Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Leeds bike path barriers too narrow for bikes to use

Several of Leeds' bike routes, including parts of the National Cycle Network have A frames barriers that are too narrow for many bikes' handlebars to get through...

Cycle trails around Leeds are being blocked by barriers too narrow to get a bike through, according to those who travel by bike in the area.

Several cycle routes – including parts of the National Cycle Route (NCN) – were fitted with “A-frames” from 2005, presumably to prevent motorised traffic accessing greenways, but these are so narrow many standard bicycle handlebars cannot fit through.

Ollie Clark, who cycles around Leeds, posted photos on Twitter of him unsuccessfully trying to get through one A-frame with his young daughter on the pannier rack. Sustrans, the charity that manages the NCN, says they will consult with Leeds City Council on the removal of the barriers, after road.cc highlighted the issue.

Chicanes on bike lanes - why are we still building this rubbish? ask frustrated campaigners

Clark tweeted a picture of one of the barriers to a cycle path in Black Moor, near Headingly, to Leeds City Council saying: “How are you supposed to get a bike onto this cycle path? Should I take an angle grinder?”

Clark told road.cc: "The blocked cycle path means I have to use quite a busy, narrow road when I take my daughter to ballet every Saturday. I've had quite a few 'close passes'."

The Twitter account, Leeds Council Help, told Clark the A-frames were the responsibility of the local Highways department, however, and pointed him to an online form to lodge a complaint.

Leeds-Bradford cycle superhighway just 75cm wide in places

A Spokesperson for Sustrans in the North of England told road.cc a better solution to prevent motorised traffic using cycle routes would be bollards “to ensure equal and inclusive access”, referring to the difficulty adapted bicycles may have getting through the barriers.

The spokesperson said: “We recognise and support Leeds CC's efforts to get more people out on bikes through their CityConnect development and vision.

“There are obvious issues with the construction of many 'A-frame' style barriers, and this is another example of such.”

“We appreciate the difficulty of stopping motorising traffic access to NCN and other areas, however this particular example can be easily bypassed by motorised traffic anyway slightly further along the road anyway."

“Therefore we would recommend removing this barrier and we will look to take this issue up with Leeds CC.”

The same A-frames are used elsewhere in Leeds, according to local cyclists, including a cycle route in Buck Stone road, on the National Cycle Network. One cyclist said you can get through them on a road bike, but risk grazing your knuckles as you do.

Maff Mace, called the A-frames “stupid”. He tweeted: “There’s one at the new Kirkstall Forge train station that goes to the national cycle way.”

Graham Lake said: “The greenway between Yeadon and Guiseley has these, ridiculous design.”

If you’re thinking Leeds and narrow cycle infrastructure sounds familiar, you may be remembering the 75cm wide “cycle superhighway”, built by transport partnership CityConnect, with cycle city ambition fund money from central Government.

 

Add new comment

33 comments

Avatar
ollieclark | 7 years ago
1 like

Council's response:

"Thanks Ollie - we had a response from a colleague in the Parks team last night, they've given the reasons for the A frames which have been in place since 2008 as: to prevent motorcycles from using the site in addition to slowing cyclists down before they join the carriageway, and stated that cyclists can get through them easily by dismounting."

Which as you can see from my picture is not true. They're too narrow for handlebars to go through and I can't lift my bike with a toddler on the back.

Cycle in Leeds (as long as you can lift a bike and don't have a child).

Ah well, back to using the roads and ignoring cycle infrastruscture.

Avatar
severs1966 | 7 years ago
0 likes

It's a perfectly understandable piece of "cycle infrastructure" when you remember that Leeds Highways dept detests bicycles, and that Leeds Council is actually PROUD of being colossally pro-motorist at the expense of everyone else.

Avatar
nigel_s | 7 years ago
2 likes

This little journal written last year by Katie Shoosmith show how anti cycling UK authorities are, in spite of weasel words to the contrary. My personal recommendation is to take your cycle tours to more civilised, deserving and welcoming parts of the world and spend your time and money there.

http://bromptonontour.weebly.com/blog/katies-bogus-adventure-in-wales

Avatar
TallBoy | 7 years ago
0 likes

There were quite a lot of this type of gate on the Leeds to Liverpool canal towpath between Shipley and Leeds, although a number were removed a couple of years ago, seemingly to improve cycle access.

However, since City Connect 1 resurfacing of the towpath completed earlier this year some of those remaining have been replaced with an even narrower version with vertical 'plates' inside the A-frame.

I contacted the Canal & River Trust when the first of these was installed (see tweet attached) but no one was interested despite repeated contact by me on both Twitter and the telephone. The advice was to 'get off the bike and turn the bars sideways'. I was provided with the plans which showed the gate width to be adjustable at the time of installation. I was told the engineers had set the new gates at the same width as the previous ones, but that was nonsense as my mountain bike would just clear the original-style A-frame gates but not the new-style ones. I am still waiting for the promised call back from CRT North West Admin Team, who were going to speak with the contractors.

Disillusioned with the lack of interest and the general depiction of cyclists on the towpath as speeding lunatics wreaking havoc on innocent pedestrians, dog walkers and runners I have cancelled my direct debit as a 'friend' of the CRT.

My only hope is that this report might make someone see sense. 

Avatar
Ramz | 7 years ago
0 likes

I almost fell off my chair when I read that someone from Sustrans suggested that bollards should have been used instead. We see this crappy design used all over the country on Sustrans' routes. They don't seem particularly fussy, so why suggest something else in this case?

Avatar
Man of Lard | 7 years ago
1 like

NCN 5 & 568 around Chester (both shared use, off road paths) suffer from these non-DDA compliant devices. As others have noted no discernible impact on the local yobs on motor bikes, but plenty of impact on those people with trailers, wheelchairs and even mountain bikes who are excluded... Sustrans blame the council,  the council say "la la la I'm not listening because you're not a local resident for local people" (they said the same to someone both resident and working for the council so that's obviously a stock reply)

Quote:

Twitter account, Leeds Council Help, told Clark the A-frames were the responsibility of the local Highways department, however, and pointed him to an online form to lodge a complaint

 

Is that not Leeds City Council (as the highway authority, as defined in law) then? Or is Leeds Council Help nothing to do with Leeds City Council?

Avatar
tritecommentbot | 7 years ago
1 like

Time to draw up national standards on what cycle paths need to be. Widths, accessibility, access, surface quality etc.

 

 

Avatar
crazy-legs replied to tritecommentbot | 7 years ago
1 like
unconstituted wrote:

Time to draw up national standards on what cycle paths need to be. Widths, accessibility, access, surface quality etc.

+1.

That's what annoys me about the oft-repeated mantra of spending [insert sum of money] per head on cycling. While there are no national standards to work to, you could spend £1000 per person and a council could still get away with building random shit like this that ends at junctions and has barriers all over it.

Put in some proper standards, some actual approved designs to work to (as pretty much every other building project has to) and then you could actually achieve something, even with just £10 per person spending.

On the subject of the barriers though, the Fallowfield Loop route in Manchester ran a pilot project over summer to actually remove a lot of the barriers. There have been no issues, the barriers are now permanently removed and from my own anecdotal evidence, there are now more cyclists using the route and people on cargo bikes, recumbents, riders towing kiddie trailers etc can now get through. Amazing, who'd have thought it - make a facility fit for purpose and people use it in safety!

And because there are more cyclists, especially slower ones, using the path, chavs on motos don't use it as they can't razz down it anymore. It's almost like someone has thought about this but then I look at the barriers put in on what is supposed to be the Manchester equivalent of a Cycle Superhighway but is actually some lightly graveled canal topwath and realise that the council are still an incompetent bunch of clueless morons.

Avatar
keithb replied to tritecommentbot | 7 years ago
0 likes
unconstituted wrote:

Time to draw up national standards on what cycle paths need to be. Widths, accessibility, access, surface quality etc.

 

 

 

DfT guidance LTN_02_08 basically covers all this, and is actually fairly good (though not perfect).  given it's been around isnce 2008 there's not really any excuse for the installation of sub-standard facilities.  I've taken to sending FOI requests to local authorities asking for justification for not following the guidance.  one assumes they have read, understood, and assessed why they cannot meet teh guidance yet still have installed a sub-standard facility...  Not had a satisfactory answer yet.

 

 

Avatar
tonylen | 7 years ago
6 likes

But the problem isnt Sustrans or the Council or whoever put these in-its the fact we are a fucked up anti social society where good manners and respect arent enough to stop twats on mopeds tazzing down these paths so the majority have to tolerate this nonsense

But..I wonder what would happen if ALL of these ridiculous restrictions were removed-would the paths be over run with motorized traffic? Or would use by their intended audience increase?And in so doing deter the anti social element? 

Isnt it worth a try?

Avatar
Yorkshire wallet | 7 years ago
2 likes

My biggest annoyance with these paths is they end up being used as dog toilets. 

Avatar
Edgeley | 7 years ago
3 likes

"To the person blaming Sustrans: if you read the article, they didn't put these barriers in, and they say they are against them"

 

Then Sustrans should camapign actively for decent routes, threaten to delist bad bits of NCNs, and generally stop acting all grateful when substandard facilities are put in by local authorities.

I am a bike campaigner in Oxford, and when we complain about rubbish proposed by Oxfordshire CC, we frequently find that Sustrans have also been consulted and said it is ok - so our feckless local authority can tick off the "cyclist approved" box .   It doesn't help one bit.

Avatar
WillRod | 7 years ago
0 likes

They put some a-frames up near me on a new cycle path, but after two weeks, the motorbikers came along with a ratchet strap and used that to bend them. It was good though, as then my brother could get his tandem through.

The council removed them after another few months but I haven't seen any motorbikes down there since. There is now just a 1m gap between a pole and a metal gate, but there isn't much room for a trike or trailer.

Avatar
bikebot | 7 years ago
2 likes

Funnily enough, Sustrans own guidance is quite interesting on this.

Quote:

5.2.4 Adjustable and/or removable barriers can be provided in order to assess in practice the implications of access control. These could be installed initially at a restrictive setting, which could then be relaxed until the desired reduction in misuse is achieved. Examples of this could include adjustable ‘A’ type barriers, which could be installed initially with a small clearance between the squeeze plates, which would then be increased over time, (see photo). Through all the considerations it is imperative to bear the statement in 5.3.5 in mind regarding what constitutes an obstruction. 

My emphasis above, photo used is actually from Leeds.

Quote:

5.3.5 It is important to re-iterate that, regardless of the outcome of consultations, where an access control measure has the effect of preventing the passage of legitimate users of the path where they have a right-of-way or access, the proposed access control may be in danger of constituting an unlawful obstruction. Legal advice may need to be sought to clarify this on a case-by-case basis.

5.3.6 Therefore the design of the access control must comply with the Equality Act 2010 and ensure that no users with a disability are excluded due to a physical restriction. These design parameters are considered in Section 6. 

That's Sustran's own emphasis above, suggesting an obstruction of this type is probably illegal. A little more reading is in order, link below for the curious.

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_content_type/access_...

Avatar
Gozzy | 7 years ago
1 like

Nice twitter quote from the Alternative Dept for Transport:

"If I ever need to feel good about Berlin's cycling conditions I just go on the Leeds cycling Facebook page. That lot really do have it rough."

Avatar
HarrogateSpa | 7 years ago
0 likes

To the person blaming Sustrans: if you read the article, they didn't put these barriers in, and they say they are against them.

I know what you mean about Sustrans routes, some are good, and some or not. I do think they've got the message on certain points - for example, their default approach is to use a tarmac surface these days.

In the case, it seems from the article that they are not to blame, so it's unfair to do so.

Avatar
VeloPeo replied to HarrogateSpa | 7 years ago
0 likes
HarrogateSpa wrote:

To the person blaming Sustrans: if you read the article, they didn't put these barriers in, and they say they are against them.

I know what you mean about Sustrans routes, some are good, and some or not. I do think they've got the message on certain points - for example, their default approach is to use a tarmac surface these days.

In the case, it seems from the article that they are not to blame, so it's unfair to do so.

From conversations with various council officials, they're absolutely to blame for the ones local to me in South Wales.

They make it up as they go along

Avatar
balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
1 like

As a MTBr I'm quite used to seeing these. Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem.

The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go.

I can see them being annoying tho if you are doing any distance

Avatar
patto583 replied to balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
3 likes
balmybaldwin wrote:

As a MTBr I'm quite used to seeing these. Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem. The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go. I can see them being annoying tho if you are doing any distance

 

Yeah, I'll just pop my fully loaded touring bike onto it's back wheel. I don't have a problem getting through them on my road bike or MTB, but that's not the only set up people use on these routes.

Avatar
VeloPeo replied to balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
2 likes
balmybaldwin wrote:

Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem.

They don't

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
3 likes
balmybaldwin wrote:

As a MTBr I'm quite used to seeing these. Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem. The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go. I can see them being annoying tho if you are doing any distance

I don't have any difficulty getting bikes through them either, but you have to realise that there's other cyclists that might be less strong/fit or have mobility issues. How is a person with leg mobility issues going to get an arm driven bike through one of those? Recumbent bikes and tandems could be very difficult even if you are fit and strong.

Avatar
dottigirl replied to hawkinspeter | 7 years ago
10 likes
balmybaldwin wrote:

As a MTBr I'm quite used to seeing these. Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem. The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go. I can see them being annoying tho if you are doing any distance

Are you nuts? Or just selfish?

Any bike with full mudguards can't be 'popped onto its back wheel'. Some smaller road bikes wouldn't get through. Some of the ones mentioned on the Taff in SW barely fitted my 38cm drop bars BUT THE LOCAL 'HOODLUMS' STILL GET THROUGH. You can tell this as they're scratched and dented to shit. Oh, and it's a bit unpleasant if you catch any part of your body on them.

 

I have mobility problems, and having to get on and off my bike is not easy. Having to dismount and lift it? Nigh on impossible.

They're excluding many including the most vulnerable, and still not preventing the problem. Pisses me right off.

 

Avatar
JonD replied to hawkinspeter | 7 years ago
0 likes
hawkinspeter wrote:

Recumbent bikes and tandems could be very difficult even if you are fit and strong.

 

Indeed.

My 'bent's about 18kg, which isn't unusual for a recumbent. It's not just the weight but a very awkward thing to shoulder press (though I can) - it's a multiple person job for many people, even for those without injuries or the sort of issues that lead some to use a recumbent. Trikes (recumbent or otherwise) even more so.

Even if you could get a 'bent on its back wheel it's bloody awkward, but a) you'd scrape the mudguard and b) the seat would prevent it passing through.

Avatar
brooksby replied to balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
3 likes
balmybaldwin wrote:

The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go.

Not so easy with a pair of panniers or a child seat, though?

Avatar
A2thaJ replied to balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
0 likes
balmybaldwin wrote:

As a MTBr I'm quite used to seeing these. Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem. The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go. I can see them being annoying tho if you are doing any distance

 

Are these at difference widths accross the country? the ones i've seen are ok as they are tall so narrow high up, a bike gets through low easy. Yes, you have to stop, but unfortunately Britain is full of chavs so we need these things to protect public pathways.

Avatar
waldner71 replied to A2thaJ | 7 years ago
0 likes
A2thaJ wrote:
balmybaldwin wrote:

As a MTBr I'm quite used to seeing these. Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem. The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go. I can see them being annoying tho if you are doing any distance

 

Are these at difference widths accross the country? the ones i've seen are ok as they are tall so narrow high up, a bike gets through low easy. Yes, you have to stop, but unfortunately Britain is full of chavs so we need these things to protect public pathways.

 

Probably. I live close to the location featured, it's Alwoodley in Leeds, the path beyond the barrier leads to the large and popular Alwoodley park/playground. I've used the path for years and can get through with 680mm wide mtb bars as well as my hybrid, pushchairs with kids go through as well. I've also been through with my son in a Co-Pilot Taxi seat carrier behind.  You do need to slow down  and turn the handle bars to get through but I think it should stay as imo it does prevent  motorbikes getting through and stops them speeding down the road before the barrier and going straight through. This year particularly has been the worst I can remember for c*nts on motorbikes speeding nearby and taking any shortcut available to them. Coming from the path side (top of picture) there is a road to the right as well  just after the barrier so would need to slow down anyway before going on.

Avatar
A2thaJ replied to balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
0 likes

Add to the national standard that the pathway takes priority over the road at the junctions it crosses every 10 yards.. thats what makes them pointless for me.  At the moment, the best bike infrastructure in the UK is a bus lane IMHO

Avatar
ollieclark replied to balmybaldwin | 7 years ago
0 likes
balmybaldwin wrote:

As a MTBr I'm quite used to seeing these. Yes they aren't great but if they keep kids with mopeds out then they aren't a problem. The are easy to get through - get off, pop the bike onto its back wheel, walk through and away you go. I can see them being annoying tho if you are doing any distance

Have you tried "popping your bike onto its back wheel" with a child in a child seat on the back?

Avatar
Al__S | 7 years ago
1 like

there is no barrier that can allow all bikes and trikes but exclude motorbikes/mopeds. At all. As trikes, larger bikes with wide handlebars can be mobility aids- not to mention mobility scooters and wheelchairs- these barriers are clear disability discrimination. That top example has no obvious provision that would allow wheelchairs or indeed prams and buggies through

Avatar
wycombewheeler | 7 years ago
4 likes

Build cycle infrastructure - if it's crap and no one uses it cite no demand as a reason not to make more. If you accidentally build good infrastructure then prevent access so you can claim jo demand and not build more.

Frees up council money for better parking in the town centre which will bring in revenue for years as more people are forced to drive and consequently make the roads worse scaring the remaining cyclists off the roads.

What's worse is that cycle funding was probably used for these a frames.

Although this level of scheming is probably beyond the council so probably just incompetence.

Pages

Latest Comments