Minutes:
The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Cllr Beverley Nielsen, Cllr Martin Allen, Cllr Natalie McVey, Cllr Matt Jenkins and Cllr Tom Wells.
The motion was moved by Cllr Beverley Nielsen and seconded by Cllr Matt Jenkins who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.
The following amendment was moved by Cllr Mike Rouse and seconded by Cllr Marc Bayliss:
“This Council recognises the current Government's stated aim to increase journeys in towns and cities to be cycled or walked by 2030 to help lower congestion. Council commits to working closely with District, Borough and City Councils across Worcestershire in pursuing Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans, through pro-active dialogue and engagement with bid submissions, match funding where appropriate and backed by a strong business case. Council reaffirms its commitment to providing the travelling public with safe, affordable and reasonable choices about how they move to provide residents with the confidence to make informed and well-supported choices.”
The mover and seconder of the motion accepted the amendment. Members spoke in favour of the amendment with the following points being made:
· The Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans provided an opportunity to introduce a module shift in travel to enable bikes or by e-bikes to replace a percentage of car trips similar to the approach taken in the Netherlands. If more could be invested in travel for the least affluent members of society then it could have an impact on obesity levels. Public Health England had suggested that the NHS could save £17bn as a result of the health benefits associated with active travel. Active travel could help improve air quality in Worcestershire. There were opportunities for cost benefit improvements from reduced costs relating to the lack of equality, physical inactivity, greenhouse gas emissions and the impact of traffic noise which according to the Cabinet Office was costing between £38-49 bn a year. Bid writing, match-funding and identified goals in developing local cycling and walking infrastructure plans would be welcomed
· Electric bikes had a key role in increasing active travel because they were able to replace car travel for many journeys, opening up longer distances. However the Council had a poor reputation in respect of active travel and had failed to receive Government funding. Much could be learned from the approach taken in the Netherlands which had separated cycle paths, protected junctions, ample cycle parking, 20mph sped limits in urban areas and shorter and more direct cycle routes. A dedicated active travel budget, engagement with user groups, and partnership working was key. A change of mind set towards active travel which gave people a choice was vital
· The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Highways and Transport commented that the Council did have a good and improving record on providing cycling and walking infrastructure. It was important that the public had a module choice of active travel and the freedom to choose how they wished to travel. However, there was limited road space and sometimes space needed to be reallocated to facilitate that choice. The Council was dedicated to providing the public with safe, affordable and reasoned choices as to how they wished to travel around the county. The Council was a pro-active travel authority
· It was disappointing that the target in the original motion that half of all journeys in towns and cities to be cycled or walked by 2030 to help lower congestion, had been removed in the amendment to the motion
· Concern was expressed about the fragmentation of strategic cycle routes whereby certain key elements of cycling infrastructure had not been joined up
· There was a block to the progress of active travel caused by the militancy of certain user groups. A “share with care” mindset needed to be adopted by all concerned
· Education was important to engender confidence amongst less experienced cyclists. It was therefore suggested that a programme of Bikeability sessions be introduced for adults, with a particular focus on e-bikes
· Good progress had been made to improve walking and cycling routes in the county but more needed to be done. However, schemes to improve the network were costly and it was important to look at more cost-effective ways of providing the necessary infrastructure
· The Netherlands had different infrastructure to this country with predominately flat, wide-open spaces and therefore a different approach needed to be adopted which examined each new individual scheme to establish what could be done to provide better infrastructure for cycling as well as other forms of transport
· The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Economy, Infrastructure and Skills commented that active travel should not just be dominated by the cycling lobby and other forms of transport such as walking should be accommodated. There was a danger that the pursuit of the provision of high specification active travel infrastructure would be expensive thereby limiting the amount of overall infrastructure that could be provided within budgets. There should be a focus on sharing road space and respecting all users of that space with more funding for education campaigns and work with the police on enforcement
· Although the “share with care” approach would be welcomed, there would continue to be a need for segregation of road users where appropriate
· The provision of more dedicated cycleways for school children would be welcomed.
On being put to a vote, the amendment was carried and put as the substantive motion which was agreed unanimously.
RESOLVED “This Council recognises the current Government's stated aim to increase journeys in towns and cities to be cycled or walked by 2030 to help lower congestion. Council commits to working closely with District, Borough and City Councils across Worcestershire in pursuing Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans, through pro-active dialogue and engagement with bid submissions, match funding where appropriate and backed by a strong business case. Council reaffirms its commitment to providing the travelling public with safe, affordable and reasonable choices about how they move to provide residents with the confidence to make informed and well-supported choices.”