Category Archives: Resources

There are lies, damned lies, and then there are standards.

There are councils and organisations around the country that are decades ahead of where some councils are and we must be able to recognise our own failings and take on board that others have done it better. They have learnt from their mistakes. They DO get it.
The following four documents are key, and councillors should be requiring these documents to be used by Highways, Planning, and Development Control as well as forming key cornerstones in ANY development.

Public Highways IAN 195

Available here 

Provides minimum requirements for the Strategic Road Network, but was authored by Phil Jones specifically to be usable by ANY council/authority as it applies to ALL road types. Key takeaways from this document are:

  • 1.2m x 2.8m long mobility bike dimensions for designing access to cycle infrastructure
  • Minimum requirements for cycle infrastructure based on road speed and volume

Get this in front of your highways team. It is part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges which Highways will use on an ad-hoc basis. There is NO reason this cannot be part of the set of standards that their engineers use.

Wheels For Wellbeing Guide to Inclusive Cycling

Available here

Simply for one simple reason. Thinking beyond the bicycle. One of the key reasons Cycle Bath recently changed its logo. People need to understand you are designing for the hand cyclist, for the wheelchairs, for wheelchairs ON trikes.

Get this in front of your councillors and your Highways Safety Officers, particularly those that love putting in stepped gates and 5 bollard formations because we “need to slow down speeding cyclists”. Get them thinking BEYOND the bicycle. So much of UK cycle infrastructure access is limited by Health and Safety and the fear of kids being killed by speeding cyclists, yet every junction of a road has a simple corner pavement ledge and we don’t have kids randomly running into roads at junctions constantly.

Highways Health and Safety create immense problems for people with accessibility issues. They design in exclusion in the name of safety.

Oxfordshire’s Development Control Walking and Cycling Standards

This one is a big one. Developers design and build developments. The roads in those developments MUST be adopted by the council. The council has a Development Control Team that signs off those roads. They use standards from the 1990s where the car is the primary concern.

Oxfordshire council realised that developers were forced to design car centric developments but wanted Walking and Cycling centric developments. They realised they had to update the standards that the Development Control Team were using BEFORE developers would design and build walking and cycling prioritised developments.

Get these in front of your councillors and insist that they take the Oxfordshire standards and rebrand/adopt them. These are decades ahead of other councils. If you do one thing, recognise that the one person in the council that is the “Development Control Team” is absolutely wrecking your housing developments keeping them grounded in a car centric 1990s air pollution creating nightmare.

 Your council’s road adoption standards are fundamentally defining the fabric of your environment and not a single councillor is aware the power this one person has. Get those adoption standards changed. Get them changed NOW.

Cycle and Walking Audit Tools – A present from Cycle Bath to BaNES councillors and council officers

Somebody once told me that every single councillor is there because they believe they can do good. I honestly believe that. I, however, do not expect every councillor to immediately have the knowledge to be able to engage with the council officers in a constructive manor.

So when it comes to public realm schemes, councillors “trust” the officers to get it right, or even trust other councillors with more expertise in that area to help them get it right. So a project is delivered, campaign groups and residents watch and then begin to give feedback through letters/email/talking/shouting. The councillors then go back to the officers and “get it fixed”.
This is how Cycle Bath had some of the posts moved on the Widcombe scheme. It was nonsensical to put the lamp post in the middle of the path and not on the edge out of the way.

It’s a very re-active approach, costly and time consuming. You wait for it to be built, then raise a concern.

A better pro-active approach that tries to get the design right at the beginning of the process is needed.

Continue reading Cycle and Walking Audit Tools – A present from Cycle Bath to BaNES councillors and council officers