“How exactly is a disabled person supposed to access this bridge?”: Campaigners call on council to remove “unlawful, discriminatory” barriers from National Cycle Route

A council is facing calls to remove a set of barriers located at the entrance to a bridge, which forms part of the National Cycle Network, after local campaigners branded them “unlawful” and “discriminatory”.

The barriers were recently installed on a bridge in Radcliffe, Greater Manchester, replacing another set of metal barriers which similarly stretched across most of the cycling and wheeling entrance to the bridge, seemingly in a bid to counteract what the local police and Bury Council have described as the “anti-social and inconsiderate” actions of off-road motorcyclists in the area.

In August 2023, Greater Manchester Police’s Bury North officers warned that motorcyclists causing a nuisance would be punished and their motorbikes seized, following several complaints from residents to neighbourhood officers that young people were “causing problems around the town”.

However, like we’ve seen across the UK in recent years, the means of deterring such anti-social behaviour – namely, the introduction of barriers and restricted access points on cycle and shared used paths – has been heavily criticised by local active travel campaigners, who argue that these measures “discriminate” against people who use wheelchairs or cycles as mobility aids.

How exactly is a disabled person supposed to access this bridge in Radcliffe? @BuryCouncil

Absolutely shocking breach of the Equalites Act. pic.twitter.com/Z42sXpcu6l

— Walk Ride GM (@WalkRideGM) March 18, 2024

Posting a photo of the barriers, situated on National Cycle Route 6 and to the left of another set of barriers for pedestrians, on Twitter this week, Greater Manchester-based active travel group Walk Ride GM asked: “How exactly is a disabled person supposed to access this bridge in Radcliffe?”

Describing the barriers’ introduction as an “absolutely shocking breach” of the Equality Act 2010, Walk Ride GM also confirmed that they have submitted a Freedom of Information request to Bury Council, in a bid to ascertain the local authority’s legal justifications for the barriers.

> Bollards too narrow for council's own cargo bike trailers were installed for "safety" reasons... says the council

“This bridge is part of the National Cycle Route and provides a crucial connection for the community in Radcliffe,” a Walk Ride GM spokesperson told road.cc.

“The introduction of barriers here discriminates against people who may use a wheelchair or cycle as a mobility aid. This barrier is unlawful and must be removed by the council. We have sent an FOI asking the council to answer themselves on this issue.”

One of the group’s members, Harry Gray, also posted on Twitter that the barriers were “an absolute death trap”, adding: “How this passed any sort of safety audit is beyond me.”

Local cyclists, meanwhile, pointed out that other barriers are present at the opposite end of the trail, with Philip noting that “I was on there today and there were lads on motorbikes, so they’ve not worked either way.”

“A conscious, deliberate, extra cost breach,” Rob added. “They went to considerable effort to breach the law here.”

> Wheels for Wellbeing and the barriers disabled cyclists face on the road.cc Podcast

In September, after a Newcastle-based cyclist complained that barriers designed to prevent anti-social behaviour were stopping him from accessing a cycle path on his recumbent, disabled people’s cycling organisation Wheels for Wellbeing criticised the tendency for local authorities to use anti-social activity as a pretext for restricting accessibility and said that “we are finding time and again that disabled people are denied access to spaces that other people can access”.

“So many physical barriers have been put in which are far more effective at preventing legitimate users from using paths and open spaces than they are at preventing the problems that are the pretext for the barriers,” a spokesperson told road.cc.

“Barriers on cycle routes are preventing disabled people from making local journeys using all sorts of mobility aids, and restricting access to exercise, recreation, and natural spaces, which are all so important for physical and mental health.

“If there really are problems with abuse of paths, it is a policing matter. Authorities need to make it easier to report problems to the police, not discriminate against disabled people with inaccessible barriers.”

> Campaigners call for clearer signage to reduce "risk of confrontation" with pedestrians, after council insists disabled cyclists won’t be fined under controversial town centre cycling ban

Cycling infrastructure planning guidance for local authorities, issued by the Department for Transport, states that routes must be accessible to recumbents, trikes, handcycles, and other cycles used by disabled cyclists.

“Schemes should not be designed in a way that access controls, obstructions, or barriers are even necessary,” the guidance says.

“The built environment should be accessible to all, including young people, older people, and disabled people. Design should begin with the principle that all potential cyclists and their machines should be catered for in all cycle infrastructure design.”

> Campaigners welcome council's U-turn on installing "discriminatory" barriers on cycling and walking routes

Despite these guidelines, we have reported on several occasions over the past year alone where councils have been criticised for signing off on potentially discriminatory infrastructure.

As noted above, Wallsend-based cyclist Alastair Fulcher sent a legal letter to Newcastle City Council in September 2023, in a bid to challenge the lawfulness of barriers on a National Cycle Route which prevent him from accessing the path on his recumbent.

> Cyclist challenges council over barriers on popular cycle route that "discriminate against disabled people"

Fulcher has Parkinson’s Disease which affects his balance, core strength, and ability to walk, but is able to continue to enjoy cycling thanks to his tricycle.

However, the 61-year-old is unable to ride the National Cycle Route 72 past Pottery Bank due to the barriers installed to again prevent motorcyclists accessing the route.

“The fact is, as I have discovered, cycle paths are riddled with barriers such as these,” he said. “It is just that this one is so important, being on an internationally recognised cycle path. The location of this barrier completely denies access to me to all of the network of cycle tracks west of this point.

“On a bicycle, you can ride all the way to Carlisle on mostly quiet cycle paths. For me, that's not possible on my recumbent.

“I do not believe the motorcycle nuisance at Pottery Bank is so bad that a disabled cyclist should have to pay the price for tackling the issue.”

> Under-fire council admits "discriminatory" cycle route barriers were installed without equality impact assessment

And in February, Bolton Council was criticised for installing “discriminatory” barriers on a cycling and walking route in the town, with anti-social behaviour once again used as the justification. However, the council, while later admitting that no equality impact assessment was carried out pre-installation, nevertheless insisted that it has acted in accordance with design guidance.

“The real issue is that the barriers discriminate against people who use many types of cycle, including adapted cycles for users with disabilities, and the council’s failure to follow due process,” cyclist and Bolton Active Travel Forum Technical Review Group member Dr Grahame Cooper told road.cc last month.

“The Public Sector Equality Duty, placed on public sector bodies by the Equality Act 2010, means that the council is required to assess the impact of the changes on protected groups such as disabled, elderly, and pregnant people and record the reasons why the perceived need for the barrier outweighs that duty.

“They have admitted that they have not done that and there is no Equality Impact Assessment. This is particularly important if they are departing from national guidance. Before the barrier was installed, the 3.5-metre-wide path was perfectly adequate for shared cycling and walking use. Now that the barriers are in, there is conflict between the needs of people walking and cycling due to the bottleneck.”

> “Benefit of removing barriers far outweighs anti-social motorbike behaviour”: Cyclist calls for removal of barriers from cycle paths for greater accessibility

And just over a week later, a project officer at Sustrans – the organisation responsible for the creation of the National Cycle Network – called for the removal of all barriers on cycle paths, and criticised the “fear-mongering” evident in attempts by local authorities to quell anti-social behaviour.

“Illegal motorbike use is a perception, there’s a lot of fear-mongering around it which may not actually reflect reality,” Hamish Belding said.

“Often the barriers are put in as an automatic sort of thing when paths are built and not in recognition of whether there’s a problem or not. I know this area [Tonteg, South Wales] very well. I know that we don’t have a motorbike problem here and the benefit of removing the barrier far outweighs any risk of antisocial motorbike behaviour.”

road.cc has contacted Bury Council for comment.