Agenda item

The City Transport Director submits a report to provide members of the commission with details on the processes to create a cycle track, and the usage of demarcation signage/lines/material and provide members of the commission with specific detail about the usage of concrete blocks as a protection measure for cycle tracks.

The City Transport Director submitted a report to provide members of the

commission with details on the processes to create a cycle track, and the

usage of demarcation signage/lines/material and provide members of the

commission with specific detail about the usage of concrete blocks as a

protection measure for cycle tracks.

A presentation was given using the slides as attached with the agenda.  Other key points included:

• On fully separated cycle tracks, delineation blocks had been installed so that visually impaired pavement-users were aware of them.
• Concrete blocks allowed for protection.  The purpose of blocks and height-difference was to protect users.
• At a national and local level, many people had reported that they did not cycle due to concerns around the dangers posed by motor traffic.  Division of cycle-tracks allowed people to cycle safely.
• Demarcation of cycle lanes/tracks also protected pedestrians form cyclists.
• The features on Aylestone Road were aimed to balance the costs involved as there were rules around how grants were used.  Additionally, it had been necessary to retain the width of the road and to avoid impact on road traffic.
• A new crossing facility was being designed on Aylestone Road.
• Installation of cycle tracks/lanes did not require a Traffic Regulation Order unless they were contra-flow.

In discussions with Members, the following was noted:

• In response to queries about the suitability of concrete blocks and whether similar cycle tracks could be installed in other areas, such as Hinckley Road, it was explained that it was important that designs were suitable for the environments.  It had been found that where designs had been forced in other areas of the country, it had not worked.  The Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan was being developed, and infrastructure and demand was being assessed and identified.  A majority of those engaged with had expressed preferences for cycle tracks as they wanted the space.  It was noted that whilst Hinckley Road was wide for most of its length, it did contain narrow areas and junctions, and it would be important to ensure that the road’s capacity was not restricted.  It was necessary to see how a system could fit and how it could be realised where there were conflicting priorities.
• With regard to concerns raised about cyclists not using cycle tracks, it was noted that cyclists had been engaged with on this as part of a consultation that would be brought back in the new year.  It was suggested that some cyclists did not use the tracks as they needed to get somewhere that the track did not support (for instance, needing to turn right when a track did not allow).  Additionally, there were safety concerns where tracks ran across driveways where there was poor visibility due to trees, and cyclists were concerned about cars backing out. 
• It was important to understand that not all cyclists were of the same ability level and not all cycled with the same purpose.
• It was crucial to understand that the more extensive the network, the more people would cycle, which would mean fewer cars on the road.  This had been supported by evidence nationally and internationally.
• In response to points made about the need to be pragmatic about what could and could not be done, and where adding cycle lanes/tracks would add value and the need for a mature model, it was noted that longer term-plans were being made and work would be proposed on this, but they would be dependent on grants as they were awarded for specific purposes.
• Issues with the cycle track on Beaumont Leys Lane could be discussed outside the meeting.
• It was necessary to look at issues on a network level.
• Concerns were raised regarding concrete blocks obstructing turning motorists.  This would be considered by officers.
• Legal advice would be sought on the requirements for consultation on cycle lane/track instalment under government legislation.
• It was noted that a footpath could not be converted to a cycle track/lane without creating a public bridleway.
• With regard to concerns raised about the sudden raise in kerbs on Aylestone Road, it was explained that the intention was that they were unidirectional, so this should avoid issues with oncoming cyclists. It was also explained that there was a slight slant on the cyclist side to give some protection.  They could be examined for pedal impact and other signs that they had been a hazard.

AGREED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account.