Active Travel England! NPPF Footnote 56! Manual For Streets 3! The Design And Placemaking PPG! And… The VAWG Strategy?
Or, can we really deliver safer streets for women and girls?
“For too many people in this country, walking is not simple or straightforward. For too many, particularly women and girls, it comes with a calculation – a constant, exhausting mental calculation – about safety, lighting, routes and risk. Rather than get excited about the destination, too many are forced to fret about the journey.” – Lilian Greenwood
Aloha Urbanistas!!
Excellent news this week and it isn’t even an April Fool.
Active Travel England (ATE) are in the process of producing guidance on how to produce… *drumroll*… streets that are safer for women and girls!
W00T!
According to ATE, it turns out that:
“New polling by YouGov… has found that almost nine in 10 (88%) women have felt unsafe while walking at night, while seven in 10 (71%) have changed their route to avoid walking in the dark during winter or darker months.” – ATE
The guidance will raise the importance of reviewing active travel through a gender lens to create safer and more inclusive spaces.
Hurrah!
As well as the usual advice of improving lighting and installing additional CCTV, it’s good to see that some places are taking more radical action, such as replacing underpasses with at-grade crossings – hat tips to Leicester and Greater Manchester! 👏
ATE also reference the VAWG strategy, stating:
“The Department for Transport [DfT] has outlined its nine commitments in the cross-government Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) strategy to drive change across the transport network: including improved CCTV connectivity at train stations, mandatory training for bus drivers on how to recognise and respond to VAWG as well as anti-social behaviour, and a new strategic VAWG package for Roads Policing.”
Good stuff.
But don’t forget, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) are of the view that:
“The NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework) is a planning document. It sets out guidelines for housebuilding and planning in England. The VAWG strategy is about protecting women and girls from violence and misogyny. [It is] unclear as to why anyone would expect the two things to be combined.”
I mean, come on! If even the DfT are on board with VAWG, how come the memo from front office never reached the MHCLG?
Perhaps someone could have a quiet word in the meantime.
And apart from me rambling on about it, here’s proof from ATE that there is actually a cross over between planning/placemaking and women’s safety!
And not only that, as I said at the beginning of March, the Draft Design and Placemaking Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) actually mentions women and girls specifically:
Movement networks fit for purpose: “a connected network of routes and clear pattern and hierarchy of streets that provide safe and accessible movement for all”. This “supports the safety of women and girls and enables safe and secure movement for everyone…” (104.)
Safe public spaces: “Designing for safety in public spaces, considering people who occupy the buildings around them, visitors and passers‑by, helps overcome crime and the fear of crime enabling everyone including women and girls to enjoy them.” (149.)
Eyes on the Street: “Designing security features early on helps people feel safe, secure, creates a sense of belonging, and deters those with malicious intent, without the need for retrospectively adding security measures. Security features should be designed to support the safety of women and girls” (150.) and include active frontages, natural surveillance, activities that draw people in and positively designed security measures.
Astonishing!
Of course, there are still obstacles to overcome when it comes to actually implementing public realm changes and street design that respond to the particular needs of women and girls.
It turns out that earlier this year, under cover of darkness, Manual for Streets 3 has been circulated to “selected stakeholders” for comment. Is this a case of marking one’s own homework? Some are concerned it lacks “technical clarity.”
And how can a consultation that is taking place behind closed doors ensure that initiatives such as ATE’s guidance on streets for women and girls be baked into the final document?
Does the draft MfS3 actually mention women and girls, or are we just going round in circles?
Also, how do we ensure that footnote 56 in the consultation version of the NPPF is actually applied? This is the bit that requires compliance with national design guidance – i.e. Manual for Streets – to inform how policy TR4 (Street design, access and parking) would be applied.
If Highways Authorities are under no duty to comply with this, are we just wasting our time?
It seems to me that there is a lot of stuff going on disparately all over the place with no clear overlaps or thought about how the upcoming NPPF, ATE guidance, MfS3 and the Design and Placemaking PPG should align and cross-reference each other to actively promote design that specifically supports women and girls getting about.
Dare I ask if there are any women taking part in the MfS3 consultation?
Who are these “selected stakeholders”?
But, there is hope if we are willing to take inspiration from France.
The Mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo is stepping down after 12 years in the job.
Despite all the misogyny, “… petitions, lawsuits, police opposition [and] the fury of thousands of motorists” she experienced, she nevertheless delivered:
The pedestrianisation of the Voie Georges-Pompidou and the annual Parisbeaches initiative
Higher parking costs to encourage public transport use
932 miles of cycle lanes
A 50% reduction in air pollution
Swimming in the Seine
The planting of 150,000 trees
The creation of 156,000 acres of new green spaces
An increase in affordable social housing from 13% in 2001 to 25% today
That is one heck of a legacy.
Clearly having a woman in charge can lead to excellent results in terms of placemaking.
But, back here in the UK, are there enough women in the placemaking professions to push the agenda for women-centric streets or are we just going to end up with more DMRB nonsense?
Folks, we need more women at the table – and fast.
Question: are you convinced that safe streets for women and girls are about to become a reality?
#placemaking #activetravelengland #vawg #manualforstreets #mfs3 #nppf #vawgstrategy #paris
… and if you enjoyed it…