Letter to the Council objecting to the revokation of the bus lane on Winwick Road
PH Owens
John Drake
BUS AND CYCLE LANE ON WINWICK ROAD Dear Mr Drake, Thank you for your letter of 14th June 2005. I writing to confirm that we wish our objection to be sustained. We are disappointed that the Council has not taken the opportunity during the eight months since my letter of 20th October 2004 to investigate alternative solutions to the problem that do not compromise the safety of cyclists. It appears that, although there has been a safety audit identifying problems with the existing carriageway layout, no safety audit or cycle audit has been undertaken of the proposed modifications to permit general traffic to use the bus and cycle lane. Before the bus lane was installed the road had a single, wide traffic lane at this point, a situation that was perfectly satisfactory for cyclists, as there was sufficient road space for motor vehicles to overtake safely. The proposal to remove the bus lane will not restore the status-quo-anti, but will create very narrow traffic lanes. As you pointed out in your letter these will be only 3m wide near to Owen Street. This is much too narrow to permit overtaking. Therefore motor vehicles coming up behind a slower moving cyclist must brake sharply and follow the cyclist. This tends to cause frustration and more aggressive drivers to attempt to squeeze past. A cycle audit of the proposal should have identified this problem. The more recent improvement of the junction with Pinners Brow has resulted in a much more orderly situation at the start of bus and cycle lane. Vehicles heading straight ahead can now use the second lane at this junction without the risk of getting blocked behind right-turning vehicles. The result is that most drivers heading north on the A49 are now using the off-side lane much sooner and most of the traffic in the left hand lane is now turning into Tesco, and many fewer vehicles need to change lane on the immediate approach to the bus lane. Not only is there much less aggression and cutting up, but there are fewer instances of illegal use of the bus lane. We would recommend that the Council repeats the stage 3 safety audit to check that the problem still exists. It should be noted that the stage 2 safety audit carried out by Parkman in June 2003 did identify the problem of merging traffic at the bus lane (paragraph B3.1.1). They pointed out that general traffic should approach the junction in the off-side lane, and that signs should be provided to indicate the correct lane in advance of the stop line. The problem has only come about in the first place due to the Council's failure to accept this advice. As I pointed out above it seems that most drivers are now approaching the junction in the correct lane, and we would recommend that the Council should install signs and lane markings to this effect. If this approach was adopted it may be possible to arrange for separately phased filter lights at the junction. This could enable the blocked off bus link to Winwick Street to operate without needing to stop the north bound A49 traffic. The benefits to bus passengers and cyclists heading north from the town centre would be significant. The issue of queuing traffic blocking the junction could be addressed by painting box junction markings. In any case the queues cannot be attributed to the bus lane as this was constructed in addition to the traffic lane, rather than from reallocating an existing road space. In your letter, you stated that "the safety audit process has considered the need of all road users and in particular vulnerable road users." However, this claim is difficult to reconcile with the fact that the stage 2 safety audit failed to make a single reference to the needs of cyclists despite being admirably thorough with respect to other road users. The section of the stage 3 audit quoted in your letter also fails to mention cyclists. However, it is possible that the authors were unaware that the lane is intended for cycle use due to the incorrect signage. There is certainly no evidence that the problem of cyclists and general traffic sharing a very narrow lane has even been noticed, let alone considered. On a closely related issue, in your letter of 5th November 2003 (ref:E/TMS/JD/322214) regarding our request for the removal of the dangerous cycle lanes at the junction, you wrote that these would be considered during the stage 3 safety audit and stage 4 cycle audit. Could you please let us know of the progress of this. Yours sincerely
Pete Owens
|