Cyclists unable to reach "stupid" traffic light button, plus face nine-minute wait for green light as more issues reported with much-criticised cycle lane

AFAIK, bikes aren't recognised as a mobility aid, and as such the Equality Act probably doesn't apply.

Someone with deep enough pockets though might be able to pursue as a test case.

Happy as always to be wrong.

Oldfatgit wrote:

AFAIK, bikes aren't recognised as a mobility aid, and as such the Equality Act probably doesn't apply. Someone with deep enough pockets though might be able to pursue as a test case. Happy as always to be wrong.

I don't think there's anything in the Equality Act that says something has to be a mobility aid for it to count.

AFAIK and INAL, being disabled using a bike is not a sufficient reason to not receive a fixed penalty for riding in a prohibited area (didn't Road.cc report about some gent in Grimsby or Stevenage, somewhere like that, which had banned cycling in certain areas).
This is because bikes aren't recorded as excluded like other mobility aids are.
It's something that - as a disabled cyclist - I've been curious to test, but lack the financial wherewithal to do so.

If this is the case, then councils may not have to apply the conditions imposed by the Equality Act and produce suitable infrastructure for bikes.

Oldfatgit wrote:

If this is the case, then councils may not have to apply the conditions imposed by the Equality Act and produce suitable infrastructure for bikes.

I was thinking that way round - ie the infrastructure fails to meet the council's EA duties; rather than a disabled cyclist can ride on the pavement.

If the existing infrastructure meets the EA requirements of a recognised mobility aid - such as a wheelchair or a mobility scooter - then the council haven't failed to meet their obligations.

The riding on the footpath was an example of the cycle not being a mobility aid, and as such, not entitled to be considered as such.

The main blocker to cycles being accommodated under EA is that cycles are not recognised as mobility aids and as such no additional accommodation is *required* to be made for them.

Surprising that they allow electric scooters and wheelchairs but not E-bikes or adapted bikes like a handcycle. Do they ever give a justification on why a hand cycle is not seen a a mobility device but a wheelchair is?

AlsoSomniloquism wrote:

Surprising that they allow electric scooters and wheelchairs but not E-bikes or adapted bikes like a handcycle. Do they ever give a justification on why a hand cycle is not seen a a mobility device but a wheelchair is?

I think a handcycle counts, doesn't it? Didn't the late lamented Heavy Metal Handcyclist score some great results against councils that built bike-restricting features that meant he couldn't get through?

I was actually looking at what is counted as a mobility aid for getting motability coverage for. You can get scooters, cars, electric wheelchairs, or Wheelchair Accessible vehicles, but not e-bikes, handcycles, trikes or other vehicles of that ilk. 

Personally, I think it's because there is a perception that a person that can ride a bike isn't disabled *enough*.

I can't walk more than 300m unaided ... but I rode an Imperial Century on Sunday and I'm just back from a 40 mile commute.
Both on my ebike.

I've had several "discussions" with people on the train as I've been sitting in a 'please give up for a less able person' seat, in long shorts and a jersey.

It's only after I've pointed to the walking stick on my bike, rolled up my short leg and shown them the 2 x 250mm long scars on my knee, that I tend to get left alone.

Chapeau. Not my own story I'm afraid but a mate who lives in France told me a good one of seeing a triathlete with bike barracked for sitting down on a regional service in France until he rolled back his trousers to show two metal legs, one below and one above the knee - he was a Legionnaire who'd copped an IED in Afghanistan, apparently.

Thank-you all for replies. To answer a few.

- Yes, cycles as mobility aids is a very grey line and an area that needs resolving. It is emerging as an issue in the current Transport Select Committee enquiry into Legal Rights to access Transport Systems - which include footpaths, pavements, bridleways etc of course.

I hope that recogntion of cycles as mobility aids will be happening, and that - like people with a visually impairement with assistance dogs, demands for "proof" will be unacceptable.

Clearly it is routine for Councils etc to try and ignore their EA 2010 responsibilities where path networks are concerned. It will be a huge issue (cf Sustrans and the 16,000 unacceptable barriers they identified on their network). When you add 30-40 years of populist 'motobike' rhetoric, it is convenient for local pols to use a conversation where  discrimination is part of a 'reasonable balance'.

Personally, my E-Bike (Boardman with invisible Gruber E-Assist) is sometimes a mobility aid, but usually not, since my blood cell sapping condition comes out of remission every few years until retreated.

- Richard Bennett the Heavy Metal Handcyclist used, much of the time, a device called a "clip-on handcycle" which attached a handcycle mechanism to his wheelchair. So that was difficult to identify as "not a mobility aid".

Jamie Wood received compensation (before it got to court) from York Council, when he uses a tricycle, and YCC changed their practices somewhat over a number of years (ie barriers adapted).

Personally I think that a handcycle would pass the test in Court.

- I don't see a legal case for cycle as acceptable mobility aid happening unless there is a Govt decision and a Judicial Review, or a dispute which reaches the Appeal Court. It would need Cycling UK or similar to take it on.

- The out of reach button could also be addressed by a mobility scooter user, since they are required to have <50m walking ability, or perhaps under secondary discrimination for an older scooter user due to demographics of people who use them.

This is an interesting twitter thread by Kate Ball, who is one of the campaign officers for Wheels for Wellbeing, about 'disabled blind' staff at St Pancras.

She was riding an E-Brompton with her wheelchair strapped to it.

https://twitter.com/tandemkate/status/1668649068002697220

mattw wrote:

This is an interesting twitter thread by Kate Ball, who is one of the campaign officers for Wheels for Wellbeing, about 'disabled blind' staff at St Pancras.

She was riding an E-Brompton with her wheelchair strapped to it.

https://twitter.com/tandemkate/status/1668649068002697220

I can only see the first tweet, where she gets told to get off and walk and says that she can't.

mattw wrote:

If people using bikes are forced to dismount to use it, the facility is unlawful under the Equality Act 2010 since many people with a disability *cannot* easily dismount from their cycles.

= Breach of Discrimination Law.

We're fighting that one in the war against discriminatory barriers.

Which Edinburgh Poliitical Personality needs a Roman Candle iinserted in their butt this time?

  disability? how the heck are they able to ride a bike with a disability if they can't mount or dismount a bike?  I think what you are saying is an extremely remote situation that the breach of discrimination law is just another example of liberal policies that pertain to the extreme few, maybe one person a year riding that road will have to perform the task of mounting and dismounting their bikes with a disability that makes it all but impossible to that function.

froze wrote:

disability? how the heck are they able to ride a bike with a disability if they can't mount or dismount a bike?

Don't know the law but it sounds like it's not on the cyclists' side here - in that bicycles are not explicitly in the relevant categories.

However outside of strict legality his sentence "... people with a disability cannot easily dismount" (my emphasis) would seem to be pertinant.  There definitely are people in this category.  Trivial example - if your legs don't really work and for more efficient travel you've transferred from your wheelchair to a handcycle.  (As opposed to e.g. clipping on a front wheel to a wheelchair).

Plenty of other conditions where someone's mobility may be pretty poor but much improved on a bike / trike.  I've seen a guy with one leg who said he uses his Brompton as his main mobility aid - although he did have his crutches with him at the time.

Why can't we make this easier?  (In this case - cock up / half-assed design it would seem).  I'd say in almost all circumstances making spaces accessible benefits everyone, not just those with disabilities.  (Aside from "costs more").

Are you saying "not disabled enough"?  As Oldfatgit points out this is sadly a common view.  Never mind "not all disabilities are visible" it's "not all are comprehensible", clearly.

Facing the wrong way for pedestrians, looks like a very expensive to get right bodge job to me...

Don't know the details of timing etc. and currently out of town so can't check.  Are they meant for cyclists?  From the position I cannot see how they're of use to pedestrians.  Having said that they're pretty stupidly placed for cyclists.  There may be a reason these are this way but I'm scratching mine...

Judge for yourselves care of Streetview:

The first one - Balfour Street (note if you move around here Streetview jumps between quite different time periods and street designs!)

His "worst" one - on East side (outside Tescos) at junction with Brunswick Road

On the opposite side:

Haddington Place / McDonald Road

Image is Haddington Place / McDonald Road looking roughly north.  Doesn't really matter in this image - cycle path is thoughtfully blocked for you in two directions!

The end of the world?  No.  Yet another detail that's really not convenient, in an overall design full of this kind of mediocrity?  Which if someone does do anything about will waste yet more money to bodge semi-right, as ktache says?  Yes.

I think that an inaccessible design is far worse than "mediocrity".

They are asking for a whole series of legal actions under EA2010, which carry compensation of up to 10k *per incident*, and a possibility of an Injunction to fix the facility.

In these cases, discrimination law has far more teeth, though it is not without minor risk for theg complainant - need to make sure you are highly likely to win.

I am currently trying to concoct an approach via this route to deal with Puffin and Toucan crossings so tight that a mobility scooter cannot even cross the road.

(Assuming Scottish law matches UK law in these respects)

Remember what one lady did in Cambridge when she thought a number of shops did not listen enough to informal approaches about access:
https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/panic-cambridges-mi...

Sadly given they were content to let the injury compensation claims build up for years (plus a couple of deaths) elsewhere on the tram network it (see previous road.cc articles / Spokes resources) it's not something that seems to trouble them.

Hopefully some day the whole story of this mess will be told.  It's not unusual for massive public projects to be sketchy - but this definitely falls into that category.

I think one factor may be limitations of the contract they have tied themselves into.

Which reminds me of our problems training RAF pilots - they outsourced it at precise previous need levels, and now the world has changed they are banjaxed.

The request buttons are indeed for cyclists. 

So because they have used Ped light boxes instead of Cycle request boxes, in theory it would be illegal to cycle down the path when green walking man is showing. 

The request button shows a pedestrian but the light it controls shows a cyclist. 

Currently south but no doubt on my return all will be fine. /snark

I also noticed the Balfour Street crossing seemed to have a long wait.  Traffic was light though so I didn't time it, I just magically became a pedestrian, scooted across on my feet and then morphed back into a cyclist again.

The junctions are definitely not what I'd call "encouraging cycling".  However if most people in the UK considered these things at all* I bet they'd feel this was at "Ferrero Rocher" level or above for cyclists!

Full thought - Leith Walk is a major road and very wide, but given the volumes of people you expect there it's not currently a speedy route anyway, I'd say.  Or rather - it's probably faster now than ever simply because of some of the motor traffic not having returned yet.

*  Most people don't think about this because it's irrelevant.  They drive / walk / take the bus so only consider cycling when there's a cyclist in their way / nearly killing them.

I've stolen this graphic !