Report of the Director for Neighbourhood

Sean Parkes a representative for Nottinghamshire County Council delivered a presentation on Cycling in Nottinghamshire, providing an overview of the County Council’s strategic background, funding for cycling, how potential infrastructure improvements are assessed and prioritised and coordinated behaviour change programmes.

Mr Parkes advised that the County Council is currently reviewing its Strategy Plan for the period 2021-2025, including its Local Transport Plan 2011-2026 and Fourth Implementation Plan 2022/23 which includes the Cycling Strategy Delivery Plan 2016 covering cycling strategic priorities, a Cycling Action Plan and cycling infrastructure priorities.

Mr Parkes explained the Boroughs role as a stakeholder consultee to review and coordinate the role of cycling networks within the County Council’s strategy within the Boroughs responsibilities as follows:

·       Local Plan/Developer Contribution Strategy

·       Cycling Development Plans on the Borough’s estate

·       AQMA action plans

·       Rushcliffe Borough Council’s travel plans (employee/visitors)

Mr Parkes continued, providing the group with examples of funding opportunities available for cycling, explaining the role of Rushcliffe when considering cycling infrastructure in town centre improvements (and other district council) funding bids, securing/releasing funding from developer contributions.

Mr Parkes advised the Group of the DfT requirements in respect of infrastructure assessment, highlighting the D2N2 Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP), an evidence based assessment to demonstrate need for improvements, whilst sharing the D2N2 strategic objectives for supporting economic growth, tourism and the visitor economy, addressing transport congestion, climate change, air quality and health deprivation.  In addition, the assessment aims to identify short (1year), medium (4 years) and long (10 years) term infrastructure priorities.

Nottinghamshire County Council at its Communities and Place Committee approved:

·       Strategic priorities for future highways cycling investment

·       Provisional short-term highway infrastructure priorities

·       Incorporation of ‘Local Transport Note 1.20: Cycle infrastructure Design’ into existing highway design principles

·       Additional assessment/prioritisation of local route improvements

In addition, the Group noted that there is to be a planned public consultation on a draft D2N2 wide infrastructure priorities.

Within the infrastructure assessment, further steps include:

·       Feasibility/design/deliverability – focusing primarily on short term priorities

·       Value for money assessments – dependent on scheme value

·       Criteria for available funding

·       Local support for proposals

The Group noted that the Boroughs potential to influence the infrastructure assessment by acting as a priority consultee, suggesting schemes around planned growth and the integration of infrastructure priorities for future plans and funding.

Mr Hugh McClintock from Pedals delivered a presentation that highlighted the growth in cycling and bike sales over the past 18 months during the Covid pandemic and the Governments current policy, ‘Gear Change’ a bold new vision on cycling and walking, including the revised DfT Local Transport Note 1/20 as touched on in Mr Parkes presentation.

Mr McClintock emphasised the need for a cycling network that is coherent, direct, safe, attractive and comfortable to use, stressing that up to date and accurate maps are essential and should be widely available and promoted.

In assessing the quality of local walking and cycling networks in the Borough, Mr McClintock requested the need for a more coordinated approach with the Boroughs role as the local planning authority and its promotion for improvements to the cycle infrastructure whilst working closely with the County Council, Highways England and private developers. Adding that many facilities designed and built many years ago fall below national and local standards.

Mr McClintock provided examples within the Borough where cycle routes were not coherent or easy to navigate, or where routes were not direct involving extra distance or lots of stopping and starting resulting in cyclists choosing to ride on the main carriageway, as it is faster and more direct, creating a safety issue.

Mr McClintock expressed the increased uptake in cycling over the past 18 months and the added popularity of e-bikes means that it is increasingly more important to improve the cycling network within the Borough and to promote cycling for leisure and promote the health and environmental aspects of cycling more broadly.

Ms Claire Maltby from Sustrans, a UK charity for promoting active travel delivered a presentation. Ms Maltby provided an insight into the charities strategic priorities as follows:

·       Paths for Everyone

A UK-wide network of traffic free paths for everyone, connecting cities towns and countryside, loved by the communities they serve.

·       Liveable Cities and Towns for Everyone

Places that connect us to each other and what we need, and where everyone can thrive without having to use a car.

Ms Maltby touched on the climate crisis, emphasising that transport is now the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases in the UK and that carbon targets would not be met, without reducing the amount of car travel.

Ms Maltby highlighted the health benefits of greener communities, where local authorities actively encourage walking and cycling as a means of moving around. In addition, Ms Maltby explained that improvements to walking and cycling networks would help in reducing  air pollutants in towns and cities, increase physical activity and mental health of our residents by making it easy and attractive to travel without needing a car.

Members welcomed the ideas put forward by the three organisations and in particular addressing Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIP) as highlighted in the presentations. Members were also keen to see more connectivity within new developments with the introduction of segregated pedestrian and cycle paths.

Members questioned whether ward Councillors should be consulted when considering improvements or changes to cycling paths as they have local knowledge in areas in which they serve, adding that improvements to existing networks would make a difference initially, providing examples by improving the surfaces of cycle paths, installing cycle boxes at traffic lights and clearer signage. Mr Parks explained that the new design standards should address some of these issues and that maintenance of existing paths was key to these initial improvements.

Members questioned how developers could be encouraged to provide cycle and pedestrian paths within the design layout on new housing developments and whether this could be enforced as part of the planning application conditions or within the section 106 agreement.

Members advised that Rushcliffe was a rural Borough and encouraging residents to commute by bike is not realistic, however Members were keen to see improvements to cycle connectivity for trains and bus services and noted the increase in the uptake of cycling for leisure purposes and the impact of this on rural roads, where improvements could be made.

Mr Parks explained that the Nottinghamshire County Council Strategy Plan would reflect the different needs of rural and urban cycling and would take into consideration links to train stations and leisure connectivity.

It was RESOLVED that:

a)    The Group note the information provided in the presentations

b)    and that the provision of cycling in the Borough be brought back to a later date of Growth and Development Scrutiny for further comment.