N Yorkshire Consults on Useless Scheme for Beech Grove

The fundamental problem with cycling on Beech Grove is danger caused by rat-running drivers, mainly heading south away from the town centre. They are trying to get from A to B as fast as possible.

Parking takes up a third of the space on what is already a narrow road. The constrained space and the rat-running drivers make cycling feel unsafe.

When pedalling away from town, you have to ride away from the parked cars to avoid getting ‘doored’. That means that drivers are either stuck behind you, or they overtake where there isn’t enough space.

Cycling towards town, oncoming vehicles are driven at or too close to you.

Modal Filters

Modal filters were in place on Beech Grove from February 2021 to August 2022. Under Network Management Duty guidance, North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) was obliged to gather evidence during the experiment, publish it, and make an evidence-based decision on whether to retain the scheme. Under the guidance the assumption is that it should be retained.

NYCC failed to follow the guidance and ripped out the modal filters in August 2022.

Autumn 2022 Consultation

Now NYCC has started a new consultation. It has presented two options for Beech Grove.

Beech Grove Option 1

Option 1 is the return of the modal filters.

We know they work: they cut out rat-running traffic, removing most of the volume of traffic. Remaining drivers are looking for parking spaces or going to their apartment blocks, and tend to drive slowly and carefully.

The modal filters also provide a safe crossing of Beech Grove for people on foot.

Option 1 works for active travel. While it was in place, Beech Grove was an oasis of calm.

Beech Grove Option 2

Option 2 involves making Beech Grove one way for motor vehicles away from the town centre – the primary direction for rat-running. In other words, Beech Grove would remain open to rat-running and it would still be hostile to cycling.

The parking would remain, meaning the width would still be constrained.

NYCC’s design involves doing nothing for cycling away from town (cycling in mixed traffic as now), and a narrow painted contraflow cycle lane towards town.

An Unprofessional Design that Does Not Meet Modern Standards

Option 2 is an unprofessional design that does not meet modern active travel standards set out in Cycle Infrastructure Design LTN 1/20.

Summary Principle 4

Summary Principle 4 endorses Beech Grove Option 1 – modal filters to cut out rat-running traffic.

Option 2 leaves Beech Grove open to rat-running – the exact thing that Summary Principle 4 warns against.

Width of Cycle Lanes

Cycle lanes don’t provide physical protection from motor vehicles, and most people will perceive them to be unacceptable for safe cycling (para 6.1.6 of LTN 1/20).

Where cycle lanes are used, they should be a minimum of 2m wide. For short sections at constraints, the Absolute Minimum width is 1.5m (Table 5-2, LTN 1/20).

Cycle lanes below 1.5m should not be used.

NYCC’s design does not specify a width of their proposed contraflow cycle lane, but since we know the width of the road we can work it out.

At the very most it could be 1m30; it’s more likely to be around 1m. Either of those widths would be unacceptable.

If it was ever painted onto the road it would be a narrow ‘murder-strip’ indicating that cyclists should ride in the gutter. It would have zero active travel benefit – indeed it would probably make cycling more dangerous.

Option 2 is an embarrassingly bad design that never should have got off the drawing board.

Local people ought to be served by a council professional enough to work to the minimum standards which are set out in the national guidance.

Instead, anyone seeing Beech Grove Option 2 would assume that NYCC must be the highways equivalent of a cowboy builder, ignoring minimum standards, cutting corners and taking shortcuts.

Beech Grove Option 2 is useless and should be withdrawn immediately.