- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Priory Lane (via Wandsworth Borough Council).PNGChanges planned for south west London road notorious for motorists hurling abuse at cyclists
Wandsworth Borough Council is consulting over planned changes to a road popular with cyclists heading to and from Richmond Park following a number of high-profile incidents in which riders have been subjected to abuse by motorists who believe they should be using a cycle path on the adjacent footway.
The local authority plans to relocate the cycle path from that runs on the footway of Priory Lane in Roehampton between Arabella Drive and Bank Lane onto the carriageway, as well as installing an advisory cycle lane between Bank Lane and Danebury Road.
It also plans to introduce a number of features aimed at curbing the speed of motorists, including installing five raised junctions and eight flat top speed tables, as well as replacing a mini-roundabout at the junction with Dowdswell Close with a priority junction.
Outlining Wandsworth Borough Council’s proposals, its head of engineering, Martin Hoare, said:
Priory Lane forms part of both the Borough and the National Cycle Route Network catering daily for over 1000 pedal cyclists. It is also a busy route for traffic as it runs parallel to Roehampton Lane, providing an alternative link between two main roads, Upper Richmond Road (red route) and the A3 Roehampton Vale.
Priory Lane is long and straight with a footway on only the northbound side of the road. In some parts of the road, peak mean speeds can reach up to 28mph which can make cycling intimidating. A cycle track therefore occupies half of the footway for much of its length so that cyclists, particularly those cycling more leisurely or with less confidence, are segregated from motor vehicles.
However, the current arrangement raises several issues, namely: the remaining footway is unsatisfactorily narrow for pedestrians; many cyclists remain in the carriageway, as well as being observed in the cycle lane; Priory Lane’s character as a cycling route where speeds should not go above 20mph is not clear to drivers; the diversion of the cycle route through Bank Lane and Roehampton Gate is not practical, most cyclists choose to continue along Priory Lane as it is a more direct route. Moreover, in the three-year period to December 2016 16 personal injury collisions were recorded in Priory Lane, 12 of which involved cyclists.
The proposals aim to improve pedestrian facilities by removing the cycle track from the footway and providing a constant footway width of 2.0m. Likewise the introduction of a northbound advisory cycle lane along the entire length of Priory Lane and associated changes to the highway layout aims to assist cycling and safety. Installation of cycle friendly speed tables/junctions are also proposed in this scheme to accentuate the 20mph speed limit in Priory Lane. Southbound cycles will be integrated with motor traffic. Road markings with the cycle symbol will be installed to raise awareness of the presence and legitimacy of cyclists on the carriageway
Here on road.cc, we’ve reported on several incidents involving motorists who mistakenly believed that cyclists should be riding on the path on the footway.
Indeed, it’s difficult to recall another road anywhere in the UK where we have reported on so many separate cases of cyclists being subjected to abuse.
The first – and most notorious – involved south west London café owner Jason Wells, originally from Australia, who was filmed in March 2016 unleashing a torrent of abuse on a rider. Wells was subsequently fined for committing a public order offence.
> Local paper identifies extreme road rage driver as SW London cafe chain owner
In July 2016, the Metropolitan Police were called to an incident on Priory Lane after a driver allegedly knocked two riders off their bikes on purpose, with passengers in the vehicle then getting involved in an altercation with other cyclists.
> BMW driver "deliberately swerved" at cyclists near Richmond Park
In September of the same year, a motorist posted footage to Facebook that showed him verbally abusing cyclists on Priory Lane as he drove past them.
The video, shot illegally using a handheld mobile phone while the motorist was driving, was subsequently deleted, but not before it had received hundreds of thousands of views on the social network.
> Video: Driver breaks law to film cyclists riding legally - then posts footage online
The consultation on the proposed changes to Priory Lane will be open until 16 February 2018 and can be found here.
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- belugabob 56 sec ago
My local football practice pitches (all weather, in a fenced off area, are regularly the scene of inconsiderate parking, with vehicles blocking the...
- chrisonabike 18 min 23 sec ago
Don't forget though "Englishman's home is his castle" - which includes my rights to grow a giant curtain wall of Leylandii to "protect my privacy"....
- Spangly Shiny 25 min 49 sec ago
Assos ASOS anyone?
- chrisonabike 39 min 24 sec ago
Replace them all with Bromptons and they'd take up zero space within days or even hours, as they are all relocated elsewhere. To eBay or possibly...
- Andrewbanshee 1 hour 10 min ago
Where I live we are experiencing a lot of housing development on small and large plots of land. These developers don't seem to have problems...
- hawkinspeter 1 hour 16 min ago
Sometimes peanuts
- Homebaker 2 hours 33 min ago
Oh you can't block roads, what if I need to drive my elderly aunt to the emergency hospital, and even though there are better routes, I want to go...
- mdavidford 4 hours 4 min ago
The answer to this is to have no friends.
- Backladder 5 hours 58 min ago
While original sash windows are nice they make it very hard to keep the house warm, we eventually went for upvc double glazed sash window...
Add new comment
24 comments
If you missed the consultation, I wouldn't worry, Wandsworth would have ignored you anyway. If you don't believe me, just take a ride up Magdalen lane "quietway" where they've removed traffic islands (enabling speeding in a 20mph zone outside a primary school), painted a "cycle lane" in the parked car dooring zone and painted magic white bicycles on the other side of the road. All of this for £400,000 out of cycling budgets....
It's a stupid idea I agree. That stretch of road is one I drive along fairly regularly and it annoys me that so many drivers misuse it. Given the speed limit and the fact that it's stright with good sight lines for much of the way, you'd think overtaking wouldn't be a problem. But it is for some drivers.
Proper traffic calming measures are needed. It would be feasible for instance to mill rumble strips into the roadway along the edges of the road, protacting the cycleway. It's even feasible to mill rumble strips into the roadway to ensure drivers stick to the speed limit by ensuring that they're spaced at a certain distance and to a specific depth - the resonance they generate would be neglible for drivers sticking to the speed limit and then become jarring for speeders.
Such a shame to have missed the consultation on this! I agree with keeping the pavement for pedestrians, but they need to make the roadway palatable for children to cycle on. A Dutch country road would be the dream, with wide advisory lanes on either side (it's not acceptable just to have one northbound), and no centre dividing line for cars. Paint the 20mph onto the road in addition to the sign. Raised tables also a good addition, they can add a pinch point for cars later if it's not enough.
Nice idea but never get cleaned.
Screenshot_20180220-214139.png
https://www.trafficchoices.co.uk/somerset/traffic-schemes/chicanes.shtml
Seems a reasonable solution, minimal diusruption for cyclists and cars only get to 23mph between chicanes so no point passing cyclists (yes, I know).
If anyone wants to see this terrible excuse of a bike path I did a run up last week to see what it was all about and took this video: https://youtu.be/n92Cg2RYl9A
Consultation closes Friday 16: no to speed bumps.
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2009/07/country-road.html
Presumably this is what the designers are thinking of but the traffic levels on Priory Lane are way too high, they're only proposing to paint an advisory lane in one direction and without using coloured tarmac it fails to even visually narrow the road.
What's needed is to filter the short cut to the A roads and stop the park being used for through traffic. A few sets of bollard so you can only drive to the closest car park to the entrance you use.
Then redesign this road based on the resulting traffic levels. What's proposed now is a waste of money.
Once again all taxpayers would seem to be having to stump up for some motorists who can't seem to be able to share the road with other users as they should.
I’m sure if they really had the balls the council could purchase a 2m strip of land on the eastern side of the road all the way from the upper Richmond Road to the Clarence Lane junction, it’s what seems to be a little used edge of a golf club.
And while that thing on the pavement is not a cycle lane by any means, I’m not sure what they’ve suggested is an improvement for families on bikes.
That's my principal objection. I live in Wandsworth and often use Priory Lane to get in to Roehampton Gate, and sometimes I cycle that way with my wife and young son using the shared/split pavement. When I am with them we usually get the train to nearby Barnes station, and then cycle up Priory Lane. Although the existing provision is far from ideal, if there is no off-road cycle lane we simply could not get in to the park in that way. I suppose our situation might be a bit niche, but it's important that families are encouraged in to the park by some means other than by car.
I've responded to the consultation in similar, and additional, terms, and I'd encourage all others who are even slightly affected to do the same.
Excelllent point from Ush about the revealing use of the word 'traffic' in the Council Engineer's comment. To me that says it all about how badly trained council engineers are.
And have I got this right, that in future (assuming I've gotten the North and South the right way round) when travelling from Barnes to the park entrance, one will have no choice but to cycle on the road? Whenever I've been there I've ended up using the rubbish shared-use cycle path (which, aside from all the other flaws listed, also gives way at every driveway), because that road is a bit unnerving (with too many bersker Australians). Yes the existing path is utter garbage, but I don't think I'd be any happier having to use the road with no cycle provision at all in that direction and only paint the other way.
Finally, the statement says the road is an "alternative link between...Upper Richmond Road (red route) and the A3". What is it an alternative to, and why aren't drivers told to just stick to that route and leave this one alone? Why do they use an "alternative link", if a primary route has been provided for them at (presumably) great expense? If it's only an 'alternative' anyway, just close it to motor traffic and be done with it.
Personally, I use the road heading towards the path but use the cycleway heading away from it.
"Alternative Link" is the problem - presumably it's a rat run that avoids a couple of sets of traffic lights.
As far as I can work out (and there are not detailed plans with dimensions) they are -
- removing the current bi-directional, (1.5m? 2m?), pavement level cycleway (which is in poor condition, too narrow to be bi-directional and results in very narrow pedestrian space)
- some of that space may become road (so the road will be slightly wider but not much)
- the Northbound side of the road which currently has the cycleway will have an advisory (ie paint only) 1.5m cycle lane.
- Southbound there won't even be an advisory lane
- the centre line of the road will be removed (theory is that this creates vagueness and slower speeds)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Personal view is that this will be even worse than at present. I reckon you'll get close passes if you use the advisory lane as drivers will run down the line of it. Without a centre line 'taking the lane' as you can currently do heading south, to clearly force drivers to overtake only when the opposite lane is free, will be less effective so I'm guessing more buttclenching moments .
Plus, nothing being done to remove traffic - the children and families you sometimes see using the current offroad lane are not going to feel safe riding in what will continue to be a fast road with high speeds.
What about advisory cycle lane boundary lines which were at least half way into the into each of the Nth/Sth lanes. So that bikes could effectively be given priority to take the lane. This, and actually enforce the 20mph limit.
If they actually enforced the 20mph speed limit, the need for a cycle lane would be redundant.
Engineer in still not getting what the problem is and still doesn't recognise that people on bikes are traffic/vehicles in law and avoiding saying micky poor shared use waste of money should never have been out in in the first place shocker ... not!
Advisory not mandatory cycle lane on a road where the peak mean speeds exceed the speed limit by 8 miles per hour, so by 40%.
Seems to me that enforcement of the laws of the road would be more appropriate.
It is of course just a short excerpt of a sentence, but this jumped out at me as revealing a fundamental problem with the thinking about this common road. The implicit suggestion that cyclists are not traffic is at the heart of many of the mis-steps made by road designers.
If motorised traffic is in general failing to conduct itself in a civilzed manner in sufficiently high rates then the solution is simple: ban them from the road.
Advisory cycle lanes or otherwise are just a ghettoisation of cyclists and a reduction of our right to travel the road network.
Absolutely.
We've had decades of timidity and motor centric assumptions.
Motor vehicles have been granted too much space on the road which we all pay for in life terms as well as financially.
The more road space they get, the worse drivers behave having developed their own form of infantilism and arrogance.
There are too many parallel roads for cars and too many through routes that they should not have been led to believe they are entitled to.
I suggest getting onto Wandsworth and telling them so.
Advisory cycle lanes here will only make things worse because a particular breed of idiot driver will issue abuse if you are not in it or give much less space when overtaking regardless of where you are positioned. The speed limit appears to be 20mph anyway though? So, no real necessity to overtake. (Although, I generally don't agree with 20mph limits unless they are outside schools, and they aren't enforced anyway.)
Table-top speed bumps may help encourage speeding drivers to slow down or find an alternative route to speed on. Give-way-to-oncoming-traffic junctions where cyclists can continue without stopping may well help.
Ultimately, the prevalent anti-cyclist mentality is the problem and that needs to be dealt with across the UK, this should be aggressively driven, and quickly (excuse the pun), by our wonderful and effective government.
Exactly. Wasn't the whole Jason Wells thing (whatever happened to him and his cafe, anyway?) because some cyclists had the temerity to ride on the road instead of on a shared-use feature??
The crucial information missing from the article and the WBC statement is whether the new cycle lane is going to have physical protection from traffic. If not, I suggest the council is just repeating the mistakes of the last decades, and building crap cycle infrastructure that's no use to anyone.
Although the article provides a link to the consultation, it is a link to pages where people can give their views, but not a link to information about the proposed scheme - so no help.
Is that Team Sky's new support vehicle?