Cycle lanes and light segregation – a new highways risk

As the budgetary pressure on councils continues unabated, alongside an increasing demand for services, innovations that present immediate costs savings appear attractive, at least on the surface. This includes light segregation. 

The relatively new species of road furniture known as light segregation was referenced in the July 2020 Local Transport Note (LTN 1/20). Its use alongside mandatory cycle lanes has certainly increased since 2020, usually within an existing highway environment.  

The aim of light segregation is to enhance the protection afforded to cyclists, complementing the solid white line signifying the presence of a mandatory cycle lane. 

Light segregation can include reflective wands or moulded solutions of differing shapes and sizes. These include Orcas, Armadillos and Mini Orcas. Intermittent kerbs or islands are also used.

Advantages 

Research carried out by ROSPA in 2017 demonstrates in stark financial terms why its popularity and implementation has accelerated. Figures from 2017 estimated the cost of a kerb separated cycle track at £700,000 per km, compared with an equivalent cost of £60,000 per km for light segregation.  

It can be introduced quickly into an existing highways layout, without any requirement for extensive planning or major construction. 

However, the pressure to increase the number of dedicated lanes for cyclists should not be allowed to deflect you from ensuring your council learns from the experience of others. 

Disadvantages 

There are a wide range of products which are all said to facilitate the easy installation and creation of cycle lanes. However, the absence of a national design standard has allowed a proliferation of well-meaning products to be brought onto the market.  

Unfortunately, what we are increasingly seeing is that these schemes have not been reviewed and the risks assessed rigorously, or at all. This is where it is essential that your highways design and risk management teams work together.  

Local authorities need to take advantage of internal expertise, particularly their road safety audit teams. Road safety audits provide an independent systematic process for checking the road safety implications of highways improvements and new road schemes. 

Taking a step back and addressing the potential risks of a new scheme is an essential part of the highways design, risk management and audit functions of a local authority. 

The involvement of agencies such as Active Travel England, with the laudable pursuit of encouraging more exercise and providing a safe space for cyclists, as well as political pressure to implement schemes quickly and cheaply, may have resulted in the expertise of highways design, risk management and road safety audit teams being overlooked or minimised.  

The result is a missed opportunity to learn from previous schemes. It is important to eradicate or mitigate (as far as possible) any potential errors in the design which may introduce conflicts with other road users, including pedestrians.  

Unfortunately, the outcome can be a series or cluster of incidents where the subsequent liability investigations reveal an absence of any rigorous design, risk management or audit processes. This has necessitated a proactive approach to manage and compromise the resulting claims, as well as then managing the remedial measures required for the scheme itself. 

There is ample evidence available to guide local authorities on obvious risks, particularly risks presenting a tripping hazard to pedestrians when crossing a cycle lane. As long ago as May 2016, Local Transport Today highlighted schemes that had to be removed due to safety concerns. This included a scheme where 55 pedestrian falls were recorded in a 24-hour period when Mini Orcas were installed.   

Claims 

Weightmans has first-hand experience assisting several clients respond to clusters of claims arising from various types of light segregation.  

The cost of these claims is not purely monetary. There has been a resulting loss of confidence in the ability of a highway authority to design and maintain its assets, while ensuring the safety of all users. 

Regrettably, history is repeating itself. In August 2025 the BBC reported that a scheme installed in Middlesbrough in 2022 is being removed. The original layout is to be reinstated following a public backlash after more than 20 accidents occurred involving pedestrians and cyclists.  The mitigation works alone will cost circa £2million (the cost of the original scheme in 2022 was £1.7million). 

As the highways space becomes increasingly crowded, all categories of user should be protected. Where possible, mandatory cycle lanes should be afforded some protection to deflect vehicular traffic away from the cycle lane if there is a risk the two could come into conflict.  

In the rush to squeeze something into an already cramped space and bolster the effect of the solid white line, the products used have provided some protection, but on occasion have introduced an entirely new hazard into the highway. Unfortunately, it is this positive act that puts a highway authority at risk when if it had done nothing and relied solely on the solid white line, it would have been in a better position.  

The August 2025 BBC article demonstrates that learning from previous experience may save your authority from being exposed to large numbers of claims, as well as substantial mitigation costs exceeding the budget spend on the original scheme.