Home 

COMMENTS ON
CHESTER ROAD PROPOSALS
January 2003

Contents

Pedestrian Refuge Island

We are very concerned at the proposed pedestrian refuge island by the Stag Inn at Lower Walton. The southbound lane is much too narrow and this will be dangerous for cyclists as there is a tendency for drivers to race cyclists to the island or try to overtake within the restricted lane width. The problem is particularly severe in this location as drivers will be frustrated by having to follow a cyclist over the narrow swing bridge and will be looking for the first opportunity to overtake. This sort of feature should not be considered on roads narrower than 11m (ie sufficient to accommodate a 2m island flanked by 4.5m traffic lanes).

In any case it is a poor location for pedestrians to cross as visibility is restricted by the bend in the road.

A proper pedestrian crossing should be provided nearer to the swing bridge where the carriageway is narrower. This should cross the road in a single stage.

 Contents 

Cycle Lane

  • We are pleased that a 2m wide mandatory cycle lane is shown on the plan.
  • Coloured surfaces should be kept to a minimum and the surface transitions should be perpendicular to the direction of travel (these are shown at a glancing angle at the start of the cycle lane and by the crematorium).
  • The reduced carriageway required could be used to provide a footway so that pedestrians walking from Higher to Lower Walton would not need to cross the road twice.
  • The cycleway link shown cutting the corner with the junction with Old Chester Road would be pointless and create an unnecessary hazard at the re-merge. It is also too narrow. It should be removed from the design.
  • The cycle lane could be continued towards the lights at Higher Walton.

 Contents 

Bridgewater Canal Bridge

There is a blind summit on the bridge and the lanes are narrow due to the restricted space (there is no clearance at all between the carriageway and the bridge superstructure). Drivers coming over the bridge at speed have very little time to react if they encounter a cyclist in their path.

  • Reduce the carriageway to a single 4.25m wide lane in each direction, with a hatched area on either side to separate the carriageway from the bridge structure.
  • Extend the 40mph speed limit over the bridge.

 Contents 

Inbound Carriageway

The nearside lane should be made as wide as possible by taking space from the central lane.

 Contents 

Shared Use Path (Comments run in direction of travel from S-N)

  • 2m is too narrow for a shared-use path (even for one-way use). There is no safe way for outbound cyclists to join or leave the cycleway. The cycleway should only be marked for one-way use (inbound) if at all.
  • The cycle lane leading to the start of the shared use path should be 2m wide.
  • The surface transition at the start of the cycleway should be perfectly flush, and perpendicular to the direction of travel.
  • The cycle crossing at the Higher Walton lights is at a bad location. Cyclists would be in conflict with vehicle movements whatever the phase of the lights.
  • Crossing of the junction with the nursery should be coloured to warn drivers.
  • The junction with Mill Lane should be raised and coloured to give a continuous surface for cyclists and to warn drivers. A STOP sign would be preferable to a give way for vehicles coming up Mill Lane.
  • The plan shows the cycle track ending in a driveway and then joining the carriageway. Both these surface transitions are poor (particularly the re-merge with the carriageway and the short transition means that cyclists are put in the difficult position of having to give way to vehicles coming from behind them. The cycle track should be re-merged onto a short stretch of cycle lane about 30m before the junction. (see Cycle Friendly Infrastructure 12.1.6). The surface transition should be perfectly flush and perpendicular to the direction of travel.

 Contents 

Crossings of Central Reservation

  • It is critical for safety that cyclists heading for these have an unobstructed route and would not end up stopping on the carriageway if the path was occupied by a cyclist or pedestrian coming in the opposite direction. The crossings should be much wider (at least 3.5 m for a cycle only crossing in addition to a 2m footway where pedestrians use the same route). Space is no problem and cost should not be an issue for such short stretch of path in a safety critical situation.
  • The cycle paths should be at carriageway level with no surface transition. The footways should be segregated by a kerb and preferably a grass verge.
  • All sharp turns should be avoided. The inside radius should be at least 6m.
  • The junctions between the cycle-path and road crossings would require cyclists to perform a right angle turn within a 2m path. Unlike pedestrians, cyclists are unable to stop and change direction instantaneously. It is important that cyclists crossing two lanes of traffic should be able to do so reasonably quickly and have a clear exit route. The junctions should be much wider and designed to permit a 6m radius turn.
  • The layout shown for cyclists heading across the central reservation to the crematorium would require cyclists to give way to traffic directly behind them before performing a right-angle turn. It would be much better for cyclists both in terms of visibility and manoeuvring to go straight across and join the slip road
  • The short cycle lane at the north end of Old Chester Road for right-turning cyclists should be at least 2m wide.

Updated 20th January 2003
Pete Owens
 Home