York: hostile to wheelchair users

(Above) A pedestrian is forced out into the road by this pavement-parked car on Low Petergate.
Parking enforcement seems almost non-existent in York.

(Below) An absence of dropped kerbs on The Stonebow. Anyone pushing an adult in a wheelchair or a wheelchair user on their own encounters serious difficulties in this part of supposedly pedestrian-friendly York.

Crap cycling & walking in York

I’ve been away in York.

I think I need to move to there and start a blog challenging the cycling propaganda put out by the complacent and untruthful council. Crap like this, for example:

York is regarded as one of the country's premier cycling cities. It has an extensive network of off-road cycle paths and on-road cycle lanes for cyclists of all ages and abilities to enjoy.

Ample cycle parking is provided throughout the city, including several sites within the pedestrianised city centre.

York has recently been awarded Cycling City status. £3.68m of government money will now help to fund further improvements to cycling facilities in the city and get more people cycling.

York’s cycling infrastructure is risible. It’s so bad that someone from the London Borough of Waltham Forest can feel quite at home there. The two photos above show the cycle lanes on Gillygate and St Leonard's Place (A19).

In the first place it’s blatantly untrue that ‘ample cycle parking is provided throughout the city’. Cycle parking provision in York is grossly inadequate. Everywhere you go there are bikes locked to street furniture and railings because the crap council fails to supply enough bike stands.

Some of the ones it does supply have been installed by clueless morons, who obviously haven’t heard that cyclists need a minimum of half a metre space at each side of a Sheffield stand.

The infrastructure is neglected and fading and perfectly symbolises the council’s indifference to maintenance.

The vehicular cycling infrastructure is both atrociously designed and regarded with contempt by local drivers. Road traffic law enforcement is practically non-existent in York and there are spectacular amounts of pavement parking and ASL incursion.

York is also deeply hostile to pedestrians, with a pedestrian zone riddled with motor vehicles, poor dropped kerb provision, sometimes no crossings on major walking routes, and where signalled crossings do exist pedestrians are made to wait an eternity to cross, and often herded into cattle pens. Signalled crossings are frequently of the kind which allow pedestrians to cross one lane at green, then maroon them in a cattle pen at red where they have to wait two minutes to cross one more lane. York's contempt for pedestrians in this regard is spectacular.

No one at York council has a clue about cycling and walking, and this very compact city is rotten to the core with car-centric design and infrastructure. York claims a modal share for cycling of 19 per cent, though I am deeply sceptical of the accuracy of this figure, and with all modal share statistics there are always very large questions regarding the area which is being measured and the methodology. Cycling in York resembles cycling in London, in that most cyclists are riding alone, and tend to be in the age range 20-45. I saw very few elderly cyclists, I didn't see child cyclists, and I didn't see family groups. In short, the cycling that you see is quite unlike the scenes you'll see in those Danish and Dutch cities where cyclists are visibly relaxed. There are a lot of riders wearing cycle helmets in York.

It’s unsurprising that York council's hyperbole is sustained by a local cycling group which is run by vehicular cyclists, once again serving to illustrate the dismal reality that among the biggest obstacles to the development of mass cycling in Britain are cycling organisations run by vehicular cyclists.

Here are some extracts from York Cycle Campaign’s manifesto:

Cyclists need more than just cycle facilities or cycle routes. These can be valuable, but they are not enough. Cyclists need the whole road environment to be suitable for them. Few cycle-specific facilities will be attractive to all cyclists - cyclists must always have the right to use the road if they wish

In this document we describe some of the ways in which the ordinary road network can be made more cycle-friendly without providing specific cycle facilities.

Provision for cyclists doesn't just mean cycle facilities

Cyclists need more than just cycle facilities. They need a cycle-friendly road environment. Because cyclists need to be able to use the entire ordinary road network, the entire ordinary road network needs to be suitable for cycling.

The City of York Council's laudable "road-user hierarchy" has cyclists near the top and private motorists at the bottom, so that cyclists' needs should be considered before those of private motorists.

This is not technically difficult, and need not necessarily require extra money.

Yeah, right. Cheap is how I feel.

Anyone who thinks that private motorists are at the bottom of the road-user hierarchy in York is delusional.

Compare cycle parking and car parking on Micklegate, for example. There are lots of car parking bays along this street. There is almost no cycle parking.

Look at the conditions for cycling over the three main bridges in central York. Only a vehicular cycling ideologue could regard them as acceptable.

Here’s a modest suggestion: close Lendal Bridge to all motor traffic. That’s just for starters. Stop thinking that York is some kind of walking and cycling paradise and start to re-imagine the city. Bring over some Dutch consultants.

I took photos. Lots of them. There will be more to come later…

(Below) Bikes locked to street furniture on Micklegate and North Street.




























Every cyclist's favourite sign.
























According to the CTC, York is the safest city in Britain for cycling. Yeah, right... All photos taken in York yesterday.

Obstruction

Market traders' stalls shouldn't be floating around on Sundays and left to obstruct both the footway and a dropped kerb. Westbury Road E17.

kick out Kier

(above) Kier: still obstructing cycle stands on a daily basis all over the borough (this one photographed on Friday is on Lea Bridge Road, by the Bakers Arms)

We are calling for the Kier contract to be immediately terminated and for street cleaning to be brought back in-house, with responsible councillors clearly identified. We want a decent service for residents and fair treatment for staff.

(below) Kier: dumping street sweepings sacks across a dropped kerb (Grosvenor Park Road E17)

Crap design

Havant Road E17. The borough's highway engineers built out the pavement but didn't make provision for dropped kerbs. Which is stupid. This council smugly proclaims that it is "positive about disabled people" but it's just froth. The council is profoundly hostile to wheelchair use in its local streets.

The really smart thing to have done, of course, would have been to install a speed table, which would not only have slowed down the traffic but also allowed pedestrians to cross from one side of the road to the other on the samel level.

More obstruction by road contractors

You wouldn't want to pull out to avoid this when a bus or a heavy goods vehicle was passing. This sign seems to have been left behind by the contractors, as roadworks are no longer taking place at this location on Forest Road, near the junction with Farnan Avenue. Saturday.

(Below) The dropped kerb is obstructed by these traffic cones and sandbags, High Road Leytonstone, junction with Browning Road E11.

The wheelchair challenge

This attractive, well-maintained and sensibly sited traffic island on Pretoria Avenue E17 ensures that wheelchair users have a total of four high kerbs to negotiate as they cross the road at a dangerous junction.

Perfect for toning up those arm muscles.

Chingford Lane syndrome

Every picture tells a story.

We live round the corner from Keynsham Avenue and people drive at ridiculous speeds around these roads. There are parked cars on both sides of the road and children live here, yet some people seem to get their kicks from driving at stupid speeds. These speeds, combined with the regular inability of drivers to give way at the mini roundabouts on Chingford Lane, surely mean that it is only a matter of time before someone gets seriously hurt. If you contact the police they say it's a council matter, and if you contact the council you don't get a response!! What will it take to get drivers to slow down?

That’s in the Comment box after this story:

A SLEEPING couple had the shock of their lives when a motorcyclist clipped a parked car outside their home and crashed his bike through their living room window. The crash is the latest in a spate of accidents along the road in Woodford Green, including one six months ago when a car crashed into the forest and caught fire. Mr Maloney and Miss Crowhurst have also had to re-build their front wall twice since 2003 as a result of road accidents.

Miss Crowhurst said: "People drive like maniacs around here, and it's only a matter of time before someone gets killed."

The photograph above shows the mini roundabout on Chingford Lane, from the junction with Lichfield Road (a recommended "quiet route" for cyclists), just a few metres from the junction with Keynsham Avenue. This area is on the borders of Woodford Green, and forms part of the northern tip of the London Borough of Waltham Forest.

The first problem is speed. Drivers race at excessive speed along Chingford Lane and don't slow for the mini roundabouts. They drive as if they had priority, even though priority belongs to the first person to enter an empty roundabout. Any car driver or cyclist emerging from a road like Lichfield Road and who has legal priority at the empty roundabout risks being hit by a lunatic belting along Chingford Lane at high speed.

But there is another problem for cyclists and pedestrians at this location. The two poles in the photograph inadvertently mark out the crossing point between Lichfield Road and the public path across Woodford Golf Course. Scroll down and let's take a closer look...




















Just to the right of the green pole on the far side of the road is the start of the path. It is marked on Transport for London Local Cycling Guide 4 as a route with "provision for cyclists". Continue down to take a closer look at this fabulous provision.




















The photograph below shows the entrance to the path. As you can see the boards ends in briars and a mud swamp.

Let's bear in mind that this is either a public right of way or a public footpath (it is impossible to tell which because the Council's Draft Rights of Way Improvement Plan comes without a map, rendering it a meaningless document). The path is unsigned at either end. The path is also difficult to locate further on. Everything possible has been done to discourage cyclists and walkers from using it. And bear in mind that the Council is under a statutory obligation to improve "the accessibility of the rights of way to blind or partially sighted people and others with mobility problems".

There is also no dropped kerb on either side of Chingford Lane, and cyclists and pedestrians crossing at this point come into conflict with vehicles using the mini roundabout. It's a comprehensive disaster, where the lawless speeding driver is king, the Metropolitan Police show once again that they have little interest in cracking down on speeding drivers, and the Council does its own bit to render cycling and walking as difficult and dangerous as possible.

And there's one more thing...




















Yes, it's the usual neglect of the basic infrastructure. A sign obscured by vegetation.

A public footpath in Highams Park

Signpost to squalor and obstruction: Handsworth Avenue E4.

The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 required the London Borough of Waltham Forest to have prepared and published a Rights of Way Improvement Plan by November 2007. The best the Council could manage in seven years was a draft. It is still working on the final version of the Plan - and its apathy about meeting its statutory obligations says everything about its historic indifference to walking and pedestrians.

One of the statutory requirements of the Council's assessment of its public rights of way network is that it must specify "future improvements", which includes "the accessibility of the rights of way to blind or partially sighted people and others with mobility problems".

Well, if the Council was honest, its assessment would say "Many of our rights of way are totally inaccessible to such persons. We have no plans to change this situation until it becomes a statutory obligation and people in wheelchairs start suing us for breaching the law."




















And now let's go for a stroll along this public footpath which leads from Handsworth Avenue E4 through to The Avenue E4. It perfectly represents the squalid, threatening and unpleasant state of many public rights of way which are in the care of this Council. In fact the only thing I can say in the Council's favour is that they have signed it. The state of it, however, is a disgrace.




















To deter pavement parking on the footpath (in a location which is close to commercial premises) the Council has installed two miserable concrete bollards. They are of a low type no longer used, because blind or partially sighted people can easily collide or trip over them. The one shown above seems to have been bashed so many times that it has come loose from its foundations.

Sadly, two bollards are not enough. Leaving aside the little matter of the complete absence of dropped kerbs, the footpath is totally obstructed by a parked car.




















The footpath curls round to the right. Here, once again, it is totally obstructed by cars parked on the path.























The Council officer who is dealing with responses to the Draft Rights of Way Improvement Plan is the Project Co-ordinator, Mr C Bates. If you have any concerns about public rights of way in this Borough or suggestions how they might be improved, or are curious as to how exactly the Council intends to meet the needs of footpath users with mobility problems, why not get in touch with him? His phone number is 020 8496 2613 and his email address is Chris.bates@walthamforest.gov.uk

This Council just can’t get it right

The dropped kerb on Matlock Road E10 at the junction with Peteborough Road.

We will make the street environment more accessible to all, in particular by providing dropped kerbs, tactile paving, and other facilities to meet the special needs of people with disabilities.

That’s a Green Charter pledge I keep going back to.

Full marks to the Council for putting in drop kerbs at junctions. No marks at all for repeatedly failing to ensure that they are properly drained.

The photograph below shows the dropped kerb on Cleveland Park Avenue E17 at the junction with Hatherley Road.

Failing Nick

Apparently the Council's Green Charter dates back to 1989. It was a pioneering statement of intent. Among its aspirations:

We will make the street environment more accessible to all, in particular by providing dropped kerbs, tactile paving, and other facilities to meet the special needs of people with disabilities.

But of course for a statement like that to have any meaning the Council of the time, and successive Councils, should have required an audit of every street, in order to identify problems and implement solutions. And none has done any such thing. Which creates problems for people like Nick Bishop:

I'm a 20-year-old student with cerebral palsy, and I've used a wheelchair all my life.

Lowered kerbs are often nowhere near low enough; frequently, too, they are obstructed by cars.

I'm never quite sure if the pavements will be suitable for my wheelchair.

If Nick Bishop came to the London Borough of Waltham Forest he would find himself facing numerous obstructions. For example: a driveway has at some point been created across the pavement on Erskine Road E17, close to the junction with Melville Road. No consideration has been given to wheelchair users, who are faced by two large kerbs. Nearby is another entrance with similar kerbs. It’s been like that for years. That’s four obstructions in the space of a few yards, rendering the footway unusable for people like Nick Bishop.

Richards Place and Council hypocrisy

The Council has always spoken with a forked tongue when it comes to transport. It claims to want to promote walking and cycling, while it simultaneously pursues policies which promote increased car ownership and use. These are contradictory goals and the second is all too often achieved at the expense of the first.

A particularly glaring and tangible symbol of Council hypocrisy can be found on Richards Place, by the Rose and Crown pub on Hoe Street.

The Green Charter proudly proclaims

We will make the street environment more accessible to all, in particular by providing dropped kerbs to meet the special needs of people with disabilities.

And the Council’s Transport and Pollution Focus Group’s Action Plan asserts a bullet point commitment

To encourage and facilitate walking; to improve facilities and provide safe environments for pedestrians

To reclaim the streets for people

On Richards Place the Council installed a dropped kerb for the benefit of wheelchair users. Excellent! And a useful facility, thoughtfully located alongside the side gate to sheltered accommodation containing elderly people. It put a yellow line there to deter motorists from obstructing it.

It has now moved the ‘no waiting at any time’ lining closer to Hoe Street and extended the footway parking exemption to include the dropped kerb. In other words, it puts accommodating the parking of cars before accommodating the needs of wheelchair users and others with a mobility disability.

(Almost all the parked cars on Richards Place are not residential but associated with a local business which uses this street as a longterm overflow facility for storing vehicles which it has no space for on its premises. If this Council was remotely serious about putting pedestrians first it would get rid of the pavement parking and extend the 'no waiting' restriction. But of course converting pavements into a permanent car park for unused vehicles is entirely consistent with this Council's transport strategy.)

obstruction on Whipps Cross Road

We will make the street environment more accessible by providing dropped kerbs to meet the special needs of people with disabilities. (LBWF Green Charter)

"And then we will obstruct such facilities by placing a litter bin there and by having our staff dump LBWF 'street sweepings' grey sacks there."

The dropped kerb at the end of Whipps Cross Road, E11, today. And only someone who has experience of pushing an adult in a wheelchair will understand the difficulty this kind of thoughtless action creates.

Green Charter Crap #6

We will make the street environment more accessible to all, in particular by providing dropped kerbs (LBWF 'Green Charter')

And having introduced a dropped kerb for wheelchair users we will then obstruct it with one of our 'quality environment' litter bins!

(Location: Whipps Cross Road, close to the Green Man.)