A marathon, not a sprint

Perhaps best read, if you've nothing better to do, from the bottom up. This cycle track's only been in situ for circa 18 years, so give it time.

From: NTMHTo: Project Planning Manager Sustainable TransportCC: Senior Transport Projects Engineer Sustainable Transport; Assistant Engineer Sustainable Transport; Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator; Northumbria PoliceSent: Friday 23^rd August 2013Subject: Re: Civil Parking Enforcement Query

Thanks Project Planning Manager, Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator, gents, but failing to find reference anywhere in the literature, guidelines or statutes to "advisory cycle tracks", and confused as to how the stretch of infrastructure we're discussing could be signed in the way it is without having been converted from a footway into a cycle track by authentic legal process, I asked the CTC:

1) To meet the definition in DfT Local Transport Note 1/12, September 2012: Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists, “10.5 Cycle Track: A way constituting or comprised in a highway, being a way over which the public have the following but no other, rights of way, that is to say, a right of way on pedal cycles (other than pedal cycles which are motor vehicles within the meaning of the Road Traffic Act 1988) with or without a right of way on foot [section 329(1) Highways Act 1980]...”, and consequently to enjoy the protection of the Road Traffic Act 1988: “21 Prohibition of driving or parking on cycle tracks. (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a [F1mechanically propelled] vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence...”, MUST a shared use cycle track converted from a footway adjacent to a carriageway be subject to a Traffic Regulation Order? 2) What is the legal status of such a shared use facility in the absence of a TRO?3) What distinguishes a nominal cycle track lacking TRO from a footway/pavement?4) Is there such a thing as an "advisory cycle track"?

to which they replied, within half a working day

"Thanks for your email.The definition of a ‘Cycle Track’ includes at least two different legal structures:a) a cycle track created under the Cycle Tracks Act 1984 from a public footpath (that is to say, a path with a right of way on foot only, away from the carriageway). This process is difficult and seldom used because of technical niceties it is probably not worth worrying about. The process is explained in the following briefing: (http://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_public/bridleways-byways-cycle-tracksbrf.pdf)
b) shared use footways, usually created from existing footways (paths for pedestrians by the side of the road) using Sections 65 and 66 of the Highways Act 1980: (https://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_public/public-footpathsbrf.pdf)Neither of these processes uses Traffic Regulation Orders. You are right that, whereas people may legally park on a footway, they are not permitted to park on a cycle track – so if residents (outside London) are unhappy with pavement parking, they should get their pavements converted to shared use footways – but they’ll still need the police to enforce them!However, TROs are required in order to restrict traffic on highways, and are therefore necessary to create a mandatory cycle lane, they are also necessary to make one-way streets etc. The Government recently announced that it is prepared to relax this requirement, which should greatly reduce the cost of developing better infrastructure for cyclists.I’m not sure what you mean by a “nominal” cycle track; a shared use footway (the things that plague the country) has normally been converted using the s65/66 process described above. If it has the blue signs to diagrams 956 or 957 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/images/uksi_20023113_en_102) [it does, both varieties] then it will have been converted or created using those processes.There is no such thing as an “advisory cycle track” in the way that you can have an advisory cycle lane on the carriageway. You could, I suppose have a permissive bridleway across private land, but if it is a highway (ie, carriageway, adjacent footway, or right-of-way away from the carriageway) then the rules are clear.CTC has in the past pushed for greater simplicity for the process of creating cycle tracks, though we also want to make sure that footways converted under the Highways Act are created up to a proper standard of design, with widths, surface quality, sightlines, curve radii and crossings suitable for cyclists to use – these are very different from the requirements of pedestrians."

I was also pointed to this from the same DfT Local Transport Note 1/12, September 2012, Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists: "10.24 Public consultation is not a mandatory requirement. By virtue of the Road Traffic Act 1988, it is generally an offence to use a motor vehicle on a cycle track. A Traffic Regulation Order is therefore not required to control such use..."

So please may we move on to how Council and partners Northumbria Police will ensure that right of way on it is exclusive to pedestrians and cyclists? And please may we do this without referring to "obstruction"? "Obstruction" may be a relevant consideration when assessing the appropriation by car users of footways/pavements, but here the offence is driving or parking a motorised vehicle, wholly or partly, on a cycle track.Unless.. the Council never went though the process of s66/65 of the Highways Act to remove the footway and replace it (technically, not literally) with a cycle track, which would be shocking - placing cyclists in legal jeopardy by erecting signs and road markings to indicate use when no such use has legally been given.

Thanks

NTMH

From: Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator

To: NTMH
Cc: Project Planning Manager Sustainable Transport; Senior Transport Projects Engineer Sustainable Transport; Assistant Engineer Sustainable Transport

Sent: Wednesday, 21 August 2013, 11:59
Subject: FW: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Hi NTMH,

I have spoken to Project Planning Manager Sustainable Transport and he has informed me that what I stated below is correct.

Thanks

Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator

From: Assistant Engineer Sustainable Transport
Sent: 15 August 2013 11:29
To: Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator
Cc: Senior Transport Projects Engineer Sustainable Transport
Subject: RE: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator,

I think what you have written is correct but I suggest you ask Project Planning Manager Sustainable Transport just to check that it is ok.

Assistant Engineer Sustainable Transport.

From: Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator
Sent: 15 August 2013 11:21
To: Senior Transport Projects Engineer Sustainable Transport; Assistant Engineer Sustainable Transport
Cc: NTMH

Subject: FW: Civil Parking Enforcement query 

Please see correspondences below.

It I my understanding that as the cycle track in question is an advisory cycle track as it has no TRO on it. Regardless of what the DFT state as a cycle track, it cannot be classed or enforced as a cycle track without a TRO. This therefor is not a Cycle track defined by the DfT definition. As stated before As there is no TRO on the area in question any enforcement should be carried out by the police for obstruction.

I am unaware of any cycle track within the county that do have a TRO on them.

Can you confirm?

Thanks

Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator

From: NTMH
Sent: 14 August 2013 23:40
To: Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator
Subject: Re: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator

thanks for getting back to me, but I don't see an answer or answers to my query of 11th July. You've re-stated Parking Services response, March 5th, to my initial contact of March 2nd: "no TRO, not our responsibility, take it to the police". I heard that the first time.

But 11th July, below, I inquired into the status of this sliver of infrastructure. Is it a Cycle Track as defined by the given DfT definition, a space where there is no right of way for motorised vehicles, a prohibition enshrined in the Road Traffic Act 1988: "any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a [mechanically propelled] vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence."? Or was it merely signed as such without the proper procedure being followed? Is it a kosher Cycle Track?

And are there any other shavings of public space in Morpeth that meet the legal definition of a Cycle Track?

If this is more Highways Design's area, please forward me on, copying me in so I know where it's gone.

Thanks again

NTMH

From: Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator
To: NTMH
Sent: Tuesday, 13 August 2013, 10:14
Subject: RE: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Hi NTMH,

My apologies for not getting back to you. I did not here from back from the other department before I went on Holiday.

I have now spoken to them and I have been informed that there is no Traffic Regulation Order on the road or on the cycle track to enable us to enforce on that section of highway. The cycle track would need a TRO on it to allow the CEO’s to enforce the area. As this is the case it would fall to the police to enforce the path for obstruction.

If you need any further information please do not hesitate to contact me.

Thanks

Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator

From: NTMH
Sent: 12 August 2013 23:06
To: Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator
Subject: Re: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Hello Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator,

not wishing to appear impatient, are we any nearer clarification?

Just so's you know, I don't stake out the allotments obsessively taking telephoto pictures from a camouflaged hide. These are camera phone snaps taken, when I can be bothered, on my commute in and out of town. It would be helpful to know whether I'm seeing routine, un-addressed infractions of road traffic law, or whether this margin of highway has been wrongly signed.

Thanks

NTMH

From: Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator

To: NTMH
Sent: Friday, 26 July 2013, 11:38
Subject: RE: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Hi NTMH

Thanks for your comment. I am awaiting a response from another department on the matter and I will get back to you on Monday.

Thanks

Parking Maintenance Co-ordinator

From: NTMH
Sent: 25 July 2013 13:49
To: Parking Services CRM
Subject: Fw: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Hi,

a fortnight is probably outwith your response time target for an enquiry, so I'd very much appreciate a reply, even if only to say you don't know and have forwarded me to X in department Y, who will be better placed to deal with it..

Thanks

NTMH

From: NTMH
To: Parking Services

Sent: Thursday, 11 July 2013, 13:37
Subject: Re: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Hello again Parking Services,

perhaps while we wait for the Highways Design team to mull over its priorities and options you could clarify a couple of things for me?

First, does the Department for Transport's Local Transport Note 1/12, September 2012, Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists, section 10 Legal Issues, subsection 5:

10.5 Cycle Track: A way constituting or comprised in a highway, being a way over which the public have the following but no other, rights of way, that is to say, a right of way on pedal cycles (other than pedal cycles which are motor vehicles within the meaning of the Road Traffic Act 1988) with or without a right of way on foot [section 329(1) Highways Act 1980]. The words in round brackets were inserted by section 1 of the Cycle Tracks Act 1984. Cycle tracks might be created through conversion of a footway or footpath, or by constructing a new highway.

accurately describe or define the Whorral Bank cycle/pedestrian facility? 

Is this what it is, thus protected by the Road Traffic Act 1988: 

"21 Prohibition of driving or parking on cycle tracks.

(1)Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a [F1mechanically propelled] vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence."

or is it an access road and car parking sited to convenience Tommy's Field allotmenters, as in the attached photos?

Second, putting the question of the status of the Whorral Bank facility to one side, is there any other infrastructure anywhere in Morpeth that meets the above DfT definition of a Cycle Track?

Thanks

NTMH

From: Parking Services
To: NTMH
Sent: Tuesday, 5 March 2013, 10:00
Subject: FW: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Dear NTMH

Thank you for your email below with regards to parking on the designated cycling/pedestrian footpath.

Unfortunately, you are correct in your assumption that this cannot be enforced by our Civil Enforcement Officers because no traffic regulation order is in place on that road ie) single/double yellow lines. However, I will forward your email to our Highways Design team to make them aware of your issues as they are responsible for where single/double yellow lines are placed.

Kind Regards

Parking Services

Sustainable Transport

From: NTMH
Sent: 02 March 2013 19:26
To: Council Helpline Portal
Subject: Civil Parking Enforcement query

Hi,

cycling home yesterday evening on the Whorral Bank cycle path, where it passes the Tommy's Field allotments opposite the new NHS development, I encountered a 'Police Warning' sign on the allotments fence. Fantastic, was my first thought: finally the police are acting to curb the persistent illegal driving/parking on this designated cycling/pedestrian facility by motorised allotmenters too lazy to use the plentiful legal parking close by. But the sign was actually a warning to illegally parked motorists to secure their valuables and lock their car. Is this really an official 'Police Warning' sign?

A while back I lobbied Northumbria Police to sanction the illegal driving/parking of Tommy's Field allotmenters. Some 'advice' was issued to the offenders. As one allotmenter told it, the police had advised that provided they parked higher up the grass verge, with no wheels on the surfaced path itself, all was fine. My sense was that the Police didn't really want to get involved, responsibility for parking law enforcement would soon be passing to the Council.

I've spoken to Council Parking Enforcement Officers who say that the absence of double yellow lines on the carriageway means it's not their responsibility.

So I'm sending this to both Council and Police in the hope that I won't be batted back and forth by two agencies not wanting the responsibility – if lines of responsibility aren't clear perhaps you could communicate with each other to get it straight? - because the Road Traffic Act 1988 seems crystal clear:

21 Prohibition of driving or parking on cycle tracks.

(1)Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a [F1mechanically propelled] vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence.

What must cyclists and pedestrians do to prevent the illegal appropration of their scant legally designated spaces by scofflaw motorists?

Thanks

NTMH