• [Cycling] Bicester: unsafe for pedestrians?

    From Spike@21:1/5 to All on Thu Feb 29 08:49:35 2024
    “If the scheme goes ahead I do not believe that the county council would be able to safeguard pedestrians”: Councillors “totally opposed” to allowing cyclists to use pedestrianised town centre street

    Plans to allow people to ride their bikes through a pedestrianised town
    centre street, at least for an 18-month trial period, have been criticised
    by opposition councillors, who say the scheme will make it difficult to “safeguard” pedestrians and other road users.

    Oxfordshire County Council is currently carrying out an initial
    consultation on plans to implement a trial which would enable two-way
    cycling on Sheep Street in Bicester, a long-established pedestrianised zone
    in the town centre’s conservation area.

    Conservative county councillors Donna Ford and Michael Waine, however, have urged the council to hold a full consultation before beginning a trial.

    “I am totally opposed to the proposal to allow two-way cycling in Sheep Street 24 hours a day, seven days a week,” Waine told the Oxford Mail (link is external).

    “Sheep Street has been a pedestrianised area for 30 years or more and has become an area used for markets, street cafes, exhibitions, and other
    events.

    “If the scheme goes ahead I do not believe that the county council would be able to safeguard pedestrians and other users, especially on busy days when
    the street is full of people.”

    He continued: “There is no clear rationale for this project given that, as with vehicles, there are readily available roads for cyclists around the
    town centre. And, there is no indication as to how the two way movement of bicycles will work particularly in the more restricted parts of the street. This is too major a proposal to agree an experimental 18-month period.”

    Bicester councillor Ford added: “Oxfordshire County Council should be open and honest with the residents of Bicester and conduct a full public consultation on this change before implementing it by stealth without
    seeking public opinion.

    “There are lots of questions still to be answered around how this would
    work with regards to two-way cycling vs one-way traffic, the effect on the much-loved Friday market, and other public events.”

    Meanwhile, Lib Dem councillor Chris Pruden even questioned the need for the trial, arguing that a lack of enforcement means cyclists are essentially
    free to ride on Sheep Street at the moment in any case.

    “Effectively it’s not like there’s a ban any way,” he said. “Bollards don’t
    seem to work. Unfortunately Cherwell doesn’t have the community resources
    to enforce anything.”

    Pruden also suggested that alternative cycling provision in Bicester should
    be considered and agreed with the Tory councillors that a proper assessment needs to be undertaken before any decision is made concerning the trial.

    Council “escalates war on cycling menaces” with new town centre ban, saying: “We will not stop until we eradicate this behaviour”

    “Oxfordshire County Council is carrying out initial consultation with key stakeholders to inform a formal decision about whether to implement an Experimental Traffic Order (ETO) to allow for two-way cycling on Sheep Street,” an Oxfordshire County Council spokesperson said.

    “Should Oxfordshire County Council decide to progress with the ETO, the
    views of everyone will be gathered during an initial six-month period once
    the experiment is in place. The information received from this public consultation will be used to help decide whether the scheme is made
    permanent or not after the 18-month trial period has ended. Additionally,
    it should be noted that the scheme can be amended at any time during its operation and even ended early should officers feel that necessary.”

    <https://road.cc/content/news/cycling-live-blog-28-february-2024-306991#live-blog-item-55439>

    --
    Spike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)