Conversion of Westgate Pavements (footways) into Shared Use Cycletracks Freedom of Information Request to WSCC

Conversion of Westgate Pavements (footways) into Shared Use Cycletracks Freedom of Information Request to WSCC

In early August 2021 ChiCycle contacted local residents recommending opposition to conversion of Westgate pavements (footways) into shared use cycleways as this would likely severely disadvantage disabled and vulnerable pedestrians. Our web post on this issue is available here.

ChiCycle are preparing the following Freedom of Information Request to WSCC Highways

TRO Team, West Sussex County Council, The Grange, Tower Street, Chichester,
PO19 1RH

Dear WSCC TRO Team,

ChiCycle are presenting the following Freedom of Information Request to WSCC TRO Team and WSCC Highways on this the 4th November 2021.

In regard to Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) CHS9038RC

DfT LTN1/20 guidelines on cycle infrastructure instruct that:

6.5.5 Where a shared use facility is being
considered, early engagement with relevant interested
parties should be undertaken, particularly those
representing disabled people, and pedestrians and
cyclists generally. Engaging with such groups is an
important step towards the scheme meeting the
authority’s Public Sector Equality Duty.

Please list which parties representing disabled and/or vulnerable people were actively consulted/engaged by WSCC over the plans to convert Westgate footways into shared use cycle tracks?

Please give details of how WSCC contacted these parties representing disabled and/or vulnerable people and what arrangements were made to promote engagement?

Were all parties representing disabled and/or vulnerable people that WSCC contacted, clearly informed that the proposed infrastructure was significantly below the standards recommended by DfT regarding geometry, minimum widths of shared tracks, minimum widths for cycle crossings, road paint markings and minimum requirements of forward visibility of approaching cyclists e.t.c. ?

If you believe parties representing disabled and/or vulnerable people were appropriately contacted about TRO CHS9038RC through another branch of local government (other than WSCC), please give details of who organised this contact/engagement?

ChiCycle responded to the TRO proposal CHS9038RC by sharing our concerns. These concerns were sent by email and also submitting as a printed copy delivered by hand to WSCC County Hall in Chichester. A copy of our concerns sent to WSCC highways is available on this link. Please confirm whether or not WSCC highways considered these concerns raised by ChiCycle before WSCC granted permission for TRO CHS9038RC to go forwards?

Please indicate if any information you are providing is of a private nature that ChiCycle should avoid republishing on the ChiCycle website.

If possible, I would prefer to receive an electronic copy of the information requested, sent to 

Many thanks for researching and sharing this council information with ChiCycle

Mark Record (Secretary for ChiCycle)

22 Barton Rd.
West Sussex
PO19 3LJ

3 thoughts on “Conversion of Westgate Pavements (footways) into Shared Use Cycletracks Freedom of Information Request to WSCC

  1. We have recently moved to Chichester and if possible would like to add our names to Chi cycle movement.

    Can you tell us if Fishbourne Road East is to have cycle lanes added?
    The road is supposed to have a 20 mph limit but there is insufficient notice to drivers about this rule.

  2. Hi Peter and Gina,
    Thanks for your enquiry.
    National Highways (formerly Highways England) claimed in their feasibility study for the Chichester to Emsworth NMU scheme, that Fishbourne Road East is a quiet street with very low traffic volumes. National Highways have acknowledged they were looking at the wrong data. There is a ChiCycle post detailing this on the following link…
    Despite their NH acknowledgment that Fishbourne Rd East is not really a quiet street, nothing has changed in their plans to support cycling on the street.
    Indeed, priority is being removed from the main axis of the road so cyclists will have to give way to motor-vehicles joining from a side road.
    Generally speaking, ChiCycle policy for the whole Chichester to Emsworth Cycle route is that it would be much better to have town planning measures to severely reduce motor traffic volumes and speeds so that it remained safe for cyclists to ride in the road. This would require revision of the local transport network so the very large numbers of new homes had more direct motor vehicle access onto the A27 and that through traffic should be prevented from driving through (what should be) quiet residential streets. This is more or less the Dutch approach to road safety. The Dutch go to significant lengths to prevent through motor traffic drive through residential areas. An issue is that National Highways have a service provision metric that means they favour only encouraging long distance motor traffic on to their trunk roads. They do everything they can to direct medium length car journeys away from using the Strategic Road Network and onto unsuitable (in my opinion) town and village streets. A serious problem with putting a cycle track next to the pavement on Fishbourne Rd East, is that their are many side roads. It would only be possible to give cyclists priority over motor traffic at the side roads (according to current DfT guidelines) if the cycle trach was set back from the main aces of the street by 5 metres. It is unlikely their is enough room to fit this in and unfortunately the alternative is very unappealing for cyclists to stop at each side road to look over their shoulder to see if a car is about to pull into the street. There are many difficult problems to solve in the area for walking and cycling but sadly the local authorities and NH seem to be going in the wrong direction.
    PS. I’ve added you to the ChiCycle mailing list.

Leave a Reply

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