Justification for giving City of York Council permission for split ASL

The request was refused by Department for Transport.

Dear Department for Transport,

On 19 September 2018, you gave permission for the application (ref GT50/025/0014) by City of York Council (CYC) for the split ASL.

Were you aware that CYC had already implemented the changes before 25 April 2018 - before you received its application (30/05/2018)?

I would like to know on what basis you approved the application.

1. Are you aware of the paragraph (p43) in the London Cycling Design Standards in 5.4.9 Advanced Stop Lines that says:

"ASLs should not, however, be relied upon alone as a measure to cater adequately for cyclists at signalised junctions as the benefits they offer are conditional upon the stage of the of signal cycle when the cyclist arrives at the junction, and **on how they are accessed under different traffic conditions** [my emphasis]. ... All ASLs and their methods of access need careful consideration at the design stage, taking into account junction layout, traffic flows and movements and signal operation."

2. a. In the application diagram YK2274-DFT-ASL-001 did the dashed markings cutting across the left-hand (turn) lane to the line dividing the left from the all-other-routes lane seem legible for all ages and types of user?

b. Are they standard for such a junction?

3. Prior to granting permission did you request or seek information on:

a) numbers and ages/abilities of people who use the junction?

b) numbers and ages/abilities of people who could the junction if it were safer/more cycle friendly?

c) traffic flows at different times during the day?

d) destination of motor vehicles using the junction?

e) destination of the people on bikes and variants who use (could use) the junction?

f) destination signage at and ahead of this junction to enable users to choose the appropriate lane?

4. Were you aware that the vast majority of the people on bikes and variants who use this junction want to go over Lendal bridge at the next junction and therefore have to cross into the right-hand lane (the one with the ASL) then back into the left-hand lane to continue their journey?

5. Were you aware that the local cycle campaign (YCC) had opposed the change? [Briefing Note Lendal Arch Gyratory – Station Road Cycle Lane 15.12.17] "In summary, YCC were opposed to the proposed removal of the cycle lane on
Station Road and believed more work should be done to find a way of retaining the
facility, or preferably replacing it with a superior alternative. "

Thanking you in advance

Department for Transport

1 Attachment

Dear R Lack

Please find attached the response to your correspondence about Policy on
Advance Stop Lines

.

Thank you,

Department for Transport
PO Correspondence
5/22 Great Minster House
33 Horseferry Road
LONDON
SW1P 4DR

http://www.dft.gov.uk/about/contact/

show quoted sections

TRAFFIC SIGNS, Department for Transport

1 Attachment

Department for Transport

Great Minster House

33 Horseferry Road

London

SW1P 4DR

Tel: 0300 330 3000

 

Web Site: www.gov.uk/dft

 

Our Ref: GT51/3/3/239040

Your Ref:

 

30 October 2018

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear R Lack

 

Policy on Advance Stop Lines

 

Thank you for your email of 2^nd October to the Department for Transport.
Your email has been transferred to the Traffic and Technology division.

 

Following from the email sent from [1][email address]
suggesting that it may be helpful if you provide a contact number. It
might be useful if I explain that the Department authorises road signs and
markings on the basis of the information provided by the local authorities
and if it complies with the regulations. If you have a problem with a road
sign, I can only suggest that you raise your concerns with the local
authority in charge of the road.

 

 

Yours sincerely

 

Traffic Signs Mailbox

 

 

show quoted sections