The DfT conducted a 1 hour webchat today where they answered 22 questions (yes only 22 in an hour) about their Cycling Delivery Plan. We asked several questions about funding and national standards but they only answered 2 of them.

Here’s the full transcript

Wednesday November 12, 2014

10:55

Hi, it’s Alison Franks and Jay Begum from the Cycling & Walking Policy Team here. We’re waiting for your questions on the Cycling Delivery Plan.

10:58

Comment From Guest Hi, Hayley Chivers from Portsmouth City Council. We are a member of Solent Transport, a joint partnership with Southampton, Hampshire and IOW councils. Would we be able to join partnership as Solent Transport? This is a preference of Solent LEP.

10:59

Hi Hayley, yes that would be great. We welcome partnerships from whatever works for you in your local area. We will be giving more thorough guidance on partnerships in the final version of the Delivery Plan.

10:59

Comment From Luke Could you give me some guidance on “expectation of government’s role in the partnership” please

11:00

Hi Luke, government will be providing access to tools and incentives including priority access to new funding, support in implementing your plans and access to a knowledge sharing network.

11:01

Comment From Guest Without funding this “plan” is a pointless wishlist. HS2 and the strategic road network have dedicated long term funding, even though return on investment for them is much less than that for cycling. Where is the long term funding commitment for cycling?

11:04

There are a variety of sources of long term funding available for walking and cycling – the Local Growth Fund, funding through the Active Travel Consortium and potentially the highways maintenance funding and the Roads Investment Strategy. However, we are also committed to the principles of localism and hope local authorities and Local Enterprise Partnerships will sign up to the commitments set out in the Plan.

11:04

Comment From Richard Burton On the news this morning was an article about setting up a National Fracking College to address the skill gap in this relatively new technology. Given that the average transport planner is completely ignorant of planning for cyclists, will there be a National Cycling College and will all new and existing transport planners be required to attend?

11:06

Hi Richard, the Cycle Proofing Working Group has a key strand of work to ensure transport professionals are trained and able to design infrastructure that works for cyclists. We are working with professional institutions such as Chartered Institute of Highways & Transportation (CIHT) on this.

11:07

Comment From Kevin Golding-Williams Hi, Kevin here from Living Streets. Thanks for arranging webchat this morning. We welcome the ambition to increase the percentage of children aged 5-10 that usually walk to school to 55% in 2025 but believe this should be a target

11:08

Hi Kevin, yes this is what we are aiming for in 2025 and will be monitoring and reporting on progress.

11:08

Comment From Ely Cycling Campaign Where does the £5 per head current funding figure come from, we don’t have anywhere near that level of funding in our area.

11:10

Hi Ely, this is a national figure on average across England. It is made up of funding for Bikeability, the Cycling Ambition Grants, LSTF (cycling share), cycle-rail, Cycle Safety Fund, Highways Agency funding for ‘cycle proofing’, from DfT and local contributions.

11:10

Comment From MJ Ray Can partnerships be rewarded for adopting the London Cycling Design Standards or similar?

11:11

Hi MJ, we are developing the criteria for partnerships during the consultation phase so thank you for your suggestion. We need to keep in mind that what works for London may not work for all areas, particularly rural communities.

11:12

Comment From Hayley – Portsmouth Would we be expected to/ be able to only join partnership once and not twice as Solent Transport and Portsmouth? If we joined as Solent Transport there are some differing walking and cycling needs across the region would this be of detriment if it meant there were several focuses across the area?

11:14

Hi Hayley, we are still working on the specific criteria, so it is useful to know what questions you have. As I said, we will publish criteria and guidance in the final Plan but do not intend to be excessively predictive.

11:14

Comment From Paul Horne Hi is there a date for Councils to return their expression of interests?

11:15

Hi Paul, no it is an open, rolling invitation. More details to follow in the final Plan!

11:16

Comment From Mark Strong How will you work to bring together Local Authorities who want to improve cycling but may not quite know what they need yet? Will there be a network facilitated by DfT along the lines of the former Local Authority Cycle Planning Group?

11:17

Hi Mark, we are planing on extending the LSTF knowledge sharing network to bring together Local Authorities to share lessons learnt and good practice.

11:18

Comment From George Are you aware of ‘Crossrail for Bikes’ that has been proposed in London? Will you be putting schemes of a similar standard on the table for other parts of UK? E.g. Full and safe separation of bikes and motor traffic?

11:19

Hi George, yes we are aware of this. We believe that it is for Local Authorities to design schemes that work best for their local areas.

11:21

Comment From Guest I did send a email asking about a London based meeting but without reply. I realise that London is slightly different but it does still need to link with national policies and any knowledge sharing facility. The old Cycling England did have links with London but this policy seems to be England without London.

11:22

Hi, sorry you haven’t received a reply to your email. We are hoping to arrange a London-based roadshow next week and will publicise details as soon as possible.

11:22

Comment From George Are you going to encourage the spread of 20 MPH zones that have worked effectively in London to boost cycling levels? E.g. City of London now totally 20 MPH. Can this become the ‘norm’ for town centres and small villages?

11:23

Hi George, we have already made it easier for Local Authorities to implement 20mph zones. It is up to authorities whether or not they wish to adopt these.

11:26

Comment From Paul Has the term “cycle proofing” been given further clarification? as this term seems to be subject to a good deal of interpretation.

11:27

Hi Paul, broadly cycle proofing is about ensuring that cyclists are considered at the design stage of new and improved road infrastructure. The Cycle Proofing Working Group are currently agreeing a more detailed definition.

11:27

Comment From Adam Semenenko Your comment that there is long term funding available is incredibly misleading. The amounts are pitiful, less than 0.7% of DfT funding is spent on cycling, making your strategy look like dismissive pandering at best.

11:29

Hi Adam, this government is serious about making the UK a cycling nation and has more than doubled spend on cycling, with £374m committed between 2011 and 2015 on cycling initiatives. We want cycling and walking to become the natural choice for shorter journeys and will be working with local authorities to help them access funding at a local level.

11:34

Comment From Lucie Hi, do you have any plans or strategy to encourage harmony between motorists and cyclists. I work for pro-cyclists solicitors and the antipathy between these groups (particularly from motorists) is deeply-trodden and, in my opinion, a huge barrier to plans to increase the number of people cycling.

11:36

Hi Lucie, we do engage with motoring groups such as the AA as well as cycling groups. Mutual respect is key, and our recent Think! campaigns encourage drivers and cyclists to look out for each other.

11:40

Comment From Gary Dawes One concern I have is that even with this plan, there is no duty on councils to provide safe space for walking and cycling schemes either on their own or as part of larger projects. Is there any plan to tackle lack of interest or ambition from LAs?

11:43

Hi Gary, last week we published three documents that we hope will help make the case for providing for walking and cycling. These can be found at https://www.gov.uk/governme… https://www.gov.uk/governme… https://www.gov.uk/governme…

11:44

Comment From Ambrose White Hi there, following yesterday’s workshop I am just seeking some more clarity on timescales. I understood that following the informal consultation which is due to finish tomorrow, there will be a further period of public consultation (4 weeks?). After this ] the Plan will be published

11:45

Hi Ambrose, sorry for any misunderstanding. The consultation phase we are in now is the only period of consultation.

11:46

Comment From Sheffield Cycle Chic What specific measures will be implemented to make cycling safer for small children?

11:47

Hi Sheffield, we want to make cycling safer for everybody. Through the Bikeability cycle training programme we have already trained over 1m school children to the National Standards, and will endeavour to continue funding Bikeability training post 2015/16.

11:50

Comment From Richard Burton You haven’t answered the question about dedicated long term funding, like that for HS2 and the strategic road network, so where is the commitment to funding?

11:52

Hi Richard. The Cycling Delivery Plan is a 10 year plan with a number of actions and commitments to increase cycling and walking. We do take cycling very serious which is why funding has more than doubled under this government, and why there are a number of funding opportunities described in the Delivery Plan.

11:52

Comment From Alex I can see that you have a clear direction from above to follow localism. What reports or other facts and knowledge will DfT be producing to help campaigners, politicians and others promote local policy that makes the roads safer for cycling and walking?

11:53

Hi Alex, I linked to some reports earlier that should help. We will also be publishing guidance to help Local Authorities make the economic case for cycling when we publish the final Delivery Plan. And we will be extending the Local Sustainable Transport Fund knowledge sharing network.

12:00

Comment From Ely Cycling Campaign You have just said the Govt have committed £374m to cyclling over 4 years, that is 93.5m per year and £1.30 per year per head (pop. of 70m). That’s not even close to the £5 per year per head stated in the delivery plan. Which is correct?

12:01

Hi, the £374m is funding committed by DfT for cycling initiatives. The £5 per head figure is based on funding committed to cycling including local contributions released due to DfT investment.

12:03

Thanks to everyone for participating. Sorry we couldn’t answer all questions in the time available. We appreciate your input and will combine them with feedback we received at the roadshows when producing the final Delivery Plan.

In March last year we became aware that Witchford Parish Council had requested that the County Council build a central island pinch point on Main Street at the entrance to the village.

We arranged to talk to the Parish Council and emailed the County Council officers to raise the following concerns.

1. It will make the road significantly more dangerous for cyclists.

Central islands of this type force the motor traffic out towards the edge of the carriageway into the area of the carriageway used by cyclists.

The negative effect in this case is magnified due the to the position of the proposed island. The proposed position is on the transition out of the 30 mph zone and so will mean traffic leaving the village at that point will be accelerating, the proposed island will then direct that accelerating traffic into the path of any cyclists using the road.

2. It will not have the desired effect of reducing traffic speed.

Cambridgeshire County Council’s advice on speed calming measures* describes the effectiveness of central islands in reducing speed as:

“Not very effective as a speed reduction measure on its own (2-3 mph)”

Furthermore it recommends them for:

“Traffic islands are a useful and cost effective way to provide some carriageway narrowing, to focus the attention of drivers and to provide crossing facilities for pedestrians.”

There are no pedestrian crossing requirements at the location of the proposed island.

*Cambrigdeshire County Council’s advice has been removed from their website it was online here – http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/transport/trafficmanagement/policy/speed_reduction_measures.htm

We were told there would be a working party and asked to be involved. We heard nothing.

Last month we discovered (buried in the Parish Council minutes) that a second island for the other end of the village was planned similar to the one already ordered. Note we had not been contacted by any of the County Highways engineers responsible for this island despite raising concerns.

Today the County Council installed the island and as predicted by us it creates a nasty pinch point for anyone cycling along the road, which many people do because  the alternative is a narrow, windy, badly maintained, unlit shared use path.

We’d like to know

• Why our reasonable concerns were ignored?
• How this obviously unsafe design passed a safety audit?
• Whether the County’s Cycling Officers were even consulted?

Abellio Greater Anglia (AGA), who run Ely station, are about to tender for provision of a Cycle Point at the station, which is due to be constructed by March 2015. They are tendering at the same time for a Cycle Point to be provided at Norwich station. One Cycle Point is currently in existence, provided at Leeds station by AGA’s sister company Northern Rail details here. Ely Cycling Campaign has recently received copies of the tender documents.

The essence of the Ely Cycle Point is to provide retail cycle maintenance and sales, cycle hire, and cycle parking, in the form both of paid-for ‘premium’ parking – in locked compounds to which only those paying for ‘premium’ parking will have access – and free parking.

The Cycle Point will be located in part of the station building, in what is currently retail space in the old Rosie and Dolly, to the left of the station entrance as one approaches from the city. The premium paid-for parking will be adjacent to and behind the building (between the building and the platform). The free parking will be partly at the front of the building, near where some cycle racks are currently, and partly (the majority) at the far end of the station building, between the end of the building and the embankment of the A142 underpass. The cycle parking currently on platform 1 will be removed once the Cycle Point is established.

The tender documents provide for 210 free cycle parking spaces, mostly in covered two-tier racks, of the type which now exist in large numbers at Cambridge station. There will also be some single-level free parking using Sheffield stands (though this will be a small part of the total). There will be either 150 or 200 premium paid-for cycle parking spaces (the tender documents seem to be inconsistent about this figure).

There are about 180 free cycle parking spaces currently on platform one, and a handful outside the station, so the new provision will represent a slight increase in the number of free spaces.

The initial charges for the premium parking will be: daily ticket £1.00 (available only during staffed hours); weekly ticket (Monday to Sunday only) £4.00; monthly ticket £12.00 per calendar month; annual ticket £99.00; with a £10.00 refundable deposit for the access swipe card.

We understand, though this is not part of the tender documents, that there are also plans to increase the size of the Ely station ticket hall, and to provide further doors into and out of the ticket hall – changes which are badly needed and long overdue.

The tender process is to a tight timescale, which is linked to the availability of external funding for the project, and we do not know how much can now be changed.

We have a number of questions about the tender documents, which we have sent to AGA.   We think that the proportion of premium paid-for cycle parking spaces to free spaces is probably wrong, and that there should be proportionately more free spaces and proportionately fewer premium ones. We have asked if this can be considered (the point was made by a number of those attending the AGA cycle forum in late July 2014).

AGA also operates ‘secure’ parking at other locations, which involves parking in a secure cage, a key to which is obtained by a refundable deposit of £25, but which is otherwise free. This seems very desirable, and we have asked whether some of the premium parking could be replaced by parking in this ‘secure’ form. We are also concerned that the free parking located at the end of the station building may be rather secluded, giving rise to an increased risk of theft (the tender document suggests that the free parking would be covered by CCTV). We have asked AGA whether all of the free parking could be located at the front of the station building, if necessary by removing car-parking spaces there, and replacing them with car-parking spaces in the area currently designed for free cycle parking.

As part of the North Ely development for 3000 houses the planning application for the new primary school has been submitted. The new school will be in an area between Cam Drive and Lynn Road, two major roads in Ely which connect to the A10 and have heavy lorry traffic and no usable cycle infrastructure.

The planning document mentions as one of it’s key design drivers:

To develop the existing access routes, identified in the site master plan, to provide safe
segregation for vehicles and pedestrians.

and:

Strong pedestrian and cycle links.

and:

Pedestrian and cyclist access is to be encouraged with the integration of footpaths with cyclelanes into the proposed highways infrastructure (Endurance Development Master Plan).Vehicular areas, car parking and drop-off is clearly identified with safe segregation.

So the usual shared-use paths which don’t work should encourage cycling and walking. Now let’s see how the car parking and drop-off is segregated:

Right, so there are drop-off points all around the school and pedestrians and cyclists have to take their chances in between. Just like pretty much any other school where most people drop their kids off by car because it’s too dangerous to let them walk or cycle.

Let’s assume some people want to walk or cycle anyway, how are they supposed to get there:

As part of the Ely development master plan, new pedestrian/cycle routes will be extended to link into and around the new primary school development.

And that’s it. No details at all. So we have a new school which will be on a major access road to a 3000 houses development, surrounded by car parking drop-off points. No pedestrian crossings, no details of cycle paths connected some non-existant cycle routes.

Anyone want to predict how most people will take their children to this new school?

So – what could be made better:

• At the very least remove all the drop-off points near the entrances and move them to the back (by the sports fields) or create a designated drop-off area, e.g. next to the staff car park.
• If you have to keep the drop off points on the opposite side of the road to
  the school, where are the crossing points to get the kids across?
• Truly segregate pedestrians from cars, not just with words!
• Segregate the cyclists from the pedestrians. Provide modern infrastructure, not the same old shared-use path that neither cyclists nor pedestrians find safe
• Make the public square at the front lager with prominent cycle parking and plenty of benches and some playground enquipment to create an environment for people where parents and children can wait during drop-off and pick-up time.
• Is it easier to walk or drive? Is it further to walk or drive? Make walking and cycling as convenient as possible and make parking and driving harder and more time consuming so it actually saves time to leave the car at home. Only then will people be encouraged to walk or cycle!

This is what we would like to see:

• Drop-off parking away from the entrance, e.g. by the sports fields.(in yellow)
• Safe crossing points outside all entrances to allow pedestrians to take the shortest route (in black)
• Segregated cycle routes on all roads in the new development (in red)
• It should also be considered how traffic near the school can be reduced. Can the roads be made one-way? Do they have to be through routes or can they be cul-de-sacs?

Please don’t make the same old mistakes and try to see how similar schemes work successfully in other places.

We hear a lot from councillors about how they want to allow more people to cycle but it seems that when there is an opportunity to make a commitment they fall short.

The CTC is now coordinating a national Space for Cycling (it started in London). The campaign has a simple message, provide space on the roads for cycling. It’s been shown in other countries that if you provide space for cycling people will use. It allows more people to leave the car at home and take the bike instead. It’s not rocket science.

Today the CTC has published a map showing the number of councillors supporting the campaign across the country. In Cambridgeshire (home of the nations ‘cycling capital’, Cambridge) it’s currently a pitiful 4%, just 3 councillors.

[UPDATE] Since we first published this post 3 more councillors have registered support bringing the total to 6 or 9%. But still none from East Cambs.Continue reading “Local councillors fail to support Space for Cycling”

The County Council are organising a “Velo Festival” this summer with a big event in Ely on Sunday June 1st in the Market Square, we’ll be there with a stall.

Here’s the description from the official flyer

Come and spend a fun packed afternoon at the first in a series of Bike Life events, where there will be an array of exciting cycling activities to try out. Get tips, advice and support on bicycle maintenance from Dr. Bike; pedal up your own delicious smoothie on a pedal powered smoothie
maker; take up the Brompton challenge and see how quickly you can assemble, race a lap and put down a Brompton; and see a history of the bicycle with a display from the March Vintage and Veteran Cycle Club. There will also be a Street Velodrome in which you can take the
challenge to speed around a specially built cycle
track, promising to be an exhilarating activity for
cyclist of all abilities and spectators.

The Street Velodrome is a mini portable version of the kind of track used for the Olympics – more info here http://www.streetvelodrome.com/