back

1. Introduction
10 years after the adoption of the Council’s first Cycling strategy, there is little evidence that cycling levels have increased within Greenwich borough. The Council’s approach to cycling provision remains piecemeal and uncoordinated, but there is a growing realisation that more must be done.

This paper, therefore, sets out the case for the adoption of a cycling strategy for the London Borough of Greenwich. It establishes a framework for action to promote and encourage cycling, capable of delivering measurable increases in cycle use which will benefit Greenwich residents by reducing congestion and pollution, and by improving personal health and local economic development.

2. Recommendations
Greenwich Councillors are asked to:
• adopt the underlying principles for a cycling strategy, outlined below in section 6;
• agree the key elements for the strategy set out in section 7;
• adopt the priorities for action recommende3d in section 8; and
• agree to draw up a strategy and implementation action plan by spring 2003.

3. Why promote cycling?
Few people would disagree that getting about in London is becoming harder and more stressful. At the start of this new millennium Londoners travelling by car get about no faster than a horse and carriage would have done at the beginning of the last century. To add to the misery, in spite of improvements locally, most people continue to perceive public transport as inefficient, expensive, overcrowded and poorly co-ordinated.

Because of it's location as London's gateway to Kent and Europe, Greenwich borough is hit particularly badly by huge volumes of motorised traffic and blighted by the consequent pollution and environmental stress.

Cycling offers a solution to some of these problems. And In the following pages we set out a strategy for promoting and increasing cycle use and safety, which can play a vital part in getting Greenwich moving again.

But it is vital to remember that cycling is not just a 'transport' issue.
• Cycling is environmentally friendly – the impact of the manufacture and use of bicycles is minuscule in comparison with other forms of transport. More bikes and more cars means less greenhouse gas emissions and reduced air and noise pollution.
• Cycling is a healthy - medical evidence shows that the benefits of cycling far outweigh the disadvantages even of cycling in London’s smog!
• Cycling is socially inclusive – bicycles are relatively affordable which means cycling is open to virtually anyone, including most disabled people. Cyclists are not cut off from their surroundings by a metal box and improved numbers of people on the streets can also improve people’s perception of security and create a ‘virtuous circle’ as more people are encouraged to leave their cars at home.
• Cycling is fun- as a sport and a pure leisure activity, cycling gives enjoyment to millions.

4. Aims and objectives
Our primary objective is simply ‘to encourage more people to cycle’. We aim to:
• encourage new people to take up cycling, particularly under-represented groups;
• improve cycle safety and security;
• improve facilities for cyclists both in the public realm and at work;
• increase cycle use among existing cyclists;
• ensure that cycling is integrated into transport policy making in order to ensure a ‘joined-up’ approach; and
• ensure that Government targets for increased cycling are exceeded within Greenwich.

5. Why we need a cycling strategy
Though cycle use in London has stabilised recently (from a dramatic fall at the end of the last century) it remains massively below its potential. More than one in three UK households own a bicycle and yet just 2% of road trips are by bicycle. Nationally 25% of all car journeys are under two miles, and 59% are under five miles – relatively easy distances to cycle. Countries comparable to the UK in terms of geography, climate and economy, have cycle use between five and 10 times higher than ours. If it were possible to increase cycle usage to something like the levels achieved in Germany or the Netherlands, it would make a significant impact on congestion and pollution, with substantial benefits to London’s economy and environment and to Londoners’ health.

In this sense, every Londoner needs a strategy that will encourage and promote cycle use. In Greenwich, with it’s poor record on air quality and high levels of respiratory disease among children, the case would seem to be more pressing than for many other areas of the capital.

And, there are particular reasons why Greenwich Council and cyclists themselves need a strategy.

The Council needs a cycling strategy because:
• without one, the Council looks set to fail to meet the targets for increased cycle use demanded from the authority by the Government in its National Cycling Strategy;
• the Council is required to produce a local implementation plan to support the Greater London Authority’s Integrated Transport Strategy, which promotes cycling heavily;
• the Council’s own Interim Transport Plan (ITP) prioritises cycling but lacks a coherent implementation programme;
• the Council has allocated an engineering budget but this is currently used reactively rather than proactively and in some years has even been underspent;
• it invests in cycle training; and
• there is no hard evidence that the Council’s efforts are making any impact.

Since there’s no evidence that the Council’s commitment to cycling, made in the ITP, is being translated into action, it’s open to question whether Council tax payers are getting value for money from the limited investment that is being made.

Cyclists need a strategy:
• that will tempt more people to take up cycling;
• because our surveys show that people are deterred from cycling through fear of the roads;
• to reduce accidents involving cyclists. 9% of all casualties on London streets in 1999 were cyclists, while they made only 2% of all road trips;
• to reduce fear of theft;
• to reduce barriers to cycling which result in riders resorting to pavement cycling or the wrong way along one way streets; and
• cyclists are council tax payers and question much of the value of even the limited investment made by the Council to date.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that cycling strategies can make a difference. York City Council, for example, estimate that cycling has increased by 16% in the three years following the introduction of their strategy.

6. Principles of the Cycling Strategy
Any worthwhile strategy sets out a series of objectives with an action plan for delivering them. The action plan would include targets and milestones against which progress can be measured, and would be based on available or achievable resources.

It is not possible for Greenwich cyclists to develop a detailed strategy in this manner, since we do not have the financial information to allow us to do so. But in the following paragraphs we set out some of the fundamental principles which we believe should underlie a cycling strategy.

• Research, monitoring and review
The recommendations set out in this report represent the first stages of a strategy. Further development of the strategy should be evidence-based. This will require the analysis of existing data and collection of new information about cycling. Furthermore, if the strategy is to deliver real value for money it is essential that each stage is properly evaluated and reviewed. It is clearly, therefore, a prerequisite of the strategy that research is conducted to benchmark cycle use and to understand more clearly the barriers to cycle use.

As a starting point, research could be conducted into the following areas:
• bi-annual cycle counts;
• cycle user questionnaires;
• cycle ownership surveys – to assess potential for increasing use by cycle owners;
• review of existing cycle provision;
• cycle accident data surveys and ‘hot spot’ analysis
• pavement cycling analysis – frequency, where and why;
• cycle theft – analysis of worst areas;
• London cycle network analysis - coherence and signage;
• road maintenance – repair, cleaning and hazard reporting procedures;
• survey of secure cycle parking provision;
• audit of training resources; and
• provision of cycle information.

• Partnership and liaison
The strategy needs to be agreed and developed in partnership with cyclists organisations and other relevant groups, such as school governing bodies included in cycle to school programmes. Cyclists should be consulted on each stage of implementation and the Council should facilitate a cycle liaison group or Forum to oversee implementation and to advise on appropriate means of consultation. The strategy and targets (set out in section 8) should be monitored and reviewed on a quarterly basis by the forum and reported to relevant council committee.

It is also important to consult and liaise with other parties, such as the Royal Parks or pedestrian or horse riding associations, where there is likely to be converging or conflicting interests.

• Consistency with the ITP
Cycling is only one part of the transport equation but the ITP gives it high priority. Therefore, all transport issues and especially roads schemes should be looked at from the perspective of the high priority groups i.e. the starting point when examining a new road scheme should be ‘what can be done to improve mobility for disabled people or cyclists on this road’, rather than the need to facilitate the passage of cars or other lower priority groups.

• Access to all roads
The strategy must recognise that there is a variety of different types of cyclist. These must all be catered for within the hierarchy of roads envisaged in the Mayor's Transport for London document (4G.26). Faster moving and experienced commuters need safe access to strategic roads, while dedicated routes and protected cycle lanes on other London roads may suit children and leisure cyclists or encourage new cyclists. While proper, segregated provision may encourage leisure or less experienced cyclists, there should be no attempt to restrict cyclists to these facilities. Any attempt to do so will inevitably fail and will cause conflict with other street space users, particularly pedestrians and drivers. There should be no ‘no go’ areas for cyclists on the roads.

• Cycle friendly road building and maintenance
We are generally against the provision of new roads in the borough, except where they are clearly necessary to facilitate new development within the borough, such as around the Dome. The evidence suggests that new roads simply attract new traffic. However, roads are continually maintained and improved. The default position in the course of this work should be that all new roadworks and pedestrian facilities should involve a cycle audit or review (see below) - an analysis of the implications for cyclists and potential to encourage cycling. For example, forward stop lines for cyclists should be automatically assumed in any new design, unless there are compelling reasons against it. Cycle lanes an automatic part of road resurfacing.

7. Key elements of an implementation plan
There should be five key elements for the Council’s to consider in developing an implementation plan for cycling:
a) access to street space for cyclists;
b) co-ordination and enabling; and
c) promotion and training;
d) resources.

(a) Street space for cycling
Our sample survey of Greenwich residents (see appendix 1) suggests that the chief reason for people not using their bicycles is fear of the roads. The statistics show that this fear is not entirely misplaced. In the first seven months of 2001 in Greenwich borough there were 21 accidents reported to the police in which pedal cyclists were injured – three a month. An essential component of this strategy must therefore be to increase safety by providing safe access to the roads for cyclists. The Government’s National Cycling Strategy (NCS) provides a framework for achieving this.

One of the primary objectives of the NCS is to encourage planning and highway authorities to create a cycle-friendly infrastructure. This can be done by making existing roads more attractive for cyclists and introducing new cycling facilities where necessary. The NCS recommends that specific procedures – cycle audit and cycle review – should be developed for use by all highway authorities to ensure cyclists are properly considered in the development of the transport infrastructure.

Cycle audits examine new highway schemes during design and implementation, to make sure that the needs of cyclists are taken into account. Cycle reviews examine the existing transport infrastructure for ease of use by cyclists.

Audits and reviews should consider the five general requirements of a good cycling infrastructure. These are: coherence; directness; attractiveness; safety; and comfort. For example, when considering a new cycle lane, the Council should consider whether it is part of a wider network (coherence), be part of a route favoured by cyclists (directness), be well lit and signed (attractiveness), be designed to reduce the risk of collision (safety) and be smooth and continuous (comfort). These procedures should ensure that the appropriate design solution is selected. In addition, it is expected that that the following hierarchy of measures, in order of preference, is considered before the design solution is chosen: traffic reduction; traffic calming; junction treatment and traffic management, redistribution of the carriageway and off-road provision.

Greenwich Council should introduce these cycle audit procedures immediately and establish a five year timetabled programme of cycle reviews, starting with the major cycle routes in the borough.

This process will ensure that the ITP’s priority order underlies all decisions about allocating or reallocating road space. And it will need to encompass:
• the need for high quality standards to be established for cycle lane provision;
• high quality and regular maintenance and cleaning for cycle lane provision, with a single hazard hotline;
• cycle friendly alternatives to speed humps and pinch points; and
• good signing;
• enforcement of speed limits for motor vehicles, and parking restrictions in cycle lanes;
• the introduction of 20mph speed limits in many residential streets;
• traffic free routes;
• priorities for new cycle provision (see below).

Since the requirement for cycle audits and reviews is a national one, many other boroughs are currently using this framework. It should be possible, therefore, for Greenwich to learn from experience elsewhere and to learn from best practice, through liaison with the Greater London Authority’s Cycle Centre for Excellence. This should also allow inter-borough benchmarking and comparisons to be made.

(b) Co-ordination and enabling
The Council has a role as the strategic authority for the borough in promoting cycle use with other public sector agencies, partners and businesses, particularly the police, public transport operators, NHS and Primary Care Trusts, retailers and developers.

Joint working with the metropolitan police is vital. The risk of cycle theft is very high within the borough. Greenwich borough police reported 376 bicycles were stolen in the 12 months up to August 2001 – more than one a day. The police are also important partners in the enforcement of cycle lanes and of speed limits generally. The Council should work closely with the police to combat bike theft and to increase the priority given to enforcement issues.

The Council must also develop adequate cycle parking throughout the borough with relevant partners. Priorities would be at educational establishments, public transport interchanges, leisure facilities, major employment sites and other major journey attractors. Design standards should be established to ensure that cycle parking facilities are secure, convenient, and well lit, under shelter and close to cycle routes.

The public transport operators are vital if the borough is to develop a properly integrated transport structure. They, like all other businesses, can help by providing better access to their sites, secure cycle parking, and showers, lockers and changing facilities for staff.

The benefits to the local economy of cycling, particularly to the local retail sector, are also significant. Research shows that cyclists are more likely to support local businesses and this reduces the ‘leakage’ from the local economy.

Priorities should include:
• liaison with the partners to develop a about cycle parking strategy;
• liaison with the police to ensure priority for cycle enforcement issues;
• staff travel and green transport plans for local businesses with incentives;
• regeneration and development control (i.e. new business developments should include facilities to benefit cyclists, such as secure cycle parking, showers, bike loans and travel allowances etc.).

The Council also has a role to play in lobbying other local, regional and central government bodies for resources and policy backing. Issues that we believe the Council should be pressing for include:
• cross borough co-ordination on issues such as key strategic routes, foot tunnels lift maintenance, Woolwich Ferry etc.;
• cycle awareness to be part of the standard driving test;
• tax benefits should be introduced to cycle friendly businesses etc.

(c) Cycling promotion
The work described in sections (a) and (b) above, will help to improve the physical infrastructure for cyclists. But it is clearly equally important that more work is done to teach people to cycle, to encourage people to use their bicycles and to tackle perceptions of and attitudes towards cycling.

The training provided to date by Greenwich Cyclists has shown that there is a huge demand from residents for cycle skills. And, training and associated events staged during the last two year’s International Women’s Week, have shown that there is equally high interest among under-represented groups in learning to cycle and about cycling in a supportive environment.

There are, therefore, a number of tried and tested ways that cycling can be promoted, and the Council should expand and develop these activities:
• cycle training – an expanded programme, for children and adults and particularly to under represented groups for beginners but also for more advanced skills;
• organised rides, for cyclists of all abilities;
• mentor and bike buddy schemes to support improving cyclists;
• cycle maintenance classes;
• cycling sports development – interest in cycle sport is growing in the UK, particularly since the success of the British Olympic team. The remit of the Council’s sports development team should be expanded to include cycling;
• public awareness campaigns, looking at the health and other general benefits of cycling, or more targeted driver awareness campaigns (to encourage drivers to take more care and remind them of the rights of cyclists and the penalties for infringing them) or cyclists’ responsibilities campaign (the need to be visible, to us lights, highway code etc.)
• information – commuter routes and local leisure ride route information should be published and available through libraries, council outlets, website etc;
• Bicycle user group – as a major employer, the Council should review facilities for, and provide incentives to, Council staff such as training, loans and cycle pools.

All of these activities have the potential to make a significant impact on perceptions of cycling and on cycle use. But, we believe that an essential ingredient of a proper ‘marketing strategy’ for cycling would be for the Council to stage regular landmark events to promote cycling. These events – say three a year – might be staged to coincide with national or international activities, such as Bike Week or European Car Free Day. They should be staged in order to capture the public’s imagination and build interest in cycling as both a sport, a leisure activity and as a practical means of travelling throughout the City. They should capitalise in the growing interest in cycling and reflect its diversity (i.e. from BMX riding to road racing, trick cycling to touring, commuting to off-roading and so on) and involve as many Greenwich residents as possible.

Commendably, the Council has set a precedent for this recently though it’s successful Car Free Day festival in Greenwich Town Centre. But the Council should build on this success, for example, by reviving the Woolwich Town Centre road racing events or Maryon Wilson Park cyclo-cross, and build more public participation into them. It could also develop the Mayor’s annual bike ride or the very popular series of activities that have been staged during International Women’s Week. These would not only signal the Council’s commitment to cycling very clearly but should also trade on cycling’s fundamental attraction – that it is exciting and fun - and make a lasting impression on participants and spectators alike.

(d) Resources
Inevitably, the measures outlined above will require a substantial increase in resources. This will require a shift to cycling schemes and complementary measures from competing schemes and additional sources. The Council should identify the necessary funding sources and establish adequate budgets to deliver the objectives.

In order to make sure that any investment represents value for money, the Council should ensure that cycle promotion is co-ordinated adequately.
• The work should be co-ordinated by a full-time cycling officer.
• There should be transparency on all transport, road and cycle expenditure.
• Resources for cycling should be increased as a % of the total budget annually.
• Planning powers should be used wherever possible to enhance cycling facilities.
• Priority should be given to maximising capital and revenue funding for the projects identified within this strategy, for example by making bids to the government, national lottery etc.

While the Council has a central role to play, it cannot deliver a step change in cycle use on it’s own. We believe that the council must work with the local community. As we have said above, this means that the strategy must be developed and continuously reviewed in consultation with cyclists – through a liaison body. And that this process should also apply to the allocation and targeting of resources.

But there is another way in which the Council should consider working with the community. A study by Jake Elster, of the Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, shows that community based cycling schemes can be used very effectively to tackle social inclusion. Examining 73 cycling projects, mainly for young people, Elster reported benefits ranging well beyond the transport and environmental gains. They included reduced crime, new services, local employment generation, skills training, capacity building and community development. The average set up cost for these projects was just £10,000. He concluded that these projects "represent a way of engaging a much wider audience with cycling than the conventional approach of promoting cycling as transport".

Elster’s study shows that locally, with some serious thinking about cycling and a relatively small amount of money, huge strides towards a more sustainable transport system and a healthier community can be made. We therefore believe that the Council should consider schemes of this nature at the heart of it’s thinking about regeneration and work with its partners to deliver the resources to allow the community itself to develop their cycle skills and expertise as part of the wider approach to social exclusion.

8. Key priorities
We would offer the following five priorities for action:

1. Cycle audit and review programme
Cycle audit and review, as described above, provide a powerful tool for improving the street space for cyclists. Cycle audit procedures should be introduced immediately and a five year cycle of cycle reviews should be established.

2. Safe, strategic priority routes
There is an urgent need for a strategic network of safe, cycle routes across the borough. These should be based on existing cycle patterns, particularly for commuters, and be co-ordinated with neighbouring boroughs. Progress in Greenwich on the London Cycle Network, developed many years ago in an attempt to provide this facility, is way behind schedule and in many places fails to meet the demands of cyclists for convenient, direct and safe routes. The Council should, therefore, consult with cyclists to prioritise a handful of East-West and North-South routes across the borough and to see through the necessary engineering work in line with the principles of the cycle review programme within two years.

3. Cycling to school in safety
85 per cent of young people own bicycles but less than 1% per cent rode to school in 1999, compared to 6% 10 years earlier (DETR, Transport Statistics Report)

If the percentage of children cycling to school rose to something like the Dutch level of 65%, local congestion at the critical peak periods would fall dramatically. This would not only benefit the environment, but would also strengthen the economy, our children’s health and our communities. Proper cycle to school pilots should be established with a view to establishing safe routes to every school over 10 year, backing these up with targeted cycle training programmes, promotional activities and the installation of associated cycle facilities.

4. Community cycling projects
As Jake Elster’s study shows, community-based cycling projects can provide benefits far beyond the transport or environmental gains. The Council should pilot at least one such project to provide a pool of cycles for a locality, to target training and to develop skills and capacity locally. This could provide a model for other such projects within regeneration areas throughout the borough.

5. Landmark events programme
To bring about a step change in the use of cycles a range or promotional activities are required. Central to this work is the adoption of a number of keynote or landmark events that will dramatically raise the profile and introduce cycling to new audiences. A small number of well-supported, exciting events or festivals, such as Car free day or the Mayor’s annual ride, will fire people’s imagination, and focus attention on the possibilities that cycling offers.

9. Monitoring and evaluation
The progress of this strategy should regularly monitored and evaluated. We, therefore, offer the following measures and milestones.

• To set intermediate targets that will allow the borough to exceed the governments target for a quadrupling of cycle use by 2012.
• To increase the modal share of cycling to at least 50% of all journeys to school by pupils of 10 years or older, within 10 years.
• To reduce the casualty rate for pedal cyclists per trip cycled by oo% within 5 years, and by 00% within 15 years compared to casualty rates.
• There should be bi-annual audits of cycle use to monitor the level of cycle use together with quantitative and qualitative monitoring of cycle use on new cycleways to monitor their effectiveness.
• % of the total transport capital budget actually spent on schemes with cycling as the principal rationale.
• To reduce the rates of cycle theft by 00% within 5 years and by 00% within 15 years.
• To reduce the rates of cycle injuries by 00% by date.
• To provide cycle training for 80% of 10 – 12 year old children by 2005.
• Establishment of a cycle liaison forum by September 2002.
• Five year programme of cycle reviews to be agreed by December 2002.
• Safe, strategic networks identified and agreed by December 2002, following consultation.
• Establishment of a pilot community cycling scheme by April 2003.
• Three landmark cycle events a year during 2003.

10. Conclusion

11. References

LB Greenwich Borough Cycling Strategy 1992/93
DETR National Cycling Strategy 23.09.96
The Mayor’s Draft Transport Strategy 2001
LB Greenwich Interim Transport Policy 2000
Greenwich Cyclists, On your Bike, response to LBG’s ITP, May 2000
CTC: Best Value in implementing cycling policy, 31.05.2000
Guidelines for Cycle Audit and Review. Institute of Highways and Transportation 1998
Cycling Matters! National Cycling Forum, February 2001
Letter from Sarah Rees, Criminal Justice Unit, Metropolitan Police, August 2001


Drawn up by
Rushton Aust rushtonaust@azof.freeserve.co.uk
Jonathan Bangs 020 8857 8433
Liz Delap liz.delap@dial.pipex.com
Nick Williams bikepest@hotmail.com or 020 8853 3947

For Greenwich Cyclists www.greenwichcyclists.org.uk

12. Appendices

back