Sharp edge trip

Private sector better?... not necessarily when it comes to cycle parking!

2011-12-30T16:46:00.000Z

Previous posts on this blog have highlighted the need for much better provision of secure cycle parking across Greater Manchester - at both public and private sector locations. See for example Park that Bike and Cycle parking?... my Kingdom for some cycle parking amongst others!

In the "Greater Manchester - Cycling Progress Report" (GMTU Report 1637) published in January 2011 it was noted that whilst analysis of "cycle trips into most key centres and cycle carriage on trains suggest that there is a continuing increase in cycle usage within Greater Manchester, with the exception of cycle parking in key locations where a slight decrease has occurred since 2008." (See Table 20 above). Trafford came second from bottom in the cycle parking locations rankings. A poor record that Trafford Council disputes and they have initiated a Borough-wide "cycle parking audit" (of which more in subsequent blog postings).

As part of this cycle parking audit I (re)visited the B&Q facility on Great Stone Road in Old Trafford and was reminded that there is still no cycle parking facilities for customers, although there are over 105 car parking spaces!

I had previously raised the lack of cycle parking at this B&Q store nearly 2 years ago and had pointed out that the B&Q website stated that they "actively promote sustainable transport to our staff and customers" and had introduced Travel Plans which promote "more sustainabletravel and transport choices such as cycling, car sharing, walking andusing public transport."

A B&Q public relations person responded in February 2010 that "in regards to your query, this store is not one of B&Q’stravel plans stores however it does have a responsible travel guide whichpromotes similar activities as a travel plan"and "Unfortunately there are no immediate plans to install cycleparking in this store" but that "I have forwarded your request to our Propertydepartment to highlight your need as a customer."

When I asked if it was possible to see a copy of the "responsible travel guide" I was informed that this was an internal B&Q document and not publicly available. However, the "One Planet Living at B&Q : Progress against targets in 2009" report stated that responsible travel guides had been "rolled out to all stores to encourage alternatives to private car use".

But it seems unlikely that people will be encouraged to choose alternative travel modes, such as cycling, to visit B&Q stores if there is a total lack of secure and easy to use cycle parking facilities.

One of the few places where people can lock their bicycles at this B&Q store are the barriers around the shopping trolley area (see photo below). But this is far from ideal as it is awkward to do, can interfere with access to the trolleys, risks damage to your bicycle and does not provide properly secure locking.

B&Q are certainly not alone within the retail and private sector in failing to provide adequate (any) cycle parking facilities for customers or visitors. There are also questions about what cycle parking requirements (if any) were included in the planning permission granted by Trafford Council and whether such planning requirements are adequately enforced.

(Future blog postings will look at some of the other private sector companies in Trafford that are failing to 'walk the walk' when it comes to encouraging sustainable and active travel.

Meanwhile if you are a B&Q customer and would like to have proper cycle parking facilities at the Great Stone Road store (or a potential customer who would like to cycle there) then perhaps you would like to drop a (polite) email to: travelplans@b-and-q.co.uk and let them know your thoughts.

Christmas Crackers!

2011-12-21T16:08:00.000Z

Ho ho ho... now I know this is supposed to be the season of goodwill and all that...... but this short stretch of cycle lane seems to be even more crackers than normal....

It is to be found on national cycle route 85 at the entrance to Painswick Park in Wythenshawe (see photo below).

A box of lovely veggie mince pies to anyone who can tell us:

what purpose this cycle serves

when it was installed, and

how much it cost?

.... and may you all have a happy festive season!

More DIY publicity - clean messages!

2011-12-21T13:00:00.004Z

In June, this blog highlighted some interesting DIY bike publicity that was literally hitting the streets in Australia, United States and elsewhere.

Now, via those lovely people at Copenhagenize.com, comes a lovely video from Brazil that illustrates how using a simple stencil and cleaning away the dirt on a range of vehicles can leave a powerful message.

Or as the Copenhagenize website puts it: " Fantastic, simple activism from Brazil. The stencil reads, simply, "Bike - not as dirty".

Such stencils are easy and cheap to make with materials that are readily available from your lovely local craft or DIY store or even found in recycling bins!

Whether cleaning the dirt away or using temporary flour and water pastes your campaign messages can be distributed in imaginative and highly visible locations.

This stencil image was created by Manchester Friends of the Earth to help publicise Car-Free day events in September.

The next Car-Free day is on 22nd September 2012... now where did we put those stencil cutters.....

Public Service Announcement #4: Calling All Cycle Mechanics

2011-12-20T09:58:00.000Z

This just in from Transport for Greater Manchester....

Calling All Cycle Mechanics

Dear Sir/Madam,

Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM), on behalf of Greater Manchester partners, submitted a Key Component bid and was awarded £4.9m from the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF). For more information about the LSTF Commuter Cycling Project please follow this link.

TfGM is now tendering for bike maintenance courses and sessions, as part of this project and we would like to make you aware of how you (or your contacts) can get involved in the delivery of these services.

TfGM wishes to establish a Preferred Supplier List for the provision of:-

- Dr Bike sessions (throughout Greater Manchester)

- Basic Bicycle Maintenance Training carried out at locations throughout Greater Manchester

- Basic Bicycle Maintenance Training carried out at the tenderers’ own premises.

If you are interested in applying for this tender you must;

1. Register (for free) on the ProContract website (see link on right hand side of this website to register)

2. When you are sent your log in details, log on to ProContract and use the search facility to find the ‘Dr Bike and Cycle Maintenance Training’ tender and register your interest – you will then have access to the Invitation to Tender (ITT)

3. Complete and return the Invitation to Tender (ITT) – the closing date 12 noon, 16th January 2012

We would be grateful if you could forward this email to any of your contacts who you think may be interested in applying.

If you or your contacts have any further queries or would like to discuss in more detail, please do not hesitate to contact either:-

Indi Lall, Procurement,

Transport for Greater Manchester, 2 Piccadilly Place, Manchester M1 3BG

Direct line 0161 2441137, Indi.lall@tfgm.com

Anne-Louise Black, Greater Manchester Walking and Cycling Officer

Transport for Greater Manchester, Transport Strategy

2 Piccadilly Place, Manchester M1 3BG

Direct line 0161 244 1616, Anne-Louise.Black@TfGM.com

New E-book: Roads Were Not Built For Cars

2011-12-16T10:41:00.000Z

Advance notice of a new Ebook by Carlton Reid, due to be released in April 2012. The promo blurb explains how:

"Many motorists assume roads were built for them; that asphalt is a relatively recent creation designed to speed them along; and that non-motorised road users have lesser rights. None of this is true.

Motorists are the johny-come-latelies of highway history. This fact is explored at length in ‘Roads Were Not Built For Cars’, an exploration of the fascinating history of roads and the part that cyclists helped in saving them. The coming of the railways killed off the coaching trade and almost all rural roads reverted to low-level local use. Cyclists were the first group in a generation to use roads and were the first to push for high-quality sealed surfaces and were the first to lobby for national funding and leadership for roads. Without cyclists, motorists wouldn’t have hit the ground running when it came to places to drive this new form of transport.

‘Roads Were Not Built for Cars’ is a history book, focussing on the 1880s and 1890s, a time when cyclists had political clout, in the UK and especially in America. The book researches the Road Improvements Association – a lobbying group created by the CTC in the 1880s – and the Good Roads movement organised by the League of American Wheelmen in the same period."

Visit the website if you would like to receive notification by email when the E-book is released.

[Disclaimer: This blogger has no connection to the author or publishers of this (e)book and receives no payment for publicising it ! In case anyone was wondering.]

Metrolink...(not) going round the bend !

2011-11-22T10:40:00.001Z

Back in March this blog posted about the madness of Metrolink's plans to install a series of steps into the Trans Pennine Trail near Sandhurst Road as part of the extension of the tram network to Didsbury. See Access for All? Metrolink plans to trash the Trans Pennine Trail ... Take action now!

Thankfully, (after a lot of campaigning, emails and lobbying), the then Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authrority (GMITA) instructed Metrolink to change their plans. See Update: Step away from the Trans-Pennine Trail !

The photograph on the right (taken last week) shows how the old Sandhurst Bridge has been removed and preparations to install a new pedestrian bridge are progressing. The new bridge will have a wider span which will allow sufficient space to have a flat, ground-level Trans-Pennine Trail alongside the tram lines on this part of the route.

Hurrah for that we can hear you saying.....

Unfortunately, it appears that the people responsible for designing and managing this scheme do not yet seem to have a good grasp of what makes a good cycling route.

The photographs on the left show very tight-angled bends in the new Trans-Pennine Trail path. Now, sometimes depending on the terrain and other factors it is necessary to build in tight turns. But this is a newly constructed section and there is clearly space to 'soften' the angle of the bends.

Have the designers never seen a copy of Sustrans Greenways guide ?, for example "7. The Design and Construction of ‘Traffic Free’ Sections."

This section contains, plenty of really good and practical design and construction advice - what you won't find in these design guides are any right-angle bends in the walking and cycle path designs. When Sustrans were asked, if there was any guidance for such tight-angle designs, a helpful but rather bemused response was received along the lines of "it seems such an obvious design criteria (not to include) that it is not specifically covered in the Greenway design guide" !

We hope that there is still time to improve the design of the TransPennine Trail, before all works are completed.

If you would prefer not to have to navigate sharp turns when cycling along - perhaps you would like to drop Councillor Andrew Fender, the Chair of Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM), and (politely) ask him to request Metrolink learn a few basic cycle design rules...

Councillor Fender can be contacted via tfgmc@manchester.gov.uk

On the slow road to nowhere fast....

2011-11-19T19:31:00.001Z

Avid readers (!) of this blog will remember a post in June discusing the damage caused to cycle lanes and advance stop line (ASL boxes) by contractors working for the utility companies and the seeming reluctance of Manchester City Council to use their statutory powers to require the contractors to repair the damage. See Digging a hole, don't dig there, dig it elsewhere !

An initial Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) request attempted to find out when the work (damage) had been carried out and by which contractors. After a little bit of to-ing and fro-ing, this FoIA request was answered on 4th July (answers in bold).

"You have requested the following information for the Charles Street / Princess Streetjunction area:

a) When (date) was the work on the highway,which resulted in the damage to the Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs), originallycarried out?

The first phase of work was started on 31January 2010 and completed on 17 February 2011. No defect was recorded.
The second phase of work was carried outbetween 12 April to 21 April
b) Which utility company/contractor wasauthorised to carry out that work?

The work was carried out by Electricity NorthWest - Escalon.
EscalonLtd, DuncanStreet Yard, DuncanStreet, SalfordM5 3SQ

c) Were the completed road works inspectedby Manchester City Council staff, and if so,

i) on what dates were the inspection(s)undertaken?

No inspection was carried out at the abovesite at the time of the opening, as no Random Sample sheets had been generatedby the Exor computer for this site. Note only 10% of each layer of inspectionof all works are generated for inspection by the Exor computer.

ii) What information was recorded as aresult of any inspections?

A reported inspection was carried out onthis section of carriageway on 28 June. The information recordedas a defect was: "no temporary lining" each sideof the cycle bay prior to permanent reinstatement.
iii) What actions, if any, were initiatedas a result of the inspections?

A site meeting has been requested by theinspector with Escalon to discuss the temporary and final reinstatementof the surface and lining."

Only repairing a pothole!

So what have we learnt from this response? The Department for Transport (DfT) document: Specification for the Reinstatement of Openings in Highways: Second Edition 2002 Section 6.4.5.4 Coloured Surfacings states that : "Coloured surfacings used to highlight highway features such as speed warnings, bus or cycle lanes, ‘gateways’ etc. shall be permanently reinstated using like materials of equivalent type and similar colour.

It is fairly clear that contractors who work on the roads should be required to reinstate the road to how they found it. However, in this case the works were not inspected after completion - despite causing quite major changes in the road surface at a busy junction.

But the good news was that a "defect" had now been recorded and a "site meeting" requested with the contractor, Escalon. So far, so good.

Unfortunately, any progress has been a little more elusive. With no progress on repairs visible by mid October, another FoIA request was submitted. The following response was received on 3rd November (answers embolded):

"You requested:

a) What was the date of the site meetingwith an Escalon representative? A meeting has not taken place despitecontinued requests to the utility company, they have not yet contactedthe Manchester City Council.

b) Which personnel were present at the site meeting? N/A

c) What outcomes / actions were identified / recorded from that site meeting?N/A

d) Has a scheduled date been agreed for "the temporary and final reinstatementof the surface and lining." ? No, this is an ongoing defect, we havedefected the repair through computer system (central computer system usedby all who wish to excavate/carry-out works on the highway). Thisdefect has been reported to the utility on the following dates: 15/06/2011,28/06/2011, 25/10/2011.

The third notice (fine) expires on the 7thNovember and we are unable to action any works ourselves until the saidexpiry date. Thereafter we will investigate the possibility of carryingout the works and recharging the utility concerned. "

So.... what I thought was a simple task of asking the Highways Section to request the contractor to repair the damage to the ASL has turned into quite a saga.... never realised it would be so difficult to get a private sector company to provide a quality service. Doesn't seem to square with the current Government's mantra of 'public sector bad - private sector good'.

I will shortly be asking MCC what the results of the investigation into the "possibility of carryingout the works and recharging the utility concerned" were...... watch this space!

Are the wheels beginning to fall off the Localism agenda...?

2011-11-19T16:21:00.001Z

Earlier this year, Secretary of State for Communities, Eric Pickles, declared that the introduction of the Localism Bill would mean the "era of big government is over" and that it would "reverse the central creep of decades and replace it with local control."

The Pickles hyperbole machine continued claiming that the Localism Bill was "a triumph for democracy over bureaucracy. It will fundamentally shake up the balance of power in this country. It will revitalise local democracy and put power back where it belongs - in the hands of the people."

Which all sounds fantastic until the wheels start to come off. Lets take the case of the powers contained in Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004... (yes, I know this is probably very sad but stick with it as the example is instructive!)

London boroughs and Transport for London already have the powers to enforce moving traffic contraventions - such as driving in bus lanes, banned turns, and boxed junction infringements. Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 contains the powers which would allow local authorities outside London to take enforcement action against road users who committed such "moving traffic contraventions".

On 15th December 2010, Norman Baker (the Transport Minister) wrote to local councils asking whether they wanted the powers contained in "Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004". The letter outlined that the: "main powers, therefore, that local authorities outside London do not have that local authorities in London have under locally made legislation is to enforce some moving traffic matters that are there either to give priority to certain road users or to smooth traffic flows and help manage localised congestion and road safety hot spots."

It has been reported that the consultation generated responses from 13 highway authorities, including: Birmingham, Brighton and Hove, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, Plymouth, Reading, Salford, Sheffield, and Southampton. All but one authority supported the powers being introduced and most reported that they would use the powers.

In September, the House of Commons transport committee’s report on traffic management, snappily entitled 'Out of the jam: reducing congestion on our roads', on traffic management concluded that: "We can see no reason why Part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 should not be fully commenced to enable local authorities to deal more effectively with moving traffic contraventions and we recommend that the Government bring this part of the Act into force, by 2013.” (Paragraph 16) (emphasis added).

So virtually everyone at the local authority level (who responded) wanted the regulations to be extended outside of London and the parliamentary transport committee could see "no reason" why this should not happen.

Unfortunately, it was announced on 18th November 2011, that Norman Baker had decided not to give the the powers to enforce moving traffic contraventions to the local authorities outside of London. The reason given? According to TransportExtra who broke the story, Norman Baker told the Local Goverment Association that “I have therefore concluded that there can be no case for devoting scarce resources to this matter at the moment. I am sorry to send what I expect will be a disappointing letter.”

So next time you are cycling in a bus lane and are nearly run over by a car, truck or lorry that shouldn't be driving in the bus lane, or are nearly side-swiped by a car doing an illegal U-turn or you cannot cross the road when the traffic lights are green because vehicles are blocking the yellow box junction.... and get to wondering why your local council aren't doing anything about it.... just remember, they would have liked to do be able to take action against such thoughtless (or downright homicidal) road users but unfortunately, despite Mr Pickles pledge to"reverse the central creep of decades and replace it with local control", it would seem that central Government still thinks it knows best.

Localism? Eat your heart out!

and the winner is.....

2011-11-18T19:17:00.001Z

Congratulations to LC, she of Naturally Cycling Manchester blog fame, for winning the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain’s Summer Poster Competition.

Great photo and caption. More details on the Naturally Cycling Manchester blog.

And another Mancunian, Kat Malin was a runner up. See Imagine photo below.

This was taken when our local “motorway in the sky” was closed to traffic for maintenance. While angry and frustrated drivers crawled through the city, some members of the local cycling community took to the sky and the gloriously clear motorway. Imagine how wonderful life would be if our roads were always this empty, reserved for a band of cheerful cyclists.
Photo by Kat Malin (Design by Zero)

“Making Manchester a World Class Cycling City” ?

2011-11-17T21:18:00.001Z

Manchester City Council has recently released a consultation draft of the Manchester Cycling Strategy "A Strategy for Cycling in Manchester 2011-2015" to members of the Manchester Cycle Forum for early comment. The introduction explains how:

"As part of the Memorandum of Understanding signed in 2010 by British Cycling and Manchester City Council, it was agreed that a joint cycling strategy be produced. Once complete, the intention is to bring together in one place the three strands of cycling: “utility” (commuter) cycling; leisure cycling and sports cycling."

The broad vision for the partnership is “Making Manchester a world class cycling city”

The draft strategy document states that to achieve this vision, "the partnership will deliver tangible improvements by making a commitment to:

• Collaboratively develop utility, leisure and sports cycling through a co-ordinated and sustainable cross-city programme

• Build on existing investment and development programmes

• Seek out additional investment to meet existing and future needs and

• Learn from others who have set examples of good practice."

The document acknowledges that it has yet to be completed and highlights that the "sections detailing plans for recreation and sports cycling are still under development but outlines of their content are included."

Whilst waiting for a more detailed draft version, (promised towards the end of November) interested parties are invite to bring their comments to the Cycle Forum meeting due to be held on Tuesday 13th December 2011 or send them to cycle.forum@manchester.gov.uk by 24th December 2011.

A message from Tameside Council to the cycling community...

2011-11-17T20:46:00.001Z

See below for the text of an email recently sent by Tameside Council's Sustainable Travel Officer to members of Tameside Cycle Forum.

Dear Cyclist,

Asyou are aware the Tameside Cycle Forum has not met for a number ofmonths. The reasons for this are numerous and includes over a 1,000 staffleaving the authority in recent months, severe and ongoing budget reductionsand additional work being taken on by remaining staff.

Partof the budget reductions is a year on year decrease by the Department forTransport funding for structural maintenance money which generally addressesresurfacing and bridge maintenance. Other minor maintenance work funding forelements such as footways repairs and potholes have also been cut. Apart from asmall sum of council funded capital works there are no other capital moniesavailable to improve the overall highway infrastructure.

Clearlythe Greater Manchester Transport Fund is rolling out Metrolink, and otherschemes within the GM area and a comprehensive Local Sustainable Transport Fund(LTSF) bid is being put together led by Transport for Greater Manchester onbehalf of all GM districts. A LTSF report is being considered by TfGMC on 11 November 2011.

Pleasedon’t forget if you have any maintenance issues which need to be lookedat these can be reported this via the Tameside website at: http://public.tameside.gov.uk/symology/cs_index.asp

However,in respect of the cycle forum, Tameside is to seek views of the other GreaterManchester Districts as to whether they hold such meetings and if so how oftenand their Terms of Reference. Once this information has been collected, then adecision will be made as to how cycle issues in Tameside should be takenforward.

Michael Hughes, Sustainable Travel Officer

E-mail: michael.hughes@tameside.gov.uk

The policy decision to establish Cycle Forums in all of the 10 Greater Manchester local authority areas was adopted in the "The Greater Manchester Cycling Strategy" 2006 and also the Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan 2006/07-2010/11 which required local authorites:

"To strengthen partnerships with other public bodies, commercial organisations and voluntary bodies in order to promote and cater for cycling.

3.8.1 Dialogue with local cyclists and other interested parties through Cycle Forums, which have been established in all councils, should be maintained and improved where necessary. Authorities should also work with local cycling groups, representatives from health authorities, schools, local businesses, the police and the passenger transport providers." (Policy 8 Partnerships and consultation)

It seems a little strange that Tameside Council are proposing to "seek views of the other GreaterManchester Districts as to whether they hold such meetings and if so how oftenand their Terms of Reference. Once this information has been collected, then adecision will be made as to how cycle issues in Tameside should be takenforward".

How about asking the cycling (and non-cycling) communities in Tameside whether they would like to have a functioning cycle forum?

So if you live, or work, in Tameside and have an interest in developing better cycling facilities - perhaps you would like to let the Sustainable Travel officer, or better still, your local councillor know your views on the matter..... just a thought!

New report: Optimising Bike Sharing in European Cities

2011-11-11T10:04:00.001Z

Whatever your views on bicycle hire, or bike sharing schemes (BSS) it is always useful to have comparative data when considering the benefits (or problems) with such services.

The recently launched OBIS handbook (Optimising Bike Sharing in European Cities) presents interesting facts and figures from bike sharing schemes in ten European countries - Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden and United Kingdom.

The handbook describes bike share scheme characteristics such as technology, scheme size, service design etc in relation to a range external city factors.

Not surprisingly, given the title, the handbook authors have a supportive attitude towards bike sharing schemes.

There is even a handy section entitled "Arguments You’ll Have to Deal With" (page 14) which lists 7 arguments (and responses) which the authors argue are commonly raised when discussing bike share schemes. These include:

The city already has a high cycling modal share; people have their own bikes.
BSSs are expensive.
The city is too small and does not have enough funding options.
A BSS will compete with local bike rental companies.
The city does not even have proper cycling infrastructure. The BSS a) will compete for funding and b) nobody will use the BSS due to the lack of infrastructure.
Cycling is dangerous; a BSS will increase the number of accidents
All the trips will be one-way; there will be a distribution problem

For any local authorities or organsiations considering introducing such schemes, the handbook also provides comprehensive advice for the three stages in the lifetime of a Bike Sharing Scheme: Planning, Implementation, Optimisation.

Public Service Announcement #3

2011-09-26T16:34:00.002+01:00

The following message just received from Transport for Greater Manchester...

"TfGM is requesting your feedback regarding proposals for cycle parking facilities

Following our successful bid to the Local Sustainable Transport Fund, Transport for Greater Manchester would like to ask for your thoughts regarding additional and improved cycle parking facilities for Manchester City Centre and other towns throughout Greater Manchester.

Your assistance will again take the form of a survey, this time regarding cycle centres and cycle compound cycle parking proposals. These new facilities will be in addition to the cycle parking facilities that are currently in place.

Your feedback will help us to determine the content of proposed cycle centres and compounds in more detail. Both the survey and information on the proposed cycle parking facilities are available via this link

The survey will be available for completion until Friday 7^th October 2011."

So what are you waiting for.... !

Ignorance you should ignore...

2011-09-22T10:18:00.000+01:00

This little snippet appears on the backpage of the latest Greater Manchester Cycling Campaign (GMCC) newsletter.

Penned by Andrew Grimes (byline: Opinions you can't ignore) in the Manchester Evening News.

LET'S GET 'EM OFF THEIR BIKES
"I AM heartened by a survey that claims fewer people are cycling to work. The more fashion-conscious among them - mainly but not exclusively women - don't like the idea of developing helmet hair styles or of turning up at their desks in a sweaty and smelly condition. This is good news for all road users, pedestrians not excluded. Anything that smashes the greenie cult of the pestilential peak-hour bike is good for the environment."
(Manchester Evening News, Friday 9th Sept 2011, Page 8)

No idea what survey he is referring to - as all the research I have seen recently has shown increasing numbers of people cycling, even in Manchester !

So here's the double challenge.....

1) Anyone know why Mr Grimes seems to have such a downer on people who cycle?

2) Suggestions welcome for a more apt byline for his column... in true Blue Peter style here's one we prepared earlier to get you started... "Ignorance you should ignore".

Policeman shoots racoon, injures cyclist.....

2011-07-27T14:56:00.000+01:00

This just in from Road.cc

"On Sunday morning, a 48-year old cyclist riding his bike near New York state’s Rockefeller State Park was slightly injured by a fragment from, or dislodged by, a bullet fired by a police officer who had been requested to shoot a racoon. Lohud.com reports that the animal was discovered sick or injured by the State Park police who requested one of their colleagues from the nearby town police force be sent to put the creature out of its misery.

Here in the UK a vet might be considered an appropriately qualified professional to euthanize a sick or injured animal but it seems that in the US the job can be carried out just as effectively by policeman equipped with a .40-calibre handgun. Having despatched the unfortunate critter the officer moved it to the side of the road and returned to his regular patrol duties.

Some time later that morning the cyclist rode up to Sleepy Hollow Police Headquarters (no, we are NOT making this up) and explained that while riding his bike he had heard a gunshot and immediately felt a stinging pain in his leg whereupon he looked down to see a small cut on his left shin.At the time he was situated at a spot about 170ft from the where the racoon came to its sticky end, separated from it by a major four-lane highway, heavy woodland and a fence.The cyclist then rode the two or three miles from the scene of the incident to the police station to report it.Police insisted the man receive medical attention and he was taken to a local hospital where no bullet fragment was found. The local Police Chief, Louis Alagno, said: "It appears to be a freakish accident. The officer took all proper precautions. Thankfully, the bike rider was not seriously hurt." Without a bullet or some other fragment, Alagno said it is impossible to determine exactly what struck the rider."

Hopefully not one of the barriers to encouraging people to cycle in Greater Manchester !

Inactivity..."the silent killer"

2011-07-14T11:55:00.000+01:00

On 11th July, the Department for Health (DH) and NHS released a new report on the benefits of physical activity and the risks from inactivity. The'Start Active, Stay Active - A report on physical activity for health from the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers' document highlights that

"whatever our age, there is good scientific evidence that being physically active can help us lead healthier and even happier lives. We also know that inactivity is a silent killer."

For adults (19–64 years) the report recommends that (page 7):

1. Adults should aim to be active daily. Over a week, activity should add up to at least 150 minutes (2½ hours) of moderate intensity activity in bouts of 10 minutes or more – one way to approach this is to do 30 minutes on at least 5 days a week.

2. Alternatively, comparable benefits can be achieved through 75 minutes of vigorous intensity activity spread across the week or a combination of moderate and vigorous intensity activity.

3. Adults should also undertake physical activity to improve muscle strength on at least two days a week.

4. All adults should minimise the amount of time spent being sedentary (sitting) for extended periods.

The report recognises the varied benefits that could be achieved by increasing the number of people choosing to cycle and walk and notes that:

"cycling and walking will reduce transport costs, save money and help the environment. Fewer car journeys can reduce traffic, congestion and pollution, improving the health of communities. Other potential benefits linked to physical activity in children and young people include the acquisition of social skills through active play (leadership, teamwork and co-operation), better concentration in school and displacement of anti-social and criminal behaviour." [Page 9]

Also welcome, is the recognition that for most people the "easiest and most acceptable forms of physical activity are those that can be incorporated into everyday life." Such as cycling instead of travelling by car.

Table 4 below (page 18) shows the amount of calories a person would 'burn' if they cycle at 'moderate' (10-12mph) or 'vigourous' (12-14 mph) speeds for 30 minutes. (Editor... no wonder I am always hungry!).

It is great to see that the Department of Health and NHS are promoting clear guidance on the wide ranging benefits of increasing the numbers of people choosing to walk or cycle. But as the report also recognises (Creating towns and cities for cycling).... "Central to this is the need for cycling to be prioritised as part of local authority transport plans." (Emphasis added). The challenge now is to translate the clear health (and environmental) benefits into a progressive strategy to improve the active travel (walking and cycling) facilities and culture in Greater Manchester. The recent successful Local Sustainable Transport Fund bid could help with this, but compared to many European and North American cities - we still have a long way to go.

The Hub - Cycling Knowledge for Professionals.....and hopefully a few campaigners!

2011-07-13T10:37:00.000+01:00

Just received an email from Richard Armitage, Chair of the Chartered Institute of Logistics & Transport (CILT) new Cycling Forum.

"Welcome to The Hub; new home for Cycling England's online resources. These pages are now hosted by The Chartered Institute of Logistics & Transport - CILT(UK) - as a free source of carefully selected guidance for anyone working to get more people cycling.

This site is currently being created with key resources from the former Cycling England website. Documents are available for download and the catalogue of reference material will be added to on a regular basis." Visit: http://www.ciltuk.org.uk/pages/cycling

Haven't checked it out yet... but it is good that a new home has been created for the excellent materials produced by Cycling England before they fell foul of the Government's shortsighted and ill-conceived "bonfire of the quangos".

Public Service Announcement #2

2011-07-12T15:57:00.000+01:00

Cycling Survey. The Visions for Walking and Cycling is a research project which seeks to assess the potential in the UK for achieving substantial increases in walking and cycling, and in improving the quality of the walking and cycling experience, by 2030. By taking part in this research you will be helping us to better understand your perceptions and experiences about cycling, particularly in terms of what helps and hinders you in cycling, and in how we can improve the physical environment to improve the cycling experience.

Your views will really help us to suggest to government how the cycling infrastructure can be improved - so thank you for your help, it is really appreciated! Please click this link to take part in our questionnaire:

Funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC), this research commenced in October 2008 and involves the universities of Leeds, Oxford, East Anglia, Salford and Manchester, in consultation with local walking and cycling groups in four UK cities. It builds upon a growing recognition that walking and cycling can make a considerable contribution to sustainable transport goals, public health and the sociability of communities.

For more details see the Visions 2030 website.

Brompton pods...coming to a train station near you?

2011-07-12T06:41:00.000+01:00

On 7th July, South West Trains launched the UK’s first ‘self-service’ Brompton Bicycle rental scheme at Guildford Station (see photo). The solar-powered Brompton bike dock has been installed by a partnership between South West Trains and Brompton Bicycle, the folding bike manufacturer

The scheme is designed to "encourage passengers to cycle as part of a fully integrated low carbon journey combining bike and train."

The company offers bikes for hire to South West Trains season ticket holders and the general public. These bikes have no travel restrictions and can be carried on all South West Trains services as long as the folding cycles are stowed as luggage.

The Brompton dock currently holds 50 bikes (but can be expanded up to 80 bikes) in the same area as one car parking space. The dock is a ‘self-contained’ unit entirely powered by solar-panels, manufactured in the UK and is made from 95% of recycling material. Passengers who want to cycle to or from Guildford station and use the dock should register and purchase a smartcard online for £50 a year. To hire a bike simply swipe the card on a locker door, take the bike, and off you go. The hire period can be for as short or long as you like, and hire prices go from £4 for a single day hire, to £2 per day for hires of seven days or more, dropping to £1.60 per day if you for hire periods of 23 days and up.

The eagle eyed amongst you may have spotted the small posters, with the slogan "From bike to train with just a snap, click and fold" that have been appearing at Manchester Piccadilly train station advertising a Brompton hire scheme based at Stoke train station. (See photo).

The Brompton system at Stoke station is reported to be a "manual" system with human operators handing out the Brompton bicycles (and presumably showing some people how to fold/unfold the bikes!).

Now, there are strong rumours that Manchester Piccadilly will soon (!) be getting an automated Brompton docking system a-la Guildford...... although there appear to be some security concerns as Piccadilly is classed as nationally important transport infrastructure... but hopefully such concerns can be sorted. More details as they arrive.....

Pete is cycling to Blackpool ! (Sunday 10th July)

2011-06-28T19:03:00.001+01:00

On Sunday 10th July, I will be joining an intrepid band of Manchester Friends of the Earth supporters cycling the 55+ miles from Manchester to sunny Blackpool to fundraise for Manchester FoE's and Love Your Bike's campaigning work.

The Love Your Bike campaign is co-ordinated by Manchester FoE so any support you can give will help LYB strengthen our campaigning for better cycling policies, infrastructure and practical support across Greater Manchester. (See the Love Your Bike website for information on the LYB campaigns)

It would be great if you could join us on the bike ride on Sunday or consider sponsoring me or the Manchester FoE team. All the Manchester FoE riders will be transported back to Manchester in style aboard a 1940's classic Big Red Bus (bikes downstairs, party upstairs!) so another great reason to join us on the day.

Details of the Manchester to Blackpool cycle ride organized by Bike Events available here.

Update (4th July). This just in from Bike Events

NO BIKES ON TRAINS:Trans Pennine Express, the train operator between Blackpool and Manchester, has informed us that they will not allow any bicycles on their trains on Sunday 10 July – the day of the ride. Their reason for this is that they have found in previous years that the restricted space available causes friction between cyclists.

Good job we have a big red bus to bring us all back to Manchester then !

Bike Fabulous... cycling with style

2011-06-20T07:11:00.000+01:00

Saturday 25th June, 11am - 5pm.

Manchester Arndale, Halle Square

Bike Fabulous 2011 will showcase clothes and accessories designed with cycling in mind, as well as everyday wear perfect for riding your bike and looking great. The event will feature catwalks shows, demonstrations, competitions, and activities for all ages including the chance keep the music going using just pedal power!

Bike Fabulous began last year and was launched at the end of Bike Week 2010 with the first cycle style show at Manchester Arndale. The event was entirely pedal powered from sound to smoothies, and Saturday shoppers enjoyed the chance to look at a variety of bikes as well as customising their own reflective vests! One lucky visitor won a bike and there were plenty of of other prizes including a pampering day at Lush.

Cycling doesn’t mean sacrificing style for comfort. Bike Fabulous is part of Love Your Bike, a campaign promoting cycling as an attractive, accessible and fun way to get around.

Throughout Saturday 25th June, the event will include:

Fashion catwalk shows that will feature products designed for cycling in style and high street brands combined for versatile looks.
Pedal powered PA system – sign up for a cycling session and help us power the event with green energy.
A bicycle magician.
Dr Bike bicycle maintenance demonstrations.
Pedal powered Smoothie maker – make a healthy drink and pedal yourself fitter at the same time.
Craft activities for children to redesign and redecorate hi-vis vests.
Advice and tips on looking good while you ride – including hair and makeup.
Enter the prize draw competition for a Edinburgh Bicycle Co-operative bicycle worth up to £350.
Win a private party in Lush for up to 10 people including food & drink and many wonderful Lush treatments…. and much more.

Check www.bikefabulous.org for more details of events and great prizes. @bikefabulous on Twitter.

Bike Fabulous Needs You!

If anyone would like to sign up for a little pedalling exercise to help power the music/PA system please contact Pete at pete@manchesterfoe.org.uk

A public service announcement.....

2011-06-16T08:53:00.002+01:00

This just in from TfGM.....

"Manchester Cycling Survey

Transport for Greater Manchester is bidding for government funding to improve cycling and walking facilities across Greater Manchester.

To assist us in making this bid, we would like to ask for your help by completing this short survey about cycle parking facilities in the city centre and barriers to cycling around Manchester.

Your responses will help us to establish the extent of use of current cycle facilities, which facilities require improvement and where additional facilities may be required to improve cycling in Manchester initially, and then across Greater Manchester.

Please note that all responses will be anonymous.

Contact details are being requested to help us with future research, and will not be used in conjunction with responses to this survey. If you have any questions about this survey, please feel free to contact Ian Davies at Ian.Davies@TfGM.com or by telephone; 0161 2441245.

Thank you for your help."

End of message.

Editors note: the survey will be online till 15th July....

Update 4th July 2011: The TfGM survey is now closed.

There was a great response to the TfGM survey about cycle parking facilities in the city centre and barriers to cycling around Manchester with 500+ completed surveys.

Also, a fair few people responded asking "what about my area" ! In the light of these responses, it is rumoured that TfGM will be carrying out a GM-wide survey in the not-too-distant future. Meanwhile, a overview of the Manchester City Centre survey results will shortly be available via the survey website.

Caption contest.....

2011-06-15T19:40:00.001+01:00

OK ! Recently spotted this sign near Manchester Town Hall on Princess Street and am wondering what exactly its purpose is?

Does the sign mean that it is a slightly half-hearted cycle way or perhaps a total lunch-out cycle way...? Am I allowed to cycle on the ramp where it has been posted and, if so, why is there not a similar sign at the other end of the ramp route?

If people are not supposed to cycle on the ramped pavement where this sign has been placed - why not put a "no cycling" sign - and if people don't understand the logo sign then spell it out in words.

And here's me thinking that in the "Age of Austerity" that City Councils are supposed to be strapped for cash... am tempted to send in a Freedom of Information Act request to ask how much was spent on this splendid example from the Department of Silly Signs...

Meanwhile... would welcome suggestions from readers of this blog for any suitable alternative captions.... there maybe a (small) prize for the best (and printable!) suggestion.... now there's a challenge.

Yours in puzzlement.

TfGM... cycling towards a sustainable transport plan?

2011-06-15T06:57:00.002+01:00

Well the bids are in and now everyone has to wait for the Department for Transport (DfT) equivalent of the white smoke from the papal chimney....I am off course referring to the Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) bids that have been submitted seeking a slice of the Local Sustainable Transport Fund available from national government. The Local Sustainable Transport Fund (or LSTF) is a Department for Transport funding scheme for "projects which stimulate economic growth whilst reducing carbon emissions." and TfGM have submitted two bids.

The "key component bid" (up to £5 million) for the Greater Manchester Commuter Cycle Project was submitted on Monday 18th April and the 'Large Project' bid (up to £45 million) was sent off on Monday 6th June.

The main element in the "key component" bid is for several large Cycle Centres (to be located in Manchester City Centre and possibly Media City) and a number of other smaller scale cycle parking/storage facilities. Whilst, the jury is still out in many cities on whether the large Cycle Centres will flourish or prove to be expensive white elephants there is a clear need across Greater Manchester for more and better cycle parking and storage facilities.

The "key component" bid also contains funding for a range of "Cycle Support Measures" including the provision of cycle training and the bid document states that: "Bikeability Level 3 training will be provided for adults along their route to work, or as part of their work, particularly targeting new cycle commuters. Cycle training will also be offered to all those taking up the Bike Back to Work offer." (Page 11)

The bid document goes on to state: "A central pool of some 3,330 places will be funded by LSTF funding, to be matched by a similar level of locally funded training." and that "Beyond 2014/15 the full costs of a cycle training programme will be met from local resources." It will be interesting to see if the 10 GM local authorities will still agree to the funding for adult cycle training beyond 2014/15 - even if the LSTF bid is unsuccessful.

Those nice people at Love Your Bike helped lobby Manchester City Council to introduce adult cycle training (for more details see the Freewheeling website) and over the last few years have been encouraging all GM local authorities to introduce similar schemes... so are delighted to see this included in TfGM's key component bid.

The snappily titled "Large Project Bid" was for just under £45 million and is an "expression of interest" which, if it makes it through the first round at the end of July, will be developed further with Department of Transport officers between August and December 2011.

Because the LSTF is a "competitive bid process", ie TfGM are bidding for funding against any of the other Metropolitan areas in England and Wales, the detailed bid documents were not available for public consultation.

A brief "Vision for Sustainability' document was circulated to a small number of organisations before the bid deadline. One of the "outcomes" listed was the aim to achieve a "doubling of commuter mode share for cycling into the Regional Centre and a 50% increase elsewhere, delivering over 7,000 additional commuter cycle trips per day and replacing around 420,000 car trips per year." (Page 9).

Which sounds ambitious, until you realise that current levels of cycling into the City Centre (during the AM peak time) are estimated to be a 1.1% modal share. Therefore the 'target' is to go from 1.1% of travel trips being made by bicycle to a grand 2.2%. Compare this to Copenhagen's current cycling modal share of over 40% !

It is also interesting to note the comment in Manchester City Council's Local Area Implementation Plan (LAIP) which states that: "Cycle journeys into the City Centre have doubled in the last 3 years and walking trips have increased by over 80%." [Page 21]

Whenever discussing statistics it is always worth remembering Mark Twain's "lies, damned lies, and statistics" observation. However, if cycle journeys into the City Centre have already doubled over the last 3 years, then given that TfGM are asking for up to £50 million of Local Sustainable Transport Funds, it does seem a little unambitious to set a similar target (although of course the actual number of people cycling would be much larger than in the previous 3 years).

The Large Project Bid document is now available and outlines proposed projects in 4 main themes:

Sustainable Access to Key Destinations and Transport Hubs
Supporting sustainable choices
Smarter Travel
Enabling community transport

In the 'Supporting sustainable choices' section the document describes how cycling training provides a "cost-effective means of giving adult cyclists the confidence to cycle to work and to cycle as part of their daily lives. It has already been successfully trialled in Manchester and Trafford, and the bid includes proposals to roll this out across the rest of the conurbation." (Page 10). Tucked away on Page 22 is a budget allocation for £2.9 million for Cycle training. If the LSTF bid is successful this revenue funding would support cycle training for 36,000 people in Greater Manchester over a 3 year period.

Now, when adult cycle training is discussed, comments often run along the lines of "why do people need cycle training, anyone can ride a bike". However, academic research has shown that between 7% and 12% of adults never learnt to ride a bicycle and the results from the Manchester Freewheeling adult cycle training scheme has shown that approx 20% of all the cycle training places were for "Learn to Ride" sessions i.e. for people who could not ride a bike - but in most cases could cycle after attending the training sessions.

Also, taking into account the large number of people who can cycle - but do not have the confidence or experience to cycle on the roads in Greater Manchester - then adult cycle training can have a big impact in helping and encouraging people to start, or return to, cycling.

If TfGM's Local Sustainable Transport Fund bids are successful, then Greater Manchester will have a mega adult cycle training scheme and this is very, very welcome.... and this element of the LSTF bid certainly cannot be described as unambitious!

....but I cannot help wondering what effect such a huge cycle training programme would have on those damn statistics!

Update 5th July

Norman Baker M.P, the Transport Minister today announced the local authorities who had been awarded Local Sustainable Transport Funds for their "key component" bids. Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) have been awarded the full £4.9 million requested for the Greater Manchester Commuter Cycle Project "key component bid". Good news.

Say goodbye to cycling down Cross St / Corporation Street ?

2011-06-10T14:43:00.001+01:00

Metrolink – proposed Second City Crossing (2CC).

Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) has just launched a 12-week statutory consultation on proposals for a second Metrolink line across Manchester City Centre which will run between Deansgate (GMEX) and Victoria via Cross Street to help prevent City Centre bottlenecks on the tram network.

The proposed route runs along Lower Mosley Street, through St Peters Square and along Princess Street (by the Town Hall) before turning right into Cross Street. The artists impression (right) is from the Second City Crossing Route proposal (page 28) presented to the GM Integrated Transport Authority committee meeting on 18th March 2011. It may only be an artist’s impression but shows no provision for cycle routes/paths and Manchester's cycle campaigns are concerned that the new Metrolink route result in the loss of Cross Street/Coronation Street as a well-used low-traffic, two-way route for people cycling across the City Centre.

One of the pinch points will be the area between Marks & Spencers and the main Arndale building where the road is fairly narrow. It is rumoured that the "solution" in this area will be to create "shared use" pavements. As one of the busiest shopping and (pedestrian) commuter streets in the City Centre it does not seem much of a solution to me - more a recipe for collisions with pedestrians (and yes, I know that people could get off and walk their bikes through that section but unfortunately many people don't/won't).

Now it is likely that many people will simply cycle along the tram tracks but not a solution that is likely to appeal to people new to cycling or encourage people to try cycling for the first time.

The latest GM Local Transport Plan (LTP3) contains a number of Priority Commitments. One of which boldly states that: “Our proposals set out ways to… remove barriers to cycling” (page 44). If Manchester wants to increase the number of people cycling then it is vital that there are safe and pleasant cycle routes across the City Centre. In transport planning jargon we need to increase the ‘permeability’ of the city.

I do not believe that the Metrolink consultation will see any major changes to the new tram route but we could use the consultation process to raise the need for better (and more pleasant) cross-city cycle routes and to lobby for Manchester City Council to include such designs and improvements in any negotiations with Metrolink - a similar process to the Section 106 funding often required for planning approval. It only seems reasonable that if Metrolink remove access to a cross-city cycle route that they be required to fund suitable replacement routes (or am I being hopelessly naive and optimistic?).

If you would like to send TfGM your views on this issue then the deadline for consultation reponses is 9th September 2011.

TfGM say that they would like to hear the views of local residents, community organisations, businesses and anyone who visits the city centre for work or leisure. There are 3 ways to send in your views....

via the online consultation form.
return the response form in the brochure available from Travelshops in Piccadilly Gardens and Shudehill Interchange or at one of our public exhibitions (see website for dates/locations).
Email 2cc.metrolink@tfgm.com with your comments

Happy consulting !

PS the Metrolink 2nd City Crossing issue will be discussed at the Manchester Cycle Forum on Tuesday 14th June. Venue: University Place (Oxford Road), Room 5.205. Time: 5.15 - 6.30pm.

More details should be available on MCC Cycle Forum webpage.

DIY publicity : 'This one runs on fat & saves you money'

2011-06-09T07:15:00.001+01:00

Love Your Bike's Fast Lane / Fat Lane poster

Bike Week will soon be upon us (18th - 26th June) and if you are looking for striking images to promote the benefits of cycling then Love Your Bike's Fast Lane / Fat Lane advert is a great example. Created in 2006, the strapline of 'Burn calories, save cash, get there on time" provides a short, pithy summary of some of the (many) benefits of choosing to cycle instead of driving. But, using the poster on bus and billboard advertising spaces does not come cheap.

So if your budget doesn't stretch to billboard size proportions, this example of stencil art / street graffiti may fit the bill.

Photographed by Carlton Reid in Adelaide, Australia and designed by Peter Drew, the photo image has been picked up by many blogs and websites around the world including the Fat Cycle Rider who is 31 years old and weighing in at 21 stone bought a bicycle and hopes that cycling will be the "start of the rest of his life!"

Am sure that all lovely local craft shops have all the bits n pieces needed to make a simple stencil ....

Digging a hole, don't dig there, dig it elsewhere !

2011-06-02T23:05:00.004+01:00

"...When along comes this bloke in a bowler which he lifted and scratched his head.

Well he looked down the hole, poor demented soul and he said. Do you mind if I make a suggestion? Don’t dig there, dig it elsewhere. Your digging it round and it ought to be square. The shape of it’s wrong, it’s much much too long. And you can’t put hole where a hole don’t belong..."

Younger (!) readers may not be familiar with the lyrics to the Hole in the Ground song made famous by Bernard Cribbins but it seemed apt for the subject of this blog posting.

One of my frequent cycle routes into Manchester City Centre takes me along Charles Street past the (very fine) Lass O'Gowrie pub and my return trip often goes down Princess Street and turns right back onto Charles Street. There used to be two fine specimens of Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs) - otherwise known as big green boxes - at the Charles Street / Princess Street junction. That was until some contractor, working for one of the utility companies, came along and dug up the road and unfortunately did not seem to feel the necessity to return the cycling infrastructure to its former glory.

Now it is very nice of Manchester council tax payers to fund the development of cycling infrastructure - but it seems a little strange that Manchester Council should have to spend more money repairing the damage caused by contractors working for privatised utility companies (Ed... does that count as a hidden subsidy?).

Well according to the Department for Transport (DfT) document "Specification for the Reinstatement of Openings in Highways: Second Edition 2002" (who said we were sad!). Section 6.4.5.4 Coloured Surfacings states that : "Coloured surfacings used to highlight highway features such as speed warnings, bus or cycle lanes, ‘gateways’ etc. shall be permanently reinstated using like materials of equivalent type and similar colour, subject to the following requirements:

a) Where the coloured surfacing is overlaid onto a road surface, a coloured overlay shall be applied to the same thickness.
b) Where the coloured surfacing is laid full depth, a coloured material shall be laid to the same thickness, wherever possible and practical. Where it is not possible or practical, the coloured surfacing material shall be reinstated by agreement.

c) Some high friction surfacing materials that are coloured have a limited manufacturer’s guarantee and may be subject to wear and abrasion during the guarantee period. However, the reinstated area shall not be inferior to the adjoining surface during the guarantee period."

Which seems a very long winded way of saying - put it back as you found it!

So bearing in mind the above snippets... I sent an email (with the above photos) to Manchester City Council Highways Services asking if they had the powers to request (dare we say - order?) the utility company / contractors to repair the damage and reinstate the ASLs.... and received a very quick response saying that they had initiated a "streetworks defect" order - which is all very encouraging although there was no indication of how long one of these would take to come into effect.

However, in November 2010 in a report to the "Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee" the Interim Head of Services stated in Section 2.2. Inspection frequency that: "The frequency of inspection is based primarily on the level of use and importance of the section of highway in question. In general, all highwainspected at six monthly intervals however, principal routes are inspected at three monthly intervals and the City Centre and busy parts of district centres are inspected on a monthly basis." [Emphasis added]

Well, I think it is fair to argue that Princess Street would be classed as a busy part of the City Centre but it seemed more than one month had elapsed since the vandalism of the ASLs.
So I wrote back to the nice Council officer and asked for the following information: a) when was the work on the highway, which resulted in the degrading of the ASLs, originally carried out, and b) which utility company/contractor carried out that work.

Not exactly asking for state secrets so was rather surprised to receive the following response:

"I am advised that this information cannot be made available. I think it is a question of who owns this data. It's been suggested that you could consider putting in a request under the Freedom of Information Act, so perhaps this route is worth pursuing?"

Why such a bureaucratic and secretive response? Is MCC's Highways Services seriously arguing that, despite holding details of all the organisations which are authorised to carry out road and street works in Manchester and presumably authorising when said companies can dig up the roads Manchester, that they do not "own" this data !

Pursue it? Indeed I will... updates as they wend their way to my inbox.

But next time you see cycling infrastructure that has been damaged by utility company contractors why not drop a line to your Council's Highway Services and remind them that they can (and should) be requiring the contractors to "put it back the way they found it".

Lets hope it does not end up like the last verse of Bernard Cribben's song...."Well there we were, discussing this hole. Hole in the ground so big and sort of round it was. It’s not there now, the ground’s all flat. And beneath it is the bloke in the bowler hat. And that’s that."

Update (1st July 2011)

Well you will just have to hold breath a little longer for the MCC Highways response to the Freedom of Information Act request submitted on 3rd June which sought the following information.

"For the Charles Street / Princess Street junction area:

a) when (date) was the work on the highway, which resulted in the the damage to the Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs), originally carried out?

b) which utility company/contractor was authorised to carry out that work?

c) were the completed road works inspected by Manchester City Council staff, and if so,

i) on what dates were the inspection(s) undertaken?
ii) what information was recorded as a result of any inspections?
iii) what actions, if any, were initiated as a result of the inspections?

Well the 20 working days period (as outlined in the FOI legislation) for responding to FOI requests was up yesterday but what I received was the following:

"Thank you for you recent Freedom of Information Request regarding works on Charles Street / Princess Street. Unfortunately we have been unable to complete your request with the time scale previously given. Once we are in receipt of all information we will then be in a position to respond and l will contact you further."

Now, the FoI legislation does allow public bodies to take more time to respond to information requests (as long as they let you know) but am a little puzzled about why it is taking so long to respond to, what should be, a very simple request. Or am I missing something here.....

"Form two lanes when cycle lane is not in use" - you cannot be serious!

2011-05-19T11:03:00.000+01:00

Earlier this year, Manchester City Council's Highway Services published a consultation entitled "Hyde Road Cycle Casualty Reduction Scheme - Improving Cycling Facilities in Your Area".

The consultation leaflet highlighted that "over the past five years, thirteen collisions involving cyclists have been reported along Hyde Road. Locations where collisions have been reported breakdown into the following clusters: Hyde Rd/Belle Vue Street, Hyde Road/Hengist Street and Hyde Road/Tan Yard Brow."

As part of these "improvements" an advisory cycle lane was installed on both side of the A57 in the vicinity of Tan Yard Brow (see google map) in late March / early April. It was reported that local residents and some bus operators had complained to Manchester City Council that these cycle lanes were causing peak time congestion. One local councillor Simon Ashley (who was not re-elected in May's local elections) claimed that these cycle lanes had “caused mayhem, queues and average delays of half an hour, with long tailbacks at the junction with Reddish Lane.” and welcomed "the Council's decision to remove cycle lanes on Hyde Rd”. (Press release dated 6th April 2011). However, it would seem that Manchester City Council had decided not to remove the cycles lanes but instead opted to install signs that read "Form two lanes when cycle lane not in use".

Those nice people at Love You Bike were a little puzzled by these signs as it would appear that Manchester City Council Highways Service is encouraging drivers to break the Highway Code. Rule 140 of which states:

“Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply". (Emphasis added]. The phrase “unless it is unavoidable” would mean something like swerving out of the way to avoid danger – not forming a second lane of motor traffic when the road is busy.

It is unclear how car/bus/lorry drivers are supposed to know whether there is a bicycle ahead of them on the cycle lane or when traffic is stationary, as is often the case in rush hour periods, whether a bicycle is attempting to filter along the cycle lane. When traffic has blocked the cycle lanes, people attempting to use the cycle lanes are either prevented from doing so or (understandably but illegally) choose to cycle on the pavement. As shown in the photograph on the left. Love Your Bike asked CTC, the national cycling organisation, whether they had seen any other local authority in England using these signs or whether they conformed with any Department for Transport guidance. Their response was: "I’ve not heard of any similar sign elsewhere in England (or anywhere else in the UK for that matter). Nor do I know of any guidance endorsing this approach."

Roger Geffen, CTC's Campaigns & Policy Director also highlighted that “Cycle lanes are there to encourage more people to switch from car driving to cycling, for the good of our health and that of our streets, our communities, our atmosphere and our wallets. Bicycle are extremely efficient users of road-space: a typical-width traffic lane can accommodate 2,000 motor vehicles an hour, or 14,000 bicycles. Asking drivers to block up cycle lanes completely defeats one of the key reasons for providing them in the first place, namely to reduce congestion on Manchester’s streets.”

These signs are not an appropriate solution as they encourage motorised traffic to drive over cycle lanes and send a very poor message to both the motoring and cycling communities.MCC Highways Service have been asked what they are planning to do to improve this situation..... updates to follow...

Update: Step away from the Trans-Pennine Trail !

2011-05-16T14:40:00.000+01:00

Readers of this blog will remember that earlier this year, Metrolink, in its infinite wisdom, decided that the best solution for the Trans-Pennine Trail (TPT) near the Metrolink extension at Sandhurst Road, Didsbury was to propose installing six sets of steps into the TPT. See "We will remove barriers to cycling by installing steps".

Those lovely people at Love Your Bike thought that building steps into a popular walking and cycling route was not the most sensible option and so organised an email lobbying action to get Metrolink to think again.

Pressure pays off. Over 550 people sent emails lobbying their GM Integrated Transport Authority members and as a result a lively GMITA committee meeting on Friday 25th March saw a succession of councillors from all political parties lining up to question the steps proposal. The Committee unanimously voted NO to the steps proposal.

Deluded fantasy. One councillor when questioning Metrolink's cost projections for the steps and the other solutuions referred to the costs as being a "deluded fantasy". Hard not to agree.

Next steps (sorry!) GMPTE/Metrolink officers were instructed to go away and come back with a more suitable proposal. Anyone who sent an email should have received a letter from Keith Whitmore, the current chair of Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) - the successor to GM Integrated Transport Authority. [Ed - please do pay attention at the back]

For all those that have not had the pleasure of receiving this missive, the letter outlines that the options being examined were:

"1. Steps plus cycle groove at Sandhurst Road (current design).

2. Lengthening of the Sandhurst Road bridge to allow the Trans Pennine Trail to pass beneath (instead of up and over).

3. “Tunnelling” through the embankment next to the Sandhurst Road bridge, again, to maintain the Trail within the cutting rather than crossing up and over Sandhurst Road itself.

4. Re-routing the Trans Pennine Trail alongside the River Mersey whereby it would not occupy the Metrolink corridor – as suggested by residents and the Love Your Bike Campaign at the meeting on 25 March and which is being discussed with the City Council."

and goes on to state that the "option of providing ramps to cross up and over Sandhurst Road is not being considered further on the basis that our preliminary investigations concluded that Options 2 and 3 above would be the more cost-effective means of providing a steps-free Trail at Sandhurst Road and would be considerably less visually intrusive than ramps (which was a concern for residents). Therefore, these options have been preferred for further consideration."

It is understood that Metrolink have requested a meeting with Sustrans and Trans-Pennine Trail in the next few weeks..... hopefully to discuss a more sensible plan. More news as we get it....

"Cycle to Chernobyl" - 25 hour cycle-athon

2011-05-10T09:59:00.000+01:00

‘Cycle to Chernobyl’ is a 25 hour cycle-athon starting at 12 (noon) on May 12th and running (or should that be cycling) through till 12 noon on May 13th. People are invited to cycle the 1737 miles to Chernobyl on 6 stationary bikes and aim to complete the task in 25 hours! There will be a group of us pedalling on stationary bikes all day and night until we reach Chernobyl (figuratively)!

Emma Henly is helping organise the event and is keen to have people help out as bucket shakers and with riding."We have a long way to go and need all the help (and legs we can get!) and we would really like to raise as much money as possible for charity - we want to raise £1737 to match the miles!"

The static bicycles will be outside the University of Manchester Student’s Union – in the heart of the campus on Oxford Road.

Anyone who would like to help pedal a few miles can turn up or book a slot by contacting Emma emma_henly(at)hotmail.com.

Also see the facebook page for more details. People can make donations at the Justgiving site.

The event is fundraising for Chernobyl Children's Project UK (More details below).

On April 26th it was 25 years since the devastating accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power station in Ukraine. The repercussions of the radioactive fallout are still being felt today by the people of Belarus, which was left dangerously contaminated. In the years after the accident, there were huge increases in children being born with disabilities and serious health problems. Sadly, society in Belarus still places stigma on having a disabled child, and many parents were advised to give their child away as they were told he or she would ‘not survive long anyway’. Chernobyl Children’s Project UK works to change the lives of the children who are affected by disability and serious illness through providing medical care and resources, nursing and expert doctor care, respite homes for terminally ill children, orphanages for abandoned children, recuperative holidays to the UK and summer camps in cleaner areas of Belarus.

Combining cycling and public transport....

2011-04-01T05:02:00.001+01:00

1st April 2011...and with great fanfare the new Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) is launched. The new transport plan states that:

"A number of transport needs cannot be covered by cycling or public transport alone since neither can offer a sufficiently flexible transport solution on its own. Proposals are set forth in the City Plan 2011 which would make it easier to combine cycling with public transport, thus providing a realistic alternative to private cars.

The Greater Manchester Public Transport Plan (2011-2015) takes a highly favourable view of combining cycling and public transport and targets cyclists as potential customers to a greater extent than in the past. This has resulted in the removal of most restrictions applying to bicycles on commuter trains. There are still some restrictions applying to rush hours. However, the most recent development is that bicycles are now allowed on commuter trains in rush hours when travelling in the opposite direction to the main traffic. As more and more commuter trains of the new type are acquired bicycles will eventually be allowed on the train at all hours of the day. Bicycles will be permitted on the new Metro around the clock."

Well it may be April Fools Day... but this text is from a real Transport Plan,* unfortunately just not the Greater Manchester Plan. (* Have changed the city name and dates but the rest of the text is contained in the City of Copenhagen Cycle Policy 2002-2012 document.)

Unfortunately, in a fairly stark contrast to the Danish policies, the 'Integration with public transport' section in the GM Local Transport Plan states:

"Combining cycling with public transport provides a viable alternative to the private car for many medium and long-distance journeys. It can both increase public transport patronage by increasing the catchment area of stations, and reduce the demand for car parking around stations. Cycle carriage is permitted on Northern trains (the major operator in Greater Manchester) but overcrowding means that there are serious problems in accommodating more than two bikes on some trains, and conductors have the right to refuse access if the train is crowded. There is, however, no restriction on the number of folding bikes carried. The carriage of bicycles on Metrolink is prohibited under the by-laws due to constraints on space on the existing trams, unless they are folded and fully encased. This policy was recently re-affirmed following a review. Bus operators in Greater Manchester do not permit cycle carriage."

Oh dear... "right to refuse", "prohibited", "do not permit" what a lot of negatives and all this in a Local Transport Plan that is supposedly more pro-cycling than previous LTPs. Whilst, an increasing number of cities in Europe and worldwide have already started to integrate cycling into their public transport networks, by and large Manchester seems to be stuck with a "cycles are a problem" mentality when it comes to the bus, tram or train network. With its aspirations to be a world-leading City, isn't it time that Manchester started to catch up? Let's hope that, together with their new name, TfGM can begin to develop the progressive policies to deliver better integratation of cycling and public transport in Greater Manchester.

This blogger would welcome details of how other cities around the world are working to integrate cycles with their public transport networks. Please leave a comment or a link. Thanks.

Coming soon..... Bicycle Village, Sunday 22nd May

2011-03-29T19:51:00.000+01:00

Bicycle Village is a bike show held in May, promoting independent shops, bike hires, cycling groups and organizations to the visitors.Everyone who love bikes and who would like to know more about them is welcome

More details of events and participants available from the website.

We will "remove barriers to cycling"... by installing steps...

2011-03-23T23:21:00.000Z

The soon-to-be-published Local Transport Plan (LTP3) for Greater Manchester contains a number of priority committments. One of these boldy asserts that:

“Our proposals set out ways to improve the pedestrian environment, remove barriers to cycling, improve cycling infrastructure…”

Which sounds really progressive and is certainly to be welcomed. Unfortunately, another part of the Greater Manchester transport machine is gearing up to implement this policy by installing a series of steps into the Trans-Pennine Trail near Sandhurst Road as part of the Didsbury Metrolink extension construction work. See previous blog entry for more details.

Metrolink's new access policy?

Those nice people at Love Your Bike, working with Sustrains and the Trans-Pennine Trail office have been lobbying Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority members to encourage Metrolink to come up with a better solution. The campaign has been reported in both local and national cycling media.

Hundreds of people took part in an email action asking their local councillors who are GMITA memebrs to intervene. The GMITA councillors asked Metrolink for a report to be discussed at the Authority meeting on Friday 25th March. Unfortunately, the report's recommendation is that "members note this update and the issues encountered in incorporating the Trans Pennine Trail into the corridor and affirm their support for the proposed design." Or put more simply, to carry on installing steps.

Which in terms of the LTP priority commitment to remove barriers to cycling demonstrates the same logic as the (in)famous Vietnam era quote that saw the US military report that 'It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.'

Love Your Bike has updated the email action and is urging people to contact their local GMITA members and ask them to reject the steps option. Oh.. and you may want to remind them that the GMITA constitution states that all members must not: "do anything which may cause your authority to breach any of the equality enactments (as defined in section 33 of the Equality Act 2006." Just a thought ....

Access for All? Metrolink plans to trash the Trans Pennine Trail ... Take action now!

2011-03-13T16:25:00.002Z

For those who have not yet discovered the Trans Pennine Trail (TPT) it is an "exciting route for walkers, cyclists and horse riders linking the North and Irish seas, passing through the Pennines, alongside rivers and canals and through some of the most historic towns and cities in the North of England."

The Trans-Pennine Trail runs coast-to-coast between Southport and Hornsea and is 215 miles (346Km) long. A north-south route connects Leeds and Chesterfield and a spur to York means there are approximately 350 miles (560 km) of Trans Pennine Trail available for people to explore. Within Greater Manchester, the TPT winds its way through Trafford, Manchester and Stockport. The website describes how canal and railway paths take you through Warrington to Trafford, where the TPT picks up the River Mersey once again following a winding riverside path along the Mersey through the southern suburbs of Manchester, passing by Chorlton Water Park and heading via Didsbury to Stockport.

Last year, the Trans-Pennine Trail celebrated its 21st birthday with a series of events supported by Manchester, Stockport and Trafford councils and people from the local communities who enjoy using the Trail.

The Trans-Pennine Trail provides an ideal traffic-free route to encourage a wide range of walking and cycling activities for both recreational, utility and commuting journeys so at a time when Greater Manchester is developing policies in the Local Transport Plan (LTP3) to encourage more people to walk & cycle you would hope that the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) would be working to improve the facilities and access provided by this wonderful local resource..... unfortunately current proposals from GMPTE/Metrolink would suggest otherwise.

As part of the Metrolink extension works in Didsbury, GMPTE / Metrolink current plans will see the installation of a series of steps into the Trans Pennine Trail route in the Sandhurst Road vicinity as part of the Metrolink extension works in Didsbury.

Apparently, the original designs provided to Manchester City Council and Sustrans indicated that the Trans-Pennine Trail would make use of ramps at the Sandhurst Road area – thus ensuring that a level access route was maintained. Despite protests from various user groups, Metrolink seem unwilling to recognise that introducing a series of steps, into what was previously a level access cycle and walking route, will create a major obstacle for a wide range of current, and potential users.

GMPTE/Metrolink did consult on the proposed modifications to the TPT but because the initial development plans indicated that ramps would be used, providing continued level access, the concerns raised were mainly in relation to the temporary re-direction of the TPT.

It was not until late February 2011 that it became apparent that the upgraded Trans-Pennine Trail would now involve the installation of a series of steps which would have a major impact on access. Enquiries about the possibility of consultation and consideration of other options received the following response:

“[There is] No opportunity to influence the design… this is the design that we are going to construct.”

Not a response likely to re-assure local residents and user groups that their concerns and needs are being taken into account by Metrolink. Enquiries about why the initial designs have now been changed to steps, received the response that the use of ramps were not feasible as they would “cost millions”. So far, no information has been provided that outlines which, if any, alternative options were examined or what the criteria and cost figures are for the steps or ramp options.

Metrolink is currently saying that each set of steps will have “cycle gutters” to enable people to wheel their bicycles up and down the steps. But this will not be much use for people carrying loaded panniers who will struggle to achieve such manoeuvres – whether they are cycle touring or simply returning from the local shops with their weekly groceries. Also, many users will find the steps an unwelcome and impassable barrier. People such as parents with prams or double pushchairs, electric and manual wheelchair users and their attendants, mobility scooters users, families cycling with child buggies or “tag-alongs” and many mobile elderly people who struggle to navigate steps. Many people are likely to find it very difficult, if not impossible, to navigate six sets of steps and will therefore be effectively deterred from using the Trans-Pennine Trail.

Now, the land that the Trans-Pennine Trail is situated on is currently owned by Manchester City Council - who also have responsibilities for the maintenance of the TPT within the Manchester area. So it can be argued that the Trans-Pennine Trail should be considered as a facility or “service” provided by Manchester City Council for the residents of Manchester. If this is indeed the case, then according to the Council’s Access 2000 Strategy:

“Since October 1999, there is a duty presented by Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act to ensure that every Council service is accessible to disabled people. The Access 2000 Strategy will help to ensure that no part of the City Council creates physical barriers to disabled people using its services. By carrying out best practice for its own design schemes, the City Council will be leading by example, in order to encourage others to follow suit.” (Emphasis added) (Section 1.4)

This would seem to make a strong case that Manchester City Council must intervene in this case to ensure that Metrolink, acting as a developer in this case, do not create physical barriers that prevent disabled people, and other residents, from accessing the Trans-Pennine Trail facility.

There is a certain level of irony when reading the commitment outlined in the draft that Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan (LTP3) proudly claims that: "Our proposals to improve the coverage and quality of public transport, to manage the highway network, improve the pedestrian environment and remove barriers to cycling will help to encourage more car users to change the way they travel." (Section 4.3.3.1, Page 34, Draft Local Transport Plan - LTP3).

It will also be interesting to see what the Department for Transport make of any bid from GMPTE (soon to be Transport for Greater Manchester) for Local Sustainable Transport Funds (LSTF). The DfT assessment criteria for LSTF bids includes the following:

"28. Proposals which also demonstrate the following characteristics will be favourably considered in the assessment process.

* have the support of a range of community interests; and
* incorporate plans for partnership working in the design and delivery of solutions with external bodies, which could include the private sector community and voluntary sector organisations and transport operators." (Page 14).

The Trans-Pennine Trail provides an ideal traffic-free route to encourage a wide range of walking and cycling activities for both recreational, utility and commuting journeys. The Metrolink extension to Didsbury should be providing an ideal opportunity to improve the quality and access to this popular service.

It seems unlikely that if, as currently planned, Metrolink effectively trashes the Trans Pennine Trail that this will do much to encourage support from local voluntary and community groups!

Take Action now!

If you value the Trans Pennine Trail and would prefer that Metrolink does not create barriers to people walking and cycling on the TPT then please consider doing one (or more) of the following:

1) Email the councillors on the Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority (GMITA) who are supposed to provide oversight and guidance for Metrolink. Those nice people at Love Your Bike have created an email action to help you contact all the GMITA members in your local area.

2) Or send your own message to your local councillors who are members of the GMITA.

3) Attend the Manchester Cycle Forum on Tuesday 15th March. A GMPTE representative will be attending to discuss Metrolink / Trans Pennine Trail and am sure they would love to hear your views.

Time: 5pm for 5.15pm start. Venue: The Town Hall, Room 11 - Ground Floor

4) Attend the Stockport Cycle User Group on Wednesday 16th March. A GMPTE representative will be attending to discuss Metrolink / Trans Pennine Trail and am sure they would love to hear your views.

Time: 6-8pm. Venue: Stockport Town Hall

Update 16th March.

Email action - In just two days, over 240 people from all 10 GM council areas have sent emails to their local councillors who are GM Integrated Transport Authority members asking them to request Metrolink to come up with a better solution.

Manchester Cycle Forum (15th March) - After 50 minutes of discussion and detailed objections, Councillor David Royle, who chairs the Cycle Forum, made it very clear to the Metrolink representative that they must rethink their plans. "This is NOT the right solution".

Manchester Friends of the Earth / Love Your Bike tabled the following resolution which was passed unanimously.

"This Cycle Forum is seriously concerned that the current Metrolink proposals to introduce sets of steps into the Trans Pennine Trail in the vicinity of Sandhurst Road, Didsbury will seriously degrade access to the Trans Pennine Trail for both visitors and local residents of Manchester. This cycle forum calls on Manchester City Council to work with GMPTE/Metrolink to ensure that the Trans Pennine Trail continues to offer 'access for all' to encourage more people to walk and cycle on the Trans Pennine Trail for recreational, utility or commuting journeys."

Some media coverage:

Didsbury Life: Metrolink and The Trans-Pennine Trail

Inside the M60: Cyclists up in arms over Metrolink proposals to install steps on Trans Pennine Trail

Fetch.It Didsbury: Metrolink – a step too far for the Trans-Pennine Trail

Ask Bury: Metrolink – a step too far for the Trans-Pennine Trail

This is not a cycle path..... but is it a long term plan?

2011-03-09T07:09:00.001Z

Reading a recent blog post by David Hembrow 'This is not a Cycle Path' highlighted for me the need for Greater Manchester to get its act together on both the short term measures and longer term planning that will be needed to help encourage more people to choose walking and cycling for everyday journeys.

A recent post on this blog (What would mass cycling in Greater Manchester look like?) looked at the low levels of people in Greater Manchester who reported that they travelled to work by bicycle (2001 census data) and highlighted a great video from the Netherlands that shows what can be achieved when planning to increase cycling levels is coherent and continuous over a long period.

David Hembrow writes about a 75km cycle trip he made where he lives in the Netherlands. David describes how "most of the first half of the route between here and Hoogeveen is on roads, not cycle paths. However, these are not roads as you probably know them. Yes, in theory they are "shared" with cars, but in practice you only very rarely see a car using them. There is a parallel road with a higher speed limit which takes the through traffic, and the only cars which use the minor road are those which are accessing properties along it."

Proposals for cycling infrastructure often highlights the two polar opposite positions that can divide the cycling communities - from the "roads are the cycle network, all cycling infrastructure is unecessary" to the "people will not cycle until there is a totally segregated cycle network". On top of this faultline is the shockingly poor quality of much of the cycling infrastructure that is installed on Greater Manchesters roads. From my experience, the cycling communities in the UK often seem to spend more time arguing amongst themselves and campaigning against things, rather than working towards developing the (longer term) measures that are essential for normalising cycling.

David Hembrow argues that: "What cyclists need to fight for is better conditions for cycling, which result in more cycling. Spending time in defending a position of being allowed to use roads which the majority of the population find unpleasant may slow the decline of cycling, but it will never grow it. The best defence is a good offence. In the case of cycling, growth comes by fighting for cycling conditions with a level of subjective safety such that everyone will want to cycle, and direct routes which make cycling efficient. The Dutch have done this for a while now, with great success relative to other countries." This reflects a recent article on the I Bike London blog which considers what the cycling communities can learn from the gay rights movement as well as the debates surrounding the setting up of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain.

I don't agree totally with David Hembrow and think that we need to get much better at being able to focus on delivering short-term (here and now) measures as well as developing and implementing the longer-term (where do we want to get to) measures. After all, the Dutch and Danes have been implementing their pro-cycling policies for over 60 years....

So... looking forward and recognising that a network of traffic-free cycle routes, or cycles routes on quiet roads is one of the most commonly stated factors that people (who do not currently cycle) highlight as a factor that could encourage them to start cycling.

One of the objectives in the draft Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan (LTP3) is to: "further develop a ‘core cycle network’, that will be implemented locally, on which people will be able to cycle with ease, convenience and safety. This will involve not only the creation of cycle lanes, but improvements at large junctions, roundabouts or pinch points that create barriers for cyclists. We see the completion of a ‘core cycle network’, over the long term, as the key intervention needed in order to create a pro-cycling culture in Greater Manchester." (Section 4.4.2.1)

To achieve such a core cycle network - the soon-to-be formed Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) and local councils will need to implement more "road space re-allocation" to help encourage active travel (walking and cycling) and other forms of sustainable transport.

The Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan (LTP2) included the following Short term Measure (2002 – 2005): "Road Space Reallocation to more sustainable modes and improved traffic management" as well as this Medium term measure (2006-2011) " Continued road space reallocation and further development of pedestrian and cycle initiatives." We will need to continue lobbying to ensure that the new Local Transport Plan (LTP3) actually implements these measures.

To ensure that any core cycle network provides coherent, consistent and continuous routes will require long-term planning and constant oversight. The unfortunate siting of a major supermarket slap bang in the middle of the Fallowfield Loop highlights the need to ensure that any future plans for cycling infrastructure are embedded into the long-term planning frameworks across Greater Manchester.

One route to acheive this will be to lobby for core cycling infrastructure provision to be incorporated into the GM Spatial Framework which should be open for consultation in June 2011. For all those that have not yet had the delights of encountering this concept the following description may help: "The GM Spatial Framework is not a fully comprehensive plan for Greater Manchester, but focuses on key agreed opportunities. The Framework will be a concise and selective guide to inform investment decisions by public and private sector partners, drawing from district core strategies and other local strategies and concentrating on issues and proposals which are important for the conurbation as a whole and may require a joint commitment, for example to secure necessary supporting infrastructure." (Page 2).

This might all sound very dull and not as much fun as cycling but if we want to develop levels of cycling similar to the Netherlands and Denmark we need to work together with a range of local government agencies, businesses and community groups to embed pro-cycling policies at all levels in Greater Manchester. Together we are stronger.....

What would mass cycling in Greater Manchester look like ?

2011-03-07T21:43:00.000Z

Well its 10 years since the last Census and very soon the forms for the 2011 (and possibly the last ever) Census will be delivered to your door. You may have seen some of the adverts in local newspapers or billboards explaining why the Census is important for helping local councils and public sector agencies effectively plan local and national services. (Although not everyone is convinced).

Amongst the wide range of data collected, the 2001 Census provided some interesting data for the "Method of Travel to Work" used by people in Greater Manchester (See graph below).

Basically, 20582 people (out of a GM total of 1.78 million) reported that in 2001 they used a bicycle to travel to work. This was about 1.16% of the Census respondents.

Hardly, a mass level of commuter cycling and lets hope that the figures for the amount of people cycling to work from the 2011 Census data (whenever they are published) show a big increase.

What is also interesting (yes I know it may be a little data geeky) is that the 2001 census data on a whole range of subjects - including Travel to Work modes - is available right down to what are known as Lower Layer Super Output Areas.

The map below is the Trafford 001B Lower Layer Super Output Area and the Travel to Work data (KS15) shows that of the 560 people in this area (aged 16-74, in employment) that 21 (3.75%) used a bicycle to travel to work.

This level of data, whilst 10 years old, is available for all areas within Greater Manchester and could provide a useful tool to measure any increase (hopefully, not a decrease ! ) in the levels of people cycling to work in very specific areas near to you.

The data is available on the Office for National Statistics - Neighbourhood Statistics website.

Meanwhile, Greater Manchester is putting the final touches to its Local Transport Plan (LTP3) and is also starting to draft a bid for up to £50 million from the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (bid deadline 6th June 2011).

In our efforts to increase cycling levels in Greater Manchester we can learn useful lessons from European countries such as the Netherlands and Denmark. The video below has been produced by video blogger Mark Wagenbuur who uses YouTube to show us what can be achieved, if we really start to think big.

Lets hope that the soon-to-be formed Transport for Greater Manchester can learn some of these lessons.

Growing the "low carbon" economy

2011-03-01T11:49:00.000Z

A graphic from the US National Building Museum highlights figures from the American Automobile Association which estimates that: "Americans spend on average $8,485 each year on their cars."

Seems like a lot of money, doesn't it? What is intriguing is that the think-piece highlights how most of the money spent on cars leaves the local economy and asks the question:

"What if you were able to get rid of a car and spend-or invest-that money in your community and city?"

Given all the lovely words being written in the Greater Manchester Strategy and various Climate Change Action Plans about the need to develop a "low-carbon" economy it would be fascinating to pull together comparable data for Greater Manchester.

A recent blog by Elly Blue "How bicycling will save the economy (if we let it)" starts to sketch out how such a bicycle economy might look.

On a subject, dear to this blog's heart, Elly highlights how "Bicycle parking is the indicator species of this new economy, with a business's enthusiasm for its two-wheeled clientele being easy to gauge by the quantity of bike racks out front."

Examples are provided of Portland, businesses who arelining up to replace their car parking with on-street bike racks. And of one local grocery store who recently opened at a location with more parking for bicycles than for cars. Am looking forward to businesses across Greater Manchester following this lead.

Her blog article promises that the next in the series will provide "A realistic, conservative funding proposal for bicycle economic development." Am looking forward to reading that...

Micro brewery... BIG bike!

2011-03-01T11:10:00.000Z

Available now on the streets of Portland, USA...the Bike Bar from Hopworks Urban Brewery - Portland’s first Eco-Brewpub.

According to the Hopwork's website the 20-barrel brewery produces 6,000 barrels a year and offers "handcrafted organic beers and fresh, local ingredients, all served in a sustainably built and operated building."

Anyone know what the licencing laws would be for operating one of these on the streets of Manchester?

Park That Bike

2011-02-26T16:38:00.000Z

Previous posts on this blog have highlighted the need for much better provision of secure cycle parking across Greater Manchester - at both public and private sector locations. See here for the latest blog post or click on the Cycle Parking cloud label.

There are many research reports that highlight the importance of secure cycle parking as one of the factors that will influence people to cycle.

For example, research published in 1996 (*) highlighted how 63% of respondents listed 'secure cycle parking' as one of the key incentives that would increase their likelihood to cycle. (See Table 3).

Whilst, many companies and organisations have made progress in providing better cycle parking and other cycle infrastructure for their staff - there is still a long way to go for cycle parking facilities in public spaces and for people visiting businesses and organisations and who visit by bicycle.

A recently published report 'Greater Manchester - Cycling Progress Report', (GMTU Report 1637 January 2011 summarises the number of cycle parking locations across Greater Manchester along with a breakdown of the number of locations per local authority. (See Table 20 below).

Am not sure how accurate these figures are - and some Council cycling officers I have spoken too say that they are under-estimates - but clearly some of the local authorities in Greater Manchester have a long way to go in terms of the provision of cycle parking in public spaces.

There are a couple of web-based cycle parking tools that may help to identify where more cycle parking provision is required.

1) Park That Bike offers a website "that enables you to comment on cycle parking in any part of the UK. People can comment on cycle parking both on-highway, in public spaces, and at key destinations such as railway stations, leisure centres, libraries and surgeries. All comments and suggestions gathered by the site are sent to the relevant local authority."

The website explains that ParkThatBike.info is a "free service that enables people to request new or additional cycle parking, or to comment on existing facilities." Users can...

Identify places where cycle parking is needed
Report existing cycle parking that is damaged
Report out-dated and badly designed facilities

The aim is to...

Show where there is a clear demand for improved cycle parking
Help councils develop effective cycle parking programmes that offer good value
Improve the quality and quantity of cycle parking across the UK

2) Cycle Parking Heat Map - enables visual comparison of bike parking density around the world.

Gregory Williams has created a cycle parking heat map that shows the bicycle parking available around the world. The default map views cycle parking in Canterbury, but you can zoom out to see a nice comparison between bike parking in your local area and around the world.

If anyone has experience of using these tools for reporting cycle parking requirements in Greater Manchester we would love to hear what sort of response(s) you have received from local councils or companies.

(*) Hopkinson P.; Wardman M. (1996) 'Evaluating the demand for new cycle facilities', Volume 3, Number 4, pp. 241-249(9).

Pedal Powered Ancoats

2011-02-26T10:48:00.000Z

Fancy a local history tour with a difference? Then you might want to try the Pedal Powered Ancoats trip.

Described on the Quaytickets booking form as being a:

"venture into Ancoats, 'the world's first industrial suburb', not on foot but by bike. Tour Guides Kate Dibble and Emma Fox lead you on a tour of the towering mills and the pioneering industrial canals that made Manchester ‘Cottonopolis’.

The industrialisation of Ancoats was so intense and dramatic, even by Manchester's own standards, that by 1849 it was stated that "Ancoats...is to Manchester what Manchester is to England". Ancoats is being considered for UNESCO World Heritage Site status; come and see why. You’ll hear stories of the wretched squalor, the teenage gangs called scuttlers, Little Italy, ice cream wars, glass making, early aircraft, music, and unique architecture. Pedal into the 21st century to watch the former 'Cardroom Estate' being transformed into trendy New Islington. Peep into a tunnel, a bell tower, and a room in a mill walled up since the war. Explore Angel Meadow where policemen walked round in threes. By the end of the tour you’ll be able to say that you’ve ridden down every street in Manchester.

Tour starts at the junction of Great Ancoats and Redhill Street, bring your own bike. It lasts approximately two hours and price includes a drink and a cake. Under 16s must be accompanied by an adult. Saturday 5th March. Start time: 1pm."

PS I don't know anything about this tour and unfortunately I am busy on that Saturday but it sounds interesting.... if anyone goes along please post a comment on this blog.

Happiness is.... cycling to work !

2011-02-25T15:48:00.001Z

Well probably not a great surprise to anyone who regularly cycles but it is nice that the all-round benefits of cycling to work, as well as for leisure/utility trips, are becoming more widely recognised...

A report published in 2010 by the Young Foundation entitled 'The State of Happiness - Can public policy shape people’s wellbeing and resilience?' highlighted recent research that illustrated how "commuting in crowded conditions and long commutes are both associated with lower levels of frustration tolerance and job stability as well as with poor health and work absences." Basically, as shown in the graph below, the longer the commute time the less happy people are.

But it is not just the length of commuting time that is important - it is also how much control people have over their journey times that plays a large part in the stress and frustration of commuting to work. Traffic congestion, roadworks and finding somewhere to park can mean that for many journeys by car or public transport there is little control over the reliability of journey times - which can lead to stress and frustration - or unhappiness.

A more recent report by the New Economics Foundation 'Measuring our progress : The power of well-being' highlighted that "studies comparing the experiences of commuting by bicycle and car report that cyclists find their mode of transport at least as flexible and convenient as those who use cars, with lower stress and greater feelings of freedom, relaxation and excitement." (*)

Or put more simply, cycling provides a more reliable and controllable means of travelling to work (or the shops, pub, school etc) and when you add in the cost-savings and health-benefits of regular cycling then.... cycling can really make you happier !

(*) Anable, J. & Gatersleben, B. (2005). All work and no play? The role of instrumental and affective factors in work and leisure journeys by different travel modes. Transportation Research Part A 39, 163–181.

Cycle parking?... my Kingdom for some cycle parking

2011-02-06T15:31:00.000Z

To somewhat massacre Shakespeare's "A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse!" quote from Richard III, it would appear that Trafford does not fare well when it comes to the provision of places to park your bicycle.

In a recently published report "Greater Manchester - Cycling Progress Report" (GMTU Report 1637 January 2011, not yet available online) it is noted that whilst analysis of "cycle trips into most key centres and cycle carriage on trains suggest that there is a continuing increase in cycle usage within Greater Manchester, with the exception of cycle parking in key locations where a slight decrease has occurred since 2008." [Wow - Shakespeare eat your heart out!]

But the report does provide a handy little table that summarises the number of cycle parking locations across Greater Manchester along with a breakdown of the number of locations per local authority. (See Table 20 below)

According to these figures, Trafford would appear to be in the relegation zone. But then again, when it comes to considering 'parking' issues Trafford Council seems to have trouble with the concept that bicycles need cycle parking facilities too and that to encourage more people to cycle - they need somewhere safe and secure to park their bikes!

First we had the recent consultation on the Local Implementation Plan (LIP) from Trafford Council (1) which had an entire section focused on 'Parking' (page 37) listing 12 objectives (subject to funding of course!) - unfortunately none of these related directly to cycle parking. The LIP consultation closed on 31st January 2011, so you have missed your chance to comment - but those nice people at Love Your Bike did point out this little oversight [as well as some bigger ones - Ed] to Trafford Council. The LYB submission should be available at the Love Your Bike website.

Well after all that excitement, along comes Trafford Council's survey on Parking facilities. Now, perhaps you are hoping that the Council's concept of 'parking' would have broadened to include cycle parking. Unfortunately closer inspection of the survey indicates that any such hopes will be dashed.

If you want to, you can complete the survey here. And whilst, your prose doesn't need to reach Shakespearean heights - perhaps you would like to suggest to Trafford Council that they broaden their thinking about 'parking' facilities in Trafford.

Notes:

(1) Transport in Trafford: A Local Area Implementation Plan. Draft for Consultation, January 2011

Cyclists 'left unprotected by police and courts'

2011-01-15T15:52:00.000Z

Well I had certainly hoped to start the New Year on a happier note but the combination of several national media stories and bicycle blogs about how the legal system doesn't deal with dangerous, or should that be murderous, driving cases and then cycling past a billboard advertising a Manchester-based law firm offering to save a drivers licence if they had been charged with driving too fast, over the alcohol limit or in a dangerous manner prompted me look a little closer into how the legal system responds to cycle related incidents.

A BBC London news article reported on 7th January 2011 that fomer British Boxing champion Gary Mason had died in a cycling collision in London. The article stated that: "Mason, 48, was on his bicycle in Sandy Lane South, Wallington, on Thursday morning when he was involved in a collision with a van. The retired fighter was pronounced dead at the scene." and that: "A man has been arrested on suspicion of causing death by careless driving and bailed until March pending further inquiries."

Whilst the exact details of the case are not (yet) known it is interesting to note that the driver was only charged with causing death by careless driving.

Careless (or Inconsiderate) Driving is defined by the Road Traffic Act 1988 (Section 3ZA, as amended by the Road Safety Act 2006) as being driving that:

“falls below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver.” A driver is regarded as driving without reasonable consideration for other persons
“only if those persons are inconvenienced by his driving”.

Whilst Dangerous Driving is defined as driving that:

“…falls far below what would be expected of a competent and careful driver, and it would be obvious to a competent and careful driver that driving in that way would be dangerous.” …"dangerous” refers to danger either of injury to any person or of serious damage to property;” [Road Traffic Act 1988, as amended by the Road Traffic Act 1991. Section 2A.]

On 9th January, the Independent newspaper published an article highlighting the Gary Mason case as well as the experience of barrister Martin Porter who was documented his recent experiences with the police and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) after having been assaulted by one driver and threatened with being killed by another. The details of the assault incident and the woeful response from the police and CPS are detailed on Martin Porter's blog - the Cycling Lawyer. (The details of the driver threatening to kill incident have been removed from the blog as the police have re-opened the case and are currently investigating).

In 1997, the Lord Chief Justice had observed how the the figures for Careless Driving or Dangerous Driving (CDDD):

"seem to us to show that the offence is regarded by the Courts as less serious than in fact it is: less serious than Parliament intended it to be and less serious than the public in general regard it. It is a trite observation, and I make no apologies for making it, that the motor car is a potentially lethal instrument. Any driver who fails to realise that what he is doing at the wheel is creating a risk when to any ordinary person such risk would be obvious, or, even worse, sees the risk and nevertheless takes a chance on avoiding disaster and so kills, is prima facie deserving of severe punishment. In our view such punishment should in many cases involve immediate loss of liberty."

By March 2006, Alistair Darling (then Transport Secretary) was arguing in the House of Commons that: 'It is important that the courts actually regard somebody who kills somebody using a car in the same way as if they had used any other means of killing people,''and that 'It's important that drivers realise that the minute they sit behind the wheel of a car they are potentially driving something that can cause death or serious injury.'' (BBC News, 8 March 2006).

However, any progress appears to be slow and piecemeal and cycling & walking campaign groups, such as the CTC, continue to argue that the police and legal system do not show sufficient interest in prosecuting drivers who cause the deaths or serious injury of pedestrians or cyclists and that even where there are prosections the sentences imposed do not reflect the seriousness of the crime.

A fascinating paper by Jake Voelcker entitled "A Critical Review of the Legal Penalties for Drivers Who Kill Cyclists of Pedestrians" takes as its starting point a CTC news comment:"

“A driver has been fined just £800 for ‘careless driving’, following the death of a cyclist. The case follows an all-too-familiar pattern, where a cyclist is killed yet the driver escapes with a small fine and a driving ban for ‘careless’ driving due to serious anomalies in the legal framework of ‘bad driving’ offences.” (CTC 'Newsnet', 27th October 2006)

The review provides a fascinating and clear, if depressing, picture of how poorly the legal system responds to cases where drivers have killed, or seriously injured, cyclists.

Amongst many interesting comparisons the review highlights how the "Health and Safety regulations would not permit thousands of one-tonne steel and glass machines with exposed moving parts to repeatedly pass feet or inches away from unprotected workers on the shop floor at well over 10m/s (HSE 1998, Sect.11). Yet this is the situation in our towns and cities today. Why are drivers allowed to impose this danger on pedestrians without more strict prosecution of liability?"

The review concludes that "it must be admitted that driving is not an absolute human right, but is a privilege enjoyed only by some. In choosing to drive – despite being aware of the potential consequences – a driver has entered into a form of contract where they are be responsible for the consequences of their actions. In this light it is only fair that, whether through recklessness or simply a moment of carelessness, if the consequences of driving are death then the driver is penalised accordingly. Currently this is not the case: an £800 fine for taking an innocent life seems a ludicrously low price to pay."

CTC's SMIDSY (Sorry Mate I Didn't See You) campaign aims to highlight the need for a change in both the legislation and the way that the police and courts respond to careless and dangerous driving cases. CTC believes that:

• The framework of ‘bad driving’ offences and sentencing should be fundamentally overhauled
to reflect the unacceptability of endangering and intimidating other road users. Sentences
should reflect the potential severity (not just the actual outcomes) of such offences, but with
a much greater emphasis on long driving bans, re-testing and community-based sanctions
such as restorative justice.

and that the statutory framework of bad driving offences needs to be reviewed with two key aims in mind:
• To relate sentencing more closely to the standard of driving rather than the outcome.
• To remove the implication that driving that causes danger can be dismissed as mere
‘carelessness’. (More details here)

Meanwhile, closer to home, the billboard below was recently spotted on Ashton Old Road, heading north from the City Centre and is advertising the services of the legal company, Hammond Trotter. With offices in Bury and London, the company's website proudly announces that they are "Specialist solicitors who will fight for your driving licence."

The company website claims that:
"Our team has many years experience in the field of criminal defence work and we believe that we are the only firm in England and Wales that delivers the best results possible for clients with road traffic problems."

The car image on the billboard has clearly been involved in a crash of some form (the front of the car is badly crumpled and damaged). The advert text asks the question: Driving Offence?
Speeding?
Excess Alcohol?
Dangerous Driving?

with the strapline of "Save your licence with Driving defences.com" [which is a division of Hammond Trotter LLP].

According to the Department for Transport "Contributory factors to reported road accidents data tables" drivers being impairedby alcohol was a contributary factor in 10% of the road crash fatalities in 2009 whilst driving in a careless, reckless manner or when in a hurry was a contributary factor in 19% of the road crash fatalities. Aggressive driving was responsible for 9% of road crash fatalities. Unfortunately, it would appear that Hammond Trotter won't be short of potential customers.

Best wishes for 2011 and may you all cycle safely.

How many bottoms can TfL fit on a (cycle hire) bicycle ?

2010-12-04T14:17:00.002Z

The London Assembly Transport Committee has recently released a report " Pedal power: the cycle hire scheme and cycle superhighways" (November 2010) that casts a beady eye over the operations of the 'Boris Bikes' cycle hire scheme and cycle superhighways in London.

As a cycle hire scheme for Manchester is one of the options being considered for inclusion in the next Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan there are important lessons to be learnt from the operation of cycle hire, or bike share, schemes in London and elsewhere.

The Greater Manchester LTP3 consultation document states that "we also need innovative solutions to help people to cycle as part of their daily lives, so we are looking closely at recent city centre cycle hire schemes to take the best from these and other marketing initiatives." (Page 12).

Consideration of a cycle hire scheme was also contained in the recent report to the Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority (GMITA) Policy & Resources committee which recommended that members consider: "iv) a major bicycle hire scheme, similar to that in operation in London, should be explored for Manchester City Centre and adjacent areas of Salford." The somewhat spurious reasoning for this particular committee to support a cycle hire scheme was that it would remove the need for integrating cycle carriage into the GM transport network - particularly Metrolink trams.... but I digress.

The London Assembly report states that they "found great enthusiasm for the cycle hire scheme but there remain questions about how it is being funded. It is not clear exactly how much sponsorship Barclays has provided for a scheme which has now been running for four months" and that "over 20 per cent of respondents to our survey had started cycling as a result of the scheme and over 80 per cent thought it good value for money. One comment received, representative of the views of many, described it as “a very significant enhancement to life in London”.

Overall the report is positive and supports the continued development of the cycle hire scheme, but the report also highlights that:

"TfL reports that the annual operating cost of the scheme will be £18 million which it expects to be met from charges and sponsorship. To date in 2010/11, TfL has received only £1.9 million of income from charges largely because the roll out to casual users was delayed by six months and has missed the summer months. TfL now expects the scheme to be self-financing in two to three years and for the income to start contributing to its £79 million set up costs by 2017/18." (Page 7) with regard to the issue of funding, the report concludes that:

"The costs and funding arrangements for the cycle hire scheme remain opaque. TfL has not told the Committee how much Barclays has paid to date for its branding of the scheme. The argument that all details of the relationships between TfL and Serco and Barclays are confidential is not a compelling one. The details of these deals determine how much of the costs of the scheme have to be met from farepayers at a time of huge pressure on TfL’s finances. It is in the public interest for these details to be made available to the Committee. This would be in line with the Mayor’s commitment to transparency about public expenditure."

To date, the London scheme has attracted over 100,000 registered members, who are making 15,000 cycle trips per day (averaged over the whole week), although the average number of weekday trips is higher at 21,000-24,000. But, this is just over half the target of 40,000 daily trips, although it should be noted that the scheme was only opened up to to casual users on 3rd December, albeit with some initial problems. TfL expects to reach an average of 27,000 trips per day by March 2011 and to reach the target of 40,000 trips per day in future (unspecified) years.

Phase 1 of the London Scheme was supposed to have enabled members and casual users to

use 6,000 bikes at 400 docking stations with over 10,000 docking points. However, the full scheme may not be in place until March 2011 and the London Assembly report indicates that 348 docking stations have been established. (Information from TfL provided on 24 November 2010).

How many docking stations are needed will continue to a subject for discussion, with the London Cycling Campaign arguing that the functionality of the scheme depends on the full complement of 400 docking stations being completed.

Recently released bike share data highlighted how people in Lyon, France's second-largest Metropolitan area, make 16,000 trips every day using the Vélo’v scheme. The Velo 'v has 4000 bikes available at nearly 350 stations around the city which has 480,660 inhabitants although the population of its metropolitan area is estimated to be 1,757,180. Despite being many times smaller than London, this scheme has nearly as many docking stations, as are planned for London and two-thirds of the bicycles.

Since it began in 2005, the Velo 'v scheme has tracked the start and destination locations as well as trip time. Researchers at the École Normale Supérieure de Lyon crunched the data from the 11.6 million bike trips and found that:

Lyon, the third largest city in France, is traversed via a cluster of narrow, one-way streets which adds to the driving distance for just about any destination. Lyon bike share data shows, however, that bike trip distance is often shorter than what an equivalent car trip might be. Reasons for this might be shortcuts and a great number of wrong way cyclists riding on the sidewalks. There are no bike lanes in Lyon.

Average cycling speed is about 10 km/hr — about 6 MPH.

The fastest cycling speeds are during the morning commute, when the average rises to almost 15 km/hr (9 MPH). In Lyon, this sedate speed is faster than the average driving speed in that congested city.

The Lyon data has also been used to create maps showing the most heavily cycled routes.(See above).

The London Assembly report also raised concerns about how effective the cycle hire scheme had been in encouraging people to switch from car travel. The report states that:

"Our survey found less than one per cent of journeys are replacing those previously made by car; TfL’s planning assumptions were for a five per cent shift from car to bike." (Page 8)

In response to complaints about the lack of bicycles, Serco has doubled its total number of redistribution staff and vehicles but as the report highlights, this in turn has:

"led to questions about the environmental impact of the scheme. It was originally expected that only electric vehicles would be used for redistribution. Serco is now using 14 electrically powered vehicles, 10 Focus/Mondeo vehicles and, on a temporary basis, three 7.5 ton lorries and four Sprinter vans. It also uses 10 Nissan vans for on-street maintenance. It has told the Committee that it is undertaking a fleet review in light of the different redistribution requirements." (Page 18)

Whilst many (most?) cycling campaigns are supportive of cycle hire schemes there are concerns that such schemes will divert limited resources from other, possibly more cost-effective, projects and initiatives that promote and support cycling. See for example the comments from one cycle organisation with regard to the proposed San Francisco Penisula Bike Share scheme:

"Dedicating $7.9 million to an unproven, risky project like bike sharing seems a poor use of limited funds, when other bicycle projects have proven track records to replace automobile trips with bicycle trips."

Hopefully, Manchester can learn lessons from other cities that have successfully introduced cycle hire schemes but until more details of any proposed scheme are made available there will remain key questions on both operational issues and potential costs. Not least, the question of where will the funding come from and will it genuinely be "new" funding or more a case of "robbing Peter to pay Paul." Watch this space.

This committee has not held any meetings...

2010-12-04T09:42:00.000Z

Am sure that Bolton Council take transport issues very seriously and there will undoubtedly be very good reasons why the Bolton Council Transport Working Group has not held any meetings since May 2010 - but would be interested in hearing what they are....

Comments welcome.

Greater Manchester transport... heading in the wrong direction?

2010-11-15T14:38:00.004Z

At the forthcoming Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority (GMITA) Policy and Resources committee (Friday 19th November) the committee members will consider whether to continue the ban on cycle carriage on Metrolink trams. Whilst no decision has yet to be formally announced, the portents do not look good. The GMPTE press release states that:

"The final recommendation from the working group - to maintain the current position - will be considered by the Authority's Policy & Resources Committee on Friday 19 November." A direction of travel that has been picked up by both local and national media and the main report on cycle carriage recommends that the Committee should:

"endorse the decision reached by the Cycles on Trams Working Group that there should be no trial for the carriage of bicycles on trams and the current policy regarding cycles on trams should remain in place and cyclists should be encouraged to park their bikes at Metrolink stops or use folding bikes and carry them fully covered on trams;"

There are a series of report that the Committee are meant to base any decision on. It is a small sign of progress that these reports are available prior to the meeting via the GMITA website.

One report, entitled "Item 04. Implications and Costs of Tram modifications" states that:

"5.1 The total cost of the modification of the mixed tram fleet would be approximately £3,312,000 when taking into account the costs of design, removal of seats, fitting the space with a bicycle restraining system, project management, risk and contingency allowance.

5.2 Any trial of the carriage of bicycles would be very difficult until all trams have been modified to enable the carriage of bicycles as cyclists would have no idea when the next modified tram will arrive at their chosen boarding point, therefore no meaningful trial could take place prior to the tram refurbishment programme being completed." and that:

"5.5 The cost of modification to trams for the carriage of bicycles therefore represents poor value for money.

5.6 Funding for the capital works to adapt trams for the carriage of bikes is unsecured."

Whilst it is true that there would now be a cost associated with retrofitting the new trams to be able to carry bicycles this rather neatly sidesteps the point that if, as was agreed in 2003, the new trams had been DESIGNED to carry bicycles then most of these retrofit costs would not apply.

On the 18th November 2002, in a letter to a local newspaper, Concillor Roger Jones (the then GMPTA chair) stated that:

“Whilst there is a clear realisation that taking bikes on existing trams is not possible, GMPTE will be purchasing many more trams as part of its third phase of Metrolink expansion out to the airport, Ashton under Lyne and Oldham and Rochdale. The Authority has unanimously agreed to the principle of allowing bikes on trams during non-peak hours, however, this is subject to the resolution of a number of very important issues.”

It is not as if the cycling community has been remiss in reminding GMPTE/GMITA that the Greater Manchester transport system would be a little more integrated if the Metrolink system allowed cycle carriage. See for example, Greater Manchester Cycle Campaign's publications 'Cycle Carriage News' which has been regularly posted to relevant GMITA councillors and GMPTE officers. In June 2008, Love Your Bike organised a press stunt with cardboard bikes to illustrate how easy it was to carry bikes on the off-peak tram network.

The GMITA reports focus relentlessly on the possible problems and dangers that might be associated with cycle carriage whilst ignoring developments in a wide and growing range of cities in Europe and North America that already have, or are introducing, public transit networks that permit (or in some cases positively encourage) people to combine their cycle journeys with the different public transport modes. For example, the table below was part of the Love Your bike and GMCC submissions to the GMITA Cycles on Trams Working Group. The Koln tram system is both more complex and larger than Manchester. It has 11 lines and carries nearly ten times the number of daily passengers. Koln utilises similar trams to Manchester (the Metrolink M5000 tram is a slightly modified version of the K5000), switching between rail lines (linking Bonn) as well as travelling through the city centre, and both being regulated via the driver.

If you haven't already spotted it, the big difference is that Koln permits passengers to travel with their bicycles. The Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority has chosen not to allow the integration of bicycles with the Metrolink or bus services - this is in marked contrast to many other cities worldwide who have been able to overcome the barriers and obstacles that GMITA/GMPTE seem to think are such a problem.

One of the key reasons given for continuing with the ban on cycle carriage on the Manchester trams, is that the £3.3 million retrofit costs are too high and not currently secure. But these costs are so high, precisely because the GMITA/GMPTE failed to ensure that the new trams ordered were configured to be able to carry bikes. The GMPTE bureacratic machine, which appears hostile to bicycles travelling on the public transport network, has played a blinder !

There is also a report purporting to show that there are no clear off-peak periods on the Metrolink system and a new public survey that shows a lower level of support than the passenger survey looking at people's attitude towards cycle carriage which was carried out by GMPTE in 2002 but never published.

What the GMPTE press release doesn't mention and the media don't seem bothered to comment on is that before respondents got to answer the questions about cycle carriage they were required to read (and indicate that they had understood) the following:

"If bikes were allowed to be carried on trams, there are several implications as a result:

1. To satisfy UK safety regulations, seats would need to be removed to allow enough space to enable bikes to be carried, for example:

o To allow 2 bikes per tram – approximately four to six seats would need to be removed
o To allow 4 bikes per tram – approximately 8 to 12 seats would need to be removed

2. The number of bikes allowed on a tram at any one time would need to be self regulated by the cyclists and other passengers as the trams do not carry onboard Metrolink staff in the saloon at all times.

3. The carriage of bikes may introduce a risk of collision with the bike by passengers, especially if the tram had to stop sharply.

4. Please tick to confirm you have read and understood these implications. Yes No."

It is interesting that the Committee report on cycle carriage (Item 08) notes that the evidence from Northern Rail (who are enthusiastic about encouraging passengers to travel with their cycles) have reported that:

"They have no record of accidents involving passengers and cycles, although the occasional claim (one or two per annum) for dry cleaning is presented where contact has been made by clothing and bicycle chains or other dirty parts of the bike."

and even the (in)famous Mott MacDonald report stated that:

"It should be noted that from the information obtained from systems where cycles are permitted on trams, none have reported any safety issues or referred to any claims resulting from bicycle carriage."

So what do you do if you don't really want to facilitate cycle carriage on the Metrolink system? How about creating a potential concern (see Point 3 above) - even though all the evidence you have from your own research and consultants suggests that there is a minimal risk of such an event happening - and introduce this into the survey before the respondent answers the key questions... I think this is what researchers would call a "loaded question".

Which makes it all the more surprising (and encouraging) that 53% of people still supported the principle of cycle carriage on Metrolink. You can see the survey questionnaire for yourself here.

In some ways we shouldn't be surprised at this continuing hostility towards cycle carriage - the bureacratic process behind the decision in January 2010 to continue with the ban on cycle carriage was a disgrace, even one of the councillors at a subsequent meeting described it as "shoddy and shabby". Despite repeated Freedom of Information requests, the main report by consultants Mott MacDonald, was not made available for public scrutny until after the Capital Projects committee had voted to continue with the ban on cycle carriage. See for example the Manchester Evening News "GMPTE's 'dirty tricks' over bike ban on trams" article. At the time the Guardian Cycling blog also commented that:

"Now I don't know enough about Manchester's trams to judge the issue with any authority. But overall, it's one of the most depressing transport documents I think I've ever read. If there's a potential problem, they've found it. Cyclists are seen purely as an annoyance, something to be managed."

It is this fixation on the bicycle as a problem combined with the apparent unwillingnes to consider how combining the public transport network with bicycles can help create a truly sustainable and integrated transport system which is so disappointing. This lack of understanding of why people may want to combine cycle journeys with other public transport modes is epitomised by the comment below which was posted on the Manchester Evening News website in response to the "Metrolink set to stand firm on bike ban after passenger survey" story

"If you are on a bike why do you need to get on a tram. On yer bike..... "

Am assuming this comment was made by a member of the public ... but unfortunately the recent reports and Committee recommendation would appear to indicate that this same lack of understanding is also prevalent amongst GMITA councillors and GMPTE officers.

More worringly, there is an another report up for discussion at the Committee Meeting on the 19th November. Item 11. "Potential for 'Tram-Train' to play a role in the development of local train services in Greater Manchester" does what it says on the tin and outlines the potential to develop a Tram-Train service across Greater Manchester to replace an unspecified number of heavy rail services. The report acknowledges a number of key challenges but exhibits a positive, can-do approach suggesting that all these obstacles can be overcome. It is interesting to contrast this can-do approach on a subject which presumably GMPTE officers support with the negative, can't do / problem laden approach to cycle carriage on the tram service.

But clearly if the GMITA/GMPTE get the go ahead to create a Tram-Train network then it follows that there will be more destinations in Greater Manchester that will become inaccessible to people wishing to combine bicycle journeys with the public transport system.

Meanwhile... people in Greater Manchester are being consulted on the Local Transport Plan (LTP3) vision and strategy that amongst other things wants to create a sustainable transport system for Greater Manchester. As part of LTP3, it is likely that Greater Manchester will make a bid to the Local Sustainable Transport Fund which seeks to support local authorities that introduce (amongst other things):
"Measures could include encouraging walking and cycling, initiatives to improve integration between travel modes and end-to-end journey experiences".

In public transport jargon poor integration between travel modes and poor end-to-end journey experiences are often referred to as the “problem of the last mile”. These are situations where the person’s final destination is up to a mile away from the nearest public transport stop and so they, often quiet reasonably, chose to travel by car. Having the option to use a bicycle for this final stretch makes it more likely that the journey could be made by a combination of public transport and bike, instead of the entire journey being made by car.

An integrated transport network that enables customers to combine sustainable modes, such as allowing users to combine Metrolink and cycle carriage could help some people overcome the “problem of the last mile”.

Now, bearing in mind that Manchester / Greater Manchester has already been unsuccessful in bids for Cycyling Demonstration City and Sustainable Travel City funding (partly) because of the perceived lack of "high-level" political support and lack of coherent GM wide cycling policies - it will be very interesting to see what the Department for Transport will make of the direction that GMITA is heading in with regard to the integration of cycles with the public transport network in Greater Manchester.

Perhaps we could start by having the vision and committment to follow our European sister cities and design a truly integrated transport system. Perhaps then the "Integrated" in GMITA can then be spoken without any irony.

A list of councillors who are members of the Policy and Resources Commitee is available here

(see below)
Labour
1 Councillor Andrew Fender (Manchester) Email: cllr.a.fender@manchester.gov.uk
2 Councillor David Jones (Oldham) Email: david.r.jones@oldham.gov.uk
3 Councillor Alan Godson (Rochdale) Email: alan.godson@rochdale.gov.uk
4 Councillor Roger Jones (Salford) Email: councillor.jones@salford.gov.uk

5 Councillor Barry Warner (Salford) Email: Councillor.Warner@salford.gov.uk
6 Councillor Alan Whitehead (Tameside) Email c/o: victoria.fletcher@tameside.gov.uk
7 Councillor Roland Griffin (Trafford) Email: roland.griffin@trafford.gov.uk
8 Councillor Patricia Holland (Wigan) Email: P.Holland@wigan.gov.uk
9 Councillor Eunice Smethurst (Wigan) Email: E.Smethurst@wigan.gov.uk

Liberal Democrats
10 Councillor Richard Knowles (Oldham) Email: cllr.r.d.knowles@oldham.gov.uk
11 Councillor Keith Whitmore (Chair) (Manchester) Email: cllr.k.whitmore@manchester.gov.uk
12 Councillor David Wilkinson (Bolton) Email: david.wilkinson@bolton.gov.uk
13 Councillor Malcolm Bruce: (Rochdale) Email: malcolm.bruce@rochdale.gov.uk
14 Councillor Craig Wright (Stockport) Email: cllr.craig.wright@stockport.gov.uk
15 Councillor David Sandiford (Manchester) email: cllr.d.sandiford@manchester.gov.uk

Conservatives
16 Councillor Ian Macdonald (Salford) Email: councillor.macdonald@salford.gov.uk
17 Councillor Barry Theckston (Bury) Email: b.theckston@bury.gov.uk
18 Councillor Doreen Dickinson (Tameside) Email: doreen.dickinson@tameside.gov.uk
19 Councillor Ian Duckworth (Rochdale) Email: ian.duckworth@rochdale.gov.uk
20 Councillor Brian Rigby (Vice Chair) (Trafford) Email: brian.rigby@trafford.gov.uk

Perhaps you would like to email them ahead of Friday's meeting?

Finally, this blog usually tries to focus on positive suggestions and proposals to improve cycling provision and sustainable transport options in Greater Manchester..... so lets end with some positives.

The proposals outlined by the Capital Projects committee in January 2010 to increase the level of cycling parking and other cycling infrastructure at Metrolink and bus stations is to be welcomed. The meeting agreed:

"That Recommendation 2 (Endorse the decision that the GMPTE should continue to provide investment for cycle facilities on the Metrolink network, rail stations and any future proposals, such as the anticipated Park and Ride facilities, be endorsed) be strengthened to reflect that GMPTE provide increased investment for cycle facilities on the current Metrolink network , rail stations and any future proposals such as the anticipated Park and Ride facilities."

As always, the devil will be in the detail(ed) plans but this increased expenditure on cycle parking is to be welcomed.

We should also welcome, possibly with a great fanfare and drum roll, that at the Policy and Resources committee meeting members will consider, and in all likelihood agree, a report that states:

"3.2 During the meeting on 13th August 2010 it was made apparent that the current policy of allowing the carriage of folding bikes on trams if fully encased is confusing. The terminology `fully encased` is implying to cyclists that the folding cycles must be carried in a hard container.

3.3 In fact the encasement is intended to protect the tram and passengers clothing from soiling and therefore does not need to be a hard enclosure. Most folding cycles are capable of being enclosed in a lightweight bag that folds to pocket size and can be purchased as a specific item from the bike manufacturer (Brompton for example).

3.5 To prevent further confusion it was agreed that the wording of the information posters should be changed to reflect this position. The suggested wording is ‘fully covered’ rather than fully encased." [Item 05 DDA compliance, folding bikes policy, heavy rail experience. Available here]

This is in response to the criticism of the Metrolink policy that stated that even a folded brompton bicycle needed to be "fully encased". Even though a folded Brompton takes up a lot less space than many small prams or even some bags. (See photo).

A point that was demonstrated with a certain amongt of tongue-in-check by those lovely people at Love Your Bike who decided to board the trams with a range of folding items (deckchairs, ironing boards etc) which do not appear to be prohibited compared to an uncased folded Brompton which is. You can watch the video here and read the Guardian and BBC articles.

So.. after all this deliberation and despite trams on the Newcastle Metro and Croydon Tramlink allowing folded bicycles to be carried without the needed to be covered - GMITA will change the policy from "fully encased" to "fully covered". Am wondering whether other passengers will be expected to "fully cover" their shoes or the wheels of prams, buggies or other assorted objects when the outside conditions are wet or muddy!

Book Review : Transport for Suburbia - Beyond the Automobile Age

2010-10-20T11:12:00.000+01:00

At nearly £40, the hardback edition is not cheap which unfortunately could limit its readership. This is a real shame as it deserves to be widely read – particularly by Government ministers and officials with responsibility for transport planning. But this is not to suggest that the book is a lifeless, academic or technical presentation of transport policies.

The book’s simple message is that with high levels of co-ordination, public transport can work even in low density suburban areas.

The book provides both anecdotal and detailed evidence of how the lack of co-ordination introduced by the ‘free-market’ approach to public transport (de-regulation) has resulted in falling passenger numbers and poorer services. In a lively and readable style, Mees illustrates how co-ordinated 'European-style' public transport provides a generalizable model of network planning that has worked in a wide range of places such as rural Switzerland, the Brazilian city of Curitiba and the Canadian cities of Toronto and Vancouver. Mees argues that this model can be adapted to suburban, ex-urban and also rural areas to provide an alternative to the car.

The book also raises issues that some in the transport policy and cycling communities would do well to consider. Mees highlights how “some environmentalists are so certain that cycling is the answer to urban transport problem that they are not interested in hearing about public transport – or in many cases, walking.” The book also highlights how many local authorities cycling policies, because they do not form part of a co-ordinated effort to reduce car use, result in tokenistic cycling policies that are “usually poorly thought through, with a focus on stunts and satisfying the demands of the small, but vocal, group of existing cyclists – whose male, middle-class demographic profile mirrors that of transport planners. So measures that appeal to ‘racing’ cyclists, such as showers at work and high-security storage for expensive bikes, predominate at the expense of practical issues like safe cycle paths and reduced speed limits. Where bicycle routes are provided, this is often at the expense of pedestrians, rather than motorists.” (p190). Sound familiar?

Transport for Suburbia – Beyond the Automobile Age, Paul Mees, Earthscan, 2010. Available from good bookshops and Amazon.

Bike Maintenance - learning to D.I.Y

2010-10-17T20:02:00.006+01:00

The leaves are falling, its getting colder and the hours of darkness are increasing... so perhaps now is a good time to give your bicycle that TLC you have been promising it for ages... and if your bicycle maintenance skills are not all they could be then there are a number of bike maintenance training courses on offer.

Have listed several courses below - ranging from free to quite expensive. Have not done any of these courses so cannot comment on the quality (or otherwise) and value for money. If your organisation offers cycle maintenance and I have missed you off then please leave a comment.

Suggest you contact the organisation concerned and ask for more details to make sure the training matches your budget and skill level.

In alphabetical order

BikeRight!

Unit 8, 877 Ashton Old Road, Manchester, M11 2NA
Tel: 0161 230 7007

Email: info@bikeright.co.uk

Certified maintenance courses for beginners and the more experienced

"We currently run one day and two day courses which build up your maintenance skills step by step. By working with us you will soon develop the skills needed to keep your bike road-worthy and safe. Courses are for a maximum of 8 people so book early to avoid disappointment - dates are limited to availability. We also run bespoke courses for groups and offer maintenance contracts for bike fleet and pool bike owners.

Basic, intermediate and advanced courses
By working with us you will soon develop the skills needed to keep your bike road-worthy and safe. Courses are for a max of 8 people so book early!"

One day overview course – covering the basics
Two day course – the basics and more
Course costs range from £65 to £130.

British Cycling

Stuart Street, Manchester, M11 4DQ

Tel 0161 274 2000end_of_the_skype_highlighting

Learn Bike Maintenance and Repair with the Professionals British Cycling is launching bike maintenance and repair workshops aimed at beginner and intermediate cyclists. Workshops will be delivered by world renowned mechanic Peter ‘Spike’ Taylor. Courses take place at the Manchester Velodrome on Wednesday 27 October 6pm -9.30pm (Beginners); and Thursday 28 October 9.30am – 5.30pm (Intermediate) Stewart Kellett, Director of Recreation and Partnerships, British Cycling said; ‘Manchester is the home of British Cycling as well as thousands of cycle commuters, leisure cyclists and would-be regular cyclists. We know that many would like help to develop their maintenance and repair skills, giving them the confidence to take their cycling further. As the national governing body British Cycling can offer something different. We have the real inside track on maintenance and repair, and a fun, hands-on, expert approach with wide appeal.’

For more info see britishcycling.org.uk/recreation or contact bikemaintenance@britishcycling.org.uk or 0161 274 2049

Course costs range from £65 to £130.

Edinburgh Bicycle Co-operative

7 Wilmslow Road, Rusholme, Manchester, M14 5FT

Tel: 0161 257 3897

"And the easiest way to get hands-on mechanical experience is to spend a Saturday or Sunday at one of our day classes where you will be shown how it's done by one of our mechanics. You will then get to practice your newly-learnt skills on your own bike on a proper workstand using the right tools. Choose between the all-day Intensive Class or the half-day Foundation Course. Beginners welcome to either (though if you have a smattering of mechanical experience you might find the Foundation Course too basic)."

Half-Day and Full-Day Classes

Half-Day Foundation Course in Cycle Maintenance
All-Day Intensive Course in Cycle Maintenance
Intensive Cycle Maintenance Course for Women
All-Day Course in Wheel Building

Course costs range £25 to £49.

FW Evans

201 Deansgate, Manchester, M3 3NW.

Tel: 0161 834 6732 end_of_the_skype_highlighting

Chill Factor, Trafford Way, Trafford Quays, Manchester, M41 7JA

Tel:

Are running FREE bi-monthly sessionson basic cycle maintenance in every store. The staff in the shop have been trained by a Cytech mechanic to demonstrate the best methods of home maintenance and are eager to share these techniques.
The session will cover the following topics:

Punctures/Tube Replacement – some handy tips to make the process stress free!
Brake Set Up – adjustment of your braking system and how to check for wear
Gear Set Up – adjustment of your gear system, including how to ‘index’ your gears
Transmission Cleaning – cleaning of the drive chain and how to check for wear
Q & A – the opportunity to speak directly with one of our trained mechanics

Every attendee will also receive a FREE Fix It Home Cycle Maintenance Guide
For more infromation visit: www.evanscycles.com/servicing/free-bike-maintenance-classes

Pedal Mcr

Website

Birch Community Centre

Workshop 3 (24/10/10; 2pm- 4pm): Bike Basics: Brakes- including types of brakes, changing brake cables
and brake blocks.

Workshop 4 (7/11/10; 2pm- 4pm): Bike Basics: Gears-How gears work + correct use of gears (cycling skills); Basic gear adjustments barrel adjusters +
understanding what limit screws do + no adjustments to limit screws and solving common gear problems such as erratic shifting and chain coming off.

To secure your place at the basic bike maintenance workshops please fill in
your details here:

https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dDZZRHIxT2E2RXFXaU9oQ2l...

All workshops are 2 hours long and cost 5.00 benefits/students etc. and 6.50
for employed people. If you would like to do pay in advance for the 4 weeks
then it will be 18/24- you can pay in advance by paypal to nesthebear_23(at)riseup.net

All tools and components (such as cables etc) are included in the cost of the
course. Drop-in is fine but where possible please let me know if you are coming so
that i can bring enough tools etc. (if we are mega short of components compared to
attendants those that have reserved a spot will take priority)

You can email info(at)pedalmcr.org.uk or text 07866734351 for more info.

Well at least they got the colour right !

2010-10-16T20:24:00.000+01:00

An earlier blog raised the subject of the inappropriate use of a "cyclist dismount" sign on Princess Street in Manchester City Centre.

Unfortunately it would seem that Manchester's highway maintenance contractors are intent on trying to reverse the recent increase in levels of cycling!

This sign was recently spotted on Stretford Road in Hulme (by the newly demolished Arch pub). As was previously mentioned the Department for Transport (DfT) Traffic Advisory Leaflet 15/99 (Cyclists at Road Works) section on "Cyclist dismount and footway cycling" states that:

"Where access is permitted for motor vehicles, "Cyclist Dismount" signs should not be used. The hazards to cyclists at roadworks are rarely great enough to justify this measure. In any case, cyclists are likely to ignore such instructions. The only situation where cyclists should be advised to dismount is where the carriageway is closed off but the footway remains open."

The carriageway on Stretford Road is not closed off - so why are people cycling being asked to dismount? As with any situation when faced with a hazard or obstacle in the road the person cycling simply takes the appropriate action to safely avoid the obstacle and continue on their journey.

But hey, while the use of the sign may be inappropriate - at least these contractors managed to get the colour of the sign right.... as the DfT guidance notes that:

"In such cases a white-on-red temporary sign "CYCLISTS DISMOUNT AND USE FOOTWAY" may be used. Under Regulation 41 of the "Transport Signs Regulations And General Directions 1994" this can be done without special authorisation if the sign is not used for longer than 6 months." (Page 6).

So.... wrong use of signage, right colour and partially correct wording gives them a 1 out of 3 score.

It is not not clear who installed the temporary pedestrian barriers and the "Cyclists Dismount" sign but the only name and logo on the building site fences is Shepherd.

Anyone have any contacts within this company - or any Hulme residents care to raise this issue with their local councillors?

Meanwhile, the Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority (GMITA) has just launched the consultation on the Local Transport Plan (LTP3) which notes that "[C]omparable European cities have much higher levels of cycling than currently found locally and addressing this disparity will enhance Greater Manchester’s reputation as an international destination" and also boldy states that Greater Manchester authorities will ensure "better maintenance in support of road safety, walking and cycling" and will also "ensure that our infrastructure schemes encourage walking and cycling through their design". Perhaps someone should tell the Greater Manchester highway contractors about these priorities.

It would seem that several other local authorities have struggled with working out when (and when not) to use "Cyclist Dismount" signs... but at least the meaning of the Mancunian road signs (incorrect, inappropriate or otherwise) was not "lost in translation" as happened with these Welsh signs!

Trafford finally get on board the bus lane ?

2010-10-13T21:50:00.000+01:00

Well here we are in October 2010 and another consultation on a Local Transport Plan (LTP3) is upon us. A key part of the two previous LTP strategy documents was a focus on work to create a network of quality bus corridors to provide priority routes for public transport bus services across Greater Manchester.

These Quality Bus Corridors (QBCs) are designed to help buses avoid traffic congestion bottlenecks and so help provide a more reliable bus service - they also double up as very wide cycle lanes.

The two photographs are of a bus corridor on Upper Chorlton Road - the north bound carriageway of which falls within Trafford Borough Council's responsibility. Despite the "bus lane" road markings and the blue sign that makes it very clear that the lane is only meant to be used by buses, cycles and taxis between the hours of 7am to 10am and 4pm to 7pm (Monday to Friday) - for the best part of the last three years this "bus lane" has functioned as a 24 hour car park facility.

The reasons for this stretch back to 20th September 2007 when Trafford Council sought authorisation for the Upper Chorlton Road, Old Trafford and Edge Lane, Stretford (Reserved Bus Lane) (Peak Hours) Order and announced that:

"NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Trafford Borough Council proposes to make an Order under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. The effect of the Order will be to prohibit all vehicles other than buses, pedal cycles and taxis from entering, proceeding or waiting in the bus lanes during the stated days and hours:-

RESERVED BUS LANE - PEAK HOURS
Monday – Friday 0700 – 1000 and 1600 - 1900
Upper Chorlton Road, Old Trafford - north side.

This "Reserved Bus Lane Order on Upper Chorlton Road" became operative on 7^thApril 2008 but according to Trafford Council there were no enforceable waiting restrictions within the bus lane.

Unfortunately, Trafford Council never got round to applying for the powers to be able to enforce ‘moving traffic offences’ (ie travelling in a bus lane). In August 2009, Trafford Council stated that the "Council may obtain powers to carry out this type of enforcement in the future, but the cost of doing so would probably not be justified, in view of the relatively short lengths of bus lanes that we currently have within Trafford."

It went on to add that "Enforcement of any parking that takes place within a bus lane, by a Civil Enforcement Officer, has proved difficult using the bus lane traffic regulation Order. The Council is therefore considering a proposal to introduce corresponding waiting restrictions, in addition to the bus lane, that could be enforced by its Civil Enforcement Officers, however, the time span for such a proposal is approximately 6-9 months."

Finally, in September 2010, a report has been sent to the Executive Member for Highways and Transportation which stated that Trafford Council wanted "To seek approval to introduce waiting restrictions along Upper Chorlton Road, Old Trafford." We are seeking confirmation that this request was approved.

So over 3 years after the original Reserved Bus Lane (Peak Orders) Order was submitted, Trafford Council have finally got round to obtaining the necessary powers to stop this "bus lane" from being used as a car parking facility. We can only hope that any necessary enforcement actions are implemented a little more speedily.... but then again if the rumours that Trafford Council are planning to reduce its Highways Department from the current workforce complement of 28 down to 12 staff are accurate - then the wait for any future bus corridor enforcement may have to wait for many more buses to come along...

You have until the 24th December 2010 to submit your suggestions and comments on the Local Transport Plan (LTP3) consultation. Perhaps you might like to comment on bus lanes and parking enforcement..... just a thought !

Any ideas ?

2010-10-13T20:10:00.009+01:00

Location: Road works on Princess Street approaching the junction with Whitworth Street in Manchester City Centre.
Three lanes have been reduced to one - so I can understand the Cycle Lane Closed instruction - what I do not understand is why the instruction for Cyclists to Dismount.

Am I supposed to get off an walk on the pavement? What is wrong with cycling in the traffic lane as I would normally do? Particularly if I was going straight on or turning right.

Would welcome any suggestions or pointers on the traffic regulations or guidance that the contractors / Manchester Highways could consider for this instruction.....

Update 1 (with thanks to Steve from Greater Manchester Cycling Campaign).

The Department for Transport (DfT) Traffic Advisory Leaflet 15/99 (Cyclists at Road Works) section on "Cyclist dismount and footway cycling" states that:

"Where access is permitted for motor vehicles, "Cyclist Dismount" signs should not be used. The hazards to cyclists at roadworks are rarely great enough to justify this measure. In any case, cyclists are likely to ignore such instructions. The only situation where cyclists should be advised to dismount is where the carriageway is closed off but the footway remains open.

In such cases a white-on-red temporary sign "CYCLISTS DISMOUNT AND USE FOOTWAY" may be used. Under Regulation 41 of the "Transport Signs Regulations And General Directions 1994" this can be done without special authorisation if the sign is not used for longer than 6 months." (Page 6).

From this guidance it would appear that, a) the contractors should have allowed cycling through the road works given that vehicles are still allowed, and b) the sign use may be incorrect as it is the wrong colour, i.e. should be white on red.

A query has been sent to Environment on Call (Manchester City Council) seeking clarification. Email: contact@manchester.gov.uk

Update 2 : (14th October) Well at least the sign has been moved...

...onto the pavement. Am wondering if the sign means that I should get off my bicycle whilst in the road!

Ironically the poster (below right) from United Utilities / Enterprise shows the cycle happily travelling along in a line of traffic. Perhaps their marketing people would like to have a little chat to their road engineering people....

Update 3 : Email from Environment on Call - received 15th October

"Thank you for contacting Environment On Call. The details have been logged on our system. An officer will inspect the location within the next 5 working days."

Hmmm - wonder if the roadworks will have been completed before the officer goes inspecting!

Update 4: Message from Manchester Highway Services - 18th October

"Thank you for your recent email regarding signage relating to cyclist at the above location. I will pass on your comments to the traffic management company working on behalf of United Utilities at this location requesting them to remove any signs that are causing a problem and to also discuss the implications for cyclists at these works.
I would suspect that they need to consider the traffic management implications in relation to cyclists safety at this location. I believe in this particular case no guidance would have been issued as the company are working for United Utilities. The Authority would work to National guidelines for works affecting cyclists and in view of this I will as stated above speak to the company concerned regarding the removal of the signage highlighted."

Translation? I will ask the contractors to remove the 'cyclists dismount' sign... well at least I think that is what this means but to misquote George Bush (Junior) I may have misunderstoodificated.

Update 5: Spot the difference! 21st October

So finally.... after seven days the sign has gone. Am assuming it was as a result of MCC Highways requesting that the contractors remove the sign - alternatively it may have been a mildly miffed cyclist deciding to do a little DIY recycling ....perish the thought!

Update 6: 27th October

Oh dear, it would seem that we are back to the drawing board. It would seem that the contractors have gone away, read the DfT guidance as it relates to the required colour schemes (see above) but ignored the substantive part of the guidance... eg the bit that says very clearly...

"Where access is permitted for motor vehicles, "Cyclist Dismount" signs should not be used. The hazards to cyclists at roadworks are rarely great enough to justify this measure. In any case, cyclists are likely to ignore such instructions. The only situation where cyclists should be advised to dismount is where the carriageway is closed off but the footway remains open. "

So, need to have a think about what to do next. Ideas and suggestions most welcome - please leave a comment on the blog.

Thanks.

A Brief Encounter (bike hire or take it with you)

2010-09-06T13:10:00.000+01:00

The Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC), has been researching the potential for cycle hire at UK rail stations.

This has involved gathering case study evidence and interviewing stakeholders and ATOC has produced a short web survey to get the views of as many cyclists and rail passengers as possible.

You can link to the survey here.

Are we on the pavement to nowhere ? (with apologies to Talking Heads)

2010-08-23T06:48:00.004+01:00

Several years ago the Warrington Cycle Campaign became (in)famous for producing the Crap Cycle lanes book (subtitled 50 worst cycle lanes in Britain).

Well, if the growing number of complaints about the cycle lane developments on Manchester Road in Chorlton are anything to go by there may soon be a "Crap Cycle Lanes on Pavements" edition being produced.

A recent article in the South Manchester Reporter highlighted concerns from local people in Chorlton about the sudden appearance of white paint cycle markings on a narrow stretch of pavement alongside the Unicorn store on Manchester Road.

In fact, this "shared use" section of National Cycle Route 55 has been in the planning stage for quite a while and was sent out for consultation by Manchester City Council's Engineering Services in late 2008 / early 2009. At the time the consultation document stated that "It is anticipated that the proposed scheme will be implemented in the Spring of 2009." Clearly the timescale slipped a little!

The blue circle signs on Kensington Road indicate that this shared use route is considered as an "unsegregated shared facility which is a cycle track with a right of way on foot".

The consultation document also stated that the purpose of this section of Off Highway Shared Use Area on NCR 55 was "To provide a safe crossing point for the route over Manchester Road, it is proposed to introduce an unsegregated shared use area from Albany Road in the south to allow access to the existing controlled crossing outside Chorlton Leisure centre, demarked through the use of shared use signage and corduroy paving to assist those pedestrians with visual impairments."

The South Manchester Reporter article quoted Pele Bhamber, Manchester City Council’s head of highways services as saying that "The preferred option was to use the pavement and the businesses forecourt area as a shared space for pedestrians and cyclists, rather than the removal of the limited parking bays to the front of the shops."

Which seems to be a little bit at odds with the text in the consultation document that stated: "To allow for two-way cycle access to the controlled crossing on the west side of Manchester Road, it is proposed that the limited waiting bay outside 109 Manchester Road be removed and built up to footway level to provide additional width for shared use operation and provide
access to the controlled crossing from Kensington Road in the west." See the consultation map for more details.

Whilst the physical engineering work will have been done by Manchester's Highways Services
department - the national cycle route design and co-ordination is undertaken by the national charity, Sustrans. Who produce an "Information Sheet on Shared Use Routes" which acknowledges concerns about the potential for conflict between different user groups accessing shared space.

"There is concern in some quarters that poorly designed shared use facilities could lead to an increase in illegal pavement cycling. The fear is that if there is little distinction between a poorly designed shared use route and an ordinary pavement, cyclists may gain the impression that it is acceptable to ride on pavements."

The Sustrans Information Sheet also provides the following guidance with regard to the width of shared use facilities: "On well used unsegregated shared use paths we recommend a minimum of 3m width. Where paths are lightly used and there is a clear verge on both sides a minimum width of 2m may be sufficient."

It is difficult to see how this section of shared use pavement meets the requirements of Sustrans
own design guidance.

In the report 'Support for cycling as mode of transport', presented to the Manchester City Council - Communities and Neighbourhoods Overview and Scrutiny Committee in November 2009, it was stated that: "When considering the safe shared or segregated use of off-road facilities for
pedestrians and cyclists, the City Council uses guidance laid out in the Department
for Transport, Local Transport Note 02/08 - Cycle Infrastructure Design." It was also stated that the overall number of reported pedestrian vs cyclist casualty figures for the three-year period (01/11/04 to 31/10/08) was thirteen. These included:

Six involving pedestrians walking into the carriageway in front of cycles;

Six involving cyclists illegally riding on the footway colliding with pedestrians;

One cyclist colliding with a pedestrian stood in the off-road segregated cycle track on Oxford Road at the junction with Grafton Street in 2005.

Judging by the volume of complaints regarding cycling on pavements in the letters and comments pages of local Manchester media - an obvious problem with these figures is that most people do not appear to formally report the many "near misses" that occur on shared use areas in Manchester. It will be interesting to see what increase (if any) in casualty figures occurs for this shared use route.

But back to the Department for Transport Local Transport Note 02/08 or "Cycle Infrastructure Design" guide. This states that "In general, offroad cycle routes in urban areas tend to be the least desired option, and it is usually better to cater for urban cyclists onroad if this is practicable. Offroad routes are often created by converting existing footways/footpaths and, if such routes are not carefully designed, pedestrians may view them as a reduction in quality of provision." It also contains an interesting Hierarchy of Provision (below) that advises which options local authorities should consider when designing cycling infrastructure.

It is interesting to note that "Conversion of footways/footpaths to shared use for pedestrians and cyclists" comes in the "Consider last" category.

The Cycle Infrastructure Design guide draws considerably on the earlier Local Transport Note 2/86 Shared Use by Cyclists and Pedestrians report published in 1986. This states that:

"Unsegregated facilities: No kind of segregation is likely to be effective if some users are likely to move regularly across the segregating line. For segregation by white line, colour contrast, or surface texture, the likelihood of ineffective operation is present for any facility whose width is less than those suggested in Table 2 (above). Consequently, if road safety gains merit conversion of such a narrow foot way or footpath this should normally be to unsegregated use. (6.19)"

and that: "Unsegregated shared facilities have been provided, and have operated safely, down to 2.0 metres with considerable - some 100 to 200 per hour - use by pedestrians and cyclists. Cyclists have also safely passed pedestrians, including those with prams and wheelchairs, on even narrower unsegregated shared facilities down to 1.5 metres wide where there have been grass verges. (6.21)"

Well so much for the national guidance - how does this match up with the cycle infrastructure that has been delivered on the ground in Chorlton?

After crossing Manchester Road at the pedestrian crossing, the National Cycle Route 55 continues along the Manchester Road pavement until turning right onto the pavement of Kensington Road.

This section of pavement may nominally meet the 2m metre width requirement - but without adequate (any !) enforcement to prevent pavement parking and combined with wheelie bins on the pavement - in reality this route will be much narrow making the shared use of this space even more difficult.

Many people regularly cycle on the pavement because they do not feel safe cycling on the roads due to the speed & volume of traffic as well as the aggressive driving behaviour of some road users. Clearly, there is a real need to provide safer routes for people who are not confident or experienced enough to cycle on the road network. High quality / well designed shared use facilities can help meet this need.

But according to the national Cycle Infrastructure Design guide "Conversion of footways/footpaths to shared use for pedestrians and cyclists" is supposed to be the last option considered - after "Traffic volume reduction", "Traffic speed reduction", "Junction treatment, hazard site treatment, traffic management", "Reallocation of carriageway space" and "Cycle tracks away from roads" options have been explored.

The consultation documents do not appear to have offered any other options from the "Hierarchy of Provision" and there are real concerns that poorly designed "shared use" schemes are a typical English "lowest cost" approach to cycle infrastructure. Instead of re-engineering the roadspace to create high-quality European-style segregated cycle routes - we settle for painting "white paint" cycle designs on pavements that are too narrow and will (almost by design) create conflicts between pedestrians, elderly / disabled people and cyclists.

If you want to like to take this issue up with the Council then you can of course contact your local councillor or communicate with: Enviroment On Call
By telephone: 0161 954 9000
Email: contact@manchester.gov.uk

Cycling with style - Absolutely (Bike) Fabulous!

2010-08-21T11:31:00.001+01:00

Cycle wear, cycle everywhere

Following the recent publication of a Mintel market research report "Bicycles - UK" (available for the grand sum of £1500!) there have been a spate of articles in the mainstream and cycling media about the sightings of the new social marketing category known as MAMILs or Middle-Age Men in Lycra as Mintel has branded them.

According to Mintel, their research shows that the growth in bicycle sales is being driven (!) by 35- to 45-year-old middle aged family men, who instead of buying a sports car are now buying high-end bikes.

And presumably cycling around at weekends in tight-fighting, figure hugging lycra - which is not always a pretty sight. Indeed there were probably a fair few MAMILs cycling around the (nearly) closed Mancunian roads during the recent Skyride in Manchester on Sunday 1st August.

Whilst any increase in cycling levels is to be welcomed, if we want to normalise cycling as a mode of transport activity that anyone can (and does) choose then - as Manchester's Headstretcher blog has highlighted - "The MAMILs have a job to do - ditch the Lycra!"

Creating the perception that cycling is for people who can afford £2000+ bikes and dress like olympic swimmers (but with go-slow helmets) does little to encourage people to see cycling to work or to the shops as a perfectly normal thing to do.

To help highlight how simple it is to cycle with (everyday) style those lovely people at Love Your Bike organised the Bike Fabulous event in the Manchester Arndale on Saturday 26th June. The event provided a showcase of fashionable and functional clothing, accessories and products designed for cycling in style and high street brands combined for versatile looks.

The event combined catwalk shows, bicycle maintenance demonstrations, pedal powered smoothie makers, an oppotrunity for people to "pimp" a hi-viz vest, bike displays, and a pedal powered PA and music system. Photographs and a video of the day are available on the Bike Fabulous websiteor US coverage in Momentum magazine.

Meanwhile, if you are looking for some inspiration on cycling in style then try the Sartorialist blog pages.

Spot the Difference !

2010-08-20T17:25:00.000+01:00

The yellow sign (photo on the left) has a very simple message to all road users - "Please Give Cyclists Room". Simple and too the point. A number of these signs were put up in locations across Greater Manchester by two cycle activists - who had become fed up waiting for local authorities to follow up on suggestions made to various local council cycle forums. So several years ago they got on their bikes and installed these lovely DIY signs. Despite this unorthodox approach it would seem that local authorities liked, or at least tolerated, the signs because many of them are still up today.

Fast forward several years to 2010 and the lovely reflective metal sign (below) have been produced by Trafford Council and installed at a number of locations across the Borough.

Same message but a "properly" designed and officially sanctioned medium. So perhaps an indication that Marshall McLuhan was right and indeed "the medium is the message" !.

We look forward to the other Greater Manchester local authorities following Trafford's example and sending this clear message to all road users.