Consultation on plans for Horsham’s strategic cycle network

Horsham District Council is consulting on its Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP).

An LCWIP seeks to identity a strategic local cycle network to fulfil the Government’s ambition to make walking and cycling “the natural choices for shorter journeys or as part of a longer journey”.

It is essential to have a LCWIP in place to make a good case for future funding.

Please comment on the plan here. This is your chance to have a say on the future of our District.

Cycling in East Street (pic: Mark Treasure)

We will be submitting our full response shortly but below are some our our initial thoughts.

Things we like:

  • The fact that Horsham council has produced a detailed document on improving road conditions for cycling and walking in the town.
  • The vision statement is good, wanting ‘cycling and walking to be the natural choice for most short journeys.’
  • We support the plan’s objectives (although these do need measurable targets attached to them).
  • We like the types of infrastructure improvements described in section 7 (cycle tracks, low traffic neighbourhoods etc).
  • The key findings from the route audits are well described.

We believe these improvements (and more) to the plan are needed:

  • The LCWIP is only a start on achieving safer streets for Horsham – to have credibility it is vital to define the milestones for future progress and commit to the next steps in the process.
  • The draft so far has no priorities, targets, timescales, budgets or commitments to action.
  • The town centre section is very weak. Every one of the shortlisted routes start or end in the town centre, but this section (a single page right at the end of the document) majors on existing problems and gives few solutions or concrete plans for change.
  • A cycling network map for the area is needed as a ‘key output’ of the plan. At the moment there are 5 unconnected ‘corridors’.
  • The routes to Warnham and Mannings Heath should be designated as primary routes under section 5. Both of these have existing parish council support, and the Warnham route has identified funding and is therefore an ‘easy win.’
  • Primary schools should be included as ‘destinations’ (section 4). ‘School run’ time in Horsham is very bad on the roads!
  • The draft has no mention of provision for disabled users who are particularly sensitive to poor standards of cycling and walking provision.
  • The cost estimates section needs to highlight the economic, health and environmental benefits of active travel. Can we afford NOT to invest in cycling and walking?


  1. Mrs L McGilligan says

    Is there any planned provision of secure bike parking for town centre, cant see any on the plan. And current provision is not secure.

    • Hi, the LCWIP is concerned with desired routes that form a network, rather than other aspects of the built environment that enable more cycling, such as parking. You are absolutely right that the provision of good quality cycle parking in the town is poor. Where would you like to see more cycle parking and what form should it take?

      • I think a large secure cycle park should have been incorporated into the Piries Place Carpark redesign, but there is still space to do so in or adjacent. Shame it wasn’t. If people have secure lockup’s at train stations why not in the town centre too, for workers commuting into town and who might also spend most of their day there? I’m also aware there is some concern about cyclists on East Street, which I do use, and don’t want to restrict. But I travel down East Street mostly because there’s not enough cycle parking provisions on that side of town centre, forcing you to cycle further in to park and lock up nearer to Carfax. But I would actually prefer to park right on the edge and walk-in. If you’re going cross town, surely Albion Way is quicker anyhow.

Speak Your Mind