Thank you to everyone who offered ideas about cycle safety in the district. Paul Stubbins gave a presentation on behalf of Dynamo, and below is his summary.
On 11th September, Lancaster City Council hosted a district-wide conversation on tackling the climate emergency, with a focus on cycle safety within the theme of sustainable transport. Although roads and transport fall under the responsibility of Lancashire County Council, Lancaster City Council formed the People’s Jury to examine the response to the climate emergency so far and help to find solutions. I represented Dynamo at the workshop, to present our analysis and suggestions for Lancaster district and the meeting was supported by officers from County and City Councils.
My decision to turn up low-tech, with a spoken presentation turned out to be a good one, as the technology gremlins were busy. The only challenge had been to condense a dozen or so contributions from Dynamo members down to 6 minutes of cycling and wheeling nuggets. There were two presenters in person, Paul Bruffell from Sustrans and myself. Living Streets and the ARUP Access and Inclusive Environments team had recorded video presentations to allow them to participate beyond the broken Wi-Fi.
Paul Bruffell presented first, describing Sustran’s aim to increase the National Cycle Network by 50%. He presented images of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) at home and abroad, with notable examples being Utrecht, Waltham Forest, Cambridge and Levenshulme.
Tanya Braun described several Living Streets initiatives to improve safe walking and cycling to school. An interesting statistic was that 50% of primary students walk to school and 50% don’t get enough exercise. Cycling numbers weren’t given but will be low. Many factors and solutions were presented which included LTNs, lowered speed limits, improved road crossings, Park and Stride, and School Street in Bury, where a traffic-free environment now exists outside a Primary School during peak times in the morning and afternoon.
Mei-Yee Man Oram from ARUP described the Permanent, Temporary and Situational factors of Inclusive Design to meet the needs of users. She said that 55% of people who do not cycle would like to start, which is a huge potential if barriers can be overcome. LTN and 20 minute neighbourhoods were noted amongst solutions to give a greater community feel.
Summarising Dynamo’s contributions, I noted that everybody benefits from the reduced congestion and air pollution that modal shift to cycling brings, and safer conditions for cycling is key. Government walking and cycling statistics suggest that Lancaster is fairly average in cycle use, the local trend though being negative, falling to 9% of adults biking at least once a week. Cycling UK data states that reported casualty rates for cyclists on public roads has been trending downwards, and we are fortunate not to have seen a fatality locally recently, but from analysis of KSI data in Lancaster we know that the common accident themes have not been addressed. In particular, Dynamo keeps paying appropriate attention to the A6 between J33 of the M6 and Lancaster City Centre, where poor road design and barely existing and broken cycle lanes, compounded by the carelessness of drivers, has kept this as the worst road in the district, and one of the most dangerous urban roads in Britain, for pedestrians and cyclists since 2007.
I gave our suggestions for safer roads/routes, safer speeds and safer road use. It was noted that a frustrating aspect of the A6 is that the more expensive measures that are taken by County seem to be the ones easiest to implement, rather than the most effective, with examples of this being the Toucan crossing at the University and the average speed cameras currently being implemented under Safer Roads funding. Dynamo has consistently communicated the need for a re-engineering of the road, to remove parking bays, and to provide a continuous priority lane for cyclists. The rationale for County’s actions was confirmed by an Officer during questions, as being that only shovel-ready schemes that fit the specific criteria of, often in-year, funding that becomes available get to happen. What then of strategic Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans?
I put the example of the offroad route between Heysham Mossgate and Snatchems of the kind of traffic-free route that is first choice for safety and has been in the Transport Masterplan for years, yet somehow nothing has been done. Also presented was our call for – where not separate – segregated cycle lanes with lane separators, improved maintenance, repainting, lining and filling potholes, improvements to the Pointer roundabout and reduction in traffic in Lancaster centre by implementing ULEZ/congestion charges. On safer speeds, we are asking for existing 20mph limits throughout the district to be enforced and for Lancaster City Council’s wish for 20mph through the city centre to be implemented by County. On safer road use we want fines for people parking in cycle lanes and national efforts for driver awareness and cyclist training, in particular awareness of highway code changes from Jan 2022.
As ever, it was outside of the presentations where the most useful connections and conversations are to be found. It was great to meet Paul Bruffell and to talk in more detail about plans to extend the Lancaster to Caton path, how the Pointer might become a signalised Dutch-style roundabout and to share ideas on how a low emission zone in Lancaster might be implemented. Best of all, Paul said that he would be happy to come along to a Dynamo committee meeting later in the year.
A new bike shop, 
Lancaster Dynamo Cycle Campaign 