Donate using PayPal

All photos

Showing items 501 to 600 from total of 167,333 items. Ordered by photo # descending.

Photo # Icon Photo Caption Categorisation
173871Photo #173871"There is no room for protected cycle lanes" they said. Embarrassing!Road environment:
Problem
road
173870Photo #173870Racks overflowing with bikes, early September 2021Cycle parking:
Problem
cycleparking
173869Photo #173869[Image taken 7.9.21] Marygate car park/Railway Walk, York [Note: No streetview at this location.] The already limited route to/through the car park (see: #172826) is further reduced by the barricades. They are part of the EV bay works. All images here today and on 6.9.21 see: #173861 and links.Other:
Infrastructure
general
173868Photo #173868[Image taken 7.9.21] Marygate car park/Railway Walk, bottom of St Mary's steps, York. [Note: No streetview at this location.] If the barrier-free route to/from the car park, Bootham Terrace, Railway Walk is blocked (see: #173865, #173866, #173867) everyone (wheelchair/mobility scooter users, pedestrians with luggage/buggies and cyclists - two had to uncleat to lift their cycles up as I was taking the image) has to bump up/down this kerb or be excluded from using the route. I also query whether the turning circle is sufficient for people with mobility issues including trike riders to climb the kerb and turn left. On many occasions over the past year the path to the left of the camera position has been blocked. On no occasion has any contractor or CYC employee realised that the kerb is a barrier for many people. The original Scarborough Bridge (around 200m behind the camera position) was replaced with an accessible one. Encountering a kerb at one of the routes it leads to makes a mockery of the project. All images here today and on 6.9.21 see: #173861 and links.Other:
Problem
general
173867Photo #173867[Image taken 7.9.21] Marygate car park/Railway Walk, York. [Note: No streetview at this location.] Context see: #173865, #173866. Explanation for image: #173868. All images here today and on 6.9.21 see: #173861 and links.Temporary closure:
Problem
closure
173866Photo #173866[Image taken 7.9.21] Marygate car park/Railway Walk, York. [Note: No streetview at this location.] The route for all users (not simply pedestrians as the sign says) is blocked. Same issue different location: #173867. The reason this is a problem: #173868. All images here today and on 6.9.21 see: #173861 and links.Obstruction:
Event
obstructions
173865Photo #173865[Image taken 7.9.21] Marygate car park/Bootham Terrace, York. [Note: No streetview at this location]. EV bay works hugely reduce the width of the route for everyone. (It is used by local and touring cyclists, peds, and people in or accompanying wheelchair/mobility scooter users.) The fencing creates a bigger, perhaps a literally insurmountable, problem for some people though... see: #173866, #173867, #173868Obstruction:
Problem
obstructions
173864Photo #173864[Image taken 7.9.21] Bootham Terrace, York. No signs warning of diversions on the other side of the rail line (through the underpass). A sign on the right is not fulfilling its purpose so is effectively flytipped. As is the frame to the left of it. The yellow flyer on the signpost is the notification this route will be closed this week. This week is the first of the autumn term. Many people won't have used it over the school holidays so will not have seen the sign. All images here today and on 6.9.21 see: #173861 and links.Other:
Problem
general
173863Photo #173863[Image taken 6.9.21] Marygate car park, Railway Walk, Scarborough Bridge, Earlsborough Terrace, York. [Note: No streetview at this location] More diversion signs (this time, though you can't tell, for electricity grid works) and therefore more clutter. See: #173861 for context and linksGeneral sign/notice:
Problem
signs
173862Photo #173862[Image taken 6.9.21] Marygate car park, Railway Walk, Scarborough Bridge, Earlsborough Terrace, York. [Note: No streetview at this location] Diversion signs for works connected to the EV charging bays at the far end of the car park (see: #172718). As the blue signs show, the 'footpath' is a key cycle route, too. The existence of people who cycle (and the benefit to the environment and local businesses) is ignored every time there are works. Yet this city is synonymous with cycling and friends/acquaintances express incredulity when I say it's far from perfect for getting round on two or three wheels and getting ever less so. Issues here today and on 7.9.21 see also: #173861 and linksGeneral sign/notice:
Problem
signs
173861Photo #173861[Image taken 6.9.21] Marygate car park, Railway Walk, Scarborough Bridge, Earlsborough Terrace, York. [Note: No streetview at this location] Diversion signs for the works to connect electricity for the EV charging bays at the far end of the car park. Unfortunately there is already a diversion in place here for the Marygate and Museum Gardens Flood Alleviation Scheme. Lots of confused people today. Other images this issue today and 7.8.21 see: #173862, #173863, #173864, #173865, #173866, #173867, #173868, #173869.General sign/notice:
Problem
signs
173860Photo #173860[Image taken 8.9.21] Haxby Road, York at exit from/access to Foss Islands Way. Someone has cut the briars [see: #173640] that came over the hoardings of the Cocoa Works site and created potentially painful hazards for pedestrians. The hoardings are very high. This may be why the briars were left on the pavement. However, they are now a trip hazard and the thorns could puncture tyres of children's cycles or balance bikes. Not a good advert for the developers (safety, maintenance, attention to detail, community awareness/commitment to...) Other image today: #173877.Other:
Problem
general
173859Photo #173859On the left a Loading Bay, and ahead some pavement parking loading activity. See also #173732.Car storage:
Problem
carstorage
173858Photo #173858The footway between Castlebank Street (or Beith Way) and Beith Street.Track:
Infrastructure
track
173857Photo #173857This section of street, which appears to be referred to as Beith Way in the COP26 diversion consultation, turns into B808 Beith Street, although the footway continues straight ahead alongside the wall.Road environment:
Infrastructure
road
173856Photo #173856The junction where it is proposed to close NCN7 during the COP26 conference and divert users around the streets of Yorkhill, Finnieston and Anderston. The carriageway of the road is accessed via the dropped kerb before the bridge, and the footway gets very narrow under the bridge (see also #174297).Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173855Photo #173855Margaret Wright community orchard.Cycle parking:
Good practice
cycleparking
173854Photo #173854[UPDATE: See #173797 for the 22.9.21 TPE response to my complaint to Matthew Golton, TPE MD and subsequent emails to the TPE Accessibility and Integration Manager.]
[Image taken 3.9.21] NCN66, Spen Valley Greenway, between Dewsbury and Bradford. [NOTE: No streetview here. I had to guess the location.] Just one of the fun things to look out for and enjoy along this accessible route. However I can no longer get here due to hooks for cycles on TransPennine Express (TPE) services (see: #173797). Here is my email to the CE of TPE, Matthew.Golton@tpexpress.co.uk


Hello

I saw on this page

www.tpexpress.co.uk/media-centre/news/2021/may/new-managing-director-for-transpennine-express

you are the new Managing Director of TransPennine Express.

I choose not to drive plus I have long been aware with age people need to give up driving for their own but also the safety of others.

I therefore use a combination of train and cycle.

However, on my first journey on a TPE train since the start of the covid pandemic I now find I cannot use your services.

1. The cycle carriage on the train I took between York and Dewsbury on Friday, 3 September 2021 at 09:50 was a shock. It had hooks. In a cupboard. I am unable to lift my cycle onto hooks. I am unable to lift my cycle off hooks.

2. The toilet doors are (it seems) self-closing. I struggled to open them. I needed two hands.

Plus,

3.

the floor was already covered in water when I entered a cubicle for the first time. I discovered why when I washed my hands. My clothing got splashed and the floor got wet too. I believe this is a direct hazard: wet floors are slippery. I believe this is public health issue: if you don't want you or your clothing to get wet you won't wash your hands.

I was travelling with someone who is 6ft. He was able to lift his cycle onto the hooks though not easily: cycles are not designed to be lifted in this way; they have lots of sharp bits; the front wheels are not fixed so move from side to side; they are oily/dirty; the cupboards are tiny; the train is moving; you are under pressure. He then tried to lift mine. There was even less space, it was a 'left-hand cupboard'. If you manoeuvre a cycle you stand on the left-hand side to avoid the chain which is on the right-hand side. Therefore when trying to stow the cycles he was on the 'wrong' side/the side people do not develop experience of lifting on.

He hurt himself. It was impossible not to block the corridor. He was unable to shut the door which meant the cycles were not secure and I would argue they were less safe than when when the cycles are in the carriage in which the owners are standing/seated.

I tried to lift my cycle off the hook but was unable to do this. I had to ask my companion to do it.

To ensure we would be able to get off at our stop - it is not possible on these trains to keep a door open and therefore it is not possible for station staff to see that someone is still getting on/off - and to avoid possibly delaying the service, the cycles had to come before passengers had started to queue to get off ie some time before we arrived at the station. There were no announcements about the time of arrival at the next stop so we started doing this immediately we left Leeds. We were therefore unavoidably doing this and putting our luggage back on while the train was moving. We were unable to hold on to any railing or brace ourselves on bends, slopes or rough parts of the track. There is no room in the carriage with the cycle cupboards in them for the cycles to be stowed out of the way. Therefore we unavoidably blocked the access for everyone going to and also from the toilets; the person with the drinks trolley - twice; the conductor.

No announcements were made as to which side the platform would be on which added to our stress and the problems for everyone wishing to disembark as well as passengers trying to move through.

Mr Golton the cycle carriage provision on TPE services is discriminatory.

I do not believe anyone with a physical disability could use the new design either/and because they cannot lift/manoeuvre a cycle but also because the hooks only accept lightweight cycles of a standard design. Therefore the design is directly discriminatory to people with physical disabilities.

I am now not able to travel independently with my cycle. Therefore the provision directly discriminates against women - we are smaller than men, we do not have upper body strength, we do not have muscles for lifting heavy items above our heads, we are rounder so have even less space in the cupboards, plus women tend to buy designs of cycle that are designed for utility use (including transporting children and shopping) or adapt their cycles to be able to do this. There was no space for a cycle with a child seat. Front racks/baskets were clearly also not taken into consideration when the hooks design was developed.

I also believe that e-cycles are not factored in. Such bikes are chunkier and heavier. My companion could not have lifted an e-cycle onto either of the hooks even if it had been a 'right-hand cupboard'.

E-cycles are popular among all ages of users but are particularly helpful for people with mobility issues/health conditions and people who are older.

Therefore the hook cycle provision on TPE services discriminates against those passengers.

The route we were to ride was NCN66, the Spen Valley Greenway

www.sustrans.org.uk/find-a-route-on-the-national-cycle-network/spen-valley-greenway

between Dewsbury and Bradford.

Dewsbury and Bradford stations (we returned from the latter on a Northern service) are barrier-free.

The access from Dewsbury to the Greenway is barrier-free. The route to Bradford rail stations is barrier-free.

The Greenway is used by all ages and all levels of fitness. These include wheelchair users, children on scooters, e-cycle users, hand cyclists, tandem riders including with a blind 'passenger', trikes, recumbents.

Yet I can no longer get to/from this accessible, inclusive, standard-setting route independently because I am small and female.

I want to move around independently - in fact, I believe freedom of travel is a human right - but can no longer use TPE services. I am also not prepared to create stress for a companion or put that person at risk of further pain or back issues due to needing to load/unload my cycle as well as his.

I made this journey to ride NCN66 many times each year before covid. I was anticipating being able to do so until late in life. I can no longer make it even now.

Plus, even as we cycled to York station I was saying yet again that I looked forward to bringing my sister and/or her youngest son to ride it with us.

However, my sister would not be able to lift her son's cycle onto a hook or hers. And the son is too small to do so.

I believe therefore this design of cycle carriage discriminates against every user. I believe it must come out and provision created as before: flexible use space that is much easier to lift a cycle into and which does not create a hazard for the user or other passengers.

I also believe the design of the toilet cubicle doors discriminate. I needed two hands to slide them open. I believe some people (including the elderly, youngsters, people with some health conditions) would not be able to open the doors or do so safely on a moving train.

I will now write to my MP to state that the TPE services with 'hooks' and heavy sliding doors are discriminatory.

I look forward to hearing from you.
Other:
Infrastructure
general
173853Photo #173853Allow cycling as well as walking on the Fisherman's Walk. Not clear if this is permitted or not.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173852Photo #173852Extend the pavement beyond the Museum to the road to Glen Rosa to enable pedestrians to reach the road to the campsite. Ample space on the south west side of the road in the woodland to do this.Track:
Problem
track
173851Photo #173851Offically allow pavement cycling up the hill at West Loch to avoid the fast cars and trucks on the A83. Pavement needs resurfacing.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173850Photo #173850Allow contraflow cycling to enable cyclists using the high road off the nasty A78 to minimise cycling on the trunk road.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173849Photo #173849Turn right off main road on to continuation of cycle route is poor and needs making much safer.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173848Photo #173848Sign needed at south side of crossing to direct people to go east for National Route 7 and Pollock Park. We went the wrong way due to this lack of info,Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173847Photo #173847Clear signs on this side of the road needed to direct people on cycles over to the Anderston Bridge cycle path. Not clear to people new to the route off the train from London.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173846Photo #173846The traffic is terrible. Speeding is rife.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173845Photo #173845Millennium Milepost BirstallRoute sign:
Infrastructure
routesigns
173844Photo #173844Millennium Milepost LoughboroughRoute sign:
Infrastructure
routesigns
173843Photo #173843Millennium Milepost ShelthorpeRoute sign:
Infrastructure
routesigns
173842Photo #173842Millennium Milepost BeltonRoute sign:
Infrastructure
routesigns
173841Photo #173841Millennium Milepost WilsonRoute sign:
Infrastructure
routesigns
173840Photo #173840Millennium Milepost Alveston ParkRoute sign:
Infrastructure
routesigns
173839Photo #173839Road surface is crap, not 100% safe for young children and newcomers to rideCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173838Photo #173838[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] Tools available at: #173837. Other images today: #173825 and linksOther:
Problem
general
173837Photo #173837[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] A cyclehoop (www.cyclehoop.com/product/pumps-stations/repair-stand/) repair stand with tools. The pump is broken but the tools, though rusty, look as if you could still use them (see: #173834). If you need repairs there is a branch of the York-based chain, Cycle Heaven, in the station (www.cycle-heaven.co.uk/contact-us/cycle-heaven-at-york-railway-station). Other images today: #173825 and linksOther:
Problem
general
173836Photo #173836[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] Caged - secure - cycle parking of the doubleheight/stacked design which many people cannot use (see: #173835.) But I don't think that's the reason it's empty. Are people still working from home for covid-related reasons? Is it because it's the (last week of the) school summer holidays? Other images this subject today: #173830. Other images today: #173825 and linksCycle parking:
Infrastructure
cycleparking
173835Photo #173835[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] These racks are in use despite being the doubleheight/stacked ones many people physically can't use, because of the design of their cycle, or on account of the attachments (search on 'York'cycle). Other images this subject today: #173830. Other images today: #173825 and linksCycle parking:
Infrastructure
cycleparking
173834Photo #173834[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] The racks are empty. The car parking is full. See also: #173830 and links. Other images today: #173825 and linksOther:
Infrastructure
general
173833Photo #173833[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] The racks are empty, depressingly the car park is full. See also: #173830 and links. Other images today: #173825 and linksCycle parking:
Event
cycleparking
173832Photo #173832[Ima[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] The racks are empty. The car parking is full. See also: #173830, #173833, #173834. Other images today: #173825 and linksCycle parking:
Event
cycleparking
173831Photo #173831[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] There's a cycle map of York where most people accessing/returning to the cycle parking would find it. Plus: the racks are the Sheffield design, well spaced, undercover, well lit, accessible and they look full. But see #173830. Other images today: #173825 and linksCycle parking:
Good practice
cycleparking
173830Photo #173830[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] Just before lockdown cycle parking at York station seemed to be at capacity. The Sheffields (racks) today looked like they do over Christmas and New Year - sparsely populated. More images this issue today see: #173831, #173832, #173833, #173834, #173835. Other images today: #173825 and linksCycle parking:
Good practice
cycleparking
173829Photo #173829[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] See: #173826, #173827 and #173828 for context. Other images today: #173825 and linksRoute sign:
Problem
routesigns
173828Photo #173828[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] As per: #173827 the capital letters and hatching look as if this is not a permissible route. Yet the cycle parking is behind the white car in the background. There are two small cycle parking direction signs on: #173829 but you can't see them from a distance and there are no others. Other images today: #173825 and linksRoute sign:
Problem
routesigns
173827Photo #173827[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] There's no route signage and the hatching with the large 'NO' make it look as if you cannot cycle in this direction. The cycle parking is directly ahead but how do you get there even if you know it exists? Other images today: #173825 and linksRoad environment:
Problem
road
173826Photo #173826[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] There's no route signage eg exit with road names, and no directions to the cycle parking. There's room on the big white sign for the latter. Other images today: #173825 and linksRoute sign:
Problem
routesigns
173825Photo #173825[Image taken 1.9.21] York rail station, York. Obstructed cycle access and no directions through the car park or to the cycle parking. Other images today: #173826, #173827, #173828, #173829, #173830, #173831, #173832, #173833, #173834, #173835, #173836, #173837, #173838.Obstruction:
Problem
obstructions
173823Photo #173823[Image taken 3.9.21] York rail station, York. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] To move between platforms there are two tunnels. Pre-covid the white panels were devoid of anything other than directions to the lifts/platforms. They are intimidating spaces. I've suggested to LNER staff that they might be a good project for students at the college. I've got some ideas for making them more attractive, too. I felt it was therefore likely that many people who use these areas would. I also suggested LNER runs a competition for ideas. Nothing came of either. But covid has brought posters to the walls. When these come down could engaging and/or attractive designs go up? Other images today: #173801 and linksOther:
Infrastructure
general
173822Photo #173822[Image taken 3.9.21] Vicar Lane, Bradford. [Note: No streetview here.] Ah, taxis can be electric and therefore need charging points too. I haven't spotted any dedicated bays in York, yet. Other images today: #173801 and linksOther:
Good practice
general
173821Photo #173821[Image taken 3.9.21] Vicar Lane, Bradford. [Note: No streetview here.] Distinctive (and once you know what it is) easy to spot cycle parking. Seemingly installed during lockdown 2020. See also: #173820 and links.Cycle parking:
Good practice
cycleparking
173820Photo #173820[Image taken 3.9.21] Vicar Lane, Bradford. [Note: No streetview here.] I'm looking out for reasons why, if there is car parking, there should not be cycle parking too. Ie can I say to a local authority, if there's car parking, in every case there should be racks for cycles too? My starting point was York: #173664. Riding through Bradford I spotted this and another: #173821. They are new, they are cycle parking and they are in car parks. Another example, this time onroad: #170649. Other images today: #173801 and linksCycle parking:
Good practice
cycleparking
173819Photo #173819[Image taken 3.9.21] York rail station. [NOTE: No streetview at this location.] The social distancing sign is not fulfilling its purpose and is a hazard and an eyesore. Given that face coverings are no longer mandatory and the crush on trains and in the toilets means distancing is not possible, this sign can go. More worrying is that the grit remains. All wheels are at risk of skidding so that's wheelchair users; people on cycles, often with dependants or people of all ages who are being cared for, onboard; children on scooters, balance bikes and their first pedalled cycles (see: # 172873), cargo cycles, and all who are new to cycling... Grit gets moved by weather, wheels, paws and feet. It needs to be cleared up as soon as it appears on places people walk, cycle, scoot, wheelchair. I will report it to LNER again. Other images today: #173797 and linksCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173818Photo #173818[Image taken 26.8.21] South Colonnade, London, E14. Tandem Lovers by Gillie and Marc Schattner. Full details: www.londonxlondon.com/gillie-marc-canary-wharf/Other:
Event
general
173817Photo #173817Elland Road cycle lane with the football ground in the background.Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173816Photo #173816Cycleway along the middle of Belgrave Road is covered in grit and pebbles (and broken glass in places) and it was clearly very poorly contructed. It needs a street sweeper along there every now and then to sweep up all the loose grit that makes cycling unpleasant and unsafe.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173815Photo #173815This road / path is marked on the OS Map as a PUBLIC footpath and traffic free cycle route. However there is a sign on the gate stating it is private and not a public right of way. The property owner MUST remove the sign and allow access!Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173814Photo #173814[Image taken 5.9.21] Bootham Stray, York. [Note: No street view at this location.] Warm, bright evening, the last day before the start of the new school term for many. How to make the best of it? Go brambling (picking blackberries). How do you get there? By bike. Other York plant-related images see: #167752 and linksOther:
Good practice
general
173813Photo #173813The trees and shrubs are heavily overgrown along the canal here - making the towpath very narrow and dangerous.Track:
Problem
track
173812Photo #173812This part of the Clydeside path at Shawfield has been closed for so long without be any repairs being attempted that the sign is now faded and falling to bits.

Whether it's @GlasgowCC, @SouthLanCouncil or @clydegateway that's responsible, get the finger out, it's a shambles. t.co/0A6zalXWkw
Temporary closure:
Problem
closure
173811Photo #173811The northern footway on South Street comes to another break, and again there is a desire line worn in the grass. NCN7 is on the opposite shared footway.

Meanwhile, a line of car showroom flags marks the course of the demolished former railway embankment and cycle path.
Road environment:
Problem
road
173810Photo #173810The resumption of the South Street footway at Ferryden Street was brief, and it comes to an end again after the car showroom built on the course of the cycle path. The path used to cross Harmsworth Street here on a former railway bridge.

NCN7 continues on the shared footway on the opposite side of the road.
Road environment:
Problem
road
173809Photo #173809South Street, with worn desire line in the grass verge where there is a missing footway, a speed camera that has been out of use for a long time, a traffic counter, and NCN7 on the footway across the road.Road environment:
Problem
road
173808Photo #173808South Street carries quite a lot of industrial traffic, due to the area it is in. So the cycle route (on the footway on the right) is so unattractive to these two cyclists that they prefer this road to the shared footway cycle route.

The one cyclist visible on the cycle route later bumped the kerb to make a right turn into Ferryden Street.
Road environment:
Problem
road
173807Photo #173807The footway on this side of South Street resumes, with the worn desire line continuous from #173806.

The NCN7 cycle route on the opposite footway is not good enough to attract these two to use it.
Road environment:
Problem
road
173806Photo #173806The toucan crossing is used to follow the cycle route which continues on the footway of the other side of South Street, but there is a clear desire line for staying on this side. There is a short break before the footway resumes at Ferryden Street.Road environment:
Problem
road
173805Photo #173805The start of the railway path section of NCN7 to Loch Lomond at Smith Street. It used to start back at Meadow Road. #101427 views the site looking in the opposite direction.

At least one of those signs is pointing the wrong way. Glasgow doesn't use square poles.
Route sign:
Problem
routesigns
173804Photo #173804[Image taken 3.9.21] Wakefield Road, Bradford. Innovation to create a dropped kerb for cyclists. See also: #173803. Context: #173801, and links.Road environment:
Good practice
road
173803Photo #173803[Image taken 3.9.21] Usher Street/Wakefield Road, Bradford. Innovation to create a dropped kerb for cyclists on a popup cycle lane. See also: #173804. Context: #173801, and links.Cycleway:
Good practice
cycleways
173802Photo #173802Shared footway on Smith Street and ramp into car park, and access to NCN7 in the background.Road environment:
Infrastructure
road
173801Photo #173801[Image taken 3.9.21] Wakefield Road/Rutland Street, Bradford. Light segregation (wands and armadillos) reallocate one of the three lanes in each direction to people on cycles. The funding came from the Government's covid-19 active travel fund. See also: #173802, #173803. Other images today: #173797, #173819, #173820, #173821, #173822, #173823 and links.Road environment:
Good practice
road
173800Photo #173800Not as bad as #173674, but all the signs that this will be yet another unpleasant autumn and winter for users of the cycle off-slip from Balshagray Avenue.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173799Photo #173799In need of some basic maintenance, overhanging branches and unswept surface on the cycle off-slip from Balshagray Avenue.Cycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173798Photo #173798[Image taken 3.9.21] TransPennine Express (TPE) service York-Dewsbury. The cycle carriage on this train design is hooks in a cupboard. I consider this completely discriminatory as it means I cannot travel independently. (See discussion blow.) It was also not possible to shut the door which meant the cycles were at risk. And makes a mockery of announcements about keeping luggage with you at all times/where you can see it. See also: #173797.

Discussion:
With this choice of trains/cycle carriage, TPE has taken away my independence and autonomy. In short: it is directly discriminatory. The Equality Act 2010 www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/sex-discrimination says you must not be discriminated against because:
you are (or are not) a particular sex). I believe TPE is discriminating against women by requiring cycles to be hung up as we are physically different to men. I am also concerned:
- the hooks provision assumes people will be travelling in pairs;
- one traveller will be strong enough and tall enough to lift the cycle of a smaller/less strong companion;
- the pairs will be both male (the hooks exclude women);
- lack of recognition that in same sex partnerships neither person may be male/tall enough/strong enough to lift a cycle onto/off a hook.

The provision of hooks (and no alternatives) makes me 'disabled'. So I had a look at The TPE Accessible Travel Policy
(www.tpexpress.co.uk/~/media/travelling-with-us/assisted-travel/tpexpress-accessible-travel-policy-aug-2020.pdf?la=en)
Valid From: 11/08/2020
The Introduction says:
"We are committed to delivering consistently excellent service, making journeys easy and convenient for all our customers. Our aim is to provide an accessible and welcoming railway for all and we will ensure that your needs as an older or disabled customer are properly considered in all aspects of service delivery. The end goal is enabling you to travel confidently and as independently as possible."
Providing hooks for cycle carriage excludes these groups and others.
Parking: There's no recognition of people with mobility issues arriving by cycle. The 'parking' (in A7.2 Disabled parking) therefore only refers to car parking.
There's "Wheelchair user spaces and priority seat reservations" but no mention of carriage of cycles people use for mobility.
Other:
Problem
general
173797Photo #173797[UPDATE] Reply from TPE 22.9.21 to my complaint see #173854:
EMAIL SENT ON BEHALF OF KATHRYN O’BRIEN, CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE DIRECTOR
Dear [Rebba]
Thank you for your further email and questions with regards to the cycle racks on our Nova 2 trains – our Accessibility and Integration Manager, Natasha Marsay, has forwarded your response to me.
I am sorry to hear you are unhappy with the design of our cycle racks on our Nova 2 services – unfortunately, we are unable to alter this design currently, but we will take your comments into consideration for the future. As you travel mostly between York and Dewsbury, I can confirm that both stations have cycle storage facilities which are free to use, and I wholly recommend that these facilities are taken advantage of.
I’d like to thank you for your feedback with regards to this matter – we really do appreciate suggestions on how we can improve from our customers, as this information is invaluable to us.
Thank you for getting in touch.
Yours sincerely
Kathryn O’Brien
Customer Experience Director

I reject this response. The reason for being on this route was to cycle the Spen Valley Cycleway. So leaving my cycle somewhere is not going to work. Plus, it does not address the issue that these trains cannot be used by most people with cycles and that presumably most (all?)* TPE services are now this design so people who travel with a cycle are excluded from travelling on trains on routes that are operated by TPE. I also don't believe customers should need to research which routes a design of train operates on or *the extent to which an operator uses a specific design of train.
Further, there was no reply to my complaint that the toilet doors are very difficult to open/keep open while you enter and leave the cubicles and are therefore also inaccessible to some people - with the loss of dignity and independence this causes.



[Image taken 3.9.21] TransPennine Express (TPE) service York-Dewsbury. [No Streetview at York rail station.] The cycle carriage on this train design is directly discriminatory. The 'provision' is now hooks in a cupboard. I am female. I was unable to lift my cycle onto or off the hooks. My sisters and most of my female friends would be able to do this. This 6ft male struggled to do so - putting his back at risk of injury and trapping his hand/suffering pain in the process. This issue today see also: #173798. My email to the Chief Executive of TPE is at: #173854. Other images related issues: #174286 and links. Other images today: #173801 and links.
Cycle parking:
Problem
cycleparking
173796Photo #173796Road needs a joint footpath/cycle path. Busy road, used by many cyclistsCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173795Photo #173795Road needs a joint footpath/cycle path. Busy road, used by many cyclistsCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173794Photo #173794Auction Café, Willingham for the veteran bicycle club luncheon.Destination:
Event
destinations
173793Photo #173793Road needs a cycle path. Busy road, used by many cyclistsCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173792Photo #173792Road needs a cycle path. Busy road, used by many cyclistsCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173791Photo #173791Road needs a cycle path. Busy road, used by many cyclistsCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173790Photo #173790Mick George skip trucks have a 20mph limit on this 30mph road in Willingham.General sign/notice:
Good practice
signs
173789Photo #17378920 mph past school - www.20splenty.orgTemporary closure:
Problem
closure
173788Photo #173788Station Road narrow shared use cycleway.Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173787Photo #17378720 mph past school - www.20splenty.orgTemporary closure:
Problem
closure
173786Photo #173786Butt Lane narrow shared use cycleway.Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173785Photo #173785Veteran bicycle club event.Road environment:
Event
road
173784Photo #173784Butt Lane narrow shared use cycleway.Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173783Photo #173783New (rough) surface on this green lane - now much easier to run/cycleCycleway:
Problem
cycleways
173782Photo #173782Sturdy hire bikes, typical for most of the Frisian islands.Bicycle:
Infrastructure
bicycles
173781Photo #173781Pavement cycling at the deep water harbour at Wilhelmshaven - smooth and wide.Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173780Photo #173780Outer dyke cycling on the D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle Route just north of the deep water terminal at Wilhelmshaven.Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173779Photo #173779Well illustrated deviation for cyclists and walkers.General sign/notice:
Event
signs
173778Photo #173778Cycling by the water just north of Germany's deep water container terminal at Wilhelmshaven.Cycleway:
Good practice
cycleways
173777Photo #173777D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle Route – with a smooth tarmac surface and traffic free.Cycleway:
Infrastructure
cycleways
173776Photo #173776Car free D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle Route on the outer dyke at the Jadebusen bay north of Wilhelmshaven.Cycleway:
Good practice
cycleways
173775Photo #173775D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle Route frequently shared with sheep.Cycleway:
Event
cycleways
173774Photo #173774D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle RouteOther:
Good practice
general
173773Photo #173773Inclined, outer dyke cycleway on the D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle Route.Cycleway:
Good practice
cycleways
173772Photo #173772The D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle Route is touristy and offers many resting places.Other:
Good practice
general
173771Photo #173771Route signs on the D1 EuroVelo 12 North Sea Cycle Route near one of harbours from where ferries serve the Frisian islands.Route sign:
Misc
routesigns

We welcome your feedback, especially to report bugs or give us route feedback.

My comments relate to: *






Your comments: *
URL of page: * https://www.cyclestreets.net/photos/all/page6.html
How did you find out about CycleStreets?:
Your name:
Our ref: Please leave blank - anti-spam measure

* Items marked with an asterisk [*] are required fields and must be fully completed.