A new protected cycle lane currently under construction in Northumberland has received a mixed response from locals, with some claiming that the new two-way route will make the road more dangerous than ever before, while arguing that it was never that risky a proposition for cyclists anyway.
The Hexham to Corbridge active travel corridor forms part of Northumberland County Council’s bid to improve walking and cycling infrastructure by delivering a protected route connecting residents to employment, education, and leisure facilities, while providing a link to Hexham railway and bus station.
Work on phase one of the project at the Hexham end is currently underway, and is expected to be complete by the end of this summer, while the whole scheme is scheduled to open in the middle of 2027.
The construction of the two-way cycleway along the A695, which also includes a segregated footpath accounting for 50 per cent of the active travel space, means that the road has been made narrower, with plans in place to lower the speed limit for motorists using it from 60mph to 40mph. Traffic lights will also be installed on the narrow Dilston Bridge to enable drivers to pass safely.
With the completion date in sight, however, the scheme has come in for some criticism from disgruntled locals, who claim the government active travel funding should have been spent elsewhere, on “more important” projects.
Last week, a post about the new cycle lane on the Hexham Matters Facebook page was deleted after the comments section became heated, while a video of the infrastructure, shared by local Shaun Cosgrave, has been viewed 42,000 times and attracted over 300 comments.
“This project isn’t getting much love at the moment, but when it’s open will people feel differently about it,” Cosgrave said.
While some commenters noted that the new bike lane will encourage more people to cycle, others – including some self-described “keen” cyclists – pointed out that they “never had any problems” on the road or that they will continues to use a quiet alternative road on the north side of the river instead of the soon-to-be-completed cycleway.
Meanwhile, speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, some locals were even more critical of the decision to install the infrastructure.
“I know it’s government funded, but I think they could have spent it on something more important,” Hexham resident Raymond Bewick said.
“I live near it and I see a lot of the traffic that goes along to Corbridge. it’s very rare that you see bikes going along there – that could improve.
“I don’t think they have kept us informed enough. A lot of it has been out of the blue, without any information. think if they had kept us better informed people might be more positive.”
Ken Robinson said: “I think it’s overpriced, and I think it’s frustrating that the road was so wide anyway. I don’t think there was a real danger to cyclists.
“Because of how narrow the road is now, if there’s a couple of wagons or buses passing, it’s going to be close. I think there’s more risk to every road user now than there was before.”
Ken’s concerns about road width were echoed in the comments under Cosgrave’s video by Geoff Robinson, who wrote: “Old road 33 feet wide. New road 24 feet wide. For both carriageways, if my paces are accurate. The emergency services use this road a lot.”
In response to these concerns, the local authority noted that safety assessments had been carried out and that the changes adhered to national highways and cycleways standards.
Councillor Nick Oliver pointed out: “There have been consultation events held in Corbridge and Hexham that were pretty-well publicised, both on social media and in the newspaper.
“There has also been a lot of engagement with residents. I understand some people will have missed that, but it is impossible to consult with everybody.
“The council has made a genuine effort, we also consulted with Hexham Town Council and Corbridge Parish Council. I think there has been every effort made.”
Some residents, however, were more positive about the new infrastructure and the impact it could have on the local communities.
“I think there should be more cycle lanes. I think there should be less driving, we should use the buses more too,” said Eleni Michael.
“It’s very healthy and with Hexham, everything is within easy reach. It’s good for the environment. I’m from Norfolk and all the front gardens there are all given up to parking for cars. The more people cycle the better.”
Over on Facebook, Adam Eckersley criticised what he deemed the “completely binary approach” being taken when it comes to the new cycle lane, dominated by the belief that “either every cyclist should use them or they are a waste of money”.
“But if their purpose is to persuade people onto bikes who wouldn’t have done so before it’s a whole different use case,” he said.
“If some people use the cycle path then that is fewer using the roads, which is positive. Expecting every cyclist to use a cycle lane is no more sensible than expecting every motorist to only drive on motorways or roads above a certain size.
“If a cycle path encourages new unconfident cyclists to try using bikes it is serving a purpose. If even 20 per cent of those who would cycle on the road also use it then that’s 20 per cent fewer cyclists on the road, which is a plus.
“But people would rather moan about the cyclists that are on the road than have fewer of them in general. Any cycle path post on social media is guaranteed to attract the ‘no-one uses them’ crowd, who somehow managed to get a driving license despite apparently being blind.”
