A plan for the future of cycling and walking in Adur and Worthing: Time to have your say

Adur and Worthing Councils have published the draft version of their Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP). The Shoreham-By-Cycle team contributed to the information that went into this document, working alongside other organisations like Worthing Cycle Forum and Sustrans.

This document will help Adur and Worthing Councils to secure funds that will make cycling and walking easier and safer for everyone. Now the plan is open for consultation, the councils want your help in checking it’s the right way forward.

Take a look

You can browse the draft version of the Adur and Worthing plan. It’s quite big and detailed, but really interesting if you want to learn more about making sustainable transport easier.

If you just want a quick overview of what’s currently proposed, this map of the Adur area provides a useful glance of the network of cycle routes that are likely to form part of the LCWIP.

We think this plan is generally good. It includes routes that currently have no cycle infrastructure – AND existing cycle routes that may be ripe for improvement. Key routes between many of Shoreham’s most important locations are covered.

You can learn more at a consultation event on Thursday 19 December at the Shoreham Centre, from 2pm to 5pm. We’ll be there, alongside officers from the councils.

When you’ve had a look at the proposals, fill in the consultation questionnaire, to tell the councils what you think. You need to complete the questionnaire by 6 January 2020.

Don’t worry about detail. That comes later. At the moment, this public consultation is about the overall plan: Which routes are the important ones to make Shoreham easier to get around?

Where is most important?

When you fill in the questionnaire, you’ll be asked to decide on priorities. This is your chance to express a view on which parts of the network should be addressed with most urgency.

See what you think. The Shoreham-By-Cycle team has considered this, and we think these three routes should top the list at first:

    1. A259 Brighton Road, linking Shoreham to Southwick (and beyond). A high quality separated cycleway is needed on this important direct route. This will enable easy safe commuting for many.
    2. Upper Shoreham Road. This road runs east to west across the whole town, north of the town centre. For much of its length, the road is very wide, meaning a high-quality separated cycleway is achievable.
    3. Middle Road. Running through the heart of east Shoreham, Middle Road is a popular, often crowded, route for children and parents going to Shoreham Academy and several other schools.

It’s good, but what could be better?

There is lots of good stuff in the LCWIP – but the Shoreham-By-Cycle would like to see details changed or added – to make this plan even better. We’ll be mentioning these proposals in the consultation. When you offer your feedback, you may want to consider whether you agree with these suggestions…

These points are not our only thoughts on what’s needed in Shoreham. They are the changes and additions we would suggest to improve the draft LCWIP.

    • Shoreham Beach. This popular area needs a safe route east of Adur Ferry Bridge – along either Riverside Road/Harbour Way or Old Fort Road.
    • Manor Hall Road. This residential road, linking Southwick to Portslade, should be included in the plan.
    • Nicolson Drive. The current National Cycle Network route 2 would be improved by moving it from Rosslyn Road to the quiet Nicolson Drive – cutting out the narrow path beside Ham Field allotments.
    • Church Lane, Southwick. NCN2 could also be made better by moving it from Park Lane to Church Lane.
    • Buckingham Park. North of Upper Shoreham Road, a proposed route up The Drive would be better within the eastern side of Buckingham Park.
    • A foot/cycle bridge connecting Middle Road recreation ground to the new riverside developments would be very ambitious, but useful, connecting two parts of Shoreham currently separated by the railway line.
    • Widewater section of the seafront NCN2 . This very convenient route is increasingly busy, used not just among people on bikes, but people on foot – often with dogs. Given the importance of this route, let’s consider an additional separate ‘superhighway-style’ route beside the A259 to Lancing, reducing conflict and discomfort by the beach.

So, there you go. Exciting times. Make the most of your chance to have an input into the future of cycling around Shoreham.

    • Check out the plans
    • Meet the council team on 19 December if you want to know more
    • Talk to us if it helps
    • Fill in the questionnaire before 6 January 2020

 

 

 

 

2 thoughts on “A plan for the future of cycling and walking in Adur and Worthing: Time to have your say”

  1. TO: Adur and Worthing Council

    From: Barb o’Kelly

    Date: January 5 2020

    As I read the plan I recorded the following notes which I hope will be of some use but which didn’t fit into the questionnaire very well

    I am a local resident who cycles and walks throughout Adur and Worthing. I am retired and cycle and walk mainly for shopping and exercise. My post code is BN436BH. My response represents only myself.

    ADUR AND WORTHING LOCAL CYCLING AND WALKING INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN

    1.03 Onroad sections used frequently by bikes can the council use different criteria for pothole repairs than that used for cars.

    1.11 improve condition for cycling and walking/ ensure that consideration is given to cycling and walking within both local planning and transport policies and strategies – this raises thequestion of where new school is to belocated to accommodate the New Monks Farm children. If it is north of the A27 they will be having to cross that busy, polluted road which will be even more congested if parents drive their children to school.

    1`.18 most serious accidents involving cyclists in collisions happen at or near a road junction, particularly at roundabouts and T junctions. There will be many opportunities for conflicts between cyclists and cars along the A259 with all the new access points for the new developments.

    2.23 – “High levels of NO2 continue to be reported at Grove Lodge, Monitoring of particulates (2.5)in Worthing show the relevant objectives currently being met.?? Most cyclists use this section of the A27during peak times.At these times the monitor shows high levels of NO2 and Particulate 2.5 pollution. It is pointless relying on the averaged figures to say the objectives are being met. A daily commuter, whether by car or cycling will be breathing in high levels of air pollution and will not be breathing in averages. Please look at the figures for the peak times

    What percent of local traffic is commercial? What percentage is through traffic?

    2.43 – concentrating on routes that connect places. South Downs Nat Park is looking at routes that connect the Park.There were many objections raised over the width of the cycle path to access the park proposed as a result of the New Monks farm Plan. Should widths not be safe and consistent in all circumstances?

    4.3 SHOREHAM HARBOUR – Objective 5 of JAAp- “To improve connections and promote sustainable transport choices through ensuring new developments are well served by high quality, integrated and interconnected networks, improved pedestrian , cycling and public transport routes and reducing demand for travel by private car in innovative ways.

    Due to inadequate provision of parking for Focus employees streets are even more congested with parked cars and cars looking for places to park. To fulfil 4.3 closer enforcement of travel plans needs to be undertaken and developers parking assessments need to be more closely scrutinised.

    Page 37 picture ref 200 2.7 approach to the Perchvery busy so widening is important. I fully agree with other suggestions for this section of the route

    Page 392003.2this road can get busy on weekends and free flow is complicated by the number of cars/vans that park on the edge of the road. There is a conflict between traffic, walkers and cyclists..this section really needs widening with the inclusion of a pavement if possible.

    200 3.4 As the new cafe has been approved the conflict between pedestrians and cyclists may be increased as people will wander into the cycle path.A barrier, perhaps planters would warn pedestrians to watch for cyclists

    200 3.5Beach road/Ferry Road is usually congested due to parking for shoppers/flats

    200 3.2sign – Caution cyclist rejoin road – why cant this be used on east st.

    200 3.5 and 3.6Unclear wording makes this difficult to understand.

    200 4.2 . A pedestrian crossing at this point will be in close proximity to the traffic lights further east and will cause further traffic congestion and pollution.

    200 4.4 “Potential for links across A259 to proposed segregated cycle/pedestrian path, Cycle route proposals are to CONSIDER priorityfor pedestrian path. Cycle route proposals are to CONSIDER priority for pedestrians and cyclists across redevelopment site accesses on the south side of the road.”What will happen if this is considered and then rejected? Howsafe will it be for cyclists in conflict with the traffic emerging from the developments.

    Do you know how many access points will be required for the new developments?Could there be a potential safety issue as cars wait for the passing cyclists before emerging onto the A259. Reference 1.18

    2.46 Can you please check that there is a shared use path on the northern side. I can’t find it.

    202.42 There is also a conflict at the southern end of East St where pedestrians cross to the pedestrianised area. Cars coming around the corner, heading north may not expect to see pedestrians and cyclists on the road. There is no sign giving them advanced warning. The current sign is too high and is hung after the corner.I have had considerable correspondence with Mike Thomas from WSCC and some with Sustrans about this.Myself and friends have been shouted atby drivers and pedestrians that we are cycling the wrong way along East St . I have come off my bike when an approaching car did not give way or leave me with enough room. Many school children use this route heading home after school. The least that should happen is proper signage before there is a serious accident . I am afraid that, over many months I have made no headway on getting any changes considered.

    The cars parkingat the Brunswick Rd St Mary’s Rd junction are usually disabled drivers. So in many cases double yellow lines would not help. Also, it is a very sharp right turn if one tries to use the designated cycle lane

    2024.5 There is a great deal of traffic and parking along Middle Rd. At the end of the school day there is a conflict between :A. additional parking as parents pick up their children: B. the buses and the cyclists from Shoreham Academy who usually ride 2 abreast. There seem to be limited possibilities for improvements, aside from improving visibility by cutting down on the parking.

    I commend the councils and Sustrans for undertaking this ambitious project. My comments are not meant to be criticisms , just observations from my time cycling around Shoreham.

    I agree that it is worth exploring the possibility of a cycle route along upper shoreham road but how would there be enforcement of the parking situation. In Brighton, along Dyke Rd there is always parking on the cycle lane.

    I do have a few questions which I hope you will consider

    If the harbour developments along the A259 are delayed or do not advance where will the money come from for these improvements? I understood that some of the financing was coming from S106 agreements.

    What will be done to protect the cyclists along the A259 from air pollution, which may well increase as developments take place. Would the shared space cycle/pedestrian route on the south side of the developments along the harbour be suitable for commuting cyclists who may want to avoid the pollution?

    Thanks you for the time and effort you have put into developing this project.

    Sincerely,

    Barb O’kelly

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s