Scrutiny Review of Cycling
in East Sussex

Report by the Project Board

Councillor Richard Stogdon (Chairman)

Councillor Jon Harris

Councillor John Garvican

November 2007

Transport and EnvironmentScrutiny Committee –27 November 2007

Cabinet – 29 January 2008

Full Council – 12 February 2008


The report of the Scrutiny Review of Cycling in East Sussex

Recommendations

Overview

Departmental roles and finance

The 2003 Cycling Strategy for East Sussex

Cycling and the Local Transport Plan 2 (LTP2)

The East Sussex ‘balanced scorecard’

Utility v. recreational cycling

The National Cycling Network (NCN) and L’Avenue Verte

Cycling and other integrated transport and maintenance schemes

Safety and cycling

Health and wellbeing benefits of cycling

Cycle training in schools

Cycling and public transport

Cycle parking at railway stations

Bicycles on trains

Cycling promotion

Other partnership possibilities

Connect 2

Cycling England

Appendix: Terms of reference, membership and evidence

Scope and terms of reference of the review

Board Membership and project support

Project Board meeting dates

Witnesses providing evidence

Evidence papers

1

Recommendations

Recommendation / Page
1 / The Board recommends that a revised Cycling Strategy for East Sussex should be developed to:
a)Send a clear, unambiguous message that sets out the Council’s direction and commitment to promoting cycling in all its forms, and the factors limiting what can be achieved.
b)Explain the priorities that will be used to allocate funding to cycling through LTP capital funds which should support suitable and effective utility cycling schemes.
c)Set out its aspirations for recreational cycling which will be dependent upon sourcing external funding and partner cooperation.
d)Explain its policy regarding the priority schemes such as L’Avenue Verte or completion of sections of the National Cycling Network (NCN) through East Sussex and clarify the basis of future progress and funding for these schemes.
e)Contain targets that are: clear; achievable yet challenging; carefully phrased to ensure public acceptability; and are within the power of the relevant organisation to achieve.
f)Take into account and be compatible with other relevant policies, such as the East Sussex Active Living Strategy 2007-12. / 8
2 / When competing for LTP capital funds, cycling schemes should be judged fairly and robustly against the LTP objectives in the balanced scorecard but without being given a negative weighting. This would allow high quality utility cycling schemes to come forward and compete effectively against other traffic and public transport schemes. / 13
3 / A £50,000 ‘cycling opportunity fund’ should be put forward annually as a project within the balanced scorecard which, if successful, would enable a range of flexible, low cost responses to meet unanticipated but desirable utility cycling activities including:
a)supplementing larger traffic and maintenance schemes to benefit cycling and walking (see page 12)
b)joint funding of cycle parking for example with rail companies at key railway stations (see page 16)
c)signing and reactive maintenance in conjunction with partners such as Sustrans (see page 9). / 13
4 / The Council should implement the Audit Commission recommendation to agree and implement an audit regime for new highway and traffic schemes by taking a practical and tailored approach depending on the type and size of scheme, including:
a) all transport scheme promoters and designers should be made aware of the need to cater for cyclists wherever possible;
b) opportunities should be identified within repair and maintenance programmes to introduce cost effective cycling measures at marginal cost using the ‘cycling opportunity fund’ as required.
The effectiveness of this approach would be measured by bringing a sample of successful scheme outcomes to Transport and Environment Scrutiny Committee during the monitoring period of this review. / 13
5 / That the scoring criteria used in the Balanced Scorecard assessment process be refined to include explicit health benefits within the Local Transport Plan 2 objective ‘protect, promote and enhance the environment’. / 15
6 / Where schools that would benefit from cycle training are failing to identify staff or time for training, the cycle training manager should take all possible action to try to encourage recalcitrant but otherwise ideally placed schools to take part by:
a) Emphasising the benefits of cycling both to individual children and the wider community
b) Engaging the help of local elected Members to use their influence
c) Consider using monetary incentives if it is cost effective and affordable. / 16
7 / That Southern be requested to consider whether in the light of the impact of its policy of banning cycles on certain rush hour services:
a) it would be prepared to adopt a more selective approach towards banning the carriage of cycles on its trains, for example by limiting the policy to certain stations rather than a blanket ban for entire routes
b) when considering the future operation of the Gatwick Express a cycle ban policy is not introduced this service
c) it will negotiate with bicycle retailers to promote discounts on the purchase of new bicycles for its customers. / 18
8 / That opportunities to provide high quality cycle parking at rail stations across East Sussex be explored fully in conjunction with Southern Rail with a view to implementation of facilities where possible. / 18
9 / That the Lead Member should consider carefully whether the Council should place a bid for resources to create a demonstration site in East Sussex under Cycling England’s second phase of cycling demonstration towns withinBike for the Future 2 (2008 – 12). / 19

Overview

  1. Today’s transport challenge is to deliver efficient, cost effective mobility for ever greater volumes of people and goods whilst reducing the impact of transport on the environment. Cycling can make a significant contribution to reducing the impact of transport on the environment in the context of a predicted traffic growth in the UK of 20% between 2003 and 2015 with an associatedextra15 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2)[1].
  2. Cycling is a unique activity in contributing to the accessibility of towns, villages, centres of employment and recreation; it can help to ease traffic congestion whilst saving CO2 and improving air quality; it helps promote and support economic and sustainable developmentand has a potentially major positive impact on public health.
  3. The 2001 census shows that just 1.7% of the resident population in East Sussextravelled to work by bicyclecompared with a national UK average of 2.9%. The highest proportion was in Eastbourne at 3.5% and the lowest in Wealden with just 1.1%. The counties with some of the highest percentages include Somerset (6.2%) and West Sussex (5.3%).In the UK 56% of all journeys by car are less than five miles and 23 per cent are less than two miles. A recent study found that the UK ranked 12th out of 15 European nations in terms of the average distance people cycle each year and 14th on distance walked. The proportion of primary school children taken to school by car has remained above 40% since 2002.
  4. In recent years the County Council has undertaken various cycling initiatives with these highlights:
  • Off road multi-user routes such as ForestWayCountryParkand the Cuckoo Trail provide extremely popular, predominantly recreational, opportunities for cycling. The cycle counters on the Cuckoo Trail indicated over 70,000 cycle trips in 2006 and it is estimated that at least as many walkers use the route.
  • The Ouse Estuary cycle track is proving extremely popular for utility trips; surveys indicate that the number of cycle trips between Newhaven and Seaford has gone up by approximately 200% since the opening of the route in 2005.
  • Highly successful and well used cycle maps in paper and on-line formats have been produced, along with a cycle ‘journey planner’, and have had to be re-printed.
  • The annual programme of guided cycle rides (Cycling East Sussex) attracts over 500 participants per annum and has been running for more than 10 years; events such as the East Sussex cycle and walks festival have also proved popular.
  • Initiatives, such as allowing cycling on Hastings promenade, have been successful but sensitivities have inevitably arisen amongst other users of the space, for example pedestrians, which have to be surmounted.
  1. Less successful have been the following outcomes:
  • An Audit Commission inspection report on transport services in East Sussex (2004) considered that a lack of strong commitment to cycling had contributed to the very low level of cycling in the county, and that the cycling strategy target to evaluate all road schemes for their impact on cyclists had not been implemented.
  • Cycle routes have sometimes been built in the ‘easier’ sections and then suddenly come to a halt because of problems, typically, land ownership issues, lack of funding, engineering difficulties or a groupopposed to a particular scheme. For example,a stretch of cycle way near Berwick, according to some local views, goes from “nowhere to nowhere else”and then “deposits cyclists in a dangerous manner back on to the main road”.
  • Unlike some other counties, there is no active county-wide cycling forum in East Sussex at present.
  1. The views of all East Sussex parish and town councils on cycling were solicited during the early stages of this review. 20% of authorities contacted responded. Details of all the responses received are provided in a separate evidence pack and are, in most respects,consistent with the outcomes of national surveys and work being reported elsewhere. Additionally a county-wide public survey was undertaken which solicited a significantly higher response than was expected.
  2. This report is therefore submitted as an interim report pending the analysis of the public consultation responses and consideration of the views of the five district and borough councils who are significant partners in determining the success of cycling initiatives.

Departmental roles and finance

  1. For several years until 2006/07, cycling activities fell within the responsibility of different teams within the Council’s Transport and Environment Department. A dedicated Cycling Officer, located in the Traffic and Safety Team, had an allocation of approximately £200,000 annually for cycling schemes from the Traffic & Safety element of the integrated transport capital programme. Officers in the Traffic and Safety and Countryside Management teams were responsible for cycle training in schools, promoting cycling activities amongst County Council staff and arranging cycle fairs and guided rides for the general public.
  2. A restructuring, following the departure of the Cycling Officer in February 2007, provided a timely opportunity for Scrutiny to consider and comment upon the County Council’s approach to cycling and make recommendations to help inform a revised cycling strategy.
  3. Until his departure, the Cycling Officer was responsible forcoordinating a broad mix of strategic and operational work including:
  • Organising cycling activities and promotional work including route maps which have proved very popular.
  • Identifying and designing specific facilities including cycle routes and cycle parking.
  • Ensuring that cycling is taken into account in other transport schemes such as road safety projects and traffic calming through cycle audits.
  • Bidding for external funding such as Interreg[2] which dominated most of the Cycling Officer’s time.
  • Conducting feasibility studies for future schemes, mostly funded by Interreg.
  • Monitoring cycle usage across the county.
  1. The Traffic and Safety Team now retains responsibility for cycle training and developing school travel plans but the strategic function forcycling has been relocated to the Transport Policy Team. Consequently, cyclingis no longer considered a stand-alone activity with its own budget.Instead, cycling schemes are now required to compete against other LTP projects to secure LTP capital funding. To date, this has resulted in one cycling scheme being funded in this way:the Harbour Road scheme in Rye.
  2. The Board considered theintegration of cycling into transport strategyto be logical, especially as available resources in general for transport schemes are limited. Whilst there is no longer a Cycling Officer in the County Council, there are named officers with responsibility for cycle strategy and cycle training which is of critical importance for effective communication about future intentions on cycling with external partners and the public.
  3. The County Council’s integrated transport budget for 2007/08 amounted to approximately £4m in support of the East Sussex Local Transport Plan 2 (2006 – 11). Of this approximately £1.3m was allocated to Traffic and Safety, and £2.7m to Transport Strategy for implementation of integrated transport schemes through Local Area Transport Strategies (LATS). The setting aside of this £1.3m for safety schemes reflects the high priority assigned to road safety by the County Council.
  4. Bidding for external funding, in particular Interreg, is a highly labour-intensive process. Furthermore, most grants require match funding by the County Council or other partners that, despite the value-for-money such grants infer, still addsa significant pressure to existing budgets.
  5. Attracting external funds for cycling in East Sussex has been successful in recent years with Interreg being the main source. This has funded a mix of schemes and has delivered route and feasibility studies on future schemes that could be implemented should additional funding become available.In many cases, additional funding has not yet become available to realise these expensive schemes on the ground.
  6. There is no current funding emerging from Interreg although opportunities for future projects are being considered. Most notably, the County Council in partnership with French and English authorities is in the early stages of developing a bid to the new ‘Interreg 4a’ programme for the L’Avenue Verte Paris to London cycle route.

The 2003 Cycling Strategy for East Sussex

  1. The Local Transport Plan includes a Cycling Strategy alongside other modal strategies such as passenger transport and walking. The Cycling Strategy was produced in 2003 to support the broader objectives contained within the Plan.
  2. It is clear with the benefit of hindsight that the 2003 Cycling Strategy was over ambitious andbacked by insufficient resources. Of the 14 targets within the strategy, seven have not been achieved; six have been achieved only in part,and just one target has been met and, in fact, exceeded. The successful target relates to the securing of external funding against a target of £500,000 by 2008.
  3. Until 2007/08, the system of prioritising cycling schemes lacked the rigourof assessment of effectiveness that other integrated transport schemes had to undergo. The Board accepts thatincreasing cycling in generalwill result in a range of health and environmental benefits and is therefore worthy of promotion in its own right. However, without significantly more resources than are currently available, it is essentialforthe County Council to prioritise potential cycling schemes based on a better understanding of the likely benefits. To achieve this will also require greater clarity in the future cyclingstrategy about therelative importance ofutility and recreational cycling (see page 10).
  4. In 1996, the government set a target to quadruple the amount of cycling by 2012 and this target was included in the Strategy. The target was abandoned by the Government in 2004 because it was deemed unlikely to be met. Indeed, cycling levels have fallen over the last 10 years in UK with just isolated locations where cycling has increased.
  5. Currently, local highway authorities now are required to define ‘challenging and achievable’ core and local targets for their local transport plans. The East Sussex LTP2 contains a mandatory target and a local target on cycling, measured using 14 automatic cycle counters. The targets together with current progress is shown in the following table:

Indicator / Target / Progress
1. Cycling trips – the national mandatory indicator / Increase the level of cycling trips in East Sussex to an annualised index of 130 by 2015/16 compared with a 2004/05 annualised index of 100, with an intermediate target of 115 by 2010/11. / From a base of 100 in 2005/06, the number of cycling trips has fallen by 10%.
2. Cycling trips – a locally set indicator / Increase the level of cycling trips in Greater Eastbourne/Bexhill and Hastings areas to an annualised index of 165 by 2015/16 compared with a 2004/05 annualised index of 100, with an intermediate target of 130 by 2010. / From a base of 100 in 2005/06, the number of cycling trips in these areas has fallen by 12%.
  1. There is no readily available comparative data against other local authorities for these indicators. Furthermore, the data in isolation does not explain why cycling trips are decreasing nor whether the trips counted are recreational or utility. To help address these questions will require further research and the analysis of the public questionnaire responses carried out as part of this review.

Recommendation1.

The Board recommends that a revised Cycling Strategy for East Sussexshould be developed to:

a)Send a clear, unambiguous message that sets out the Council’s direction and commitment to promoting cycling in all its forms, and the factors limiting what can be achieved.

b)Explain the priorities that will be used to allocate funding to cycling through LTP capital funds which should support suitable and effectiveutility cycling schemes.

c)Set out its aspirations for recreational cycling which will be dependent upon sourcing external funding and partner cooperation.

d)Explain its policy regarding the priority schemes such as L’Avenue Verte or completion of sections of the National Cycling Network (NCN) through East Sussex and clarify the basis of future progress and funding for these schemes.

e)Contain targets that are: clear;achievable yet challenging; carefully phrased to ensure public acceptability; and are within the power of the relevant organisation to achieve.

f)Take into account and be compatible withotherrelevant policies, such as the East Sussex Active Living Strategy 2007-12.

Cycling and the Local Transport Plan 2 (LTP2)

  1. The Local Transport Plan 2 (LTP2) is a statutory document covering the period 2006-11. It states how East Sussex will deliver the national and local Government shared priorities for transport – tackling congestion, delivering accessibility, safer roads, better air quality and other quality of life issues.
  2. There is an increasing amount of research emerging from UK and the rest of Europe to demonstrate that promotingutility cycling alongside with other key transport and traffic policies does play a significant part in reducing traffic congestion as well as increasing the accessibility of employment and facilities, improving environmental quality, and increasing safety.
  3. It will take time in the UK, but towns, such as Groningen in the Netherlands, have achieved a bicycle use rate of 40% only by developing a range of policies over 30 years.