Horsham Cycling Review – Route 1 (High Priority)

In a recent post, I described how Horsham District Council commissioned an independent review of cycling in Horsham, back in 2008, with a view to assessing where ‘gaps’ existed in Horsham’s cycling network, and how to go about improving the attractiveness and safety of cycling in the town.

This review was presented to the Council cabinet on 2nd April 2009, and can be found here (beginning on p.194). There were 235 separate recommendations for improvements in the report, covering the main potential routes for cycling in the town. I will document those recommendations on this blog, noting precisely what has been implemented at the relevant locations in the intervening two years.

We start with the Cycling Review’s Route 1 – a high priority route, from the north of the town, along a major arterial route into the town centre. It is the green route marked as 1 on the map below, taken from page 21 of the Review.

Each recommendation has a measured ‘Practicality’, namely

M Best carried out as part of the maintenance programme (e.g. resurfacing) or when other highway works are being undertaken 

1 Relatively inexpensive to introduce in both design and implementation, and should provide good return for minimal cost 

2 Could be more expensive but generally should provide a reasonable return in giving more advantage to cyclists and pedestrians 

3 Potentially expensive with the level of return uncertain 

4 May be desirable but may also be impractical/very difficult to implement, or have negative outcomes beyond the area to be treated. 

The first recommendation –

Pondtail Drive/ Pondtail Rd roundabout – Redesign roundabout to continental design (Practicality – 2). Reduce circulating space and entry/exit speeds by introducing hatching/overrun areas (Practicality – 1).


No change has been carried out at this (enormous) mini-roundabout. There is some hatching here, but it pre-dates the Review, and does nothing to limit vehicle speeds across the roundabout, which is so wide upon entry and exit vehicles do not slow at all. See the van in the picture for evidence.

Next recommendation –

Pondtail Rd (Pondtail Drive – Pondtail Close) – Reallocate roadspace and remove centre line to provide cycle lanes (min 1.25m) in both directions and 2-way central lane (min 4.8m) for motor vehicle flow (Practicality – 2). Introduce cycle-friendly traffic calming measures (Practicality – 3). Remove parking where this affects visibility at junctions (Practicality – 1).


None of these 3 measures implemented.

Pondtail Rd/Pondtail Close Roundabout – Redesign roundabout to continental design (2). Reduce circulating space and entry/exit speeds by introducing hatching/overrun areas (1). Increase deflection northbound with cycle slip (2).


None of these 3 measures implemented.

Pondtail Rd (Pondtail Close – Warnham Rd) – Reallocate roadspace and remove centre line to provide cycle lanes (min 1.25m) in both directions and 2-way central lane (min 4.8m) for motor vehicle flow (2). Introduce cycle-friendly traffic calming measures (3). Remove parking where this affects visibility at junctions (1).


None of these measures implemented. No parking restrictions at this junction, for instance.

Pondtail Rd junction with Warnham Rd – Signalise junction (4). Move signalled crossing towards junction and convert to Toucan to allow use by cyclists. (3). Convert crossing to Toucan w. linking cycle tracks.


This junction has not changed.


The crossing is still distant from the junction (seen in the background), without any linking cycle track, and is not a Toucan.

Warnham Rd – Trafalgar Rd – Create a new link path across open space to signalled crossing of Warnham Rd (2).


No linking path across this open space.

Trafalgar Rd/ Rushams Rd (Warnham Rd – North Parade) – 20 mph limit (2). Sign cycle route (1).



No 20 mph limit, but it appears some signage has been put up.

Crossing of North Parade – Replace island crossing with single-stage Toucan crossing (with link paths) (2). Replace central island crossing with build-outs (with cycle lane continued) and wide cycle/zebra crossing (2). 


No change here. (I have already covered the potential danger for cyclists of this island feature in a post here).

North Parade (Rushams Rd – Springfield Rd) – Widen cycle lanes to min 1.25 m (1). Create cycle tracks on both footways (3). Create cycle track on east footway (2). Create cycle track inside park (3). Convert existing Pelican crossing to Toucan. (2).


Cycle lanes still desperately narrow. No cycle tracks created on or alongside either footway.


The crossing is not a Toucan. No cycle track has been created in the park, but in the interim, cycling is now permitted on the footpaths already extant in the park.

Springfield Rd (N of Albion Way) – Remove parking on west side to allow northbound cycle lane (min 1.25 m) (2). Colour existing southbound lane at j/w London Rd (1). Move centre line to allow northbound cycle lane outside parking (2).


No cycle lane northbound, only parking bays.


The southbound cycle lane is not coloured across the entirety of the junction.

Springfield Rd j/w Albion Way – Realign southbound cycle lane to run straight ahead at left turn (1). Install ASLs at junction with Albion Way (1).


No realignment of the cycle lane.


No ASL at the junction.

Springfield Rd (S of Albion Way) – Remove upstand in southbound cycle lane (1). Allow contraflow cycling southbound (1). Clarify situation re. cycling on western footway (1). 


Upstand not removed.


No southbound contraflow cycling.


Lack of clarity about pavement persists.

Springfield Rd/Worthing Rd (pedestrian priority area) – Formally allow cycling at all times and sign appropriately (1). 


No cycling allowed, no signage.

Worthing Rd (bus station access) – Reallocate road space to create wide cycle track on W side with table crossing at bus station to Route 3 (3). Create shared use cycle track on ex. west footway (2).


No cycle track in the road space here.


No shared used on this path (although this would undoubtedly be a bad idea, given the narrow and constricted nature of this footpath).

So, in summary, only one of the 35 recommendations for this route into Horsham town centre has been acted upon – and that was the erection of a few signs. No lower speed limits, no wider cycle lanes, no removal of parking – not even the simplest, easiest and cheapest measures have been implemented.

How the Cycling Review’s recommendations for the other routes in Horsham have fared will be assessed in due course.

This entry was posted in Cycling policy, Horsham, Horsham Cycling Review, Infrastructure, Parking, Road safety. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.