to assist pedestrians and cyclists across the road?

Not sure. (Support a crossing, but would prefer an improved design).

Please use this box for any additional comments on this proposal 

The estimated Annual Average Daily Flow (AADF) for all motor vehicles on Bishopsford Road (A217), as reported by the DfT, is approximately 14,000 [4]. For the 600-metre section of Bishopsford Road between Rose Hill roundabout and Middleton Road, there are currently no official crossing points suitable for cycling. Consequently, residents living in this area of St Helier wishing to cycle towards Morden, currently either need to navigate around the six-junction Rose Hill roundabout to the south (where some out-dated, incomplete, infrastructure exists [5]), or use the busy Middleton Road to the north. Therefore, a new crossing for Bishopsford Road, adjacent to Newstead Walk path and Malmesbury Road (London Borough of Merton), is very welcome as this will reduce the barrier effect of Bishopsford Road and help join the two communities situated on either side of the road.

However, the proposed design of the new signalised, shared pedestrian and cycle crossing at this location (Figure 4) appears to have several limitations, including the potential to create conflict between cyclists and pedestrians. At the very least, there would be the expectation for this signalised crossing to be a parallel cycle and pedestrian crossing (rather than the proposed shared crossing) on a full-width raised table [6]. A much better, and preferred, option would be for the construction of a signalised stand-alone cycle crossing on a direct alignment between Newstead Walk and Malmesbury Road.

Limitations of the proposed crossing design include vulnerability for those on foot, who will be required to mix with cyclists on a section of footway on the west side of the crossing, as well as on the crossing itself; vulnerability for those cycling southbound on Malmesbury Road to access the crossing due to the potential conflict with motorists turning on to Malmesbury Road from Bishopsford Road; vulnerability for cyclists and pedestrians when riders, who are cycling on Bishopsford Road (north or south), wish to join the new path to Newstead Walk but find their access blocked by people waiting to cross the road. This latter situation could create a particularly dangerous situation for a rider, because the circumstance could result in them needing to perform an emergency stop on road carry large volumes of fast moving traffic in a constrained-width carriageway. 

Therefore, the preferable option would be for the Newstead Walk path (possibly as a ‘walking and cycling link’ (Figure 6)) to be routed so that it aligned directly with Malmesbury Road, and for Malmesbury Road to be closed to motor traffic at its intersection with Bishopsford Road (but to include a gap for cycling), and for a signal-controlled crossing to be constructed between the newly aligned Newstead Walk and the filtered entrance to Malmesbury Road. All conflict would be removed, and a robust, highly visible, cycling asset would be created.

Ideally, the scheme design for the Bishopsford Road crossing would additionally incorporate sections of segregated paths along Bishopsford Road to future-proof the infrastructure for a subsequent upgrade to provide dedicated cycling infrastructure along the entire length of Bishopsford Road [7].

Our recommendations for the proposed Bishopsford Road crossing:

  • As a minimum requirement, provide a parallel pedestrian / cycle crossing on Bishopsford Road on a full-width raised table
  • Consider the introduction of a signalised stand-alone crossing on Bishopsford Road to be directly aligned between Newstead Walk and Malmesbury Road, and for this to include a point closure, with cycle gap, at the point of entry with Malmesbury Road
  • Ensure the final design of the crossing at Bishopsford Road facilitates ease of manoeuvre in all directions by all types of cycle
Do you support a new path to link the new crossing on Bishopsford Road to Newstead Walk? 

Yes

Please use this box for any additional comments on this proposal

A key consideration here is that the design of the path’s interface with Newstead Walk ensures highly visible, and robust, access and egress between Newstead Walk and Bishopsford Road. A similar link in nearby Peterborough Road has often had access restricted due to inconsiderate parking. (For more on this see Peterborough Road cycle path (September 2014)). 

The Newstead Walk to Bishopsford Road path needs to be constructed to a high standard, offering a good rolling resistance (i.e. machine laid not hand laid) and to provide a surface that is smooth, non-undulating, and has good rolling resistance. The path needs to remain free of standing water in wet weather and free of ice in cold weather. 

Ideally this path would be routed so that it aligned directly with Malmesbury Road as outlined previously.

Our recommendations for the new path link between Newstead Walk and Bishopsford Road:

  • Ensure the final design of the Bishopsford Road to Newstead Walk path facilitates full access and agree at its intersection with Newstead Walk at all times and for all types of cycle 
  • Ensure the Bishopsford Road to Newstead Walk path is constructed to a high standard
  • Reconsider a re-alignment of the Bishopsford Road to Newstead Walk path, and the possibility for this to be delivered as a ‘walking and cycling link’ (Figure 6)

3: Wrythe Lane – New zebra crossing with cycle facilities

SuttonToColliersWoodCycleway_StHelierArea_05_WrytheLane

Figure 5: Plan of proposed parallel crossing for Wrythe Lane (LB of Sutton)

Wrythe Lane | OpenStreetMap

Wrythe Lane | Google Streetview

Wrythe Lane | Streetmap

Do you support widening the existing shared use pedestrian path between Robertsbridge Road and Wrythe Lane?

Not sure (‘yes’ to widening, but ‘no’ to shared use)

Please use this box for any additional comments on this proposal

The proposal to widen the path between Roberstbridge Road and Wrythe Lane (Figure 5) is supported, but a key consideration is that the path is constructed to a high standard to provide a surface that is smooth, non-undulating, and has good rolling resistance. The path needs to remain free of standing water in wet weather and free of ice in cold weather. 

The ‘not sure’ option has been selected in response to support for this proposal because there is an element of ambiguity in the question as posed. The path as currently installed between Robertsbridge Road and Wrythe Lane is not shared use, as implied in the question, but provides partial separation [8], as noted in the accompanying plan.

It is our view that retention of the existing partial separation (essentially a segregated pedestrian/cycle path as currently the case) remains the preferred option over shared use. One reason for this is because separate paths will provide a better interface with the proposed parallel zebra and cycle crossing at Wrythe Lane, and reduce conflict between users. A full ‘walking and cycling link’ design (Figure 6), whereby a cycle carriageway is flanked by footways, would be the most desirable option as this would be fully adaptable for future growth in cycling.

Our recommendations for the path between Robertsbridge Road and Wrythe Lane:

  • Ensure the Robertsbridge to Wrythe Lane path is constructed to a high standard
  • As a minimum requirement, retain partial separation on the Robertsbridge to Wrythe Lane path
  • Consider the option of converting the Robertsbridge to Wrythe Lane path to a ‘walking and cycling link’ (Figure 6)
SuttonToColliersWoodCycleway_StHelierArea_06_RantyHighwayman

Figure 6: ‘Walking and cycling link’
Image courtesy of @RantyHighwayman

Do you support a new zebra crossing with parallel crossing for cyclists across Wrythe Lane? 

Yes

Please use this box for any additional comments on this proposal 

A new zebra crossing with a parallel crossing for cyclists across Wrythe Lane (Figure 5) is strongly supported. The parallel crossing will have the additional benefit of facilitating a wider aperture to the paths either side of Wrythe Lane. An improvement on the proposed design would be for the crossing to be on a full-width raised table, and for the central refuge island to be removed. There is a concern that the depth of the central pedestrian refuge island may not be of a sufficient enough size to accommodate cycles with extensions when they are stationary and awaiting to cross the second carriageway. With the raised table in place, it would be appropriate to extend the 20 mph speed limit along Wrythe Lane (at least over the section of the road passing by the hospital and the shopping area – Thornton Road to Rose Hill). 

An ongoing issue with the existing crossing point, and its interface with the adjacent paths, has been the poor facilitation of access by cycle to the Rosehill Park path when approached from the westbound direction on Wrythe Lane. (This was discussed in our report of a cycle tour of St Helier that took place in August 2015). The new design for the crossing and path will need to ensure that all manoeuvres between all directions can be comfortably made with ease by all styles of cycle.  

As discussed in relation to the proposed Bishopsford Road crossing, methods of improving the cycling experience for those cycling along the road over which the proposed, or upgraded, cycle route crosses need to be considered in all designs. Ideally, this would include some sections of segregated paths along Wrythe Lane to future-proof the infrastructure for a subsequent upgrade to provide dedicated cycling infrastructure along the entire length of Wrythe Lane. This, in turn, would greatly improve access by cycle to St Helier Hospital, the main entrance of which is situated about 300 metres to the south-east of the crossing (also see comments to the Rosehill Park East / Greenshaw Woods path in the following section).

It is noted that LIP funded scheme investigations are currently ongoing in the immediate area of Wrythe Lane [9], and that the Cycleway scheme is being developed in conjunction with other Council schemes currently under discussion in this area. 

Our recommendations for the upgraded crossing on Wrythe Lane:

  • Include a full-width raised table as part of the final design of the Wrythe Lane parallel pedestrian/cycle crossing
  • Ensure that the final design of the Wrythe Lane crossing facilitates ease of manoeuvre in all directions by all types of cycle
  • Consider the scope for integrating with the Cycleway plans ideas for introducing segregated cycle lanes on Wrythe Lane at some future point

4: Rosehill Park East/Greenshaw Woods – Upgrade existing shared use pedestrian/cyclist path

SuttonToColliersWoodCycleway_StHelierArea_07_RosehIllPark_GreenshawWood

Figure 7: Plan of proposed upgrade to the existing segregated pedestrian/cycle path linking Wrythe Lane with Rosehill Park West and Grennell Road (LB of Sutton)

Rosehill Park East / Greenshaw Woods | OpenStreetMap

Rosehill Park East / Greenshaw Woods | Google Streetview 1 | Google Streetview 2

Rosehill Park East / Greenshaw Woods | Streetmap

Do you support the widening of the existing shared use pedestrian and cyclist path through Greenshaw Woods between Wrythe Lane and Grennell Road? 

Not sure (‘yes’ to widening, but ‘no’ to shared use)

Please use this box for any additional comments on this proposal 

The ‘not sure’ option has been selected in response to our support for the proposal to widen the path through Greenshaw Woods between Wrythe Lane and Grennell Road (Figure 7) because there is an element of ambiguity in the question as posed. The link, as currently installed between Wrythe Lane and Grennell Road, is not shared use as implied in the question, but provides partial separation (a segregated pedestrian/cycle path) as noted in the accompanying plan (Figure 7). It would be anticipated that separation between those cycling, or using mobility scooters, and those on foot is maintained (or improved upon). The proposal to widen the path would suggest that partial separation is to be maintained, as the over-all width requirement is greater for partially separated paths [10].

Maintaining partial separation would ensure that the path is future-proofed for anticipated growth in cycling. Furthermore, a study to understand cycling among the older population, and how this affected independence, health and wellbeing [11], has shown that this cohort in particular feel more comfortable cycling when not having to share space with people on foot. The London Cycling Design Standards (2014) [12] notes “…people with visual impairments, children and older people, all of whom may feel intimated by sharing space with cyclists”. The new Cycleways are designed to attract older people and children, and so this is another reason for maintaining a separation. The LCDS also notes [13] “The proximity of schools [in this case Greenshaw High School], residential accommodation for older people, hospitals [in this case St Helier Hospital], health centres and facilities for disabled people can have a significant influence on the composition of pedestrian flows. It may highlight the need for cycle-slowing measures or even rethinking cycle routes to avoid the need for shared use”. A ‘walking and cycling link’ design may be considered less appropriate here as it would be important not to urbanise the green space. Nevertheless, provided careful considerations for the unique surroundings of Greenshaw Woods and Rosehill Park East open space were upheld, the ‘walking and cycling links’ option could be worthy of consideration. 

As noted in previous sections, the key consideration for the path is that it is constructed to a high standard to provide a surface that is smooth, non-undulating, and has good rolling resistance and remains free of standing water in wet weather and free of ice in cold weather.

A contemporary example of a well-constructed path, to which there would the expectation the Greenshaw Woods path would emulate (if not further improve upon), is the the recently constructed New Malden to Raynes Park path in Kingston [14].

Lighting is important, to provide a feeling of social safety, and so improvements to lighting as proposed would be very welcome. In the Netherlands, the type of lighting used to illuminate cycle paths is often designed to be in harmony with the surroundings. So, through wooded areas, such as Greenshaw Woods, led lighting with a greenish tinge would be the preferred used. Lighting can also be dynamic, and so brightens when a cyclist approaches. This reduces energy usage and light pollution. The Cycleway would be an opportunity to explore these types of ideas.

Additionally, the construction of a new path, as a spur, between the proposed, upgraded, Greenshaw Woods path and St Helier Hospital, would be highly recommended. After all, it is highly likely that the demand for cycling between Sutton town centre or surrounding residential areas and St Helier Hospital is higher than the demand for cycling between Sutton town centre and Colliers Wood (although evidence to the contrary would be welcome). It is recognised that a spur path would require the construction of a new entrance through the perimeter fence, along with changes to the hospital car-park layout. Alternatively, a better option would be to facilitate segregated cycle lanes on Wrythe Lane, and so provide access to the front entrance of the hospital directly linked to the Cycleway.

Our recommendations for upgrading the path between Wrythe Lane and Grennell Road:

  • As a minimum requirement, retain partial separation between the paths linking Wrythe Lane with Grennell Road
  • Ensure the Wrythe Lane to Grennell Road link is constructed to a high standard
  • Consider the scope for new techniques in lighting provision on the Wrythe Lane to Grennell Road link that is in harmony with the surroundings
  • Consider the options for constructing a direct walking and cycling link to St Helier Hospital (not to preclude the preferred option for segregated paths along Wrythe Lane at some future point) 
Do you support a raised table to slow drivers at the access point to/from the park on the bend of Grennell [Road]/Rose Hill Park West? 

Yes

Please use this box for any additional comments on this proposal 

A raised table at the access point to/from the park on the bend of Grennell Road/Rose Hill Park West to slow drivers is strongly supported.

The existing kerb-side gully, at the intersection of Grennell Road/Rosehill Park West and the Greenshaw Woods cycle path, causes a significant undulation for riders crossing between the road and the path (and vice versa). The discomfort is further heightened by the angle of entry and exit (required to provide improved visibility). A raised table built over the drainage gully would facilitate a greatly improvement here.

Our recommendation in relation to the installation of a raised table at Rosehill Park West / Grennell Road:

  • Ensure the  interface at the point at which the Wrythe Lane to Grennell Road path joins Rose Hill Park West / Grennell Road is constructed to a high standard and provides safer geometry than is currently the case, with minimum variation in surface level between the path and the carriageway

 

 


References

[1] Also see ‘Sutton’s proposed first Quietway: what is required to make it a success?’ (Get Sutton Cycling, July 2016)
[2] Low Traffic Neighbourhoods: https://lcc.org.uk/pages/low-traffic-neighbourhoods
[3] In July 2018, the scheme ’Stavordale Road area – speed reduction measures’ was presented to the St Helier, the Wrythe and Wandle Valley local committee as a proposed scheme for the 2019/20 Local Implementation Plan (LIP). This was as a result of a petition received from the Circle Community Residents Association in February 2018. It is noted that this scheme was subsequently approved for the 2019/20 LIP and again for the 2020/21 LIP (“proposal to be consulted upon in 2019/20 with implementation in 2020/21”)
[4] Department for Transport, Road Traffic Statistics, site number 28542 https://roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk/manualcountpoints/28542
[5] Consideration for a major infrastructure upgrade at Rose Hill was proposed by us in 2014. Although this had support from officers, it was not universally supported by councillors ‘St Helier’s decision on Rose Hill roundabout – a summary’ (Get Sutton Cycling, November 2015) 
[6] The London Cycling Design Standards (TfL, 2014), Chapter 5 (pdf), Page 8, Figure 5.4 Cycle crossing options, suggests that a shared pedestrian and cycle crossing is adequate at locations where cycle flows are low to medium and the road to be crossed has daily traffic flow exceeding 8,000 in 24 hours. Five years on from this publication, and we would argue that it was time for all crossings provided on high-profile Cycleways to be delivered to a standard that anticipates a significant increase in cycle flows on the alignment of the route
[7] It is worth noting that during a traffic count on Friday, 15 September 2017, between 7.35am and 8.17am (forty-two minutes), only twenty-eight vehicles were observed on Malmesbury Road at the intersection with Bishopsford Road. If this is a typical traffic flow rate for this location, it would suggest that a point-closure would not cause a great deal of inconvenience. It also calls in to question the need for a dedicated right-turn filter in the centre of Bishopsford Road for traffic to access Malmesbury Road at this point. Cycling counts included one person cycling on Malmesbury Road, but around twenty-nine on Bishopsford Road – suggesting that Bishopsford Road is one of the busiest roads for cyclists in the borough.
[8] Partial separation: London Cycling Design Standards (TfL, 2014), Chapter 4 (pdf), Page 62, Figure 4.13 Degree of separation between cyclists and pedestrians off-road.
[9] 2019/20 LIP: Wrythe Lane – between Welbeck Road and St Helier Hospital: To investigate a cluster of personal injury accidents along Wrythe Lane. Measures to be identified in 2018/19 and implementation to be completed in 2019/20; Area improvement scheme – Area bounded by Wrythe Lane, Tweeddale Road and Winchcombe Road: Investigate measures to reduce speeds, improve walking and cycling facilities. 2020/21 LIP: Wrythe Lane / Tweeddale Road / Thornton Road – junction improvement: To complete design of the junction layout consulted upon in 2018/19. Implementation to commence in 2019/20 and be completed in 2020/21: Area improvement scheme – area bounded by Wrythe Lane, Tweeddale Road and Winchcombe Road: Investigate measures to reduce speeds, and encourage walking and cycling in 2019/20 with implementation in 2020/21.
[10] London Cycling Design Standards, Chapter 4 (pdf), page 65, Figure 4.1.7 Recommended effective widths for partially separated and shared routes
[11] cycle BOOM was a study to understand cycling among the older population and how this affected independence, health and wellbeing.: https://www.cycleboom.org
[12] London Cycling Design Standards, Chapter 4 (pdf), page 61
[13] London Cycling Design Standards, Chapter 4 (pdf), page 65
[14] About New Malden to Raynes Park scheme’  https://www.kingston.gov.uk/info/200316/cycling_and_walking/1267/new_malden_to_raynes_park (RB of Kingston-upon-Thames)

v1: 03.11.2019

Tagged with: ,
Posted in Consultation

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

LCC Newsletters via email
Opt in to receive emails from either the Sutton local group list or the main LCC enewsletter list here or manage all your LCC subscriptions here.
Follow us on Twitter
%d bloggers like this: