Norwich streets could become 20mph zones as part of £5.5m cycle project

An artist's impression of what the playing field in Heartsease would look like, with a  tree-lined avenue with separate cycling and pedestrian paths. An artist's impression of what the playing field in Heartsease would look like, with a tree-lined avenue with separate cycling and pedestrian paths.

Wednesday, March 12, 2014
6:30 AM

A 20mph limit could be introduced on roads around a Norwich estate as part of a multi-million pound scheme to make streets safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Map showing the Heartsease streets where 20mph zones are proposed.Map showing the Heartsease streets where 20mph zones are proposed.

Norwich City Council has a £5.5m project, made up of £3.7m from the government and £1.8m of local transport and health money, part of which will be used to create what is known as the pink pedalway - an eight mile cycle route stretching from Heartsease to the University of East Anglia.

Consultation in areas which the route will pass through has now started.

The proposals which affect Heartsease will come under the spotlight at a public consultation event today.

Proposals for Heartsease include a new tree-lined avenue with separate cycling and pedestrian paths running through the playing fields between Sale Road and the towers, as well as a raised crossing to help cyclists and pedestrians to cross Woodside Road into Broadland.

On the proposal for 20mph limits on a number of streets, council officers say slower traffic speeds will help improve the environment with less air pollution and noise, helping to make cycling and walking more enjoyable.

That, they say, should encourage more cycling and walking and reduce the number of vehicles on the road.

Some traffic calming could be introduced and people living in the area will be invited to comment on roads where that might be needed.

Mike Stonard, Norwich City Council’s cabinet member for environment, development and transport, said: “It’s important to us that residents and anyone else interested in these improvements get involved in the consultations so we can make informed choices as we move forward with the scheme.”

Today’s event will run between 1pm and 6.45pm, at St Francis Parish Church Hall in Rider Haggard Road.

Project staff will be on hand to talk about the proposals.

People who are unable to attend the event or would like to submit comments separately can do so by emailing pedalways@norwich.gov.uk All comments must be received by 5pm on Tuesday, March 18.

A similar consultation event on proposals in Mousehold took place last week.

• Do you think more needs to be done around Norwich for cyclists and pedestrians? Write, giving full contact details, to Letters Editor, Prospect House, Rouen Road, Norwich NR1 1RE.

22 comments

  • Here we go again, they have got this money without a clue on how to spend it. Why on earth would you want a tree lined cycle path along sale road? The traffic along Sale road is virtually none existent, surely you should put cycle paths along roads where it is dangerous to cycle? Or am I missing something here?

    Report this comment

    Catton Man

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • What a fantastic idea! We have a 20mph limit, traffic calming and they really do work! Ha,Ha, Ha! This is the biggest guarantee to make the little boy racers go faster, they enjoy hitting the bumps and flying whilst revving the engine and in the wrong gear to make more noise. This has to be the best leisure activity since skateparks. There is never anyone to monitor or issue speed tickets either!

    Report this comment

    blackdog2

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • Sorry, I got it wrong! - buses and cycles rule -O.K! Get used to it.

    Report this comment

    biglingers

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • 'if only these dangerous errant cyclists were targeted as much as the motorists' - Looking past the point that you're right, for the most part (not always mind) cyclists shouldn't be on the paths. The reason they are not targeted in the same way as motorists is they are many many times less likely to kill or maim. Not looking to excuse antisocial behavior, but that is the reality of it.

    Report this comment

    monkeynuts

    Friday, March 14, 2014

  • @bl0f3ld Yep, punctures, one of the many problems that rarely happen on cleaner, better kept roads, the cars tend to keep the roads glassthorn free. Did you know that or are you trying to make some kind of point (badly)?

    Report this comment

    monkeynuts

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • Use the money to fill in pot holes...

    Report this comment

    Andy T

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • Use the money on enforcing existing speedlimits instead of creating ones which wont be observed.

    Report this comment

    watchdog

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • Borrowdale Drive has a 20mph speed limit but it's never adhered too. Why chuck more Money down the drain on another so called safety scheme.

    Report this comment

    getreal

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • It's all very well having cycle paths or having safer cycling routes, I live in Dussindale which has a great network of cycle paths, nobody uses them... every single day on the way to, and from work, I follow the same people cycling on the road with a cycle path 3 feet away! If a cyclist was involved in an accident, who's fault would it be? Use the money elsewhere, cyclists would not use 'safer routes' even when available. Cycle paths or not, cyclists apparently do not need to adhere to a highway code, go wherever and do whatever they want on the roads. This money could be better spent elsewhere.

    Report this comment

    bl0f3ld

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • The roads round Heartsease need attention immediately not cycle lanes, there is a huge dip in Barclay Road and if i'm not mistaken one has started on Deloney Rd near the junction of Clancy Rd. I can remember when the Open Academy was built we had letters to inform us of speed ramps going to be laid in Marryat Rd that was years ago, as usual nothing happened and the markings where they were going to be have long gone!

    Report this comment

    SallyK

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • bl0f3ld: It's not mandatory that a cycle path be used if one exists and has already been stated, they are generally poorly designed and spit you out onto main roads eventually anyway (Riverside development). The problem with the paths in Dussindale is they are shared access so all the nattering mummies and dog walkers take up the entire width of the pedestrian and cycle path. Most of the signage for the cycle paths is covered by overgrown shrubbery from peoples gardens too so perhaps any cyclist passing through Dussindale isn't even aware of their existance. That big circular thingy you hold onto in your car might help you a bit mind.I say carpet bomb the hell out of the whole area with speed cameras, all the proceeds going to shiny cycle lanes with solid white lines to stop lazy car drivers just parking up on the verge when they have a perfectly adequate driveway to park in (St Williams Way). Neugh!

    Report this comment

    frank young

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • I have a 20 mph zone near me and does anyone observe it? Do they heck as like. Why keep introducing laws that can't or aren't being enforced?

    Report this comment

    John L Norton

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • If there is a way to waste money these people will find it.

    Report this comment

    Sweet cheeks

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • With more cycle lanes or paths perhaps people wouldn't feel the need to use the pavement? M&S is a problem though. It seems to be more a case of can't be bothered to dismount and cross at the lights than anything else.

    Report this comment

    frank young

    Thursday, March 13, 2014

  • To make it safer for cyclists? The cyclists seems to have claimed the pavements for themselves. They have become a menace to pedestrians. Cycling in such crowded places as by the corner of M&S and seemingly wherever pedestrian are gathered. Have I missed something ? Has the law changed giving them the right to the pavements? if only these dangerous errant cyclists were targeted as much as the motorists. By the way , I am a cyclist and have no desire to ride on pavements.

    Report this comment

    norman hall

    Thursday, March 13, 2014

  • Wasn't Nigel's fave T-girl, Chloe, available for soundbite and photo-shoot?

    Report this comment

    B Ungatory

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • @Andy T 'Use the money to fill in pot holes' Whats interesting is more people out of cars and on bikes means less pot holes. If youre interested a cycle is about 900x less damaging to the road surface than a car.

    Report this comment

    monkeynuts

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • I think the artist forgot to paint the vandalism, rubbish and decay in his work!

    Report this comment

    KeithS

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • bl0f3ld: It's not mandatory that a cycle path be used if one exists and has already been stated, they are generally poorly designed and spit you out onto main roads eventually anyway (Riverside development). The problem with the paths in Dussindale is they are shared access so all the nattering mummies and dog walkers take up the entire width of the pedestrian and cycle path. Most of the signage for the cycle paths is covered by overgrown shrubbery from peoples gardens too so perhaps any cyclist passing through Dussindale isn't even aware of their existance. That big circular thingy you hold onto in your car might help you a bit mind.I say carpet bomb the hell out of the whole area with speed cameras, all the proceeds going to shiny cycle lanes with solid white lines to stop lazy car drivers just parking up on the verge when they have a perfectly adequate driveway to park in (St Williams Way). Neugh!

    Report this comment

    frank young

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • @bl0f3ld 'whos fault would it be'? Well, not the cyclists for not using the cycle path that's for sure. Nor should it be. What people (non cyclists) keep conveniently forgetting is cycle paths will only be used if they are convenient to do so. To use a cycle path in the UK means constantly giving way to cars turning left across your path, it means punctures, and it means if a cyclist wishes to turn right it becomes a total headache. And unlike roads they more often than not do not go to where you wish to go. These are things that if the roles where revered car drivers would never put up with if the option was there not to.

    Report this comment

    monkeynuts

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • @monkeynuts Obviously I know it would not be the cyclists fault, for not using a perfectly good cyclepath! Why would it be? it never is! "Not convenient to use a cyclepath"!!! Punctures!!!; I take it these do not happen when using the road, Unbelievable!

    Report this comment

    bl0f3ld

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

  • 8 Mile long Cycle Route, erm no ta. Erm what is a Bike?

    Report this comment

    che bramley

    Wednesday, March 12, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Partly Cloudy

Partly Cloudy

max temp: 19°C

min temp: 17°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT