Marsh Lane Contraflow - Scheme CHCRE 4291

The purpose of this cycling contraflow scheme was to improve connections between the University of Central Lancashire, Lancashire County Hall and Preston Railway Station. It has been funded under the Local Sustainable Transport Fund.

This scheme has now been finished for a couple of weeks now so last Saturday (8th August 2015) I thought I would take a look.

One-way 30mph motorised traffic travels in the direction A-C and the cycling contraflow lance C-A. The scheme begins at the Ring Way and continues up to Ladywell Street (not shown on map)

What caught my attention when I saw the plans was the buffer zone (hatchings) between the motorised traffic and the cycle lane disappears between the section B-C, as it passes under the rail bridge. Also, the motorised lane appears to widen. I passed these concerns onto LCC who told me that "road measurement should have been sufficient, however we will rectify that further more". Not sure what that meant by that.

Here is a picture I took last December approaching the rail bridge at section B.

There is in fact a pedestrian walking towards me on the opposite side of the road underneath the lights! So visibility under the bridge is an issue. Also notice that cycling contraflow runs downhill. Motor traffic travelling at 30mph and a cyclist riding down hill at 20mph, giving an head-on impact speed of 50mph, with poor visibility!

Here are some of the pictures I took last Saturday.

You can clearly see the previous centre line. So the new traffic lane is now wider here than it was previously. But why widen the lane under the bridge? Is this what LCC meant by "road measurements"?

But just how narrow has the buffer zone now become under the bridge? Especially when you compare it to how much buffer space is given further up the road. Again visibility is still an issue.

I watched a few cars travelling this section towards the bridge. You can see how the driver of the silver car has 'followed' the solid white line and driven to their right, away from the nearside kerb. A driver may think that the lane is now widening back out to two lanes as it was previously.

This scheme has been implemented exactly as shown on the plans I had received. Nothing has been changed nor rectified despite some serious cycling safety concerns regarding this section of the scheme.

UPDATE: 16/08/2015

I had word back from LCC and they wanted to "maintain constant running lane width" so they have widened the lane in this narrow section. They did concede that there should have been hatching lines between the solid lines. They also felt that this paint along with new signage was sufficient. I would have to disagree.

I also failed to notice last time was at the end of the scheme at the traffic lights we have my two least favourite cycling signs; End of Route and Cyclists Dismount. Groan.....

Neil Illing
CTC Right to Ride -  Preston

A6 Cycle Scheme 2015

Not long after I became CTC Right to Ride representative for Preston last year a new cycle scheme was proposed for the A6. I use to cycle commute this busy city road so was excited for what Lancashire County Council (LCC) were going to propose.

I had the idea to audit the proposed route before and after to give a comparison as to what LCC had spent the money on and whether it was good value.

When I audited the proposed route back in November 2014 I gave it a potential score of 34/50.

The scheme has been operational for a couple of weeks so it was time to re-visit.

Straight away I have a taste of the scheme. And this is the problem when converting a pavement into a shared path use. For every road off that shared path there are two End of Route signs and an END painted on the path. It is depressingly endless. Here are just a few examples.

 

 


Next was probably the largest 'hard' engineering task; moving the brick bus shelter back a couple of metres from the road and widening the path. This certainly took a couple of weeks to complete. Notice the two bands of rumble strips and SLOW signs either side. It's a newly hand-laid path. So whilst not as good as the road it is acceptable.

It's not long before I spy the first of many Cyclists Dismount signs.

I guess the reason is that it is a two-stage crossing and the central island is well under one metre wide. The scheme is on the opposite side of the road as well so why not remove the pointless island and make it a one-stage crossing?

Next is the crossing at Queen Street. I did make comments last time about the state of the narrow 'blister' path. However, instead of levelling it LCC have out up another Cyclists Dismount sign.

It's fair to say that I'm now getting a bit depressed, but there's worse to come...

After crossing Queen Street we are back to riding on the original, appalling path that is full of gravel and glass; it has not even been sweeped. The section is full of 'clutter' from road signs to signal junction boxes. Add in pedestrians and it's going to be awful when the Queen Street retail park is built. 

The route then crosses Church Street which make an ideal contraflow to allow cyclists into the city centre. But alas not, instead it's another opportunity to put up yet another Cyclists Dismount sign.

Next is the fast junction for buses going into the bus station. The bend radius of this corner allows motor vehicles to carry their speed round the corner. Though there is a new Cycle Route Ahead warning triangle there is a very puzzling Cyclists Dismount sign and a new SLOW warning. 

Instead of crossing after the guard rail you are directed to a new dropped kerb section a little further up the road. To then ride to dropped kerb opposite and travel in front of an empty office building.

The next section is very puzzling. As you approach the walkway above the road you have an End of Route Sign and an END sign, without anywhere to go? It's as if the route has just stopped. But in the picture below, near where that silver car is and just before the traffic lights outside the Holiday Inn the shared path sign appears again. Confused?

At this point I crossed over the road at these lights and returned down the opposite side of the route.

On the road opposite is a puzzling cycle give way for no apparent reason followed by a new dropped kerb section onto the shared path.

As you approach the prison the shared path gets cluttered with over grown vegetation.

Crossing the junction by the prison the dropped kerbs have been widened. Though you will need your wits here as there are no controlled lights for a cyclist.

 

However, on crossing and looking back at this junction there is yet another puzzling Cyclists Dismount sign. Why?

The rest of the section now is more of the same nonsense. Why is there another pointless End of Route sign when there is a painted 2-way cycle sign beyond it?

And another...

At this point I still don't know where this section ends; all the signs have just stopped. Is it at the crossing of the Guild Wheel? Who knows?

If you take away the cost of moving a brick bus shelter the next biggest cost of this scheme appears to be the sheer number of End of Route and Cyclists Dismount signs. 

My revised actual audit score is now 22/50 (see here for more details). That's a drop of 12 marks, mainly to the excessive and often puzzling signing but also the appalling surface of some of the sections.

Would I use it? No.

Would I recommend it to novice cyclist, like my teenage daughter? No.

Instead, if travelling to Preston city centre from South Ribble use the Route 55 Tramway instead.