Thursday, 19 May 2011

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

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...





Monday, 16 May 2011

Update: Step away from the Trans-Pennine Trail !


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....

Tuesday, 10 May 2011

"Cycle to Chernobyl" - 25 hour cycle-athon

‘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.

Friday, 1 April 2011

Combining cycling and public transport....

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.

Tuesday, 29 March 2011

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

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.

Wednesday, 23 March 2011

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

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 ....

Sunday, 13 March 2011

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

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