AGENDA ITEM NO. 3
Sustainable Development and Transport Scrutiny Commission
Cycling Safety Inquiry Information Pack
Contents
• Inquiry Programme • Bristol City Council Background report • Research Summary: Understanding Walking and Cycling, Lancaster University et al 2012 • Cycling in London, Scoping and Summary of London Assembly’s Transport Committee July 2012
APPENDIX A
Sustainable Development and Transport
Scrutiny Commission
Cycling Safety Inquiry Thursday 20th September 2012 1:30pm – 5:00pm
Aims and Objectives
The key aim is to address the question: what can the Council and its partners do to improve safety for cyclists in the city ?
The main objectives for the Inquiry are to: • Assess the current evidence on cycling safety • Identify causes of, and gauge, cyclists’ safety concerns • Identify causes of negative safety perceptions deterring potential cyclists (including the influence of social marketing) • Draw on good practice from around the world • Assess all transport interventions and policy in relation to cycling safety • Make recommendations as necessary to be taken into account in the Council’s development of a cycling strategy
Attendees • Scrutiny Commission/Cabinet members • local and national community, cycling and transport organisations • Academics • Public health specialist • Freight Transport Association • Council Officers
Venue • Committee Room 15, The Council House, College Green, Bristol BS1 5TR
Programme
1:30 Registration/ tea and coffee 2:00 Welcome and Programme Cllr Mark Bradshaw, Chair of Commission
2:05 Public Forum relating to the Inquiry Cllr Mark Bradshaw 2:35 Introduction and Public Health perspective Chair: Dr Adrian Davis, Public Health & Transport Consultant
2.50 National Research: Understanding Cycling (the role of Dr Dave Horton, ‘safety’ in getting more people cycling) Transport Academic
3.05 International Best Practice (why some countries are so Jim Davis, Cycling much safer for cyclists and how this is inspiring a new Embassy GB wave of cycling advocacy) 3:20 Lessons from Bristol Cycling City ED Plowden, Cycling City Manager 2009-11 Q&A 3:30 UK infrastructure (how do we provide for safe cycling Tony Russell/Jon and what more do we need to do) Usher, Sustrans
3:45 The Social Marketing View Alan Tapp, Centre for Social Marketing, University of the West of England
4:10 Q&A Tea Break 4:20 Voxpop
4:30 Round table discussion on presented evidence and key Chair/Alistair Cox/Jon priorities for the Council and its partners Usher/Ed Plowden 4.55 Way forward and close Chair 5.00 Close
APPENDIX B
Bristol: becoming better by bike Bristol: becoming better by bike
Bristol and South Gloucestershire’s Cycling City award gave the city a real opportunity to embed cycling as a legitimate transport choice for thousands of people within the Greater Bristol region. The project set out to tackle the major barriers to cycling through a combination of engineering solutions, encouragement measures, educational programmes and enforcement measures. You'll find this publication packed full with our activities and some of the initial results that we've seen. Funding for the project came to an end in March 2011, but that doesn’t mean an end to the Cycling City project. Bristol will continue improving conditions for cyclists over the years to come, continuing to turn itself into a true cycling city and working with neighbouring towns and cities to improve transport links to other local destinations. Read on to find out what the project achieved, or turn to page eight to find out about the future for cycling in Bristol and South Gloucestershire. With 36 infrastructure projects completed, Bristol and South Engineering Gloucestershire Councils have made some monumental changes to the way people travel around our city. In short, we’ve encouraged Solutions thousands more people to cycle more safely, more often. Below you'll find some of our major achievements...
CYCLE PARKING
Total new arterial cycle spaces 9 routes coming 2 autumn 2011 New cycle spaces at train stations 200km of signed bike routes
35km of 1580 traffic-free new cycle lanes 20 signs 36 infrastructure projects completed 18km of on-road CITY CENTRE cycle lanes Ashton Court 20 19 “pinch points” 20 tackled, Leigh bringing 3.3km Woods of improvements Max speed 700 NEW 12km of 35 new cycle Now covers top-class Two 20mph shelters and BIKE SYMBOLS speed limit areas one in six mountain 1224 new spaces PAINTED households bike trails in schools ON ROAD in Bristol
June November Cycling City status August September Prince St Bridge cycle lane opens and grants become awarded to Bristol Long Ashton Road Bikeability training, available for community cycling projects and South upgraded and new grants for Bristol and Gloucestershire cycle paths to the South Gloucestershire councils Bridge Learning schools and Westbury Campus on Trym gets safer October routes to schools Improvements for the Bristol-Bath Railway Path at Lawrence Hill and July Roadshow team start Meads Reach running one-to-one help bridge installed and advice sessions 2008 Encouragement measures The Cycling City project has encouraged thousands of people to get on their bikes and find a cheaper, faster and healthier way of getting around our city. Our 'softer measures' projects fall into six different categories...
ployers an em d 5 or 0 aj sm Individual support Bike availability m a 2 lle 1 R Training sessions r o h b u it u te w s i p A fleet of n 1 12 l 7 g e a n n 2 all abilities bikes i s
s k Bikes n r b e i n o
s L i loaned to k d g sol eve W L e es ry ik m hundreds of a s b o S n k n new cyclists f c t d N o a h Business
B r
t O
t
s I
o e h
a n S k i
o
d S
o B
i l
E
e u l
p d S
v T s
s h
e
e l e E
m e
a 50
l c
o a s
C
a
y
p h n s
e v
N
r
c i e
a
o
d f
A
g r a
n o
n
n r g
e li Annual N
s e e
t c s E b w
y n engagement u m
ork of c o T N I
Jam Busting f A c M yc Grants for tools, safety equipment,competition le maps locks, parking and maintenance sessions Roadshows Leisure cycling
Short leisure Communities Accompanied rides ride community projects booklets 17 including: events Silver Cyclists £400,000 Cycle Screen Festival Inve ke st in m bi tra m nt n ils Two’s e o u tai Company n Bristol’s Biggest Bike Ride Lights and locks for
community groups Rollapaluza 80,000 maps for cyclists distributed Discover v Bristol Get Gorgeous 10 community workstations +street parties, cycle powered stages, and much more+ Ashton Court Leigh Woods
January June July September December Concorde Way Record numbers at St Matthias Park shared Better By Bike website Improved route for phase 1 complete Biggest Bike Ride space improvements launched cyclists on the Portway and new crossing for Brunel Way
February River Street link built 2009 1
6 , 9 2 Education 0 y Cycling City’s work with schools o and young people is crucial in u n ensuring that the next g generation of adults make p e more short everyday journeys o by bicycle. pl e tr BMX ai Bike Club ned parks: brought in B bility cycling into Go Ride ikea 55 Concorde Project Lawrence Weston "Bike it" running between Stockwood 13 youth coaching sessions Roadshows at universities four schools in Emersons Green clubs accross in 7 schools with and colleges, engaging with schools South Gloucestershire 2 more in development the city over 600 pupils Bristol students cycling levels doubled in these schools
January March May August Improvements Lighting along Work finishes on All Abilities bikes launched and to Whitchurch Bristol-Bath Railway Path Festival Way 20mph zone for Inner South Bristol 0 Railway path and new routes in and links in St George and along Hengrove Park Hartcliffe Way and Ridgeway Playing Fields
Bristol picks up ‘best city for cycling’ and ‘third most June February bike-friendly city in the UK’ Even higher numbers at
201 Eastville Park improvements awards Biggest Bike Ride Cycling City Cycle routes and parking infrastructure
Cycling City infrastructure projects have all been designed with the larger cycling network in mind. Small linking sections and longer cycling paths all contribute to these nine routes into the city. Some of these routes are completely traffic-free whilst others take in cycle-friendly roads or shared space areas. Discover them for yourself by logging on to www.betterbybike.info
September October March Road safety New cycle bridge On-road path improvements along over M5 in between Frenchay 1 0 Bromley Heath Road and January Lawrence Weston Hospital and UWE. Badminton Road and new Bikeback and mountain 20mph zone for traffic-free section for December launched, bike trails at Inner East Bristol. Cumberland Basin Road. New cycle Malago Ashton Court get lane on St Greenway gets a a makeover Phillips facelift and new Causeway route opens to Bristol Cycle Festival and new Bradley Stoke May packs nearly 90 November route to leisure centre February On-road biking events to a Route improvements between UWE, Cribbs Brook Bridge completes Concorde Way route improvements for 201 201 fortnight of fun Filton Abbey Wood and Parkway Station Causeway and new cycling links in Emersons Green Filton Road (A38) Initial Measures The 20mph Limit: Outcomes Cycling has increased, cycle accidents are down and local residents are strongly in favour 20 Take a look around and it’s of the new speed limits clear that the Cycling City (67% pre-implementation, 83% post-implementation) project has helped (ref: Bristol South 20mph limit area monitoring report) dramatically change the way thousands of people get around our city. With lots more cycle parking Bike route counts: and dedicated cycling routes 215% Automatic count it’s now much easier to get data up on two new bike routes: Concorde Way around by bike. Our support 187% services have helped lots of Hartcliffe Way people to re-discover their bicycles and our one-off 2008 2011 projects such as Bike Back or Cycle commuter rates: the new mountain bike trails The average rate of Cycling to people cycling to work: work rates in: are helping lots of different Awards 2010 Ashley 26% biking ‘tribes’ to have fun on 9.8% two wheels. Bishopston 20% Cycling Plus ranked Bristol as ‘the number one cycling city’ (2010) Redland 20% A full and independent 2007 evaluation of the project is due Bike Dock Solutions ranked Bristol joint top 6.7% Southville 20% with London for cycle parking and cycle in 2012, but in the meantime routes (2011) (ref: Quality of Life report 2010) the city e of ’s m Bristol has some of its own on ajo The Municipal Journal named the Cycling , r r d 201 o a 1: 1 a City project as the winner of the 2011 o 4. d figures to show how successful R 8% s r , n Sustainable Infrastructure Achievement of te s o the project has been... the Year Award e w c h u a
o l s
a The IPSOS/MORI National Highways G
Modal share:
1 4
Satisfaction Survey (2010) ranked Bristol top
. 2
8
0
%
in two categories (cycle route information 0
2
m
n
i
and cycle facilities at place of work) %
o 6
.
7
d
:
% 2
0 a
0
6
2
.
l
7 s
h
a
m
r
e
o
r
f
f
o
p
r
u
c , y g c i l n What’s next?
The success of the Cycling City Bristol, South Gloucestershire and the two other authorities in the West of England region were project has helped Bristol and successful in applying for a £5m project to the surrounding regions to usher develop key commuter routes between the in a new phase of sustainable major urban areas in the region. This project will focus on walking, cycling, bus transport development. travel and car share alternatives, helping people to switch to healthier, less costly and more environmentally-friendly modes of transport. Cycling will of course still be a major feature in Bristol and South Gloucestershire. Measures will continue to help beginners get their wheels in motion and provide commuters with more traffic- free routes and cycle lanes, helping the region to achieve the 2026 cycling target, outlined in the 2011–2026 Joint Local Transport Plan. l More information about the Key Commuter Routes project and the Local Sustainable Transport Fund can be found at: travelplus.org.uk/local-sustainable- transport-fund 1 1
l You'll find lots of cycling information and local 0 2
y l
events on www.betterbybike.info. You can u J
•
also follow Better By Bike on Twitter and 6 1 9 0
Facebook to get the latest information. D B
•
n g i s e D
l o t s i r l For details about the projects included as B –
l i c
part of the Local Sustainable Transport Fund n u o C
please email [email protected] or y t i C
l
call 0117 922 2000. o t s i r B
Greater Bristol Cycling City
End of Project Report
June 2011
Foreword
Foreword by Cllr Dr Jon Rogers and Cllr Brian Allinson, Executive Members for Cycling City at Bristol and South Gloucestershire respectively.
Bristol and South Gloucestershire's Cycling City status continues to be a source of great pride for the region and it is one that will live on in the months and years to come.
This report catalogues the achievements of both councils during the project, and as people reading this will see, there are many. We have not only successfully added to and improved the cycling network, we have also captured the public's imagination through engaging with people face to face, where they live, work, play, shop and go to school, and online through our website - www.betterbybike.info - and social media channels. As a result, approximately half of the local population are aware of the 'betterbybike' brand - a phenomenal achievement for a transport initiative. All this and we have provided some 18,000 children and adults with the training they need to undertake cycle journeys with confidence.
The project has added impetus and momentum to our transformation of the city and its surroundings. This is a vital part of a long-term commitment to improve the sustainability of our transport system and the overall quality of life for our residents. The project has also worked closely with other projects that aim to do this, such as the Greater Bristol Bus Network, and other partner agencies such as the NHS and Avon and Somerset Police Force.
Thanks to all of this we have already seen a doubling and even a trebling of use on some of the new routes. We're seeing faster rates of cycle growth than ever before - or at least since we started counting. Ride your bike at rush hour and you're now likely to find yourself waiting at a traffic light with lots of other cyclists. It's a great feeling.
All citizens, not just those who are already cycling, are benefiting from better air quality, less traffic congestion and safer roads. The thousands that have started cycling recently are improving their health and well being, using a cost-effective and sustainable form of transport to last a lifetime, and discovering a fresh perspective on our beautiful city and the surrounding area. We will continue to reap the rewards for years come too – people who have not been born yet will benefit from what we have achieved in the last few years.
The city is now recognised on an international scale for its commitment to cycling. Study trips by delegates from towns and cities in Norway, USA, Japan and Germany, plus a host of national awards prove that it is not just us locals who think Bristol is a great place to cycle!
Lastly of course, the work goes on. There are schemes being built as we write, such as the top class mountain bike facilities being built in Ashton Court and Leigh Woods, due for completion in 2011, and we have demonstrated our commitment to continuing to support and value cycling in our latest Local Transport Plan, which commits us to continue the focus right through until 2026.
We have supplied details about all the Cycling City projects to the Government's National Evaluation Report and we are looking forward to any learning and guidance that this will give us as we continue to build on what we have already achieved.
Vive les revolutions!
3 1. Introduction
The Greater Bristol Cycling City Project
In June 2008, Cycling England and the Department for Transport (DfT) awarded the urban area of Greater Bristol £11.4 million to invest in the promotion and encouragement of cycling through better infrastructure, training and promotion.
The two local councils covered by the area, Bristol City Council and South Gloucestershire Council, pledged to match this grant to create a total budget of £22.8 million.
The project, spanning two and a half years, led to an increase in investment of spend per head of population to £16 per annum, with the vision of more people cycling, more safely, more often. This funding was split according to population size, equating to 72% for Bristol and 28% for South Gloucestershire.
Greater Bristol’s Cycling City Project is part of the second phase of a Cycling Demonstration Towns programme, alongside another 17 towns and cities, which aims to understand and evaluate how to invest effectively in cycling.
Aims and Objectives
The project set out to put Greater Bristol well on the way to:
• doubling cycling to work • doubling cycling to school • doubling cycle flows counted on existing cordons and screen lines • doubling the provision of on-street cycling parking • doubling the number of people who see cycling as a realistic travel option in Greater Bristol
The project also set out to contribute to the independent evaluation of the Cycling City and Towns programme.
The award meant the start of a process to embed cycling as a real alternative choice of transport for short journeys within the whole of the urban area of Greater Bristol. This has allowed for the development of a longer term cycling strategy for the Greater Bristol area, which has fed into Joint Local Transport Plan 3 – a 15-year transport strategy.
End of Project Report
In the funding agreement, all Cycling Cities and Towns were required to submit an end of programme report to the Department for Transport (DfT) by the end of June 2011. This report serves the following functions:
4 • To assist the monitoring and evaluation contractors to understand clearly what the activities or 'outputs' have been – this contributes to a national evaluation report, due to be published in 2012 • To give an overview of the investment in cycling in Greater Bristol (including both grant and match funding) • To help the DfT to identify transferable lessons for other local authorities • To provide a report to local stakeholders about what has been delivered • To provide evidence to support an application to the Local Sustainable Transport Fund
In addition, from a Greater Bristol governance perspective, the report also aims to:
• Identify lessons learnt from management of projects • Contribute towards future policy development
The audience for this report is the DfT and their national evaluation team. Other publications will be derived from this report for local public audiences.
5
2.1 Infrastructure Schemes
Cycling City infrastructure schemes, both on-road and traffic-free, have been installed with a focus on providing viable cycling alternatives to encourage motorists currently taking short journeys to make some or all of their journeys by bike. In particular, these schemes have been focussed along a number of radial and arterial routes out of the city centre, linking residential areas to employment and leisure areas. In total, 36 new or improved routes have been constructed and designed to ensure they are direct, convenient, legible and easy to use.
On-Road and Traffic-Free Improvements
Full details of the different routes can be found in Appendix 6, which supplements the map in Appendix 2. In addition, descriptions and maps of each route can be found at www.betterbybike.info/infrastructure
Examples of work include:
• Contra-flow streets: A number of contra-flow streets introduced to allow cyclists to travel against the flow of motor vehicles on one way streets, provide an advantage by allowing cyclists ‘filtered permeability’ through an area – mostly in central Bristol. • Measures to increase the use of the Bristol-Bath Railway Path: Two new paths have been installed to provide access to two highly populated communities. Lighting has also been installed to provide illumination up to Bristol City Council's administrative boundary. • The creation of Concorde Way: Concorde Way is a new route which links two major retail centres – Cribbs Causeway on the northern edge and Cabot Circus in the city centre, with Bristol Parkway station and the 'Northern Fringe' major employment centre en route. • Work with the Greater Bristol Bus Network: Cycling was considered using Cycle Route Implementation and Stakeholder Plans (CRISPs) to identify as many opportunities as possible to benefit cyclists in parallel with buses. This follows on from the success of the Showcase Bus Route delivered in 2003 on the A38 in north Bristol. The latest count (2010) shows a 14.8% modal split for cycling along this busy road, up from 7.6% in 2002.
20mph Limit Areas
The two 20mph limit pilot areas in Bristol were implemented as part of the Cycling City project and Active Bristol, with the overall aims being to:
• Encourage more people to walk and cycle • Improve road safety (in line with Bristol City Council's casualty reduction targets) • Help create more pleasant and shared community space.
6
Inner South Bristol area consists of part or all of the wards of Bedminster, Southville, Windmill Hill and Lawrence Hill and became active in May 2010. Inner East Bristol area consists of part or all of the wards of Ashley, Easton, Eastville, Lawrence Hill and St. George West and became active in October 2010.
Although evaluation is still ongoing, post- implementation monitoring by Bristol City Council in Inner South Bristol has shown the following positive outcomes:
• Cycling and pedestrian activity increased by up to 12%. • Pedal cycle casualties decreased by 40% in the first six months – along with a general feeling from local residents that safety has been improved. • Traffic speeds have generally reduced by 1.4mph across all roads, whilst the main roads have seen a greater average reduction of 1.8mph. • The largest speed reduction has been on Greville Road, where mean average speeds have reduced by 5.3mph. • Public support for the scheme increased during the study as local people saw the benefits that it offered and there is now very significant support for extending 20mph limit areas further across the city. Nationally 70% of adults surveyed (British Social Attitudes Survey 2010) support residential street 20mph limits. In Bristol’s post implementation surveys this figure is 88%. • In addition to the 20mph Vehicle Activated Signs (VAS) installed on several of the higher speed roads, there is also significant support for more enforcement of the speed limit.
“In the after survey of Inner South Bristol 20mph Limit Area, residents’ support for a maximum speed limit of 20mph or less rose from 73% to 88%.” [Ref: Inner South Bristol: 20mph speed limit pilot area monitoring report]
Both 20mph limit areas can be seen in a map at Appendix 2
Tackling Pinch Points
Work began in June 2009 with representatives of the cycling community to identify the top opportunities to make Greater Bristol's cycling network more coherent and legible. The aim was to unblock existing barriers or pinch points, identify desire lines that may become contra- flows and resolve the other top identified issues; many of these were identified using a specially created online map for people to report problems and opportunities. This map was also useful to identify locations for the installation of cycle parking stands.
A map showing how the pinch points programme links up with the existing cycle network can be found at Appendix 4.
In order to allow analysis of the amount of infrastructure investment in Greater Bristol, the Cycling City area has been segmented into smaller areas as follows:
7
This has been done because:
• Some areas have benefited from higher levels of investment as agreed in the formulation of the programme • An explanation may be required for what are likely to be variable results across the city • It is anticipated that the national evaluation may benefit from this approach, not least because the size of these segments are more comparable with the size of other cycle demonstration towns and cities.
During the Cycling City Project, 53.14 km of new or improved on-road or traffic-free infrastructure was installed across the Greater Bristol area.
The following table shows the amount of investment in the seven segments as shown in the map above, and also the areas that the new or improved infrastructure serves.
8
Geographical On-road cycle lanes Traffic-free cycle lanes Key residential/ segment area added/improved (km) added/improved (km) employment areas benefited Hotwells, Sea Mills, ONE 0.42 0.2 Avonmouth, Shirehampton. Northern Fringe TWO 3.95 0.84 (UWE, major retail centre, large employers). Frenchay, Snuff Mills, THREE 1.62 3.31 UWE.
Whitchurch, FOUR 5 1.7 Brislington, Hengrove.
Bridge Learning FIVE 1.19 5.1 Campus, Long Ashton, Hartcliffe. Cribbs Causeway, SIX 0.72 19.19 Bristol Parkway railway station, major employers. Cadbury Heath SEVEN 5.1 4.8 schools, Emersons Green.
TOTAL 18 35.14
Headline Infrastructure Messages
The information below gives a summary of improvements between July 2008 and March 2011.
Area One: The Cycling City project implemented 0.42 km of on-road and 0.2 km of traffic-free cycle infrastructure. These infrastructure improvements are of particular benefit to commuters into Bristol from Sea Mills and Hotwells, and also provide a link across the floating harbour, which is a popular leisure route. New developments in this area joined to an existing path along the Portway.
Area Two: The Cycling City project implemented 3.95 km of on-road and 0.84 km of traffic-free cycle infrastructure. This segment also contains half of the Inner East Bristol 20mph limit area covering Montpelier and St. Pauls. These infrastructure improvements are of benefit to all
9 cyclists, from commuters travelling from north, east and south Bristol, to school children in Westbury on Trym. The work here includes signals and junction improvements in city centre and reallocation of space on Prince Street Bridge.
Area Three: The Cycling City project implemented 1.62 km of on-road and 3.31 km of traffic-free cycle infrastructure. This segment also contains half of the Inner East Bristol 20mph limit area covering Easton and Redfield. These infrastructure improvements are of particular benefit to those accessing Bristol from the north and east of the city, and also provide a link to Temple Meads train station. This segment contains Meads Reach Bridge, providing a link to Temple Meads station therefore allowing improved access to a major transport hub.
Area Four: The Cycling City project implemented 5 km of on-road and 1.7 km of traffic-free cycle infrastructure. These infrastructure improvements are of particular benefit to those commuting into Bristol along the busy A4 Bath Road and also provide access to a popular leisure route into Whitchurch along a former railway line. In partnership with Greater Bristol Bus Network and as a result of a review with stakeholders, a new signal junction has also been installed on Totterdown Bridge that allows cyclists to filter through a red traffic signal when travelling inbound to the city centre.
Area Five: The Cycling City project implemented 1.19 km of on-road and 5.1 km of traffic-free cycle infrastructure. This segment also contains the large Inner South Bristol 20mph limit area, covering the areas of Bedminster, Southville, Windmill Hill and Ashton. In addition, two new toucan crossings were installed at Clanage Road (providing a link to the UWE campus and a leisure route into Ashton Court) and at Hartcliffe Way (taking cyclists safely over to the new shared use path). These links are of particular benefit to those travelling into the city centre from south Bristol, as well as serving a new housing development and a new learning campus at Hengrove Park. At the Three Lamps junction of the A37 and A4, a new signal configuration was installed in partnership with the Greater Bristol Bus Network, giving buses and cyclists an advantage as they are able to pass through a red light for private motor vehicles.
Area Six: The Cycling City project implemented 0.72 km of on-road and 19.19 km of traffic-free cycle infrastructure. These schemes serve many areas including large employment areas at the Northern fringe, several schools, retail and residential areas. Two of the routes directly service Bristol Parkway train station – providing routes towards central Bristol and Bradley Stoke leisure centre and community school.
Area Seven: The Cycling City project implemented 5.1 km of on-road and 4.8 km of traffic-free cycle infrastructure. These schemes particularly serve residential areas along the northern and eastern fringes, and provide better cycling access to local schools and shopping centres.
10
Examples of Specific Infrastructure Schemes
Bradley Stoke Way Forming part of the Concorde Way strategic cycle route, Bradley Stoke Way connects a route from Bristol Parkway train station to the Mall at Cribbs Causeway route, via Bradley Stoke leisure centre, library and community school. The improvements include a complete refurbishment of the timber bridge over Stoke Brook, the installation of around 600m of low energy LED lighting, provision of three new cycle crossing points and over half a mile of new shared use path. Consequently, a continuous off-road cycle route has been created between Stoke Brook to the south and Primrose Footbridge to the north. Manual surveys by South Gloucestershire Council at the footbridge reveal a 50% increase in cycle movements between February 2010 and January 2011. The route connects the above destinations (including the community school where the levels of cycling are well above average), the benefits in terms of are set to continue into the future.
St. Werburghs Path St Werburghs Path was one of the first paths to be completed (in May 2009) and is now part of the Concorde Way. Counts taken in May 2011 show 12,000 monthly trips (ref: Automatic Cycle Counter [ACC] readings). This is an increase of 31.7% on last September and an increase of 215% compared with September 2008 when a manual count estimated the number at 3,800 monthly trips.
Hartcliffe Way A 1.6 km segregated cycle and pedestrian path was built parallel to Hartcliffe Way road to improve this section of the Malago Greenway, which connects the south of Bristol with the City Centre. Two one- day counts were undertaken by the city council to compare usage figures between March 2008 (14/3/2008) and March 2011 (24/3/2011). The counts show an increase from 124 to 229 journeys, an 84% rise. A one-day count in May 2011 gave a figure of 356 journeys, a 187% increase from the March 2008 figure.
Prince Street Bridge Due to a number of interventions in the city centre over the last fifteen years, motorised traffic numbers on Prince Street Bridge had been steadily declining (down by 75% compared with 1995), whilst cycle numbers doubled over the same period. The Prince Street Bridge intervention was designed reflect this change, by re-allocating road space and making a more convivial environment for cyclists and pedestrians.
11 This intervention of 'shuttle-working' signals has increased cycle numbers significantly. The average number of journeys before the intervention was 1,624 daily cycle trips between Monday and Friday (July 2008). This figure increased to 2,025 daily cycle trips by May 2010, up by almost 25% in less than two years.
Qualitative surveys have been undertaken and 295 bridge users interviewed; the results show only 7% of people did not like the changes and 60% of people are in favour of the changes and believe it has been a benefit to the area.
Bristol-Bath Railway Path The railway path is now regularly seeing a combined two-way flow of up to 3,000 cyclists on a weekday in spring, with an average of 2,474 in May 2011. The number of cyclists using the path over the winter months has increased by up to 29% since cycle path lighting was installed. In March 2007 the total number of cycle trips on the railway path during the hours of darkness was 28,774. In 2011 it was 37,273.
12 2.2 Cycle Parking and Signing
A map of cycle parking and signing can be found at Appendix 3.
Cycle Parking
Between July 2008 and March 2011, a total of approximately 4,204 new cycle stands (and therefore 8,408 spaces) have been installed in public places across Greater Bristol. It is estimated that this represents an increase of 217% in the availability of cycle parking.
Number of stands installed between July 2008 Location and March 2010
Schools 612 (1224 spaces)
Workplaces 622 (new office space) + 400 MOD + 260 (business grants) (2,564 spaces)
Universities/FE/HE 229 (458 spaces)
Train stations 174 (348 spaces)
Local shopping centres 657 (1,314 spaces)
City centre 1,401 (2,802 spaces)
New Available Spaces 8,710
Included in the above figures are the replacement of 12 pay and display car parking bays (with six stands in each) at six locations in the city centre where space is more limited, providing a total of 72 new stands (144 cycle parking spaces). A seventh location at Great George Street in central Bristol has been designed and agreed and will be completed by Summer 2011.
A number of highway ‘buildouts’ have also taken place, such as on St Marks Road in Easton where carriageway has been re-allocated to provide adequate and safe parking for bikes.
"The number of new cycle stands and their wide spread across the City is a fantastic achievement.” Cycle Forum member
Cycle Parking Grants to Schools
Both Bike It and non-Bike It schools have had access to cycle parking grants (non-Bike It under the Wheels and Heels fund, with priority given to schools with travel plans). During the Cycling City project, 46 grants totalling £390,136 were awarded to schools, leading to a total of 13 1,223 new cycle parking spaces and an increase of 29% in cycle parking in Greater Bristol schools. As part of this, 35 cycle shelters were also built using grant funding, providing safe and secure parking for school children travelling by bike. Some of the grants were also used to upgrade access pathways to cycle shelters, provide cycle lockers and helmet lockers, and install secure fencing around existing cycle parking sites.
A number of schools rebuilt under the Building Schools for the Future programme were re- opened during the Cycling City Project and each has highly visible and conveniently located secure cycle parking.
Cycle Signing
Cycling City worked in collaboration with Bristol City Council's City Design team to develop a strategy for signing that could be used across the Greater Bristol cycle network. The aim was to raise awareness of local route knowledge, countering this significant barrier to people cycling through the delivery of a coherent and integrated signed network. Using the help of stakeholders, a signing toolkit was developed that involved the use of surface cycle symbols with colours to help cyclists navigate individual routes.
The focus for the network was to sign and promote arterial routes that feed the city. As existing flow data shows, it is these routes where the greatest increase in the number of cyclists is initially expected.
The signing strategy in particular is
• linked to other modes of transport, e.g. walking and public transport • linked to useful destinations for shopping, work, leisure and education • built upon peoples' existing 'mental map' of Bristol
As a result of stakeholder consultations, 200 km of signage was implemented along seven main arterial routes (and the feeder routes which serve them) across Greater Bristol. These routes are: Concorde Way, Frome Valley Greenway, Bristol-Bath Railway Path, Whitchurch Way, Malago Greenway, Festival Way, the Downs Way (NCN4) and the key ring road paths to the north. These routes are shown in Appendix 3. Approximately 1580 directional signs and 700 surface markings have been installed as part of the programme.
Customer Feedback on Signing:
“The route wasn't signposted. I got lost, frustrated, angry and missed my train. I wish I'd taken the car.” Bristol Resident in 2009 (pre-signing implementation)
14 "I successfully navigated my way from home [to the city centre] on Malago Greenway using the new signs and I love the cycle symbols on the road, it makes you feel like you belong there." Bristol Resident in 2010 (post-signing implementation)
“I used the Cycle Journey Planner to plan a route, but along the way I came to the signs for UWE where I was headed. They were easy to follow and once I was on the Concorde Way the overall route was much, much better than I anticipated”. South Gloucestershire Resident (2011)
15 2.3 Workplace Engagement Activities
Between July 2008 and March 2011, Cycling City engaged with 12 major employers and around 50 smaller ones. Criteria were identified to decide and prioritise with whom to work. These were: • Overall size and scale • Pre-existing commitment to ‘green’ travel practices • Willingness to engage with the Cycling City project • Geographical proximity to existing or new infrastructure • Likely (positive) influence on other businesses and the public • Triggers for change – e.g. premises move, parking problems, mergers, etc.
Among the major businesses identified were the Ministry of Defence, Bristol City Council, the Environment Agency, University of Bristol, City of Bristol College, the University of the West of England, Hewlett Packard and John Lewis.
Each of the 12 major employers was assigned an Account Manager from the transport directorate in Bristol or South Gloucestershire Council. Their role was to develop a relationship, identify resource needs and mobilise support from the Cycling City roadshow team, with the aim of building some momentum to increase cycling levels. Regular roadshows were held on employer sites and other services were made available by agreement, including led rides, try a bike sessions, Dr Bike maintenance sessions and lunchtime talks.
The smaller businesses were again targeted for geographical proximity and propensity to cycle, with the greatest success coming from the ‘white collar’ organisations.
Many businesses were self-selecting, recruited through various cycle and transport forums, or as they pro-actively approached the project looking for help and support.
Bristol and South Gloucestershire councils worked to develop Cycle Champions at each workplace. The team found that cycle initiatives worked best where there were enthusiastic champions, capable of mobilising colleagues.
For example, energy firm Garrad Hassan worked with the Cycling City project to encourage cycling, applying for a match-funded grant to build what they believe is the biggest bike shed in any Bristol workplace. Garrad Hassan’s Cycle Champion was instrumental in this process, even getting the whole company into branded t-shirts for the launch photo call (see right).
Similarly, legal firm Burges Salmon developed a cycling culture and used their office move to new premises as a catalyst for change, with a number of parking spaces being given over to cycle stands at their new headquarters. "A big thank you to you all. I had my bike serviced today and it is now working like a dream and feels really safe. Thanks so much for organising this event for the BBC. Brilliant!" BBC employee:
16 "Just to say, thank you so much for attending the environmental awareness event at the University Hospitals Bristol this week. The hospital Trust was very pleased with the event and very grateful to those stallholders that gave up their time to participate. It was great that Cycling City could be part of it." NHS employee:
Businesses Engaged With:
The following table shows the businesses that Cycling City engaged with, and their approximate number of employees:
Employer Approx. number of employees Airbus/GKN/Rolls Royce/BAE 3,000 Aztec West Business Park 5,000 Bristol City Council 16,000 Burges Salmon 600 City of Bristol College 2,000 Environment Agency 1,000 John Lewis/Waitrose 1,000 Ministry of Defence 10,000 North Bristol NHS Trust 6,000 Temple Quay 6,200 University of Bristol 5,474 University of the West of England 3,404 Plus 50 smaller businesses 20,000
Total workforce engaged 79,678 Greater Bristol workforce 300,000* Percentage of Greater Bristol workforce 26% potentially engaged
*This is an estimated figure as the Cycling City boundary is not co-terminus with the South Glos boundary (only a third of the geographical area of South Gloucestershire is included).
A map of businesses engaged with can be found at Appendix 5.
Grants to Businesses
Grants were available to businesses within the Cycling City area to part-fund facilities that complemented the promotion of cycling within their organisation and helped to achieve the aims of Cycling City. The grants could be used for facilities including:
• Tools and safety equipment • Locks • Cycle parking 17 • Lockers • Cycling clinics • Staff workshops
The grants were match funded and eligibility was assessed on a needs/prioritisation basis, up to a total amount of £10,000. Over the life of the Cycling City project, grants of £146,051 were awarded to public and private sector organisations. In turn, this was met with a total of £318,144 received in match funding.
Through Life Cycle UK, a local charity organisation, 300 cycle parking stands were given to organisations across Bristol, providing an extra 600 cycle parking spaces to businesses, community groups, churches and housing schemes.
Jam Busting Challenge
The 2010 Jam Busting Challenge saw 91 organisations and 1,837 individuals taking part. Of the 232 people whose normal travel to work mode was by car alone, 216 reported a switch sustainable transport modes. In 2009 1,180 individuals participated from a similar number of organisations.
18 2.4 Neighbourhood Engagement Activities
Community grants
A community grant fund was set up in 2009 and administered through the Quartet Foundation, with 20 projects funded to a total of £109,219. The grants enabled cycling activities to be added into many existing community projects, reaching target groups that would have been otherwise more difficult to engage with. The majority of neighbourhood-based projects that received funding were based in areas of multiple deprivation and health inequalities, where the potential health gain could be the greatest.
Examples of projects included: • Refurbishing old bikes for re-sale into the community • Guided bike rides around Bristol for new cyclists and riders lacking confidence • Mountain bike sessions with young people • The purchase of specialist bikes for disabled people • Bike maintenance sessions for young people • A 'Silver Cyclists' club to encourage older people to take up cycling • A project to allow blind or partially sighted people the opportunity to participate in tandem cycling • Workshops with young women to encourage them to take up cycling
A detailed report about the community organisations that received funding is available on request.
Additionally, outside of the Quartet Foundation grants, Cycling City funded further initiatives to encourage cycling including: • the set up of 10 community bike stations (enabling people to maintain and repair their own bicycles) • funding cycling initiatives at 13 community events • providing resources such as lights and locks to 22 community organisations
In a number of cases, the addition of bikes into community groups' work was considered so successful that they are now using core funds or new funding sources to continue the projects.
There has also been a large amount of volunteering associated with these and other projects, which reflects the enthusiasm in Greater Bristol for enabling people and communities through cycling.
"I welcome the opportunity to learn more about bike maintenance. It's great to have a project that allows you to be hands on with fixing problems, enabling learning and self sufficiency." Member of St. Werburghs Bike Workshop Project
19 Case study - Bristol Bike Project
Bristol Bike Project is a community-organised scheme for vulnerable people. Each person attending the project is given a bike that needs refurbishment and taught how to do this for themselves. Cycling City funding of £2,500 was used to equip each bike with a lock and lights and also to increase the number of tools and workstations in the project in response to growing demand. To date over 400 bikes have been fixed and given to vulnerable members of the community, such as those not in education, employment or training, asylum seekers and recovering addicts, with ten new people benefiting from having bicycles from the project each week. The bike workshop is open five to six days a week and is entirely run by enthusiastic volunteers who are aiming to secure additional funding to allow them to reach more people and to expand their current space. The project has proved so successful that it recently won the 2011 Observer Ethical Award for a grassroots initiative.
More information about the Bristol Bike project can be found at http://vimeo.com/12901441 and www.flickr.com/thebristolbikeproject
Personalised Travel Planning
Between April 2009 and March 2010, Cycling City employed a team of cycle advisers, provided by Steer Davies Gleave, to undertake door-to-door personalised travel planning, focused on cycling. This was targeted using MOSAIC demographic analysis to find households with a higher propensity to cycle.
In the first year of engagement, residential door-to-door personalised travel planning (PTP) was carried out across three areas of Bristol in two separate phases.
This table shows household participation rates across the areas sampled:
Households in Households Participating Participating Area ward* targeted households individuals
Bishopston & Redland 9,214 7,032 1,587 2,132 (23%)
Horfield 5,000 3,850 1,242 1,631 (32%)
Out of all the households targeted, 26% participated with the Cycling City programme, leading to 3,763 conversations with a cycle adviser.
20 Take up of key offers across both phases were as follows:
Number taken up between April 2009 - Service March 2010
PTP appointments 345
Cycle training referrals 244
Dr. Bike sessions 236
Route plans given 70
Loan bikes completed 63
Accompanied rides given 12
Total services given 970
The door-to-door personalised travel planning service was offered across a relatively small area of the city and although this approach worked well, there was a need to engage more widely.
In 2010-11 the approach changed. A new team of advisers were engaged as a roadshow team able to work across households, events and businesses in a flexible, scalable manner.
This approach extended the project’s reach across the wider city and engagement through businesses was pivotal, with over 13,000 people contacted and a further 7,780 in-depth conversations held, which helped encourage people to start cycling and raised the profile of cycling in the city.
The following engagements were carried out by the roadshow team between May 2010 and March 2011:
Number of roadshows between May 2010 Type of engagement - March 2011 Business 206 Educational 164 Mobile 45 Public 40 Residential 37 Total engagements 492
Employers embraced the roadshow to varying degrees. Some put on one-off events, whilst others, notably Hewlett Packard and the Ministry of Defence, created opportunities for the team to attend regularly. This enabled the offer to be varied, mobilising various partners to add 21 interest, not least as these major employers collaborated with the neighbouring University of the West of England to host joint events.
During the summer months, the team attended many events across the city, including Bristol’s Biggest Bike Ride, the Harbour Festival and smaller events, such as the Festival of Nature and street parties organised through the Streets Alive initiative. All of these have substantial footfall, which kept the team busy with enquiries and follow on activities.
Road shows were also held at academic venues such as the University of Bristol, the University of the West of England, City of Bristol College and libraries to promote cycling to new residents of the city.
The team encouraged people to take up cycling with offers including free loan bikes, adult cycle training, personalised travel planning, accompanied rides and Dr. Bike sessions, plus tailored guidance, advice and support.
Number delivered between May 2010 - Type of service March 2011 Resources (maps) given out 13,876 Conversations held 7780 Dr. Bike appointment 743 Route plans given 407 Loan bike uptake 177
"I know from having spoken to a few people at work here that all of these different events you're doing are really encouraging people to cycle to work. Personally I would probably never actually have got past all the various barriers to cycling I had if it hadn't have been for going to one of the events here, getting a loan bike, having lessons and using the Dr Bike and Back Back sessions. So thank you and I hope you continue to get funding to carry on with all of this!" Roadshow customer feedback
Loan Bikes
Cycling City provided a fleet of good quality, fully equipped loan bikes for customers to borrow free for a one-month period. The aim was to provide an opportunity for people to try out cycling without having to buy a bike beforehand.
"I wasn't cycling at all before I borrowed the loan bike. Now I cycle everyday." Loan bike customer
"Without it I wouldn't have started cycling. I'm now buying my own bike. Great service." Loan bike customer
22
Dr Bike
Many participants brought along bikes in various states of disrepair; mechanics fine-tuned them for free to a serviceable level wherever practicable. This helped to build confidence and assisted many people to return to their bikes.
"My bike had broken so it [the service] was very good for getting me cycling again." Dr. Bike customer
"My bike wasn't working at all so he [the mechanic] got me going again. I thought it would cost me a lot of money to get the bike fixed but it turned out to be a simple problem and now it’s working like a dream!" Dr. Bike customer
Adult Cycle Training
The aim of adult cycle training is to develop skills and confidence. Participants ranged from complete beginners wishing to learn to cycle, to improvers and experienced cyclists wishing to improve their skills.
During the Cycling City project, 1146 adult cycle training sessions were carried out within Greater Bristol, a small number of these were referred by the Police having been caught cycling anti-socially. As they had made the effort to pay for and attend a lesson, unsurprisingly many customers reported that their level of cycling has increased and/or their experience improved as a result of the training that they received:
• Before the training 61% reported to be cycling less than once a month • After the training 78% reported to be cycling once a week or more.
(Ref: Life Cycle UK customer follow-up survey)
“The cycle training was brilliant. I learnt a lot in such a short time.” Adult cycle training customer
23 2.5 Events
A comprehensive events programme was carried out with the aim of reaching all parts of Greater Bristol, with a focus on engaging new and non-cyclists:
Cycle Carnival and Festival This event took place over two weeks in September 2010 and featured a fortnight of 89 events including bicycle fashion shows, bicycle powered merry-go- rounds, bicycle tours, bicycle polo, bicycle poetry, bicycle photo shoots, a pedal-in cinema and several bicycle powered music stages. The emphasis was on participative events getting people onto bikes rather than as spectators and over 6,000 people attended events during the fortnight.
The main event of the festival was the Freewheelin' Carnival, which saw over 1,000 riders take part in a mass ride through Bristol city centre followed by an event in Queen Square, designed to encourage more cycling. An independent group is planning to stage another festival in September 2011.
Cyclescreen Film Festival Cyclescreen Film Festival was held at the Watershed and featured a weekend filled with cycling films, talks and events. A total of 779 people attended the film showings, and lots more visited the exhibitions and stalls, aimed at getting people back in the saddle. The event was so successful that the Watershed are running the event again independently in August 2011.
Cycling Zone at the Harbour Festival The pedal powered stage was a huge success, with teams from local employers and ad-hoc volunteers queuing up to keep it going all day. The roadshow team had in-depth 'conversations' with 87 people and gave away further resources to 245 members of the public (maps/leaflets).
Bristol's Biggest Bike Ride - Mass Participation Event 2009 and 2010 saw the 16th and 17th anniversary of Bristol's Biggest Bike Ride, and with them came a record number of 7,500 riders at each event – an increase from 4,000 riders in 2008.
Neighbourhood Events Local neighbourhood events were carried out throughout the project to promote the opening of new infrastructure close to schools and parks.
Street Parties with Streets Alive for 20mph Limit Area Launches The roadshow team attended street parties to celebrate the launch of two new 20mph limit areas within the city, where they encouraged residents to take up cycling through advice,
24 guidance and the offer of key services such as personalised travel planning, loan bikes and Dr. Bike appointments.
Get Gorgeous and Discover Bristol Rides In 2009 and 2010 CTC provided a series of rides for novice women culminating in a 50 mile ride to the Cheddar Gorge and back in a day, whilst the Cycling Campaign ran a series of rides to help people discover the less known routes around Bristol. These will be continuing without Cycling City support in 2011.
Business as usual Cycle Bristol CTC and other local clubs ran weekly rides throughout the duration of the Cycling City project.
Bike Breakfasts In addition to breakfasts at individual schools and employers, the number attending public Bike Breakfasts rose from 150 in 2008 to 920 in 2010.
25 2.6 Increasing Bike Availability
In Bristol in 2009, a survey by Cycling England found that 34% of adults owned a bike and 86% of children and 26% of adults and 81% of children had ridden a bike in the last year. This showed the potential for investing in schemes that increase bike availability in the Greater Bristol area. (Ref: AECOM and consortium partners evaluation survey)
The following projects show the work that was carried out to make bikes more readily available:
All Abilities Project
The All Abilities project was launched in August 2010 as a result of a partnership between Cycling City, Aiming High for Disabled Children, and Cycling Projects. Based in St Pauls Adventure Playground, the project offers children with a range of disabilities the opportunity to ride one of 12 specialist bikes, ranging from quads to hand cycles which can be adapted according to each rider and their specific needs.
Groups can hire bikes during ‘closed’ sessions with individuals being able to hire them during ‘open’ sessions. Both type of session are pre-bookable and until March 2011 this was free to members.
The project has proved to be popular with a number of local special schools making regular bookings for months in advance. The aim is to grow and develop this project to enable it to become self-sustaining, and to spread the benefits as widely as possible. This will be achieved by training teachers, group leaders and volunteers to run sessions and maintain the bikes, as well as widening access to other potential customers such as adults with disabilities.
To the end of March 2011:
• Three Let’s All Play sessions took place involving 78 children and 10 adults. • Forty-eight pupils and 26 staff have taken part in regular weekly schools sessions. • Ten Bristol City Council instructors and two Life Cycle UK instructors were trained and are now delivering sessions. • Since the launch day in August 2010, 175 people have used the bikes.
"One of the pupils from New Fosseway has been attending since Autumn 2010. Initially he had no interest in the bikes and preferred to play in the playground but gradually he was encouraged to take short turns on double bikes with school staff. He liked to do things at his own pace, in his own way and without assistance (he is autistic) and began to start sitting on a trike and exploring the park by scooting it with his feet. In March 2011 he stayed
26 on a trike for a long time and rode using the pedals and brakes and joined in with the other students doing circuits." Teacher at Brislington Enterprise College Autistic Spectrum Disorder Unit (BEC ASD)
The service is now funded until March 2012 with a market research project currently underway to assess options to sustain the project in the longer-term.
Bike Back Project
The aim of this project was to establish a large-scale bicycle recycling project in partnership with Bristol Prison, which would recycle and refurbish bicycles to encourage more cycling, reduce waste and reduce re-offending.
This involved equipping a prison workshop with bike maintenance work-stations and providing productive employment, training and qualifications for prisoners. HMP Bristol has provided the workshop rent-free and is paying prisoners’ wages and in co-operation with Bristol City Council, has entered into a contract with a not-for- profit organisation, Life Cycle UK, to run the facility and provide bicycle maintenance.
Based on similar projects elsewhere, it is anticipated that the project will become self-funding, with the sale of bicycles generating funding alongside HMP Bristol’s significant contribution of facilities, premises staff and labour costs.
By the end of March 2011:
• The production line had been set up and the system was operational, with 48 prisoners having been involved • More than 109 bikes had been sold to members of the public • A total of 643 bikes had been collected through a mixture of public donations and arrangements with the household waste recycling sites across Bristol • In excess of £200 had been put back into the project from scrap metal sales • Regular sales were being held with at least 50 bikes per month being sold.
It is anticipated that the skills and training that the prisoners receive will result in increased confidence and better employability in the future. Prisoners have indicated that the project offers them the opportunity to learn new skills, to keep busy and have time outside of their cells with other people.
Customer Feedback Those purchasing recycled bikes have been very positive about the scheme and many have commented that it has enabled them to get back in the saddle. Selling the bikes at a low cost rate has meant that people who are unable to afford the cost of a new bike are still able to take to the city on two wheels.
27 A woman came in to donate a bike (that dated back to 1948) and to pick up another, having recently retired and was looking to get back into cycling again. She bought a refurbished bike and her husband commented: “Thank-you so much. You don’t know what this means to us both – for [my wife] to get her independence and confidence back, it’s very special indeed.”
Another customer commented on how the mixture of low cost bike and adult cycle training sessions has helped them to get to know the city better by bike: “…I can't imagine my time in Bristol over the last couple of months without it. It has been really useful in getting to know the city and the (adult cycle training) lessons I took really boosted my confidence.”
Recommendation for Future Action and Sustainability There are various plans in place to develop this project and ensure its sustainability into the future, but already the demand has been established with the great majority of the bikes being sold quickly. One grant giving trust has awarded £10,000 per annum for the next three years and further grant applications are being made. A Big Lottery Fund decision is due in autumn 2011.
28 2.7 Schools and Young People
Bikeability
Over the Cycling City project, 16,920 children took part in Bikeability training. The table below breaks this figure down across the Greater Bristol area:
Bristol South Glos
Numbers trained Level 1: 600 Level 1: 402 2008-09 Level 2: 2,100 Level 2: 517 Level 3: 0 Level 3: 20
Numbers trained Level 1: 1,129 Level 1: 854 2009-10 Level 2: 1,583 Level 2: 2,524 Level 3: 23 Level 3: 106
Numbers trained Level 1: 1,186 Level 1: 1,292 2010-11 Level 2: 1,664 Level 2: 2,805 Level 3: 62 Level 3: 53 Level 1: 2,915 Level 1: 2,548 Sub-totals Level 2: 5,347 Level 2: 5,846 Level 3: 85 Level 3: 179
Grand total 8,347 8,573
School population in 86,377 24,604 Cycling City area
Percentage of school 10% 35% population trained
Approximately 1,800 children were Bikeability trained in Greater Bristol in the year prior to Cycling City funding, with 89% of state primary schools, 40% of secondary and 57% of special schools involved.
Working with schools
The schools programme included supporting a wide range of Bike it and non Bike It schools with help organising and funding bike to school initiatives, activities and events to engage pupils, parents and carers to cycle. This included bike to school breakfasts, Dr Bike activities, help and advice for parents and carers and competitions and prizes to encourage cycling to school.
29 Family events included themed cycle treasure hunts on the Bristol-Bath Railway Path, often in conjunction with neighbouring authorities. Other events supported the opening of cycle infrastructure and launch events in new or refurbished parks to raise awareness of new measures.
Work with schools also included working with other local authority departments, such as Parks and Neighbourhood Arts teams, to support their cycling activities and to provide activities and workshops leading up to the Freewheelin' Cycle Carnival in September 2010. Work was also joined with the Smarter Choices schools work programme at relevant points to support the healthy ways to schools project.
The schools programme also managed cycle parking grants to schools (see section 2.2 for further details). Parking grants have typically paid for covered cycle shelters with lockable gates containing Sheffield stands and scooter parking.
Bristol and South Gloucestershire schools took part as a pilot in Sustrans’ Virtual Bike Race in 2010, whereby schools could enter a national competition usually only open to Bike It schools. Six non-Bike It schools in Greater Bristol took part, involving 1,505 children plus staff. The overall national winner was St. Mary’s RC Primary School in South Gloucestershire.
Sustrans ran a similar themed 'Big Pedal' competition in 2011, open to all schools, with 44 schools across Bristol and South Gloucestershire taking part. During the three weeks of the competition, 62,462 journeys were made to a Bristol or South Gloucestershire school by bike, with a Greater Bristol Bike It school, Filton Avenue Junior, achieving first place in the regional category.
Bike to School Week
Bike to School Week in September 2010 was organised in Bristol and South Gloucestershire with a range of activities to which schools could sign up. These activities included grants for Dr Bike sessions, bike breakfasts, Bikeability training during the week, bike costuming workshops and information on how to hold a school cycle carnival procession in the playground.
A range of paper resources such as a Bike to School Week manual, how-to-do sheets, diaries to record journeys, wall charts and stickers, posters, etc were available for different age groups and small Bike to School branded incentives produced for participating children. Aardman Animation allowed the use of the Shaun the Sheep images for branding. There were also prize draws for participants who cycled every day for the week over the two authorities, prizes included bike vouchers, locks and lights. A total of 36 schools (with a head count in excess of 15,000) were involved in this project.
Feedback from schools:
• They would prefer to hold a Bike to School Week in the summer term towards the end of the school year after Year Six SATs (2010’s event was in early Autumn to link with the two week Bristol Cycle Festival and carnival). • They would love to hold the week again and thought the grant to hold a bike breakfast and book a Dr Bike really helped to focus parents and children on the weeks activity.
Feedback from pupils:
30 • "I like coming to school on my bike, it's fun." • "I always ride my bike even in the snow and rain. I've won quite a few prizes over the years" • "I love Bike Week!"
Concorde Project
The Concorde Project aimed to provide a cycle-based solution to transport problems arising from changes to 14-19 education provision at secondary schools in South Gloucestershire. The project aimed to encourage pupils and staff at four local schools (Bradley Stoke and Abbey Wood schools and Filton and Patchway Community colleges) to use the network of new off-road cycle routes that have been built in the area, by providing measures such as:
Cycle storage: Cycle storage has been installed at Bradley Stoke School, Abbeywood School and Filton College.
Pool bike scheme: 40 pool bikes have been provided (10 bikes at each school), to encourage pupils and staff to make sustainable journeys between school sites. Equipment such as pumps, weather- proof clothing, maintenance equipment, locks and data tags are also being given to schools.
Promotional materials: A strong identity was developed with pupils and resulted in ‘Cyked’ branding to use on leaflets, cycle maps and pool bike scheme information.
Public art project: Pupils from three secondary schools have been designing artwork as part of their GCSE coursework portfolio. An artist was recruited to lead the project, and short listed designs have now been installed at various locations on the new cycle routes.
The project will soon expand to include transition work with primary schools within Bradley Stoke/Filton areas, the groundwork for which has already been laid by the Bike It project. Familiarisation for Year Six pupils and their parents with new routes between schools will also take place in order to promote recreational riding, as well as sustainable home-to-school journeys.
Bike It
Sustrans Bike It programme is a scheme that delivers an intensive pro-cycling educational programme to schools in local authority/primary care trust areas. The programme seeks to raise awareness, develop skills and encourage children to take action to increase the number of school journeys they make by bicycle.
31 In consultation with schools and partners, each Bike It officer develops a programme of activities that can offer a wealth of additional benefits to the children, the school, the community and partners. The project adds to local investment in cycle infrastructure, bike storage and cycle training and helps to meet many transport, health, environment and education objectives.
Part of the Cycling City bid was for the Sustrans Bike It programme to be expanded to two officers, having previously only one officer working across Bristol City, South Gloucestershire and Bath and North East Somerset local authorities. In addition, the Bristol Primary Care Trust provided further funding for another two officers, bringing the total number to four.
One hundred percent of pupils at Bike It schools have participated, however some pupils were more intensively engaged than others. The most common activities were champion meetings, award presentations, classroom sessions, Dr. Bike sessions, pupil-lead steering groups and bike breakfasts.
The levels of engagement of Bike It schools (at September 2010) is shown below:
Bristol South Glos Total
Intensively engaged 24 5 29
Supported 12 12 24
At a distance 1 1 2
TOTAL 37 18 55
The Bike It project has achieved significant modal shift in the Greater Bristol schools where it has worked. Looking at the overall figures for all Bike It schools that have been part of the project for at least one year, regular cycling has effectively doubled from 12% to 23%, and the level of pupils who have never cycled to school has declined from 72% to 50%. The South West average for regular cycling to school is 2%.
The fact that 43% of Bristol pupils said in their 'pre' surveys that cycling would be their preferred school travel method shows that there is still a lot of potential to continue the trend of increasing the numbers of pupils who choose to cycle to school on a regular basis. There is also more work to be done in other areas, such as numbers of pupils travelling to school every day by car – for which the percentage remains approximately the same for most schools after one year of Bike It (around 26%). Schools in areas of multiple deprivation were targeted with some success, and this was augmented by schools self-selecting or targeted as being close to cycling infrastructure.
The graph below shows the percentage of pupils cycling to school both pre and post Bike It intervention:
32
A map showing Bike It schools across Greater Bristol can be found at Appendix 5.
(Ref: Sustrans (2010) 'Bike It: A progress report on the programme in Bristol and South Gloucestershire')
Youth Engagement
This project used interventions to encourage more children and young people to cycle and to attempt to assess how cycling for leisure and sport impacts on the propensity to use cycling as a means of transport. To promote these projects 2,000 leaflets detailing all the extra curricular activities children and young people could take part in were disseminated.
This age group is all too often discounted from and under represented by community projects as they can be labelled as being ‘hard to reach’. These projects were aimed at providing a legacy to the Cycling City project; useful skills and permanent structures for generations of Bristolians to utilise, pass on and share.
Key projects funded, set up and supported were:
• Refurbishment of an existing BMX facility in Lawrence Weston and another refurbishment in Stockwood is planned. A further two at Eastville Park and Brunel Way are planned and due to be installed later in 2011. BMX tracks enable young people to get fit and develop bike-handling skills and can often lead them to continue cycling into adulthood. BMX tracks will enable up to 20 young people at any one time to learn new skills from other riders or teach others their skills. • A new BMX track built in Emerson’s Green, constructed from the spoil when a new cycle path was implemented nearby. The BMX track was designed by the local groups who now use this new facility. • Support for adventure playgrounds including cycling maintenance tools, training and storage. Four adventure playgrounds in various areas across Bristol are now able to teach and train young people to fix their bikes and learn useful transferable skills to take to potential future employment. Each of the four adventure playgrounds sees on
33 average 150 children passing through the gates each week and approximately 350 different children will use the facilities during an average year • Purchase of helmets to support the annual BMX Jam in St George. Children who could not otherwise afford basic equipment were able to take part • A pilot of Bikeability painted tracks in Eastville Park. Young children can now learn basic cycling skills in a safe, off road, environment.
Go Ride
British Cycling’s Go Ride sports development programme provides young people opportunities to participate in the sport and to develop their potential through improving the quality and quantity of cycling provision in schools and clubs.
Cycling City funded a Go Ride Coach to work within the Greater Bristol area, to deliver a high quality school and community-coaching programme, through engagement with young people, volunteers, schools and clubs.
During the Cycling City project, the Go Ride Coach worked with seven schools and 309 young people. The programme in the Greater Bristol area also engaged with a further 304 young people throughout events such as inter-schools competitions, activity coaching, club support sessions and Go Ride racing. Work is still in progress as the project’s funding is ongoing.
As part of this programme 8 Specialist Sports Schools were provided with 15 bikes each, and these are being regularly used both as aprt of the PE curriculum and as part of after-school and holiday activities, and a considerable number of PE staff are now ACAT trained. The bikes are likely to be used to support Duke of Edinburgh Awards in the future
One of these schools is turning a container into a workshop and store where BTEC engineering pupils will maintain the bikes as well as work on building bikes for a charitable project with schools in Kenya.
Bike Club
Bike Club aims to reach young people who experience barriers in access to cycling and works to increase participation in a number of areas. Thirteen clubs were supported across Greater Bristol, reaching approximately 1,250 participants. Clubs included:
Made 4 Ever Youth Club, Kingswood: Tailored specific girls only programme to encourage them into cycling through cycling trips and film making.
Bristol Bike Club and Hospital Education Service: Helped to develop a programme of cycling activities including Bikeability and mountain biking to help young people who are in, and recovering from hospital to get physical activity.
City Academy Youth Achievement Foundation: Helped disengaged young people to get involved in bike maintenance and mountain biking.
34 2.8 Further and Higher Education
Engagement was carried out with the University of the West of England (UWE) and the University of Bristol (UoB) as employers, and has ensured a great deal more parking on each site. Many of the new routes end with or have UWE en route. Work directly with students has taken place via these initiatives, rather than anything directly targeting students.
A research project will be undertaken with UoB next year to assess the impact of loaning bikes to new students when they arrive at university.
35 2.9 Train Stations
Bristol Temple Meads
Seventy additional cycle parking stands (140 spaces) have been paid for by Cycling City and are in storage awaiting their installation (by Network Rail) on platform three – this is to cope with the demand as the existing 175 spaces are often fully utilised. Additionally, there are 87 stands currently within 20m of the station. A major remodelling of transport interchanges at Temple Meads is planned but was delayed by the recession - this is now part of Bristol’s ‘Enterprise Zone’. As such, work with Temple Meads to improve the overall cycling experiences will be part of this larger plan. In year one of the project, Meads Reach Bridge was installed, providing a safe and accessible link by bike to Temple Meads station from the city centre.
Bristol Parkway
Fifty-two additional cycle parking stands (104 spaces), including two secure covered shelters in prominent spaces in the car park have been installed at Bristol Parkway station. Two new routes also feed this area (City Centre to Parkway Station and Parkway Station to Bradley Stoke leisure centre and community school), linking key destinations to the train station.
Suburban Stations – Cycle Parking Stands
Suburban Train Station Number of stands installed St Andrews Road (Avonmouth) 12 Sea Mills 4 Shirehampton 6 Clifton Down 22 Redland 4 Montpelier 6 Stapleton Road 4 Lawrence Hill 6 Bedminster 4 Filton Abbey Wood 15
36 2.10 Leisure Cycling
Many of the routes developed, especially the traffic- free routes, can act as both utility and leisure routes. For example, Festival Way provides a viable route from the south and west of the city into the city centre. A booklet of 10 short family/leisure rides was published in 2010 and 20,000 copies were given out to members of the public, along with 70,000 (Bristol) and 10,000 (South Glos) cycle maps during 2009 and 2010.
The Cycling City project was also instrumental in ensuring that £400,000 funding was levered in for the development and upgrade of 12 km of mountain Bike trails in Ashton Court and Leigh Woods. Additionally BMX tracks are being built/refurbished as part of the Youth Engagement programme of initiatives (see section 2.7 for further details).
37 3. Expenditure
The project overall came in on budget, with the full amount of the Government grant being invested and claimed including an extra allocation of £60,000, which was awarded and invested in 2011 towards the end of the project. The split between capital and revenue is shown in table one.
Table one: grant split between capital and revenue
Amount of grant funding claimed from Funding source DfT
Capital £7,641,625
Revenue £3,996,743
Total grant claimed £11,638,368
The majority of grant funds were invested in infrastructure as demonstrated by pie chart one.
Pie chart one: grant spend by category
9% 2% 3% Infrastructure 13% Smarter Choices Schools Communications Project monitoring and evaluation 11% 62% Project team
A number of resources were shared by Bristol and South Gloucestershire councils across the overall budget (items such as communications and project management were top-sliced) and the remainder of the budget was split by the proportion of population living in the two council areas, being 72% for Bristol and 28% for South Gloucestershire.
38 Due to the size and complexity of the programme a separate spreadsheet for match funding was developed in line with the counting rules developed by Cycling England, which mean that initiatives with direct benefit to cycling in Greater Bristol can be counted. A summary is presented in pie chart two, which demonstrates that the required match was met and exceeded from a variety of sources.
Pie chart two: match funding by source
20% Bristol - South Glos capital 32% programme Bristol - South Glos revenue programme Private - developer funded (e.g. S106) Voluntary and community sector
Other public fund 2% 27%
19%
The category of ‘other public funds’ includes a wide variety of sources such as:
• The NHS, who contributed staff time and expertise as well as financial contributions to the Bike It programme and 20mph speed limit area roll out. • Grants and other direct financial contributions came from the Big Lottery Fund, Youth Sport Trust, Aiming High for Disabled Children, the Arts Council, Quartet Foundation and Safer Bristol • In kind sources of match funding came from areas such as the Highways Agency, HMP Bristol, local charities and volunteers, and the Play Pathfinders Programme. • Ten percent of Greater Bristol Bus Network funds invested on the highway can counted as match funding. Significant benefit to cyclists were identified and implemented as part of the programme for these bus corridors.
39 4. Initial Outcomes
The full national evaluation of Bristol and South Gloucestershire's Cycling City project will be released by the DfT when post-intervention data is available. The project has submitted all the data requested by the national evaluation team. Ongoing monitoring post-Cycling City will also be submitted to the national evaluation team.
However, some early independent indicators are available, showing that Bristol has made encouraging progress and is now regularly ranked as one of the best regions in the country for cycling facilities.
For example, a Cycling Plus survey in 2010 ranked Bristol as 'the number one cycling city' and a report by Bike Dock Solutions in 2011 ranked Bristol as number one for cycle parking per head of population. More recently, a CTC Fill That Hole survey gave Bristol a 'highly commended' award in its 2011 survey and the Municipal Journal named the project as the winner of the 2011 Sustainable Infrastructure Achievement of the Year Award.
In terms of the quality of provision, the IPSOS/MORI 2009 National Highways Satisfaction Survey (released in 2010) ranked Bristol top in two categories (cycle route information and cycle facilities at place of work) and scored the city highly against the other 25 urban unitary authorities in cycle parking and directional signage for cycle routes (coming second and third respectively).
Meanwhile, in the same survey South Gloucestershire came second out of 76 in four categories (cycle facilities at place of work, cycle route information, cycle parking and drop kerb crossing points) and third in four categories (provision of cycle routes where needed, condition of routes, cycle crossing facilities and direction signing). Scored against the 20 rural unitary authorities, South Gloucestershire came top in the same six categories.
Measures collected by each council back up the general consensus that Greater Bristol's Cycling City demonstration town status is bringing about some significant changes:
• Due to factors such as the lowering of speed limits, raising awareness of the presence of cyclists and a 'safety in numbers' effect, the number of serious injuries to cyclists under 18 years of age is down by 50% (ref: NHS report). Further monitoring by Bristol City Council suggests a decrease in the rate of cycle accidents when viewed against the total number of cyclists. • In the new 20mph limit areas cycling has increased, cycle accidents are down and local residents are strongly in favour of the new speed limits (67% pre-implementation, 83% post-implementation). (ref: Bristol South 20mph limit area monitoring report). • Automatic count data on two new bike routes, Concorde Way and Hartcliffe Way, have risen by 102% and 84% respectively since 2008 (ref: Automatic Cycle Count data 2010). • The average rate of people cycling to work in 2007 was 6.7%. Figures from 2010 show 9.8% of people now cycle to work, with the Ashley area of the city showing over 1 in 4 people cycling to work (26%). The areas of Bishopston, Redland and Southville also show around 1 in 5 people cycling to work (ref: Quality of Life report 2010). 40 • The project's website - www.betterbybike.info - has received ½ a million page views in the last 18 months, with cycle maps and route information receiving the majority of hits (ref: Google Analytics). • Bristol City Council's Citizen's Panel survey (2010) indicated that 38% of people in the city were aware of Cycling City or the Better By Bike campaign and 9% of people now cycle daily, 16% cycle once a week. Similar figures are also reported in South Gloucestershire's Viewpoint survey. • Gloucester Road, one of the city's major roads, now has a 14.8% modal share for cycling, up from 7.6% in 2002 (ref: Manual cycle count data).
Whilst these results give a flavour of the impact of the Cycling City project, they don't by any means give the full picture. As stated above, the DfT will release an independent progress report when post-intervention data is available.
41 5. List of Appendices
Appendix 1 – Map showing Greater Bristol investment segments Appendix 2 – Map showing Greater Bristol cycling infrastructure Appendix 3 – Map showing Greater Bristol signed cycle routes and cycle parking locations Appendix 4 – Map showing pinch points and connectivity with other routes Appendix 5 – Map showing Bike It schools, targeted businesses and areas of encouragement activity Appendix 6 – Table of infrastructure schemes Appendix 7 – Case studies
42 Greater Bristol investment segments
un t on 20 M4)
J nc i n 15 M5) Engine Iron Common Goose Acton Green
J nc on 16
A W
A W O O Yate
M O M 5 9 Stoke M 4 Easter Lodge Compton Over Nibley
M Frampton
M Westerleigh Bradley O O W Cotterell A Patchway Stoke Common Compton Mayshill Greenfield Winterbourne Chittening un t on 17 Cribbs
AY W Causeway 5 MO O M Berwick Coalpit Heath
R
O T
O
M
9 Stoke Hicks M Gifford Common 6 Ram Hill Westerleigh Filton Winterbourne West Hallen Down un t on 19 Brentry
Y Henfield TORWA MO Filton Y M5 A W Henbury R 1 O O M 2 Harry 3 Blaise M Stoke Hambrook Moorend u ct on 8a Hamlet M Southmead 4 MOTO R WAY J nc i n 1
M 4 M OTORWAY Avonmouth Lawrence Northville UWE Bromley J nc on 18 Weston Heath
Westbury Blackhorse Lyde Coombe on Trym Green
Y Dingle A W R O O
M5 M Eastfield
Y Frenchay W
OTO Horfield M 32 Sea Mills Henleaze M Shirehampton Emersons Lockleaze Oldbury Downend Pucklechurch Court Green Mangotsfield Staple 2 Stapleton Hill Shortwood J nc on 19 Stoke Bishopston Pill Ham
AY RW Bishop O O M 5 Green M un t on 2 Eastville Siston Easton in Sneyd Ashley Soundwell Gordano Redland Park The Down St. Werburghs
Abson Y Downs A W R T O
2 3 M 3 7 Montpelier u c ion 3 Siston Cotham Common Easton Speedwell Doynton Kingswood Webb’s St. Pauls Clifton Whitehall Heath Abbots Down Warmley Leigh Clifton St George Broadmead Redfield Bridge Mount Yate Centre Hill Wick Clifton Hotwells The Wood Dings Barton St. Annes Hill Redcliffe Temple Quay St. Philips North Marsh Hanham Common Bower Southville Ashton Cadbury Broomhill Heath Failand Windmill Hill Arno's Bedminster Vale Longwell Hanham Green Brislington Common Beach
Ashton Knowle Willsbridge Long Vale 5 Ashton Upton Filwood 4 Cheyney Park Flax Cambridge Bedminster Bitton Bourton Batch Down Stockwood Somerdale Inn’s Vale Headley Court Highridge Park Stockwood Unitary Authority boundary
Hengrove Keynsham Bishopsworth 1 Park 0 2km N Barrow Withywood Estate Gurney Chandag Hartcliffe The three easternmost gridsquares of this map are based upon Ordnance Survey material Estate with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office 0©Crown Copyright Unauthorised1 reproduction infringes Crown2km CopyrightN and may lead to Whitchurch Queen prosecution or Civil proceedings Bristol City Council Licence No LA 09055L 2010 Charlton The rest is based on Bristol Design Copyright map
Dundry Chewton Keynsham Greater Bristol cycling infrastructure
un t on 20 M4)
J nc i n 15 M5) Engine Iron Common Goose Acton Green
J nc on 16
A W Stoke A W O Yate
M O
9 4 Lodge Easter Compton Over Nibley Frampton Westerleigh Bradley O Cotterell A Patchway Stoke Common Compton Mayshill Greenfield Winterbourne Chittening un t on 17 Cribbs
W Causeway M Berwick Coalpit Heath
R
O T
O
M
9 Stoke Hicks M Gifford Common Ram Hill Westerleigh Filton Winterbourne West Hallen Down un t on 19 Brentry
Y Henfield TORWA MO Filton Y M5 A W Henbury R O O M 2 Harry 3 Avonmouth Blaise M Stoke Hambrook Moorend u ct on 8a Hamlet Southmead M T Y J nc i n 1
4 R
Lawrence Northville UWE Bromley J nc on 18 Weston Heath
Westbury Blackhorse Lyde Coombe on Trym Green
Y Dingle A W R O O
M5 M Eastfield
Y Frenchay W
OTO Horfield M 32 Sea Mills Henleaze M Shirehampton Emersons Lockleaze Oldbury Downend Pucklechurch Court Green Mangotsfield Staple Stapleton Hill Shortwood J nc on 19 Stoke Bishopston Pill Ham
AY RW Bishop O O M 5 Green M n t on 2 Eastville Siston Easton in Sneyd Ashley Soundwell Gordano Redland Park The Down St. Werburghs
Abson Y Downs A W R T O
2 3 Siston M Common Montpelier u c ion 3 Cotham Easton Speedwell Doynton Kingswood Webb’s St. Pauls Heath Clifton Whitehall Warmley Abbots Down Leigh Clifton St George Broadmead Bridge Redfield Mount Yate Centre Hill Wick Clifton Hotwells The Wood Dings Barton St. Annes Hill Redcliffe Temple Quay St. Philips North Marsh Hanham Common Bower Southville Ashton Cadbury Broomhill Heath Failand Windmill Hill Arno's Legend Bedminster Vale Longwell Hanham Green Infrastructure before Brislington Common Cycling City (pre 2008) Ashton Knowle Willsbridge Long Vale Infrastructure built and Ashton improved as part of Filwood Cycling City Park Flax Cambridge Bedminster Infrastructure coming soon Bourton Batch Down Stockwood Somerdale Inn’s Vale Headley Court 20mph limit areas Highridge Park Stockwood Cycling City boundary
Hengrove Keynsham Bishopsworth 1 Park 0 2km N Barrow Withywood Estate Gurney Chandag Hartcliffe The three easternmost gridsquares of this map are based upon Ordnance Survey material Estate with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ©Crown Copyright Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to Whitchurch Queen prosecution or Civil proceedings Bristol City Council Licence No LA 09055L 2010 Charlton The rest is based on Bristol Design Copyright map
Dundry Chewton Keynsham Greater Bristol signed cycle routes and cycle parking locations
un t on 20 M4)
J nc i n 15 M5)
J nc on 16
A W
A W
O
M O
9
4
Bradley O
A Stoke
un t on 17
W M Cribbs Causeway
R
O T
O
M
9
M
un t on 19
Y
TORWA
MO Y M5 A W R O O Henbury M
2 3 M
u ct on 8a M T Y J nc i n 1
4 R
Emersons J nc on 18 UWE Green
Y A W R O O
M5 M
Y W
OTO M 32 Shirehampton M Snuff Mills
Staple Hill
J nc on 19
Y WA OR O M 5 M
t on 2
T
u c ion 3
Kingswood Legend Warmley Concord Way/SGC routes 1/3/4 Festival Way Frome Valley Greenway/ SGC routes 9/12 Bristol Bath Railway Path/ Ashton SGC route 8 Court Malago Greenway Whitchurch Way Downs Way Welsley Way (coming Autumn 2011) Portway (coming Autumn 2011) Links/Feeder routes Cycle parking pre Cycling City Cycle parking post Cycling City Cycling City boundary
1 Note: 0 2km N Some feeder routes include quiet roads Hartcliffe The three easternmost gridsquares of this map are based upon Ordnance Survey material where cycle signages has been installed. with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ©Crown Copyright Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to Whitchurch prosecution or Civil proceedings Bristol City Council Licence No LA 09055L 2010 The rest is based on Bristol Design Copyright map Pinch points and connectivity with other routes
un t on 20 M4)
J nc i n 15 M5) Engine Iron Common Goose Acton Green
J nc on 16
A W
A W O Yate
M O
9 Stoke
4 Easter Lodge Compton Over Nibley Frampton Westerleigh Bradley O Cotterell A Patchway Stoke Common Compton Mayshill Greenfield Winterbourne Chittening un t on 17 Cribbs
W Causeway M Berwick Coalpit Heath
R
O T
O
M
9 Stoke Hicks M Gifford Common Ram Hill Westerleigh Filton Winterbourne West Hallen Down un t on 19 Brentry
Y Henfield TORWA MO Filton Y M5 A W Henbury R O O M 2 Harry 3 Blaise M Stoke Hambrook Moorend u ct on 8a Hamlet Southmead M T Y J nc i n 1
4 R Avonmouth Lawrence Northville UWE Bromley J nc on 18 Weston Heath
Westbury Blackhorse Lyde Coombe on Trym Green
Y Dingle A W R O O M Eastfield
Y Frenchay W
OTO Horfield M 32 Sea Mills Henleaze M Shirehampton Emersons Lockleaze Oldbury Downend Pucklechurch Court Green Mangotsfield Staple Stapleton Hill Shortwood J nc on 19 Stoke Bishopston Pill Ham
AY RW Bishop O O M 5 Green M Ashley n t on 2 Eastville Siston Easton in Sneyd Down Soundwell Gordano Redland Park The St. Werburghs
Downs 20 Abson
23 Montpelier 30 16 Siston Cotham 29 Easton Speedwell Common 24 Doynton 33 Kingswood Webb’s Clifton Whitehall Heath Abbots Down 32 Warmley Leigh Clifton St George 2 13 Bridge 3 1 Redfield 4 6 22 Mount Yate 5 Hill Wick 7 12 Clifton 25 8 10 Hotwells 27 9 The Wood Dings 15 Barton St. Annes 26 Redcliffe Hill Temple 14 19 Quay 28 St. Philips North 11 Marsh Hanham Common 18 Bower Southville Ashton 21 17 Cadbury Broomhill Heath Failand Windmill Hill Arno's Bedminster Vale Longwell Hanham Green Brislington Common Beach 31 Ashton Knowle Willsbridge Long Vale Legend Ashton Complete Filwood Park On site March 2011 Flax Cambridge Bedminster Bourton Batch Down Stockwood Somerdale Inn’s Vale Starting 2011/12 Headley Court Highridge Park Stockwood Links and feeder routes Cycling City boundary Hengrove Keynsham Bishopsworth 1 Park 0 2km N Barrow Withywood Estate Gurney Chandag Hartcliffe The three easternmost gridsquares of this map are based upon Ordnance Survey material Estate with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ©Crown Copyright Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to Whitchurch Queen prosecution or Civil proceedings Bristol City Council Licence No LA 09055L 2010 Charlton The rest is based on Bristol Design Copyright map
Dundry Chewton Keynsham Greater Bristol map showing Bike It schools, targeted businesses and areas of encouragement activity
un t on 20 M4)
J nc i n 15 M5) Engine Iron Common Goose Acton Green
J nc on 16
A W
A W O Yate
M O
9 Stoke
4 Easter Lodge Compton Over Nibley Frampton Westerleigh Bradley O Cotterell A Patchway Stoke Common Compton Mayshill Greenfield Winterbourne Chittening un t on 17 Cribbs
W Causeway M Berwick Coalpit Heath
R
O T
O
M
9 Stoke Hicks M Gifford Common Ram Hill Westerleigh Filton Winterbourne West Hallen Down un t on 19 Brentry
Y Henfield TORWA MO Filton Y M5 A W Henbury R O O M 2 Harry 3 Blaise M Stoke Hambrook Moorend u ct on 8a Hamlet Southmead M T Y J nc i n 1
4 R Avonmouth Lawrence Northville UWE Bromley J nc on 18 Weston Heath Sea Mills Westbury Blackhorse Lyde Coombe on Trym Green
Y Dingle A W R O O
M5 M Eastfield
Y Frenchay W
OTO Horfield M 32 Henleaze M Shirehampton Emersons Lockleaze Oldbury Downend Pucklechurch Court Green Mangotsfield Staple Stapleton Hill Shortwood J nc on 19 Stoke Bishopston Pill Ham
AY RW Bishop O O M 5 Green M un t on 2 Eastville Siston Easton in Sneyd Ashley Soundwell Gordano Redland Park The Down St. Werburghs
Abson Y Downs A W R T O
2 3 M
Montpelier u c ion 3 Siston Cotham Common Easton Speedwell Doynton Kingswood Webb’s St. Pauls Clifton Whitehall Heath Abbots Down Warmley Leigh Clifton St George Broadmead Redfield Bridge Mount Yate Centre Hill Wick Clifton Hotwells The Wood Dings Barton St. Annes Hill Redcliffe Temple Quay St. Philips North Marsh Hanham Common Bower Southville Ashton Cadbury Broomhill Heath Failand Windmill Hill Arno's Bedminster Vale Longwell Hanham Green Legend Brislington Common Promotional banners displaying Ashton Knowle Willsbridge Long Vale distance to city centre by bike Ashton Businesses working with Filwood Park Cycling City Flax Cambridge Bedminster Bourton Batch Down Stockwood Somerdale Bike It schools Inn’s Vale Headley Court Targeted Personalised Travel Highridge Park Stockwood Planning (PTP) areas
Hengrove Keynsham Cycling City boundary Bishopsworth Park Barrow Withywood Estate Gurney Hartcliffe Chandag 0 1 Estate 2km N Whitchurch Queen The three easternmost gridsquares of this map are based upon Ordnance Survey material Charlton with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office ©Crown Copyright Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to Dundry Chewton prosecution or Civil proceedings Bristol City Council Licence No LA 09055L 2010 Keynsham The rest is based on Bristol Design Copyright map
Appendix 6
Greater Bristol Cycling City - End of Project Report
Segment Infrastructure Scheme On road Traffic free length (km) length (km)
One Portway Contraflow 0.42 Floating Harbour crossing 0.2 TOTAL 0.42km 0.2km Two Westbury on Trym Safer Routes to Schools 0.44 Northern route 1 (St. Werburghs path) 0.7 Northern route 2 (Northern fringe to city centre) 0.14 Constable Road traffic calming 0.3 Prince Street Bridge 0.7 River Street 0.25 St. Matthias Park 0.7 Pinch points (* see below) 1.56 TOTAL 3.95km 0.84km Three Frome route – Stapleton Road link 0.28 Meads Reach Bridge 0.55 Speedwell Link to Bristol-Bath Railway Path 1.18 BBRP lighting extension 0.21 Eastville Park improvements 0.69 St. George’s Park link 0.17 Lawrence Hill underbridge 0.4 Pinch points (* see below) 1.45 TOTAL 1.62km 3.31km Four Bath Road review 5 Whitchurch Railway Path 1.7 TOTAL 5km 1.7km Five Malago Greenway uplift 2 Southern Route – Hartcliffe Way 1.35 Hengrove Park links 0.9 Bridge Learning Campus 0.65
Appendix 6
Greater Bristol Cycling City - End of Project Report
Connect2 Ashton Sidings and Bedminster Cricket Club 0.72 Connect2 Megabowl Link 0.25 Long Ashton Road 0.12 Pinch points (* see below) 0.29 TOTAL 1.19km 5.1km Six City Centre to Parkway Parkway Station to Bradley Stoke Leisure Centre and 4.69 Community School 3.36 Bradley Stoke to Cribbs Causeway 5.33 Northern Link to UWE 2.92 Eastern Link to UWE 2.49 Western Link to UWE (developer funded realignment element only) 0.4 A38 0.72 TOTAL 0.72km 19.19km Seven A432 3.2 A4017 1.9 Emerson's Green Links to Village 3.31 Emerson's Green Science Park link 1.5 TOTAL 5.1km 4.8km GRAND TOTAL 18km 35.14km
Appendix 6
Greater Bristol Cycling City - End of Project Report
*Pinch Point Schemes
Segment Pinch point scheme On road length (km)
Two Broadmead 50m Silver Street 100m Nelson Street 250m Quay Street 80m Colston Avenue 50m Small Street 150m Corn Street 80m St. Stephens Street 150m St. Nicholas Street 200m Bridge Street 50m Castle Street 100m Lower Castle Street 150m Royal Oak Avenue 15m Redcliffe Bridge 130m TOTAL 1.56km Segment Three St. Phillips Causeway 1300m Berwick Road 150m TOTAL 1.45km Segment Five Mead Street 60m Coronation Road 130m Greenway Bush Lane 100m TOTAL 0.29km GRAND TOTAL 3.3km
Appendix 7: Case study one – Conditional Cautioning approach
One of the most common complaints concerning cycling is about riding on pavements and jumping red lights. This is an issue that is frequently raised in neighbourhood forums as well as in the media and correspondence. Equalities assessments also highlighted concerns about cycling in parks and on shared use pavements. At the same time inconsiderate behaviour by other road users is seen as a barrier to getting more people cycling.
The Cycling City project has taken a holistic response to the problem, which covers the following areas:
Education
Cyclists need to know about and feel confident in using suitable roads and cycling routes, so training, maps and route finding support is provided. Cycle training on safe road cycling and awareness of more vulnerable people is an effective response, and 16,920 children and 1146 adults have received this through the Cycling City programme. A Code of Conduct for cycling features on publications and the Better by Bike website.
Engineering
Cyclists belong on roads or on shared use paths. Where there is persistent pavement cycling it can be indicative of a problem on the road that needs addressing. Sometimes there is also uncertainty about which pavements are shared use and signing can help with this, although this needs to be treated with care so that motorists are not tempted to “encourage” onto the pavement those cyclists who do legitimately want to use the road. The setting up of 20mph limit areas covering 20% of households in the city has made road cycling a more viable option for many.
Enforcement
This should be 'tough on irresponsible cycling, and on the causes of irresponsible cycling'. But there is also a need to tackle the sort of poor driving that is a barrier to cycling for many people (including obstructing cycle lanes or Advanced Stop Lines). Joint roadshows between Safer Bristol, the police and Cycling City have been organised, giving advice, maintenance, hi-viz straps and lights. Police and Community Support Officers (PCSOs) may issue Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) for inconsiderate and anti-social behaviour. The Home Office has issued guidance about FPNs and cycling:
“The issue is about inconsiderate cycling on the pavements. The new provisions [FPN] are not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic, and who show consideration to other road users when doing so. Chief officers recognise that the fixed penalty needs to be used with a considerable degree of discretion and it cannot be issued to anyone under the age of 16.“
The idea of a conditional cautioning system was devised as an enforcement response but with an educational approach. A system was set up linking Avon and Somerset police neighbourhood teams and the Central Ticketing Office with Life Cycle UK who deliver adult cycle training. When a £30 Fixed Penalty Notice is issued there is an option to take it as a cycling awareness-training course for £15. The police continue to apply the same conditions they use for Fixed Penalty Notices.
About half of those issued with a FPN ticket took up the training option (but none of the motor vehicle drivers). Feedback has been positive with main learning points being road positioning, observation of the road, awareness of other road-users and alternatives to cycling on the pavement.
Appendix 7: Case study two – the Cycling City roadshow team
One of the big challenges faced by Greater Bristol’s Cycling City project was to get more people cycling, more safely, more often. Improving the infrastructure and availability of routes created the environment for this, yet many people simply cannot see themselves on a bicycle.
Initiatives to engage people in discussion about cycling featured strongly throughout the project, along with a comprehensive programme of communications activities – e.g. advertising, press releases, the www.betterbybike.info website and many events. Contracts were let for other supporting services such as adult cycle training and ‘Dr Bike’ cycle maintenance, together with the acquisition of a fleet of 100 loan bikes, intended for one-month loans to people who wanted to try cycling for an extended period.
In 2009, travel consultancy Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned to undertake some targeted customer engagement activities; principally door-to-door personalised travel planning (PTP) in neighbourhoods whose demographics suggested a higher propensity to cycle (e.g. Redland, Bishopston & Horfield). Some workplace engagement was also conducted during this phase. The objective was to engage people in discussions about cycling, using Motivational Interviewing techniques, intended to elicit a response from the customer to overcome their own fears and objections. Those who were contemplating cycling were encouraged to participate by taking up relevant supporting services as described above.
It was quickly recognised that concentrating intensively on a limited number of neighbourhoods was restrictive and the project team considered a range of options to enable a broader reach across the city. At the same time, many requests for attendance at local events across Bristol and South Gloucestershire were being received, which were becoming increasingly difficult to fulfil. The way forward was to establish a ‘roadshow’ team, which could be deployed flexibly in support of the Cycling City project.
The team was set up using a combination of existing PTP staff and new recruits, managed locally by a team leader. Equipped with a branded cargo trike, a range of display stands and a gazebo, the team took on the challenge of working at multiple events, seven days a week, wearing their ‘betterbybike’ t-shirts with pride.
2010 was a particularly high profile and busy summer, with events ranging from street parties, neighbourhood and cultural events, through to the city’s first Cycle Festival and Carnival. The team could be seen every day at leisure centres, health centres, libraries, council Customer Service Points and street markets, meeting people, route planning, providing information and signposting customers to available services.
The other important strand of the roadshow team’s work has been support for business engagement. Led by Officers from both local authorities, they played a crucial part in visiting over 50 local businesses, engaging with employees, running led rides and supporting cycle champions and bicycle user groups to get more people in the saddle. Businesses large and small became involved, ranging from small professional services firms in the city centre, to major employers, such as the Ministry of Defence at Filton, employing over 8,000 people.
What was clear is that there are many ways of innovating around a core approach – the team have found many ways of enhancing the customer experience, from working alongside health professionals and community groups to access ‘hard to reach’ customers, to arranging buddy rides for loan bike customers or helping people plan routes to work, all of this whilst a ‘Dr Bike’ is getting their bike back on the road. The versatility and flexibility of the team has been a winning combination in reaching a wider public and converting people to cycling who might otherwise have remained contemplators.
Appendix 7: Case study three – direct marketing
As part of the Smarter Choices work programme, a direct marketing campaign (using mail, email and social media) was employed in targeted parts of the city to promote cycling infrastructure and initiatives organised by the Cycling City team.
The largest direct marketing campaign ran in spring 2011 to promote a complete, end-to-end route between two large shopping areas – Cabot Circus in central Bristol and Cribbs Causeway, some seven miles away in north Bristol. Above-the-line advertising and training and support services from the Cycling City roadshow team backed the direct marketing campaign.
The cycle route, which takes in several cycling paths, namely the Frome Greenway, Concorde Way and South Gloucestershire routes 1, 3 and 4, includes a significant number of businesses, retail and leisure areas, making it a useful route for commuters and other short trips by bicycle
Likely prospects were identified using Mosaic segmentation software, according to a range of socio-demographic and lifestyle characteristics that favoured cycling.
The mail campaign saw 40,000 fold-out leaflets printed and distributed to targeted households in several wards along the route. With a user-friendly map and copy and imagery derived from the latest research findings from a report into The Image of Cycling by the University of the West of England's Business school (due to be published in summer 2011), the aim of the campaign was encourage people to discover that cycling was free, easy, gave you freedom, made you feel young again and helped to relieve stress - key emotional drivers identified by pre-campaign focus group respondents.
E-mails were also sent to 4,500 people on the Better By Bike mailing list and followed up with associated social media work (using 1,500 fans/followers on Facebook and Twitter).
The call to action was to either ride part of the route or to visit a website address to download more detailed maps and other useful resources.
The campaign went live on March 18th 2011 and ran for 3 months. Total website hits during that time rose by 68% on the same time period in 2010, totalling 160,200 (or 580 visits per day) with 700 hits arriving on a dedicated landing page. Prompted recall rates for the campaign images came in at 18% using a sample base of 677 people.
A comparison of automatic cycle count data between March – June 2011 and the same period in 2010 showed a 110% increase in two- way cycle traffic along the route.
42 APPENDIX C Understanding Walking and Cycling
Summary of Key Findings and Recommendations Understanding WALKING CYCLING Summary of key findings and recommendations
Project team:
Colin Pooley (Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University) Miles Tight (Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds) Tim Jones (Built Environment, Oxford Brookes University) Dave Horton (Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University) Griet Scheldeman (Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University) Ann Jopson (Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds) Caroline Mullen (Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds) Alison Chisholm (Built Environment, Oxford Brookes University) Emanuele Strano (Built Environment, Oxford Brookes University) Sheila Constantine (Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University)
Corresponding author:
Colin G Pooley Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YQ E-mail: [email protected] Tel: 01524 510241 Fax: 01524 510269 Understanding walking and cycling: Summary of key findings and recommendations
Further information:
Understanding Walking and Cycling Project: http://www.lec.lancs.ac.uk/research/society_and_environment/walking_and_cycling.php
This research was funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC grant EP/G00045X/1) From 1st October 2008 to 30th September 2011 © Lancaster University, September 2011 Contents
Section 1 Introduction Page 1 Section 2 The problem Page 1 Section 3 Aims and scope of the project Page 2 Section 4 Research methods Page 3 Section 5 Attitudes towards walking and cycling Page 5 Section 6 Physical environment factors influencing Page 8 walking and cycling Section 7 Household and family factors influencing Page 11 walking and cycling Section 8 Perceptions of normality Page 16 Section 9 Policy implications Page 17 Acknowledgements Page 21 References Page 21 Executive summary
It is widely recognized that there is a need to increase levels of active and sustainable travel in British urban areas. The Understanding Walking and Cycling (UWAC) project, funded by the EPSRC, has examined the factors influencing everyday travel decisions and proposes a series of policy measures to increase levels of walking and cycling for short trips in urban areas. A wide range of both quantitative and qualitative data were collected in four English towns (Leeds, Leicester, Worcester, Lancaster), including a questionnaire survey, analysis of the built environment, interviews and ethnographies. Key findings of the research are that whilst attitudes to walking and cycling are mostly positive or neu- tral, many people who would like to engage in more active travel fail to do so due to a combination of factors. These can be summarised as: ► Concerns about the physical environment, especially with regard to safety when walking or cycling; ► The difficulty of fitting walking and cycling into complex household routines (especially with young children); ► The perception that walking and cycling are in some ways abnormal things to do so. It is suggested that policies to increase levels of walking and cycling should focus not only on improving infrastructure (for instance through fully segregated cycle routes), but also must tackle broader social, economic, cultural and legal factors that currently inhibit walking and cycling. Together, such changes can create an environment in which driving for short trips in urban areas is seen as abnormal and walking or cycling seem the obvious choices.
One Introduction
This report provides a summary of the aims, methods and key findings arising from a three year EPSRC-funded research project on the role of walking and cycling for everyday travel in English urban areas. The project is a collaboration between the Universities of Lancaster, Leeds and Oxford Brookes and was funded from October 2008 to September 2011 as part of an EPSRC initiative to research walking and cycling as means of sustain- able urban transport. This report provides an overview of the project and summarises key findings and recommendations, with selected examples of evidence to support these results. It does not provide full evidence, but this will be made available in a series of forthcoming publications arising from the project.
Two The problem
Despite recent policies to promote more sustainable travel (for example, Cycle Demon- stration Towns, Smarter Choices and Travel Planning), British society remains heavily car dependent with many short urban trips being undertaken by car. It is often assumed that short trips could easily be made by bicycle or on foot (e.g., DfT, 2011 pg 5), and
Page 1 the statistics suggest that there are many short trips that could be converted. According to the National Travel Survey (2010) 36.1% of trips under 2 miles and 53.0% of journeys under 5 miles are undertaken by car, with walking accounting for 23.4% of all trips and cycling only 1.5% of all journeys. When compared to other European countries, whilst levels of walking are broadly similar, cycling in Britain is substantially less common than elsewhere. For instance in Sweden and Finland 9% of all trips are by bicycle, in Germany 10%, in Denmark 18% and in the Netherlands 26% (Pucher and Buehler, 2010). The re- search reported here suggests that assuming trips (in the UK) could be undertaken by bike or on foot just because they are short is a rather simplistic approach that fails to fully understand the nature of the problem. A purely distance based understanding of the problem ignores difficulties caused by the physical environment, complex household interactions and a perception that walking and cycling are not normal.
Sustainable and active travel is relatively uncommon in British towns and increased cy- cling and walking could significantly reduce congestion, improve the local environment including air quality, reduce transport-related greenhouse gas emissions and improve personal health. Despite investment of c£150m in promoting cycling in British towns and cities since 2005 the overall levels of utility cycling have scarcely changed and, as shown above, remain well below levels in comparable continental European countries. Most of the investment in cycling has been focused on physical infrastructure and train- ing schemes, but there is little understanding of how people make decisions about eve- ryday travel or why they respond poorly to initiatives that have been undertaken. The importance of understanding behaviour change has been highlighted in a recent House of Lords report (2011), and the potential benefits to society and environment from in- creased walking and cycling are substantial.
Aims and scope of the project Three
The overall aim of the research was to gain a clear understanding of the factors that struc- ture everyday travel in England and, especially, to investigate the reasons why people do and do not undertake short everyday journeys on foot or by bike. We identified six specific research aims: ► How are walking and cycling incorporated into everyday routines of families, households and individuals? ► How do walking and cycling as everyday means of transport interact with other modes? ► How are decisions about specific walking and cycling routes made? ► Do most individuals construct an identity of themselves and others as cyclists or walkers? ► How do specific interventions to promote cycling and walking affect everyday decision making about short-distance travel? ► How is the particular complexity and contingency of travel decision making with respect to cycling and walking best conveyed to planners and policy makers?
Page 2 Four Research methods
The project focused on four study areas: Leeds, Leicester, Worcester and Lancaster. These were selected to represent urban areas with a range of different characteristics and with varied levels of intervention to promote walking and cycling. Selected characteristics of the areas are summarised in Table 1.
A multi-method approach was used making innovative use of a range of quantitative and qualitative research tools. Four principal methods were employed: ► A questionnaire survey probing experience of and attitudes towards walking and cycling across all four towns ► Spatial analysis of connectivity and land use in the four study areas ► Household and mobile interviews (e.g. walking go-alongs) about everyday travel with respondents in the four study towns ► Household ethnographies in selected districts of the four towns
Two separate questionnaire schedules were prepared, one focusing on walking and one on cycling. Questions were designed to collect data on the experience of and attitudes towards either walking or cycling and were constructed to be analysed within the con- text of the Theory of Planned Behaviour. Walking or cycling questionnaires were sent to a sample of households in all four study areas stratified using location and the index of multiple deprivation to produce a cross-section of the population. There was no attempt to specifically target walkers or cyclists as the questionnaire focused mainly on attitudes and respondents were asked to complete the questionnaire irrespective of whether they walked or cycled. 15000 postal questionnaires were distributed evenly across the four ar- eas with a response rate of almost 10% giving 1,417 usable returns (798 walking and 619 cycling). The sample of respondents was broadly representative of the total population but with some over-representation of females (especially for the walking questionnaire), older age groups, car owners and those with a degree level qualification (especially for the cycling questionnaire).
Table 1: Selected characteristics of study towns Worcester Lancaster Leicester Leeds
*2001 census District population* 93,353 133,914 279,921 715,402 **English indices of depriva- Index of Multiple Deprivation** 185 135 23 114 tion 2007. Rank of average rank where 1 is most deprived and % non-white British ethnicity* 6 5 39 11 354 least deprived. Connect2 intervention X X X Sustainable Travel Town X X X Cycling Demonstration Town X X X
Page 3 Research methods
Spatial analysis of the four case study towns consisted of detailed land-use mapping and identification of the network of all routes that could be used for walking and cy- cling (which can differ significantly from the road network). Multiple Centrality Analysis was then used to assess connectivity within the city. Network buffers of 800 metres for walking and 2500 metres for cycling (roughly the average acceptable distance travelled over 10 minutes to access everyday activities) were developed and used to calculate local and global measures of connectivity as well as prevalence of everyday services within walking and cycling distance of the home. These indices could then be correlat- ed with self-reported data on levels of walking and cycling provided by the question- naire survey to assess the extent to which land use and connectivity influence levels of walking and cycling.
80 semi-structured interviews were undertaken with people selected (mainly) from their questionnaire responses to be broadly representative of the population structure and travelling characteristics of the population of each of the four towns. 40 interviews were undertaken in households and probed attitudes to walking and cycling and the reasons why people chose particular modes of travel, and 40 interviews were conducted as either walking or cycling ‘go-alongs’. Respondents were accompanied on a ‘usual’ journey and the interview focused on the motivations for travelling on foot or by bike, on route selec- tion and on the experience of the journey. Half of the mobile interviews were on foot and half were undertaken whilst cycling, and a small number of the cycle journeys were also recorded visually with a head cam.
Household ethnographies were undertaken with 20 households (5 in each town). In each urban area one location was selected – designed to reflect particular characteristics – and all respondents were recruited from that location. This allowed the researchers to im- merse themselves in the local community and begin to understand the ways in which people moved around. The purpose of the ethnography was to observe and understand the nature of everyday journeys within a community and this was done using a combina- tion of research tools including interviews, go-alongs, mobility inventories, observations, mapping exercises and community participation. The precise nature of the ethnographic research varied across the four districts in recognition of the need to engage different communities in particular ways. This flexibility in the face of local variability is one of the strengths of employing a multi-sited ethnographic method. Approximately three months were spent in each community and the interviews and ethnographies generated 262 separate transcripts and produced over 1.5 million words of text. All names cited in the text are pseudonyms.
Page 4 Five Attitudes towards walking and cycling
Public attitudes towards walking and cycling for short trips in urban areas were addressed both through the questionnaire survey and the qualitative data. As shown in tables 2 and 3 attitudes to walking and cycling were mostly positive, especially with regard to walking. Walking was most strongly and positively associated with enjoyment, personal health, saving money and reduced contributions to both local air pollution and climate change. The key negative association with walking was risk of being exposed to wet or windy weather, which was the top reason listed for not walking. Cycling was also posi- tively associated with health benefits, saving money and reduced contributions to local air pollution and climate change, but was rather less strongly associated with enjoyment. There were a number of negative associations with cycling, including need to negotiate difficult road junctions, cycling being a bad experience using existing roads and desire for more cycle lanes to feel safer, which together indicate notable safety concerns. Indeed poor safety was one of the key reasons for not cycling expressed by approximately 80% of respondents. Other negative associations which together with safety concerns are likely to explain the reduced enjoyment of cycling relative to walking were cycling being too
Table 2: Attitudes to walking If I make, or were to make, Leicester Lancaster Leeds Worcester journeys on foot: N=167 N=244 N=200 N=187 1= strongly agree; 3= neutral; 5= strongly disagree I would find walking enjoyable 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.9 Neutral scores are in the range of 2.8 to 3.2 I would get a sense of freedom 2.0 2.1 2.1 2.0 I would feel part of my community 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 I would find it relaxing 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.0 It would benefit my health 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 It would save me money 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.1 It would be a be a bad experience 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.8 using the existing footpaths It would mean I contribute less 2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 to climate change It would be too much physical effort 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.9 It would more than likely expose me 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.3 to wet or windy weather It would mean I contribute less to 1.9 2.1 2.0 1.9 local air pollution It would take me too long 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.9 I would be safe when crossing 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.4 the road
Page 5 Attitudes towards walking and cycling much physical effort, risk of one’s bike being stolen whilst parked and risk of exposure to bad weather. Results were generally consistent across all four study areas. This sug- gests that while there are negative associations with walking or cycling these are prima- rily external to the individual, relating instead to the environment, especially the built environment. The implication being, that these negative associations could in the main be reversed through appropriate engineering measures. The positive associations how- ever are primarily intrinsic and personal, and would require more complex interventions to build on them. This was also emphasised by interview respondents with the views of Molly on walking in Leicester being typical: ‘I like to think through the day, talking to myself and planning for the next day, it’s a thinking and planning activity. Very relaxing, wind away all the stress and pressures of the day’. The in-depth ethnographies also emphasised that while overall views about walking and cycling were similar in the four case study towns, there were significant differences between localities both within and between settle- ments, and that place and culture can be very significant.
If I make, or were to make, Leicester Lancaster Leeds Worcester Table 3: Attitudes to cycling journeys by bicycle: N=121 N=193 N=175 N=130 1= strongly agree; 3= neutral; I would find cycling enjoyable 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.3 5= strongly disagree Neutral scores are in the range I would get a sense of freedom 2.3 2.3 2.4 2.2 of 2.8 to 3.2 I would feel part of my community 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.0 I would find it relaxing 2.6 2.5 2.7 2.6 More cycle lanes would make me 1.8 2.0 1.9 1.9 feel safer It would benefit ym health 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.7 It would save me money 1.7 2.1 2.1 1.8 It would be a be a bad experience 2.5 2.5 2.3 2.4 using the existing roads It would mean I contribute less 2.0 2.1 2.0 2.0 to climate change It would be too much physical effort 3.4 3.4 3.1 3.3 It would more than likely expose me 2.1 2.1 2.0 2.1 to wet or windy weather It would mean I contribute less to 1.8 1.9 1.9 1.9 local air pollution It would take me too long 2.9 2.9 2.5 2.8 It would put my bike at risk of 2.7 2.8 2.4 2.5 being stolen whilst parked It would mean I have to negotiate 2.3 2.4 2.0 2.3 difficult road junctions
Page 6 Attitudes towards walking and cycling
Qualitative data were analysed using Q methodology (Watts and Stenner, 2005; Eden et al 2005). This is a systematic approach to explore and summarise the discourses that are prevalent in the interview transcripts. Initially, a sample of 50 statements (or viewpoints) from the interviews covering the most pertinent topics were selected. 25 participants in our case study towns were asked to sort (rank order) these statements in relation to their level of agreement or disagreement with each. The 25 sorts were then subjected to factor analysis to identify clusters of interrelating variables or participants’ sorts. Using a varimax rotation three factors were identified as significant which together explained 42% of the variance. Each of the factors was interpreted and summarised according to the compo- nent loadings from the original statements and were described as follows: ► Cycling sanctifiers (17% of the variance) – this discourse reveals a strong moral pro cy- cling stance. Cycling is regarded as providing ultimate freedom and more convenient access across the city (even than by car). People who subscribe to this discourse are con- fident cycling in traffic and are reluctant to see the implementation of segregated cycle infrastructure if this leads to the erosion of cyclists’ right to use the road. ► Pedestrian prioritizers (16% of the variance) – this discourse reflects the very positive and ‘normal’ image of walking as a means of travel to get from place to place and because of the desire to see more priority given to people moving on foot in cities. People who sub- scribe to this discourse are not car averse – they own and drive cars themselves – but wish to see more restrictions placed on the use (and cultural symbolism) of cars in urban areas. There is also the desire for segregated cycle paths which are perceived to benefit people travelling on foot (reduced danger/conflict because of pavement cycling) and cyclists (re- duced danger/conflict because of motor traffic). ► Automobile adherents (9% of the variance) – this discourse is most satisfied with the present car system and is underpinned by the belief that people have a choice of how to travel around and it is up to them to exercise it. Walking is regarded as a leisure activity and cycling practiced by enthusiasts or by committed environmentalist. People who sub- scribe to this discourse are against any measures that infringe their liberty to drive such as traffic calming even if this could improve conditions for walking and cycling. Indeed, this discourse suggests that walkers and cyclists should take more responsibility for their own safety when moving around the city.
While the data may be making the obvious statement that some people are committed cyclists, some prefer walking and some are wedded to the car, perhaps the more interest- ing implication is that 58% of the total variance is not explained by these ‘mobility iden- tities’. We argue that it is this large unexplained variance on which we need to focus in order to understand the factors that influence the travel decisions of people who are not currently committed to a particular form of travel, and who thus may be more open to changing their travel behaviour than those with a strong mobility identity. The remainder of this report used a range of data to explore such factors in more detail.
Page 7 Attitudes towards walking and cycling
One factor that it is important to bear in mind is the gap that often exists between the values and attitudes that people have and their actual behaviour. Much policy in a range of areas (for instance climate change, health promotion, sustainable travel) works on the premise that if people’s attitudes and values can be changed they will also alter their behaviour and make choices that are (for instance) good for their health or the environment. However, research has shown that there is often a ‘value –action gap’ (Shove 2010) and that having attitudes and values that identify with more sustainable travel or healthy living does not mean that these beliefs are carried through into everyday life. Many different barriers and constraints intervene to create an environment where people who profess to support walking and cy- cling actually use their car for most trips. In the sections that follow we use data from the research to examine the ways in which such factors influence short trips in urban areas.
Physical environment factors influencing Six levels of walking and cycling
Although we have little control over some aspects of the physical environment (such as the weather or topography) that may deter pedestrians or cyclists, there are other aspects that can be changed. Two sets of factors relating to the physical environment can be identified as important. Planners and researchers of the built environment place considerable em- phasis on the connectivity of places and the permeability of the urban environment (Naess, 2006; Van Dyck et al, 2008). In other words, if places are well connected and it is easy to travel by bike or on foot between them, then levels of walking and cycling should increase. The second key factor is risk. If the physical environment is perceived as potentially danger- ous for any reason, then people are likely to be much less inclined to travel through that area on foot or on a bike, and will either avoid what they perceive as risky locations or will travel in the security of their car (Pucher and Dijkstra, 2003; Jacobsen et al 2009).
The association between street connectivity and availability and mix of activities in prox- imity to the home with frequency of walking and cycling was investigated. GIS was used to include all cycle and walking routes that could be reasonably used (deduced from both map and field evidence) on the Ordnance Survey Integrated Transport Layer for the four cities. A street network buffer of 800m for walking and 2400m for cycling was drawn around the homes of respondents to the questionnaire survey. This was based on the average distance travelled over an ‘acceptable 10 minute journey time’. Multiple Centrality Analysis (MCA), which calculates the shortest paths between nodes (intersec- tions) across the whole network, was used to produce indices of ‘betweeness’, ‘close- ness’ and ‘straightness’ and provided an indication of ‘global connectivity’ by estimating values within each buffer. Measures of ‘local connectivity’ included intersection density, network density and average number of junctions at each intersection within each buff- er. Ordnance Survey Address Layer 2 and associated Base Function data were used to
Page 8 Physical environment factors influencing levels of walking and cycling
classify ten different land use typologies and prevalence and diversity were measured within each buffer. The frequency of walking and cycling journeys recorded in the ques- tionnaire survey was then correlated with the land use and connectivity measures. The analysis demonstrated that there was a significant positive correlation between walking trips and city-wide (global) and local measures of connectivity but that this was gener- ally weak (r=.06 intersection density to .16 betweeness). There was also a weak posi- tive correlation between prevalence and diversity of activities within walking distance of the home. For cycling, no correlation was found between any of the global or local connectivity measures or with the prevalence or diversity of activities within ‘accept- able’ cycling distance. This suggests that the connectivity of the street network and the availability of everyday activities within walking and cycling distance of the home are insufficient on their own to encourage walking and (particularly) cycling. This is not to suggest that they are unimportant, but that other factors may militate against their use as we discuss below.
There is clear evidence from the qualitative research that perceptions of risk were a major factor influencing everyday travel decisions. This was true for both cyclists and walkers but the nature of the perceived risk differed. Cyclists were most concerned about dangers from motorised traffic, and this finding was supported by the quantative analysis, but walkers were most concerned about threats from other people in a poorly supervised urban environment. Box 1 provides a small selection of quotes from the qualitative data to support these views. Interestingly the questionnaire survey provided a slightly different perspective on threats from other people in that most respondents stated that fear of being attacked was only rarely or never a concern with regard to making a journey on foot. There was a small (but significant) correlation with female gender (with women more fearful) but these views were consistent across all four study sites. Likewise, there is a small but significant negative correlation between fear of at- tack when it is dark and frequency of walking, which reflects concerns about walking at night expressed in Box 1. There are two related explanations for the apparent difference in response. First, in the questionnaire respondents were asked if risk from people was a concern for them if making a trip on foot. If they rarely made such trips then such factors may not have been on their radar. Second, committed walkers who travelled regularly on foot were not prevented from travelling in this way, but this does not mean that they did not experience concerns. It was these concerns that were expressed in the qualita- tive data.
Page 9 Physical environment factors influencing levels of walking and cycling
I am not comfortable at all with cycling. I am always scared of the traffic around me. Box 1: Physical factors (Molly, Leicester) influencing cycling and walking As a cyclist you’re not really recognized as a road user but you can’t use the foot- paths so its bit frustrating. (Raj, Leicester) My ideal would be if it were possible, transport wise, for cycle paths to be absolutely physically removed from roads as in a proper kerb separating cyclists from traffic so that cyclists didn’t have to use the pavement but weren’t sharing the road with cars then cycling would definitely be an option and I’d find ways around the other incon- veniences of cycling. But as I say, with cyclists having to mix with traffic it just seems crazy. (Holly, Lancaster) I wouldn’t tend to go walking at night generally. (June,Worcester) I feel safer going through that street where there’s a lot more people around, rather than that road where you’ve got the cars but you don’t really have many people walking it. (Patrick, Leeds). I feel very vulnerable walking some places because I can’t run. (Jen, Worcester) There’s some places I wouldn’t go on my own. And there are some places I perhaps would go if I was in a car. (Dick, Leicester)
To summarise, from our analysis of the influence of the physical environment on walk- ing and cycling it is clear that traffic is a major deterrent for all but the most committed cyclists. Potential cyclists, recreational (off-road) cyclists and occasional cyclists are dis- couraged from using their bicycles for everyday urban journeys because of their fear of cars and heavy goods vehicles. For pedestrians, the major factor relates to footfall. Empty streets are perceived to be more dangerous and, again, although committed walkers are not deterred many potential or recreational walkers restrict their journeys on foot be- cause of their perception of risk. For both walking and cycling the availability of local facilities and the structure of the built environment, although not unimportant, were not major factors determining levels of walking and cycling.
Page 10 Seven Household and family factors influencing levels of walking and cycling
Over the last half century household structures in Britain have become increasingly com- plex with a greater incidence of divorce or separation, while increased pressures of work and time (especially in dual-career and lone parent households) have further reshaped household dynamics (Buzar et al, 2005; Southerton, 2002). Evidence from the question- naire survey, interviews and ethnographies collected for this research shows that the complexities and constraints of everyday life, constructed around household, family and work commitments, are major factors which influence the ability of some people who may have an inclination or intention to walk or cycle for short trips to actually use this method of transport on a daily basis. For many families it just becomes too difficult to organise themselves for more sustainable modes of travel, and using the car becomes an easy default option even for very short journeys. The extent to which the need to trip
Table 4: Household constraints on walking and cycling (%) How often are you unable to make a journey: on foot by bicycle Because you need to give a lift to a child Source: Questionnaire survey, 2009 Often 17.5 21.1 Sometimes 22.4 18.4 Rarely 9.3 9.2 Never 36.6 31.6 Not applicable 14.2 19.7
Because you need to give a lift to an older person:
Often 6.5 15.6 Sometimes 17.3 15.6 Rarely 25.4 14.9 Never 40.0 31.9 Not applicable 10.8 22.7
Because you need to give a lift to someone else you care for:
Often 8.6 11.8 Sometimes 20.5 22.9 Rarely 16.8 11.1 Never 39.5 31.4 Not applicable 14.6 22.9
Page 11 chain forms a barrier to walking and cycling is a reflection of this (76% of respondents to the walking questionnaire who provided details of trip chaining (n=492) said it pre- vented them from walking at least some of the time, and 53% of cycling respondents who provided details (n=399) said the same). While there are households, including some of our respondents, who do successfully embed walking and cycling into busy lives, at present these are a distinct minority and may be perceived as making unusual lifestyle choices. Many different factors are important, and most interact with each other, but key issues include the presence of young children or elderly relatives with constraints on their mobility, ill health, the complexities of multi-purpose journeys, time pressures, and lack of space for storing cycles or walking clothes and shoes. Perceptions of risk, as outlined above, also interact with family and household factors as risks may be perceived to affect particular family members differentially.
Table 4 summarises responses from the questionnaire on the degree to which other family or household members may constrain travel. Approximately 40% of respondents sometimes or often were unable to make a trip on foot or by bicycle because of the pres- ence of a child and 25-30% of respondents found that their mobility choices were con- strained by either an elderly person or someone else for whom they cared. In the context of cities designed and built for cars much more than for cycling and walking, car use has for many households become both normal and easy, while walking and cycling are not. In such a context, a household’s structure and related commitments become significant factors in influencing the mode of transport chosen for a trip, with the convenience of the car – should one be available – often becoming the decisive factor.
Such points are made even more effectively via the qualitative data collected from in- terviews and ethnographies. Almost all households with young children gave examples of the ways in which the presence of children to some extent either restricted travel or made it more complicated. Box 2 summarises a small selection of relevant quotations from across the four study areas. It is important to stress that many families did man- age to travel sustainably with young children, but as the interchange in Box 3 shows, re- corded during an ethnographic intervention, a simple journey with three small children can take a considerable amount of organisation and negotiation. For many parents this is just too much trouble and putting the children in the car for even a very short journey becomes the easier option. Such families may have aspirations to travel sustainably, but the complexities and constraints of everyday life imposed by family, time pressures and a busy schedule mean that forms of travel that are perceived to be more difficult to ac- complish are only rarely executed. For such families, switching trips from cars to walking and cycling is less about changing attitudes and much more about making walking and cycling easier to accomplish in the context of busy everyday lives.
Page 12 Household and family factors influencing levels of walking and cycling
Box 2: Family and household We’d like to [cycle more] but when children are smaller it’s actually, there’s very few constraints on walking and places where they can safely cycle, in terms of roads … [Cycling as a family] … that’s cycling very difficult while my youngest is still on stabilizers and not confident. I don’t want to put her on a road with much traffic. (Jason Leicester) Children influence walking routes (both through wanting (insisting) to go a particu- lar way and through parents wanting to take them a nicer/safer/less polluted way). (Hailey, Leeds) As the kids got older they liked it [walking] less and less. (Dick, Leicester).
[When you have children] You don’t have any sleep and you just can’t do it [¾ of an hour journey each way]. You can’t get up at half six every day and go to work. (Cassie, Leicester) With the demands of family and work and everything there’s not much time or en- ergy [for walking and cycling]. (Percy, Worcester) Usually I go with the car because of convenience, less time, because sometimes J [age 3] is tired when I pick him up from nursery and I would have to carry him, and I have my books as well, and when there’s two of them… In the week [I use the car] for two days a week, at some point I might even try just walk with the kids, but it’s usu- ally because with the two kids they have different energies, and R runs and J is a bit more like staying here and hanging round here and there, so that creates some kind of tension and also I’m on pressure to get on time to work, then it’s really much more convenient to just strap them on the seats and take them and leave them and that’s it. Apart from that I would just walk. (Don, Lancaster)
One reason why walking and cycling are often seen as difficult is because of the require- ment for a range of kit and outdoor clothes to be readily available. If a bicycle has to be taken from a locked shed and wheeled through the house, or if outdoor clothes and shoes have to be gathered from four corners of the home, this is a major disincentive to travelling by bike or on foot. Travel by car requires a minimum of outdoor clothes or equipment and the complexities of running a car are, for most people, a taken-for grant- ed aspect of modern life. Such views were expressed by a number of respondents during the ethnographic fieldwork which included ‘mobility inventories’ of where people stored the things needed for travelling by bike or on foot. Box 4 gives just two examples from Lancaster respondents. Again, what these quotes stress is that policies to develop more sustainable travel patterns are not just about changing attitudes or even the physical en- vironment. They also have implications for housing policy and the provision of adequate
Page 13 Household and family factors influencing levels of walking and cycling
Linda: The water bottle is just by your pop-up book, do you want me to carry? Box 3: Extract from Ethnographic Tell me what you want me to carry, tell me what you want to carry.… go-along in Lancaster (two parents (Linda and Paul) and Mick: Where’s my book bag dad? three children (Mick, James and Linda: Oh I’ve got it underneath the pram do you want me to hold it? Rebecca)) Or would you like to hold it? Mick: I want to hold it. … Linda: Come on then (puts Rebecca in pushchair) Mick: I can hold my water bottle actually. Linda: No I’ll put it in my bag James, it’s going to get wet. Paul: You are going to have to walk quickly today. Linda: Come on lets put that in your; I’ll remind you of it when we get there (Rebecca cries) James let me help you. Careful. I’ll give it to you when we get there. Come on. Paul: The dog stays here; he helps me work. Linda: Right OK guys. Mick do your coat up please it’s really wet. Paul: See you later guys All: See you Linda: Do you want to take this umbrella? There’s an umbrella Mick do you want that one?
Yes. One of the important things about bikes is having ready access to them I find. Box 4: Issues of storage and I’ve just been fixing up a bike for a friend and I said you have to make it somewhere organisation where you can get at it quickly otherwise you won’t use it. It has to be somewhere where a couple of seconds and it’s ready rather than having to go in the shed and have to do it and have to do this and have to do that, so it’s there. (Fred, Lancaster) J goes to work in Morecambe and endeavours to go on her bike or on the train when- ever possible. And that’s often down to weather, or whether there are any jobs to do on the way back or places to go where public transport and the like is not possible … We both try and walk, J cycles whenever we possibly can, I obviously walk and use public transport, then this again would apply to both of us and the boys of course as well. This is if you are walking or using public transport we need to be equipped so I have set up waterproofs, coat, trousers, waterproof trousers, hats of various varie- ties depending on cold, sun, rain; shoes. (Tom, Lancaster)
Page 14 Household and family factors influencing levels of walking and cycling
storage space for cycles and outdoor clothes in all homes. Those families that travelled regularly by bike or on foot had taken steps to organize their lives in such a way that walk- ing and cycling were easy.
Concerns about safety relate not only to the nature of the physical environment, but also reflect perceptions of responsibility for the safety of children and other family members. Thus, a physical environment which might be quite acceptable to a single person with- out responsibility for others, may be perceived as unacceptably risky to a parent who may be concerned not only for the welfare of their child but also for their own safety and the impact of an accident on their dependents. Many respondents expressed concerns about the safety of children cycling (Box 5 gives just 2 examples) and the testimony of Brian is particularly telling as although he is himself a keen cyclist he questions the value of the cycle training provided for children as he is not comfortable with them cycling in current road conditions.
Box 5: Parental attitudes to risk There’s just no way I’d cycle in the city centre, and there’s no way I’d let my kids cycle there either. It’s Too dangerous. (Sandra, Leeds) Of course I want my kids to cycle. I love cycling. They can get free training which’ll make them better cyclists. But a big part of me hates the idea of them riding on the roads, so I do wonder why we’re bothering to teach them. It’s like creating a false expectation, isn’t it? (Brian, Lancaster)
To summarise, our research shows that, under the conditions which currently prevail across urban Britain, household and family commitments are significant factors in re- stricting the extent to which people use walking and cycling for everyday travel, even when their own values and attitudes incline them towards more sustainable forms of transport. For most people there is no single factor that restricts the use of more sus- tainable travel modes, rather it is a combination of circumstances including the logistics of organising and moving with (sometimes tired) children, pressures of time and other commitments, the ready availability of the paraphernalia needed for walking and cycling and parental concerns about safety. Unless such factors are explicitly recognised and tackled, strategies to increase levels of walking and cycling for everyday trips are likely to have limited success.
Page 15 Perceptions of normality Eight
Most people prefer not to stand out as different, but tend to adopt norms of behaviour that fit in and reflect the majority experience. In Britain, travelling by car is the default po- sition for most people (over 60% of all trips are by car) and car ownership and use is seen as normal. Although in the questionnaire survey attitudes to walking and cycling were mostly neutral or positive, qualitative evidence makes it very clear that for many people a combination of the ease and normality of car travel makes this the most obvious means of travel on many occasions. A few respondents expressed quite strong views that if you did not own and use a car you were not perceived to be ‘normal’, but more commonly the feelings expressed centred more on the fact that using a car for short everyday travel was what most people did, and to do anything different was, on most occasions, just too difficult. The combination of travelling in a way that was different from most people, of wearing what might be viewed as odd clothes, or of arriving slightly dishevelled from a walk or cycle ride were all too difficult to negotiate and deal with for many people. A se- lection of such views is presented in Box 6.
The whole thing with transport and not having a car, I do feel like a second class Box 6: Images associated with citizen, there’s definitely a sense that as a pedestrian and a cyclist you are definitely walking and cycling second class citizens. (Jim, Lancaster) People still assume that there’s something wrong with you if you don’t drive. (Bob, Leeds) The general reaction or when I say I cycle to work or whatever they say ‘oh do you’ as though it’s unusual. (Don, Worcester) You do get a sense of some people thinking oh, you’re a bit weird because you’re go- ing up on the bike you know. A bit odd. (Sally, Worcester) It’s not a cool thing for a girl to be on a bike. (Anju, Leicester) I probably would cycle if I didn’t worry so much about image and public opinion - me arriving at a meeting hot and sweaty. (Joe, Leicester) The [cycle] helmet is a problem for me. Because … I just think it would make my hair a little squashed. (Lara, Leeds) Walking boots and skirts and bare legs in summer are out – in winter I’ll wear boots with trousers. (Jan, Leeds) I get called the bag lady, because I walk everywhere and I have quite a lot of stuff with me. (Steph, Leeds)
Page 16 Perceptions of normality
The significance of such issues in influencing people’s everyday travel decisions should not be underestimated and the regular use of a means of transport that presents a com- bination of physical (risk, topography, weather), familial (children, household routines) and societal (image) difficulties is a challenge that is very difficult for people to overcome – even those with strong environmental values. At the moment there is a vicious circle where the physical and household barriers to walking and cycling mean that relatively few people travel on foot or by bike and thus to do so seems abnormal, thus increasing the difficulty for many. There is clearly need to move towards a virtuous circle where the physical environment is made as welcoming as possible, and walking and cycling are made as easy as possible so that more people engage in sustainable travel, thus making walking and cycling seem normal. In this way the negative images expressed by respond- ents (Box 6) are likely to be dispelled.
Our research makes clear that the extent to which a household finds it difficult to incor- porate walking and/or cycling journeys into its everyday routines reflects the degree to which car use has become normal, and habitual. We suggest that as walking and cycling are made more normal, more households will develop more strategies and systems to more easily accommodate walking and cycling into their ordinary, everyday movements. Ethnographic observations of households in which walking and cycling, and not driving, were usual modes of transport demonstrate this to be the case.
Nine Policy implications
The key message that comes from this research is that at present in Britain using the car for short trips in urban areas is convenient, habitual and normal. It is what people expect to do, what most people expect others to do and what many other people who have yet to benefit from car ownership aspire to do. Alternatives to the car – especially cycling and walking – are perceived to take too much effort, need planning and equipment that causes hassle, and may be risky and uncomfortable. They also run the risk of being per- ceived by others as eccentric or odd. These are all powerful reasons for not walking and cycling and for using the car for most short trips in urban areas.
Solutions to this conundrum are obvious but difficult to implement because they require integrated policy and extend well beyond the usual remit of transport policy and plan- ning. It is argued that to achieve any significant increase in levels of walking and cycling it is necessary to reverse the balance of power embedded in the issues outlined above. In short, it is necessary to make travel by car for short trips in urban areas more difficult and, most crucial, make it feel abnormal and exceptional. In contrast, policies have to be put in place that make walking and cycling easy, safe, comfortable, and accepted as the normal and obvious way of moving around urban areas for most people.
Page 17 This message is not anti-car ownership, but it is arguing for a significant reduction in car use for short trips in urban areas. There will remain journeys for which a car is necessary, and individuals who due to poor health or infirmity cannot walk or cycle. But for much of the population switching to more sustainable forms of transport for many journeys is entirely feasible if such forms of transport are made accessible, safe and routine. The aim is to achieve responsible car use.
We identify several specific areas where policy change is needed. None of these is easy, and neither can they be treated as a set of independent or discrete measures. To be effec- tive, they need to be viewed in the context of a long-term and substantial shift in priori- ties of actors at multiple levels of local and national government, as well as of employers, communities and voluntary organizations. However, the measures proposed have been at least partially achieved, by a variety of different means, in many cities in other north- ern European countries (The Netherlands, Denmark, Belgium, Sweden, and Germany). In combination these proposals are aimed at providing the best possible walking and cy- cling environment (both physical and cultural) on all routes. In summary, they challenge the degree to which British society is locked in to car use in urban areas, and they provide strategies through which people can comfortably find alternative means of everyday travel for short trips. Table 5 summarises these policies and responsibilities and they are spelled out in more detail below.
First, it is essential that the urban environment is made safe for cyclists and pedestrians. This requires the provision of fully segregated cycle routes on all arterial and other busy roads in urban areas. It is clear from the research that most non-cyclists and recreational cyclists will only consider cycling regularly if they are segregated from traffic, and that pedestrians are hostile to pavement cyclists.
Second, pedestrian routes must be made as welcoming as possible to increase footfall. This could include widening pavements, removing street furniture that obstructs pave- ments and ensuring that pavements are well lit, well maintained and kept free of leaves and ice.
Third, there need to be effective restrictions on traffic speeds, parking and access on all residential roads and other routes without segregated cycle and pedestrian paths so that both cyclists and pedestrians feel that they have a safe and convenient environment in which to travel. This could include 20mph speed limits and resident-only access by car in some areas.
Fourth, the system of legal liability on roads used by the public should be changed to protect the most vulnerable road users (cyclists and pedestrians). One approach would be to adopt ‘strict liability’ so that pedestrians or cyclists injured in an accident involv- ing a motor vehicle do not have to prove fault in seeking compensation. Forms of ‘strict liability’ are adopted in much of continental Europe and while not changing criminal
Page 18 Policy implications
responsibility they place a civil responsibility on drivers to obtain insurance that will pay vulnerable victims independently of fault. This may act as an incentive for car driv- ers to behave in a way that protects the most vulnerable road users.
Fifth, there need to be changes in the spatial structure and organisation of the built en- vironment, enforced through planning legislation, to make accessing common services and facilities on foot or by bike easy. This would require the development of more neigh- bourhood shopping centres within walking or cycling distance of most people, restric- tions on out-of-town developments, provision of secure bicycle parking facilities and the provision of cycle storage in most homes.
Sixth, there need to be wider societal and economic changes to give people the flexibility to travel more sustainably. Polices (that already exist in many countries) could include the greater use of flexi hours so that walking and cycling could be more easily fitted into a household routine, more family-friendly welfare policies so that in families with small children one parent could afford to reduce working hours and thus be less constrained by time commitments, and more equitable educational provision so that most children attend a school close to home.
Seventh, it is necessary to change the image of cycling and walking. To a great extent this should be consequential on the above changes: as more people walk and cycle then more people will accept it as normal. However, campaigns to promote walking and cy- cling as normal and something accessible to all and not dominated by super-fit or unusu- ally committed specialists should also be adopted.
In summary, there are a number of different ways in which the above objectives could be achieved – and different solutions may be applicable in particular places – but three key points underpin our policy proposals.
First, it should not be assumed that it is sufficient to change attitudes and make people more environmentally aware. It is necessary also to make the changes that enable people to translate these values into actions.
Second, do not base policies about walking and cycling on the views and experiences of existing committed cyclists and pedestrians. These are a minority who have, against all the odds, successfully negotiated a hostile urban environment to incorporate walk- ing and cycling into their everyday routines. It is necessary to talk – as we have done - to non-walkers and non-cyclists, potential cyclist and walkers, former cyclists and walkers, recreational cyclists and occasional walkers to determine what would encourage them to make more use of these transport modes.
Page 19 Third, it should be recognized that while physical infrastructure is important, it is not on its own sufficient. There is also need for an integrated policy that embraces social welfare, employment, housing, health, and education amongst other policy areas to create a to- tal environment that is welcoming for cyclists and pedestrians.
We recognize that the scale of changes proposed may seem daunting. The measures proposed cannot be achieved overnight – though some could be implemented quite quickly – but achieving transition to a society where walking and cycling is normal should be seen as a long-term project which creates more sustainable urban environ- ments for future generations.
Policy goal Main responsibility Example policy measures Table 5: Summary of proposed policy implications Create a safe physical environ- Local Authorities, voluntary Fully segregated cycle paths ment for pedestrians and cyclists and community agencies Restrictions on vehicle speeds where most people feel and access comfortable either walking or Pavement widening cycling. Effective pavement mainte- nance and cleaning
Encourage motorists to be National Government Adopt ‘strict’ liability for more aware of the vulnerability motorists as is found in much of pedestrians and cyclists and of continental Europe thus reduce perceptions of risk associated with active travel
Reduce trip distances in urban Local Authorities, private Restrict out-of-town retail areas by providing more retail, businesses, voluntary and developments social and educational community agencies Strict land-use planning control facilities close to residential Encourage development of areas, and facilitate access to neighbourhood and such services. community-based facilities Provide cycle parking and storage facilities
Create a social and economic National Government, More flexible orkw ing hours for environment in which active Local Authorities, parents of young children travel (walking or cycling) is employers, voluntary and Family-friendly welfare policies seen as achievable by most community agencies Community-based schemes for people for short trips in child care, school transport etc. urban areas Cycle storage facilities in all homes
Promote the normality of Local Authorities, National Campaigns to demonstrate that walking and cycling Government, voluntary and walking and cycling are not community agencies, media, only for super-fit specialists but employers, educators are to some degree possible for most people for some journeys
Page 20 Acknowledgements
Thanks to all the people who willingly gave up their time to be interviewed, to be accom- panied and to be observed during their daily journeys. Additional research assistance on the project was provided by Helen Harwatt, Helen Muir, Tony Whiteing, Matthew Page and Emma Bill. Assistance with coding and data entry was provided by Anna Tarrant, Emily Bowes and Michaela Edwards. Research for this project was funded by the EPSRC. Publication design by Simon Chew, Lancaster Environment Centre, Cartographic Unit.
References
Buzar, S., Ogden, P. and Hall, R. (2005) Households matter: the quiet demography of urban transformation: Progress in Human Geography 29, 413-36. Department for Transport (2010) National Travel Survey 2009, London: DfT Department for Transport (2011), Creating Growth, Cutting Carbon, Making Sustainable Local Transport Happen, White Paper Cm 7996, London: Department for Transport. http://www2.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/sustainabletransport Eden, S. , Donaldson, A. and Walker, G. (2005) ‘Structuring subjectivities? Using Q meth- odology in human geography’ Area 37, 413-22 House of Lords Science and Technology Select Committee (2011) Behaviour Change Report, London: TSO. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201012/ldselect/ldsctech/179/179.pdf Jacobsen, P., Racioppi, F. and Rutter, H. (2009) ‘Who owns the roads? How motorised traf- fic discourages walking and bicycling’ Injury Prevention 15, 369-73. Naess, P. (2006) Urban Structure Matters. RTPI Press. Pucher, J. and Buehler, R. (2010) ‘Walking and cycling for healthy cities’ Built Environment 36, 391-414 Pucher, J. and Dijkstra, L. (2003) ‘Promoting safe walking and cycling to improve public health: lessons from The Netherlands and Germany’ American Journal of Public Health 93, 1509-16. Shove, E. (2010) ‘Beyond the ABC: climate change policies and theories of social change’ Environment and Planning A 42, 1273-85 Southerton, D. (2002) Squeezing time: allocating practices, coordinating networks and scheduling society Time and Society 12, 5-25. Van Dyck et al. (2009) Neighbourhood walkability and its particular importance for adults with a preference for passive transport Health and Place 15, 496-504 Watts, S. and Stenner, P. (2005) ‘Doing Q methodology: theory, method and interpretation’ Qualitative Research in Psychology 2, 67-91
Page 21 This ReportThis on 100% recycled paper. is Printed
www.lec.lancs.ac.uk/research/society_and_environment/walking_and_cycling
APPENDIX D
Investigation into cycling in London
Transport Committee
Introduction Background
This investigation will examine the Mayor and TfL’s plans Cycling in London: safety facts to improve cycling safety, and look ahead to the longer- term solutions that could help London achieve the Mayor’s Concern about safety is the reason most often given by increased target to encourage more people to cycle. non-cyclists to explain why they do not intend to take up cycling.1 Introduction The purpose of the Committee’s investigation will be to: draw together concerns about cycling in London; assess Cyclists’ safety has been a growing concern over the past the feasibility of potential solutions; examine the level of year following the deaths of 16 cyclists in London in 2011. Background resources invested in cycling safety improvements; and The numbers of cyclists killed or seriously injured (KSIs) in hold the Mayor and TfL to account for the delivery of London have failed to reduce in line with TfL targets, and promised improvements. have increased in the past two years. Between 2009 and Questions for the review 2010 KSIs fell by 18 per cent, under half of TfL’s 50 per Terms of reference cent target. Cyclist fatalities in London increased between
The terms of reference for this investigation are: 2010 and 2011 from 10 to 16. Prior to 2011, the trend How to contribute had been for annual reductions in the number of cyclists
To understand the issues facing current cyclists and killed although both serious and slight injuries to cyclists About the Committee the barriers to potential cyclists; rose between 2009 and 2010.
To examine the plans proposed by the Mayor and Renewed calls on the Mayor and TfL to take further action TfL to improve cycling safety and increase cycling to improve cycling safety have resulted in a TfL review of modal share; and 500 junctions, prioritising improvements at Bow To generate recommendations to the Mayor and Roundabout, where two cyclists were killed on Cycle TfL to improve the cycling environment and cycle Superhighway 2. safety in London.
This paper provides further information about this 1 Cycle Attitudes report (2009) as cited in TfL Cycle Safety Action Plan investigation. 2010, p. 8
1
Investigation into cycling in London
Transport Committee
Cycling organisations have called on the Mayor to make 2010 marked the Mayor’s ‘Year of Cycling’ and saw the significant infrastructure improvements to offer better introduction of the Cycle Superhighways and the Cycle protection to cyclists. Ahead of the election, the Mayor Hire scheme to encourage cycling in Central London and pledged to introduce a number of safety-enhancing along commuter routes. In outer London, TfL has funded measures within his first 100 days in office, i.e. by 13 13 ‘biking boroughs’, supporting local plans to improve August 2012.2 cycling and safety. TfL is also taking action on Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) to improve driver awareness. Introduction The Mayor’s cycling vision and initiatives Relevant past work Currently, trips by bicycle make up just around 2 per cent Background of all journeys. The Mayor’s vision in his Transport Strategy This investigation will build on previous work on cycling is for a ‘cycling revolution’ in which the number of cycle undertaken by the Transport Committee on the Barclays journeys in London will increase by 400 per cent by 2026 Cycle Hire Scheme and Cycle Superhighways (2010), cycle Questions for the review (with 5 per cent modal share), and cycling will be safer. parking (2009), London Cycle Network + (2005). Its report on 20mph speed limits (Braking Point, 2009) is also These twin aims come together in the Mayor’s Cycle Safety relevant to this work. How to contribute Action Plan, stating that “one of the most effective strategies to increase the safety of cycling may be to How the Committee could conduct this investigation encourage more cycling and more cyclists.” However, some About the Committee stakeholder groups take the opposite view, suggesting that The Committee will investigate this topic over two more Londoners are likely to cycle only once significant meetings. Its first meeting on 12 July 2012 could be used safety improvements have been made. to discuss concerns about cycling in London and potential solutions with cycling stakeholders and members of the public.3 This meeting will involve stakeholders providing views and information and also include audience 2 The commitments are: 1) Create three flagship Love London, Go Dutch developments on major streets or locations; 2) Ensure all planned developments on main roads under his control are completed to Love 3 Although the Committee’s investigation would focus on measures to London, Go Dutch standards, especially junctions; 3) Complete the Cycle increase cycling and cycle safety, members could also consider the impact Superhighways to Love London, Go Dutch standards, available here. of other Mayoral priorities – such as smoothing traffic flow.
2
Investigation into cycling in London
Transport Committee
participation with members of the public invited to Written information contribute their views and suggestions from the floor. This discussion would then set the scene for a second meeting The Committee will also invite written views and on 11 September 2012 which will be used to explore information including from local cycling campaign groups, solutions to the issues raised with representatives of the national and international organisations such as the Dutch Mayor and TfL. Cycling Embassy, academic experts in road transport planning, British Cycling, Cyclists Touring Club, cycle Introduction First Committee meeting manufacturers and TfL. The Committee will also seek specific detailed information from TfL in relation to its The Committee will hear stakeholders, including some of the approach to improving cyclists’ safety e.g. its criteria for Background following, at its initial meeting on 12 July: prioritising the major road junctions for improvement, and its planning decisions for the forthcoming cycle London Cycling Campaign, or CTC; which could provide superhighways. Questions for the review its views on the issues facing cyclists and the principles of the Love London Go Dutch campaign; Feedback on issues raised How to contribute Sustrans; which could discuss measures to promote cycling to non-cyclists, and the main barriers to Following its meeting in July, the Committee will publish cycling, particularly for under-represented groups such details of the information gathered at its meeting on the as women and families; issues raised about cycling in London and potential About the Committee
London Boroughs Cycling Officers Group; to discuss solutions. It will seek a response from the Mayor and TfL
borough-level measures to improve cycling, such as to this publication in advance of its second meeting. It will
training and cycling infrastructure; also invite feedback from cycling stakeholders on the issues identified so that any additional issues are gathered and/or a representative from the freight industry; to discuss challenges with driver awareness, and measures in advance of the September meeting. In addition the Committee will engage the wider public’s views on the to improve training. issues raised using social media.
3
Investigation into cycling in London
Transport Committee
Second Committee meeting changes to Bow Roundabout),4 one of the areas selected by the Mayor to be a flagship development site, or an The second meeting in September will provide an example of successful cycling improvements in another opportunity to discuss the issues and suggestions raised at city. the first meeting with representatives of the Mayor and TfL. The Committee could explore progress with the Questions for the review
Mayor and TfL’s current action to improve cyclists’ safety, Introduction including the measures taken in the first 100 days of the During the investigation the Committee will seek to answer Mayoralty, the review of 500 junctions and the further the following questions, including the following: action that could be taken. Members will also look to use Background What is the impact of recent cycle safety this meeting to hear from expert guests representing other infrastructure improvements on the number of large cities to discuss effective measures used elsewhere to cyclists and cyclists’ safety? improve cycling. Questions for the review What are the main safety concerns of cyclists in Following the second meeting, the Committee will publish London? a report setting out its findings on cycling in London and How to contribute How are cyclist groups engaged in decision-making the measures being taken or that could be taken to to improve cycle safety? improve cyclists’ safety. This report will include recommendations to the Mayor and TfL in light of the What lessons have been learnt from the About the Committee findings. introduction of the first 4 Cycle Superhighways, and how will these lessons be applied to those still Other activity to gather evidence to be built?
In addition to evidence hearings and requests for written What action is TfL taking to improve junctions information, Members will look to also arrange a site visit following the junction review process? to look at cycling infrastructure improvements (eg. recent
4 The Committee could use any such junctions as case studies to illuminate TfL’s response to improving cyclists’ safety and how it approaches cycle junctions more broadly and what lessons can be learned.
4
Investigation into cycling in London
Transport Committee
What priority is given to cycling in TfL’s spending Please send submissions to Jo Sloman, London Assembly, decisions? City Hall, The Queen’s Walk, London SE1 2AA, or email: [email protected] What are the potential impacts of under- investment in cycle safety? The Committee would welcome receiving written
How does the cycle safety agenda fit with the submissions by 20 August 2012 so they may be used to Mayor’s agenda to smooth traffic flow? inform the discussion at its second meeting. Introduction
About the Committee Timetable for the investigation Background The Transport Committee examines all aspects of the This investigation will take place over Summer/Autumn capital's transport system in order to press for 2011. The stages will include: improvements for Londoners. Its remit includes: mainline Questions for the review Agreement of terms of reference: 14 June 2012 rail, the Tube, buses, trams, taxis and minicabs, walking, cycling and roads. The Committee pays particular attention Desk-based research/gather written views and to how the Mayor's Transport Strategy is being How to contribute information: July –September 2012; implemented, and the work of TfL. Formal meetings: 12 July and 11 September 2012 Produce findings: by December 2012. The membership of the Transport Committee and details of About the Committee its work are available on its website.
How to contribute to the investigation
The Committee is inviting written views and information to inform its investigation. Submissions should aim to address the questions outlined above.
5 Transport Committee
Cycling in London Summary of discussion on 12th July July 2012
Introduction
The Transport Committee held a meeting with expert guests and members of the public on 12th July 2012. This was the first of two meetings for the Committee’s investigation into cycling in London. This is a summary of the issues raised during the discussion, which we have published and sent to the Mayor, Transport for London (TfL) and other stakeholders for feedback and comments ahead of our second meeting in September. We would welcome comments on this summary by 20th August; please send your feedback to: [email protected]
At the meeting the Committee put questions to a guest panel comprising:
Chris Bainbridge (Chair, Borough Cycling Officers Group); German Dector-Vega (London Director, Sustrans); Martin Gibbs (Policy and Legal Affairs Director, British Cycling); Chris Peck (Policy Co-ordinator, Cyclists’ Touring Club); and Ashok Sinha (Chief Executive, London Cycling Campaign).
Cyclists’ groups and members of the public were also invited to contribute to the discussion. Representatives from TfL and the Freight Transport Association observed the meeting. In addition, the Committee sought views from the public through email and social media channels; these comments informed our questions to the panel, and many of the issues received in writing are also reflected in this summary.
The summary is organised by the main topics coming out of the session, structured under six headings as follows:
There could be a range of reasons for the recent increase in cycling casualties in London The TfL junction review presents opportunities for wider safety improvements Further work is needed to reduce the risks posed by HGVs to cyclists in London Encouraging more cyclists may require rethinking road space for cyclists and others, including pedestrians Cycling policy needs to be designed for all Londoners More political and financial support may be needed to boost cycling
This is not an exhaustive account of all the issues raised in the meeting, and it does not represent our conclusions on cycling. A full transcript of the meeting is attached in Annex A, and Annex B contains the written submissions and tweets we have received to date. The issues outlined in this paper will form the basis of discussion at our second session on cycling on 11th September 2012. Our second meeting will focus on what TfL and the Mayor are doing to improve cycle safety and encourage greater cycling in London, and we will also consider international good practice.
Following our second meeting we will publish our full report containing conclusions and recommendations along with all the evidence we have received.
2
There could be a range of reasons for the recent increase in cycling casualties in London
The meeting opened with discussion on TfL’s recently published cyclist casualty figures for 2011. These showed a rise in slight, serious, and fatal injuries in the last year, although TfL and others note that these should be viewed in the context of increases in cyclists over recent years.1 The Cyclists’ Touring Club (CTC) and guests at our meeting believe these rises are disproportionate to increases in the number of cyclists in London.2 TfL is analysing these figures in order to understand the reasons for these rises. Our panel discussed a number of possible explanations for the increases including policies to smooth traffic flow, Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGV) driver behaviour, and lack of enforcement against dangerous behaviour on the roads by both drivers and cyclists.
Increased casualty statistics could be related to the introduction of TfL’s policy to ease traffic congestion. Cyclists surveyed by London Cycling Campaign (LCC) are concerned that efforts to enable motor traffic to move more easily around London pose a threat to cyclists’ safety.3 Ashok Sinha noted that many people continue to cycle despite fear of heavy traffic. Fear about the volume and speed of traffic, nonetheless presents a concern to other groups, such as non- commuters who cycle during the day, and pedestrians.4
Others are concerned that rises in cycling casualties are linked to driver behaviour. We heard that traffic congestion can lead to driver frustration, resulting in motorists breaking highway rules and endangering cyclists.5 We also heard that drivers whose behaviour endangers cyclists – such as speeding – can sometimes take diversionary courses instead of incurring licence penalties, which may result in those with poor motoring behaviour remaining on the roads.6
A lack of road safety enforcement could be partly responsible for a rise in cycling casualties. A member of the public reported that infringements – for example, mobile phone usage by drivers, which is one of TfL’s lines of enquiry into casualty increases – is taken more seriously in other countries such as Holland.7 German Dector-Vega commented that in Denmark, drivers of vehicles that injure cyclists are held responsible for cyclists’ safety, yet in the UK the law does not act in cyclists’ favour. Chris Peck suggested a fall in police numbers may also be linked to fewer penalty notices being issued.8
Chris Peck said cyclists would welcome greater enforcement against common infringements, including misuse of cycle Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs) by all types of motor vehicles, and speeding, to help them feel safer on London’s roads.9 Many feel there is little respect for safety
1 Chris Bainbridge, meeting transcript, p. 5 2 Chris Peck, meeting transcript, p. 7 3 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 4-5; 4 Ruth Mayorcas (member of the public from Chiswick), meeting transcript, p. 41; Richard Bourn, (Campaign for Better Transport), meeting transcript p. 26 5 Dave Suttle (member of the public from Greenwich), meeting transcript, p. 20 6 Chris Peck, meeting transcript, p. 6 7 Ruth Mayorcas (member of the public from Chiswick), meeting transcript, p. 41 8 Chris Peck, meeting transcript, p. 6 9 Chris Peck, meeting transcript, p. 15 3
measures such as Advanced Stop Lines – including by the police – giving cyclists’ little confidence that measures designed to protect them will be enforced.10 One way enforcement could be improved is by installing cameras to enforce traffic regulations at junctions where motorists jump red lights.11 Some Londoners also want better enforcement against dangerous cycling.12
The TfL junction review presents opportunities for wider safety improvements
Our panelists welcomed TfL’s decision to review dangerous junctions, but noted a number of issues with the review. Several panel members told us that what cyclists and potential cyclists fear most is fast-moving traffic, especially at junctions. Busy junctions and gyratories with little provision for cyclists can act as a barrier to cyclists using nearby routes.13
The panel warned that the decision to review 500 junctions would mean that resources were spread too thinly. TfL has received £15m from central government for the junction review. Chris Peck and Chris Bainbridge expressed concern that this meant too little money would be spread too thinly, because the budget could be absorbed by significant improvements to a small number of junctions. Cycling improvements to Tottenham Hale gyratory alone cost £3m.14 Tackling too many junctions could also result in an un-focused approach, rather than improving the worst junctions. LCC – which is engaged with the junction review process – wanted greater clarity on the process TfL would use to prioritise junction improvements, the timetable, and the criteria for allocating resources to each junction.15
The junction review presents wider opportunities to introduce new technology aimed at improving cyclists’ safety. TfL could explore measures such as provisions for cyclists to turn left at red lights;16 and cycle-specific traffic lights. However, legislative barriers may block the introduction of new infrastructure or technology. This means that TfL currently has limited flexibility to improve cycling safety. German Dector-Vega cited the example of a 3-year wait for the Department for Transport to authorise TfL to introduce ‘Trixi’ mirrors which are now being introduced on the Transport for London Road Network.17
UK legislation for wider cycling safety improvements lags behind other countries. Cyclist groups are calling on the Department for Transport to consider changes to traffic regulations to allow TfL to trial cycling safety measures.18 A member of the public called for cycling provision to be built into all regeneration and development proposals.19
10 Annex B - Document containing written submissions and tweets 11 Dave Suttle (member of the public from Greenwich), meeting transcript, p. 20 12 Annex B - Document containing written submissions and tweets 13 Chris Peck, Ashok Sinha, Chris Bainbridge, meeting transcript, pages 7-9 14 Chris Bainbridge, meeting transcript, p. 9 15 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 3 16 Chris Peck, meeting transcript, p. 7 17 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 9 18 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 9 19 Donnachadh McCarthy (member of the public from Southwark), meeting transcript, p. 19 4
Further work is needed to reduce the risks posed by HGVs to cyclists in London
There was widespread agreement about the risks that Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) pose to London cyclists. Chris Bainbridge and Ashok Sinha highlighted that collisions involving HGVs accounted for around half of cyclist deaths.20
HGVs pose a risk to London cyclists for a number of reasons. London’s road network contains many arterial routes which allow HGVs and other large vehicles to pass through central areas, spaces which are often shared with cyclists and other vulnerable road users.21 At times, HGVs also have to use quieter roads, and Martin Gibbs noted that some HGV drivers and their employers are paid by the deliveries they make and are therefore incentivised to driver faster to maximise deliveries, which in turn makes roads more dangerous for cyclists.22
HGV training programmes can benefit efforts to improve cyclists’ safety. Boroughs run programmes including ‘exchanging places’ events, whereby drivers and cyclists experience being in the other’s position, yet these schemes reach only a minority of drivers.23 Cyclists’ groups and the freight industry are working collaboratively on moves to improve mutual awareness (such as through the Freight Operators Recognition Scheme). Ashok Sinha warned that transport authorities needed to address the wider issue of whether road design that brings together cyclists and HGVs is appropriate, particularly if under-represented groups are to be encouraged to cycle.24
Encouraging more cyclists may require rethinking road space for cyclists and others, including pedestrians
Many cyclists are fearful of high volumes of motor traffic on London’s roads and they feel that London’s road culture favours motorists.25 Decisions about the physical space allocated for cycling are central to policies encouraging more people to cycle.
Guests told us repeatedly that London must re-balance the physical road space given to cyclists. There is strong support for more segregated cycle provision; both to make cyclists feel safer, and to encourage non-cyclists to start cycling. A member of the public commented that cycling was higher in areas such as Kingston where segregated routes exist.26 While segregated routes may be appropriate in places, Ashok Sinha and German Dector-Vega suggested that London should aim for cyclists and other road users to mix where possible, and to use segregated routes where necessary.27 Other suggestions to increase space for cyclists included making one-way streets into two-way streets for cyclists, especially in congested areas such as Zone 1.28
20 Chris Bainbridge, meeting transcript, p. 3; Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript p. 13 21 Annex B - Document containing written submissions and tweets 22 Martin Gibbs, meeting transcript, p. 14 23 Chris Bainbridge, meeting transcript, p. 13 24 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 14 25 Annex B - Document containing written submissions and tweets 26 Rik Andrew (founder member and current board member of LCC), meeting transcript, p. 44 27 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 33; German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript p. 34 28 Rik Andrew (founder member and current board member of LCC), meeting transcript, p. 23 5
Several panelists and members of the public thought that the design of the Mayor’s Cycle Superhighways may have little impact on encouraging non-cyclists onto the roads. The Cycle Superhighways often follow busy arterial routes; but, alongside physical considerations, decisions to segregate cycle routes or not are affected by political and budgetary constraints.29 TfL could address the needs of less confident cyclists by selecting quieter routes running parallel to the Cycle Superhighways and introducing more segregation.30 Comments from the public gallery and views we have received in writing have highlighted concerns around conflict with other road users31 – such as taxis and buses32 – and obstacles such as parked cars,33 which can aggravate fear among cyclists.
We heard that decision-making about cycling facilities can be constrained by concerns surrounding the impact they could have on motorised traffic. German Dector-Vega described how attempts to introduce cycle-specific infrastructure are sometimes rejected due to concerns about traffic congestion. He stated that TfL’s junction modelling on the Cycle Superhighways was used to justify decisions not to alter junctions in favour of cyclists. While this modelling was used to reject some cycle-specific measures, German argued that it is not fit for purpose and that this line of argument is flawed because evidence shows that, in practice, motorists adjust their behaviour to traffic flow. In his view, traffic would be dissuaded from entering areas modified for cyclists if drivers knew their journeys would take longer; an analysis that is supported by others.34
We also heard that TfL and the boroughs could do more to reduce conflict between cyclists and pedestrians. Consultation and decisions about road design should involve both cyclists groups and organisations such as Living Streets, to ensure the needs of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users are taken into consideration.35 Ashok Sinha noted that in some boroughs, like Hackney, cyclists’ groups engage in constant dialogue with the council about proposed developments. This reassures local residents that appropriate consultation processes are being used, and allows the council to explain the reasons behind decisions that affect cyclists.36
Cycling policy needs to be designed for all Londoners
London needs a cycling policy for the large proportion of residents who want to cycle but who do not. Cycling in London currently attracts only a very small proportion of Londoners. For example, 40 per cent of people in Southwark want to cycle, but only 3 per cent currently cycle, according to a local cycling campaigner.37
29 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 30 30 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 30 31 Miranda Housden (member of the public from Tower Hamlets), meeting transcript, p. 21 32 Rik Andrew (founder member and current board member of LCC), meeting transcript, p. 44 33 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 28 34 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 9; Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript p. 10; Charlie Lloyd (works for LCC), meeting transcript p. 25 35 Susan Hoffman (campaigner for Living Streets), meeting transcript, p. 19 36 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 33 37 Donnachadh McCarthy (member of the public from Southwark), meeting transcript, p. 18 6
Comments from the guest panel and the public suggested that cycling policy has historically been designed for a minority of confident cyclists, meaning that uptake of cycling remains limited among some groups, including the elderly, women, and children. Low uptake among the elderly in London was put in contrast with cities such as Tokyo where cycling is popular among older people, and is recognised for its health benefits.38 German Dector-Vega said that, as a city: ‘we need to attract everyone into cycling, so the more men, women, children, old, young, confident, nervous, casual, the more the better.’39
Members of the panel and the public alike emphasised that London’s cycling environment can be hostile for new and inexperienced cyclists. In order to broaden the appeal of cycling to these groups, they suggested that the Mayor and TfL need to design a cycling policy for all Londoners. The Cycle Hire scheme has had some success in encouraging cycling as a ‘normal activity’, helped by the fact that users do not need any special cycling equipment to use the scheme.40 Yet others pointed out that despite campaigns by TfL which encourage people to cycle small distances, they are unlikely to change their behaviour and swap their car for a bicycle due to negative perceptions of cycle safety.41
It was suggested that currently around a third of London school children are driven to school.42 Parents would like their children to cycle to school, but they do not because of a myriad of reasons. These include busy roads, restrictions prohibiting adults accompanying children cycling on pavements, and other vehicles obstructing cycle lanes.43 We heard about efforts to encourage competitive cycling in schools.44 Others stressed that a lack of safe roads for children to cycle to and from school prevented some from taking part.45
Efforts to make cycling attractive for the most vulnerable groups are likely to encourage all groups to cycle more,46 as described by a member of the public: ‘When London starts building facilities for my daughter to peacefully cycle to school with me, then you will start seeing the other people, who all of these surveys tell us are too scared to get on a bicycle in our city, actually get out and bicycle.’47
We heard that the design of the local cycling environment can influence Londoners’ choices about cycling. Boroughs are working to provide one-to-one cycle training and bicycle maintenance and advice, which are helping to reach those groups that cycle less. Slower traffic speeds (such as default 20mph speed limits in residential areas),48 and segregated cycling infrastructure would help achieve this. Ashok Sinha stressed that cycling needs to be made an
38 Donnachadh McCarthy (member of the public from Southwark), meeting transcript, p. 47 39 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 3 40 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 16-7 41 David Arditti (Co-ordinator of Brent Cyclists), meeting transcript, p. 43 42 Francesca Leadlay (works for Sustrans), meeting transcript, p. 47 43 Tim Lennon (member of the public from Richmond and representative of Cycling Embassy of Great Britain), meeting transcript, p. 27 44 Katherine Harborne (Councillor and Cycling Czar, LB Richmond), meeting transcript, p. 42 45 Geoff Stello (member of the public from Lambeth),meeting transcript, p. 45 46 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 34 47 Tim Lennon (member of the public from Richmond and representative of Cycling Embassy of Great Britain), meeting transcript, p. 27 48 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 34-5 7
attractive door-to-door experience for non-cyclists, which should include addressing concerns about secure cycle parking.49
We also heard that public services and local communities can benefit from policies designed to encourage more people to cycle.50 A member of the public suggested that every pound spent on cycling generates £18 of economic benefit.51 We were told that evidence shows town centre retail businesses benefit from people who cycle and walk, because people travelling by bicycle spend more in local shops.52
More political and financial support may be needed to boost cycling
Members of the panel suggested that the Mayor and TfL could do more to give cycling mainstream status.53 One way cycling in London could gain more political recognition is through the appointment of a cycling representative on TfL’s Board.54 People told us that cycling also needs greater investment. A member of the public suggested that with current levels of funding it would take 3,000 years for cycling facilities in some areas of London to reach international standards.55
Our discussion underlined the gap between London and other European cities where participation in cycling is much higher. Ashok Sinha pointed out that the scale of the Mayor’s ambition for cycling will affect how motivated Londoners feel to engage with decisions about improving cycling.56
In cities such as Amsterdam and Copenhagen, cycling has been made central to transport planning and design. Conversely, one member of the public stated that in London, ‘cycling and non-motorised transport is seen as peripheral’57, while another described cycling as a ‘second rate mode of transport’, adding that ‘cycling has been seen as a nuisance’.58
Speakers noted that TfL often rejects comparisons with approaches adopted elsewhere, citing unique space constraints in London. There was consensus that this line of argument was inadequate, with guests suggesting instead that improving cycling in London will require political leadership. Martin Gibbs explained that ‘there is no doubt we need to work with the physical constraints that we have, but if we want to transform this city we need to put cycling at the centre of it.’59
49 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 38-9 50 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 36 51 Donnachadh McCarthy (member of the public from Southwark), meeting transcript, p. 47 52 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 34 53 For example, German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript p. 3, 33 and 35-6; Martin Gibbs, meeting transcript p. 36 54 German Dector-Vega, meeting transcript, p. 40 55 David Arditti (Co-ordinator of Brent Cyclists), meeting transcript, p. 22 56 Ashok Sinha, meeting transcript, p. 39-40 57 Ruth-Anna Macqueen (member of the public from Hackney), meeting transcript, p. 27 58 Geoff Stello (member of the public from Lambeth), meeting transcript, p. 46 59 Martin Gibbs, meeting transcript, p. 12 8
The Transport Committee Caroline Pidgeon (Chair) Valerie Shawcross (Deputy Chair) Jennette Arnold Victoria Borwick Tom Copley Andrew Dismore Roger Evans Darren Johnson Joanne McCartney Steve O'Connell Murad Qureshi Richard Tracey
Committee contacts Jo Sloman, Assistant Scrutiny Manager [email protected] 020 7983 4942
Dana Rothenberg, Communications Manager [email protected] 020 7983 4603
Online You can find further information about the Committee and access reports at: http://www.london.gov.uk/moderngov/mgCommitteeDetails.aspx?ID=173
Large print, Braille or translations If you, or someone you know, needs a copy of this summary in large print or Braille, or a copy in another language, then please call us on: 020 7983 4100, or email: [email protected].
Published by Greater London Authority July 2012 9