Allowing cycling in parks and other public open spaces could improve safety and modal share for cycling, but councils considering such a step may encounter vociferous opposition from non-cyclists. Rhodri Clark reports
Creating continuous cycle routes along highway infrastructure can be an expensive and complicated business. Even if a comprehensive route is achieved, it may still prove insufficient to overcome the concerns of many potential users about the safety of cycling on roads.
Compared with that process, creating new cycle routes through public open spaces is like a walk in the park. Urban parkland is already equipped with suitable paved routes, but tradition and bylaws dictate that cycling is not officially allowed there. Many authorities are now considering reviewing or removing those prohibitions, or have recently done so, as pressure grows for better cycling provision.
The UK Government has encouraged English authorities to revoke cycling bylaws by ending, in May 2011, the requirement for revocations to be approved by Whitehall. Grant Shapps, then local government minister, said: ‘I want to make sure they [cyclists] can cycle in safety and where appropriate use the local parks, promenades and public spaces, but all too often unnecessary, unwanted and outdated byelaws instead force them onto nearby busy roads.”
Last year, Plymouth CC revoked two old bylaws. One prohibited cycling in parks except where there were ‘conspicuous notices’ to that effect. The other bylaw stipulated that cycling in parks could be permitted only as part of agreements between the council and an individual or club. The effect of these bylaws was to prevent the council from designating cycle routes in parks.
Senior transport planner Jim Woffenden told Plymouth’s cabinet that allowing cycling in certain parks would work towards the aims of the Third Local Transport Plan. ‘By providing a healthy and relatively low-cost method of transport, there is a real opportunity to close the life-expectancy gap which exists between the wealthiest and poorest segments of Plymouth’s population,’ he said. ‘Increased exercise through regular cycling has been shown to reduce absenteeism and improve workplace productivity.
‘As the university and college population has expanded, the proportion of students that have to travel further to their place of study has increased.
Through the introduction of viable cycling and walking routes between accommodation and campus, this group are more likely to perceive a higher quality of life from their experience of studying in Plymouth, contributing towards greater graduate retention in the city. Cycling to school has also been shown to improve children’s concentration, potentially raising attainment levels.
‘Many of the parks covered by the existing bylaw are used already by members of the public who cycle through them. Through the formalisation of the routes through certain parks, there is the opportunity to reduce friction and increase natural surveillance, preventing anti-social behaviour, by the increased number of people passing through the space. Furthermore, as these routes are off-highway, they are likely to be significantly safer than any of the alternative routes, so improving safety for children and new cyclists.’
However, permitting cycling in parks is opposed by many non-cyclists who perceive it as a threat to their safe enjoyment of what are supposed to be quiet spaces. Last summer, the London Borough of Bromley painted prominent ‘No Cycling’ signs on paved routes in Kelsey Park, at the request of the Friends of Kelsey Park. ‘A minority of cyclists … have been riding in a manner which has caused concern amongst, and potential danger to, other park visitors,’ a council spokesman explained.
‘Cycling in the park has always technically been banned and we have always applied this bylaw with sensitivity and discretion.’
The signs prompted residents to express indignation on Twitter. One tweeted: ‘Where is the sense in banning cycling in Kelsey Park? We need to encourage active lifestyles in an Olympic year.’
Elsewhere in London there is resentment among cyclists that cycling remains prohibited on many paths in Royal Parks, where people caught flouting the rules are fined or sometimes even arrested. The Royal Parks introduced a pathway code of conduct in 2007, and says it has to balance the needs of different users. Its approach is to allow cycling on internal park roads and on designated routes along perimeters, leaving the centres of parks for pedestrians to wander without having to look out for cyclists. It concedes that this policy does not always allow cyclists to take the most direct route, and can add time to journeys.
The London Borough of Hackney’s approach is to allow cycling in all parks, ‘as a sustainable form of transport that promotes healthy lifestyles’, but subject to a code of conduct which stresses the need for cyclists and pedestrians to treat each other with consideration. ‘We will take action to resolve issues where they arise through enforcement, behaviour change campaigns and physical improvements if deemed appropriate,’ says the council.
A Cardiff CC scrutiny review this year recommended replacing the current no-cycling bylaw with a bylaw which provides a default position that responsible cycling is allowed in the city’s parks except in designated cycle-free areas.
The council receives a ‘negligible number of complaints’ about cycling in parks, but there are pinchpoints where walkers and cyclists come into conflict. One is where the Taff Trail long-distance route narrows as it passes through Hailey Park. The council has already developed a code of conduct for shared-use pathways in partnership with the park’s Friends group.
The small number of complaints may not accurately reflect the number of incidents in Cardiff’s parks, however. Many near misses or minor collisions probably go unreported because there is no obvious place to report incidents which are too minor to interest the police. The scrutiny review recommended developing a reporting mechanism for cycling incidents in parks. ‘This would allow for the mapping of incident “hotspots” and enable the impact of the recommended bylaw changes to be reviewed.’
Seaside promenades are another source of friction between groups of users. Cycling is banned from Weymouth prom, and enforcement was stepped up after a pensioner broke his leg in a collision with a cyclist on the prom in 2011. However, the enforcement hit the headlines in May when a five-year-old boy was threatened with prosecution if he continued to ride his bike on the prom. His aggrieved mother pointed out that a motorised land train for tourists could be driven legally along the prom.
Conwy CBC is currently allowing cycling on Llandudno prom for a 12-month trial period. The issue has been hotly debated for years, with cyclists arguing that the promenade road – lined with hotels and parked cars on both sides – is too dangerous and deters potential cyclists. Sustrans had said the National Cycle Network avoided the town, depriving Wales’ biggest seaside resort of potential custom, because there was no suitable route for it while cycling was banned from the prom.
Save Our Promenade, a campaign group opposing cycling on Llandudno prom, believes the ban on cycling will resume after the trial period. It argues that mixing cyclists and pedestrians there is ‘fraught with danger’.
The rules applying to Bournemouth promenade aim to pacify both sides. They permit cycling on the prom at any time except from 10am t
Register now for full access
Register just once to get unrestricted, real-time coverage of the issues and challenges facing UK transport and highways engineers.
Full website content includes the latest news, exclusive commentary from leading industry figures and detailed topical analysis of the highways, transportation, environment and place-shaping sectors.
Use the link below to register your details for full, free access.
Already a registered? Login
