Hampshire consultation on staggered barriers

Very many thanks to everyone who contributed so brilliantly on Hampshire's staggered barriers consultation, below or separately. You can see the submission I sent in here. I also included previous documents on anti-motorbike barriers that only keep out legitimate users, and about the Lethal Bollards on NCN22 at Farlington Marsh, which we haven't been able to remove yet. Apologies if I missed yours.

My original request below.

Can you help steer Hampshire County Council on the use of staggered barriers on walking and cycling routes, as well as the use of cyclist dismount signs, end of route signs and cycle prohibition orders?

The council knows that these are a barrier to active travel generally, but especially for some types of cycles, including adapted cycles for people with disabilities.

They want our thoughts and experiences of these features and to send in any examples of locations where you feel these have caused issues for cyclists, with photographs if possible.

Their brief is to consider the following:

  • Develop a position statement on use of “no cycling”, “cyclist dismount” and “end of route” signs, and use of staggered barriers and other barriers on walking and cycling routes, to avoid use unless absolutely essential on safety grounds.
  • Consider how these measures impact on Cycling Level of Services, Junction Assessment Tool, and Healthy Street Check for designers. 
  • Consider how these measures impact on our Public Sector Equalities Duty. 
  • Create Technical Guidance for our new position.
  • Consider how this approach could apply to developments.

Their deadline is end of January, so please give me plenty of time to consolidate your comments. You can add your comments below, or email them to Wilf9@forrow.com. If you have location specific issues, I need the exact location and description, and a photo if you have one (but please don't delay responding in the hope of a photo opportunity).

This could improve Hampshire's cycle policies and make it a more cycle-friendly place - please help!

Many thanks, Wilf

About Wilf Forrow

I'm a retired IT consultant, and a touring and utility cyclist. I'm particularly interested in campaigning for better cycle infrastructure, and a member of Sustrans and Cycle Hayling, amongst others. I am fascinated by cycle technology, and especially folders.

9 thoughts on “Hampshire consultation on staggered barriers

  1. Hi Wilf. A few comments on cycling signage and barriers. What are the objectives of staggered barriers. Possibly to stop large vehicles, cars. From entering. Maybe to slow cyclists down. Or because they are there. For the first a mid track post would do. For slowing cyclists should be unnecessary. Third, no comment. As regards signage. Most are unnecessary, ignored, or totally irrelevant. The only one, end of route may be significant. But what then? Back onto the road and hope everyone has read the new highway code! Which actually makes no difference to our rights. Hope this helps a bit. Barry

  2. They are a major problem for me on my recumbent. We have several in the Fareham area which neither my disabled son, nor I, can get through on our 'bents, so we have to detour either on busy roads, or footpaths.

    1. Thanks Roger! That's exactly what we need to get changed.

      I think this particular case might be more about setting the right policy for the future rather than fixing individual cases, but he's asked for examples, so if you have any details of locations, and/or pics, I'll add them.

  3. Staggered barriers are a menace as they are used to stop Motor cycles ( which it fails to do) and makes it virtually impossible to use them if you are 90 like me or have a tricycle. The only time they should be used is to stop people rushing into the road at the end of a cycle track.
    No Cycling signs are usually ignored by me as they are applied to underpasses where I could not hit my head on the ceiling if I tried. End of route signs are unnecessary as it is usually obvious and only clutters up the pavements with posts. I have yet to obey a dismount sign as I would not be able to remount as there are no signs that I have seen so I would have to stop cycling totally and that will never happen. S.K. Ginger.

  4. Hi Wilf. There is a shared use path in Petersfield, known as the Taro Trail and Riverside walk which leads from the town centre area to the leisure centre. There is a section with 4 sets of staggered barriers, one at each road junction. Each set presents an obstacle to cycles. In my own experience the barriers are very difficult to get past if you are riding a bike with two panniers laden with shopping, for this reason I tend to take the road route when making utility trips by bike into the town centre.
    I'm not sure if this works, but there is a link to the annotated
    map below. I have some photos too, I can email a link to the fold if you like.

  5. Wilf

    In my view Cyclist Dismount signs are often used inappropriately making disrupting cycle routes and making them impractical. This is exacerbated by the public not understanding that a white on blue sign is advisory, as opposed to an instruction.

    Three places in particular where they are miss-used:
    1. Bath Lane Fareham, the underpass linking Cams recreation ground to Fareham High Street
    2. Gosport Rd, Fareham, the A32 Underpass near the Quay Street roundabout.
    3. Newtown C of E Primary School. These are staggered gates with cyclist dismount signs which are put across the cycle track at when pupils are arriving at and leaving school. I believe they were installed some years ago following an incident or near miss with a child and a cyclists. I don't dispute there use when children are entering and exiting school, but I use the track regularly and find the gates are being put into place 30-40 minutes before the end of the school day when there are no children about and cycling past the school can be done quite safely.

    With regard to No Cycling signs; there is a no cycling sign which stops cyclists crossing Anns Hill Cemetery, from Wilmot Lane to Southcroft Road. This makes no sense when the cemetery has two roads from Anns Hill which cars regularly drive along.



  6. Very many thanks to everyone who contributed so brilliantly on Hampshire's staggered barriers consultation, in the comments above or separately. You can see the submission I sent in at the top of the article.

  7. Andy Henderson made a good point but I missed his email, so I'll do a follow-up. If anyone else has anything to add - shout!

    There’s a couple of good posts on the ‘As easy as’ blog which are relevant:



    Regarding the second one, the guys working on Copse Lane recently said the ‘Road closed’ signs weren’t supposed to include cyclists. As you know, we routinely encounter closed roads that are not closed to cyclists. I’m guessing the problem is that the road signs don’t come with an ‘except cyclists’ option.

  8. Phil Nelson points out that barriers can cause both injury and erosion of the surface.

    When the barriers were installed over the A3M in Park Lane Cowplain I was consulted and replied on behalf of the DA stating that they were totally unnecessary as the path on the North side to the shops was narrow and motorcycles could access the bridleway by other means.

    Needless to say they were installed in a manner which makes it very difficult to ride through and I have seen cyclists fall during the manoeuvre.

    Where pedestrian and cycle traffic enters and exits there is significant wear on the surface causing puddling when wet, another hazard.

Comments are closed.