Gloucestershire challenges DfT response after being cycle plans "do not adequately address the issue of motor vehicle dominance"

There are sections of cycle lane (just a white painted line in places & an awful red surface that is slow to ride on in others). There are also sections of shared use path...dodgy red gravel surface that exits & joins the carriageway...I stay on the road throughout. The cycle lane heading into Churchdown is often blocked with cars when the traffic is busy...forcing cyclists to either squeeze inside or take to the centre of the road.

Gloucestershire on the whole has a shocking history when it comes to ill conceived cycle provision. For many years there have been some excellent cycling advocates who have worked tirelessly to lobby for better provision & some input into design of new provisions, but unfortunately this has largely fallen on deaf ears or been entirely ignored. I am not an advocate of a shared path alongside the road. As a road cyclist moving along at a decent pace, the stop start nature of such layouts is impractical & where such sections merge back into an active road lane I consider these  dangerous.

Unfortunately much of the local road network is poorly designed for both cars & bikes. There are many places where just a minor alteration could substantially improve traffic flow & also make for safer cycling. 

Given that for the last 50 years cars going between Gloucester and Cheltenham have had a direct dual carriageway (Golden Valley Way) I'd have thought that for the old road via Churchdown, there would be lots of potential to make a cycle friendly route. 

I for one would love to see just how bad these plans were that the motoring DFT! Felt that they didn't go far enough. Wow

Having dealt with Gloucestershire highways department extensively over a number of years, I am sadly not surprised.

Perhaps the Councillor should refer to a copy or link of the current cycle infrastructure guidance note 1/20. I suspect the proposed plan from the council involved much shared use pavement and schemes should now be allowing for on road provision unless this is not possible such as protected cycle lanes and priority at junctions. In fairness to the Councillor it may be that many designers in the county highways department will only be seeing the design from the view of a motorist and are not trained or capable of designing proper cycle infrastructure.

As sometimes dryly observed on Wikipedia, "this article needs improvement".

"Councillor Nigel Moor, cabinet member for planning and environment, said: “I am proud we’re doing everything we can to get funding for Gloucestershire cycle schemes."

Just like Boris the Liar who did everything to prevent covid deaths, which are now the highest per capita in the world.

Look, I know we don't expect politicians to tell the truth, but this current crop of tories are approaching Trumpian levels of dishonesty.  If even our car-centric DfT recognises that your plans are rubbish, it might be better to admit it and revise them, rather than trying to defend them.