- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
Portsmouth Road cycle lane - Kingston Mini HollandKingston's Portsmouth Road cycle tracks finally complete
A new cycle route, two years in the making, finally opened this week.
The final touches were added to the 1400m fully segregated riverside route, on Portsmouth Road in Kingston upon Thames on Tuesday, one of six routes planned as part of the borough’s £30m “Mini Holland” programme.
Although there is a “shared space” section beside a zebra crossing, and the junctions are slow to navigate, campaigners say designs are the best option for the route and have been improved almost beyond recognition from their early incarnations.
Kingston overhauls Mini Holland plans after criticism
Kingston Cycling Campaign Co-ordinator, Jon Fray, told road.cc: “Kingston Cycling Campaign is pleased we have got proper segregation pretty much all the way along”.
“I think [the council] have done just about the best they can do.”
Kingston council faced backlash after its original designs were little more than advisory bike lanes - as Fray puts it “white lines separating bikes from traffic”. After more than 700 people responded to a consultation on the scheme, many calling for better protection for people on bikes, the council increased the segregated portion of the route from 20 per cent to 85 per cent.
Fray said pedestrian crossings and narrow road width limited the council’s options for the route, other than a small amount of “shared space” with pedestrians. He said once the adjacent riverside path is reopened, many people will use that.
He said most of the route is not shared space, though that isn’t always clear from designs. “The design changes along the length. At the narrowest point the track is not a thing carriageway height, it is at footway height. This may cause some confusion because people may think it's footway but it is actually intended to be 'cycles only' and is signed as that, not as shared.
“By the junction with Woodbines Ave there is a bit of shared use, but with the crossing there and access to the riverside that doesn't seem unreasonable.”
“Part of it was opened in the summer and there was some aggro between drivers being aggressive for cyclists not using the very short bit of cycle track, but it wasn’t continuous and you had to cross traffic to get to it, so we are hoping people will make use of it. It’s certainly better than what we had before.”
Kingston cyclists unimpressed with Mini Holland plans
The previous advisory cycle lane was less than half a metre wide and disappeared at the narrowest parts of the road.
A council spokesperson told road.cc: “The developments are aimed at relieving the pressure of a growing population on the borough’s transport network by providing new facilities for cycling and walking, while improving road safety and public spaces.”
“The two-way segregated cycle lane on Portsmouth Road is nearly 1.4 km long. It follows the recommended minimum width set out in TfL’s London Cycle Design Standards, which is three meters wide, allowing for comfortable use by all types of bicycles, less confident riders, and the increasing number of bicycle users that will come with population growth.”
One local cyclist has filmed the entire route, and has highlighted some issues with the designs.
David Williams says in one direction, travelling on the same side of the road as the cycle route, is simple. However, he says, the opposite direction is less straight forward because cyclists need to cross the road twice, to enter and exit the cycle lane.
He says: “This hasn't been thought through as well as it could have. Riders are expected to mount the pavement with a sharp left and use the tiger crossing. You could just signal right and cross the traffic if you felt confident.
“Coming off the other end is more complicated. There are toucan crossing and you are expected to mount the pavement, in practical terms most cyclists will leave the cross and join the carriageway. I am told there is a full red phase where cyclists could cross in any direction. It would be nice to have some green cycle lights to show when this is.”
Consultations on schemes covering Kingston Station, Wheatfield Way, Surbiton to Kingston and Fountain Roundabout took place in the summer.
Now, consultations on three further cycling routes are open, and end on 17 November - from Kingston to Kingston Vale, New Malden and Tolworth.
The Kingston Vale route is 2.5 miles long, linking a local hospital, a university and Richmond Park. A mixture of kerb protection, “quietways” on low traffic streets, and shared space with pedestrians will be used.
Money was awarded three Mini Holland schemes in outer London in March 2014, intended to become a showcase of town centre streets, which prioritised people moving by bike and on foot over motor traffic.
Laura Laker is a freelance journalist with more than a decade’s experience covering cycling, walking and wheeling (and other means of transport). Beginning her career with road.cc, Laura has also written for national and specialist titles of all stripes. One part of the popular Streets Ahead podcast, she sometimes appears as a talking head on TV and radio, and in real life at conferences and festivals. She is also the author of Potholes and Pavements: a Bumpy Ride on Britain’s National Cycle Network.
Latest Comments
- hawkinspeter 2 sec ago
What's that? A mobile home for squirrels?
- PRSboy 14 min 2 sec ago
The advertising in Strava is in the feed, usually disguised as some low-grade challenge sponsored by Whoever. Every time one of your 'friends'...
- mark1a 21 min 50 sec ago
Brompton however....
- Backladder 32 min 42 sec ago
While original sash windows are nice they make it very hard to keep the house warm, we eventually went for upvc double glazed sash window...
- wtjs 51 min 26 sec ago
The UK's 'Active Travel' checklist seems to be:...
- Andrewbanshee 1 hour 55 min ago
As you said the pedals will be hidden anyway. My shoes, 3 pairs of them, have reflective strips on the heel and my winter trousers do too on the...
- Steve K 1 hour 56 min ago
Other drivers only care about disabled people when it gives them a way to object to cycling infrastructure.
- mark1a 10 hours 21 sec ago
I'll put you down as a no then.
- chrisonabike 15 hours 26 min ago
Well if you *can* interview the original riders at all surely they worked, at least?...
Add new comment
48 comments
I live on one of the river roads that lead onto Portsmouth Road where this new cycle highway is located. I think it's brilliant, but I can see potential danger that if I want to join the lane, I have to cycle across the main road and into the bike path - which means taking into account 4 different traffic flows simultaneously.
Like playng frogger but with real life consequences.
@bikebot the bridge is only useful for someone like me who lives in North Kingston so can cycle along the river to get onto it without crossing the dual carriageway.
However there is a busy round about at the Hampton Wick end and there is no cycle path to get you around that roundabout. Basically as with most cycling infrastructure in the UK where cycle paths are most needed e.g. at roundabouts, junctions they disappear.
I've already responded on the bridge point. Read earlier reply.
Well, at 11am yesterday, I tried to use this again. And failed to get on, as cars weren't allowing me to pull out and cross onto the tracks. One car actually shadowed me, planting itself too close to risk pulling out.
There were also lots of people walking where I would have been cycling. But I can't blame them, as it was their pavement first.
Decided to turn off down Catherine Road and continue south on Maple road instead.
You were blocked from using the parrallel crossing by The Anglers?
When a vehicle is that close to my rear wheel and not budging, I don't really want to pull across in front of it to take primary in preparation for a turn. There was a solid flow of traffic in the opposite lane, so we would have had to wait for a while.
I also had two friends following me who couldn't get across either.
Drivers didn't appear to be expecting cyclists to be pulling out to cross over, as two cars had steamed past shortly before, when I had tried to signal.
I've cycled for a few years now, but I can imagine inexperienced cyclists, after a relatively smooth trip into town, would not enjoy this part of the return. I wonder how soon we'll have the first incident?
You don't have to, you go left on to the shared use area via the dropped kerb that's before it. There's an arrow there pointing you onto it and the bike lane on that side ends. Then by entering the parallel crossing you have the same priority as pedestrians do to cross. If you try to turn into it directly while in the traffic lane, technically you don't have priority (disclaimer, may need to double check on that).
It's a "jug handle", and there are better arrangements that I could point to but I think there the engineers have decided to be cautious about how quickly drivers can learn new infrastructure. CS6 for example does have a direct diagonal crossing by Farringdon, but it's signal controlled.
A-ha, had only watched the northbound video.
I'd seen the sign, and glimpsed the arrangement, but on Sunday I was travelling too fast to figure out how to negotiate it, and yesterday had forgotten about it.
I'd have preferred a roundabout. Smoother corners at speed. The current arrangement is certainly not for those travelling at 20mph.
And that bit around Laithwaites is just...mental.
I often take out rides from Market Square, heading south. Not sure whether we'll opt for the tracks or stay on the road. Morning traffic can be unpredictable and impatient.
Kingston doesn't have to be a dump but it would require tackling the dual carriageway and an attempt at something more than the piecemeal approach we have had so far (which I can't support I am afraid). 200 yard sections of unlinked and inadequate lanes don't cut it as you still have to find ways to link and integrate at a later date after an endless cycle of consultations.
It pains me to hear London portrayed as the "village idiot of urban innovation" but it's correct. We don't even have to entertain original thought and just copy what works from our near neighbours. But we won't, as we're wedded to those consultations that dilute worthy into at best only partially worthy. So that's why I don't support diluted "flagship" projects. Sorry to those who feel otherwise but we're not on the same page.
I'll just leave this here for those interested:
http://www.copenhagenize.com/2015/02/the-village-idiot-of-urban-innovati...
You've seen that the new consultations do actually form continuous routes?
Let's not go over the problems again, you can do that by responding to the consultation, but they are continuous and the only way to argue for them to be improved rather than diluted is to argue for them (with criticism). The only other page available, is the status quo of the last 40 years which some people are quite happy with, but the share of cycling will never increase.
What I forgot to say is that Kingston's a shithole. All lanes should lead out of there, none in. And I'm allowed to say this as I'm from there
Everyone that's driven on the gyratory, wishes all the lanes did lead out of there!
The Kingston bridge cycling lane is often full of both peds and glass. Especially on a Sunday morning. I avoid it due to both.
Bikebot,
There's nothing wrong with the images you show of the cycle lane over the bridge but there's everything wrong with the entry and exit.
To disabuse you of one incorrect inference, I believe money should be spent on infrastructure for the benefit of those who say they would cycle but won't (usually because it's too dangerous). I do not for a moment believe it should be targeting existing cyclists, so forget whether it is right or wrong for me personally.
I come at infrastructure from the angle of the parent with 2 children under 12 who wants to cycle but won't. The question is will it work for them ?
On the north end of the bridge cycle lane, your images don't show the lane spitting you straight back out on to the dual carriageway. On the Bentall's lane, it spits you out into a bus lane where they turn left and worse still, the end of the lane is concealed by a low wall, not exactly great for seeing young children. So here we have danger designed in, hence my description of "half baked".
So whilst "cyclists who argue against protected infrastructure" might "test your patience more than a little", I will only argue in favour of infrastructure that addresses the needs set out above otherwise we're wasting money and time.
Fair enough, but note that you've now filled in the details of your complaint and it sounds like you don't actually have a problem with the bridge itself. Criticism without context is constantly being picked up and repeated to oppose it. So yes, you're first statement does test my patience.
I would criticise the lack of continuation on Hampton Court Road first, which is 40mph, has very narrow bike lanes but wastes masses of space down the middle. That's not something Kingston can solve directly, it's Richmond's road. Second, I'd cricise the crossing at Bentall's, but it seems that Kingston are looking for a way to extend that lane as protected space all the way under John Lewis.
Now it sounds like you'd support that, and there are other changes that can be argued for, but naming the bridge as a problem makes that more difficult to achieve. Basically, words are weapons.
I rode it today, heading south from Kingston to the Laithwaites junction. I was running late so was doing about 18mph.
I got onto it fine - as there were no cars around at the time. My main observation is the tarmac on the pavement section hasn't been levelled properly - it's really lumpy, and the faster you go, the worse it feels. The segregated section was fine.
It was an improvement to the very ropey road, and the bollards didn't give me any problems. There weren't any peds around on the cycling bit. I just rode off the pavement back onto the main road at the lights - wasn't sure what I was supposed to do, but there were people at the lights that I didn't want to tangle with.
Well I certainly wouldn't be riding that at those speeds - at least 10 times walking pace and practically matching the cars.
I predict claims for colliding with those near invisible bollards, and any serious speed road riders remaining on the road.
Unfortunately Kingston already has a fair amount of half baked infrastructure, have a look at the pointless lanes outside Bentalls or the lane over the bridge. As I said, I sadly don't share the enthusiasm as unused infrastructure is counter productive in my humble opinion, people look at it and say "we spend money on it and they don't use it". It then becomes part of the argument against spending (the already paltry sums) on cycling. We can get it right, the embankment and oval/vauxhall are examples of this but the video above does not fill me with hope. I'll be happy to be proven wrong if it turns out otherwise.
What's your complaint about the bridge?
I'd obviously prefer it if the lanes were the widths now recommended by LCDS, but do you think these two would be happier sharing with the cement mixer?
Images via streetview.
For the curious, the bridge has a bidirectional track on one side and a narrower one directional track on the other. The whole structure was widened in 2000 to accomodate them and the bus lane.
I use those "pointless" cycle paths every day. I find them very useful. But then I use my bike just for getting around, not racing around.
Will racing cyclists ever be happy with a bike lane which is also being used by slower cyclists though? To keep up their high speeds they appear to prefer the main roads I've noticed. Not bashing the lycra brigade, but I can see how trying to squeeze in bike paths that suit all the different type of cyclists is nigh on impossible in London.
So we rode this today. Took the missus and sister-in-law, who by no means calls herself a cyclist. I gave no preamble beyond "we'll use a new cycle lane that's not finished yet." Her reaction? "It's really good. For 300 yards. The rest is shit."
Its biggest problem, as stated somewhere above, is that most of it looks like pavement. Yes, there are unfinished sections where parallel pedestrian areas will run closer to the river, but there are already finished sections of those, and on a sunny Sunday, where you'd have thought walking by the river held most appeal, nearly everyone on foot treated the cycle lane as the pavement. Cycling was almost pointless. I ride two small cycle paths on the commute that aren't that obviously marked and reckon I use my bell every other day on them. At 7am to boot.
Someone above mentioned red asphalt. It's a necessity if this is going to be a success.
Hate it, hate it, hate it!
The road is now too narrow. I have lived in the area for 15 years, I cycle and drive it lots and it just doesnt work.
Cycling on the road is just awful, the cycle lane is fine for slow cyclists mums and dads, kids, etc. If you cycle on the road you cause chaos, driving behind a cyclist is terrible as you cant overtake.
Then further on Portsmouth Road when you really need a cycle lane you are just dumped into a really busy road that has a road surface from hell.
I really wish we would stop wasting money on these schemes and the years of consultation and planning and just resurface more roads, create 'red paint' lanes that is a much better and efficient use of the space. I know its not an easy fix in an area that has a lot of cars/car usage, but I feel using the road space for a cycle lane was a bad idea.
Hate it...
Fukawitribe, top video, 13-29 seconds various narrowing points due to trffic lights/street furniture.
1.44, a bus stop with limited space for people waiting for the bus.
1.53 pedestrian on path, not clear if shared use or not.
2.10 ditto
2.17 ditto
2.27 ditto
2.59 ditto
As I said, maybe I have missed something and bikebot suggests it isn't finished (which I hope it isn't).
I do know that this particular road is used by numerous club run types and I can't seem them using it due to the reasons set out above. It therefore has the potential to be another priory lane (Roehampton), i.e. visible infrastructure that isn't used because it's half baked so expect lots more youtube videos of Mr Angry (aka Mr Jason Wells) losing their shit because a bicycle isn't in the cycle lane.
Sorry it doesn't accord with your views but riding around London over the last 20 years, the biggest and most consistent sources of conflict are where there's a perceived provision of cycle lanes and cyclists not using it. I sincerely hope this will not turn out to be one of these but a straightforward viewing of that video rings alarm bells for me.
I'm not knocking your concerns, everyone has some with this one, merely that you saying you wouldn't build it at all seems extreme and some of the criticism seems at odds with some comments from a local cycle concern and some people that have ridden it. It's also not finished as you mention and others have said and whilst I understand the valid issue with 'perceived provision', whether or not it's suitable for a club run comes across as missing the point about new cycling infrastructure
Half of this route is bascially just cycling on the pavement. If the route gets enough traffic to "justify" the 2-way segregated part, then surely there will be too many cyclists for the pavement section?
I hate shared space. It's generally a "can't be arsed" solution.
The only section that is shared use is by the junction with the Toucan crossings and immediately around the pedestrian crossings further up. The scheme doesn't feature any shared space.
I wish I shared the enthusiasm of others here. Watching the video, there are pinch points, street furniture and a merging from segregated into shared pedestrian use along the route where it looks like potential flashpoints have been designed into the route rather than designed out. As for heading southbound and having to cross the road several times, I really don't know where to start.
I see lots of aggro from drivers when roadies who want to chug along at 20mph+ (it's a pancake flat section of road after all) stay on the road for all the reasons outlined above.
Maybe I have missed something but if you are going to do infrastructure, do it properly or don't do it at all.
So, if it were up to you this wouldn't be have been built then. I wonder how Kingston Cycling Campaign, the people on here who have used it and others might feel about that... perhaps you could educate them as to why that would be an improvement on what they now have ?
The shared use section is actually quite small, just around the junction. The pedestrians further up will in future be using the riverbank path which is still underconstruction (because the claim about the project being finished isn't exactly true). All of the sections marked with bike symbols are not shared use. You don't have to cross several times, when approaching from Thames Ditton you don't have to cross at all and you bypass the traffic lights.
There are issues, most can be resolved. I'm going to keep mentioning red asphalt until enough people catch on to how brilliant it is. But I don't support the "do it properly or don't do it at all" view as I'm a pragmatist. The Dutch and the Danes didn't have a secret lab where they grew best in world highway engineers overnight, their old infrastructure is also full of flaws (as is some of the new stuff)
Haven't used route this so I'm not venturing an opinion, but I would say that you aren't using the word 'pragmatist' correctly! "Do it properly or not at all" and "pragmatism" are not mutually-exclusive. The whole point of the former position is the belief that poor infrastructure makes things worse, i.e. it doesn't work, which means the pragmatic approach would be to oppose it.
Perhaps you mean you are an 'incrementalist'!
Pages