Increased cycle casualities due to increase in cycling, says DfT's Norman Baker, and suggests "trixi mirrors" might improve safety

Minister of Transport Norman Baker said today that increased cycle casualties on Britain's roads may be due to increased rates of cycling - and suggested measures to improve visibility for truck drivers at traffic lights might help.

Mr Baker, UK's Regional and Local Transport Minister, said: “We take the issue of cycle safety extremely seriously and are working to reduce the instances of death and serious injuries of cyclists on our roads.

“The year-on-year rise in the number of cyclists killed and injured may be due to the increase in cycling we have seen in recent years."

Mr Baker was responding to Department for Transport data released last week that showed cycle casualties increased by 10% in 2011 compared to 2010.

The DfT has not published statistics showing increase in cycling for the period to March 2011. Rather, 2010 statistics say that cycle casualties rose by 1%, and cycle use rose by 1% in 2009-10 - supporting the Minister's claim that increased cycle causalities were due to increased cycling:

The number of pedal cyclists killed increased by 7 per cent from 104 in 2009 to 111 in 2010. The number seriously injured in accidents reported to the police increased by 2 per cent to 2,660. Total reported casualties among pedal cyclists also rose, by 1 per cent, compared to 2009. Pedal cyclist traffic levels are estimated to have risen by 1 per cent over the same period. (Reported Road Casualties in Great Britain: Main Results 201030 June 2011)

Minister Baker is right about the long term trend. From 2000 to 2010, there has been a 23% increase in the number of miles cycled annually from 2.6bn to 3.1bn miles. (DfT Table TRA0101 Road traffic (vehicle miles) by vehicle type).

In the same period, 2000 - 2010, reported cycle casualties per billion miles fell by 30%, from 7,900 to 5,500 casualties per billion miles cycled. (DfT: Reported casualty rates: by road user type and severity Great Britain: 2000-2010).

To put this another way: for every million miles cycled, the average cyclist might expect to have accidents resulting in injury 5.5 times. If we say, for example, that average journey distance was 3 miles, I make that, erm, one accident per 60,600 journeys. If you did around two cycle trips a day, that would take a round 100 years.

In the short term, though, there was a surge in cyclist deaths. UK cyclist organisation CTC reported on 30 June a 10% increase in cycle deaths per billion miles in 2010. Maybe this is a statistical blip - and some have blamed the severe winter. "Cycle casualty numbers not reducing fast enough" 

Trixi mirror - Guardian

Norman Baker added: “We want to see more innovative measures being put in place to improve cycle safety and we have authorised a trial of trixi mirrors in London which, if successful, could be used elsewhere in the country to make cyclists more visible to drivers.”

Trixi mirrors were first suggested in 2009, when when the Guardian reported on Boris Johnsons idea of visibility mirrors at traffic lights, and quoted Transport for London's suggestion that visibility problems with large lorries are causing most of the cycle casualties:

"Of the 15 cyclists who died on the capital's roads last year, nine were killed in collisions with lorries. In most cases the lorry was turning left and the driver failed to see the cyclist on their inside, according to TfL. The proposed mirror would give the driver, who will be looking at the traffic signals as they wait for the lights to change, a clear view of anyone between the lorry and the kerb, or those just below the front of their vehicle." (Guardian 16 June 2009)

Brighton's £6.3m Lewes Road sustainable transport bid includes a direct bus-to-railway link and electric bicycles - but can it solve the problem?

24 May 2011. Brighton and Hove City Council yesterday published details of its £6.3m bid for funding for a sustainable transport project in the Lewes Road Corridor. The bid is widely supported as a step in the right direction, though there are concerns it does not go far enough.

The bid, made on 18 April, seeks funding of £4m from the Department for Transport (DfT) Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF), with additional funding of £2.3m from local stakeholders including the bus and train companies, Sussex University and the council's own Local Transport Plan. If successful, the bid funds will be applied to capital and revenue projects over the period 2011-2015.

The bid application includes letters of support from major stakeholders including the Brighton and Hove Buses and Southern Rail, the Universities and several community organisations including Lewes Clean Air Campaign.

In January this year the DfT announced the £560m LSTF, intended to encourage Local Authorities to make plans to promote sustainable transport. Brighton and Hove's application was submitted to the DfT 18 April to meet the DfT deadline for the first round of funding ("Tranche 1"), for projects up to £5m. Winning bids will be announced end of June. A second round of bids for up to £5m closes 6 June (Tranche 2). Then there is another round for projects up to £50m. Deadline for expressions of interest for this is also 6 June.

Links to download details of Brighton's bid can be found at the end of this article.

Is the plan any good?
Cycle campaigners said that the application was prepared in a short time by the council planners, and there was insufficient time for community consultation.

Lewes Clean Air Campaign spokesperson Duncan Blinkhorn said: "Lewes Road for Clean Air / Bike Train are a community partner in this bid. We support it because we want to see real progress toward this route being a sustainable transport route which can have a positive impact on local health, well-being as well as the global threats of climate change from significant reductions in emissions of CO2, air polutants and noise.

He added: "We have some concerns that the bid lacks sufficient ambition and offers little in the way of practical steps to improve cycling but we hope that these things can be developed more a later stage."

Major elements of the proposal include publicity to promote cycling, walking and public transport, bus stop improvements including weather cover and "real time" bus information displays, and improved access to the South Downs National Park, including signage and resurfacing of routes and improvement of access including rights of way.

This is all to be welcomed. However, in the absence of a citywide sustainable transport plan, it will be hard to improve the problems of slow public transport links with other parts of the city, and dangerous cycle routes into town.

In particular, the publicity-promotion of cycling seems optimistic, without provision of safe cycling routes around such obstacles and pinch points as the Underpass, Vogue Gyratory and the Level.

The report does acknowledge: "The poor surrounding cycling and pedestrian facilities mean parents and carers are reluctant to let their children walk or cycle which also contributes to a lost opportunity to improve health."

The local improvements might encourage more people to use the South Downs National Park, but will it encourage more people to cycle and walk to work and school?

To ease congestion we want people to use cars less. To do that, we need to make sustainable transport the mode of choice: prioritise public transport, so becomes as fast to get the train station by bus as it is by car; make walking and cycling safe and attractive.

There are some nods in this direction: a "green wave" on traffic lights in Vogue Gyratory will give sustainable transport priority. And a new direct bus service will allow residents to get to the station without having to change buses (extension of route 21). But overall journey times on buses are likely to remain long as buses struggle through congested streets. And a green wave for cyclists on Vogue Gyratory is unlikely to make it less intimidating. A cycle bypass is needed there, and cyclists still have to confront the Level...

Imagine a fast tram to the station,  and delightful cycling and walking routes... people leaving their cars at home or on the city outskirts. Am I dreaming? Actually, there used to be railway line running though the Vogue Gyratory, it was demolished only in 1984. Ultimately we will need to re-engineer the city to get where we want to go. That will help stimulate the economy as well.

For the time being, in my opinion, without an overall city plan that coordinates a sustainable transport policy, it will be hard for a local project like this Lewes Road Corridor bid to persuade substantial numbers of people to switch to sustainable transport for trips like work and school.

It is doubtful that more community consultation on this isolated project could have come up with better ideas - and in the end, the vocal spokesperson for Lewes Road Clean Air Campaign, Duncan Blinkhorn, gave the project his support.

In my opinion, the money would be better spent on making an integrated city plan - then we can make a start on some of the serious civil engineering obstacles - like Vogue Gyratory. And similar obstacles on Old Shoreham Road. So let's go for the big prize, the £50m bid.

In the meantime, this bid should be supported, not because it promises fundamental change - but because it is a step in the right direction, and an opportunity to focus the city's attention on what is needed to promote real modal shift toward sustainable transport. If it does not go ahead, we will lose the funding opportunity.

Bid Details
The application includes elements under the following headings:
SC1 – Personalised Travel Planning (PTP)
SC2 - Travel Planning (Universities)
SC3 - School Travel Planning
SC4 - Community Road Safety Campaign
SC5 - Electric Bikes Research and Promotion
TI1 - Links to South Downs National Park (SDNP)
TI2 - Traffic Signal Review and Upgrade
TI3 - Pedestrian Wayfinding Extension
TI4 - Bus Real Time Information (RTI) Extension and Upgrade to GPRS
TI5 - Rail Station Access Improvements
TI6 – Improved Bus Stop Waiting Environments
TI7 - Bus Service Improvements to Brighton Station

Download the full details of Brighton and Hove's "Lewes Road Corridor
2011-2014" LSTF Bid here:
http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1146323

Cycling England is dead; long live cycling in England

A delayed posting of the link to my second story for Guardian Environment. 28 March 2011. Cycling England has been abolished and the Department for the Environment says it will take the work in house and promote sustainable transport using a new £560m Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF). But sustainable transport lobbyists say the "localism agenda" may derail attempts by government to achieve "modal shift towards sustainable transport". After all, not all local authorities want sustainable transport - the Tory administration in Brighton and Hove declared in January that it wants to repeal moves in that direction.

Link to Guardian story, with comments, here

My story was subbed to fit the Guardian word count. My original story is below:

Cycling in England after Cycling England is abolished

1590 words

By Russell Honeyman

russellhoneyman@yahoo.co.uk

22 March 2011. On March 31, Cycling England will be no more, and critics fear its successor will be unable to achieve modal shift toward sustainable transport because it is crippled by the “localisation agenda”.

To all intents and purposes, Cycling England is dead already. The “Non Governmental Public Body” that was supposed to get “more people cycling, more safely, more often” in England has been abolished as part of coalition government reforms to “increase accountability, deliver smaller government and improve efficiency”.

The Department for Transport (DfT) will bring key functions of Cycling England in-house. It says the work can be done better within the Department through the mechanism of a £560m Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF).

Secretary of State Norman Baker launched of the LSTF in an online video describing his vision for “modal shift to sustainable transport”. Electric cars and long distance rail travel will help reduce carbon and yield health and environmental benefits. Physical inactivity and poor air quality cost the state scores of billions a year, while walking and cycling improves high street turnover by 10-15%. Congestion, he said costs us £11bn a year.

Mr Baker praised Cycling England’s Demonstration towns. Over £160million in government funds to 18 towns and cities over 6 years saw increases of 27% in cycling, and doubled the number of children cycling to school. During this time cycling was on a general decline in the rest of the UK.

But Mr Baker wants an end to “the top down approach”. He wants to hand power back to local authorities, alongside decentralised economic power, regional growth funds and Local Enterprise Partnerships. He wants to move away from specific grants to local, customised solutions.

Hence, he abolished Cycling England, and in its stead, set up the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF). He envisages local authorities working in partnership with voluntary sector, community and business to put forward proposals for grant funding from the scheme. The first round will be in April 2011.

That’s just over a week a away.

Sustainable Transport charity Sustrans' Policy Manager Jason Torrance broadly welcomed the LSTF. But today, he warned: “The localism agenda makes it difficult to have an adequate response to climate change or physical inactivity. We need a national response to a national crisis. Devolving responsibility to Local Authorities to interpret, or in their own way prioritise as they see fit, is not necessarily a recipe for success. Phillip Hammond quotes national policy as giving over-riding commitment to localism – the reality is that this may well end up undermining the government’s very own strategy.”

Mr Torrance is sanguine about the demise of Cycling England: “We don’t have a funding environment that has £140m for a Cycling England. It is now incumbent on the local authorities to use the momentum in a wider sense and move towards integrated transport systems as a part of upcoming Local Transport Plans published at the end of March.” (more>>>)

Good news from the DfT - more money for cycle town projects after Cycling England is dead

Some £836,000 was granted by the DfT on March 21 to "chosen cycle town projects" and railways as a sort of one-off grant to improve cycling - in the last moments of Cycling England which finally ceases to exist on 1 April.

On the UK Parliament website, Norman Baker says he is granting the money "to implement a number of small sustainable projects in the cycle towns and, separately, for three train operating companies to enhance their bike and rail schemes."

Very mysterious and in contradiction to the idea that all Cycle Town projects will cease on April 1.

"The chosen cycle town projects - Blackpool, Bristol, Cambridge, Colchester, Darlington, Derby, Exeter, Leighton Linslade, South Gloucestershire, Southend, Shrewsbury, Woking and York - have been assessed as capable of being delivered within the current financial year while offering value-for-money"

Brighton and Hove was not on the list.

The announcement continues: "This is in addition to our recently launched local sustainable transport fund which allows local authorities to bid for a share of £560 million over four years, aimed at encouraging sustainable transport solutions, including cycling initiatives, that will create economic growth and cut carbon.

"This additional funding demonstrates the Government's continued commitment to cycling, recognising their potential contribution to reducing carbon emissions, improving health and creating economic growth.

Link to Parliament website for more info

Cycling England is dead; new Sustainable Transport Fund undermined by Localism Agenda

The Department for Transport has abolished the "quango" that promoted cycling and sustainable transport in the UK, saying it can do better in house. But Sustrans says the government's strategy is undermined by its "localism agenda".

On March 31, Cycling England, the “Non Governmental Public Body” that was supposed to get “more people cycling, more safely, more often” in England will be abolished as part of coalition government reforms to “increase accountability, deliver smaller government and improve efficiency”.

The DfT has set up the £560m Local Sustainable Transport Fund to take over its role from 1 April 2011. The LSTF will provide funds, but no guidance to local authorities on the journey to “modal shift” in sustainable transport? Will this be enough to change our present car-bound national profile to one where we use public transport and walk and cycle more? Instead of our sluggish 1-2% of trips by cycle at present, can we in the UK ever hope approach the dashing Dutch figure 27% of trips by bicycle (33% in racy Utrecht)?

I tried to talk with Secretary of State for Transport, Norman Baker. His spokesperson was very helpful, and directed me to an online video of the Minister, where I saw a convincing depiction of the dream of a future UK where transport is sustainable.

But it is going to to be up Local Authorities to deliver the dream. The spokesperson confirmed that no policy or advisory body or department would replace Cycling England. It would be up to local authorities to devise and implement initiatives to persuade people to use sustainable transport.

Yet, as I know from living in Brighton and Hove, local authorities are not all committed to sustainable transport. Anyway, cycling campaigners believe we can’t achieve modal shift without enabling national policies and legislation.

Maybe something is cooking behind the scenes in the DfT that no one is telling me about, some killer policy move that will mark the route to the promised land of sustainable. But it there is, they are not telling me.

I decided to talk to Sustrans. Sustrans was among the vocal critics of Brighton and Hove City council in February when they announced plans to demolish the city’s flagship cycle freeway, paid for by Cycling England money.

I spoke with Jason Torrance, Sustrans' Policy Manager. He surprised me by telling me that the creation of the LSTF arose from an idea first mooted by Sustrans, Campaign for Better Transport and Friends of the Earth – that of a Transport Carbon Reduction Fund. It formed part of both Conservative and Liberal Election Manifestos in last year’s parliamentary elections.

“So you got what you wanted?” I asked.

“Yes and no,” he said. “We got ring fenced funding for Sustainable Transport – which the DfT are to be congratulated for. But we didn’t want less money for Transport overall – but who does?. When we made our original proposition we didn’t know Local Authority Transport funding would be slashed. In England, outside of London it’s 26% lower. Capital and revenue are both reduced, even with the sticking plaster of the LSTF. Spread over all the Local Authorities, the LSTF funding is very small, too small to make any significant difference.

“There is a welcome focus on where the majority of journeys take place – locally. But there is a collision of national government aspirations and localism agenda. The Transport Secretary, Phillip Hammond says on the one hand that the government has prioritised action to tackle climate change but on the other hand he says that local views can be different. Some will deprioritise sustainable transport.

Mr Torrance is sanguine about the demise of Cycling England: “We don’t have a funding environment that has prioritised £140m for a Cycling England. It is now incumbent on the local authorities to use the momentum in a wider sense and move towards integrated transport systems as a part of upcoming Local Transport Plans published at the end of March.”

I asked him whether he felt the DfT could achieve modal shift without a strong body like Cycling England helping guide Local Authorities with policy guidelines set at national level, such as 20 mph and stricter liability.

“It’s a not a problem of the existence or otherwise of Cycling England, it’s problem of the localisation agenda,” he said.

I told Mr Torrance that where I live, in Brighton and Hove, the Local Authority is trying to repeal its commitment to sustainable transport.

“Yes, in the general dialogue there is an alleged war on the motorist. We’ll see more of that around fuel duties. But our inefficient transport system imposes significant costs on our economy. Congestion, air quality, accidents, and physical inactivity each cost our wider economy some £10bn a year. That’s quite a cost. Travel choice has been marginalised and motoring made a necessity.”

The DfT told me they would not set up an infrastructure or policy unit to guide local authorities Local Authorities under the LSTF, and rather, “it is local authorities and their delivery partners who have the practical experience and expertise of delivering successful sustainable transport projects on the ground.”

Mr Torrance replied: “The reality is that we have an ever devolving localised political trend. We need urgent guidance from central government to Local Authorities. That is what will save billions. We have a huge potential to change the way that we make the majority of our journeys and make the step change to four out of five local journeys being made by foot, bike or public transport,

“The localism agenda makes it difficult to have an adequate response to climate change or physical inactivity. We need a national response to a national crisis. Devolving responsibility to Local Authorities to interpret or in their own way prioritise as they see fit is not necessarily a recipe for success. Phillip Hammond quotes national policy as giving over-riding commitment to localism – the reality is that this may well end up undermining the government’s very own strategy.”

Do you think we need 20 mph limits and stricter liability?

“Sustrans’ Quality Streets campaign (www.quality-streets.org.uk) has brought a coalition of organisations together to push for the critical enabling environment for cycling – low motor traffic speeds via a 20mph default in all residential areas. We are pushing for additional guidance to encourage local authorities. But being a tempered political realist that’s not going to happen on a national level. It is happening due to local decisions in some places, parts of London and Portsmouth for example. But there’s no coherent road safety strategy in this country. The localism agenda precludes national strategy guidelines. We are lagging behind many parts of Europe and our economy is suffering. If we wanted to achieve that modal shift - that 2% of trips that are currently made by bike transformed into the around 27% happens in the Netherlands - we would need real focus and real direction from government.”

From your relationship with government, do you believe the structures being proposed by the DfT will enable modal shift toward sustainable transport?

“My wife says I’m a relentless optimist. But my optimism is getting stretched very thinly indeed. We have small steps where giant leaps are required.”

OPINION: Will Brighton & Hove get away with scrapping the cycling dream and keeping the money?

Clock Tower Approaches

Audit and evaluation of The Cycle Demonstration Town by the seaside

Cycling England is set to close on March 31. But there may yet be a few twitches from the corpse of the body that was supposed to promote cycling in England. After it closes, the work of the monitoring and evaluating the work done in Cycle Cities and Towns, funded by Cycling England grants, will continue for some time.

So we’ve yet to hear the reports of what happened to Brighton and Hove’s Cycle Town scheme, where key components were scrapped.

Despite its apparent commitment to being a Cycling Town (link below), Brighton and Hove, where I live, is in the grip of a minority Tory council administration which in January declared its intention to “repeal” the city’s decade long commitment to promoting sustainable transport, and instead to combat “unfair penalisation of car drivers”.

Over the last year or so, the council has cancelled key elements in the plan for a network of protected cycle lanes that lay at the heart of the Cycling Demonstration Town scheme. The scheme was paid for by Cycling England grants and cost around of £4.5 million including partial grant matching from the city.

In February the Conservatives proposed a budget including plans to demolish The Drive Cycle Freeway in February - which cuts across the driveways of Tory heartland in Hove. Council Leader Mary Mears she said there were no fears the council would have to refund the money to Cycling England because “that quango is about to be abolished.”

Of course Mary Mears is mistaken. She will have to account for it because it is public money. But since her council now no longer has to answer to a “Non Departmental Public Body” like Cycling England, but rather to the Department of Transport under the political control of Liberal Democrat MP for the nearby town of Lewes, Secretary of State Norman Baker, one wonders whether the evaluation procedures applied will be as rigorous as they might have been when Cycling England was alive.

Cyclists in Brighton and Hove are incensed by the apparent diversion of resources intended for a cycling infrastructure that was supposed to encourage thousands of school children to cycle to school. Where are the protected cycle lanes planned for Old Shoreham Road and London Road? Where are The Drive’s safe interchanges and connections with the north of the city and the South Down’s National Park?

We draw scant comfort from the fact that the Department will continue to fund Bikeability (cycle training for children) for four years from 2011 – 2015, and to fund safe routes to school and Bike Club in 2011/12. These programmes encourage children to cycle to school, but I know from cycling The Old Shoreham Road myself that this is asking for trouble when there are no safe cycling lanes. Kids are forced to cycle along the pavement because it is too dangerous along the road. And cycle casualties are increasing in the city.

The council has cancelled the important backbone of protected cycle freeways, and instead painted white lines on the road or designated cycle lanes on peripheral routes, such as Madeira Drive, which is actually closed during peak summer periods. (more>>>)