A417 Cycle Path Proposals

Were the cycle path to be built to the standard in one of the artist’s impressions, I don’t see how anyone could object to using it. The difficulty will arise in the difference between this proposal and the reality of what appears! It is a long road with not much overtaking at rush hour so one would be expected to use it with some justification. Blocking off the Sustrans route in Upton should not be what anyone intends so I can’t believe they won’t make provision for cyclists. Having said that I cannot believe making all east bound traffic from Wantage (and northbound from Hagbourne Hill) that wishes to enter Upton do so in the nasty dip by the George and Dragon can be justified on safety grounds at all.

A fixed Route 544 would be better – no roundabouts or pedestrians to negotiate and direct access to campus. It would also be nicer for leisure cyclists – no big lorries coming past and better access to the Ridgeway and the downs. It may work out cheaper as well as most of the infrastructure is already in place (using existing C roads).

So I think fixed Route 544 should receive higher priority.

I’d like a cycle path along the A417. I no longer commute to the Harwell cite, but to Culham. Using the Wantage-Harwell back-route for the first part of the journey adds miles to my journey. It is a beautiful route, but impractical for daily commuting. If I were working at Milton or Didcot I’d have the same problem. I agree that cycle paths tend to be rubbish, so that cyclists get the choice of using a substandard route and trashing their bike/interrupting their journey for needless road crossings, or using the road and getting aggro from drivers. However, I suspect that the A417 is a no-go route for most cyclists anyway (esp. during rush hour); adding a cycle path adds options.

And, of course, because of the ‘interesting’ way cycle provision is designed, I’d guess that the path will just dump cyclists at some random place (I quite like the superb Didcot-Milton interchange cycle route, for all those cyclists who want to go to the A34). But if the route is there, at least there is something to connect to when further road works are planned.

I’m not too hopeful though. Earlier this year I went to a public meeting where the public were to make suggestions for the transport plan from 2020, or some such distant time. We were encouraged to think big – examples raised were a light railway alongside the main rail track, an overhead railway, tramways, driverless cars, but the idea of a cycleway alongside the A417 was dismissed as too expensive to even consider.

I thinl LS’s final paragraph is the telling one – the likelihood of getting what was pictured in the original proposal is, alas, vanishingly small and there is a very strong danger of a “line on the road, job done” scanario. After all we can’t even afford to surface the roads properly anymore. Even the new interchange at Chilton, which uses government money, has no provision for cyclists to get from one side to the other. My feelings are analgous to those I have for the canal system (of which I am fond). There is significant volunteer effort beong poured into the Wilts & Berks canal project (which will only ever exist in artists’ impresssions and little specimen lengths, a bit like new cycle routes) while existing canals deteriorate. In the current climate we should be upgrading existing routes to improve their surfaces and accessibility as, in reality, this is the best we can do. “Overhead railway” sums up the level of dissociation between “consultation” and reality, usually fulled by those who have “consultation exercise” on their checklist. Or maybe I am just getting old and grumpy 🙂