Traffic Regulation Order review for Worcester city centre roads
On Thursday 12th September 2024 at the Worcestershire County Council meeting, the Cabinet Member for Highways Cllr Marc Bayliss confirmed there would be a review on the Traffic Regulation Order’s (TRO) that prohibit cycling on a number of city centre roads. This statement was prompted by a question raised by Alan Amos, who has subsequently made the following statement to the Worcester News about the issue:
By definition, a pedestrianized zone is a safe and welcoming area where pedestrians can shop and walk because all moving vehicles, including cyclists, are banned. In Worcester, it is between 10 a.m.and 6 p.m. If you allow any moving vehicles into it, you no longer have a pedestrianized zone and the City Centre shopping area will revert to a dangerous and unwelcoming place to be, especially for the elderly, those with hearing, visual, and physical disabilities, and young children. I have already been contacted by one disabled group objecting to this proposal. As it is now, cyclists routinely flout the law. Because cyclists don’t have any identification, they continue to do so with impunity and never get caught. I and many others worked hard to extend the hours of the ban on moving vehicles to what they are today, and it has worked very well. So there is now absolutely no need whatsoever to change it just for the sake of a handful of lazy, selfish cyclists. There is no reason why they just cannot dismount at one end of the zone, push their bikes through, and remount at the other end, which would take no more than a few minutes. I always take the view that “if it ain’t bust, don’t fix it”. In this case, leave well alone.
As a result of decades of decisions that prioritise people driving cars over all other forms of transport, we are left with an often gridlocked city with very few alternatives to transport beyond driving. Worcester stands out as a city having almost no segregated infrastructure for people choosing to travel by bike within the City Centre.
Both the City and County Councils are aligned with central government targets in aiming to increase rates of cycling; to achieve this it is essential that safe and direct routes are enabled across the city centre on desire line routes. Amos is chasing ghosts. The majority of segregated paths where cycling is allowed are shared use with pedestrians, notably the riverside and, the canal towpath (which incorporates a section of the National Cycle Network), and paths in St Peters and Warndon Villages, all of which are much narrower than the city centre streets. These are well used by people walking and riding bikes, and are a good demonstration how easily the two modes of transport can mix with minimal incidents.
The alternative to cycling through the city centre is to force people onto the orbital roads which have high volumes of traffic and congestion, and in most cases are multiple lanes in each direction. There are experienced cyclists who would have concerns about riding these roads during rush hour, for others this is an insurmountable barrier, particularly when travelling with children. As we have done before we’d invite Councillor Amos (and any other Councillors or Officers) to travel on these roads by bike, supported by Bike Worcester volunteers, to experience this first hand, before providing opinions on suitability or safety. Perhaps then I’d be more prepared to listen to Alan’s views as to whether things are bust, and need fixing; at present he is simply poorly informed.
The current prohibition of bikes is a huge barrier to encouraging more people to make short journeys by bike in the city. Bike Worcester isn't advocating to fully revoke the ban - it supports the Cabinet Member of Highways suggestion of reviewing the current scheme to improve road safety for everyone, but the provision of some safe routes across the city centre (north / south and east / west) are essential. Perhaps a better approach would be to suspend the TROs prohibiting cycling for a period of time and to undertake some trials, with predefined pass / fail criteria, to determine a solution that works for all modes of transport?
If Cllr Amos was serious about road safety (or public health, or air pollution, or liveable cities, or the decarbonisation of transport), he would focus time, energy and effort on the most significant cause of road danger (reckless, dangerous and inconsiderate driving) and stop talking about paper cuts whilst the County is on cycling-infrastructure life support. RTC statistics for Worcester can be found here. Nationally the police reference the Fatal 4 when talking about the cause of RTCs: speeding, distracted driving (phone use), drugs and alcohol, and not wearing seatbelts. Cycling in a shared use environment with pedestrians does not feature on this list. West Mercia are well placed to comment on safety aspects of the roads in Worcester, and in 2017 supported a removal of the TROs prohibiting cycling on safety grounds.
We seriously question Cllr Amos’ cogency: he constantly refers to people who propel themselves on two wheels as “lazy and selfish”. We have concerns about his ability to mount a coherent argument if this is the best he’s got. People choosing to walk or cycle for short journeys rather than driving are clearly not lazy; it’s embarrassing that Alan continues to deride and insult residents and visitors to Worcester in this manner, a desperate attempt at dog whistle politics that has no place in the Faithful City. Time to grow up. As for the selfish argument, this is also nonsense. Whilst active travel provides immediate benefits to an individual’s mental and physical health (reducing the burden on the NHS), it also takes a car off the road improving air quality and reducing congestion, reduces road danger for other users, and makes the city more pleasant and livable for all residents and visitors.
Alan again rakes up the incoherent and ridiculous trope about cyclists being unidentifiable. We’ve covered that in this blog here, along with similar arguments about insurance and road tax. No doubt we’ll see Alan’s alter ego Hwicce spouting similar rubbish on the Worcester News comments, his current favourite is referring to people travelling by bike as the Selfish Cycling Urban Mafia or SCUM; we’re not sure this adheres to the Nolan Principles, Alan.
Alan quite rightly points out that the current TROs are not enforced, and many people travel through the area on bikes, which also demonstrates this happens safely and with minimal incident (worth comparing this to the ever increasing tally of RTCs on the city roads causing destruction, injury and death). I suspect this is partly due to the rule not being known and that it’s unintuitive (see comment above about other cities), or people are choosing to ignore it rather than cycling on the roads. Of interest is how little problem this causes; people walking and people on bikes are remarkably adept at avoiding each other, particularly on wider streets such as those in the city centre. For those people that do abide by the TRO there can be much bigger consequences.
What Alan doesn’t mention is that the TROs are often also ignored by people driving motor vehicles, again, most likely ignorance. Next time you’re in the city centre keep your eyes peeled for delivery drivers (they’re not hard to spot) and compare the impact they have on the flow of pedestrians compared with the impact on bikes. We’re not sure if Alan is aware that there are exemptions to the TRO for motor vehicles, and as he’s adamant a pedestrian zone is one where ‘all moving vehicles are banned’, maybe this means it’s not a pedestrianised zone? Also the TRO is only applicable for 8 hours per day, so for the other 16 hours, which includes when children travel to school in a morning and Worcester’s night time economy they revert back to being roads?
Finally, but perhaps most importantly, the TROs also prohibit the use of mobility scooters during the stated times. So will Alan be calling for identity plates and enforcement for all scooter users, or does this further highlight it’s just and deep seated and irrational dislike of people riding bikes?
We fully support the Cabinet Member's suggestion for a review of the existing TROs, with the best outcome being a trial of some selected Share with Care routes through the city centre.
