John: Why I Cycle

Posted on June 21, 2013February 10, 2018 by nigreenways

John Kyle is a 61 year old GP and has been a Belfast City Councillor for just over 6 years. John talks about his love of cycling which gets him out for leisure and between his places of work..

I’ve cycled all my life, but more so the past 10 years since my knees decided they had had enough of jogging. I cycle partly for health reasons but I love the freedom cycling gives you, the sense of speed, the proximity to nature – you see so much more than when in a car. I really love the buzz I get from physical activity, and definitely love being able to bypass traffic jams.

Continue reading “John: Why I Cycle” →

What value in the perception of cycling safety?

Posted on March 21, 2013February 10, 2018 by nigreenways

Regional Development Minister Danny Kennedy is in the final stages of considering whether to allow all taxis into bus lanes in Northern Ireland. What appeared just weeks ago to be a done deal in favour of the taxi lobby, has been thrown into the mix again by vocal opposition from ordinary commuters in Belfast. But are Departmental officials giving enough weight to the perception of safety among current cyclists, and crucially the thousands of people Belfast needs to convince to switch to the bike?

The case presented by the Department for Regional Development (DRD) for allowing all taxis into bus lanes is fundamentally weak. Private taxi firms are the only group lobbying for the proposal, and no compelling argument has been brought in favour. It remains the ‘easy’ solution for DRD’s dilemma posed by DOE taxi reform, yet transforms and exaggerates a small scale inconvenience for taxi drivers into a major worry for (current and potential) cyclists in bus lanes.

Taxis want access to bus lanes simply to speed past rush hour traffic – this is clear and obvious. Yet this clashes with both the requirement for an efficient, reliable and attractive bus service (DRD admit bus journey times will be slowed) and the view among cyclists that 2,000+ taxis threatens the sense and reality of safety and security on their journey.

Foxes in the chicken coop

Cyclists launched a campaign against the plan with a City Hall protest and a petition, handed in to the Minister on 13th March. Among the 500+ signatories, many added personal comments to the petition – 76% quoted “safety of bus lanes” as their major concern, effectively a ‘subjective‘ view that private taxis will lessen safety. Views on this ranged from individuals reconsidering their own journey choice to the common belief that it will damage cycling across the city.

Yet to counter cyclists’ fears, DRD officials have been quoting accident statistics in bus lanes. The following was part of a Roads Service submission to the Stormont Regional Development Committee:

“The main issue that was brought up in the consultation was the adverse impact to safety of cyclists, and if I could elaborate a little bit on that … the information we have in the last 3 years up to March ’11, showed that there were very few collisions actually in bus lanes, and of the collisions that were caused in bus lanes were actually crossing manoeuvres; vehicles that were actually crossing from the main traffic flow across the bus lane, possibly into side streets. That was the main cause. In fact the information we have, no accidents that were actually caused between vehicles that were actually allowed to use the bus lane, that were permitted to be there. So from that point of view, we feel that the vehicles that actually use the bus lane and the causation of accidents in the bus lane obviously isn’t an issue … we feel that it will not, hopefully, have a detrimental effect to the safety of cyclists.”

In one sense DRD have done their job correctly here – measuring objective safety and declaring that bus lanes are demonstrably safe spaces for cyclists. But DRD have told us what we already know, and why we’re trying to retain this ‘safer’ network. Not particularly enlightening.

On the other hand, the flawed logic could be compared to a farmer who protects his hen house with a wire fence and strong lock at night. With no evidence or experience of attacks on hens, he takes it as proof that allowing foxes into the coop shouldn’t be detrimental to the safety of hens.

Perception of safety is valued by policy makers (elsewhere)

There are moves to add perception of risk and safety to transport planning in other areas, notably by the Department for Transport in Whitehall. But it seems policy makers in Northern Ireland have little to go on other than collision stats. The situation is quite different in countries where cycling as transport is valued.

Copenhagen is a city where 36% of all trips to work or places of education are made by bike, and they are aiming for 50% as their next milestone between 2015 and 2025 (Belfast has no targets). In their current bicycle strategy document, there is a clear distinction made between accidents (objective safety) and the “sense of security” (subjective safety):

Traffic safety has been greatly improved over the past few years. Statistically, the risk of being involved in a serious accident has fallen by 72% per cycled kilometre since 1996. Copenhageners’ sense of security in the traffic has also improved of late. If this sense of security is to rise even further among current cyclists and potential cyclists alike, the most important areas of focus are creating more space on the cycle tracks, making intersections safer and using behavioural campaigns to improve consideration in traffic – including on the cycle tracks. The general traffic safety efforts are also very important. For example, reducing speed limits for cars where necessary.

In the Netherlands, the principles of ‘sustainable safety’ would mean conflict between fast taxis and slower cyclists would be designed out of, not into, road policy. SWOV, the Institute for Road Safety Research, has also studied subjective safety in traffic (for all users), and points out the weak relationship between objective and subjective safety – which at the very least should lead DRD to question the role of accident statistics as the sole determining factor in the taxi decision. Recognising that at the extremes fear of traffic may affect individual travel choice, the question must be asked about the value of improving subjective safety:

If the objective is the reduction of the number of road casualties, then improving subjective safety in traffic is hardly important. If the objective is to use feelings of being unsafe as an indicator for possible dormant road safety hazards, it is important to assess the validity of these complaints and signals. If the objective is to make people feel at ease in their living environment, and to prevent them from feeling that their own mobility or that of others is impeded by feelings of being unsafe in traffic, then improving subjective safety is important.

Should DRD be using an ‘objective’ measure to dismiss a ‘subjective’ fear, especially one which has great potential to limit personal choices? If the third goal listed above extends to the desire for adding more cyclists to the transport mix in Belfast, then DRD are duty bound to research, evaluate and seek to improve subjective safety of cycling, something worryingly absent from the consultation and the rush to bow to taxi firms’ wishes.

And in reality, it’s not as if DRD are lacking for evidence of a problem here. The PARC study linked to the ongoing development of the Connswater Community Greenway found that 60% of people felt roads were too dangerous for cycling, and this in an area of Belfast with some of the highest concentrations of commuter cyclists. Similar findings are available from just down the road in Dublin (report) in a city where for years all taxis have been allowed in bus lanes, or ‘pipes of steel’ as many cyclists would refer to them.

DRD’s own bible for road development, the Belfast Metropolitan Transport Plan 2015 (BMTP) deals with this area. If we quickly brush past embarrassing sentences like “On heavily trafficked roads cycle routes would be expected to be provided as fully segregated facilities” (Dutch-style paths in Belfast? Not on DRD’s watch!) we see that subjective criteria such as safety is considered important:

Attractiveness: Routes must be attractive to cyclists on subjective as well as objective criteria. Lighting, personal safety, aesthetics, noise and integration with the surrounding area are important (my emphasis)

But then judging by the preceding sentence, the BMTP is a wacky tome, from which planners can pick and choose as they desire (see: the largely forgotten Gasworks Bridge).

It’s fair to assume most people who signed the taxis in bus lanes petition cycle regularly on roads, and the message from those who added comments was clear. 76% of people specifically mentioned bus lanes as being valuable safe space for cycling. 25% believed taxis are a uniquely dangerous form of transport, 20% were convinced the plan runs contrary to DRD policies to promote sustainable transport, and interestingly 6% of people indicated that giving up cycling as a result of this plan was a serious option.

We’re making a clear point, but is anyone listening?

The problem with collision statistics #1

DRD’s evidence showing “accidents in the bus lanes obviously isn’t an issue” is based on existing bus lane conditions, which of course doesn’t include the private hire taxis that so concern cyclists. Not only will bus lane traffic be doubled, it will be made more competitive, with new faster vehicles mixing with existing slower users. If you don’t think taxis will create more dangerous situations for cyclists in bus lanes, here’s what William McCausland from Fonacab stated after the City Hall cycling protest:

“The taxis aren’t nearly as large as the buses, so their ability to manoeuvre around the cyclists is going to be much simpler.” Source: UTV

This is exactly the type of reckless attitude that has brought us to this point of protest. Most Belfast bus lanes are at most 3 metres wide. There just isn’t the required safe clearance for a saloon car to pass a cyclist within the boundaries of a bus lane with traffic to the right. This is the type of impatient manoeuvre we so fear, and Fonacab are clearly chomping at the bit to let their drivers engage in. It’s so worrying that a ‘professional road user’ running a taxi firm would have so loose a grasp of Rule 163 of the Highway Code.

“give motorcyclists, cyclists and horse riders at least as much room as you would when overtaking a car”

The problem with collision statistics #2

There is also the troubling issue of relying on collision figures as a true measure of objective road safety. Our friends from Cyclist.ie pointed to a startling piece of research was commissioned in Ireland to attempt to inform road safety policy with an idea of the under-reporting of RTCs. The report showed that the Road Safety Authority’s collision figures were grossly out of step with the numbers of people actually admitted to and discharged from hospital as a result of a RTC – which was 3.5 times greater.

However, when it came to cyclists, over the five year period from 2005-09 the RSA reported 109 seriously injured cyclists on Ireland’s roads. The number of hospital discharges for cyclists involved in a RTC in the same period was 1,050: “The difference in numbers is almost ten-fold“. This is truly shocking.

This struck me on a personal level. I was knocked down just over two years ago, by a vehicle using an operational bus lane illegally. I didn’t require hospital treatment, but at the same time I didn’t report the issue to the PSNI either. Another unreported collision, among how many every year in Northern Ireland?

Cycling in Northern Ireland becoming more dangerous?

Undeniably cycling is becoming more dangerous here, even before allowing taxis in bus lanes. Between 2004 and 2011 road safety has improved in Northern Ireland. However the rate of cyclists killed or seriously injured showed a sharp increase in 2010-11. Broadening it out to include minor casualties as well, the trend is upwards for cycling against a downward trend generally.

There’s little indication DRD have even recognised this as a particular developing problem, judging by the rush to place thousands of cyclists into conflict with thousands of taxis on tight bus lanes during the busiest periods on our roads.

Bus lanes = cycling network

How crucial are bus lanes to cycling in Belfast at present? DRD development of the Belfast arterial road network has produced a repeating pattern – citybound bus lanes for the morning commute, advisory cycle lanes mainly on the countrybound evening side, with some bus lanes substituting. According to DRD there is just 1.32 miles of segregated cycle tracks in Belfast, with many more areas shared with pedestrians, to varying degrees of usefulness/convenience/safety.

But the 48km of bus lanes constitutes a vast swathe of Belfast’s commuter cycling space, especially in the highly congested morning rush. Ignoring subjective safety concerns of existing cyclists will tip the balance of risk and reward in the favour of more private car travel, and all the problems that will bring for Belfast as a city trying to keep pace with modern development – while London’s vision puts us to shame.

The gut feeling that DRD have it all wrong

Ultimately this comes down to instinct. Those of us who currently use a bike on the road make our choice based on the balance of risk and reward for cycling in rush hour, and safer spaces have been demonstrated to make a difference even in Belfast, with rises of over 200% in a decade in some areas. Belfast is still in a period of cycling growth, but there’s no guarantee this will continue without investment in safer infrastructure and signalling to non-cyclists that safety concerns are being factored into transport planning. The gut feeling that roads are not a safe place to be on a bike clearly holds so many people back from cycling, male or female, young or old, rich or poor.

It’s not all bad news from DRD; this is the department which is radically altering Belfast city centre with the goal of improving sustainable transport. And they’re providing the kick start funding for Belfast Bike Hire, which has the potential to transform the city in the long run. But for that to be a success will require many thousands of people, many who have never cycled before, to feel safe enough to pedal the roads of Belfast. If it doesn’t feel safe, it just won’t be attractive.

We are fighting to hold back the tide, with bus lanes rightly valued as some of the safest road space we have. Our low levels of cycling will tell you that bus lanes alone are not the answer, and many people simply will not cycle in traffic at all due to fear. But if we value the rises in cycling seen recently, how can we expect to build upon it when the little safe space we have is being taken away and turned into taxi expressways?

Taxis in bus lanes a backward step for cycling

Posted on September 5, 2012February 10, 2018 by nigreenways

Roads Service are about to make Belfast roads significantly more dangerous for cyclists, and risk jeopardising commuter cycling levels. A consultation on plans to open bus lanes to all taxis is closing shortly, but what is driving their preferred option?

Roads Service’s stated preference is to allow taxis to use bus lanes, despite presenting no evidence of an overall benefit, save to taxi firms and drivers. Meanwhile, practically the only form of city-bound cycling infrastructure in Belfast is about to get much busier, and more dangerous.

The taxi situation

Currently bus lanes are dedicated space for buses, cyclists, motorcyclists and public hire taxis (black hackney cabs and ‘taxi buses’). These taxis had a monopoly in Belfast on the ability to pick up passengers from the street. Private hire taxis were only available through prior booking, and had no access to bus lanes. Although the legislation is NI-wide, I’m focusing on Belfast, as the majority of NI’s bus lanes are on this city’s arterial routes.

From 1st September new taxi regulations came into force which effectively levelled the playing field in Northern Ireland – all taxis operate under one system, and any taxi can be hailed and pick up a fare from the roadside.

Now that the two-tier system is defunct, Roads Service are considering three options for future access to bus lanes:

no access to taxis (not favoured – “removing a facility, that is currently operational without any apparent major impact, would be hard to defend”)
access to wheelchair accessible taxis only (possibility – “This could be a viable option providing it does not present practical difficulties in terms of enforcement, and identifying accessible vehicles. Some potential users would view limiting access to accessible taxis only as being overly restrictive.)
access to all taxis (preferred – “to preclude a section of taxis … would disadvantage both the taxi, as a business entity, and the intending passenger, who as a user may reasonably expect a taxi to stop when hailed.”)

In the absence of genuine opposition from cyclists and groups interested in sustainable travel, implementation of Option 3 will follow the consultation period.

Why does this matter to cyclists?

Belfast has very little dedicated cycling infrastructure, and commuter cyclists rely on the relative calm of bus lanes for a safer journey during rush hour. Numbers of cyclists appear to be on the increase, and although hard targets for uptake don’t exist in Northern Ireland, we have ‘aspirations’ to increase the number of journeys by bike.

But what stops more people from commuting by bike? Belfast City Council’s response to a recent consultation on the draft Northern Ireland Active Travel Strategy is instructive. A short council staff survey on attitudes to cycling (and walking) showed that “a lack of adequate infrastructure closely coupled to personal safety issues have been the primary barriers to the uptake of active travel in Belfast” and further pointed to the Department for Transport Local Transport Note 2/08 on Cycle Infrastructure Design which “recommends that traffic volumes and speeds should be reduced where possible to create safer conditions for cycling.”

Allowing access to competitive commercial operators will both increase the volume of traffic and add more fast vehicles to bus lanes. How does this encourage more people to cycle, when instances of pressure from slowed taxis and dangerous overtaking attempts will increase?

The published considerations for and against

Negatives

“any increase in accessibility to bus lanes has the potential to impact on current usage”
A survey showed that on one route, public hire taxi levels were 3 per hour – adding the observed private hire taxis under the new proposed framework could see that figure jump to 20 per hour. This would represent a near doubling of combined bus and taxi traffic within this lane (but again the impact on bus efficiency is all that is of concern, not cyclists)
The impact will be lessened because taxis use lanes illegally now anyway (so that’s okay then)

A report commissioned from Amey in 2008 noted and recommended:

there should be no change to current arrangements under new licensing system i.e. only wheelchair accessible taxis be allowed in bus lanes
“bus lanes are currently underperforming against targets…additional vehicles in the bus lane … would probably contribute to further reduced bus journey speeds”
“there was little evidence from other UK cities, of any movement to allow private hire vehicles into bus lanes during the hours of operation” (so Belfast is actually leading the way in suppressing sustainable transport!)
“there was little evidence that private hire vehicles play any role in delivering sustainable transport systems”
“of road user groups surveyed (motorcyclists; bus drivers; bus passengers; cyclists; car drivers; public hire taxi drivers; and, private hire taxi drivers) the only group that supported allowing private hire taxis into bus lanes was the private hire taxi drivers. The reasons given for opposing access being concerns over the impact on bus lane performance, sustainability, defeating the purpose of a bus lane and safety”

Positives

“availability of bus lanes to all taxis would better serve the needs of all users with disabilities and not just those who use wheelchairs” (in this case, then why are blue badge holders prevented from driving private cars in operational bus lanes?)
“Taxi services provide an important element of the overall public transport service in the BMA”

The arguments put in favour of allowing taxis access to bus lanes reaches its nadir: “Currently these taxis will generally be moving and will only stop to set down a fare, it would be rare that they would stop to pick up. It is felt this situation may not change greatly with the change in the taxi licensing regime, regular intending passengers on the routes in question will in all probability have chosen to use the cheaper bus service. It is also felt that dropping off may be fairly rare given that the destination will generally be the city centre or somewhere else away from the bus lane.” So to summarise, taxis really really need access to bus lanes, even though we think there’ll be little business for them there.

Roads Service lays bare its complete lack of regard for cyclists – fast travelling taxis shouldn’t hamper buses too much. But where is the consideration that fast moving taxis and relatively slow cyclists, the group who we nominally want to grow, don’t mix well?

What is the best option for cyclists?

Option 1 would clearly be the best situation, if we value bus lanes as a way to encourage sustainable transport. Any slowing of bus journeys or increased conflict with vulnerable road users runs against all sense. Taxis are not a sustainable mode of transport and therefore should not enjoy a privileged position on the road.

Option 2 is effectively a continuation of the current situation. It won’t do much to improve bus journey times or cycling uptake, but is an acceptable compromise. But continuing a two-tier system risks disadvantaging taxi drivers who do not drive wheelchair accessible vehicles.

Option 3 should be rejected outright by Roads Service.

Why is Roads Service confusing the issue?

A simple and obvious option has not been included in the consultation. A less kind commentator might suggest deliberate obfuscation by Roads Service.

There is a fundamental difference between ‘right of access’ to enter a bus lane and ‘right of travel’ for the length of a bus lane. The preferred Option 3 gives taxis full right of travel, a clear advantage over private cars and commercial vehicles to skip past queues of traffic. Yet the only Roads Service arguments presented in favour of option 3 concern the right to access a bus lane to pick up or drop off passengers. These are wholly separate arguments.

The current legislation states “a person shall not…cause or permit any vehicle…to enter, proceed or wait in a bus lane”, apart from those permitted. The solution is to grant in legislation the right for taxis being hailed to enter a bus lane and temporarily stop to collect a passenger. However, the taxi must then exit the lane and continue its journey in the main traffic flow.

Under Roads Service’s preferred option, taxis will be routinely stopping in bus lanes for this purpose anyway, holding up other permitted traffic. It’s the general usage of the lane for travelling which brings taxis directly into conflict with cyclists, something the consultation document utterly fails to address. But this is not surprising given our record on cycling measures.

Giving taxis full right of travel in bus lanes harms the effectiveness of the scheduled public transport system, dissuades current and potential cyclists from using the lanes, and makes a mockery of Northern Ireland’s sustainable travel aspirations.

Northern Ireland blind spot on cycling gets worse

I have come to the conclusion that civil servants and politicians in Northern Ireland are trying everything in their power to drive cyclists off the road. Wasting money on unenforceable advisory cycle lanes is one thing, concentrating what budget is left on cycle boxes which cyclists can’t safely get to is another. But proactively creating conditions to scare potential cycle commuters to stay in their cars, while happily accepting slower bus journey times, and making the road conditions less pleasant and more dangerous for existing cyclists is moving things on to a new level of incompetence.

Buses and cyclists are an uneasy mix in Belfast, but the current situation seems to be just about acceptable to increasing numbers of commuter cyclists. We share the bus lanes with a few motorcyclists, and the occasional black cab. Northern Ireland has been crawling slowly towards a more sustainable transport system, despite best efforts to obstruct progress. Throwing hundreds of taxis into the rush hour mix is simply crazy, but an understandable product of our current road strategy and mismanagement.

What can be done?

The consultation is open until Friday 21st September 2012. It is imperative that the views of cyclists who use bus lanes are made clearly to Roads Service. Despite the clear preference, there remains the possibility to change minds. Give your response to the consultation here, and raise the issue with your local councillors and MLAs. Take action before it’s too late.