Tag Archives: Leicester City Council

Despite all the posts Sainsbury’s forgot some signs

I have been getting at Sainsbury’s and Leicester City Council for the mess they have made of the junction of Melton Road and Troon Way/Watermead Way. See

Anyway, we went shopping there yesterday (yes by bike, traffic on a Friday afternoon is terrible, we would have been crazy to drive).

We were trying to find our way in and find the bike parking. It turns out that my original guess (south side of the vehicular entrance) was wrong. The best way in on a bike is off Troon Way. But despite all those posts there is not a single sign anywhere to tell cyclists how to get to the store. DUH!!!!

I wonder how a large company like Sainsbury’s can work so hard to promote themselves as having excellent environmental policies, how they can have huge posters everywhere explaining how this new store is so brilliant for the environment while being so totally useless about supporting staff and customers arriving by bike.



What Leicester City Council and Sainsbury’s could have done (2)

In my previous post What Leicester City Council and Sainsbury’s could have done (1) I took a minimalist approach to providing a safe infrastructure for the Melton Road junction with Troon Way/Watermead Way at the site of the new Sainsbury’s. Now I want to take a little more radical approach.

Political Support

Both Sainsburys and Leicester City Council make bold claims for their political support for the environment and for carbon reduction.

Sainsbury’s on the environment

Let us imagine the sort of design that would fit with a Supermarket chain that claims the following:

Respect for our environment

At Sainsbury’s, respecting the environment is about doing the right thing. We aim to be the UK’s greenest grocer, which is great for our business but even better for the environment.

Making a positive difference to our community

For us, retailing is about more than quality products and great service. It’s also about supporting and helping the communities where we work, and being a good neighbour. We aim for our stores to be at the heart of the communities they serve

Further more, let us imagine they wish to build a flagship store that is their most environmentally efficient:

Sainsbury’s new supermarket in Leicester is one of two ‘Triple Zero’ stores the retailer has just opened. It is Sainsbury’s most environmentally friendly store to date and uses the very latest technologies available to complement its industry-leading standard specification.

Neil Sachdev, Sainsbury’s Property Director, said: “We aim to be the UK’s Greenest Grocer and achieve our 20×20 target to reduce our operational carbon emissions by 30 per cent absolute. To do this we’re now building and running highly sustainable, low carbon stores.

Such a store would of course take into account the environmental impact of it’s customers travelling to and from the site, sadly though all their public messages about the environment ignore transport, it is the elephant in the supermarket.

Of course if you want to build a very environment friendly superstore it helps to do it in an environment friendly city, so let us consider Leicester City.

Leicester City on the Environment

Leicester makes bold claims:

Setting sensible targets

So with a Supermarket chain and City both committed to a sustainable and low carbon environment, to the local community and to healthy and active travel, what might they do for transport at a site with 1,000’s of homes within a couple of miles, a site at a major junction where there is a lot of congestion and which is at the junction of key routes into and around the city.

  • They would presumably have targets for the percentage of staff walking, cycling or using public transport to get to work. They would do all they could to encourage this to reduce congestion, reduce car parking needs and increase the health, wealth and productivity of their staff.
  • They would presumably have targets for the percentage of customers walking, cycling or using public transport to get to and from their store. They would prioritise access to the store for these customers recognising that by doing so they benefit the local community by reducing congestion, pollution and health care costs.
  • They would presumably recognise how key the junction next to the store was for access into and around the city. They would note that it is the most direct route into the city for the communities of Thurmaston and Syston (and beyond). They would note that alternative cycling and walking routes into the city are far less direct and are through unlit parkland that is on the flood plain and thus inaccessible at night and when flooded. They would note that the crossing of the river Soar from the junction is one of the few that does not flood (the next nearest to the North is the A46 which is 3 miles away, to the south it is Loughborough Road 1.4 miles away) and so is important for cyclists and pedestrians.
  • They would note how close schools were to the site and the safety issues that come from having an attractive supermarket across a busy road from schools.

Noting all these things creating safe, attractive and convenient walking, cycling and public transport routes to, from and past the Supermarket would be of the highest priority.

Designing the transport links

The roads by this site are all very busy. For example the Melton Road is a dual carriageway that has 5 lanes heading south into this junction. Troon Way has 4 lanes heading east into the junction. There are frequent tailbacks on all 4 arms of the junction.

The London Cycling Campaign has helpfully adopted a simple formula for when cyclists should be provided with high quality protected space. If speeds exceed 20mph (based on 85th percentile actual speeds not the speed limit) or 2,000 PCUs per day (passenger car units, a weighted measure see this pdf for more detail. Here is a bit more detail. The London Cycling Campaign claim this is similar to Dutch requirements although it seems to me that theirs are more finely grained and consistently applied which no British standard relating to safe cycling infrastructure has been. See the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain for some analysis of Dutch standards.

However, every road at this junction way exceeds both the 20mph speed limit and the 2,000 pcu per day measure. The suggestion from a City Council officer I met at the safety audit that cyclists heading out of the city should ride on the dual carriage way shows a worrying lack of interest or understanding of safety for people on bikes.

So, idiot engineers from the City Council aside, it is clear that this junction should have fully protected cycle infrastructure on every arm. Consider the map

If Sainsbury’s and Leicester City were serious about their environmental policies then they would be looking at making the following cycle journeys safe and convenient:

  1. North/South along Melton Road A607 to provide good access in and out of Leicester (especially for the Golden Mile) for people in Thurmaston/Syston (and the villages beyond). Also to the Rushey Mead Secondary school on the Melton Road.
  2. East/West along Watermead Way/Troon Way A563. This is a critical east/west connection for cyclists, especially at night and in winter when many will not want or be able to cross the river Soar in Watermead Park. It provides critical connections between work places, hospitals and residential areas
  3. North/South to East/West due to the strategic crossing of the Soar and the direct route of the Melton Road there are many routes that will turn at this junction. For example from Syston to Glenfield Hospital is from North to West. Syston to the General Hospital is North to East.
  4. Local Routes to Sainsbury’s. The closest homes are behind the store in Thurmaston and across Troon Way. However, access from Melton Road (North and South) as well as Watermead Way (Birstall is from 1 mile away) will also be popular.
  5. In the summer connections into Watermead Park and the Sustrans route along the River Soar would probably be popular for people who are less confident cyclists.

With roads as busy as these I believe that grade based segregation is the best solution. Toucan crossings are slow and inconvenient. In the UK these are never very responsive to the needs of pedestrians and cyclists due to the focus on maximising motorised traffic flows. Nor do they provide attractive options that encourage school children to cycle (especially they do not encourage parents to allow their children to cycle to school).

However, the UK also has a very poor history when it comes to the design of grade separated segregation. We build subways that feel dangerous and which flood. We build bridges that are eyesores as well as narrow with long detours on the steep ramps. There are examples close to Sainsbury’s and they are frequently ignored by pedestrians and cyclists like this:

The Dutch do things differently and the best recent example is the Hovenring at Eindhoven that I rode over this summer. (although Mark also mentions a somewhat similar roundabout in Norway).

Note how the Dutch solution is attractive (no more than that, beautiful)!


Not only is it beautiful it also feels very safe. The ramps are gentle and wide, for the most part with grass banks rather than railings. The roundabout gives you a choice of directions so you can avoid other people to feel safe. There is great visibility from all directions and the road which also makes you feel safer.

There are other practical advantages to the Hovenring, installation was quick as large segments were simply lifted into place. Cyclists and pedestrians never have to wait and never delay motorised vehicles. Maintenance is easy as the Hovenring is wide enough and strong enough for normal maintenance vehicles to drive on it.

Imagine how Sainsbury’s could have used this in their publicity and as a sign of where their most environmentally friendly store was. What a great gateway into the City the Council could have made this.

Things would have been done very differently. Instead of all the roads rising upto the junction it would have been lowered by a couple of meters, this would have provided the material for the ramps. It would have made the slopes easy for cyclists and pedestrians. One exit ramp could have curved gently down to the store canopy (where no doubt Sainsbury’s would have thought of providing more than 19 Sheffield stands for bike parking). One ramp could lead to a new cycle bridge alongside Watermead way where currently cyclists have to ride with no protection on a very busy road with a 50mph speed limit.

With imagination and a commitment to their public policies Sainsbury’s and Leicester City Council could have produced something to be proud of, something that would have gone a long way to transform the way that people get around Leicester and to/from this store. With that imagination they would both have gained huge visibility just as Eindhoven is currently reaping the benefits of being see the world over as a leading city for cycling.




What Leicester City Council and Sainsbury’s could have done (1)

I have written a lot of blog posts now on the failures of Leicester City Council and Sainsbury’s in the design and implementation of the new junction on the Melton Road at Troon way/Watermead Way because it is appallingly bad. There is probably at least one more critical post to come about actually getting to the Superstore by bike. So if you haven’t seen these posts have a look:

The thing that is really frustrating is that it could easily have been so different. On the east side (where Sainsburys is) there is lots and lots of space.

So my first suggestion for what Sainsbury’s could have done is very simple. They could have re-connected the old 1930’s segregated cycle track alongside the Melton Road so that it stayed as a segregated track running all the way through the junction.

They could have copied the design of the new segregated cycle track they have put in on Newarke Street where there is a colour and grade separation between the cycle track and the footway. See that in this video:

Then at all the crossings they could have copied the design of the “super crossing” near the station where a toucan crossing is both very wide and straight as it crosses the Central Ring dual carriageway.

The cycle track and footway would have needed to curve away from the Melton Road slightly from just north of the Sainsbury’s entrance to just south of Troon Way in order to allow the toucan crossings to be straight. This would have also allowed the cycle track to bypass behind the bus stop as they always do in the Netherlands.

The new left turning lane into Troon Way would have needed to be made a little more separated in order to line up the crossings. The central refuge of the Troon Way crossing would have needed to be a little wider so that the cattle pens could be removed and the crossing be straight.

None of this would have cost very much in the context of the whole junction.

The problems with the other side of the junction could have also been solved very simply by

  • upgrading the existing 1930’s cycle track on the Sainsbury’s side from Thurmaston to Belgrave.
  • upgrading one Melton Road crossing north of the junction and one south to supercrossings (with linked lights)

As part of this the Council could have reasonably resurfaced the 80 year old segregated cycle track on the east side of the Melton Road all the way from Manor Road in Thurmaston to the entrance to Rushey Fields in Belgrave (just south of the vehicle entrance into Rushey Mead Secondary School). Most of that cycle track has not been resurfaced in 80 years and now the concrete slabs have big steps between them. While resurfacing it could have been widened into it’s grass verge, been given priority over side roads and entrances by running it across a hump as existing standards allow (there are only about 4 needed) and bus stop bypasses installed.

If that work had been done then I am confident many people would be content to use this as a fast two way cycle route along the Melton Road and when travelling North would cross from the west side to ride the whole length on the east side. Therefore a crossing of Watermead Way would no longer be an issue.


I feel I should have made it clearer that my suggestion is not just about this junction but about how it connects and how it can contribute to a wider network.

My suggestion connects at the north end with a scheme (that has a significant number of design issues itself) provided by Leicestershire County Council. With a naff bit of shared pavement you can get past the health centre and shops at the Humberstone Lane junction and then use the route along the Thurmaston bypass which is partially on a 20mph limit road (a speed limit that is widely ignored) and then on a shared footway to Thurmaston Shopping Centre. From there the quality goes down again and you have a section of poor shared footway to the mini roundabout at Fosse Way where you are abandoned.

At the south end of my suggestion there is the possibility of using Lanesborough Road to connect to Bath Street and join the Sustrans route through Abbey Park. There are only two problems with this. a) the bit between Thurcaston Rd and Abbey Pumping Station floods a lot and b) there is no safe route into the City once you get to the Central Ring Road.

A signposted alternative for cyclists at the southern end is to go through Rushey Fields and along Harrison Road. I only recommend this if your destination is on Harrison Road and you are a confident cyclist with a death wish. It is horrible!

More frequently these days I tend to go straight along the Melton Road/Belgrave Road. It is unpleasant but it is fast. I find it easier going towards the city than away from it though. This is the Golden Mile in Leicester, it has exciting vibrant shops and restaurants but ends being dominated by a combination of parked and speeding motorised vehicles. The road could be made so much more attractive to visit by reducing it to a single lane of motor vehicles in each direction with protected segregated cycle tracks and wider pavements with outside seating for the restaurants in the summer.


The questions Leicester City Council don’t want to answer

In a three month period Leicester City Council have opened three new pieces of cycle infrastructure:

  • A new segregated cycle lane on Southgates
  • A new segregated cycle lane on Newarke St
  • The Melton Rd/Troon Way/Watermead Way junction at the new Sainsbury’s

All have been built with posts in the middle of the cycle infrastructure. The ones on Newarke Street have now been removed, we are promised the ones on Southgates will be removed in the new year (4 months after it opened) and today I was promised that some of them at the Sainsbury’s junction will be removed – but no promise of when.

However, this leaves a number of questions for Leicester City Council:

  1. How did these posts get put in the middle of cycle infrastructure in the first place?
  2. What policies and procedures at the City Council have been changed to make sure this does not happen again?
  3. What new training has been given or is planned for the City engineers involved in these projects?
  4. When the Cycle City Workshop was shown drawings why were these posts not on them?
  5. How much has it cost us to correct these errors?

At the same time the City Council has published a new design for the Haymarket Bus Station. This has lost the segregated cycle track that was shown to the City Cycle Workshop and now has no provision for safe cycling (while adding a number of features that the Cycle City Workshop have made clear increase the danger for cyclists).

So why is the City Council not making it a design brief requirement that all new infrastructure is safe and convenient for cyclists?



Leicester City Council Safety Audit failure

On my way into Leicester I noticed a large volume of high vis safety jackets at the now notorious junction at Leicester’s new Sainsbury’s where the Melton Road crosses Troon Way/Watermead Way (see my three previous posts).

It turned out that inside the high viz jackets were a team doing a safety audit, so I stopped to talk to them.

The good news is that Sainsbury’s are going to move the smaller posts that are dotted all over the paths (but I don’t know when and I have no specific assurance that this will be all the posts).

The bad news is that a man who seemed to be talking for the developer said that none of the posts supporting the road signs will be moved. There are 3 sets of posts:




(note this last one does now have a sign on it).

I was told that these cannot be moved because the posts have to be in these positions due to the large number of services running under the footway and the verge at this point.

This is a failed excuse!

It is an excuse that would never be acceptable in a road used by motor vehicles! Can you imagine saying “We are sorry that we have put this post in the middle of the dual carriageway, but there was nowhere else it could go because of services under the road”.

I could accept them saying “we clearly made a mistake and it would be very expensive to correct now. We have changed out design standards and our policies, we are sending our engineers and site managers on training courses to make sure this never happens again”.

What I do not accept is this excuse which says cyclists and pedestrians do not matter to us, we are not willing to invest any skill, any resources into creating and implementing a design that will be safe and convenient for them.

There is so much space around the signs. The posts on the Sainsbury’s could have been placed up to about 4 metres more away from the road. When the whole area has been dug up and relaid in a new place it is entirely unacceptable to claim that the position of services prevents safe positioning of these signs.



Bargains by Bullitt #ride:13miles

Today I struggled with time travel (the problem is neatly described by my friend Angie in Realised Ecclesiology), for me the result was that at about 5pm I needed printer paper to finish preparation for the morning.


So I trundled off to Staples where I couldn’t resist a bargain. Three boxes of paper for the price of two. That meant 7,500 sheets of A4 (should keep me going for a while) weighing 39kg for the 7.5 mile ride home. Lucky I had a Bullitt with me 🙂

The ride was no problem (and nice enough that I took the quieter more scenic route through Watermead Park). However, getting out from Staples (or Maplin for that matter) is a different matter.

Leicester City Council obviously think that nobody would want to visit Staples or Maplin by bike (maybe they have noticed the complete lack of any bike parking) so they have surrounded them with a network of one way streets to force everyone, cyclists included onto the Central Ring dual carriageway. Thanks a lot!

I confess that the frantic Central Ring at 5:45pm on a damp Saturday afternoon did not appeal at all. So I broke the law and went the wrong way along a couple of one way streets until I could break free from the trap.

Clearly this is one of the areas which demonstrate to the world the aspirations of Leicester to be a Cycle City. The Sky Ride team are incredibly positive when they write “Leicester has numerous cycle trails around the city making it the perfect place to get on your bike”. Clearly they run their projects without using any stationary.

Here is the google map of the site, I think Midland Street is now one way in the other direction just to makes things worse.

It seems to me that a basic requirement for a city to be considered to be on the starting rung towards being cycle friendly is that it does not force cyclists onto any of it’s manic ring roads. Sadly, this is a basic requirement that Leicester fails time and time again. There are at least three journeys that I do regularly that are impossible without riding at least a short distance on the Central Ring road: They are:

  • Home to city centre (Grafton Place to Abbey Street)
  • City centre to General Hospital (Charles Street to Swain Street)
  • City Centre to Royal Infirmary (Marlborough Street or Tower Street to Jarrom Street)

Other parts of the city are also bad. Coming from Oadby being a good example, the main cycle route is the A6!


Leicester City Council cause outrage in our home

I have been writing to Leicester City Council about the total lack of any provision for pedestrians or cyclists at a major junction (Melton Rd/Troon Way). For background see Cyclists and Pedestrians failed by Leicester City Council « 42 Bikes.

Today I got a response to my last email (and my thanks to John Dowson for replying in about two weeks):

We have looked at whether low cost improvements can be made, but the length of crossing distances and hence the time a pedestrian would be crossing the highway are outside of standard design requirements. This means that simply putting in a pedestrian/cycle facility on a junction a junction without intervening islands to segregate the lanes, which would also be necessary to keep traffic moving, would be inherently unsafe. As the lane widths have to be maintained, this also means widening the junction, which increases the costs significantly. The junction has a high accident record, generally of shunts, red light infringements and turning movement errors, which means that we need to be thorough in designing a safer, better junction. The simple solutions you suggest are regretfully not practical and this remains a junction that we have been unable to improve at a reasonable cost.

I have replied with some detailed questions.

However, when I showed this email to Jane she was reduced to spluttering outrage.

Our understanding of the junction of Melton Road and Troon Way can be summarised as:

  • The Council knows this junction has a high accident rate
  • There are no signals to indicate to pedestrians or cyclists when it is safe to cross because the distance is too far to cross safely
  • Travelling to and from Leicester a pedestrian needs to cross a minimum of 5 lanes of traffic.
  • Travelling to and from Leicester a cyclist has separated cycle paths that end before this junction and start after it
  • There are no alternative options for pedestrians or cyclists (other than a long detour on unlit paths through Watermead Park)
  • There is a secondary school less than 1/3 of a mile away
  • The Council are unwilling to make the junction safe for pedestrians and cyclists because they believe it is too expensive to make it safe for pedestrians and cyclists while maintaining the flow of traffic (note how they exclude pedestrians and cyclists from their definition of traffic, it does not matter if their flow is destroyed and their safety is a lower priority than the flow of cars).

Is this legal?

How can a Council provide footpaths and cycle paths that lead to a junction that they know is unsafe?

Shouldn’t there be signs up saying:

“Leicester City Council know that this junction is unsafe:

  • there are no lights to tell you when to cross,
  • the light sequence does not give you time to cross,
  • there are no safe refuges,
  • vehicles frequently crash here.

Therefore do not try to use this pavement or cyclepath as it does not go anywhere and we should never have built it.

We apologise that this means you cannot get into or out of Leicester by walking or cycling.

Have a nice day!”



Cyclists and Pedestrians failed by Leicester City Council

Back in November I wrote Bad road junctions #1 Leicester A607/A563 and said that I had emailed the appropriate people in Leicester City Council.

I have now had a reply (apparently it was first sent on 5th January to the wrong email address). It includes this:

Thank you for enquiring about pedestrian and cycle facilities at this junction, which we received on 18th of November 2010.

You are correct in saying that this junction is poor for pedestrians and cyclists to cross. We have looked at addressing this but have found it to be prohibitively expensive to construct safe crossing facilities at the junction and we currently have no scheme in progress this financial year. As a cyclist I fully understand your concerns about using this junctions, especially when we have reasonable cycle facilities on sections of Melton Road and adjacent routes. I have copied this email to Andy Salkeld, our cycling co-ordinator, so that he can advise you alternative routes if that is helpful.

That is from

John Dowson. Team Leader Sustainable Transport. Transport Strategy. Highways and Transportation

To be honest I am quite stunned by this response. In my reply I pointed out that to achieve a safe crossing for pedestrians we need:

  • The installation of green/red pedestrian indicators on existing traffic signal posts.
  • The reprogramming of the traffic light sequence to provide a pedestrian pause on the parts of the junction where there isn’t one (I think that means the four exits from the junction).

Let us be clear. A few signal display boxes, a bit of re-wiring and reprogramming does not meet anyone’s definition of “prohibitively expensive”. A small team should be able to complete the work in a couple of nights work.

I wonder how the cost of this work compares to the 18 planned weeks of work that we are still enduring on the northern end of the B667 in Thurmaston. These have blocked the pavement for that whole time and the result will be a wider road for cars to feel more comfortable when they break the speed limit and so be less safe for cyclists (oh and add a junction into a new industrial area that looks like a race track designed for cars travelling at 60mph).

I do not accept that the installation cost of safe crossings for pedestrians is “prohibitively expensive”. I suspect that instead what is really meant is:

We have looked at addressing this but have found it to be prohibitively expensive to construct safe crossing facilities that do not delay motorised traffic at all at the junction

It seems that providing safe crossings for pedestrians and cyclists is unimportant compared to slowing cars at all. As we hear these priorities let us remember that the number one cause of deaths of Children in the UK is road transport.

Note that if the work is done to provide safe crossings for pedestrians then making it safe for cyclists simply requires less than 400metres of existing pavement to be re-designated as shared use, given the typically appalling levels of sign-age for cycling facilities in Leicester we could expect two double sided shared use signs per section of pavement. So 8 double sided signs to be installed on existing posts. That can hardly be described as prohibitively expensive either (it might take one person half a day, with no road closures needed).

I have responded to the email with this cheap interim suggestion. However I want to recognise that Leicester describes itself as a Cycle City with a stated aim “Leicester City Council’s aim is to get more people cycling, safely and more often”. So I have also suggested that it should be obvious to everyone that this cheap interim solution can hardly be considered ideal and that it will do little to encourage more cyclists (at this point see this post from today: What won’t bring about mass cycling (5) vehicular cycle campaigning). My longer term suggestion that I included is quite simple and I accept it would be a little more expensive:

Obviously as Leicester is a “Cycle City” I would expect a much higher quality cycle provision such as I have used in the Netherlands and in Copenhagen. That would include:-

  • a 2.5m wide separated cycle lane on each side of the Melton Road from East Goscote to Leicester City Centre
  • the entire cycle route to be raised above the road level giving clear priority over all motorised traffic at every driveway and side road along the whole route
  • proper maintenance of a smooth cycle surface including priority gritting and snow sweeping when required.
  • prioritised traffic light flow for cycles along the whole route as that when a cyclist gets one green light they will not see a red light all the way along the route

I concluded with:

I am sure that as cyclists you would agree that without routes of that quality it is a nonsense to call Leicester a Cycle City and without such an infrastructure Leicester will not achieve a significant increase in modal share for cycling (and I do not see how any interim target less than say 20% of all journeys could be considered significant). I am sure you are aware that no city in the western world has achieved significant model share for cycling without a significant investment in separated cycle infrastructure.

I look forward to hearing from you as to
a) Why relatively minor changes at the Melton Road/Troon Way junction to make it much safer will be prohibitively expensive
b) What is being done to provide a cycle infrastructure for Leicester that justifies the title “Cycle City”

I’ll let you know when I hear something.


Leicester – Cycle Parking

Fantabulous! Today I was in Leicester Town Hall for some training – on filling in the forms as an authorised person for weddings, riveting stuff 🙂

So I had cycled in a lot earlier that I normally like to get up on a Saturday (well any day really). As the traffic was so light just after 8am I went straight in by road.

The route is faiely quiet through Syston and more so on the old road through Thurmaston Village centre. Then a good segregated cycle path alongside the A607 dual carriageway past  Rushey Mead. Just one very odd exception as you pass the busy A563 Troon Way, where you are dumped onto the dual carriageway just to get through the junction.

Then on road through Belgrave (very messy with lots of lights, wide bits, narrow bits and junctions), over the flyover (very nice that they have reduced it to 1 lane of cars, because they are too fat and heavy for the bridge, leaving loads of space for bikes). Then a couple more junctions and you are at the pedestrianised shopping area, through which you are allowed to cycle. You are then at the Town Hall which has The Leicester City Council – Bike Park.

The Bike Park was just opening as I arrived at 8:30am (I told you it was horribly early) and yes the guy who was opening up arrived by bike. It has space for 120 bikes indoors with showers, bike maintenance and a bike shop.

Excellent service and completely free for the 3.5 hours that they looked after my Bullitt. Very friendly too, had a nice chat with them both arriving and leaving.

So  I highly recommend The Bike Park, I’ll be using it whenever in Leicester between 8:30 and 6 (8 and 6:30 weekdays).

Oh and of course because I had cycled I had plenty of time to get a nice coffee before the meeting started and still save money over the car parking, let alone the fuel 🙂 Plus at the end I had a lovely gentle ride back through Abbey Park and Watermead Park. On a beautiful day I felt sorry for anyone who had driven in.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: