Responses to Letter: We Need to Stop Shouting and Start Listening

1. Liz Critchfield Reply

   November 19, 2024 at 3:37 pm

   Any scheme that can provide safe travel for pedestrians, cyclists and motorised traffic is to be welcomed.

   The problem with the current proposal is that it does the opposite. Pedestrians and cyclists will have to share space, at times barely a metre wide. Whilst I’m sure the majority of cyclists are sensible, some are not. There have been some horrific pavement accidents reported, especially with e-bikes: a recent one left a 10 year old boy with appalling facial injuries.

   Space is also an issue with vehicular traffic – in places there will be a few centimetres between larger vehicles. People perhaps need to be reminded that the A3100 is not just a local Burpham Road, it’s the main southbound access to Guildford and carries a lot of commercial traffic. They can’t switch to bikes.

   I agree the shouting and vituperative comments from some who should know better need to stop, along with the “cyclist good, motorist bad” attitude. There are idiots in both camps.

   Perhaps a possible compromise would be to level and resurface the road which would at least improve the current cycle track.
   • George Potter Reply

     November 19, 2024 at 6:01 pm

     Unfortunately what Ms Critchfield is saying is simply incorrect.

     The scheme proposes a minimum space of 1.8 metres width for shared usage, or just shy of six feet in the old money, and that would only be for the narrowest five per cent of the route where there physically is not the space to do anything else without unacceptably narrowing the carriageway.

     Elsewhere shared usage would be in excess of three metres wide, but the vast majority of the route would see pedestrians and cyclists physically separated from each other, with the benefit of significantly widened pavements for pedestrians, along with seven new pedestrian crossings along the road and around roundabouts.

     Similarly, the minimum carriageway width along the road will be 6.5 metres (over 21 feet), which has been independently confirmed as well within the safe standard for two large lorries to pass each other without either having to leave the centre of their lane. This is also, in fact, wider than the current pinch point on the Portsmouth Road outside The Anchor pub, which is used by large lorries in both directions every single day without incident.

     As with many arguments against the scheme, the claim that this would not be safe or would make things worse for pedestrians is based on fundamental misunderstandings about what the scheme is actually proposing, by people who haven’t read the latest designs or the independent safety audit which concluded that this would be a major safety improvement for pedestrians (as well as cyclists) compared to what we have right now.

     George Potter is a Lib Dem borough and county councillor.
2. Bethan Moore Reply

   November 19, 2024 at 6:47 pm

   I thank Liz Critchfield for engaging with my request.

   From what you’ve said, it seems that shared pathways for cyclists and pedestrians is your main concern and that you are worried about accidents happening. It’s a concern I’ve seen in other comments.

   I can understand that if someone rides uncourteously in this situation to you could feel frightened. The problem is that this the exact situation cyclists on London road (and many other roads) currently find themselves in. We share the road with cars and the less courteous ones can leave me shaking.

   So where do we go? How can we all travel without unnecessary fear? Resurfacing would be nice, but isn’t enough from my point of view.

   Thanks again for the polite discussion.