Posted by: cycleknutsford | January 13, 2014

Cycle Route Proposals

Andrew Coatsworth and Patrick Jones of CycleKnutsford have created this paper proposing improvements to two major cycling routes in Knutsford.

Cycle Knutsford – Paper 2013_7_B


  1. Guys
    Having read your report it is not clear to me what your suggested actions are and who should do them.?

    Having got out the excellent Map in looking at your detailed assumptions I make the following comments. RSVP your thoughts.

    1) Routes to Tatton Park at both Town and Dog wood entrance should be considered priority.
    a) because this is an important leisure route within Knutsford.
    b) bike and go from the station would help encourage cyclists to Park
    c) campaign for Parkgate link now.
    d) focusing here has knock on benefits for other key routes.
    e) Council funding as part of Park development may be accessible.

    2) The routes to Knutsford Sports Club and Egerton Youth Club should be considered a priority as this has a major amount of traffic and as family based would encourage cycling. Tatton park route would be part of this route plan.

    3) Any planned changes to Bottom street as part of town plan pedestrian priority should help cyclists and again would improve the early part of routes to Park and Mereheath Sports from Cross town and Legh Road and Bexton.
    This is preferred routeway avoiding the already identified as hazardous A50 Canute square Garden road route.

    4) Sparrow lane is important as a major ped and cycle way key here is to make sure pathway is kept clear.So Low cost high return investment.

    5) Cycling is not prohibited across the Moor. The gates at either end make access for all users difficult but not impossible. Cyclists dont need to use path most hybrids can handle the grass. The Penny farthing race around the Moor is legend! Macc Borough Council made the fencing errors. A key use of the Moor area is for routeways across Town. Cycle Knutsford members should attend Friends of the Moor meetings first weds of each month.Also DIRECT contact Town and Cheshire East Councillors as the only views they hear is via Friends group.

    • Great letter/comments and I totally agree with you. Please contact me on

  2. Hello Debbie
    First thanks for taking the trouble to give feedback on the paper 2013/7/B “Improving Cycling in Knutsford”.

    In hindsight I should have ensured that more background information was given at the time of the report being put on the web-site, and so I will attempt to now fill some of the gaps, by which I hope to largely address your comments.

    The matter of identifying improvement to cycle routes in Knutsford is sufficiently important, and, as we found, likely to require a rapid response as opportunities arose, for Cycle Knutsford to set up a working party for this sole purpose. The report was the work of two people, drawn from the four people of this working party of CycleKnutsford, but to avoid further delay in responding to your comments, I am, with the agreement of the leader, writing in a sole capacity, rather than agreeing the response with the rest of the working party.

    The background is that in late November 2013 CycleKnutsford had the opportunity to propose to East Cheshire, and possibly Sustrans, means to improve cycling in Knutsford, with the prospect of very early action. We had less than 3 weeks to prepare for a meeting with East Cheshire; with more time we would have produced a more comprehensive report and have sought input, such as you have now given, from a wider group of people.
    Having set the scene, may I consider the individual matters you have raised?

    We have identified the generality of actions that we believe East Cheshire Council should make. The detailed design of changes to highways and communal land are not a matter for CycleKnutsford, although we will offer views and hope to be consulted.

    You make a number of comments concerning cycle routes, which were identified in the CycleKnutsford map, but which not deemed priorities in Section 4 of the report. We need to distinguish cycle routes, ie where cyclists go – on highways, paths, or even across open parkland (at least two of the there routes within Tatton Park on the CycleKnutsford map), from specific cycling provision. There are important cycle routes in Knutsford which require no specific cycling provision at all.

    Following your numbering:

    1) Routes into Tatton Park. I don’t consider route to Tatton Park at the town end requires special provision (but see below concerning King Street); I have no experience of cycling in at the Dog Wood entrance, although I found the two kissing gates very difficult on x-country skis! As the report notes, Dogwood should be considered with the proposed future development of Park Gate Estate. On item 1e -“council funding of park development”, I note that the Bewiderwood scheme, to which I am personally opposed, is apparently to address a park defecit – there is no surplus funding for park development, as you put it.
    2) Mereheath Lane. Important I agree, but to be addressed along with housing proposals. There would be no point in, say, putting in a cycle lane in Mereheath Lane, as cars would continue to park there, but on top of the cycle lane.
    3) King Street. As note in section 4 of the report, King Street requires consideration for cyclists, and East Cheshire is in a study phase. There is no point in pressurising East Cheshire for say a cycle lane in King Street – it is far too narrow, and the best way forward seems to be treat cars, pedestrians and cyclist as having equal rights in the limited width available. Accordingly I have personally visited Poynton, also in East Cheshire, to watch the shared use system in operation, and I believe this may be a suitable way to improve King Street.
    4) Sparrow Lane – I have never had a problem cycling down Sparrow Lane – is there some issue I am not aware of?
    5) The Moor. You are right! A new sign prohibiting cycling across the Moor, a sign I firmly believe to have been present when Patrick Jones and I surveyed the route, has disappeared as suddenly as it appeared. You make a very good point in suggesting liaison with the Friends of the Moor – can you suggest a suitable contact please? Finally, concerning your comment about Town and East Cheshire Councillors, I am very happy to write that we are extremely fortunate to have an East Cheshire Councilor active on both the CycleKnustford Committee and on the routes working party.

    As the immediate need to submit this report prior to the meeting we had with East Cheshire Council officials was achieved, there is now an opportunity to further develop our proposals at a more leisurely pace. I would be happy to meet with you and cycle the routes you refer to, and to hear first hand your views.

    Thanks again for the feedback.


    • Andy thanks for your reply. Note the purpose and urgency of your need to put something together. My comments just sit there to help us all stay joined up as and when cycling is promoted in town. Particularly when ‘highways’ development is proposed that seems to forget about walking and wheeeling!!
      Re Moor the friends of the Moor have a website .

  3. Great reply Andy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: