Proposed improvements to our town paths

The Brooklands Accessibility Project has been a major scheme to provide safer walking and cycling between Weybridge and Brooklands. So far this has provided the new path along Heath Road to the station, a wider path with a tarmacadam surface from Lonsdale Road to Seven Arches Bridge, and improvements to the path past Brooklands Museum, through the park and onto the A245.

Phase Four of the project was dependent on the cost of the first three phases but it was envisaged that some money would be available to improve the route into Weybridge town centre. This phase takes the route from the crossing on Heath Road, along Melrose Road and makes use of the paths around the allotments and Churchfields Park to finish in the town. These are a wonderful asset at the heart of the town and give a very pleasant option for residents away from the noise and risk of using the roads. To make these paths safer for all users, Phase Four proposes to widen the paths by clearing the earth alongside the fence sections around the allotments, cutting back any overhanging vegetation and laying macadam up to the fence edge.

I have proposed that a small section of allotment fencing near the skate park should be moved back in order to smooth out the rather dangerous right angled corner. 

I have also asked Surrey County Council’s Project Manager for the current cut-through track (see photo) to Churchfields car park be formally implemented as a better option for users going to the town centre than the path that goes to Church Lane and to the roundabout at the Church Street/Balfour Road junction. Furthermore, I am hoping that there will be enough money to pay for much-needed lighting of the path alongside the playground section.

 

5 thoughts on “Proposed improvements to our town paths

  1. There is no point in putting in more split paths for cyclists/pedestrians as cyclists rarely use the paths and still cycle in the roads alongside them causing delays to traffic. Example, go to Walton bridge and watch the cyclists crossing there.
    I suggest the council make the pathway narrower just for pedestrians and add a cycle route along the roadway instead. Then they might use it.

    • I voted against the Walton Scheme because is was not a proper cycle lane – neither fish nor fowl. However, it was designed for people who would not otherwise cycle. Normal cyclists would not want to use such a “baby” cycle track. My view was that a well designed cycle path would be used by cyclists such as me but I would not use much of the current Walton path because it made to give way to side traffic. The last thing a cyclist want to do is is to slow down all the time.

      By the way, many Surrey engineers knew this because they too are cyclists but they can only provide what the politicians ask for.

      The idea highway, when the speed limit is over 20mph, it to have separate footways, cycleways and carriageways. Other countries manage it and it is beginning to be done here. The cost is little compared to other highway schemes. The benefits are massive.

      • There is a need to slow the speed of cyclists on these proposed routes.

        Currently there are ‘chicanese’ which if not retained.. Need to be replaced with something a little more ‘cycle friendly’ but physically forceful.

        I take the point about pedestrian conversations.

    • Ian’s comment doesn’t really apply to this particular development. It runs alongside the allotments and the Churchfields recreation ground, and there is no adjacent road. It’s currently quite well used by cyclists, particularly children going to/from Heathside school. Closing the path to them would force them on to busy polluted roads and a longer route.

      Hopefully the improvements will enable cyclists to give pedestrians a slightly wider berth, but it’s important they don’t go too fast, and go slowly past pedestrians (which is mostly my experience, here). Also I would hate it if it proved no longer possible to stop and have a conversation on this path. We need a ‘Pathway Code’ analogous to the Highway code.

  2. Very concerned that this widening and chjcana removal will encourage high speed cyclists through an area which is already parkland /play and known to local residents as a calm route away from traffic.

    I do not accept that an improved corner near the skateboard park would do other than encourage the high speed conflict noted above. Young mothers with push chairs already make full use of these narrow routes to enter the park.

    I DO support improve vegitation maintenence around existing streetlamps and the need for an extra lamp between the well lit car park and Church Lane..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *