£1m to improve cycling provisions in York

York Press: £1m to improve cycling provisions in York £1m to improve cycling provisions in York

CITY of York Council has been awarded £1million by the Department for Transport to improve cycling provisions in the city.

Local councils have bid for money from the £64m government's Local Sustainable Transport Fund, (LSTF). The council secured the maximum available for individual Local Authorities, which was £1m.

The award will allow the council to continue to invest further in cycling.

Cllr David Levene, cabinet member for transport said, “The award of £1m to the council from the government's Local Sustainable Transport Fund recognises the step changes that are being achieved through the iTravel York programme to reduce congestion, improve air quality and provide sustainable travel options for everyone. We are not complacent with what we have achieved so far and will capitalise on the successful Tour de France Grand Depart and the upsurge in cycling to encourage more people to take up cycling as a healthy and economical means of transport and leisure activity.”

Comments (25)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:27pm Mon 14 Jul 14

marvell says...

Please note Cllr Levene - that before you take any credit for this award, that it is the coalition government giving you this - the one that you and your hapless colleagues try to blame for every budget shortfall that you create through wasteful vanity projects and disastrous bridge trials.
Please note Cllr Levene - that before you take any credit for this award, that it is the coalition government giving you this - the one that you and your hapless colleagues try to blame for every budget shortfall that you create through wasteful vanity projects and disastrous bridge trials. marvell
  • Score: 32

1:37pm Mon 14 Jul 14

old_geezer says...

If you commenters were in a sinking ship, you'd rather die squabbling than bail it out!
If you commenters were in a sinking ship, you'd rather die squabbling than bail it out! old_geezer
  • Score: -2

1:41pm Mon 14 Jul 14

BL2 says...

I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor!
I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor! BL2
  • Score: 20

3:29pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Yorkshine1 says...

Yeah! More painted lines and advanced motorist stop boxes.

If that's your lot, I wouldn't bother to be honest.
Yeah! More painted lines and advanced motorist stop boxes. If that's your lot, I wouldn't bother to be honest. Yorkshine1
  • Score: 7

3:33pm Mon 14 Jul 14

strangebuttrue? says...

So Mr Levene talks of reducing congestion and improving air quality. Would that be by reducing the up to 48% increases that have occurred since 2006 with no increase in the volume of traffic which have largely been caused by the congestion created by the anti car measures put in place by the puppet master Mr Merrett?
There is a simple solution to improve air quality in York - use our hard earned money, which this is, to take out the anti car measures put in by Mr Merrett. Voila job done.
So Mr Levene talks of reducing congestion and improving air quality. Would that be by reducing the up to 48% increases that have occurred since 2006 with no increase in the volume of traffic which have largely been caused by the congestion created by the anti car measures put in place by the puppet master Mr Merrett? There is a simple solution to improve air quality in York - use our hard earned money, which this is, to take out the anti car measures put in by Mr Merrett. Voila job done. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: 13

3:43pm Mon 14 Jul 14

lovingyork says...

Could it be spent on training to teach cyclists how to ride properly on the roads! the amount I see going all over the road, right down the middle of roads and going blatenly through red lights is amazing!
Could it be spent on training to teach cyclists how to ride properly on the roads! the amount I see going all over the road, right down the middle of roads and going blatenly through red lights is amazing! lovingyork
  • Score: 10

3:53pm Mon 14 Jul 14

yorkiemum says...

BL2 wrote:
I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor!
Let's hope they sooner than later build a bridge over the rail line otherwise this so called cycle track will become another waste of time and money!!
[quote][p][bold]BL2[/bold] wrote: I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor![/p][/quote]Let's hope they sooner than later build a bridge over the rail line otherwise this so called cycle track will become another waste of time and money!! yorkiemum
  • Score: 7

4:10pm Mon 14 Jul 14

GMuser says...

pedalling paul wrote:
Eric Olthwaite wrote:
That should keep the piddling pillock happy for all of 10 mins!
No, for a lot longer in fact. I wondered when the Press Release would appear, as this extension to York's current LSTF grant has been on the cards for a while. If I've correctly read the tea leaves, this is more for personal travel planning, than for capital spend. But we are still getting some useful capital spend on the back of other schemes eg the underpass on the A59/A1237 roundabout.
The present Govt. system of inviting competitive bids from a relatively small pot of dosh, is creating as many losers as winners amongst Local Authorities. I can't help but believe that it would be more sensible to reinstate more widescale "across the board" grants via the Local Transport Plan scheme, which has been severely emasculated since the Con/Lib govt. came into office.
I was going to make the point that PP is continuing with his normal Bike Haven quest but know it would not register with him as he is immune to any other concept.... BUT his vision has to be correct always according to all his posts.
Whilst I understand that EVERYONE has a choice as to which mode of transport suits each individuals need I DO NOT PUSH THE ONE WAY VISION of the PP world which he continually spouts to everyone. The roads are for all to use BUT all who use them should obey the rules of the road.
Any fool on a bike that does not obey the rules cannot blame everyone else. Junping red lights, not signalling what they are going to do, undertaking cars, etc, etc, Do not get me wrong this applies equally to vehicle drivers
The same rules apply to ALL road users. Follow the highway code , thats what its there for, a guide to proper road use.

This note will not only upset PP but hopefully any idiot on our roads that believes it is solely for their personal use and everyone else must accommodate them!!!

Point made I hope.
[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eric Olthwaite[/bold] wrote: That should keep the piddling pillock happy for all of 10 mins![/p][/quote]No, for a lot longer in fact. I wondered when the Press Release would appear, as this extension to York's current LSTF grant has been on the cards for a while. If I've correctly read the tea leaves, this is more for personal travel planning, than for capital spend. But we are still getting some useful capital spend on the back of other schemes eg the underpass on the A59/A1237 roundabout. The present Govt. system of inviting competitive bids from a relatively small pot of dosh, is creating as many losers as winners amongst Local Authorities. I can't help but believe that it would be more sensible to reinstate more widescale "across the board" grants via the Local Transport Plan scheme, which has been severely emasculated since the Con/Lib govt. came into office.[/p][/quote]I was going to make the point that PP is continuing with his normal Bike Haven quest but know it would not register with him as he is immune to any other concept.... BUT his vision has to be correct always according to all his posts. Whilst I understand that EVERYONE has a choice as to which mode of transport suits each individuals need I DO NOT PUSH THE ONE WAY VISION of the PP world which he continually spouts to everyone. The roads are for all to use BUT all who use them should obey the rules of the road. Any fool on a bike that does not obey the rules cannot blame everyone else. Junping red lights, not signalling what they are going to do, undertaking cars, etc, etc, Do not get me wrong this applies equally to vehicle drivers The same rules apply to ALL road users. Follow the highway code , thats what its there for, a guide to proper road use. This note will not only upset PP but hopefully any idiot on our roads that believes it is solely for their personal use and everyone else must accommodate them!!! Point made I hope. GMuser
  • Score: 10

5:21pm Mon 14 Jul 14

MarkyMarkMark says...

GMuser: "junping red lights, not signalling what they are going to do, undertaking cars, etc, etc, Do not get me wrong this applies equally to vehicle drivers!"

Too right. The difference is when a cyclist does it, if it goes wrong, the one who usually suffers is the cyclist. (Darwin Awards time!) But when someone in a car, van, bus or lorry does it, the effects are far more serious. And sadly, if it involves a cyclist, it's still the cyclist who usually suffers most.

Incidentally, passing a queue of stationary vehicles on the inside isn't an offence. Although one does need to be cautious. Especially when the vehicles in question start to move, or don't signal their intentions when turning (either way), or deliberately pull in to the left to prevent cyclists moving past them (sour grapes syndrome).
GMuser: "junping red lights, not signalling what they are going to do, undertaking cars, etc, etc, Do not get me wrong this applies equally to vehicle drivers!" Too right. The difference is when a cyclist does it, if it goes wrong, the one who usually suffers is the cyclist. (Darwin Awards time!) But when someone in a car, van, bus or lorry does it, the effects are far more serious. And sadly, if it involves a cyclist, it's still the cyclist who usually suffers most. Incidentally, passing a queue of stationary vehicles on the inside isn't an offence. Although one does need to be cautious. Especially when the vehicles in question start to move, or don't signal their intentions when turning (either way), or deliberately pull in to the left to prevent cyclists moving past them (sour grapes syndrome). MarkyMarkMark
  • Score: 5

5:22pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Caecilius says...

There's a gap in the provision for cyclists on Water End, where the cycle route comes to an abrupt end just before the Clifton Green junction and dumps riders into the flow of traffic. You must have noticed it, Coun Levene, the Tour de France went right past the spot. The junction's always rammed with cars anyway, so if you were to put an on-road cycle lane in that short stretch of road it wouldn't make overall congestion any worse, and it would be bound to encourage more people to take up cycling as a healthy and economical means of transport and leisure activity.

Of course, if your party hadn't spent £12,000 of council tax payers' money on ripping it out in a futile attempt to appease the car lobby, it would still be there and Labour wouldn't have ensured that £540,000 of the last lot of money that York got from the LSTF had been wasted, by removing a safety-critical section of the cycle route that it had paid for.

Are you going to have a public consultation on how to spend the latest grant - then ignore the results, again?
There's a gap in the provision for cyclists on Water End, where the cycle route comes to an abrupt end just before the Clifton Green junction and dumps riders into the flow of traffic. You must have noticed it, Coun Levene, the Tour de France went right past the spot. The junction's always rammed with cars anyway, so if you were to put an on-road cycle lane in that short stretch of road it wouldn't make overall congestion any worse, and it would be bound to encourage more people to take up cycling as a healthy and economical means of transport and leisure activity. Of course, if your party hadn't spent £12,000 of council tax payers' money on ripping it out in a futile attempt to appease the car lobby, it would still be there and Labour wouldn't have ensured that £540,000 of the last lot of money that York got from the LSTF had been wasted, by removing a safety-critical section of the cycle route that it had paid for. Are you going to have a public consultation on how to spend the latest grant - then ignore the results, again? Caecilius
  • Score: -5

5:31pm Mon 14 Jul 14

aflaxensaxon says...

'that is' 'what it is' A guide to proper pronunciation..
'that is' 'what it is' A guide to proper pronunciation.. aflaxensaxon
  • Score: -1

5:33pm Mon 14 Jul 14

Sinjy says...

yorkiemum wrote:
BL2 wrote:
I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor!
Let's hope they sooner than later build a bridge over the rail line otherwise this so called cycle track will become another waste of time and money!!
You would have thought they would have costed the bridge up before starting work on the rest of the cycle path to no-where.

It's only a matter of time before someone stumbles into the path of an on-coming car on the A-road while trying to get from the end of the cycle path to either a footpath or cycle path near the Haxby Road roadabout.
[quote][p][bold]yorkiemum[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BL2[/bold] wrote: I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor![/p][/quote]Let's hope they sooner than later build a bridge over the rail line otherwise this so called cycle track will become another waste of time and money!![/p][/quote]You would have thought they would have costed the bridge up before starting work on the rest of the cycle path to no-where. It's only a matter of time before someone stumbles into the path of an on-coming car on the A-road while trying to get from the end of the cycle path to either a footpath or cycle path near the Haxby Road roadabout. Sinjy
  • Score: 3

5:38pm Mon 14 Jul 14

bloodaxe says...

BL2 wrote:
I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor!
Hare-brained. As in the animal, not the thatch.
[quote][p][bold]BL2[/bold] wrote: I hope they finally spend it on something worthwhile, unlike the other hairbrained schemes such as the cycle path between haxby and clifton moor![/p][/quote]Hare-brained. As in the animal, not the thatch. bloodaxe
  • Score: 1

6:23pm Mon 14 Jul 14

DEKKA says...

lovingyork wrote:
Could it be spent on training to teach cyclists how to ride properly on the roads! the amount I see going all over the road, right down the middle of roads and going blatenly through red lights is amazing!
Most cyclists haven't been trained properly. What's the average motorists excuse??
[quote][p][bold]lovingyork[/bold] wrote: Could it be spent on training to teach cyclists how to ride properly on the roads! the amount I see going all over the road, right down the middle of roads and going blatenly through red lights is amazing![/p][/quote]Most cyclists haven't been trained properly. What's the average motorists excuse?? DEKKA
  • Score: 4

6:47pm Mon 14 Jul 14

mgoodman says...

sadly, we appear to have replaced Cllr Merret with another Cllr who spouts unsupported rubbish:

"the government's Local Sustainable Transport Fund recognises the step changes that are being achieved through the iTravel York programme to reduce congestion, improve air quality and provide sustainable travel options for everyone"

is there any evidence that iTravel York has reduced congestion? or improved air quality? and what sustainable travel options have been provided 'for all'? i can certainly say my 'travel options', sustainable or not, have remained exactly the same...

but what depresses me most, is the contempt that this Cllr must have for the citizens of York if he believes that we are foolish enough, and naive enough, to believe what he says...

'democracy' feels very, very damaged in York.
sadly, we appear to have replaced Cllr Merret with another Cllr who spouts unsupported rubbish: "the government's Local Sustainable Transport Fund recognises the step changes that are being achieved through the iTravel York programme to reduce congestion, improve air quality and provide sustainable travel options for everyone" is there any evidence that iTravel York has reduced congestion? or improved air quality? and what sustainable travel options have been provided 'for all'? i can certainly say my 'travel options', sustainable or not, have remained exactly the same... but what depresses me most, is the contempt that this Cllr must have for the citizens of York if he believes that we are foolish enough, and naive enough, to believe what he says... 'democracy' feels very, very damaged in York. mgoodman
  • Score: 5

8:45pm Mon 14 Jul 14

oi oi savaloy says...

You just know that 90% of that money will get trousered by this corrupt bunch!!??
You just know that 90% of that money will get trousered by this corrupt bunch!!?? oi oi savaloy
  • Score: 2

8:56pm Mon 14 Jul 14

julia brica says...

Would you buy a second hand car from any of that lot ?
Would you buy a second hand car from any of that lot ? julia brica
  • Score: 2

5:00am Tue 15 Jul 14

Magicman! says...

MarkyMarkMark wrote:
GMuser: "junping red lights, not signalling what they are going to do, undertaking cars, etc, etc, Do not get me wrong this applies equally to vehicle drivers!"

Too right. The difference is when a cyclist does it, if it goes wrong, the one who usually suffers is the cyclist. (Darwin Awards time!) But when someone in a car, van, bus or lorry does it, the effects are far more serious. And sadly, if it involves a cyclist, it's still the cyclist who usually suffers most.

Incidentally, passing a queue of stationary vehicles on the inside isn't an offence. Although one does need to be cautious. Especially when the vehicles in question start to move, or don't signal their intentions when turning (either way), or deliberately pull in to the left to prevent cyclists moving past them (sour grapes syndrome).
I have an electronic horn on my bike with a switch that can lock in the 'on' position... if I get behind a car that has purposefully moved to block my route through past the static vehicles, I simply lock on the switch for the horn and let it blast out... the car driver does eventually get the message, but you'd be surprised how long it takes sometimes.
[quote][p][bold]MarkyMarkMark[/bold] wrote: GMuser: "junping red lights, not signalling what they are going to do, undertaking cars, etc, etc, Do not get me wrong this applies equally to vehicle drivers!" Too right. The difference is when a cyclist does it, if it goes wrong, the one who usually suffers is the cyclist. (Darwin Awards time!) But when someone in a car, van, bus or lorry does it, the effects are far more serious. And sadly, if it involves a cyclist, it's still the cyclist who usually suffers most. Incidentally, passing a queue of stationary vehicles on the inside isn't an offence. Although one does need to be cautious. Especially when the vehicles in question start to move, or don't signal their intentions when turning (either way), or deliberately pull in to the left to prevent cyclists moving past them (sour grapes syndrome).[/p][/quote]I have an electronic horn on my bike with a switch that can lock in the 'on' position... if I get behind a car that has purposefully moved to block my route through past the static vehicles, I simply lock on the switch for the horn and let it blast out... the car driver does eventually get the message, but you'd be surprised how long it takes sometimes. Magicman!
  • Score: -1

5:06am Tue 15 Jul 14

Magicman! says...

Caecilius wrote:
There's a gap in the provision for cyclists on Water End, where the cycle route comes to an abrupt end just before the Clifton Green junction and dumps riders into the flow of traffic. You must have noticed it, Coun Levene, the Tour de France went right past the spot. The junction's always rammed with cars anyway, so if you were to put an on-road cycle lane in that short stretch of road it wouldn't make overall congestion any worse, and it would be bound to encourage more people to take up cycling as a healthy and economical means of transport and leisure activity.

Of course, if your party hadn't spent £12,000 of council tax payers' money on ripping it out in a futile attempt to appease the car lobby, it would still be there and Labour wouldn't have ensured that £540,000 of the last lot of money that York got from the LSTF had been wasted, by removing a safety-critical section of the cycle route that it had paid for.

Are you going to have a public consultation on how to spend the latest grant - then ignore the results, again?
Most likely, knowing this hairbrained council who seem intent on proving that a room full of monkeys could do a better job.

council:- "we'll make York a better place for cyclists"
first thing they do on coming into power: spent £12,000 going AGAINST a public consultation AND responses from official roads-related professionals such as the RAC, the Police, the Ambulance Service, Fire and Rescue, and Collision Investigators to remove the most useful section of a cycle route just to appease a small minority of overly-vocal vociferous motorists who believe that road belongs solely to them; but knowing the cycle lane removal wouldn't work on its own, the council also fiddled with the traffic lights timings - the result of which is queue on Shipton Road now at DOUBLE the length they were when Water End had a cycle lane in place. And the more ironic outcome of this is that now that queuing is making the number 2 Park and Ride bus service run very late and has become unreliable: but when there was a cycle lane on Water End there were less queues on the A19 and so the bus didn't take as long into the city centre.

I honestly wouldn't trust this council to properly open up new cycle routes - they couldn't open a French escort's legs with a wheel of cheese!
[quote][p][bold]Caecilius[/bold] wrote: There's a gap in the provision for cyclists on Water End, where the cycle route comes to an abrupt end just before the Clifton Green junction and dumps riders into the flow of traffic. You must have noticed it, Coun Levene, the Tour de France went right past the spot. The junction's always rammed with cars anyway, so if you were to put an on-road cycle lane in that short stretch of road it wouldn't make overall congestion any worse, and it would be bound to encourage more people to take up cycling as a healthy and economical means of transport and leisure activity. Of course, if your party hadn't spent £12,000 of council tax payers' money on ripping it out in a futile attempt to appease the car lobby, it would still be there and Labour wouldn't have ensured that £540,000 of the last lot of money that York got from the LSTF had been wasted, by removing a safety-critical section of the cycle route that it had paid for. Are you going to have a public consultation on how to spend the latest grant - then ignore the results, again?[/p][/quote]Most likely, knowing this hairbrained council who seem intent on proving that a room full of monkeys could do a better job. council:- "we'll make York a better place for cyclists" first thing they do on coming into power: spent £12,000 going AGAINST a public consultation AND responses from official roads-related professionals such as the RAC, the Police, the Ambulance Service, Fire and Rescue, and Collision Investigators to remove the most useful section of a cycle route just to appease a small minority of overly-vocal vociferous motorists who believe that road belongs solely to them; but knowing the cycle lane removal wouldn't work on its own, the council also fiddled with the traffic lights timings - the result of which is queue on Shipton Road now at DOUBLE the length they were when Water End had a cycle lane in place. And the more ironic outcome of this is that now that queuing is making the number 2 Park and Ride bus service run very late and has become unreliable: but when there was a cycle lane on Water End there were less queues on the A19 and so the bus didn't take as long into the city centre. I honestly wouldn't trust this council to properly open up new cycle routes - they couldn't open a French escort's legs with a wheel of cheese! Magicman!
  • Score: 1

5:12am Tue 15 Jul 14

Magicman! says...

In all seriousness, the council should arrange for each ward and parish to hold meetings at a suitable time (so 10am on a tuesday is not 'a suitable time', 2pm on a saturday is a suitable time) whereby those within the ward or parish can state what cycling provisions they would like to see happen AND how to go about it.

If the council is guided by one simple point when it comes to cycling provision, it should be this:
Painting extra white lines on a road, safe cycling provision it does not create.
(York Road in Haxby is an example of that, or the Audax Road / Sterling Road junction at Clifton Moor is an even better example - filtering cyclists into the path of a passing HGV right at a traffic island, oh yeah that's a real smart cycle lane!!)
In all seriousness, the council should arrange for each ward and parish to hold meetings at a suitable time (so 10am on a tuesday is not 'a suitable time', 2pm on a saturday is a suitable time) whereby those within the ward or parish can state what cycling provisions they would like to see happen AND how to go about it. If the council is guided by one simple point when it comes to cycling provision, it should be this: Painting extra white lines on a road, safe cycling provision it does not create. (York Road in Haxby is an example of that, or the Audax Road / Sterling Road junction at Clifton Moor is an even better example - filtering cyclists into the path of a passing HGV right at a traffic island, oh yeah that's a real smart cycle lane!!) Magicman!
  • Score: -1

6:57am Tue 15 Jul 14

thinkingoutsidethebox says...

a great pity that this money cannot be used for the greater purpose of covering the financial mess of Lendal Bridge traffic fines which York tax payers will end up having to cover without a doubt as there will still be masses of ancillary costs.
Not being naive here - but WHY did the comments suddenly cease on the call for the dippy to stand down. Does someone phone the editor and say this can't be allowed to continue.
a great pity that this money cannot be used for the greater purpose of covering the financial mess of Lendal Bridge traffic fines which York tax payers will end up having to cover without a doubt as there will still be masses of ancillary costs. Not being naive here - but WHY did the comments suddenly cease on the call for the dippy to stand down. Does someone phone the editor and say this can't be allowed to continue. thinkingoutsidethebox
  • Score: 2

7:12am Tue 15 Jul 14

oi oi savaloy says...

thinkingoutsidethebo
x
wrote:
a great pity that this money cannot be used for the greater purpose of covering the financial mess of Lendal Bridge traffic fines which York tax payers will end up having to cover without a doubt as there will still be masses of ancillary costs.
Not being naive here - but WHY did the comments suddenly cease on the call for the dippy to stand down. Does someone phone the editor and say this can't be allowed to continue.
more to the point, why was my comment on the dippy to stand down removed?? all i said was as a 'goodwill gesture he and TSL should get on a grand central and go to where JA came from!
[quote][p][bold]thinkingoutsidethebo x[/bold] wrote: a great pity that this money cannot be used for the greater purpose of covering the financial mess of Lendal Bridge traffic fines which York tax payers will end up having to cover without a doubt as there will still be masses of ancillary costs. Not being naive here - but WHY did the comments suddenly cease on the call for the dippy to stand down. Does someone phone the editor and say this can't be allowed to continue.[/p][/quote]more to the point, why was my comment on the dippy to stand down removed?? all i said was as a 'goodwill gesture he and TSL should get on a grand central and go to where JA came from! oi oi savaloy
  • Score: 2

2:33pm Tue 15 Jul 14

Yorkshine1 says...

Boring, reactionary, repetetive, populist drivel.
Boring, reactionary, repetetive, populist drivel. Yorkshine1
  • Score: 2

5:08pm Tue 15 Jul 14

MarkyMarkMark says...

Magicman! wrote:
In all seriousness, the council should arrange for each ward and parish to hold meetings at a suitable time (so 10am on a tuesday is not 'a suitable time', 2pm on a saturday is a suitable time) whereby those within the ward or parish can state what cycling provisions they would like to see happen AND how to go about it.

If the council is guided by one simple point when it comes to cycling provision, it should be this:
Painting extra white lines on a road, safe cycling provision it does not create.
(York Road in Haxby is an example of that, or the Audax Road / Sterling Road junction at Clifton Moor is an even better example - filtering cyclists into the path of a passing HGV right at a traffic island, oh yeah that's a real smart cycle lane!!)
I've said it before on here .... cycling in York is good, but not brilliant.
In some places, it falls far short of the basic requirements....
- We have cycle lanes that are potentially lethal to the cyclists (especially chldren) due to being on the pavements, and requiring cyclists to give way at every junction (Beckfield Lane).
- We have cycle lanes that are potentially lethal to cyclists because they have "street furniture" (lamp posts, signposts, traffic light "overhangs") in them - a moment's inattention and you can come up on them very quickly indeed. (Malton Road.)
- We have cycle routes that are potentially lethal to cyclists because they are poorly positioned and force you into the highway in front of other vehicles - Clifton Moor as mentioned, the roundabouts at Stockton Lane and Green Lane, Acomb, and dare I even mention at Water End/Bootham/Shipton Road.

Our cycle paths should be removing cyclists from danger, not placing them in it when they least expect it.

How about asking some of the local cycling groups where to focus the money for maximum benefit. And running the answers by the local community groups to see if they have a good reason why that shouldn't be so?
[quote][p][bold]Magicman![/bold] wrote: In all seriousness, the council should arrange for each ward and parish to hold meetings at a suitable time (so 10am on a tuesday is not 'a suitable time', 2pm on a saturday is a suitable time) whereby those within the ward or parish can state what cycling provisions they would like to see happen AND how to go about it. If the council is guided by one simple point when it comes to cycling provision, it should be this: Painting extra white lines on a road, safe cycling provision it does not create. (York Road in Haxby is an example of that, or the Audax Road / Sterling Road junction at Clifton Moor is an even better example - filtering cyclists into the path of a passing HGV right at a traffic island, oh yeah that's a real smart cycle lane!!)[/p][/quote]I've said it before on here .... cycling in York is good, but not brilliant. In some places, it falls far short of the basic requirements.... - We have cycle lanes that are potentially lethal to the cyclists (especially chldren) due to being on the pavements, and requiring cyclists to give way at every junction (Beckfield Lane). - We have cycle lanes that are potentially lethal to cyclists because they have "street furniture" (lamp posts, signposts, traffic light "overhangs") in them - a moment's inattention and you can come up on them very quickly indeed. (Malton Road.) - We have cycle routes that are potentially lethal to cyclists because they are poorly positioned and force you into the highway in front of other vehicles - Clifton Moor as mentioned, the roundabouts at Stockton Lane and Green Lane, Acomb, and dare I even mention at Water End/Bootham/Shipton Road. Our cycle paths should be removing cyclists from danger, not placing them in it when they least expect it. How about asking some of the local cycling groups where to focus the money for maximum benefit. And running the answers by the local community groups to see if they have a good reason why that shouldn't be so? MarkyMarkMark
  • Score: 0

8:59pm Tue 15 Jul 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

If you type "knee-jerk" or "pavlov" into Google, this page is the top result.
If you type "knee-jerk" or "pavlov" into Google, this page is the top result. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 2
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree