Councils have secured £4.6m of funding to create a cycle route linking Huddersfield, Brighouse and Halifax. The money will be used to upgrade a number of canal towpaths to make them fit for cycling with work to be carried out between spring 2016 and spring 2018.
The Huddersfield Daily Examiner reports that Calderdale Council will be managing the project which has come about thanks to Cycle City Ambition funding awarded to the Leeds City Region by the Department for Transport.
Councillor Barry Collins, Calderdale cabinet member for regeneration and economic development, said:
“By linking into existing facilities the proposals will create a safe, high quality cycle route between Halifax, Brighouse and Huddersfield. Details of the proposed works on the individual lengths are still being developed. Improvement works will be phased and are planned to take place between spring 2016 and spring 2018.”
Sections identified include:
- A stretch of the Huddersfield Narrow Canal between the town centre and Milnsbridge
- An extension of the path along the Calder and Hebble Navigation at Cooper Bridge, linking it with Brighouse
- The Rochdale Canal between Todmorden and Sowerby Bridge
- The Leeds Liverpool Canal in the Steeton and Silsden areas
One issue that has sometimes arisen regarding upgraded towpaths has been the speed of some cyclists.
Last month, a canal towpath in Bath which has also been earmarked for improvements via Cycle City Ambition funding saw posters put up along it expressing concern about this. The posters featured a photo of the bloodied face of a woman who had been knocked over by a cyclist on a Wigan towpath earlier in the year.
Elsewhere, following a recent incident involving a cyclist and a dog walker, there were suggestions that cyclists are riding more quickly since resurfacing work was completed on the Basingstoke Canal.
In 2013, Sustrans told cyclists not to race on shared use paths, asking riders to slow down or even keep off them. The organisation also called for apps like Strava to highlight routes that were inappropriate for fast cycling.
21 thoughts on “£4.6m plans to upgrade West Yorkshire canal towpaths to create cycle route”
I hope that Calderdale
I hope that Calderdale council will manage the project well, and keep the Canal & River Trust well away from it. Whenever the CRT get involved, there are big delays, and they put down a rubbish gravel surface.
People do need to be careful on shared use paths. When riding a bike, you have to slow down and be considerate when passing people on foot; and walking, you have to try not to block the path, and keep any dog under control.
I’m not sure there’s much that can be done about occasional problems resulting from a lack of consideration on one side or the other. With a bit of give and take, it shouldn’t be too hard to rub along reasonably well. It’s not helpful to exaggerate the number of problems.
I wonder how long the
I wonder how long the anti-cycling movement will take to evolve from pushing people off bikes on the roads to waiting in the hedges to push people into the canal
What they should do is put
What they should do is put down a surface of little bits of flint that can go through any amount of puncture protection – both the punctures and the inability to control the bike on the slippery surface should put off cyclists from cycling along the canal. Those that do decide to cycle regardless can enjoy the dust that gets kicked up on by other cyclists, who doesn’t love a face full of gritty chalky dust. And because the path doesn’t drain you can enjoy puddles and mud and lots of Canadian geese crap.
If you want to prevent accidents then how is putting down a material a bike can’t stop on going to help?
What they should do is put
What they should do is put down a surface of little bits of flint that can go through any amount of puncture protection – both the punctures and the inability to control the bike on the slippery surface should put off cyclists from cycling along the canal. Those that do decide to cycle regardless can enjoy the dust that gets kicked up on by other cyclists, who doesn’t love a face full of gritty chalky dust. And because the path doesn’t drain you can enjoy puddles and mud and lots of Canadian geese crap.
If you want to prevent accidents then how is putting down a material a bike can’t stop on going to help?
Another pot of cycling money
Another pot of cycling money raided by another council to fund a cock-up.
As for Kei7077, what mind bending drugs are you on and can I have some? Why should money from a cycling fund be used to make something unusable by cyclist. Hang on, isn’t that the Tour Legacy?
Yorkshie Whippet wrote:As for
I think he was being sarcastic mate.
Here we go again – shared
Here we go again – shared paths = conflict, pain and suffering X(
If this money is REALLY for cycling infrastructure, then don’t allow loose dogs and stupid people with headphones on it at all.
Dedicate it to cycling, for cyclists to use only.
Otherwise, call it a footpath or public park and don’t pretend it has anything to do with cycling infrastructure.
Making the same mistake again and again is definitely a sign of madness.
Just ridden 12 miles on part
Just ridden 12 miles on part of the Trans Pennine Trail, plenty of other cyclists, joggers & dog walkers and not one sign of conflict. One gent even wished us luck in getting to our destination before the expected rain arrived. Am I abnormal in not having issues on shared paths? 😀
Try walking along a shared
Try walking along a shared path and you’ll see that not all cyclists are the pleasant individuals we wish them to be. Fact is, some people are just dickheads no matter what form of transport they’re using. All shared paths do is make cyclists capable of bullying pedestrians instead of being bullied by motor vehicles.
It seems that no lessons have been taken on board from the Leeds-Liverpool canal work whatsoever. Expect a crap surface in any areas the CRT deems to be ‘rural’ and for the work to take at least 3 times as long as it should.
pamplemoose wrote:Try walking
[quote=pamplemoose]Try walking along a shared path and you’ll see that not all cyclists are the pleasant individuals we wish them to be. Fact is, some people are just dickheads no matter what form of transport they’re using. All shared paths do is make cyclists capable of bullying pedestrians instead of being bullied by motor vehicles.”
Agreed but that doesn’t mean all cyclists should be held responsible and penalised for the actions of the bad cyclists. None of the official bodies talk about banning pedestrians from paths but most muggings are carried out by pedestrians on footpaths, surely a reason to ban pedestrians using your arguement.
Remember a “d1ck” on a bike will be a “d1ck” no matter what his mode of transport is.
If city connect and CRT are
If city connect and CRT are involved not doubt it will end badly.
They could do with improving
They could do with improving the cycling facilities on the A61 between Leeds and Wakefield, I’m sure more commuters would appreciate that.
Having read many comments by
Having read many comments by cyclists in Leeds, where a similar project is nearly complete, I have great reservations about the value of the investment. The project is supposed to be for commuters (and the nearby A644 is very busy) but Canal & Rivers Trust (CRT) have told Leeds cyclists that 4mph is about the speed they want. Would you ride to work at that speed? Its almost walking pace? The surfacing on the Leeds route is very controversial being loose material with cobbled speed humps. This project looks like being created as bridleway to circumvent land issues, so must be designed to add horses to the canal path also? Finally the access road from the A62 leads to a landfill site on a single track road, and has high daily HGV movements , not a great start for a safe cycle route? So will the £4.6 improve commuter routes for cyclists or just enhance CRT estates?
langsett wrote: Canal &
That’s amazing!
Why would you use a path where you have to ride that slowly?
I ride on a dedicated cycle path in Doncaster (yay Yorkshire) to get from home to the station everyday and I average 15mph over 4 miles, including stretched where I’m doing 20.
I feel safe doing this as it is well separated from both cars and pedestrians.
Quote: Canal & Rivers Trust
Can you provide a source for this? It would be of great use to those of us campaigning to improve the CityConnect scheme.
Yet more cycling facilities
Yet more cycling facilities in Yorkshire. We don’t all live in Yorkshire you know!
😉
Gizmo_ wrote:Yet more cycling
You have our deepest sympathies. Move here, there’s plenty of space left.
Chris James wrote:Gizmo_
You have our deepest sympathies. Move here, there’s plenty of space left.— Gizmo_
Yep some of us live in London 😀
I use the cycle towpath
I use the cycle towpath between Shipley and Leeds, which is undergoing a similar project. I would say DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES GIVE MONEY TO CANAL AND RIVERS TRUST FOR CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE. They hate having cyclists on towpaths, they use money designated for cycling to pay for things that make cyclists’ lives hell (speedbumps, loose flint surfaces, etc) – they only pay lip service to cycling so that they can get government funds for other stuff they want to do, such as reinforcing canal banks.
I told canal and rivers trust about an incident I saw with one of their new speedbumps, where a small child on a bike, travelling at less than 10mph, crashed because of the uneven cobbles of the speedbump. They simply refused to acknowledge that the speedbumps were a danger to inexperienced cyclists, particularly those using small diameter wheels.
The above incident with the
The above incident with the child is covered by the equality act. Gravel surfaces and cobbled speed bumps are also serious fails for wheelchair users and mobility scooters.
Ask for the design and access statements and accessible transport plans.
And have they remembered to
And have they remembered to enable the canal boats to be towed by horse?