SPOKES South West Herts Cycling Group
This is the campaigning web site of Spokes South West Herts Cycling Group. We campaign in the following parts of Hertfordshire:
◦ Three Rivers District,
◦ Watford Borough, plus
◦ the Bushey North and Bushey South electoral divisions of Hertsmere District.
Our aims are
◦To campaign for better conditions for cyclists in SW Herts.
◦To encourage more people to enjoy cycling.
◦To organise a programme of cycle rides to provide for all tastes.
◦To publish a quarterly newsletter free to members.
This Cyclescape group web site contains both public information (campaign news, events, and issues) and also allows Spokes members to discuss campaign issues privately if they wish:
Campaign News - https://spokesswherts.cyclescape.org/issues/2143-campaign-news-south-west-herts
Campaign Events - https://spokesswherts.cyclescape.org/issues/2132-campaign-events-south-west-herts
Campaign Issues - https://spokesswherts.cyclescape.org/issues
Membership of Spokes is open to any person who supports cycling. Spokes is independent and non-political. You can join us here:
We show our support for the four E’s of cycle promotion (Engineering, Enforcement, Encouragement, and Education) with activities such as:
◦ Suggesting improvements/reporting problems affecting cycling by contacting and liaising with local authority councillors/officers.
◦ Contributing to consultations on planning applications, Local Plans, and local cycling strategies.
◦ Going to local fairs and events with displays of our work, plus supplies of leaflets, cycle gear, maps, etc.
◦ Taking part in the annual Bike Week in June, including offering rides for beginners and people thinking of getting back on their bikes. (Our rides programme throughout the year includes rides for the less confident).
◦ Spokes is affiliated to Cycling UK. It is also a member of the Hertfordshire County Council Cycling Forum and of CycleHerts (the federation of Hertfordshire Cycle Campaigning Groups).
Please report road and path hazards via Cycling UK's Fill That Hole web site at:
and follow what is going on nationally by subscribing to Cycling UK's monthly Cycle Campaign News service at:
Create an unsegregated cyclist/walker area in the paved area that was produced when the northern arm of Northway, Rickmansworth became traffic-free. Call it Northway Square. This would become the centre of Rickmansworth's cycling/walking network, with Bikeability level 2 routes leading:
* To National Cycle Network Route 61 (The Colne Valley Trail at the Aquadrome), to Mill End, and to Maple Cross.
* To Rickmansworth Station, to Chorleywood, and to The Cedars Estate,
* To Croxley Green, via Three Rivers District Council's car park.
Upgrade the existing public footpath to a bridleway so the route remains on the definitive map.
Harrow's draft Local Implementation Plan sets out the transport strategy for the next 3 years.
Current DfT consultations.
Lots of interesting stuff about inclusive transport regarding trains, buses, cars, public realm, streets and yes a bit about cycling too. Quotes:
8.11 While we consider CIHT and DPTAC’s recommendations and how to take them
forward, we are requesting that local authorities pause any shared space schemes
incorporating a level surface they are considering, and which are at the design stage.
We are also temporarily suspending Local Transport Note 1/11. This pause will allow
us to carry out research and produce updated guidance.
Objectives regarding Cycling:
• Update Local Transport Note 2/08, which sets out the Department’s guidance to
local authorities on designing safe and inclusive infrastructure for cyclists, to take
account of developments in cycling infrastructure since its publication in 2008 and
the responses to the draft AAP consultation and publish a revised version by early
• By 2020, explore the feasibility of amending legislation to recognise the use of
cycles as a mobility aid71 in order to increase the number of disabled people
Hertfordshire County Council has developed a new transport strategy for the South West Herts area. The Draft South West Herts Growth & Transport Plan (GTP) proposes packages of transport schemes responding to transport challenges linked to planned growth across the area, and in support of the proposed objectives of this plan and the objectives of Hertfordshire’s new Local Transport Plan 4.
The South West Herts GTP focuses on Hemel Hempstead and the Watford area as well as links to surrounding towns including St Albans, Harpenden, Luton, Bushey and Rickmansworth. The plan has been developed with support from HCC’s consultant AECOM and with input from local county councillors and district council partners.
A Summary of the draft South West Herts GTP has been produced for this consultation. If you would like to explore the proposals and background in more detail this is set out in main document for the plan -- the South West Herts GTP Prospectus.
For a long time I have wondered about a crowd-sourced cycleability map.
In this, people cycle along a link (accepting the first question of how to define the beginning and end of this) then give it a thumbs up or down. After enough people do this, then others can see how popular it is.
Some people wonder about subjectivity but I think this should be less of a problem with more voters.
The reason I am asking is because this method could apply to a potential commercial project for a Council which wants to drive around 100km of rural roads and use a panel of 4 experts to grade meaningful segments on a 1 to 7 scale according to their suitability for HGV movements.
Any views on whether this is already done within an app I am not aware of, or could be it done by anyone as an add-on to something else, or is it something CamCycle could offer as a commercial package (there may well be more than one local authority looking for this sort of thing)
From the DfT:
As part of the Transport Investment Strategy, the government committed to creating a Major Road Network (MRN).
This consultation asks for views on:
how to define the MRN
the role that local, regional and national bodies will play in the MRN investment programme
which schemes will be eligible for MRN funding
A new MRN would help deliver the following objectives:
support economic growth and rebalancing
support housing delivery
support all road users
support the Strategic Road Network
The creation of an MRN will allow for dedicated funding from the National Roads Fund to be used to improve this middle tier of our busiest and most economically important local authority ‘A’ roads.
What is the new London Plan?
The London Plan is one of the most important documents for this city.
It's a strategic plan which shapes how London evolves and develops. All planning decisions should follow London Plan policies, and it sets a policy framework for local plans across London.
The current 2016 consolidation Plan is still the adopted Development Plan. However the Draft London Plan is a material consideration in planning decisions. It gains more weight as it moves through the process to adoption, however the weight given to it is a matter for the decision maker.
Consultation on the draft London Plan
Consultation on this plan is open. Comments will be publicly available. After the consultation, comments are reviewed by an inspector and you may be called in to discuss comments at the Examination in Public.
What is an Examination in Public?
At the end of the consultation period your comments will be reviewed by the independent Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State to carry out the Examination in Public for the London Plan.
You may be invited to discuss your comments at the Examination in Public. All comments will be made available to the public at the end of the consultation period. The legal provisions for the London Plan are in Part VIII of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Act 1999 (as amended) in sections 334 to 341. The Examination in Public is covered in Section 338.
We have undertaken research that shows that in 2015, Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) were involved in disproportionately high numbers of fatal collisions with cyclists (78 per cent) and pedestrians (20 per cent) on London’s streets, despite only making up four per cent of the overall miles driven in the Capital. The Direct Vision Standard (DVS) forms part of The Mayor, Sadiq Khan and TfL’s Vision Zero approach to reducing road danger. The DVS categorises HGVs on the level of the driver’s direct vision from the cab.
We consulted earlier this year on the principles of a new DVS. Listening to the feedback from this consultation and working closely with industry and stakeholders we have now further developed this scheme. The Consultation report and Responses to Issues Raised document from this first phase of consultation are available to view in from the links at the bottom of this text. The responses showed that, in general, there is support for the principle of a Direct Vision Standard.
We are now seeking your views on proposals to introduce a new Safety Standard Permit Scheme as part of DVS which widens our approach beyond direct vision and includes a safe system approach to allow us to address a broader range of road danger risks.
The proposed scheme would require all HGVs over 12 tonnes to hold a Safety Permit to operate in Greater London from 2020. HGVs will be given a rating between ‘zero-star’ (lowest) and ‘five-star’ (highest). Only those vehicles rated ‘one star’ and above would be allowed to enter of operate in London from 2020. Zero rated vehicles would only be allowed if they can prove compliance through safe system measures. By 2024 only ‘three-star’ rated HGVs and above would automatically be given a Safety Permit. HGVs rated two star and below would need to demonstrate increased safety through progressive safe system measures.
The safe system could include specific industry recognised measures such as sensors, visual warnings and comprehensive driver training. The Safety Standard Permit scheme would evolve over time, taking into account advances in technology.
Detailed information about the scheme and the approach in which we have arrived at our current proposals are set out in the consultation document. A full Integrated Impact Assessment is also included.
The consultation approach
We are undertaking a phased consultation approach at key stages of the development of the consultation proposals to implement the Direct Vision Standard:
Phase 1 (24 January to 18 April 2017) – we set out the case for HGV driver direct vision and consulted on the Mayor of London’s outline proposals to introduce a Direct Vision Standard for HGVs in London and the principles of the Standard itself. The responses showed that, in general, there is support for the principle of a Direct Vision Standard.
Phase 2a – policy consultation (this consultation) – this current phase of consultation seeks views and feedback on the scheme proposals as outlined above and within the supporting consultation document which includes supporting technical reports including the full Integrated Impact Assessment. Feedback from this phase of consultation will be used to develop a second IIA and finalise the scheme proposals to be included in phase 2b of the consultation.
Phase 2b - Final scheme proposals and statutory consultation (Spring/Summer 2018) – this final phase will consult on the final proposals for the HGV Safety Standard Permit Scheme, including statutory consultation on the appropriate regulatory measure to ban or restrict HGVs in London under the scheme, subject to UK Government and European Commission support and notification.
London Assembly says:
Over recent years, TfL policy has increasingly focused on the construction of physical cycling infrastructure on London’s roads. A change in direction towards more segregated infrastructure followed our report in 2012 recommending this approach.
Our investigation will cover the full range of cycling infrastructure in London, with a particular focus on:
Cycle Superhighways: a form of cycle lane, designed to make cycling safer by helping keep cyclists away from general traffic, and offer direct and continuous cycling on major routes.
Quietways: a network of cycle routes that link key destinations, improving safety and convenience through small-scale interventions.
Mini-Hollands: TfL schemes to invest neighbourhood-level improvements in walking and cycling, involving a range of interventions in each area.
Cycle parking: provision of parking spaces on-street, at stations or in dedicated parking facilities.
It is important that TfL is able to establish the effectiveness of the infrastructure it installs on London’s roads. We are concerned that to date there has been no comprehensive study of the new infrastructure’s impact on cycling safety, modal share and other road users.
Questions to answer:
1. What progress on new cycling infrastructure has been made under Sadiq Khan, and what are his long-term plans?
2. Has TfL resolved the problems that delayed some cycling schemes under the previous Mayor?
3. Has segregation delivered the anticipated benefits on the Cycle Superhighways? How many cyclists are using these routes?
4. To what extent has segregation had negative consequences for other road users and, if necessary, how can this be mitigated?
5. Have Quietways delivered their anticipated benefits? How many cyclists are using them?
6. What are the differences in infrastructure between inner and outer London? How can TfL ensure infrastructure in different areas is sufficient and appropriate to the location?
7. How will TfL’s new ‘Strategic Cycling Analysis’ help determine where and how to invest in infrastructure?
8. How appropriate is the 400-metre target set in the draft Transport Strategy? Can we equate proximity with access?
9. Is TfL’s approach to public engagement working effectively to improve scheme designs and meet stakeholder needs?
10. Are Londoners sufficiently aware of the cycling infrastructure available to them, and how can awareness be increased?
11. How is TfL using infrastructure to attract a more diverse range of people to cycle in London?
12. Is there sufficient cycle parking in London, and is it in the right locations?
13. How are the lessons of the Mini-Hollands and other previous cycling schemes being applied elsewhere?
14. Should cycling infrastructure be oriented toward longer-distance commuting journeys, or more localised trips?