Women! Cycling! Paris! And NPPF Footnote 48… 🚴♀️
Or, the challenge of delivering the infrastructure that would encourage women to cycle
“Design should begin with the principle that all potential cyclists and their machines should be catered for in all cycle infrastructure design.” – LTN1/20 (1.4.1)
Back this week to the topic of women’s safety on our streets and how we cater for women – and everyone else for that matter – to get out and about.
I note that Cycling UK are currently promoting the “My ride. Our right” campaign to get more women cycling, which is a laudable thing to do.
Let’s face it, there are lots of reasons why we all – not just women – should get on two wheels:
· It’s good for your health
· It’s good for the planet’s health
· It’s cheaper than running a car
· It’s often more convenient than public transport
And yet…
… only half as many women cycle as regularly as men…
… with a survey showing that 9 in 10 women fear cycling in UK cities.
Clearly something is going wrong in terms of city and cycle infrastructure design when:
· 79% of women fear being hit by a vehicle
· 62% fear road rage or harassment
· 56% fear cycling at night
… and we know that people have been campaigning for better cycling facilities seemingly for ever – Alix Stredwick from Cycling UK has been on the case since 2001!
So, how on earth can we be stuck in this situation when we’ve seen publication after publication variously calling for good cycle infrastructure including:
Manual for Streets, published 2007
Manual for Streets 2, published 2010
Making Space for Cycling, published by Cyclenation in 2014
Healthy Streets for London, published 2017
The National Design Guide, published 2019
Building for a Healthy Life, published 2020
LTN1/20 – Cycle Infrastructure Design, published 2020
Streets for a Healthy Life, published 2022
The National Planning Policy Framework, (latest edition) published 2024
… and on and on and on.
Document after document after document telling us we should be proactively designing streets and spaces to accommodate cycling and, in some cases such as LTN1/20, actually showing us how to do it.
And yet?
We still have shared use “facilities” as a default assuming the local highway authority can even be bothered to go that far in its attempts to accommodate “active travel” and subsequently document after document after document such as:
Transport for New Homes – Project Summary and Recommendations, published 2018…
Building Better Building Beautiful Commission – Living with Beauty, published 2020…
Place Alliance – A Housing Design Audit for England, published 2020…
Transport for New Homes – Garden Villages and Garden Towns: Visions & Reality, published 2020…
Transport for New Homes – What is being built in 2025?, published earlier this year…
… telling us that when it comes to cycling and getting about sustainably, what we’ve actually delivered is yet more car-dominated sprawl.
Accommodating cycling is an integral part of placemaking. It is not just a ‘nice to have’.
Cycling is a great leveller, enabling women, who are more likely than men to have no access to a car, to enjoy greater freedom and opportunities.
On this channel I have commented ad infinitum on the issues created by the rise of the SUV epidemic, the fact we are still all “Trapped Behind the Wheel” and women’s concerns for their safety after dark… all articles prompted by a well-timed comment by Saoirse Ronan on the Graham Norton Show last autumn:
And now here we are with Cycling UK picking up the baton in the ‘let’s have safer streets’ relay.
The fact is, we know what to do to create safer streets. It’s all in the policies and guidance I mentioned above. There’s no mystery to any of this.
The simple truth is that for whatever reason WE CONSISTENTLY CHOOSE NOT TO DO IT!
Could it be that even though Footnote 48 in the NPPF (December 2024 edition) states that ‘policies and decisions should not make use of or reflect the former Design Bulletin 32…’ the people who wrote it conveniently forgot that highway authorities, unlike planning authorities, are under no duty to adhere to this requirement?
Hence, yet more provision of shared use… cycle lanes that stop and start assuming they are even there at all… cycle tracks that don’t link up… are all par for the course.
I spoke a couple of weeks ago about gender responsive planning. Clearly, I think, its time has come.
That’s inclusivity! That’s accessibility! Make life easier for the vulnerable and you make life easier for everybody else!
So, before I sign out, dust off your copy of LTN1/20 and let’s go do some research… in Paris!
“Mais pourquoi?” I hear you cry!
Well, Paris has, believe it or not, topped a European ranking of 36 cycling-friendly cities for children by a country mile. The Streets for Kids, Cities for all report is (thankfully) a relatively quick read but it focuses on interventions that we have been campaigning for and struggling to implement for decades… despite the policies and guidance being in place to back it all up.
Cities were judged on the number of School Streets (London ranks No1 here – W00T!), safer and slower speeds (30kph/18mph – London ranks No17 – hmmm) and the provision of protected cycling infrastructure (London ranks No27 – oh dear).
Don’t forget that lower speed limits and protected cycling infrastructure are at the heart of the “My ride. Our right” campaign. Just sayin’.
None of this is unusual. We’ve heard it all before! But again, we consistently choose not to do these things and in Wales, the 20mph speed limit – a policy that we know has prevented over 100 deaths and serious injuries – is being rolled back.
We are so civilised and advanced, we would happily trade life for speed. Fantastic.
Well done!
But, could it be that if cycling is safe for children it’s also safe for women… and, by extension, everyone else?
Mais oui!
In comparison to Paris – which still has work to do, by the way – here in the UK, Bristol has ranked eighth. So there are signs of hope.
We clearly have a long way to go but if we want more people cycling – as we claim to do – we just have to get off our ever-expanding behinds and invite it.
Do say: If we actually apply LTN1/20, we can seamlessly design inclusively for everyone!
Don’t say: If you want cycle infrastructure, could we squeeze in a sub-standard shared-use route next to the dual-carriageway?
Question: Inclusivity is at the heart of LTN1/20, but how do we actually ensure it is implemented in new-build schemes and existing street upgrades?
#cyclinguk #myrideourright #cycling #women #ltn120 #placemaking #nppf #manualforstreets #paris #streetsforkidscitiesforall