Rickmansworth Town Centre
Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
Project Ref: 12356/NTN/MP/PE
July 2006
Client:
Three Rivers District Council,
Three Rivers House,
Northway,
Rickmansworth,
Herts, WD3 1RL.
peter brett associates
11 Prospect Court
Courteenhall Road
Blisworth
Northamptonshire NN7 3DG
Tel: +44 (0)1604 878300
Fax: +44 (0)1604 878333
E-mail: [email protected]
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
PBA Document Control Sheet
Project Title :
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Project Ref
12356/NTN/MP/PE
:
Report Title :
Stage 3 Safety Audit
Date:
July 2006
:
Name
Position
Signature
Date
Team Leader
P Edwards
Senior Engineer
17/07/2006
Team Members
B Uyduran
Engineer
17/07/2006
Authorised for
A Fry
Senior Associate
17/07/2006
issue by
For and on behalf of Peter Brett Associates
Issue
Revision Description
Date
Signed
Peter Brett Associates disclaims any responsibility to the Client and others in respect of any matters outside the
scope of this report. This report has been prepared with reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of
the Contract with the Client and generally in accordance with ACE Short Form Conditions of Engagement and
taking account of the manpower, resources, investigations and testing devoted to it by agreement with the Client.
This report is confidential to the Client and Peter Brett Associates accepts no responsibility of whatsoever nature
to third parties to whom this report or any part thereof is made known. Any such party relies upon the report at
their own risk.
© Peter Brett Associates 2006
i
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
Introduction ............................................................................................... 1
2
Items raised in the previous combined Stage 1 and 2 Safety Audit ........... 3
3
4
Items raised in this stage 3 audit ............................................................... 4
Audit Team Statement ............................................................................... 11
APPENDIX A
Documents referred to in this Audit………………………….………12
APPENDIX B
Figure 1- Site Reference Plan ................................................. 13
ii
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
1
Introduction
1.1
Peter Brett Associates have been commissioned by Three Rivers District Council to
undertake a Stage 3 Road Safety Audit (RSA) on the recently implemented
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network.
1.2
The scheme comprises the creation of a network of cycle routes, mainly advisory
cycle lanes throughout Rickmansworth town centre. It is noted that some elements of
the scheme which was previously subject to a combined Stage 1 and 2 RSA have
since been removed from the implemented scheme. Details of the scheme are shown
on drawings listed in Appendix A.
1.3
The roads in Rickmansworth town centre have either 20mph or 30mph speed limits
and are lit. Several of the town centre roads are used by bus services.
1.4
The audit team membership was as follows:Philip Edwards, BSc. (Hons).
-
Peter Brett Associates, Northampton
Bahadir Uyduran, BEng. (Hons).
-
Peter Brett Associates, Northampton
The Audit took place during June/July 2006 and comprised an examination of the
documents listed in Appendix A and a site visit which was undertaken on 28th June
between 12:15 and 13:45. The weather at the time of the site visit was fine.
1.5
The Audit was carried out under the Terms and Conditions as described in HD 19/03.
The team examined and reported only on the road safety implications of the scheme
as presented and has not examined or verified the compliance of the design to any
other criteria.
PC Derek Crosby of Hertfordshire Police had been scheduled to attend the site visit
but was unexpectedly not available on the day of the site visit.
Hertfordshire County Council were also invited to attend, although were not available.
1.6
A combined Stage 1 and Stage 2 Road Safety Audit was undertaken (PBA February
2006) and the problems raised are reviewed in Section 2 of this report.
1
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
1.7
It was noted that in a number of locations that the scheme proposals had not been
fully implemented as shown on the drawings.

High Street – diag. 1057 cycle symbols have not been laid on carriageway

High Street – advanced cycle stop line not implemented

Station Road Cycle Lane signs and roadmarking 1004 denoting the edge of
the advisory cycle lane not installed

Green surfacing and edge of advisory cycle roadmarkings not laid across the
junction with Northway

High Street – east of Church Street – hatched build-outs not implemented

Council Office car park – existing speed ramps not modified

Also, the advisory cycle lane in High Street in the vicinity of Wharf Lane has
been laid on a different alignment to that shown on the drawings.
2
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
2
Items raised in the previous combined
Stage 1 and 2 Safety Audit
The problems raised in the previous combined stage 1 and 2 audits have been
reviewed.
Problem 2.12 – tactile paving required for segregated footway/cycle track. The
proposal set out in the designer’s response to provide roadmarkings and tactile
paving to demarcate the segregation between the footway and cycle track has not
been implemented and therefore this remains a problem which is reiterated in this
report.
Problem 2.13 – cyclists from the advisory cycle lane in The Cloisters turning left to
use the shared footway/cycle track to head northbound along High Street will be
brought very close to south bound vehicular traffic on the carriageway before able to
join the cycle track. This does not appear to have been addressed in the
implementation of the scheme and remains a problem which is reiterated in this
report.
Problem 2.14 - between Park Road roundabout and The Cloisters, High Street there
are 2 vehicular lanes south bound, an advisory cycle lane on the nearside and
parking bays on the offside. The 2 vehicular lanes have been retained, but the cycle
lane deflects across the nearside vehicular lane between No.1 and No.3 High Street
which may lead to conflict between vehicles in the adjacent lanes and remains a
problem which is reiterated in this report.
3
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
3
Items raised in this stage 3 audit
3.1
Problem
Location A on Figure 1
Summary – Start of cycle lane not signed.
At the start of the advisory cycle lane in Wesum Way, there is no cycle roadmarking
(diag. 1057), nor cycle lane sign, (diag. 967). Drivers may not initially appreciate the
presence of the cycle lane.
Recommendation
The commencement of the cycle lane should be highlighted by appropriate signage,
3.2
Problem
Location B on Figure 1
Summary – Give-way lines omitted.
At the junction of Ebury Approach with Wesum Way, the give-way roadmarking has
been omitted across the end of the cycle lane. Cyclists may fail to give way as
required.
Recommendation
The give-way lines (diag. 1003) should be completed across the end of the cycle lane
at the junction.
4
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
3.3
Problem
Location C on Figure 1
Summary – Unsuitable alignment of cycle lane.
At the junction between Wensum Way and High Street the cycle lane has not been
constructed on the alignment shown on the drawings, but in fact leads into the
parking bay. This is incorrect and is likely to cause cyclists to swerve in order to
remain on the main carriageway.
Recommendation
The detail for the termination of the cycle lane should be amended to provide a
smoother alignment for cyclists.
3.4
Problem
Location D on Figure 1
Summary – Cycle lane roadmarkings omitted.
The edge line of the advisory cycle lane (diag 1004) along Station Road has been
omitted. At night-time, the green coloured surfacing of the cycle lane does not
contrast from the adjacent carriageway and the presence of the cycle lane is not
visible.
Recommendation
The roadmarkings delineating the edge of the cycle lane should be applied.
3.5
Problem
Location E on Figure 1
Summary – Re-commencement of cycle lane not signed.
The advisory cycle lane does not continue through the junction with North Way.
Where the cycle lane re-commences on the north side of the junction it is not clearly
indicated with any roadmarkings. Drivers, particularly those turning right from
Northway may not initially appreciate the presence of the cycle lane.
5
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
Recommendation
The commencement of the advisory cycle lane should be highlighted by appropriate
roadmarkings, for example, diag. 1004 lane line, diag. 1009 taper and diag. 1057
cycle symbol.
3.6
Problem
Location F on Figure 1
Summary – Gulley grating hazardous to cyclists
There is gulley grating within the cycle lane at the junction between Station Road and
Homestead Road. Part of the gulley grating has broken away and the resulting gap
could be hazardous to narrow-wheeled cycles.
Recommendation
The gulley grating should be replaced.
3.7
Problem
Location G on Figure 1
Summary – Insufficient cycle parking.
Some additional cycle stands have been installed within the station forecourt.
However there still appear to be insufficient for the number of cycles which are being
parked throughout the day. Hence several cycles are being left secured to the
pedestrian guard rail at the Rectory Road junction. These cycles obstruct the footway
and there is a risk of pedestrians injuring themselves on sharp projections from the
cycles.
Recommendation
Additional cycle racks should be installed at the station forecourt.
6
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
3.8
Observation
Location H on Figure 1
Summary – Signage confusing.
The signage for cyclists on the path which leads from Victoria Close to the subway
under Rectory Road may be confusing. The “no cycling” sign diag. 951 has been
retained where the path leaves the carriageway, and is repeated at the chicane
nearer to the subway entry with a “Cyclist dismount” sign beneath. For cyclists
travelling north from the subway, the sign diag. 956, (unsegregated footway/cycle
track) is back to back with the “no cycling” sign at the chicane, implying that the length
of path from the chicane to the carriageway in Victoria Close is a shared use
footway/cycle track.
Recommendation
The signs should be reviewed to ensure that they are consistent.
3.9
Problem
Location I on Figure 1
Summary – Road humps and channels lack conspicuity in darkness.
Within the council car park, where the cycle route is directed, there are 2 speed
humps and also 2 drainage channels within the surface of the Staff Car park, crossed
by the cycle route. At night-time, these features are not conspicuous and could be
hazardous to pedestrians or cyclists. The flood light at the eastern end of the car park
tends to dazzle when approaching from the west which may exacerbate the problem.
Recommendation
The conspicuity of these features at night-time should be improved. This could
possibly be achieved by appropriate roadmarkings, eg. road hump triangle (diag.
1062) at the humps and possibly cross-hatching in the vicinity of the drainage
channels. Lighting could also be revised to improve its effectiveness for lighting the
surface features and to reduce the glare from the floodlight.
7
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
3.10
Problem
Location J on Figure 1
Summary – Top of steps may not be appreciated in sufficient time.
There is a flight of steps descending from the Council office car park to The Cloisters.
It is not apparent to an approaching cyclist that there are steps (as opposed to a
ramp) until a few metres in advance of the top step, which may not be sufficient time
to stop, especially in wet conditions. It is noted that there is sign diag. 966 “Cyclists
dismount” at the top of the steps, but this sign may not be sufficient warning.
Recommendation
Measures to prevent cyclists from accidentally descending the steps should be
provided. Enhanced signing or a physical barrier may be required.
3.11
Problem
Location K on Figure 1
Summary – Cyclists may turn against one-way traffic flow.
At the end of the cycle lane at the junction of The Cloisters and High Street, it is not
clear that cyclists intending to continue north along High Street should leave the
carriageway and join the footway/cycle track. The layout as constructed tends to lead
cyclist to turn left on the carriageway against the one-way traffic in High Street.
Also, the roadmarking diag. 1057 has been applied upside down relative to the
direction of travel in the cycle lane. This could confuse cyclists and mislead them into
cycling the wrong direction in the cycle lane along The Cloisters away from High
Street.
Recommendation
The end-detail of the cycle lane should be revised to direct left-turning cyclists off the
carriageway. This could possibly be achieved by curving/tapering the end of the cycle
lane towards the dropped kerbs and also highlighting the presence of the offcarriageway cycle track. (See 3.11 below).
8
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
Also, the cycle symbol roadmarking should be re-laid in the correct orientation for this
location.
3.12
Problem
Location L on figure 1
Summary – Shared use segregated footway/cycle track not correctly implemented.
The proposed shared use segregated footway track on the western side of High
Street from The Cloisters towards the railway bridge has not been fully implemented.
There are no roadmarkings to demarcate the footway from the cycle track and no
tactile paving (eg. ladder/tramline). Also the signage which has been provided, ie.
sign diag. 957 at the southern end adjacent to The Cloisters and diag. 966 (“cyclists
dismount”) at the northern end lack conspicuity due to there location and mounting
height (2.8m approx).
Recommendation
The shared use footway/cycle track should be completed with the necessary
roadmarkings and tactile paving. The northern end of this length of cycle track, where
cyclists should dismount will also require highlighting, possibly through the use of
roadmarkings and tactile paving.
3.13
Problem
Location M on Figure 1
Summary – Cycle lane conflicts with vehicular traffic lane.
High Street from Park Road roundabout towards the town centre is divided into 2
lanes. Where the cycle lane deflects round the parking bays between No. 1 and No. 3
High Street, the cycle lane converges with the centre lane marking, effectively
diminishing the nearside vehicular lane to a fraction of a metre. There was observed
to be a tendency for cars to be guided by the centre lane marking and as a
consequence drive through the cycle lane, particularly at nigh-time when there were
no cars parked in the nearside parking bay.
9
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
Recommendation
The existing centre lane marking should be removed in advance of the deflection in
the cycle lane. Given the presence of the offside parking bays passing under the
railway bridge and the nearside cycle lane, it may be preferable if the carriageway is
treated as a single lane and the existing centre lane marking removed from Park
Road Roundabout up to the approach to the Pelican crossing north of The Cloisters.
3.14
Problem
Location N on Figure 1
Summary – Existing roadmarkings may be confusing.
The original lane markings in High Street have not been revised or renewed as
necessary to accommodate the new cycle lane. As a consequence some of the
original roadmarkings are confusing or have been partially obscured.

There is an ahead arrow within a parking bay, inside of the cycle lane, which
could encourage drivers to attempt to pass cyclists on the inside if the parking
bay was empty.

The left turn arrow and remains of “A404” text is within a parking bay on
nearside of the cycle lane which could encourage drivers to attempt to pass
cyclists on the inside if the parking bay was empty

The arrow heads of the lane designation arrows at the High Street/Church
Street junction have been obscured by the advance stop line for cyclists.
Recommendation
The original roadmarkings within High Street should be renewed and revised to take
into account the presence of the new cycle lane. In particular, lane arrows for general
traffic should not be positioned within parking bays on the nearside of the cycle lane.
10
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
4
Audit Team Statement
I certify that this audit has been carried out in accordance with HD 19/03.
AUDIT TEAM LEADER:
Name: Philip Edwards
Signed:
Position: Senior Engineer
Date:
Organisation: Peter Brett Associates
Address:
11 Prospect Court
Courteenhall Road
Blisworth
Northamptonshire
NN7 3DG
AUDIT TEAM MEMBERS:
Name: Bahadir Uyduran
Position: Engineer
Organisation: Peter Brett Associates
Address:
11 Prospect Court
Courteenhall Road
Blisworth
Northampton
NN7 3DG
11
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
APPENDIX A
Documents referred to in this Audit
Documents:
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network – Combined Stage 1 & 2 Safety Audit
– PBA February 2006
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network – Designer’s response to the Combined Stage 1
& 2 Safety Audit – PBA February 2006
Drawings:
PBA drawings Nos.:12356/301/100 - B
Town Centre Cycle Route Construction Details
12
D:\81897716.doc(1)
Peter Brett Associates
Rickmansworth Town Centre Cycle Network
Stage 3 Safety Audit
APPENDIX B
Figure 1 - Site Reference Plan
13
D:\81897716.doc(1)