February 2004
This document is a draft response from Greenwich Cyclists to the consultation questionnaire issued by Faber Maunsell on behalf of the authorities. See http://www.thames-gateway-cycle.org.uk/survey.asp.
t is largely based on our own cycling strategy. You will note that we have declined to be constrained by the questions that simply ask for our views on cycle routes, cycle parking and the delivery agency!
Our final response obviously needs a good introduction saying why we welcome this exercise (and complaining that their consultation meeting was during the daytime on a working week - so our members were unable to attend!)
But what else? In particular, what do you think about the last questions about who should be responsible for delivering a cycle strategy and action plan in the Thames Gateway.
Answers please, and any other suggestions to bikepest@hotmail.com.
Background
Thames Gateway London Partnership (TGLP) is committed to the development and delivery of a sustainable transport system in order to support the economic, social, and environmental regeneration of East and South East London. In line with this objective, the Partnership is currently undertaking a study to develop a Cycling Strategy and Action Plan for the sub-region, working with the London Borough of Tower Hamlets and funded through Transport for London.
FaberMaunsell have been appointed to undertake the commission of developing a TGLP Cycling Strategy and Action Plan which will:
The intention is for the study to directly inform a future programme of delivery by TGLP, and the Thames Gateway boroughs, Transport for London, Sustrans and others including the implementation of physical and non-physical measures and wider promotional activity.
Questionnaire response
WHAT ARE THE KEY CYCLING ISSUES CONCERNING CYCLE ROUTES IN YOUR AREA AND WHAT PROBLEM(S) DO THESE ISSUES CAUSE?
(Please comment regarding comfort, safety, directness, attractiveness and coherence)
It is vital to recognise that there are different types of cyclist. Cycling is a leisure activity, a sport and an extremely efficient mode of transport, accounting for about 4.4% of all journeys nationally, and a higher percentage in London. The needs of commuters are quite different to, say, a family or group of friends on a day out. And even in the 'sport' category, there are huge differences, from road racers to BMX riders. So, every road is a cycle route, many paths are too. And, a lot of cycling is done off road.
Therefore, any strategy that seriously sets out to widen take-up of cycling must recognise that cycle routes or parking is just one element of a strategy. We believe that there are four key elements for the authorities to consider in developing an implementation plan for cycling:
a) | street space for cycling; |
b) | co-ordination and enabling; |
c) | promotion and training; and |
d) | resources. |
a) Space for cycling
To encourage cycling, more must be done to tackle conditions on the roads, to improve safety and comfort, and to give cyclists priority. This can be done by making existing roads more attractive for cyclists and introducing new cycling facilities where necessary. The Government's National Cycling Strategy (NCS) provides a framework for achieving this. It 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.
According to the NCS, "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 Thames Gateway authorities 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."
The Thames Gateway authorities 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.
They should also embrace the following issues:
For young or inexperienced cyclists, off-road routes are important. They provide a safe environment in which to learn or refine cycle skills and are a vital if more people are to make the transition between leisure cycling and more general use. Care must obviously be taken to minimise conflict between the cyclist and pedestrian, but it is vital to consider developing cycle routes in parks and on common land throughout the Gateway area. Moreover, cycle parks and BMX courses provide a focus for cycle activity and do a great deal to promote cycling ad cycle sport. BMX riding is now a recognised sport and will feature in the coming Olympic Games. As the Thames Gateway develops, there will be increasing pressure on green space and parkland. Its importance as a cycling training ground should not be overlooked, and new cycling opportunities should be 'built in' as new parkland and open spaces are developed.
b) co-ordination and enabling
The strategic authorities for the Thames Gateway have a role to play 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.
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:
The strategic authorities for the Thames Gateway also have a role to play in lobbying other local, regional and central government bodies for resources and policy backing. Issues that we believe they should be pressing for include:
c) promotion and training
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.
There is evidence that the dangers of cycling are much more perceived than real. The average cyclist can expect serious injury only once in every 80 lifetimes, and death due to cycling in more than 4,500 lifetimes. Cycling is 20 times more likely to lengthen life than shorten it, and cycling is safer than many sports and other common activities. Furthermore, some of the increase in risk is a direct consequence of fewer people cycling. As more people cycle, so individual risk goes down.
There is, therefore, a vital need to tackle this negative perception if cycle use is to be encouraged successfully. One way to do this is through public awareness campaigns. These should emphasise the positive virtues of cycling: health and fitness, speed in towns, flexibility, easy parking & enjoyment and avoid focussing on the aspects that encourage the belief that cycling is risky, such as safety or cycle helmet wearing campaigns.
There are a number of successful models. One of the best documented is the 'Cycle instead' campaign organised by the Western Australian State Government. Focussing on promoting cycling in its own right, it highlighted the health and fitness benefits of cycling, and emphasised its suitability for short journeys and family interaction. Evaluation showed that 24% said they considered taking up cycling as a result, 33% said they thought about cycling more often, and 16%said it had made them think about buying a bike.
The training provided to date by Greenwich Cyclists has shown that there is a huge demand from residents for cycle skills. And, we 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 Thames Gateway authorities should expand and develop these activities:
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 Thames Gateway authorities 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 Thames Gateway. They should capitalise on the growing interest in cycling and reflect its diversity (i.e. from BMX riding to road racing, track cycling to touring, commuting to off-roading and so on) and involve as many Thames Gateway residents as possible.
There is another way in which the Thames Gateway authorities 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 Thames Gateway authorities should consider schemes of this nature at the heart of its 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.
d) Co-ordination and resources
Inevitably, the measures outlined above will require a substantial increase in resources. This will require a shift from competing schemes and the identification of additional sources.
For the sake of proper accountability the Thames Gateway authorities should identify the various budgets that impact on cycling (not just engineering, but promotional budgets too) and identify the cycling elements within them. It will be vital to then assess whether these will be sufficient to achieve the objectives within this strategy and to begin to identify the additional resources required to fully achieve the targets and the potential sources. This process is crucial if the strategy is to be at all meaningful. The budget provision will be an integral part of the action plan for delivering the strategy. Consequently, it must be matched with a political will to agree year on year growth in order to secure the resources to deliver the objectives if necessary.
As a rule of thumb, we would expect to see Thames Gateway authorities match the Cycling Public Affairs Group's recommendation that cycle schemes make up 5-10% of the total annual transport capital bid and 10-20% of the local safety scheme budget.
In order to make sure that any investment represents value for money, the Thames Gateway authorities should ensure that cycle promotion is co-ordinated adequately.
HOW CAN THE PROBLEM(S) BE RESOLVED?
We have explored many of these issues in the section above. But we recommend the following five priorities for action:
1. Cycle audit and review programme
The cycle audit and review processes, 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. Strategic priority routes
There is an urgent need for a strategic network of safe, cycle routes across the Thames Gateway boroughs. These should be based on existing cycle patterns, particularly for commuters, paying particular attention to the borough boundaries. The Councils should, therefore, consult with cyclists to prioritise key East-West and North-South routes across the boroughs and to see through the necessary engineering work in line with the principles of the cycle review programme, with a timetabled programme.
3. Cycling to school
85% 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) A large number of car journeys are known to be transporting children to school.
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. There is evidence that this can be done successfully. As a result of a recent initiative at Kesgrave School in Ipswich, 71% of children now cycle to school
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 Thames Gateway authorities should pilot at least one such project each 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 boroughs.
5. Landmark events
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. The Thames Gateway authorities should support the Mayor of London's efforts to secure a Tour de France start in the UK and also support the British Cycling authorities attempts to re-establish the Tour of Britain.
WHAT ARE THE KEY CYCLING ISSUES CONCERNING CYCLE PARKING IN YOUR AREA AND WHAT PROBLEM(S) DO THESE ISSUES CAUSE?
(Please comment regarding comfort, safety, directness, attractiveness and coherence)
As mentioned above, Cycle Parking is just one aspect of cycle promotion. There simply isn't enough cycle parking, particularly at many popular sites (for example, both of the two museums to open most recently in Greenwich were built without cycle parking). Such provision as there is is often poorly sited and unsafe.
HOW CAN THE PROBLEM(S) BE RESOLVED?
The Thames Gateway authorities must develop adequate cycle parking throughout the boroughs 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. Other local authorities, such as for Cardiff, Edinburgh, Oxford and Oxfordshire, have done a considerable amount of work to develop cycle parking standardsi. It would be a relatively simple matter for the Thames Gateway authorities to adopt best practice in this area, by adopting the standards of one of the most ambitious authorities, Oxford City Council to apply to development in Thames Gateway authorities.
Public transport providers are vital partners 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 and secure cycle parking.
WHO DO YOU THINK IS CURRENTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRESSING IMPROVEMENTS?
It's not really clear to what you are referring here. But in general terms, the local authorities are responsible and in London work with the Mayor of London, though TfL and the Cycle Centre of Excellence, with the London Cycle Network, administered by the lead borough Camden, and Sustrans are responsible for the Thames Path routes.
FROM WHAT YOU KNOW, HOW WELL DO THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRESSING IMPROVEMENTS PERFORM?
Generally not very well, but huge variations.
WHO SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROGRESSING IMPROVEMENTS?
While the Thames Gateway authorities have a central role to play, it cannot deliver a step change in cycle use on its own. We believe that the Thames Gateway authorities 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.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
NAME
Nick Williams
ORGANISATION REPRESENTING (IF APPLICABLE)
Greenwich Cyclists (see www.greenwichcyclists.org.uk)