Comment on Priory Lane cycle route proposals

Published: Wednesday 17th January 18

The council is proposing to alter the layout of the cycle lane in Roehampton’s Priory Lane, and is seeking the views of local people.

Priory Lane is part of both the local and the national cycle route network and is used daily by more than a thousand cyclists, as well as being a popular route with motorists.

There is a footway on one side of the road only, and a cycle track takes up half of it. The cycle route is diverted through Bank Lane and Roehampton Gate.

The proposals would see a dedicated northbound cycle lane installed along the whole of Priory Lane, leaving the entire footpath for pedestrians. Southbound cycles will be integrated with motor traffic. Cycle-friendly speed tables and junctions would be installed to encourage motorists to keep to the 20mph limit.

The council’s transport spokesman Cllr Jonathan Cook said: “This route is popular with cyclists but we feel it could be safer for them and for pedestrians. Before we do anything we want to know what local residents think of the plans. Your views will be taken into consideration before any final proposals are published.”

Find out more and comment on the plans here

If you would prefer a paper copy, email consult@wandsworth.gov.uk.

The deadline for comments is February 16

 View comments on this article

Comments on this news item have been closed.

If you wish to complain about a comment, contact us at press@wandsworth.gov.uk.

Recent comments

I use Priory Lane frequently, usually driving but I have also cycled. Something urgently needs to be done to make the road safer for cyclists. Cyclists are deterred from using the cycle lane as at present it means crossing the road at the Upper Richmond Road end to access, it is raised at pavement level and cyclists do not want to slow down to stop at the entrances to side roads. I would support the pavement for pedestrians being widened slightly, the levelling off the existing cycle lane to the road to allow more road space and a cycle lane at road level or, if possible, a 2 way cycle lane being introduced, clearly segregated from the road on the other side of Priory Lane, next to Roehampton Club golf course.
Penelope Evans

23 February 2018

I think it is a brilliant proposal. I’ve been riding for 20 years to Richmond park and on so many occasions I’ve been abused or intimidated whilst riding along Priory Lane due to the fact there is a cycle path on the pavement. I don’t use it because it is broken in places it shouldn’t be ( tennis club) it is also dangerous to pedestrians who will wonder into the cycle path. The speed that motorists drive along Priory Lane always baffles me? Is it because it’s straight? There is a 20 limit but many seem to ignore it. I am very grateful that Wandsworth is considering changing the configuration of Priory Lane.
christopher bracewell

14 February 2018

This proposal is clearly regressive and totally fails the 8-80 vision for accessible cycling for all ages and abilities - would you ever let your child cycle down this road without the cycle lane? The cycle lane should be improved and made to have priority over the side roads. If the footway needs widened then make the road 1-way for motor traffic and provide a proper 2-way cycle lane. Why does LB Wansdworth insist on prioritising motorists (a minority) over those who walk, use public transport and cycle. I regularly use the route - the existing layout gives rise to collision risk at side roads OR leads to close passes due to the behaviour of motorists who get frustrated with cyclists. 20mph is fast for most cyclists!
Alasdair Young

6 February 2018

I think it is a great idea to install a proper cycle track north bound, the current one is uneven and dangerous forcing cyclists to join the road. I still think it should be kept at pavement level for children and non-confident cyclists to use. Something defiantly needs to be installed to manage the "20mph" limit- a speed camera etc. the speed limit is currently ignored by many cars. I have personally witnessed two bike/car incidents caused my motorists speeding.
Claire McCulloch

30 January 2018

Living in Roehampton Gate, my family and I have for many years used Priory Lane as drivers, cyclists and walkers. Ideally it should be widened, but if that's not possible: 1) The pavement is wide enough. 2) The cycle track at pavement level must be kept, for safety of children and less confident cyclists. 3) Removing the central road white line would be very foolish; northbound traffic tailed back half a mile (typically between 4.00 and 7.00 p.m. every weekday in winter) would become undisciplined. 4) When returning home late evening on an empty, long, straight road with no houses either side, the 20 mph limit seems ridiculous; Priory Lane is not a residential road, so should not have been part of the imposition of residential 20 limits.
Colin Goodwin

29 January 2018

I find the proposal to eliminate the southbound cycle lane terrifying. I would cease cycling to the park or to the Bank of England, happily exchanging my fitness for safety. Cycling uphill (ie southbound) is the most demanding for an average cyclist. Drivers get angry when behind a slow-moving cyclist. This is when aggression comes out and accidents happen. By telling challenged cyclists to cycle with traffic, you're prioritising the fit and excluding the others. PLEASE RECONSIDER.
Jean Straus

28 January 2018

Our neighbourhood has no bus as the Council have consistently failed to provide a solution to our transport problem. Walking up to Roehampton Lane takes 25 min of brisk walking; it is also 25 min on foot to Barnes Station. The current cycling lane is the only way my family can safely get to Barnes Station quickly without using our car. Ibstock Place School young pupils use the cycle lane every day, which gives them an independent and safe way to school. I can only conclude that for some strange reason you decided to ban safe cycling while increasing traffic, pollution and accidents. It is not broken, so don't fix it!
Angelique Vickers

26 January 2018

As someone who uses this path on a regular basis, this makes no sense whatsoever! The cycle path works very well. It allows cyclists to avoid the very busy two way traffic on a narrow road. I have never seen a problem with cyclists going in different directions on the cycle path and have never seen a problem for pedestrians. Now it is proposed to close the path to 50% of all cycle traffic. No! I cannot believe it is proposed to force old people on bikes and children on bikes into the busy narrow road. Who will take responsibility when someone gets hit by a car? It is lovely to see families with young children cycle to and from Richmond Park. I guess now they walk one way. No bus service either. Fix that instead.
Richard Atterbury

21 January 2018

I agree with others that the cycle lane should be done to both directions as this is a popular commuter route which means in the morning the cyclists go Northbound and in the evening they go Southbound. I recommend to reach out to a company called Strava who would have tonnes of valuable data on various commuter routes / cycling journeys which would make cycle route planning simpler and decisions would be backed with real data.
David Bartalos

20 January 2018

As a regular cyclist on this route I am always keen to see improvements in cycle safety - hopefully this will be better for us cyclists.
Gary Shepherd

20 January 2018

wandsworth hate cyclists and runners. Why not make the road one way and allow space for cyclists both ways? By keeping the road 2 way it just encourages traffic into the park and wandsworth should be doing their best to dissuade people from using the park as a rat run. In fact why not make the park route one way as well as that would allow people to come and visit but maybe make it less attractive for a short cut. I would not be surprised if the council removes the cycle path and then surprise surprise runs out of money to complete the work. Plus I would recommend they put more resource into filling in the potholes etc. I wonder where the impetus to propose these changes came from ?
peter noble

20 January 2018

Hi, I regularly use Priory lane to cycle to central London from Kingston. I don't typically use the cycle lane as I tend to cycle quickly and therefore don't impede traffic - and it feels safer to ride on the road, giving pedestrians more freedom. The majority of cars are well behaved but a minority are dangerous, with close passes and aggressive driving. Speeding is a major issue though so speed tables and speed indicators would help. As for your proposal, it could work as long as cyclists have priority over cars exiting from T junctions. I would rather have a "Blue lane" cycle path on the road in both directions with occasional barriers instead of having to ride on the pavement. Have you considered occasional rubber buffer separators?
Andrew Davis

20 January 2018

It's good that they are doing something about it but this doesn't seem nearly ambitious enough. Surely the approaches to Richmond Park should be one of the areas where cycling is prioritised. Unless the cycle lane is two way you just won't get the value from it.
TimG

20 January 2018

This is an AWFUL proposal from the cycle-hating Wandsworth Council. Again, they want to waste money to downgrade and remove the tiny amount of cycle infrastructure we have. Again, they are pretending to be improving what they seek to destroy. As a disabled driver and cyclist, I would no longer be able to cycle this route and would be forced into my car more - not cool. As I value my life, I don’t like sharing roadspace with fast/heavy motor traffic when cycling. The reason many don’t use the cycle track is because it is badly designed. Proper two way tracks work - used by over 95% of people cycling on roads with protected Superhighways. A proper, segregated cycle track, off the footpath would solve all the current problems
Simon Shields

19 January 2018

I know this route well, and I think a better layout is long overdue. I hope the northbound route will be seperated from the road, and cars pulling out from side roads will need to give way. Otherwise I think you will end up buiding a cycle lane and the cyclists will not use it.
Harvey Ward

19 January 2018

I avoid this route usually as there are too many cyclists merging with too much school traffic. It's seriously dangerous as it is. This is a much needed improvememnt to this popular cycling route.
Cherie Ward

19 January 2018

Please make the surface smooth like the road. The current bumpy cycling surface is uncomfortable and tiring, and not really fit for purpose.
keithp

18 January 2018

The problem in Priory Lane is the shocking levels of motor traffic which is mostly going into Richmond Park in order to use it as a bypass to get to Richmond or Kingston. It's not the park's job to be a relief valve for congestion caused mainly by lazy locals. To help resolve this problem therefore, L B Wandsworth must exert pressure on the Royal Parks Agency to close Roehampton Gate to motor traffic. Robin Hood Gate was closed some years ago to motors on the grounds of horse safety, so Roehampton Gate can be closed on the grounds of cyclist safety.
Richard Evans

18 January 2018

More needs to be done to limit the speed of motorists for a start. Most speed and many drive well over 35mph. As a result dedicated cycle lanes should be introduced going both ways
eric dol

18 January 2018

As there is a reduction in speed I think the cyclist should use the road provided they have to use the road before they get to cycle Lane anyway
Tony arthur

17 January 2018

I cycle to and from work using this path and it has always stuck me as a perfect width for cycles both ways and pedestrians and mostly it is brilliantly safe as it's separated from the road traffic. Please don't change a thing and waste money Thank you
Diane Slater

17 January 2018

As a runner and cyclist I use Priory Lane quite a lot. I agree that it is sensible to segregate all forms of traffic along this road as suggested northbound. I am concerned that southbound traffic will be dangerous for cyclists, depending on how cycle-friendly the speed tables will be. Provided that they do not cause motor vehicles to veer towards cyclists, this might be the best solution if a fully segregated road is not possible. What is missing from the consultation is the foot, pedal and vehicle counts - how can we/you come to a conclusion without data on the relative flows (at different times of day)?
David Knight

17 January 2018