After months of public engagement, a petition with over 1,400 signatures, and a formal meeting with the County Council in January, we’ve now received a detailed – but still incomplete – response from Lancashire County Council’s Active Travel Team. Below is a summary of the key points raised by Richard Askew and Chris Hadfield, along with our reflections on what this means for our campaign.
🔹 LCWIP Prioritisation Still in Progress (Point 1)
According to Chris Hadfield, the prioritisation of Strategic Routes identified in the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs) was completed by the end of March. However, due to the upcoming local elections and the “purdah” period (when councils must avoid politically sensitive decisions), the formal sign-off and public release of these priorities may be delayed.
📝 “We will continue to work with the outputs… to avoid unnecessary delay,” Chris notes.
Our take: While it’s good to hear that progress is being made, the process lacks transparency. We urge the Council to publicly commit to a timeline for when these priorities will be shared and how the A6 scheme fits into the bigger picture.
🔹 Funding for the Pointer Roundabout Confirmed (Point 2)
Richard confirmed that £750,000 in Safer Roads Fund money is allocated for improvements at Pointer Roundabout, including cycling infrastructure. Design work is ongoing and being led by the Road Safety Team.
💬 “In the event of any underspend, we’re advised that this can be spent on other areas of the A6.”
Our take: This is a promising step, but we’re still waiting to see design proposals and how significantly cyclists will benefit. We’ll be following up to ensure that active travel is truly prioritised in the final plans.
🔹 Funding Sources Identified (Point 3 & 5)
The Council shared several potential sources of funding:
-
Active Travel Fund 5 (£1.4m)
-
Consolidated Active Travel Fund (£4.5m total, £3.5m for infrastructure)
-
Integrated Transport Block (£6–9m annually)
-
Local Transport Grant (£34.9m for 2025/26)
-
Developer Contributions (CIL/S106)
However, these funds are competitive, and schemes must already be well-developed with low delivery risks to be selected.
💬 “We can’t yet confirm where the £6m in new funding will be spent.”
Our take: Knowing the money exists is not enough. We still don’t know whether any of it will go toward the A6 cycle lane. We call on the Council to confirm whether this project is being seriously considered during the prioritisation process.
🔹 HIF Scheme Work Exists – But Paused (Point 4)
There was preliminary design work for the A6 cycle corridor completed under the now-defunct Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF). This included initial designs and an early-stage feasibility study.
💬 “This work remains valid and can be picked up once a suitable mechanism is found.”
Our take: If valid designs already exist, we believe it is time to reactivate this work instead of shelving it indefinitely. It’s wasteful and counterproductive to delay on the basis of work that has already been completed.
🔹 Council – University Relationship Unclear (Point 6)
Chris noted that different departments within the Council engage with the University for various reasons (e.g. events, economic development). In the past, contact was made with a staff member involved in the University Travel Plan, but there is no clear ongoing partnership regarding sustainable transport.
Our take: This is a missed opportunity. A formal collaboration between the County Council and the University could accelerate progress toward sustainable travel goals, including safer cycling options for students and staff.
Final Thoughts
The Council’s response provides more information – but not enough clarity, direction, or commitment. The continued delays and vague assurances suggest that cycling infrastructure on the A6 is not being prioritised as it should be, despite clear public support and previously completed planning work.
We will continue to:
-
Push for publication of the LCWIP priorities
-
Follow up on the Pointer Roundabout scheme
-
Request that the A6 corridor be actively considered for the new funding streams
-
Call for revival of the paused HIF cycle scheme designs
Lancaster deserves a safer, greener, and more accessible future – and we’re not backing down.