Kingston Cycling Campaign
The council is undertaking a public consultation on its draft third Local Implementation Plan (LIP). This is a statutory document that outlines how Sutton will contribute to meeting the outcomes and objectives in the new Mayor of London’s Transport Strategy, published earlier this year. It also outlines key proposals for transport schemes in the borough for the next three years (to 2021) and longer term ambitions to 2041.
"proposals to improve the flow of traffic and improve the environment for residents, traders, pedestrians, cyclists and users of public transport. The aim of the scheme is to encourage more people to walk, cycle or use public transport and reduce the number of local car trips. Funding for this scheme is available from Transport for London."
How is this going to achieve this by creating a few parking bays and a new sign for a car park?
Current DfT consultations.
Lots of interesting stuff about inclusive transport regarding trains, buses, cars, public realm, streets and yes a bit about cycling too. Quotes:
8.11 While we consider CIHT and DPTAC’s recommendations and how to take them
forward, we are requesting that local authorities pause any shared space schemes
incorporating a level surface they are considering, and which are at the design stage.
We are also temporarily suspending Local Transport Note 1/11. This pause will allow
us to carry out research and produce updated guidance.
Objectives regarding Cycling:
• Update Local Transport Note 2/08, which sets out the Department’s guidance to
local authorities on designing safe and inclusive infrastructure for cyclists, to take
account of developments in cycling infrastructure since its publication in 2008 and
the responses to the draft AAP consultation and publish a revised version by early
• By 2020, explore the feasibility of amending legislation to recognise the use of
cycles as a mobility aid71 in order to increase the number of disabled people
From the DfT:
As part of the Transport Investment Strategy, the government committed to creating a Major Road Network (MRN).
This consultation asks for views on:
how to define the MRN
the role that local, regional and national bodies will play in the MRN investment programme
which schemes will be eligible for MRN funding
A new MRN would help deliver the following objectives:
support economic growth and rebalancing
support housing delivery
support all road users
support the Strategic Road Network
The creation of an MRN will allow for dedicated funding from the National Roads Fund to be used to improve this middle tier of our busiest and most economically important local authority ‘A’ roads.
What is the new London Plan?
The London Plan is one of the most important documents for this city.
It's a strategic plan which shapes how London evolves and develops. All planning decisions should follow London Plan policies, and it sets a policy framework for local plans across London.
The current 2016 consolidation Plan is still the adopted Development Plan. However the Draft London Plan is a material consideration in planning decisions. It gains more weight as it moves through the process to adoption, however the weight given to it is a matter for the decision maker.
Consultation on the draft London Plan
Consultation on this plan is open. Comments will be publicly available. After the consultation, comments are reviewed by an inspector and you may be called in to discuss comments at the Examination in Public.
What is an Examination in Public?
At the end of the consultation period your comments will be reviewed by the independent Planning Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State to carry out the Examination in Public for the London Plan.
You may be invited to discuss your comments at the Examination in Public. All comments will be made available to the public at the end of the consultation period. The legal provisions for the London Plan are in Part VIII of the Greater London Authority (GLA) Act 1999 (as amended) in sections 334 to 341. The Examination in Public is covered in Section 338.
We have undertaken research that shows that in 2015, Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) were involved in disproportionately high numbers of fatal collisions with cyclists (78 per cent) and pedestrians (20 per cent) on London’s streets, despite only making up four per cent of the overall miles driven in the Capital. The Direct Vision Standard (DVS) forms part of The Mayor, Sadiq Khan and TfL’s Vision Zero approach to reducing road danger. The DVS categorises HGVs on the level of the driver’s direct vision from the cab.
We consulted earlier this year on the principles of a new DVS. Listening to the feedback from this consultation and working closely with industry and stakeholders we have now further developed this scheme. The Consultation report and Responses to Issues Raised document from this first phase of consultation are available to view in from the links at the bottom of this text. The responses showed that, in general, there is support for the principle of a Direct Vision Standard.
We are now seeking your views on proposals to introduce a new Safety Standard Permit Scheme as part of DVS which widens our approach beyond direct vision and includes a safe system approach to allow us to address a broader range of road danger risks.
The proposed scheme would require all HGVs over 12 tonnes to hold a Safety Permit to operate in Greater London from 2020. HGVs will be given a rating between ‘zero-star’ (lowest) and ‘five-star’ (highest). Only those vehicles rated ‘one star’ and above would be allowed to enter of operate in London from 2020. Zero rated vehicles would only be allowed if they can prove compliance through safe system measures. By 2024 only ‘three-star’ rated HGVs and above would automatically be given a Safety Permit. HGVs rated two star and below would need to demonstrate increased safety through progressive safe system measures.
The safe system could include specific industry recognised measures such as sensors, visual warnings and comprehensive driver training. The Safety Standard Permit scheme would evolve over time, taking into account advances in technology.
Detailed information about the scheme and the approach in which we have arrived at our current proposals are set out in the consultation document. A full Integrated Impact Assessment is also included.
The consultation approach
We are undertaking a phased consultation approach at key stages of the development of the consultation proposals to implement the Direct Vision Standard:
Phase 1 (24 January to 18 April 2017) – we set out the case for HGV driver direct vision and consulted on the Mayor of London’s outline proposals to introduce a Direct Vision Standard for HGVs in London and the principles of the Standard itself. The responses showed that, in general, there is support for the principle of a Direct Vision Standard.
Phase 2a – policy consultation (this consultation) – this current phase of consultation seeks views and feedback on the scheme proposals as outlined above and within the supporting consultation document which includes supporting technical reports including the full Integrated Impact Assessment. Feedback from this phase of consultation will be used to develop a second IIA and finalise the scheme proposals to be included in phase 2b of the consultation.
Phase 2b - Final scheme proposals and statutory consultation (Spring/Summer 2018) – this final phase will consult on the final proposals for the HGV Safety Standard Permit Scheme, including statutory consultation on the appropriate regulatory measure to ban or restrict HGVs in London under the scheme, subject to UK Government and European Commission support and notification.
London Assembly says:
Over recent years, TfL policy has increasingly focused on the construction of physical cycling infrastructure on London’s roads. A change in direction towards more segregated infrastructure followed our report in 2012 recommending this approach.
Our investigation will cover the full range of cycling infrastructure in London, with a particular focus on:
Cycle Superhighways: a form of cycle lane, designed to make cycling safer by helping keep cyclists away from general traffic, and offer direct and continuous cycling on major routes.
Quietways: a network of cycle routes that link key destinations, improving safety and convenience through small-scale interventions.
Mini-Hollands: TfL schemes to invest neighbourhood-level improvements in walking and cycling, involving a range of interventions in each area.
Cycle parking: provision of parking spaces on-street, at stations or in dedicated parking facilities.
It is important that TfL is able to establish the effectiveness of the infrastructure it installs on London’s roads. We are concerned that to date there has been no comprehensive study of the new infrastructure’s impact on cycling safety, modal share and other road users.
Questions to answer:
1. What progress on new cycling infrastructure has been made under Sadiq Khan, and what are his long-term plans?
2. Has TfL resolved the problems that delayed some cycling schemes under the previous Mayor?
3. Has segregation delivered the anticipated benefits on the Cycle Superhighways? How many cyclists are using these routes?
4. To what extent has segregation had negative consequences for other road users and, if necessary, how can this be mitigated?
5. Have Quietways delivered their anticipated benefits? How many cyclists are using them?
6. What are the differences in infrastructure between inner and outer London? How can TfL ensure infrastructure in different areas is sufficient and appropriate to the location?
7. How will TfL’s new ‘Strategic Cycling Analysis’ help determine where and how to invest in infrastructure?
8. How appropriate is the 400-metre target set in the draft Transport Strategy? Can we equate proximity with access?
9. Is TfL’s approach to public engagement working effectively to improve scheme designs and meet stakeholder needs?
10. Are Londoners sufficiently aware of the cycling infrastructure available to them, and how can awareness be increased?
11. How is TfL using infrastructure to attract a more diverse range of people to cycle in London?
12. Is there sufficient cycle parking in London, and is it in the right locations?
13. How are the lessons of the Mini-Hollands and other previous cycling schemes being applied elsewhere?
14. Should cycling infrastructure be oriented toward longer-distance commuting journeys, or more localised trips?
London Assembly says:
What different approaches could TfL and London boroughs take to improve junctions and increase walking and cycling in Outer London?
Small pockets of improvement don’t change the fact that most London streets are dominated by traffic and noise. They are hostile places even to step out into for a pint of milk.
On behalf of the London Assembly Transport Committee, Caroline Russell AM is investigating how our streets and junctions can become more people-friendly.
There are a number of specific questions the Committee is seeking to answer. Please address any questions where you have relevant views and information to share, and feel free to cover any other issues you would like the Committee to consider.
Are there lessons to be learned from previous junction improvements?
How can we enable more people to walk and cycle?
How can we make our streets and junctions less hostile to people getting around by bike and on foot?
How do you get all road users on board?
Please email firstname.lastname@example.org by August 11 and share the investigation on Twitter using #OuterLondonJunctions
The Mayor and TfL are promoting walking and cycling as a form of active travel and a way to reduce health inequalities - however, currently, over 40 percent of Londoners fall short of the recommended 150 minutes of activity per week.
TfL research has found that people who live in Outer London tend to walk less than those who live in Inner London. Public transport coverage is lower and car ownership is higher in Outer London, with cars making up a larger share of journeys. In particular, people who live in Outer London are less likely to walk children to school, walk to see friends or relatives, and walk to pubs, restaurants and cinemas.
53 percent of Inner Londoners walked at least five journeys a week, compared to 35 percent of Outer Londoners
47 percent of Inner Londoners walked as part of longer journeys on other forms of transport at least five times a week, compared to 41 percent of Outer Londoners
Complete separation of cyclists and cars can't always be achieved. To make sharing of the road safer I would like to propose using rumble strips instead of flat paint to separate the bike lane from the rest of the road. It would act as a physical reminder for car-drivers that they are encroaching the bike lane. This happens particularly near pinch points like road bends or crossroads. So even just a selective application of rumble strips could have a very positive effect, I believe. What's the view of the cycling community? Has it been tested?