Kirkstall Road will benefit from a £245,000 road improvement scheme at an accident blackspot between Woodside View and Weaver Street.
Leeds City Council has approved the creation of a segregated cycle track on a section of the A65 Kirkstall Road as part of a wider package of road improvements. These include:
- Providing a segregated cycle track between Woodside View and Greenhow Road;
- Reduce the overall width of Kirkstall Road to cater for the track.
- Give priority to pedestrians and cyclists at side road junctions between the designated streets, and introduce side road speed tables to change priority to reduce vehicle speeds
A council report says the section of Kirkstall Road did not benefit from alterations from the multi-million pound Quality Bus Initiative in 2012 which introduced priority bus lanes in a bid to reduce traffic congestion. It says:
“Over the past five years there were 59 recorded injury accidents along this length. These accidents are as a result of varied causation factors with a large proportion involving Pedal Cyclist. From the 59 recorded injury accidents 56% involved a pedal cyclist or pedestrians.”
The report, written by trainee engineer Jack Young, goes on to say that the introduction of the cycle track should not impact on the capacity of the road. Consultation has been taken internally, and to date no adverse comments have been received. It adds:
“In order to improve the road safety and assist in cycle safety and therefore support economic growth along this section of A65 Kirkstall Road there needs to be measures taken to assist cyclist and pedestrians along here. Although there is a loss of carriageway it is only over short lengths and the proposals will have a considerable benefit to cyclist and pedestrians.”
You can read the council’s decision in full here. The decision was taken under delegated powers by the chief officer for Highways and Transportation Gary Bartlett.
One moment please …
“Over the past five years there were 59 recorded injury accidents along this length. These accidents are as a result of varied causation factors with a large proportion involving Pedal Cyclist. From the 59 recorded injury accidents 56% involved a pedal cyclist or pedestrians.”
So thats 56% of 59 = 33, over 5 years = 6 ish
So 6 people a year (and thats cyclists AND pedestrians) on a road that carries hundreds of thousands of cars a month
And a trainee engineer wants to spend £250,000 to make it … narrower
Oh, and the decision to sanction that lunacy was taken under delegated powers by the chief officer for Highways and Transportation, with zero public consultation
Bravo
.
A votra ouvee!
Good Lord! How can they justify this decision ? What am I only hearing about this now?
It’s not exactly a small amount of money, is it? Nearly a quarter of a million of tax payers’ money …
Suggest they use the cycle superhighway, as its hardly ever used !!! Try to make use of this waste of money eyesore, danger to road users, pedestrians, home owners and cyclists you have already created before wasting more tax payers money.
Very pleased to see cycling being taken seriously. Cycling rates are very low in Leeds and that won’t change until proper, safe infrastructure is built.
The above scheme was designed and delivered by a trainee without serious overview of professional people. Why what makes you think WTE you can ride roughshod over the people? Clearly you know you can. Cocking a snook at local people who live in the area. And who do really give a damn? That is why most people do not vote at local elections. No democracy. Only untouchable Quangos.
For proven wrong decisions, responsible council officers will be fined by a diminution of their pension provision by 20% for each decision made.
A proposition proposed by the people of the City.
I propose this to Leeds City Council. I would like a response…
Your sprog suggests that cyclists ‘promote economic growth’. Show me any stats. that differentiate cyclists from other members of our working community?
Reviewing the team through LinkedIn, the trainee engineer is at a stage in his career development where he is more than competent to produce these designs and the report. The designs are suitable based on current design standards and limitations placed on the Highways and Transportation department. Being pedantic, 4.6.2 should be revised to note the rate of accidents will continue if nothing is done (unfortunately accidents will still happen). Rather than direct your ire at a young gentleman who has produced perfectly satisfactory designs that improve the road infrastructure for cyclists and pedestrians, you may want to raise this issue with your Councillor. £250k might sound a lot of money but quite frankly, it is very little and consulting at every point of the matter will slow the progress of work to a snails pace.
Six people a year were involved in a recorded accident, which are six people who were injured/late to work because of an accident on just half a mile stretch of road.
Please can someone explain to me how by moving the give way markings further away from Kirkstall Road will actually improve the situation? Whilst I appreciate all efforts to make junctions safer I feel that this work has done exactly the opposite, if a car waits at the newly positioned give way markings the drivers view of approaching cyclists is even more restricted than it was before and on Barnborough Street in particular the is no view whatsover towards the city centre because of the school wall. Any partially sighted or blind pedestrians no longer have the pimple areas to warn them that they are about to cross a junction.
I will not be surprised if this scheme results in more accidents, not less.