Busy week in Sustainable Transport

I've been busy working hard on your behalf (unpaid) this week. 


Tuesday saw the Sheffield City Cycle Forum which I chaired, in the absence of any politicians. 


On the agenda were: 


 Access From Walkley to the City Centre - a small group from Cyclesheffield is working on this, and Gareth had put together an excellent report. We are working with the Central Community Assembly on this one as they've got what little money there is to progress it. 

Dore Station Car Park Consultation. The PTE has bought the site of the former Garden Centre (for a cool 1.2million apparently ) and plan to put a P&R site on it. The plans they've put together so far a look a little too car-heavy and we'd like to see more of an integrated transport hub approach, with cars having their place in it of course. The station itself is due for development with an extra platform allowing more service to both travel through and call (on the Sheffield-Manchester line)  and it would be good to see someone take over the station building as a business. The Bike Tree shop has recently opened nearby, and with Northern keen to improve integration with cycling there is lots of scope.Some platforms on the main line, allowing Sheffield - Dronfield - Chesterfield trains to call as well, would be great.

4.        Cycle Contra-flow on One-way Streets. Transport for London are trialling this for the DfT with a view to rolling it out across the UK. Basically all you would need is an "Except Cyclists" sign on a No entry sign and away you go. It works on the presumption that every road is safe for contraflow cycling unless there is a compelling reason why not. It would certainly make life easier for Boris and Dave!

5.        CycleSheffield Issues. Oughtibridge, Brocco Bank (it's driving us crazy - put in a report at  http://www.sheffield.gov.uk/roads/schemes/drivingmecrazy2010  if it is you too. )  the Killamarsh Connect 2 scheme were discussed.

On Wednesday we had the Northern Rail Cycle Forum up in Darlington. It's a Cycling Demonstration Town and it was interesting to see what had been done to improve cycling. There is a network of off-road paths, most of which seemed to be good quality, although I believe the Darlington Cycling Action Group has issues with some of them. The sining, which  is based on times rather than distances seemed pretty good. Apparently the town has increased its modal share from 1% to 3%, so they've made a good start, although it's hardly the 30% you see in Copenhagen. We pedalled out along a National Cycle Network route crossing the A66, and came back by a different route. One issue we had was that Andy was unable to get his hand-bike through a barrier unaided.

Here are some notes from the forum meeting:-

Darlington - town centre allows cycling.

Signs have times on rather than distance.

Bike It v. Successful.

Cycling has gone from 1% to 3%

car mileage has decreased.

Andy chamings hand bikes on trains.

Inclusive cycling conference 3rd March Sheffield.

Northern cycle policy needs to be amended to take hand bikes into account.

Increased use of flexible space.

Train conductors to do risk assessment.

Use of social media

Market research on Leeds - Sheffield corridor & city region.

Dore P&R

Waterfront conf discount for NRCF members

Station champions on NRCF website.

Get something on Look North? 

Bike Rescue - York (Foot of Lendal bridge)  Use of re-cycled bikes for bikerail


Thursday saw me take to the Peak Park Anniversary route to discuss the Porter Valley Masterplan with a group of stakeholders. Much of this was about how to stop Forge Dam lake from silting up, but the cycle route got talked about as well. The consultant seemed very interested in the prospect of making the route part of the National Cycle Network - perhaps he was thinking about getting hold of some Sustrans funding. Making it part of the NCN  would also increase the pool of volunteers that the Friends of the Porter Valley could call on as well, in these days of the Big Society. So we are making some allies there, and it;s a long way from the days when members of the Friends referred to cyclists as "Lycra Louts" 


Lastly, I headed up to Dore for the consultation on the Park and Ride, referred to above. Here are the questions to ask about the project:- 

  

(Numbers refer to the diagram at http://www.sypte.co.uk/media.aspx?id=1626

• Is there CCTV and will this permanently cover the cycle stands (and car park and platforms – I believe the station is to remain unstaffed)?
• Are the cycle stands (at 12) in the correct place – would they be better on the platform, closer to the pedestrian entrance (at 5), or somewhere else?
• Are there enough cycle stands (20 cycle stands = 40 bikes)?  The current four stands are frequently used to capacity. Will the spacing be correct so you can actually park 40 bikes?
• The fence between the car park and platform is solid, would railings be better (better public surveillance of the platform, car park and cycle stands)?
• The extent of the waiting restrictions (13) and times of operation are not given.  Apart from the reasons given in the leaflet (“Background – Current arrangements”), the extent of the restrictions should perhaps go further than the current ‘need’, as the road is quite narrow and on-street parking is a hazard to cyclists here (and other vehicles and peds who choose not to use the crossing).  Additionally, whilst the car park may be adequate for current needs, in a few years time as train travel continues to grow, parking will spill over onto the roads again - particularly if a second platform is built as has been proposed and train numbers increase, creating greater P&R demand (including cycle parking).  As commuter P&R is a peak hour issue, perhaps the waiting restrictions may be at these times only – do you think that they should be 24 hour, for example?
• When parking demand exceeds supply (as is likely in the future), cars will park on any available space within there car park, usually pedestrian and landscape – just look at Centertainment at busy times!  Such areas (e.g. at 10, 4, 5, between and around 9 and 10, around 2 and the pedestrian footways on the access road at the car park entrance/ egress points) need protecting from such inconsiderate motorists.  Providing enforceable double yellow lines on the access road may help here whilst self enforcing physical measures would be more appropriate within the car park.
• Pedestrians should be given priority where the car park access/ egress points are and not vehicles as is implied by the plan (i.e. the footway should be continuous) and this should form the start of internal traffic calming measures (the straight aisles appear to be about 100m long).
• From a bus user point of view, access to the station is now in a less suitable location.  As in the bullet point above, pedestrians should perhaps be given priority across the access between points 7 and 10.
• Cycle access should be available, shared with peds, from the cycle stands (at 12) to the pedestrian crossing facility at 8.  Cycle slips, from Abbeydale Road on the footway at the crossing should also be provided.  If the crossing is signal controlled it should be a toucan, so that cyclists can legally use it.  These measures will then allow cyclists a safer (and in some cases a more direct) right turn access to/ from the Station from Abbeydale Road and also decrease the risk of car/ cycle incidents within the car park itself.  Additionally, it will provide a ‘right turn’ facility from Abbeydale Road into Dore Road for the less confident cyclist.
• The pedestrian desire line, between the crossing and the platform entrance (at 5) will be a straight line across the car park.  The layout should recognise this as it does at 10.  Perhaps the layout should give more consideration to pedestrian needs?  The current layout will lead to some pedestrian/ car conflicts.
• Should there be a bus turning area adjacent to the station rather than having the bus stops on the road?

Sorry for the long post - thanks if you got this far!