Installation of A-frame on NCN92

The request was refused by Lancashire County Council.

Andrew Drummond

To whom it may concern,

I write to you in relation to the recently installed barriers at the entrance to the path at the end of Massey Croft, at OS location SD 882 1745.

I notice that a metal A-frame and horse trough has been installed, prior to which this area was accessible by those using adaptive cycles, such as handcycles, cargocycles, and bicycles with tag-along trailers; unfortunately the narrowest part of the A-frame is at handlebar width and is approximately 720mm, less than the recommended 1.5m meaning that this may be impassable to non-standard cycles and so to adaptive users.

I write to ask the following questions;
1) When was this barrier installed?
2) Was an Equality Impact Assessment was carried out at this location, as required by the Equality Act 2010 S.149, prior to the installation of this barrier.;
3) Could you please provide a copy of that Equality Impact Assessment;
4) Why was an A-frame used here, instead of either a folding or retracting bollard?
5) Who installed this barrier?
6) Who approved this barrier?

I note that this route forms part of the signposted NCN 92 and is part of the 'Valley of Stone' cycle route.

7) Who does this cycle route fall under the remit of?
8a) Were they consulted prior to installation?
8b) Were Sustrans, who are responsible for the National Cycle Network consulted?
8c) If so, what was the response from the above?
8c.i) If they did not approve, why was this ignored/overruled/disregarded, and by whom?
8c.ii) If they did approve, please provide evidence to support this.
As this forms part of the signposted and advertised local cycle network, it is not unreasonable to expect cyclists, including disabled and adaptive cyclists, to wish to pass along here, as they are legally entitled to do.

It is also reasonable to assume that many cyclists passing through here will not be familiar with the immediate local area, and may struggle to find an alternative route;
It is further reasonable to assume that this route will see a higher proportion of less experienced and less-able cyclists, who are less likely to be able to achieve or maintain higher paces, and, accordingly, should not be forced onto main roads and away from quieter routes like this.

I remind you that dismounting is not an option for the majority of users of adaptive cycles, such as handcycles, trikes and so on, and requiring a dismount for users of such 'cycles is a contravention of EA2010 S.20(3)(4), and constitutes an act of direct discrimination under Equality Act 2010, Section 21.

9) What provision has been made for the passage of cyclists along this signposted cycle route, with regards to this barrier?
10) What allowances and accommodations have been made for disabled cyclists?
11) Leading on from 10), what provision has been made for cargobikes, tricyclists, and adaptive cycles in general?
12) How would a cargobike pass through here? (Assume length of 2.15, width 89cm)
13) How would a recumbent handcycle pass through here? (Assume 2.2m length, 5.5m turning radius - not an extreme example, fairly typical).
14) How would an upright handcycle pass through here? (Assume 1.8m length, 5.5m turning radius - again, not extreme, fairly typical)
15) How would a wheelchair with a clip-on handcycle pass through here? (assume length of 1.6m, width of 72cm at the bottom, 74cm at the cranks - Again, not extreme, fairly typical)

The UK Government has recently embarked on a programme of encouraging the construction, provision and improvement of cycling infrastructure.

16) Please explain how the installation of this barrier, and the subsequent de facto banning of disabled cyclists from this route, aligns with this programme.

The Equality Act 2010, Section 20 (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201...) contains a number of stipulations with regards to provisions, practices, criterion and physical features. These are legal obligations, and as such, not optional.The Equality Act 2010, Section 20 is henceforth referred to as and by "S.20".

17) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with S.20(3).
18) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with S.20(4).
19) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with S.20(7).
20) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with S.20(9).
21) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with S.20(10.

I again remind you that expecting disabled cyclists to dismount is a violation of S.20(3). I also remind you that expecting disabled cyclists to go a long way out of their way to avoid this barrier is a violation of S.20(3),(4).

Finally, I expect immediate and urgent action to be taken in order to bring this barrier into compliance with the above legislation;

22) Please explain what immediate steps will be taken to restore inclusive and disabled accessibility for the above route.
23) Please provide the correct contact point for any further actions, including for any potential Letter(s) Before Action(s) to be addressed to.

Please provide the requested information in either table, or bulletpointed format, addressing each question raised fully in turn. Please do not use "Refer to previous answer N", as none of my questions are likely to be satisfactorily answered by a prior question, and this will only result in additional FOI requests.

If it is not possible to provide the information requested due to the information exceeding the cost of compliance limits identified in Section 12, please provide advice and assistance, under the Section 16 obligations of the Act, as to how I can refine my request.

If you can identify any ways that my request could be refined I would be grateful for any further advice and assistance.

If you have any queries please don’t hesitate to contact me via email and I will be very happy to clarify what I am asking for and discuss this request; my details are outlined below.

Thank you for your time and I look forward to your response.

Best wishes,

Andrew Drummond

Freedom of Information, Lancashire County Council

Request for Information under the Freedom of Information Act (2000)
We are writing to acknowledge receipt of your enquiry of 10 May 22 in which you request the disclosure of information.
We can confirm that your enquiry will now be assigned to an officer who will commence a search for the information you require, and they will respond within 20 working days. Should we envisage any delays, or require more details from you, we will contact you immediately.
If you have any queries about the above, please do not hesitate to contact us, quoting ref: 2171440 (AA3)

Regards

Information Governance Team
Legal, Governance & Registrars.
Lancashire County Council
www.lancashire.gov.uk
[Lancashire County Council request email]

show quoted sections

Freedom of Information, Lancashire County Council

Dear Mr Drummond

 

Request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000

 

Further to your request for information, made under the provisions of the
above Act, please see below our response.

 

Request:

 

I write to you in relation to the recently installed barriers at the
entrance to the path at the end of Massey Croft, at OS location SD 882
1745. I notice that a metal A-frame and horse trough has been installed,
prior to which this area was accessible by those using adaptive cycles,
such as handcycles, cargocycles, and bicycles with tag-along trailers;
unfortunately the narrowest part of the A-frame is at handlebar width and
is approximately 720mm, less than the recommended 1.5m meaning that this
may be impassable to non-standard cycles and so to adaptive users. I write
to ask the following questions;

 

1) When was this barrier installed?

2) Was an Equality Impact Assessment was carried out at this location, as
required by the Equality Act 2010 S.149, prior to the installation of this
barrier.;

3) Could you please provide a copy of that Equality Impact Assessment;

4) Why was an A-frame used here, instead of either a folding or retracting
bollard?

5) Who installed this barrier?

6) Who approved this barrier? I note that this route forms part of the
signposted NCN 92 and is part of the 'Valley of Stone' cycle route.

7) Who does this cycle route fall under the remit of?

 

8a) Were they consulted prior to installation?

8b) Were Sustrans, who are responsible for the National Cycle Network
consulted?

8c) If so, what was the response from the above?

8c.i) If they did not approve, why was this ignored/overruled/disregarded,
and by whom?

8c.ii) If they did approve, please provide evidence to support this. As
this forms part of the signposted and advertised local cycle network, it
is not unreasonable to expect cyclists, including disabled and adaptive
cyclists, to wish to pass along here, as they are legally entitled to do.
It is also reasonable to assume that many cyclists passing through here
will not be familiar with the immediate local area, and may struggle to
find an alternative route; It is further reasonable to assume that this
route will see a higher proportion of less experienced and less-able
cyclists, who are less likely to be able to achieve or maintain higher
paces, and, accordingly, should not be forced onto main roads and away
from quieter routes like this. I remind you that dismounting is not an
option for the majority of users of adaptive cycles, such as handcycles,
trikes and so on, and requiring a dismount for users of such 'cycles is a
contravention of EA2010 S.20(3)(4), and constitutes an act of direct
discrimination under Equality Act 2010, Section 21.

 

9) What provision has been made for the passage of cyclists along this
signposted cycle route, with regards to this barrier?

10) What allowances and accommodations have been made for disabled
cyclists?

11) Leading on from 10), what provision has been made for cargobikes,
tricyclists, and adaptive cycles in general?

12) How would a cargobike pass through here? (Assume length of 2.15, width
89cm)

13) How would a recumbent handcycle pass through here? (Assume 2.2m
length, 5.5m turning radius - not an extreme example, fairly typical).

14) How would an upright handcycle pass through here? (Assume 1.8m length,
5.5m turning radius - again, not extreme, fairly typical)

15) How would a wheelchair with a clip-on handcycle pass through here?
(assume length of 1.6m, width of 72cm at the bottom, 74cm at the cranks -
Again, not extreme, fairly typical) The UK Government has recently
embarked on a programme of encouraging the construction, provision and
improvement of cycling infrastructure.

16) Please explain how the installation of this barrier, and the
subsequent de facto banning of disabled cyclists from this route, aligns
with this programme. The Equality Act 2010, Section 20
([1]https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201...) contains a
number of stipulations with regards to provisions, practices, criterion
and physical features. These are legal obligations, and as such, not
optional. The Equality Act 2010, Section 20 is henceforth referred to as
and by "S.20".

17) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with
S.20(3).

18) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with
S.20(4).

19) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with
S.20(7).

20) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with
S.20(9).

21) Please clarify how the installation of these barriers aligns with
S.20(10. I again remind you that expecting disabled cyclists to dismount
is a violation of S.20(3). I also remind you that expecting disabled
cyclists to go a long way out of their way to avoid this barrier is a
violation of S.20(3),(4). Finally, I expect immediate and urgent action to
be taken in order to bring this barrier into compliance with the above
legislation;

 

22) Please explain what immediate steps will be taken to restore inclusive
and disabled accessibility for the above route.

23) Please provide the correct contact point for any further actions,
including for any potential Letter(s) Before Action(s) to be addressed to.
Please provide the requested information in either table, or bullet
pointed format, addressing each question raised fully in turn. Please do
not use "Refer to previous answer N", as none of my questions are likely
to be satisfactorily answered by a prior question, and this will only
result in additional FOI requests

 

Response:

 

Lancashire County Council can confirm we do not hold the information you
are seeking and your request is best being directed to Rossendale Borough
Council who can be contacted on the following link
[2]https://www.rossendale.gov.uk/forms/form...

 

Please note the barriers were installed by Rossendale Borough Council and
this land is not recorded as a public right of way so Lancashire County
Council's consent was not required.

 

If you have any queries regarding any of the above, or you require any
additional information, please do not hesitate to contact the team quoting
the above reference number.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Information Access Officer

Information Governance Team

Lancashire County Council

W: [3]www.lancashire.gov.uk

 

 

 

 

show quoted sections