Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

“We could have saved more trees”: Council approves loss of 26 trees to build cycle lane — but “saddened” authority says felling due to residents rejecting reduced road width

The trees will now be chopped down and replaced with 32 new saplings by the council, who have been accused of spreading “misinformation” by residents who previously organised the largest tree hug in the country

A council has confirmed that 26 trees will now be cut down and replaced with 32 new saplings to make way for a cycle lane — and while residents have been protesting against the bike lane, even organising the UK’s largest tree hug and garnering support from Sir David Attenborough, the council has argued that the trees could’ve been saved if the residents agreed to a reduction in the width of the highway.

The Binley Cycleway saga has been rumbling on for more than a year now. On one side of the battle lines is Coventry City Council, who claim to have done everything in their power to reason with the residents and propose an extension to a popular cycle lane that saves trees and provides safer cycling infrastructure, and on the other, the residents, who accuse the council of spreading “misinformation” and say that a bike lane on Clifford Bridge Road is a “recipe for disaster”, as cyclists would become “sitting ducks” for motorists accessing driveways.

But after a number of headline-grabbing twists and turns, the saga looks to be heading towards a somewhat tepid climax, as the BBC reports that the council approved the felling of the 26 trees to finally add a long-delayed final section of the £12 million Binley Cycleway, a 6km-long route connecting the Coventry town centre to University Hospital.

> 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

The revised plan was signed off yesterday after multiple redesigns by Councillor Patricia Hetherton, the cabinet member for city services, following drawn-out opposition from the residents, who said that the authority had listened to residents and made changes based on their feedback.

“I’m saddened we’re losing those trees,” she said. “If we reduced the width of the highway, we could have saved more trees. But clearly the residents didn't want that, and as a consequence we're having to lose more trees.”

The cycle lane had recently made national headlines when more than 900 people showed up for an organised tree hug, breaking the record for the largest tree hug in the country, and demanding an alternative route be drawn up for the Cycleway that was “less destructive”.

Tree huggers protest Binley Cyclway in Coventry (gilly_t_photography, Karron Gibson on Facebook)

> “They just don’t want a cycleway”: Campaigners criticised for staging country’s largest tree hug to block “destructive” bike lane plans — while suggesting it could be built by “lighting up” nature reserve

In September this year, the cycle lane protestors found an unexpected ally to their cause in the form of Sir David Attenborough, with 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.”

However, the council has said that the 32 saplings which are set to replace the trees would provide “greater long-term benefits”. Cllr Hetherton was also asked about what Sir David would think of her decision, to which she replied: “I think Sir David would be thrilled to bits that we're doing a cycle path that gets people out of cars and on to cycles.

“The devil is always in the detail and when you give people a headline, they can respond accordingly. But when you actually show them what you're trying to do, it has a different impact.”

Clifford Bridge Road trees anti-cycle lane campaign (Save Clifford Bridge Road Trees)

The council said that it expects about 200 cyclists a day to use the Clifton Bridge Road section of the route once it has been built, with a report noting that collisions resulting in injury had reduced across the previously completed sections of the cycleway.

A few weeks ago, former West Midlands Cycling and Walking Commissioner Adam Tranter called the anti-bike lane campaigners’ motives into question, 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 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.

Binley cycleway protests and apparent cyclist crash (Abigail Hinley/Dawn McCann)

> ‘Tree-hugging’ cycle lane opponents ‘backed’ by David Attenborough accuse council of spreading “misinformation” – but local authority says trees are only being cut down because residents opposed loss of on-street car parking

Following Tranter’s comments and road.cc’s coverage of it, Dawn McCann, one of the leaders of the opposition to the planned Clifford Bridge Road cycleway, argued that the local authority was “misleading the public” by “putting out several untrue statements”, denying that the scheme’s original design was rejected by residents due to plans to cut the number of on-street car parking spaces.

McCann, who claimed that the current design is “unsafe” and that other parts of the cycleway are causing frequent collisions, also refuted the council’s claim that many of the 26 trees earmarked to be felled as part of construction works are infected with the disease Ash dieback, instead insisting that the trees are in “fine condition” and are simply, in the council’s eyes, “in the way”.

However, the head of public realm at Coventry City Council told road.cc that plans to cut parking spaces had made the scheme “unacceptable” to residents, while noting that other areas where the cycleway has been installed have led to a “significant reduction” in collisions, increasing safety for vulnerable road users.

Adwitiya joined road.cc in 2023 as a news writer after completing his masters in journalism from Cardiff University. His dissertation focused on active travel, which soon threw him into the deep end of covering everything related to the two-wheeled tool, and now cycling is as big a part of his life as guitars and football. He has previously covered local and national politics for Voice Cymru, and also likes to write about science, tech and the environment, if he can find the time. Living right next to the Taff trail in the Welsh capital, you can find him trying to tackle the brutal climbs in the valleys.

Add new comment

15 comments

Avatar
Rendel Harris | 3 weeks ago
6 likes

Quote:

 residents [say] cyclists would become “sitting ducks” for motorists accessing driveways.

A sitting duck is only under threat if somebody decides to shoot at it. The residents have unintentionally exemplified exactly the problem with driver attitudes towards cyclists: you're going to be in danger because I can't be trusted to behave safely, courteously and in accordance with the Highway Code.

Avatar
leaway2 | 1 month ago
0 likes

£12 million for 6km, crikey.

Avatar
brooksby replied to leaway2 | 1 month ago
7 likes

leaway2 wrote:

£12 million for 6km, crikey.

You should see the cost of a motorway junction...  3

Avatar
muhasib replied to brooksby | 1 month ago
4 likes

"the cost to rebuild the M25 junction 10/A3 Wisley interchange is £317 million. The project is expected to be completed in 2025. "

Avatar
quiff | 1 month ago
9 likes

Just had a look on the built sections of this cycle track on Streetview, and I'm impressed. The road where they're protesting (Clifford Bridge Road) looks to me like it would once have had a lot more trees and a continuous verge, but they were paved over to provide parking...  

Avatar
Samtheeagle | 1 month ago
9 likes

I have worked in developing and delivering environmental enhancement for wildlife and people for the past 35+ years.  It never ceases to disappoint me the hypocracy of people.  Oppose habitat improvement because it doesnt suit their view of the world (despite evidence base) but will declare their dedication to nature and the landscape when it suits their cause (generally where it would affect their property price or view).  

Avatar
wtjs | 1 month ago
10 likes

I appreciate that this is re-stating the obvious but McCann and the other 'protestors' are a dreadful bunch of hypocritical anti-cycling NIMBYs who couldn't care a toss about the trees or the (won't somebody think of the...) cyclists they're essentially threatening to mow down as they tear out of their driveways. 

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to wtjs | 1 month ago
2 likes

Unfair!  That's just opinion based on reading stuff on the internet!

(Which - to be fair, was what they apparently actually wrote ... and then  didn't deny / clarify when they popped up here and were asked about it...)

Obviously you shouldn't be commenting without taking up their offer to "come and meet us" and see the road in question.  I mean - it couldn't be as black and white as it seems, and the council representative's account was obviously full of porky pies, right?

(TBF at least as often it's councils' statements that are getting a hard stare in the pages of road.cc).

Avatar
brooksby | 1 month ago
7 likes

Quote:

McCann, who claimed … that other parts of the cycleway are causing frequent collisions

Quote:

the head of public realm at Coventry City Council told road.cc that … other areas where the cycleway has been installed have led to a “significant reduction” in collisions, increasing safety for vulnerable road users.

Well, one of them isn't telling the truth… 

Avatar
brooksby | 1 month ago
9 likes

Quote:

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.

Well, duh

Avatar
mdavidford | 1 month ago
7 likes

Quote:

McCann ... refuted the council's claim

Still no.

Avatar
The_Ewan | 1 month ago
15 likes

Quote:

the council has argued that the trees could’ve been saved if the residents agreed to a reduction in the width of the highway

Presumably they could also have been saved if the council had just reduced the carriageway width without residents' agreement.

They had a choice of two options, both of which the nimbies hate. So why piss them off with the silly decision when you could piss them off with the better one?

Avatar
FionaJJ replied to The_Ewan | 1 month ago
4 likes

Perhaps, but it might be worth letting the residents stew in the juices of their own making. Those who are genuinely concerned about the trees should be be annoyed at the people who prioritised saving their parking spaces. It's possible, some thought they'd call the council's bluff. Of course, you could argue that in the other direction too - if people don't want the trees to be cut down, then this is the alternative. Be clear - it's one or the other.

The downside of reverting to the original plan is that it gives residents the impression that they can simply reject schemes without consequence. You could argue this is part of what a good consultation should be, but it also adds considerable cost, and introduces delays, which suits the objectors.  

In this case I'm not convinced the trees here were particularly special, and they are being replaced. If some are ash, then those not already experiencing ash dieback will do soon enough. 

 

 

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to FionaJJ | 1 month ago
3 likes

FionaJJ wrote:

The downside of reverting to the original plan is that it gives residents the impression that they can simply reject schemes without consequence. You could argue this is part of what a good consultation should be, but it also adds considerable cost, and introduces delays, which suits the objectors.

Yes.  In the best of all possible worlds we might go on like this and just let people find their way to having it exactly how they wanted.  But ... local choices for transport and traffic do have a wider impact.  And in fact (through tax) we are all paying for this.

Again chimes with what Chris Boardman was talking about in terms of getting things done at a council / local authority level.  If "do nothing" is even on the table then it must be clear that there is a cost to that and what that cost is.  (That might be "we cannot then guarantee... " or perhaps if you reject help improving *this* you can't then apply for funding for other stuff).

Avatar
Car Delenda Est replied to chrisonabike | 1 month ago
3 likes
FionaJJ wrote:

if you reject help improving *this* you can't then apply for funding for other stuff).

The perverse result of this is people saying yes to everything, or at least everything that doesn't affect them, to get as much funding as possible.

Latest Comments