Oxfordshire County Council has published the results of its informal consultation on plans to improve walking, wheeling and cycling through Abingdon town centre.
The overall picture is one of broad support. However, residents of East St Helen Street – who made up around 6% of respondents strongly opposed some measures.
The full results can be viewed at https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/43234/widgets/147176/documents/103518
The consultation, held between 30 September and 28 October 2025, focused on a £1.47 million scheme funded through the Government’s Active Travel Fund. It would upgrade the National Cycle Network Route 5 (NCN5) as it passes through the town centre.
Proposals included:
* New pedestrian and cycle crossings at the Bridge Street / High Street junction
* A contraflow cycle lane on East St Helen Street
* Planting on East St Helen Street
* New informal crossings on both East and West St Helen Streets
* Early-stage ideas for a future contraflow on West St Helen Street (not yet funded)
Around 345 people completed the survey and more than 220 attending drop-in events at Abingdon Guildhall.
Support for individual elements varied.
Improved crossings at the Bridge Street / High Street junction were supported (strongly or partly) by 81% overall, and 50% of East St Helen Street residents.
The East St Helen Street contraflow was supported by 70% overall, but only 15% of East St Helen Street residents.
New planting in East St Helen Street was backed by 67% overall, but just 5% of residents on East St Helen Street residents.
Respondents with disabilities generally supported the proposals.
55% of respondents said the changes would make them more likely to walk, wheel or cycle in the area – an aim of the scheme.
Despite this overall support, several concerns were repeatedly raised.
Road width and safety
Many questioned whether East St Helen Street is too narrow to accommodate contraflow cycling alongside parked cars, pedestrians and delivery vehicles. Heavy goods vehicles serving local businesses were mentioned.
Parking pressure
Residents, particularly on East St Helen Street, were concerned about the loss of already limited parking spaces.
Heritage and character
There was worry about the visual impact of road markings, signage and materials on one of Abingdon’s most historic streets.
Crossing locations
Some respondents felt the proposed crossing points may not align with how people actually move through the area.
The consultation suggests that many people see benefits in safer crossings and a more connected cycling route through the town. At the same time, there are challenges in introducing these changes on a narrow, historic street.
Council officers are now reviewing the feedback to decide whether changes are needed before the scheme progresses.
As a reminder of current conditions, there was an incident on East St Helen Street today involving a car manoeuvring to park and another passing vehicle that hit the car and shunted it into other parked cars.
How apposite that this should appear on The Blog the day after the car accident on East St. Hellens. I walked passed it shortly after it happened and there were bits of car bodywork all over the road and hanging off the two vehicles … forget ‘crumple zones’ it was more like a disintegration. Even so, the cars can’t have been going any great speed … just good fortune that any cyclists weren’t in close proximity. There was some ‘tidyng up’ going on as I passed so I couldn’t tell whether either of the vehicles had mounted a pavement … A lot of luck at play, though I felt sorry for both drivers as a ‘momentary’ loss of concentration in ‘tight’ circumstances’ had such disproportionate repercussions.
Just had a quick scan of the Council report and it contains a lot of numbers from a small self-selected sample and some authoritative-looking tables … I do have experience of this sort of thing having written the ‘spec’ for two successive Music Charts contracts … and it still doesn’t take into account what happens to traffic wanting to access South Abingdon and The Brewery from Stert and Bridge Streets during times when The Fair is in Town if the key road junction is to be infested with road furniture. I suppose, after filtering through Town these drivers will have to joint the others inching along the Drayton Road.
This plan still looks like the Council wanting a project they can spend some money on just so they can appear ‘decision-makers’.
I think the results are good but as always, woefully low numbers of respondents for a town of 40k. Just in reply to the other comment, as has been stated before the funding for this project comes directly from central government and is ringfenced for exactly these kinds of projects. I am personally grateful that our local gov’t is looking out for such grants and making the most of the available funds to improve the town which I think the junction improvements will do.
At the consultation I asked the council rep whether this project would go ahead regardless of the consultation results, he refused to comment simply stating they would review the views. I suggested that they had been given a guaranteed amount of money to spend on this project and if they didnt use it for this purpose they would lose it, and therefore it would proceed regardless, he refused to comment.
From a west st helen st resident.
Very pleased about this getting the go ahead. It will really help improve access to and around Abingdon.
Crossing Bridge Street with a pram is no fun. All too often drivers are more interested looking for a gap, than for people.
It will also be massively helpful for families, locals, and commuting cyclists to get into Abingdon from South and West Abingdon.
People will not only be able to follow a cycle route, they’ll be able to wheel / use mobility scooters / cycle along it as well.
Glad you’re pleased, Phil. Whereabouts in Abingdon do you live?
yep bikes and mobility scooters one way and co op lorrys and cars the other way in a road that at some points is not even 15 feet wide, pretty obvious that those in favour do not live locally in the town centre
Shocking. This will erode even more.of the towns character.
Bollards, tacky orange/broen tarmac and more and more signs everywhere – pat yourselves in the back, well done!
Another excretion from the Traffic Engineering graduates ? Natives may get used to it but certainly signage Data-overload for visitors unfamiliar with the town even if they are familiar with the contents of the Highway Code (pedestrians as well as drivers). Just because they exist, doesn’t mean that all available graphics should be used within a 200 metre stretch of surface.
However, I will reserve judgement until the result becomes mixed with the usual highway anarchy. Contra-flow cyclists in a narrow space – what could possibly go wrong ?
And I suppose there is no link between this and tge fact that a numbers of councillors in the area are cycling fanatics
For the drivers here concerned about a cycling contraflow, surely you have encountered single lane traffic with passing places?
If you have ever driven past the Anchor this road already has a cycle contra flow.
With your objections to improved and safer pedestrian access, and provision of bicycle access along a national cycle route, it’s important to try to think about people / children who don’t / can’t drive.
What’s your experience been of cycling into town with your kids, or just crossing the road with your baby in a pram?
Or, maybe a family simply wants to leave their car behind when accessing town, Abbey Meadows, or even on their way to the Europa School.
Or how about cycling one street further along and going up west st Helens with the flow of traffic. Problem solved and no large scale engineering required. God forbid the cyclists need to dismount and walk 50m to the .market square
You are right Colin. It’s odd having to look both ways, in East St. Helen’s Street, because cyclists are too lazy to use West St. Helen’s Street and Lombard Street. Also, l notice that when a vechicle is heading along E St. Helen’s, cyclists going the wrong way, go straight onto the pavement and don’t seem to care about pedestrians already walking along the pavement. They expect them to get out of the way.
Here’s some ideas.
1. Suggested a few years ago …A riverside walkway from St Helen’s Wharf –
A boardwalk‑style path along the left bank would solve several problems at once:
– Creates a direct, safe, scenic route between the Wharf and the bridge/Gaol.
– Removes conflict between pedestrians, cyclists, and cars on narrow town‑centre streets.
– Could be built as a low‑impact structure similar to the recycled‑plastic boardwalks now used in nature reserves (Guildford is replacing theirs for exactly this reason — durability, low maintenance, and environmental protection).
Even if cyclists had to (heaven forbid!!) dismount, it would still be a huge improvement in permeability.
The main barriers would be:
– Environment Agency permissions (floodplain, bank stability, habitat, land ownership).
– Heritage constraints near the bridge and Gaol.
– Funding — these projects tend to run into six figures even for modest lengths…because the UK is only good at lining the pockets of consultants and contractors.
– Political appetite — councils often avoid anything that looks like it wont make money.
But technically? Entirely feasible.
—
🚲 2. A new pedestrian & cycle bridge
A foot/cycle bridge near Margaret Brown Gardens or the old canal entrance would be a game‑changer:
– Provides a second east–west crossing, reducing pressure on the existing routes and road user conflicts.
– Creates direct desire‑line routes for people travelling between South Abingdon, the town centre, and the Abbey Meadows side.
– Opens up new circular walking routes and improves access to green space.
– Could be designed as a lightweight, elegant structure with minimal river impact.
Other towns have done this with great success — but the sticking point is always the same: political will, cost, and, in my opinion….not “anti car” enough.
—
🚗 3. Why these ideas struggle politically
the core issue: in UK local politics, a pro‑walking/pro‑cycling scheme is only considered legitimate if it is also anti‑car — or at least so it seems. If it slightly improves active travel that’s great…but better still to actively discourage private car ownership.
Anyway….the con-sultants have had their say, fortunately, they get paid whether the scheme works for us or not. 👍
But….we do have restricted parking now along the wharf …so…that’s good 👌
Is this really needed or just a need to spend money that is on offer from central government that could be used elsewhere?
Adding more pedestrian crossings and cycle lanes will just slow traffic even more so than current.
Is a cycle lane in West St Helens really needed? Many cyclists flout the one way rule anyway.
Why do people not cross at the correct points? There are plenty of safe crossing areas, but people (even those with pushchairs) are keen to cross wherever they like, not considering the risks these pose.
To make central Abingdon safer, more needs to be done to stop people parking outside Posh Nosh or the barbershop. There are yellow lines, but clearly not regularly policed.
Also, many of us love looking back at Abingdon over years gone by. The ‘street furniture’ this requires will make the town look even worse (and will need to be maintained).
Just my view, but this is not needed.