Government-owned company has back-pedalled on its pledge to cycle-proof the line, say campaigners, locking out cyclists for generations to come

The company building the HS2 high speed rail line is accused of watering down commitments on cycle crossings along the route, in a move campaigners say will endanger lives and lock out cycling for generations to come.

The government-owned company, HS2 Ltd, was accused of back-pedalling on its legally-binding assurance that it would “cycle-proof” phase 1 of HS2, from London to the West Midlands, earlier this year by Cycling UK, the national cycling charity. The assurances, which became legally binding when they were incorporated into the High Speed Rail Act, stated HS2 Ltd would have a dialogue with the Cycle Proofing Working Group (CPWG), a government advisory body, with the assumption that they would include high quality design standards.

Members of the CPWG say HS2 Ltd breached that agreement when it adapted poor cycling design standards without consulting them, adding that HS2 Ltd claimed there was not enough money in the £56bn project to cycle proof phase 1.

They say, while adding extra width on 40 bridges and tunnels at construction phase would cost very little, the high cost of retrofitting tunnels and bridges means cycling could be permanently designed out.

In a select committee meeting on Tuesday, CPWG members said the same thing looks set to happen again with phase 2a, from West Midlands to Crewe, following a letter sent by HS2 director Oliver Bayne on Monday referring to following the “principles” of design standards, rather than the “applicable aspects” of them. These pledges do not become legally binding until the HS2 phase 2a Act is passed.

Before the meeting, Phil Jones of transport consultants PJA and a CPWG member, said: “HS2 have treated the CPWG with contempt. They were supposed to engage with us, but the only engagement was turning up to two meetings, and making some vague statements with no further commitment to do anything.

“They made it clear they had no money [for cycling]. They said we could scrutinise their designs [for crossings] but didn’t provide them. This is the government’s advisory body; that’s what it’s there for.”

Highways England and the Welsh government have both adopted high quality design standards, which set out minimum standards for cycling, and Jones joined Cycling UK in calling for HS2 to do the same.

John Grimshaw, co-founder of sustainable transport charity Sustrans, wrote a feasibility report on an HS2 cycleway which was proposed by government but later cancelled – Grimshaw says the report was presented to local authorities, effectively leaving it to them to deliver. He says cycling provision on the 40 crossings would, in many cases, cost a minimal amount but benefit communities.

“If you don’t plan for cycling provision on bridges or tunnels you design out cycling forever,” he said. “It will make it prohibitively expensive in the future to do them.”

Grimshaw told the committee it was “extremely difficult to get HS2 to make minor changes that would cost pennies” and pleaded with HS2 to “link local communities, rather than separate them”.

For example, he says children living in Quainton in Aylesbury, who go to school in Waddesdon two miles away, will not be able to ride to school after phase 1 of HS2 is built. Grimshaw told the Guardian: “In the original proposal there was an underpass; that mysteriously got dropped, and now if you want to cycle between the two you face a 60mph road.”

The HS2 route through Birmingham has six major bridges planned, none of which, the Guardian understands, will have cycling provision. Campaigners are concerned HS2 has not made clear how communities can apply for such provision.

In Tuesday’s meeting, Peter Miller, director of environment for HS2, described the difficulties of including a cycle lane on one road HS2 is already widening near Yarnfield, in Staffordshire, and said it was difficult to cost cycling infrastructure. He questioned whether there was any desire for cycle crossings from communities along the route.

HS2 committee member Martin Whitfield MP responded: “If you don’t make room for cycling on a bridge or tunnel when you build it, it’s never going to happen. If you put it in, it gives communities the opportunity [to add cycle lanes later on].”

The former HS2 and cycling minister, Robert Goodwill, was among those who supported a network of bridleways alongside HS2 in 2015.

Tim Mould QC, representing HS2, said that though it was up to HS2 to build crossings, it was up to Cycling UK to negotiate the necessary permissions for cycling, for which the secretary of state set aside £15,000 for the entire HS2 phase 2a route.

Roger Geffen, Cycling UK’s policy director, said: “HS2 Ltd could be a model of best practice for cycle proofing. However, employing sub-standard cycle provision and penny-pinching on the costs of tunnels and bridges means they’re on the opposite course.”

An HS2 Ltd spokesperson said: “To help ensure HS2 leaves a positive road safety legacy for local communities, £36.5m has been made available through the Road Safety Fund for Phase 1 and 2a, ensuring areas along the route benefit from high quality road and cycle safety projects. HS2 is engaging with various organisations to identify opportunities where cycling can be incorporated in the design.”