Shared access in Woking

LouKnee

Hi,
I commute into Woking in Surrey by bike. As one of the UK cycling towns they have done a great job of providing decent facilities for cyclists at, I guess, some expense (for the record I am not a Woking council tax payer).
Not so long ago an 18 month consultation came to an end with the aim of assessing the impact of allowing cyclists and pedestrians to both use traffic free areas in the town centre. The result was zero incidents reported. So not a problem then.
However within weeks, disabled groups had raised objections and the council was obliged to review the findings. As a result cyclists are now banned from some shared areas.

This post would be shorter if I could have found the link to the Guardian article that explains the reasons for the review (their search is not v. good). From what they said it seems that disabled charities (principally RNIB in this case) are funding opposition to any scheme where cyclists may be in a shared space with pedestrians.

I do not oppose the possibility of cyclists being made responsible if they cause injury or worse, but it seems that all the good work could be undone at this rate!!

thelawnet

LouKnee wrote:

Hi,
I commute into Woking in Surrey by bike. As one of the UK cycling towns they have done a great job of providing decent facilities for cyclists at, I guess, some expense (for the record I am not a Woking council tax payer).

The money came from a central pot. The local councillors with one or two exceptions are typical Surrey aged conservatives and wouldn't spend local money on it, and when someone complained about bicycles they took the first chance to ban them.

Not so long ago an 18 month consultation came to an end with the aim of assessing the impact of allowing cyclists and pedestrians to both use traffic free areas in the town centre. The result was zero incidents reported. So not a problem then.
However within weeks, disabled groups had raised objections

The Guide Dogs for the Blind are absolutely loaded and decided to campaign against it, they saw it as part of their charitable objects to force cyclists onto the busy triple carriageway around the town.

and the council was obliged to review the findings. As a result cyclists are now banned from some shared areas.

Not yet they're not. And only from 10am-4pm, bizarrely. I can't imagine it will be legally enforceable.

Thread: http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=49116

dombat

Cycle Woking is trying hard to get people in their bikes while the geniuses at the "Local Committee" try to reverse their decisions.

Firstly, the great Fishwick Island. Put in for about 15k as pedestrians (mostly kids going to school) would cross the road to follow the canal (a national cycle route), but they would be left trapped in the middle of the road waiting for a gap. A few people kicked up a bit of a fuss (none with knowledge of traffic management or engineering) so got a petition going. The Woking Cycle User Group got a bigger petition in a shorter space of time, but the dead committee hate bikes so spent another £10k (of cycle town money) to get rid of it.

Now (a) there is still a massive queue in the mornings (b) children and peds still cross in the middle of the road and (c) those who use the traffic lights run the constant risk of red light jumpers.

Then there was the shared space argument. Masses of evidence was presented showing they work, but the guide dog lot were every anti (understandably) but all their evidence was just hot air and perception. The real danger to bikes, peds, blind, deaf, wheelchairs is always cars. Not too worry, ban bikes between 10 and 4, so children coming out of school at 3/330 will need to use Victoria way, a 2 or 3 land dual carriage way round town. Genius!

Then there was the Victoria Way hump. Put in for a new bike crossing, then the police moaned because if they were doing 150MPH they'd take off, so that went (another £20k approx).

Then to round it off, local hit n run driver who killed 17 year old on a bike = £87 fine, 10 points, 100 hours (facts of case are not clear from local stories. No speeding or alcohol involved). http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2092575_byfleet_crash_driver_undergoing_counselling

I suggest you write to the counsellors and tell them what you think and email Jonathan Lord MP and tell him what you think too.

thelawnet

dombat wrote:

Then there was the Victoria Way hump. Put in for a new bike crossing, then the police moaned because if they were doing 150MPH they'd take off, so that went (another £20k approx).

Is this the partially constructed crossing opposite the Light Box? Or something else?

Then to round it off, local hit n run driver who killed 17 year old on a bike = £87 fine, 10 points, 100 hours (facts of case are not clear from local stories. No speeding or alcohol involved). http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/s/2092575_byfleet_crash_driver_undergoing_counselling

She was originally arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and according to the facebook page she was under the influence of sedatives.
http://www.facebook.com/pages/RIP-Joel- ... 0030607753

There is some more detail here: http://www.surreyherald.co.uk/surrey-ne ... -28584894/

dombat

Yes, is the hump by the Lightbox.

I saw the original story about Alcohol/Drugs, but it wasn't mentioned in stories after the case. Perhaps there was lack of evidence or something??? Shocking outcome though.

thelawnet

dombat wrote:

Yes, is the hump by the Lightbox.

I haven't really looked closely, but why does it need to be a hump. The pedestrian crossing isn't a hump. Is it being redesigned?

BTW do you know what happened to the double decker cycle parking they had in briefly?

LouKnee

The cycle rack was going to be removed by the council. I believe this was because of the work to remodel the entrance to the Peacocks but not sure exactly why. Anyway I work in Dukes Court and I can inform you that is the double decker rack was acquired from the council and installed as an employee bike rack.

thelawnet

LouKnee wrote:

The cycle rack was going to be removed by the council. I believe this was because of the work to remodel the entrance to the Peacocks but not sure exactly why. Anyway I work in Dukes Court and I can inform you that is the double decker rack was acquired from the council and installed as an employee bike rack.

Ah, is it more popular there? It seemed like a pretty naff design to me.