Home 

WARRINGTON CYCLE NETWORK PLAN
THE CORE KILOMETRE
October 2001

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

2. CONTEXT

3. WHY THE CORE KILOMETRE STRATEGY?

4. OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSALS

5. ROUTES TO THE WEST

6. ROUTES TO THE NORTH

7. ROUTES TO THE EAST

8. ROUTES TO THE SOUTH

9. IMPLEMENTATION

REFERENCES

  Contents 

1. INTRODUCTION

This report describes the measures needed to establish the first kilometre of the cycle routes identified in Warrington Borough Council's "Local Transport Plan for 2001/6"[1] (LTP), "The Core Kilometre". Map 1, extracted from the introduction of the LTP, shows the routes covered by this plan. The routes build upon the "cycle ring road" which will be implemented in the near future and was described in a previous Cycle Campaign Report[2] . This report also takes into account important changes in the last 2 years such as the adoption of the LTP by the Warrington Borough Council and its subsequent backing by the Government.

Overview of Major Cycle Routes
Map 1 - Overview of Major Cycle Routes in the "Core Kilometre"

 Contents 

2. CONTEXT

2.1 Warrington Borough Council Policy

According to the Government's "Guidance on Local Transport Plans"[3] , all LTPs should adopt a transport hierarchy that puts pedestrians, cyclists and public transport first, and car-borne commuters last. It states that "Ministers will be looking to local authorities to build on existing efforts to increase the amount and safety of cycling, and thereby contributes towards the National Cycling Strategy targets".

True to this principle, the Government particularly praised Warrington's LTP for its proactive Cycle Strategy, based on sound principles. The following four policies from the Council's adopted Cycle Strategy[1] can be seen as the principles of this report:

Hierarchy of action to improve conditions for cyclists
CP1 Wherever possible, measures to make the use of existing roads safe and convenient for cyclists will be implemented in preference to segregation. Route design will consider the following approaches in descending order of preference:
  1. Traffic reduction
  2. Traffic calming
  3. Junction treatment and traffic management
  4. Redistribution of the carriageway
  5. Cycle lanes and cycle tracks

Development of a cycle network
CP2 The Council will seek to provide a comprehensive Borough wide network of safe, convenient cycle routes linking the town centre, residential areas, public transport facilities, local shopping centres, community and leisure facilities, schools, open spaces and the surrounding countryside.

Network design
CP3 The route network will achieve high standards of coherence, directness, safety, attractiveness and comfort, and design criteria.

Cycle priority measures
CP4 Measures will be provided, wherever possible, which improve cyclists' safety and/or give cyclists greater priority (in terms of access and journey times) over other traffic on roads within the identified cycle network.

2.2 Designing Routes for Cycling

Best practice for designing cycle routes is continually developing. The Cycle Touring Club provides a helpful literature lists on its web site. Helpful documents include:

  • Cycle-Friendly Infrastructure[4]
  • The National Cycle Network: Guidelines and Practical Details[5]

Key principles are:

  • Always design the carriageway for use by cyclists.
  • Roads and junctions should be inherently cycle friendly rather than being designed for motorised traffic with special cycle facilities being added later to mitigate an inherently cycle-hostile design
  • The most important measures for improving conditions for cycling are reducing traffic volumes and speeds, careful design of junctions (especially roundabouts), and measures such redistributing the carriageway to give more space to cyclists, perhaps in conjunction with buses
  • Pedestrian/Cyclist shared use paths should be a last resort. Safety on routes featuring such facilities is rarely improved. In fact there is evidence that safety is reduced due to problems such as poor visibility (particularly at junctions), sharp bends, bollards, slippery bridges etc[6].
  • Even where shared use is deemed appropriate, this should supplement on-road measures not replace them.

2.3 Warrington Cycle Campaign

The campaign promotes safer cycling for existing cyclists in Warrington, and aims to encourage more people to travel by bicycle in and around the town.

We want to see:

  • A comprehensive, safe cycle network in Warrington
  • Good quality cycle parking provision throughout Warrington
  • An integrated transport strategy with cycling at its heart
  • Road traffic reduction and slower traffic speeds
  • Better account taken for the needs of cyclists and pedestrians in the road network, especially at junctions and roundabouts
  • Responsible cycling - using lights at night and respecting pedestrians on pavements

The campaign's web address is:
www.WarringtonCycleCampaign.co.uk

2.4 Town Centre Infrastructure to Date

A previous report by the Warrington Cycle Campaign[2], details proposals for a "Town Centre Cycle Ring Road". The proposals have been welcomed by Warrington Borough Council officers, and plans have been drawn up to carry out much of the work proposed. The "Cycle ring road" route will run from Bridge Street east along Academy Way to Scotland Road, Goldbourne Street and Bold Street; then from Bold Street via existing quieter roads back to Bridge Street.

 Contents 

3. WHY THE CORE KILOMETRE STRATEGY?

Warrington Borough Council's current plans to provide the "Cycle Ring Road" (see 2.4) will be an excellent first step to improving cycle access to and from Warrington Town Centre. The Core Kilometre Strategy is the logical next step because:

  • It clearly follows on from "Cycle Ring Road" currently in progress, demonstrating a planned improvement to the cycle network. The "Cycle Ring Road" is the hub. Next the aim should be to start to provide the spokes to link in to this hub.
  • Without it, all the planned radial routes in the LTP will be severed by the main inner circulatory ring road. The inner circulatory, consisting of the A57 and A49 roads through the town centre (Midland Way, Lythgoes Lane, Brick St, Mersey St), together with the proposed Bridge Foot By-pass scheme continue to prevent cycle access to the Town Centre by all but the most confident cyclists.

 Contents 

4. OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSALS

4.1 West

Map 1 shows the last part of routes from the West to the Town centre. Routes either via Sankey Way or one via Liverpool Road share the stretch between the Crossfields roundabout and the town centre. Key features covered in the proposal include:

  • cycle link to Bank Quay Station
  • improvements to Sankey Street
  • junction treatment at Sankey St/Liverpool Rd/Parker St (A5061)/Crossfield St
  • improvements on Liverpool Road

4.2 North

Map 1 shows three routes from the North to the Town centre, converging on Winwick Street at its junction with Scotland Road. The routes follow Bewsey Road, Winwick Street and Orford Lane respectively. Key features covered in the proposal include:

  • improvements to Winwick Street
  • junction treatment at Winwick St/Tanners Lane/Haydock St
  • improvements to the Lord Rodney Roundabout
  • junction treatment at Pinners Brow/Orford Lane/Lythgoes Lane
  • direct cycle route between Winwick Street and Winwick Road

4.3 East

Map 1 shows three ways of entering the Town centre from the East. The first follows School Brow and Cockhedge Lane. The second follows Church Street and Buttermarket Street , and the third follows Hall Street and crosses Mersey Street to Academy Way. Key features covered in the proposal include:

  • upgrading Brick Street (A49) Crossing
  • introducing a Toucan Crossing of Mersey Street

It is worth noting that the second route described above has been greatly improved by the realigning of the roundabout at the junction with the A49 (Mersey St).

4.4 South

Cycle access issues from the South to the Town Centre are dominated by plans for the new Bridgefoot bypass and the consequences for cyclists both at Bridgefoot and at the Bryan Bevan Island junction. The advent of the Bridgefoot bypass plans means that proposals made by the Cycle Campaign previously[2] are now out of date. The basic line of the routes shown on Map 1 however, remains unchanged. Key issues covered in this proposal are:

  • cyclists overview of the Bridgefoot bypass scheme
  • opportunities for Cyclists - the New Bridge Foot
  • improvements to Knutsford Road (A5061)
  • improvements between Bridge Foot and Brian Bevan Island
  • junction Treatment at Brian Bevan Island
  • improvements to Wilderspool Causeway (A49)
  • improvements to Chester Road (A5060)
  • designing the Bypass
 Contents 

5 ROUTES TO THE WEST

5.1 Cycle link to Bank Quay Station

The toucan crossing recently installed across Parker St (A5061) at Bank Quay Station has improved access for cyclists as well as pedestrians and is very valuable.

To further improve the cycle route now opened up from Bank Quay station towards Bridge Street, it is proposed that:

  • the priority of the junctions along Museum Street is changed to give right of way to East-West traffic.

5.2 Improvements to Sankey Street

Sankey Street used to be the main road (A57) from Warrington to the west but now only takes local traffic. The principle hazard for cyclists is caused by the car parking.

It is proposed that:

  • Parking should either be prohibited, or pavement build-outs should be constructed to create inset parking bays separated from the carriageway by a 1.5m wide hatched area. This approach would protect cyclists from car doors and help to create a more pleasant and safe environment for cyclists.

Note that Figure 2, which shows proposals for Winwick Road also illustrates the improvements proposed here for Sankey Street.

5.3 Junction Treatment at Sankey St/Liverpool Rd/Parker St (A5061)/Crossfield St

The Main traffic flow follows the A5061 turning from Liverpool Rd to Parker St.

With this in mind, it is proposed that Advanced Stop Lines for cyclists (ASLs) should be provided particularly on the Liverpool Rd and Parker St approaches. Figure 1 shows the proposals for this junction. Important design issues for these ASLs are:

  • Approach cycle lane from the south (Parker Street) should be to the right of the left hand filter lane and start before the filter lane branches off. This will enable cyclists travelling forward or turning right to avoid being carried left by the traffic.
  • Approach cycle lane from the west (Liverpool Road) needs to be between the two general traffic lanes so that it can be used by right turning cyclists.
  • From the north Crossfield Street is probably too narrow to provide a cycle lane of adequate width (widths should be 2m as a minimum). If this is the case a narrow cycle lane should NOT be implemented as this could cause conflict with left turning traffic.
  • The triangles on Sankey Street are removed to give the junction a more conventional and pedestrian friendly layout.

Sankey St/Liverpool Rd/Parker St/Crossfield St Junction
Figure 1 - Proposed Junction Improvements at Sankey St/Liverpool Rd/Parker St/Crossfield St

5.4 Improvements on A5061 Liverpool Rd

Cycle lanes have been added to Liverpool Road between its junction with Crossfield Street/Parker Street and Crossfields Roundabout. While we welcome the intention to give cyclists priority by installing cycle lanes on this strech of road the poor quality of the facility, in particular the inadequate width, is endangering cyclists.

Proposals are:

  • This stretch of road currently has sub-standard 1.2m wide cycle lanes. These should be widened to the standard cycle lane width of 2.0m.
  • A bus lane should be provided from the bus stop at Milner St at least as far as the top of the railway bridge. This would prevent buses being blocked in at the bus stop and greatly assist right turning cyclists to get into lane. Ideally, if traffic was prohibited from turning left into Crossfield St then the bus lane could be continued all the way to the junction.

 Contents 

6 ROUTES TO THE NORTH

6.1 Improvements to Winwick Street

Winwick Street used to be the main road (A49) from Warrington to the north but now only takes local traffic. The road is wide and still laid out to accommodate a large volume of traffic so there is the potential to create a more cycle friendly environment.

Figure 2 illustrates the following proposals:

  • The road should be reduced to a single 4.25m-wide lane in each direction, with spare road space reallocated to wider pavements.
  • Inset bays should be created by building out the pavement. These bays should be separated from the main carriageway by a hatched area to protect cyclists from car doors. Such an approach would accommodate the taxi rank by Central Station and could facilitate managed parking
  • Pavement should be wide at the junctions to allow pedestrians to cross safely and at the bus stops to create bus "boarders"

Winwick Street
Figure 2 - Proposed Improvements to Winwick Street

6.2 Junction Treatment at Winwick St/Tanners Lane/Haydock St

Tanners lane used to take a reasonable volume of traffic travelling east to west, north of the town centre. The construction of Midland Way has effectively made this route redundant so now the junction is not particularly busy.

It is proposed that:

  • The B5210 should be re-routed and traffic travelling east from Froghall Lane or Crossfield Street should be signposted to follow Midland Way to Battersby Lane. This should reduce traffic volumes at this junction, improving cycle safety.
  • Since the traffic flow on Winwick Street has been reduced (see 6.1), the left hand filter lane on the Winwick St as it approaches from the south is redundant. It should be removed (see Figure 3) as its presence forces cyclists heading straight on to filter across traffic to the right, a difficult manoeuvre.
  • This single north bound lane should continue beyond the junction towards the Lord Rodney roundabout (Figure 3).

6.3 Improvements to the Lord Rodney Roundabout

The Lord Rodney roundabout still reflects the role of Winwick St as the main route north from town. There are minimal deflections, which means it is possible for traffic to negotiate the junction at speed. High traffic speeds are dangerous and off-putting for cyclists. This is particularly problematical for cyclists heading north-east from Winwick Street to Pinners Brow, since they come into conflict with vehicles heading North to the (currently) blocked up section of Winwick Street.

Figure 3 shows the following proposals:

  • The roundabout should be replaced by a reduced diameter roundabout centred on the line of Pinners Brow. Winwick St should be 'bent in' from the north and south so that four 'arms' are at right angles (NE, NW, SW, SE).
  • The geometry of the roundabout should be based on the 'continental' design described in Sustrans guidelines5. The entry and exit arms should be a single lane perpendicular to the roundabout rather than meeting it at a tangent. The circulatory carriageway should be just wide enough to vehicles to perform a right hand turn.
  • A runoff area in the centre of the roundabout would assist bus passage

Lord Rodney Roundabout

Figure 3 - Junction Treatments at Winwick St/Tanners Lane/Haydock St and the Lord Rodney Roundabout

6.4 Junction Treatment at Pinners Brow/Orford Lane/Lythgoes Lane

The main traffic flow is along the A49 Lythgoes Lane, while the main cycle routes follow the B5210 from Pinners Brow to both Orford Lane and Lythgoes Lane north bound. Currently, the most difficult manoeuvre for cyclists at the junction is turning right into Pinners Brow towards the town centre from the busy A49. In addition, the left hand filter lane can also be intimidating for cyclists heading out of town from Pinners Brow to Orford Lane.

Figure 4 shows the following proposals:

  • The junction should be provided with advanced stop lanes for cyclists. This particularly important on the south-west and north-west approaches since this would go some way towards addressing the difficult manoeuvres described above.
  • The approach cycle lane from the south-west (Pinners Brow) should be to the right of the left-hand filter lane to assist cyclists heading straight on towards Orford Lane.
  • The approach cycle lane from the Northwest (Lythgoes Lane) should be just to the left of the right-hand filter lane to help cyclists turning right into Pinners Brow.

Pinners Brow/Orford Lane/Lythgoes Lane
Figure 4 - Proposed Junction Treatment at Pinners Brow/Orford Lane/Lythgoes Lane

6.5 Direct Cycle Route between Winwick Street and Winwick Road

The LTP proposes a bus route following Winwick Street through the section that is currently blocked off to join bus lanes on Winwick Road. Although this may be affected by the proposed Tesco/stadium development the route should be designed for use by cyclists.

It is proposed that:

  • North bound cyclists should be accommodated in the proposed bus lane.
  • South bound cyclists on Winwick Road will need to turn right from a busy road. The junction should be designed in such a way that cyclists do not have to filter across lanes of fast-moving traffic. This should be achieved by introducing a signalised junction.
  • The proposed bus lanes on Winwick Road should be wider than the outside lane to enable buses to overtake cyclists within the lane. The bus lane should be as wide as possible.
  • Even if a bus lanes is not introduced on Winwick Road, the principle of a wider kerb-side lane applies. An ideal width for a kerb-side lane carrying general traffic is 4.25m

 Contents 

7 ROUTES TO THE EAST

7.1 Upgrading Brick St (A49) Pedestrian Crossing

The route into town via School Lane and Cockhedge lane could be the most attractive to cyclists travelling from the East. Brick Street (A49) provides a significant barrier, and the route along the Cockhedge Lane has been broken by the Cockhedge Centre development.

It is proposed that:

  • The existing pedestrian crossing should be upgraded to a Toucan crossing and realigned to assist cyclists heading from Cockhedge Lane via School Brow. This route will join up with the existing Toucan crossing of the A57 to the north of Sainsburies Supermarket.
  • The crossing must be a single stage since the central island is too narrow for cyclists to stop. This would also be the most satisfactory option for pedestrians, for whom the A49 also forms a significant barrier to the Town Centre.
  • Measures should be taken to re-connect the severed ends of Cockhedge Lane, or to link Cockhedge Lane to Buttermarket St., enabling cyclists (but not general traffic). This could be achieved by simple means such making a passage through a low wall.

7.2 Upgrading Mersey St (A49) Crossings

The A49 along Mersey Street and Brick Street continues to act as the most significant barrier against cycle access to the Town Centre from the East. The two pedestrian crossings of Mersey St (A49) serve useful lines for cyclists heading from the town centre towards the Greenway at Kingsway Bridge.

It is proposed that:

  • Both crossings be upgraded to toucan crossings.
  • The northern crossing should be realigned to assist cyclists heading from Buttermarket St to Napier St.
  • The southern crossing should be realigned to assist cyclists heading from Academy St to Hall St.
  • Both crossings should be a single stage (see also 7.1).

 Contents 

8 ROUTES TO THE SOUTH

8.1 Bridgefoot Bypass Scheme: Cycling Principles

All cycle routes to the south will be affected by the Bridgefoot bypass scheme, which makes the Cycle Campaign's previous proposals[2] redundant. In order to improve access for cyclists (one of the objectives of the bypass1), the following principles must be followed:

  • The design of the scheme should make the roads themselves navigable for cyclists
  • Any use of cycle paths should not replace sound cycle provision on the roads and should not be at the expense of pedestrians
  • The bypass should be subject to cycle audit procedures

8.2 Opportunities for Cyclists - the New Bridge Foot

Bridge Foot itself should be greatly improved by the scheme, particularly for cyclists heading for Knutsford Road (A5061). In order to capitalise on the opportunities for cyclists:

  • The proposed bus route over the old bridge should be designed for use by cyclists with wide (4.5m) lanes to enable buses to overtake.
  • The bus lane approach from Knutsford Road (A5061) should keep to the left of all other traffic lanes to maintain continuity through the junction (see Figure 5). This will enable cyclists to avoid having to filter across a significant volume of left turning traffic and will prevent buses being blocked from reaching the junction by a queue of left turning vehicles

Bridge Foot
Figure 5 - Proposals for Bridge Foot and Brian Bevan Island

8.3 Improvements to Knutsford Road (A5061)

To improve safety for cyclists on Knutsford Road, it is proposed that:

  • The kerbside lanes on the dual carriageway section should be widened to 4.25m by moving the dividing line to the right. This will make it safer for vehicles to overtake.
  • Bus lanes should be installed in both directions.

8.4 Improvements between Bridge Foot and Brian Bevan Island

The railway bridge can be intimidating for cyclists due to narrow traffic lanes. Although many cyclists currently use the pavement over the railway bridge, this does not provide link safely with the rest of the route and can bring cyclists into conflict with pedestrians. It is proposed that:

  • Space should be taken from the central reservation and outside lanes to widen the kerbside lanes, providing safer on-road cycling
  • If sufficient space is available a full width (2.0m) cycle lane could be created. (A wide general traffic lane is preferable to a narrow cycle lane if space is limited)
  • A cycle lane on the southbound carriageway would not be useful because south-bound cyclists will be heading in all directions from Brian Bevan Island. A cycle lane would discourage correct road positioning approaching the junction and therefore be disadvantageous.
  • Off-road cycle paths should not be considered an alternative to on road cycling (see the Cycle Strategy[1]). Particular notice should be given to the hierarchy of cycle provision (see 2.1). If any cycle paths are constructed, they must be easy to use, and link up safely with other parts of the route.

8.5 Junction Treatment at Brian Bevan Island

Currently, Brian Bevan Island is not too bad for cyclists as effectively there are only 3 arms to the roundabout so there are few conflicting cycle/motor-vehicle movements. When the bypass is complete this will become more problematical. There will be 4 major arms to the junction with a significant traffic flow over the blue bridge and a large number of right-hand turn manoeuvres.

It is proposed that:

  • The roundabout replaced by a signal-controlled crossroads
  • Each of the four approaches should have Advanced Stop Lines installed (whether or not the roundabout is replaced by a crossroads).
  • Cycle approach lanes should be aligned as shown in Figure 5. These locations have been chosen to assist right-turning and forward travelling cyclists. The most popular cycle routes will be straight across the junction; between the town centre and Wilderspool Causeway/Chester Road.

8.6 Improvements to Wilderspool Causeway (A49)

North bound, the existing bus lane is ideal for cyclists. On street parking is permitted on the south bound Causeway near to Brian Bevan Island. To improve cycle safety in this area, it is proposed that:

  • Inset parking bays with pavement build-outs at junctions and for bus boarders should be created.
  • Parking bays should be separated from the main carriageway by a hatched area to protect cyclists from car doors.

8.7 Improvements to Chester Road (A5060)

On the southbound side of Chester Road, it is proposed that:

  • Inset parking bays and pavement build-outs are constructed as described in Section 8.6.
  • The width of south-bound lane should not be reduced to less than 4.25m by the proposed introduction of a bus lane north-bound. Otherwise cyclists could be subject to dangerous "squeeze" from overtaking traffic.

8.8 Designing the Bypass

The new bypass should be subject to cycle audit procedures to ensure an inherently cycle friendly carriageway design.

It is proposed that:

  • wide (4.25m) lanes separated by a wide hatched centre line are used, permitting lorries to overtake cyclists safely.
  • Junctions should be designed with care to avoid cycle/motor- vehicle conflicts.
  • Cycle hostile features such as roundabouts, central refuge islands, junctions that require filtering and shared use pavements should be avoided.
  • A toucan crossing is introduced to take the Greenway route across the road at the west end of the Blue Bridge.

 Contents 

9. IMPLEMENTATION

In order for the schemes to be a success, important factors other than the engineering measures discussed above need to be addressed. In particular:

  • When work is well underway the routes need to be publicised, perhaps a leaflet with map showing routes, cycle parking, cycle shops.
  • Signposting – particularly where the routes are different to general traffic routes.
  • Thorough cycle audit procedures should be implemented to ensure that new works, including the Bridgefoot by-pass are cycle friendly.
  • Cycle parking in the Town Centre still requires significant improvement. Many of the recommendations in the Cycle Campaign's previous report[2] are still valid. Although Cycle parking at the Train Stations has improved, there is still further room for improvement. The Cycle Parking implemented at Cockhedge is very poor, both in terms of quality and location. The Cycle parking at the new Lidl supermarket east of the town centre is an example of good practice.

 Contents 

REFERENCES

  1. The Local Transport Plan 2001/6, Warrington Borough Council, 2000
  2. A Practical Vision for Cycling in Warrington Town Centre, Warrington Cycle Campaign, April 1999
  3. Guidance on Local Transport Plans, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, November 1998
  4. Cycle-Friendly Infrastructure, Department of Transport / Bicycle Association / Cycling Tourist Club / Institution of Highways and Transportation, 1995
  5. The National Cycle Network: Guidelines and Practical Details for, SUSTRANS, March 1997
  6. Two Decades of Redway Cycle Paths in Milton Keynes, J.Franklin in Traffic Engineering and Control, July/August 1999

 Contents 

Updated 20th October 2001
Pete Owens
 Home