'Radically different' active travel plans in Royal Borough slammed by councillors

A four-week consultation window for ‘radical’ changes to roads in Maidenhead and Windsor has been labelled unacceptable by councillors.

Residents have been given until February 9 to give feedback on a number of schemes which aim to reduce car traffic and encourage more walking and cycling in the borough.

The proposals have been drawn up after the council secured £335,000 from the Department for Transport (DfT) as part of the Government’s Active Travel Fund.

The funding aims to encourage local authorities to deliver projects which reduce the number of cars on the road in the post-coronavirus era.

Schemes put forward in the borough include a bus gate in Shoppenhangers Road to stop drivers using the road for through journeys between Braywick Road and Larchfield (see p1).

Low-traffic neighbourhoods are also suggested in Windsor, which would see a number of roads closed off to cars, restricting access between Dedworth Road and Maidenhead Road.

Councillor John Baldwin (Lib Dems, Belmont) told a meeting of the council’s infrastructure and overview scrutiny panel on Tuesday: “These proposals are so radically different from what was originally intended. I think our original bid was for over £700,000 and we’ve received barely half of that.

“What we’ve seen is a complete change in approach. It isn’t a scaling down of a previous set of consulted changes, it’s a radically different approach.”

He added: “The consultation window is unacceptable and if the consultation window can’t be moved I think the proposal should be withdrawn in its entirety.”

Conservative councillor Phil Haseler (Cox Green) said the council needs to look at how fair and meaningful the consultation is as the schemes proposed could have ‘very serious knock-on effects’ for residents.

The council’s cabinet member for transport and infrastructure, councillor Gerry Clark (Con, Bisham and Cookham) responded: “This is not a scheme that we’re going ahead with, this is a consultation to determine the appetite for such schemes.

“If residents are overwhelmingly against it these schemes will not progress.”

Leave your comment

Share your opinions on

Characters left: 1500


  • Pursuer

    13:37, 24 January 2021

    More loony proposals- Whoopee HMG has given the Council £355k - What can we waste it on? Great we can introduce loads more blockages so that cars take longer to go from A-B and create more pollution in process. Who are all these pedestrians and cyclists who are so inconvenienced by the existing town structure (i.e. before it was messed up by 'traffic flow experts'). Congestion, were we living as normal, would be massive given now all these bright ideas designed to reduce traffic flow added to this are chicanes, plastic pyramids, 'pop up' bollards, yellow lines, etc etc . The Cookham Road 'Essential' alterations, started many weeks ago as '3 weeks work' - still not finished, conveniently designed to be almost invisible after dark until you hit it ( I haven't). BTW Does anything in RBWM get done on time and within Budget? Everything seems to over run.. RBWM organisational skills seem to to resemble the ability to organise a drinks party in a Brewery



Editor's Picks

Most read

Top Ten Articles