The government made it quite clear, no cycle lanes no extra cash for road repairs. The upgraded road surface on Holderness Road now is far far better than it was previously.
I looked into the guidance that went with the funding bids. They're on line for people to view, and that's not strictly the case. The first bids had to be completed by a particular deadline to qualify for the main funding, but both pretty much relate to on road cycle lanes. The main resurfacing is slightly different. It looks like the Council tried to blend the funding with works that were already planned.
The Council are certainly claiming that the resurfacing of Holderness, Hessle and Anlaby Roads wouldn't have happened without the introduction of the cycle lanes.
Suggest looking at the Government's Gear Change document, it says exactly what TwoWrights stated - no permanent segregated cycle lanes = no funding for cycling. If a local authority has a cycling strategy that says different, they would be well advised to update it.
I have. It's not a stand alone document, and also has links associated with the recent funding. There's an argument that the funding for the lanes enabled council to meet some of the criteria that funded the resurfacing, and that would link the two, but there are some exceptions.
That's my understanding of it . I'm all for cycle lanes as I sometimes bike across the city 2 work . I just dont like the current cycle lane scheme on Freetown way . The way cars have to cut in to turn off doesnt seem safe . Not seen any bikes on them as yet
If anyone has found something that shows how the success or otherwise is to be measured, I'd be interested to see it.
It does. The new government policy favours physical separation from motorised traffic and from footways. Ambitious in many transport corridors!
Which if you look at the bus/cycle lanes you'll see many don't fit that, but still met some of the criteria. It's because there are a number of factors being combined.