A council criticised for installing "discriminatory" barriers on a cycling and walking route in Bolton, apparently to prevent anti-social behaviour, has admitted no equality impact assessment was carried out pre-installation but believes it has still acted in accordance with design guidance.

The barriers appeared on Rothwell Street on a cycling and walking route, Bolton Council arguing their installation was a necessary reaction to criminality and people using the route to evade the police. However, Dr Grahame Cooper and many others have called the council out for the inadvertent impact such barriers can have on people, particularly those with disabilities who may use an adapted cycle.

"The real issue is that the barriers discriminate against people who use many types of cycle, including adapted cycles for users with disabilities, and the council's failure to follow due process," he told road.cc.

"The Public Sector Equality Duty, placed on public sector bodies by the Equality Act 2010, means that the council is required to assess the impact of the changes on protected groups such as disabled, elderly and pregnant people and record the reasons why the perceived need for the barrier outweighs that duty.

"They have admitted that they have not done that and there is no Equality Impact Assessment. This is particularly important if they are departing from national guidance. Before the barrier was installed, the 3.5-metre-wide path was perfectly adequate for shared cycling and walking use. Now that the barriers are in, there is conflict between the needs of people walking and cycling due to the bottleneck."

The route has also become strewn with litter and broken glass since the barriers were installed, Dr Cooper suggesting it has created a "focal point for anti-social behaviour and littering".

However, of main concern is the inability for many cycle users to still be able to access the route. Explaining the decision to the Bolton News (link is external), Bolton Council said the barriers were introduced as a "temporary" measure to tackle "a prolonged period of anti-social behaviour and criminality".

"People were using the route at the end of Rothwell Street to evade police officers," a council spokesperson said.

"Working with Greater Manchester Police, the council installed the temporary barriers at the end of Rothwell Street to assist the police in tackling the anti-social behaviour which was blighting the local community.

"Installing the barriers is not an action taken lightly but there is still access for pedestrians and most cycles and it is expected that the barriers will only be a temporary measure.

"The design guidance for cycle infrastructure states that barriers should only be used if there is 'a persistent and significant problem of antisocial moped or motorcycle access that cannot be controlled through periodic policing' which is the case here."

That final paragraph references the official Department for Transport guidance for local authorities regarding the design of "high-quality, safe cycle infrastructure", but does not mention the fact that in the very next paragraph, the LTN1/20 (link is external) guidance also states:

Access controls that require the cyclist to dismount or cannot accommodate the cycle design vehicle are not inclusive and should not be used.

The council reportedly also confirmed that it had not carried out an equality impact assessment, a process meant to help authorities consider the potential effects of policies, and to make sure they do not discriminate or disadvantage people.

Dr Cooper also tells us he has seen the response to a Freedom of Information request, made to Greater Manchester Police, which asked the force to "provide a copy of advice or communication from 2023" with Bolton Council or relevant councillors relating to the barriers' installation.

"Following receipt of your request searches were conducted within Greater Manchester Police (GMP) to locate the requested information and I can confirm the information requested is not held by GMP," the reply reportedly came.

Dame Sarah Storey, Paralympian-turned-active travel commissioner for Greater Manchester, said she would be working "with the police and local authority to find a long-term solution". Campaign group Walk Ride Greater Manchester warned there are more than 100 similar barriers across Bolton.

Similar cycle lane-blocking barriers have been seen in locations across the country, campaigners and local riders calling on local authorities to remove them to make routes more accessible for all.

In January 2022, York City Council removed the "shameful" barriers that blocked access to a cycle route, while Stockport Council in the same year decided to backtrack on barriers installed to, as in Bolton, combat anti-social behaviour.

Back in September a cyclist in Newcastle sent a legal letter to the council to challenge the lawfulness of barriers on a National Cycle Route which prevent him from accessing the path on his recumbent.

Most bizarrely was the case in Milton Keynes last year which saw ultracycling legend Steve Abraham criticise the local council's move to install bollards on a cycleway as it meant the route was no longer accessible for those using cargo bikes.

The bizarre bit comes from the fact the cargo bikes in question, used by Abraham in his work as a courier, were themselves supplied by the council.

https://road.cc/content/news/council-under-fire-discriminatory-cycle-route-barriers-306757

On 15/02/2024 10:22, Simon Mason wrote:
> A council criticised for installing "discriminatory" barriers on a cycling and walking route in Bolton, apparently to prevent anti-social behaviour, has admitted no equality impact assessment was carried out pre-installation but believes it has still acted in accordance with design guidance.
>
> The barriers appeared on Rothwell Street on a cycling and walking route, Bolton Council arguing their installation was a necessary reaction to criminality and people using the route to evade the police. However, Dr Grahame Cooper and many others have called the council out for the inadvertent impact such barriers can have on people, particularly those with disabilities who may use an adapted cycle.
>
> "The real issue is that the barriers discriminate against people who use many types of cycle, including adapted cycles for users with disabilities, and the council's failure to follow due process," he told road.cc.
>
> "The Public Sector Equality Duty, placed on public sector bodies by the Equality Act 2010, means that the council is required to assess the impact of the changes on protected groups such as disabled, elderly and pregnant people and record the reasons why the perceived need for the barrier outweighs that duty.
>
> "They have admitted that they have not done that and there is no Equality Impact Assessment. This is particularly important if they are departing from national guidance. Before the barrier was installed, the 3.5-metre-wide path was perfectly adequate for shared cycling and walking use. Now that the barriers are in, there is conflict between the needs of people walking and cycling due to the bottleneck."
>
> The route has also become strewn with litter and broken glass since the barriers were installed, Dr Cooper suggesting it has created a "focal point for anti-social behaviour and littering".
>
> However, of main concern is the inability for many cycle users to still be able to access the route. Explaining the decision to the Bolton News (link is external), Bolton Council said the barriers were introduced as a "temporary" measure to tackle "a prolonged period of anti-social behaviour and criminality".
>
> "People were using the route at the end of Rothwell Street to evade police officers," a council spokesperson said.
>
> "Working with Greater Manchester Police, the council installed the temporary barriers at the end of Rothwell Street to assist the police in tackling the anti-social behaviour which was blighting the local community.
>
> "Installing the barriers is not an action taken lightly but there is still access for pedestrians and most cycles and it is expected that the barriers will only be a temporary measure.
>
> "The design guidance for cycle infrastructure states that barriers should only be used if there is 'a persistent and significant problem of antisocial moped or motorcycle access that cannot be controlled through periodic policing' which is the case here."
>
> That final paragraph references the official Department for Transport guidance for local authorities regarding the design of "high-quality, safe cycle infrastructure", but does not mention the fact that in the very next paragraph, the LTN1/20 (link is external) guidance also states:
>
> Access controls that require the cyclist to dismount or cannot accommodate the cycle design vehicle are not inclusive and should not be used.
>
> The council reportedly also confirmed that it had not carried out an equality impact assessment, a process meant to help authorities consider the potential effects of policies, and to make sure they do not discriminate or disadvantage people.
>
> Dr Cooper also tells us he has seen the response to a Freedom of Information request, made to Greater Manchester Police, which asked the force to "provide a copy of advice or communication from 2023" with Bolton Council or relevant councillors relating to the barriers' installation.
>
> "Following receipt of your request searches were conducted within Greater Manchester Police (GMP) to locate the requested information and I can confirm the information requested is not held by GMP," the reply reportedly came.
>
> Dame Sarah Storey, Paralympian-turned-active travel commissioner for Greater Manchester, said she would be working "with the police and local authority to find a long-term solution". Campaign group Walk Ride Greater Manchester warned there are more than 100 similar barriers across Bolton.
>
> Similar cycle lane-blocking barriers have been seen in locations across the country, campaigners and local riders calling on local authorities to remove them to make routes more accessible for all.
>
> In January 2022, York City Council removed the "shameful" barriers that blocked access to a cycle route, while Stockport Council in the same year decided to backtrack on barriers installed to, as in Bolton, combat anti-social behaviour.
>
> Back in September a cyclist in Newcastle sent a legal letter to the council to challenge the lawfulness of barriers on a National Cycle Route which prevent him from accessing the path on his recumbent.
>
> Most bizarrely was the case in Milton Keynes last year which saw ultracycling legend Steve Abraham criticise the local council's move to install bollards on a cycleway as it meant the route was no longer accessible for those using cargo bikes.
>
> The bizarre bit comes from the fact the cargo bikes in question, used by Abraham in his work as a courier, were themselves supplied by the council.
>
> https://road.cc/content/news/council-under-fire-discriminatory-cycle-route-barriers-306757

Such a tortuous way to avoid saying the obvious: the criminality and
anti-social acts are those of chav-cyclists on their chav-bikes, just
like it is everywhere else.

eburtthebike | 1 hour ago
1 like

Unless the criminals escaping from the police were using some form of vehicle more than 1,5m wide, I don't really see the point of these barriers, because that's the only people they're going to stop.

"Installing the barriers is not an action taken lightly but there is still access for pedestrians and most cycles and it is expected that the barriers will only be a temporary measure."

It appears to be a decision taken very lightly, with no reference to guidance, no Equality Impact Assessment, and no consultation with local cyclists. Seems pretty permanent to me, and if it's only temporary, what is the permanent solution and when is it going to happen?

On 15/02/2024 13:12, Simon Mason wrote:

> eburtthebike | 1 hour ago
> 1 like
>
> Unless the criminals escaping from the police were using some form of vehicle more than 1,5m wide, I don't really see the point of these barriers, because that's the only people they're going to stop.
>
> "Installing the barriers is not an action taken lightly but there is still access for pedestrians and most chav-cycles and it is expected that the barriers will only be a temporary measure."
>
> It appears to be a decision taken very lightly, with no reference to guidance, no Equality Impact Assessment, and no consultation with local chav-cyclists. Seems pretty permanent to me, and if it's only temporary, what is the permanent solution and when is it going to happen?
>

Dbloke | 4 hours ago
2 likes

Im still for and against them
We get a lot of dick heads on mopeds using such pathways as a speedway, often two or three at a time.
But they do get in the way for the rest of us