First reported 14 Apr 2014•Latest report 2 Sep 2022
Definition
What this concern includes
Includes failures in the design, provision, width, continuity or separation of cycle lanes where the deficiency exposes cyclists to material collision or loss-of-control risk, including insufficient space beside moving traffic, lanes narrower than applicable recommendations and absent cycle lanes on busy roads.
Not included
Excludes general road-design, junction, signage, visibility or traffic-management deficiencies where cycle-lane provision is not the shared unsafe condition.
Excludes isolated cyclist behaviour, collisions or use of footpaths where no deficiency in cycle-lane provision is identified.
Excludes pedestrian-only route, pavement or cycle-path maintenance concerns that do not concern the adequacy of cycle-lane provision for cyclists.
Excludes the broader road-safety hazard where the report does not identify a material cycle-lane provision deficiency.
Reports
9
Distinct published reports
Individual concerns
11
A report can raise multiple concerns
Date range
2014–2022
First to latest report issue date
Stated actions
20
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Transport for London2
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council1
Cheshire East Council1
Department for Transport1
Dorset County Council1
Dorset Highways Department1
London Borough of Camden1
London Borough of Croydon1
Oxfordshire County Council1
Slough Borough Council1
South London Legal Partnership1
English unitary authority3
English county council2
London borough council2
Public transport authority2
Local authority service1
Ministerial department1
Sub-organisation1
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
Oxfordshire
Concerns raised2
Insufficient cycle-lane width
Cycle lane layout failing to provide clear and safe positioning for cyclists crossing the junction
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.9
Action
Amend cycle-lane widths to meet the Department for Transport’s 1.2-metre minimum standard.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Identify other city cycle-network sections that fall below current width standards.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Provide cyclists with a five-second advance green signal at Headley Way.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Provide a dropped kerb directing cyclists from London Road to the Headley Way shared-use path.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Remove the stone planter at Headley Way to increase space for pedestrians and cyclists.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Redesign and amend Headley Way road markings and cycle-lane markings to clarify cyclist movements through the junction.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Implement recommendations from the completed Stage 4 Road Safety Audit in proportion to the risks identified.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Commission and complete a Vulnerable Road Users audit of the relevant highway arrangements.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Action
Review key junctions posing potential risks to vulnerable road users and develop short-, medium- and long-term mitigations.
Stated by Oxfordshire County CouncilStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 16 January 2023.
Berkshire
Concerns raised1
Failure of Dover Road layout to safely separate cyclists from motor vehicles
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.3
Action
Review all cycle lanes as part of the updated borough cycling strategy.
Stated by Slough Borough CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 November 2019.
Action
Prepare comprehensive cycling design standards based on proven best practice.
Stated by Slough Borough CouncilStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 November 2019.
Action
Continue working with SEGRO representatives to promote vehicle priority at nearside cycle lanes and discourage cyclists from undertaking at junctions.
Stated by Slough Borough CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 14 November 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.2
Position
Two cycling incidents do not constitute a collision cluster or demonstrate a systemic junction problem warranting concern.
Stated by Slough Borough CouncilDisputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.
Position
Segregating cyclists or reallocating road space is not feasible without disproportionate financial investment given the presenting problem and competing priorities.
Stated by Slough Borough CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Dorset
Concerns raised1
Lack of cycle lanes on both sides of the carriageway
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Introduce parallel safer routes along sections of the A338.
Stated by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 11 June 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.3
Position
The fatal incident location was outside BCP Council’s jurisdiction, so BCP Council was not responsible for intervention there.
Stated by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole CouncilOutside remitThe respondent said that this matter was outside its role or authority.
Position
Limited road-safety funding prevents BCP Council from implementing all requested modifications, requiring casualty-based prioritisation.
Stated by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Position
Additional cycle facilities, signing or lighting on the A338 are not considered necessary because the casualty record does not warrant them.
Stated by Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole CouncilNo action considered necessaryThe respondent said that no further action was needed.
Dorset
Concerns raised1
Lack of safe cyclist accommodation at the junction
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Carry out the wider A354 route study and consider the junction crossing, cyclist stop-line and corridor safety recommendations within it.
Stated by Dorset CouncilStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 12 May 2019.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Pedestrian crossings and cyclists’ advanced stop lines cannot yet be committed to because the wider route study and available funding remain uncertain.
Stated by Dorset CouncilUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Inner West London
Concerns raised2
Inadequate cycle lane provision leading up to the traffic lights
Lack of cycle lane provision in LAVENDER HILL immediately past the junction
This report raised 4 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Consider providing an improved cycle feeder lane within the revised junction design, accounting for western-arm constraints.
Stated by Transport for LondonStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 8 July 2018.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
A cycle lane cannot currently be provided because insufficient carriageway space would require wider vehicles to enter it, creating a false sense of security.
Stated by Transport for LondonUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Cheshire
Concerns raised1
Lack of a cycle lane on a busy road
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Complete a road safety assessment of the carriageway stretch concerning cycleway provision.
Stated by Mike SuarezStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 19 February 2017.
City of London
Concerns raised1
Lack of a separate lane for cyclists from vehicular and pedestrian traffic
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Publish proposals for improved traffic arrangements in the London Bridge area, including consideration of cyclist safety.
Stated by Transport for LondonStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 4 June 2015.
South London
Concerns raised1
Confusing bicycle-lane design and appearance at the junction
This report raised 6 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
Action
Conduct the junction safety review with TfL designers and obtain short- and long-term improvement options.
Stated by London Borough of CroydonStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 16 October 2014.
Inner North London
Concerns raised1
Insufficient space for cycles in the oncoming bus lane
This report raised 1 other concern. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concerns
Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
Action
Permit cyclists to use the Bloomsbury Way contra-flow bus lane with bollards, signing and a clear box junction under an experimental order.
Stated by London Borough of CamdenStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 April 2014.
Action
Commission traffic consultants to model signals across the Holborn area scheme, including Vernon Place and Southampton Row, and assess options for improving cyclist facilities.
Stated by London Borough of CamdenStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 April 2014.
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
Position
Implementation of major junction changes cannot occur immediately because it depends on consultation, funding and coordination with other projects.
Stated by London Borough of CamdenUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correction
Includes failures in the design, provision, width, continuity or separation of cycle lanes where the deficiency exposes cyclists to material collision or loss-of-control risk, including insufficient space beside moving traffic, lanes narrower than applicable recommendations and absent cycle lanes on busy roads.
