Campaigners keen to block plans for a cycle lane and save 26 trees from felling despite the local authority’s claim that new trees would be planted in their place, have had their “credentials for protecting nature” questioned after it was revealed that some of them had asked for the bike lane — proposed to be built across the driveway — to be moved to the top of a nearby nature reserve which could be “lit up”.
The uproar has been caused due to the construction works for the last stretch of the Binley Cycleway in Coventry, with the 6 km-long route connecting the city centre to University Hospital. However, it would mean that 26 trees on Clifford Bridge Road would have to be cut down.
In August, the council had said that the felled trees would be replaced with 32 new trees and a range of low-growing plants. However, the opposition against the cycleway, which materialised in November last year with a petition and has continued to trickle on in the last twelve months — with even Sir David Attenborough offering his blessing in a bizarre turn of events — reached another headline-grabbing point when campaigners got together to stage the UK’s largest tree hug this weekend.
The BBC reports that a total of 703 people were needed to break the record, but more than 900 people showed up, with organisers saying they were “absolutely stunned” by the turnout. They added that the event demonstrated how people felt about the “beautiful trees”, and demanded an alternative route be drawn up for the cycle lane that was “less destructive”.
> Hundreds sign petition slamming decision to “sacrifice 26 irreplaceable trees” to make way for “dangerous, little used” cycle lane that “adds to pollution” – but council says more trees will be planted in their place
However, former West Midlands Cycling and Walking Commissioner Adam Tranter has called their motives into question, instead suggesting that the protest to save the trees could be a smokescreen to deflect from some of the resident’s wishes to simply not have the cycle lane built there.
“I think it is worth noting that previous designs of the cycleway instead narrowed general traffic lanes and moved parking, leaving trees as they are, but these were also ‘rejected’,” Tranter said. “I am afraid, the truth is, they just don’t want a cycleway.”
“To avoid having a cycleway along Clifford Bridge Road, campaigners also suggested to me that we build the cycleway on top of a nearby nature reserve - and light it up - which perhaps casts some doubt on their credentials for protecting nature.”
The UK's largest tree hug in Coventry with 925 people, listed in Alternative Book of Records (gilly_t_photography on Facebook)
The original plans for the Binley Cycleway did not include the removal of the 26 trees. However, Coventry City Council was forced to redesign the scheme three times due to complaints from locals about reduced parking provisions along the road and the proposed narrowing of lanes for motorists.
Tranter added on Twitter: “Earlier versions did retain them [the trees], but they were campaigned against by the same people as forcefully as this revised design. The earlier design could have been built by now and safely and sustainably get people to and from the hospital.
“For the avoidance of doubt, I would build the original design which retains the trees but moves parking and narrows the carriageway. It will, of course, still not please the campaigners.”
Binley Cycleway, Coventry (Coventry City Council)
The tree hug marks another chapter in the long-running battle waged by the anti-cycle lane campaigners. Dawn McCann, a local who helped organise the tree hug and set up an online petition calling for the cycle lane plans to be blocked, had said last year that cyclists will be like “sitting ducks”, under threat from the people reversing their cars into the driveways.
> “Our roads will be safer if we all look a bit more”: Cycle lane plans “a recipe for disaster,” say residents – because reversing motorists can’t see cyclists “aiming at you at 30”… due to parked cars on road
“At the moment cars reverse on the pavement,” McCann said at a council meeting. "When you build the cycle lane, they will have to reverse across a footpath and a cycleway onto Clifford Bridge Road. Even if you reverse on Clifford Bridge Road [into the drive], between parked cars you don’t know if a bike’s coming."
“The visibility thing has been the main thing that the Clifford Bridge Road residents are worried about, I don't know how you get round that,” she added. “If you're reversing out across [the cycle lane] with a bike aiming at you at 30, it doesn’t matter how many times you look, there are going to be collisions.”
Another resident said that the plan to cut down the trees as part of the cycleway’s construction came at “too high a cost” and will “cause irreversible damage to the local environment”.
It all took a turn for the unexpected in September when the campaigners found an unlikely ally in none other than Sir David Attenborough — the veteran broadcaster and environmental campaigner writing to an 11-year-old boy advising him on how to stage a protest to halt the protected bike lane’s construction, remarking that it would be a “shame” if the city council went ahead with plans to cut down 26 trees.
“I can well understand your reaction on hearing of the council’s plan to fell the trees you describe,” the 98-year-old told the schoolboy, before suggesting that he contact the Warwickshire Wildlife Trust for help with his campaign. “They may be able to advise you on how to organise a protest.”
> David Attenborough encourages boy to stage anti-cycle lane protest, as veteran broadcaster weighs in on plans to “sacrifice 26 irreplaceable trees” for new bike route
Responding to the tree hug demonstration, Coventry City Council said: “The trees advertised for removal on Clifford Bridge Road are primarily in average condition with limited usable lifespan, and some are Ash trees affected by Ash dieback.
“Trees are an important part of moving towards net zero [carbon], and we will plant more trees than we remove.”
Add new comment
8 comments
As much as I enjoy cycling,I wouldn't want to lose the trees. Our local council has put in a new cycle way which is barely used. Also, while I can and do cycle,I cannot walk and have a blue badge. I know how much this loss of parking would impact others in the same situation. A fresh report shows that the construction industry is the most polluting and yet successive governments won't do anything to encourage and make it easier financially,to restore buildings already in existence,why? because housebuilding is this country's only major industry left and is all about growth and pension pots. All the time we concrete over our countryside unnecessarily,I won't feel guilty driving my car, because I cannot use public transport and I daren't use my bike to commute, because bike theft is rife
I too don't like cutting down trees but according to the report the majority are suffering from ash dieback. The plans also state that 32 New trees will replace them which is more than was cut down. As for reversing onto a main road, I think the residents need to read the highway code, it's actually illegal to reverse out onto a main road. Net zero Will never be achieved by ANY country and is often used to block more sustainable projects.
“The visibility thing has been the main thing that the Clifford Bridge Road residents are worried about, I don't know how you get round that,” she added. “If you're reversing out across [the cycle lane] with a bike aiming at you at 30, it doesn’t matter how many times you look, there are going to be collisions.”
Doesn't look that steep a road to me
The highway code states that reversing onto a main road shouldn't happen. So why do these residents think that that is an excuse?
Well, surely that's obvious, isn't it? Their objections were nothing at all to do with 'protecting nature' - that was just a fig leaf to cover the fact that they didn't want to lose parking and didn't want to encourage cyclists there.
I bet if they were planning on taking the trees down to widen the road these people wouldn't give a monkey's.
If only there were something else which could be removed, to find that space...
Well, they're not asking for more trees to be planted in the road...
Equally I bet "fewer cars to save the trees" gets theoretical support until people are asked to drive their own one less.
The solution?
Just from maps this does seem like it would be a useful through-route for cycling, and it seems there aren't good "quiet side streets" which would give any kind of direct route for cycling in this area. (Nearest other "connector" is a main road 500m away - that would be at the limit or beyond for for a Dutch "cycle grid" I think).
For cars - not far away is the (wide, "fast") ring road running parallel...
I wonder if the Dutch would remove the junction with the B4082 and the ring road junction here, and split Clifton Bridge Road so that it was not a through-route for motor traffic but permeable by bikes. That should reduce a lot of the motor traffic volume. You'd only drive on the southern or northern sections if you lived there. (This is exactly the redesign choice made by some Dutch cities - you have to drive out to the ring road, round, then back in again for short journeys across the city. Or, you know, bus, cycle or walk...)
One issue I can see is that there might be complaints that now you can't quickly access the hospital from the south. That would no doubt be seen as an "impossible" in the UK. I imagine the Dutch would have looked at a junction for traffic direct to hospital from the ring road back in the day...
Otherwise - if you want the trees you can keep them, but you have to have a narrower carriageway (so through traffic slowed by turning cars - no doubt not acceptable as "dangerous"). And / or give up some of your
drivewaysfront gardens (obviously being such nature-lovers, they couldn't do that...)