Strategies for walking and cycling?

Ensuring the National and Regional Transport Strategies deliver for sustainable transport

Saturday 26th November 2005 - Lamb's House, Burgess Street, Leith
Organised jointly by:
 

INTRODUCTION

Colin Howden, Director of TRANSform Scotland, welcomed delegates to the event, which had been organised by CTC Scotland and TRANSform Scotland against the background of the Scottish Executive’s major review of current transport policies. The review will include:

  • the establishment of seven Statutory Regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs), who will be charged with developing Regional Transport Strategies (RTSs)
  • the creation of Transport Scotland, a national transport agency
  • a new National Transport Strategy (NTS)
  • a Strategic Transport Projects Review, apparently focused on large infrastructure projects.

The organisers were united by concerns about the current focus of the Executive’s transport planners, which appears to be largely upon:

  • rail – with an internal rail policy review, and a public rail consultation
  • freight – with an internal freight policy review, and two parliamentary inquiries (the Local Government and Transport, and the Public Petitions committees).

The Scottish Executive's approach is backed up by a national transport agency that has been instructed to concentrate on the delivery of large infrastructure projects - which may not be the same as strategically important interventions, towards for example improving the environment, public health or social justice.

The conference was devised to help participants remind the Scottish Executive (SE) that transport should serve all members of the public in a socially just and environmentally sustainable fashion. This implies that government must deliver a lot more in areas such as:

  • walking – still the second most common mode of transport, yet an issue on which the SE does not even have a strategy
  • cycling – commonplace in many countries overseas but relatively limited in Scotland
  • the needs of non-motorised users more generally
  • living streets projects – e.g. traffic calming, slower speeds, 20mph zones, Home Zones, Street Audits


The National Transport Strategy and transport policies at regional and local levels should, moreover, reflect awareness of health- and climate change-related imperatives (e.g. by aiming at an overall road traffic reduction) and social justice objectives (e.g. by prioritising public transport over costly extensions to the existing road network).

Colin noted that the lobby behind these demands was neither strong, wealthy nor well-connected, but that it had substantial constituency that needs to be catered for and could become more involved in relevant campaigns. Their voices need to be heard at national, regional and local levels, with the following developments providing particulary promising opportunities:

Firstly, nationally, the Scottish Executive is due to begin a written consultation on the National Transport Strategy (NTS) in early 2006 (to run for 12 weeks), with the finalised NTS in place by June 2006.

Secondly, regionally, the Executive is consulting on the Guidance on Regional Transport Strategies [with a deadline of 20/12/05]. The Regional Transport Partnerships are due to commence work on the Regional Transport Strategies in April 2006, with finalised RTSs to be in place by April 2007. There was also a concern that the membership of the Regional Transport Partnerships would not adequately reflect sustainable transport interests, and work needed to be done to ensure that they did.

Finally, locally, each of the 32 local authorities will produce a revised Local Transport Strategy over the next 12 months. The Scottish Executive had produced revised guidance on the Local Transport Strategies earlier in 2005.

PRESENTATIONS

John Russell from Living Streets Scotland talked on the topic of 'Civilising the Streets'. He commented on a wide range of interrelated issues including: (i) justice and social inclusion, (ii) how providing for walking can deliver better neighbourhoods, (ii) the health benefits of walking, (iv) the capacity of walking to substitute for short car trips, and (v) providing connections between walking and public transport.

Alison Bell of the Scottish Executive spoke on 'How will the National, Regional and Local Transport Strategies address the need to increase walking and cycling?'. Alison gave an overview of existing policies for walkers and cyclists, described the statutory and policy background to the NTS and summarised findings from a cycling and walking consultation event held in September 2005 in Glasgow. She acknowledged the notable contribution active transport can make to public health improvements and endorsed demands for modal shift and an overall reduction of the need for long-distance travel, but left the audience with the overall impression that promotion of economic growth ‘by building, enhancing, managing and maintaining transport services, infrastructure and networks to maximise their efficiency’ continues to rank more highly in the SE’s approach to transport planning than any of the above concerns. The full written consultation for the NTS was highlighted as a ‘major opportunity coming up to influence long-term policy’, with updates being obtainable at www.scotland.gov.uk/topics/transport/nts

Online presentation by Alison Bell

Tom Bertulis of Cycling Scotland delivered a presentation on 'Good practice in delivering cycling in Scotland'. Based on eight criteria and a methodology exploring ‘soft’ as well as ‘hard’ evidence, Cycling Scotland recently conducted a national assessment of provisions for cycling. While the Borders was identified as the council with the most satisfying record overall, examples of good practice in specific areas were found in various parts of the country. The City of Edinburgh Council, for instance, was commended for its Local Transport Strategy 2004-2007 policy objectives and Cycle Friendly Design Guide, while Fife Council was mentioned for a travel survey that sought to establish ‘baselines, permanent telemetric counters’. The account stressed the importance of guidance (i.e. information about cycling-friendly infrastructure at local and regional levels), cycle training provisions for children and adults, and training events for those involved in planning (cycling officers, members of cycling forums etc.), as well as travel plans, stakeholder engagement and public promotion campaigns.

Online presentation by Tom Bertulis

Tony Russell of CTC gave a presentation on 'Good practice in delivering cycling in England'. The main subject of this presentation was CTC’s UK-wide cooperative benchmarking project on cycling policy (2000-2003). Funded by the Department for Transport, the project comprised self-audits, external assessments (based two-day study visits) and two series of workshops which gave participating local authorities/local highway authorities an unprecedented opportunity to gauge how well they were doing in terms of cycling support, what kind of objectives they should adopt next and how others have achieved their results. The latter include not only better infrastructure but ways of making the promotion of cycling part of broader policy trajectories and interdepartmental agendas. Local cycling officers left the project with well-informed action plans, as well as a better understanding of the issues, additional practical skills, contacts to cycling professionals up and down the country, as well as ‘greater confidence, motivation and inspiration’. A framework for measuring progress and action learning, benchmarking for cycling appears to have been well worth the investment and might prove equally productive in other areas of transport planning.

Online presentation by Tony Russell

Roger Geffen of CTC delivered the final address, summarising its outcomes and activists' priorities during the next few months.

Overall Conclusions:

The release of the (draft) NTS for public consultation will present a major opportunity for campaigners to flag up the benefits of a walking- and cycling-friendly alternatives and the problems encountered by those who engage in walking and cycling at present. Participants indicated that they had appreciated the event as an opportunity to gather information about the NTS and about policy contexts at regional and local levels. They gained valuable insights into methods of measuring progress in relation to walking and cycling provisions and appeared to be strengthened in their determination to make the case for walking and cycling effectively and with plenty of back-up from the wider public.

WORKSHOP SESSION 1 looked at the issues and concerns that had motivated participants to attend and at the specific and general changes they would like to see. Below is a digest of people's comments and suggestions:

Issues and Concerns:

  • Major roads as barriers to access: lack of community links and commuting routes, with National Cycle Network and other cycle routes often following scenic routes that are longer than the trunk road route
  • Widespread disregard by HCVs of speed limit (40mph on single carriageway roads) - freight companies under pressure to have short journey times but in the Highlands, sole routes shared by all types of users
  • Insufficient efforts to tackle speeding more generally
  • Speed limits on rural roads are too high
  • Trunk road departments too unimaginative/unwilling to incorporate needs of non-motorised users
  • Should we be pushing for segregated routes or keep cyclists on the roads?
  • Crossings on busy roads: resistance to signalised crossings as they would slow cars down
  • Government bows to pressure to provide dual trunk roads while not providing for walkers and cyclists
  • Low level of utility cycling (commuting, shopping trips, etc) amongst general public: need for more encouragement & training
  • Large-scale infrastructure is not always the solution
  • Perception of danger vs. real dangers (e.g. HGVs, large roundabouts)
  • Difficulties in defining ‘short trip’ (e.g. in Angus)
  • 'We-can-build-our-way-our-of-congestion' mentality
  • Insufficient prominence of pollution/health/climate change concerns
  • Insufficient prominence of social inclusion aspects
  • Politicians fear being labelled ‘anti-car’ in public

What do we want:

  • Reallocation of road space (including contra-flow lanes)
  • Attractively designed cycle parking in prominent places
  • Road safety and travel awareness campaigns
  • Sustainable transport strategies with clear targets and indicators‘
  • Non-motorised-user audits
  • Audits of schemes pre-construction and post-construction
  • Penalties for local authorities not meeting NTS/RTS/LTS objectives on walking/cycling
  • Speed/traffic law enforcement
  • Consideration of walking/cycling in any ‘corridor’
  • Education: (1) transport engineers/planners and other professionals, (2) wider public education of users of different modes of transport (promotion of cycle training)
  • ongoing consultation of user groups
  • Funding issues: long-term/continuous - revenue funding a particular problem
  • Official recognition that more traffic does not (necessarily) imply more economic growth
  • Policies that reduce the need for travel and make travel more effective
  • Better protection for pedestrians and cyclists
  • "Human engineering" (national lead on bringing about attitudinal and behavioural change)

WORKSHOP SESSION 2 looked at ways of influencing current strategies. Below is a digest of comments and suggestions from participants:

Who to contact

  • Members of our groups, plus wider environmental organisations, such as Friends of the Earth local groups, student groups, mountain bike organisations and Local Access Forum members
  • Make and maintain contacts with councillors, MSPs and MPs
  • Circulate paper put together by Highland Cycle Forum which identifies suitable community links for off-road routes to be used as basis for ideas in other areas - see http://www.highlandcyclecampaign.org.uk/
  • Push for SE to ringfence funding, but recognise that transport provision is dominated by local councils (lobby accordingly at that level)
  • Resources available include email lists (new or existing), pictures (e.g. from Sustrans) of in adequate cycle/walking infrastructure


What to say

  • Agree on central, coordinated message
  • Be clear about responsibilities of the SE
  • Keep it simple and stress walking AND cycling at all times
  • Include references to best practice
  • Ask for walking / cycling audits on all trunk roads
  • Note links between transport and land use/planning
  • Note personal responsibility for climate change
  • Note economic benefits of walking/cycling and link to health, environment, social inclusion etc.
  • Cycle provision on buses: could be included as part of the contracts when awarded to bus companies.
  • Safe Routes to Schools
  • Cycling to be accepted as a regional matter
  • Regarding Regional Transport Partnerships/Regional Transport Strategies: call for non-professionals in governing boards, query criteria for choice, seek observer status
  • Send out a template response letter by email to encourage responses to NTS consultation document, but keep it short and simple and give clear details of who to send it to
  • Organisations should post their official consultation response on their website; if you don’t have time to write a complete response until the deadline put up a short “holding” response with the main points you are going to make


Report by Konstanze Glaser, edited by Colin Howden. Photos by Mark James. Report produced 20/12/05.

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

[CycleTalk index] [CTC Scotland]