Coming soon..... Bicycle Village, Sunday 22nd May

Bicycle Village is a bike show held in May, promoting independent shops, bike hires, cycling groups and organizations to the visitors.Everyone who love bikes and who would like to know more about them is welcome

More details of events and participants available from the website.

We will "remove barriers to cycling"... by installing steps...

The soon-to-be-published Local Transport Plan (LTP3) for Greater Manchester contains a number of priority committments. One of these boldy asserts that:

“Our proposals set out ways to improve the pedestrian environment, remove barriers to cycling, improve cycling infrastructure…” 

Which sounds really progressive and is certainly to be welcomed.  Unfortunately, another part of the Greater Manchester transport machine is gearing up to implement this policy by installing a series of steps into the Trans-Pennine Trail near Sandhurst Road as part of the Didsbury Metrolink extension construction work.  See previous blog entry for more details.

Metrolink's new access policy?

Those nice people at Love Your Bike, working with Sustrains and the Trans-Pennine Trail office have been lobbying Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority members to encourage Metrolink to come up with a better solution. The campaign has been reported in both local and national cycling media.

Hundreds of people took part in an email action asking their local councillors who are GMITA memebrs to intervene. The GMITA councillors asked Metrolink for a report to be discussed at the Authority meeting on Friday 25th March. Unfortunately, the report's recommendation is that "members note this update and the issues encountered in incorporating the Trans Pennine Trail into the corridor and affirm their support for the proposed design."  Or put more simply, to carry on installing steps.

Which in terms of the LTP priority commitment to remove barriers to cycling demonstrates the same logic as the (in)famous Vietnam era quote that saw the US military report that 'It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.'

Love Your Bike has updated the email action and is urging people to contact their local GMITA members and ask them to reject the steps option.  Oh.. and you may want to remind them that the GMITA constitution states that all members must not: "do anything which may cause your authority to breach any of the equality enactments (as defined in section 33 of the Equality Act 2006."  Just a thought ....

Access for All? Metrolink plans to trash the Trans Pennine Trail ... Take action now!

For those who have not yet discovered the Trans Pennine Trail (TPT) it is an "exciting route for walkers, cyclists and horse riders linking the North and Irish seas, passing through the Pennines, alongside rivers and canals and through some of the most historic towns and cities in the North of England."

The Trans-Pennine Trail runs coast-to-coast between Southport and Hornsea and is 215 miles (346Km) long. A north-south route connects Leeds and Chesterfield and a spur to York means there are approximately 350 miles (560 km) of Trans Pennine Trail available for people to explore. Within Greater Manchester, the TPT winds its way through Trafford, Manchester and Stockport. The website describes how canal and railway paths take you through Warrington to Trafford, where the TPT picks up the River Mersey once again following a winding riverside path along the Mersey through the southern suburbs of Manchester, passing by Chorlton Water Park and heading via Didsbury to Stockport.

Last year, the Trans-Pennine Trail celebrated its 21st birthday with a series of events supported by Manchester, Stockport and Trafford councils and people from the local communities who enjoy using the Trail.

The Trans-Pennine Trail provides an ideal traffic-free route to encourage a wide range of walking and cycling activities for both recreational, utility and commuting journeys so at a time when Greater Manchester is developing policies in the Local Transport Plan (LTP3) to encourage more people to walk & cycle you would hope that the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE) would be working to improve the facilities and access provided by this wonderful local resource..... unfortunately current proposals from GMPTE/Metrolink would suggest otherwise.

As part of the Metrolink extension works in Didsbury, GMPTE / Metrolink current plans will see the installation of a series of steps into the Trans Pennine Trail route in the Sandhurst Road vicinity as part of the Metrolink extension works in Didsbury.

Apparently, the original designs provided to Manchester City Council and Sustrans indicated that the Trans-Pennine Trail  would make use of ramps at the Sandhurst Road area – thus ensuring that a level access route was maintained.  Despite protests from various user groups, Metrolink seem unwilling to recognise that introducing a series of steps, into what was previously a level access cycle and walking route, will create a major obstacle for a wide range of current, and potential users.

GMPTE/Metrolink did consult on the proposed modifications to the TPT but because the initial development plans indicated that ramps would be used, providing continued level access, the concerns raised were mainly in relation to the temporary re-direction of the TPT.

It was not until late February 2011 that it became apparent that the upgraded Trans-Pennine Trail would now involve the installation of a series of steps which would have a major impact on access.  Enquiries about the possibility of consultation and consideration of other options received the following response:

“[There is] No opportunity to influence the design… this is the design that we are going to construct.”

Not a response likely to re-assure local residents and user groups that their concerns and needs are being taken into account by Metrolink.  Enquiries about why the initial designs have now been changed to steps, received the response that the use of ramps were not feasible as they would “cost millions”. So far, no information has been provided that outlines which, if any, alternative options were examined or what the criteria and cost figures are for the steps or ramp options.
  
Metrolink is currently saying that each set of steps will have “cycle gutters” to enable people to wheel their bicycles up and down the steps.  But this will not be much use for people carrying loaded panniers who will struggle to achieve such manoeuvres – whether they are cycle touring or simply returning from the local shops with their weekly groceries. Also, many users will find the steps an unwelcome and impassable barrier. People such as parents with prams or double pushchairs, electric and manual wheelchair users and their attendants, mobility scooters users, families cycling with child buggies or “tag-alongs” and many mobile elderly people who struggle to navigate steps. Many people are likely to find it very difficult, if not impossible, to navigate six sets of steps and will therefore be effectively deterred from using the Trans-Pennine Trail.

Now, the land that the Trans-Pennine Trail is situated on is currently owned by Manchester City Council - who also have responsibilities for the maintenance of the TPT within the Manchester area. So it can be argued that the Trans-Pennine Trail should be considered as a facility or “service” provided by Manchester City Council for the residents of Manchester. If this is indeed the case, then according to the Council’s Access 2000 Strategy:

“Since October 1999, there is a duty presented by Part III of the Disability Discrimination Act to ensure that every Council service is accessible to disabled people. The Access 2000 Strategy will help to ensure that no part of the City Council creates physical barriers to disabled people using its services. By carrying out best practice for its own design schemes, the City Council will be leading by example, in order to encourage others to follow suit.” (Emphasis added) (Section 1.4)

This would seem to make a strong case that Manchester City Council must intervene in this case to ensure that Metrolink, acting as a developer in this case, do not create physical barriers that prevent disabled people, and other residents, from accessing the Trans-Pennine Trail facility.

There is a certain level of irony when reading the commitment outlined in the draft that Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan (LTP3) proudly claims that: "Our proposals to improve the coverage and quality of public transport, to manage the highway network, improve the pedestrian environment and remove barriers to cycling will help to encourage more car users to change the way they travel."  (Section 4.3.3.1, Page 34, Draft Local Transport Plan - LTP3).

It will also be interesting to see what the Department for Transport make of any bid from GMPTE (soon to be Transport for Greater Manchester) for Local Sustainable Transport Funds (LSTF). The DfT assessment criteria for LSTF bids includes the following:

"28. Proposals which also demonstrate the following characteristics will be favourably considered in the assessment process.

* have the support of a range of community interests; and
* incorporate plans for partnership working in the design and delivery of solutions with external bodies, which could include the private sector community and voluntary sector organisations and transport operators." (Page 14).

The Trans-Pennine Trail provides an ideal traffic-free route to encourage a wide range of walking and cycling activities for both recreational, utility and commuting journeys. The Metrolink extension to Didsbury should be providing an ideal opportunity to improve the quality and access to this popular service.

It seems unlikely that if, as currently planned, Metrolink effectively trashes the Trans Pennine Trail that this will do much to encourage support from local voluntary and community groups!

Take Action now!

If you value the Trans Pennine Trail and would prefer that Metrolink does not create barriers to people walking and cycling on the TPT then please consider doing one (or more) of the following:

1) Email the councillors on the Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority (GMITA) who are supposed to provide oversight and guidance for Metrolink. Those nice people at Love Your Bike have created an email action to help you contact all the GMITA members in your local area.

2) Or send your own message to your local councillors who are members of the GMITA.

3) Attend the Manchester Cycle Forum on Tuesday 15th March.  A GMPTE representative will be attending to discuss Metrolink / Trans Pennine Trail and am sure they would love to hear your views.

Time: 5pm for 5.15pm start.   Venue: The Town Hall, Room 11 - Ground Floor

4) Attend the Stockport Cycle User Group on Wednesday 16th March. A GMPTE representative will be attending to discuss Metrolink / Trans Pennine Trail and am sure they would love to hear your views.

Time: 6-8pm.  Venue: Stockport Town Hall



Update 16th March.

Email action - In just two days, over 240 people from all 10 GM council areas have sent emails to their local councillors who are GM Integrated Transport Authority members asking them to request Metrolink to come up with a better solution.

Manchester Cycle Forum (15th March) - After 50 minutes of discussion and detailed objections, Councillor David Royle, who chairs the Cycle Forum, made it very clear to the Metrolink representative that they must rethink their plans. "This is NOT the right solution".

Manchester Friends of the Earth / Love Your Bike tabled the following resolution which was passed unanimously.

"This Cycle Forum is seriously concerned that the current Metrolink proposals to introduce sets of steps into the Trans Pennine Trail in the vicinity of  Sandhurst Road, Didsbury will seriously degrade access to the Trans Pennine Trail for both visitors and local residents of Manchester. This cycle forum calls on Manchester City Council to work with GMPTE/Metrolink to ensure that the Trans Pennine Trail continues to offer 'access for all' to encourage more people to walk and cycle on the Trans Pennine Trail for recreational, utility or commuting journeys."

Some media coverage:

Didsbury Life: Metrolink and The Trans-Pennine Trail

Inside the M60:  Cyclists up in arms over Metrolink proposals to install steps on Trans Pennine Trail

Fetch.It Didsbury: Metrolink – a step too far for the Trans-Pennine Trail

Ask Bury: Metrolink – a step too far for the Trans-Pennine Trail

This is not a cycle path..... but is it a long term plan?

Reading a recent blog post by David Hembrow 'This is not a Cycle Path' highlighted for me the need for Greater Manchester to get its act together on both the short term measures and longer term planning that will be needed to help encourage more people to choose walking and cycling for everyday journeys.    

A recent post on this blog (What would mass cycling in Greater Manchester look like?) looked at the low levels of people in Greater Manchester who reported that they travelled to work by bicycle (2001 census data) and highlighted a great video from the Netherlands that shows what can be achieved when planning to increase cycling levels is coherent and continuous over a long period.

David Hembrow writes about a 75km cycle trip he made where he lives in the Netherlands.  David describes how "most of the first half of the route between here and Hoogeveen is on roads, not cycle paths. However, these are not roads as you probably know them. Yes, in theory they are "shared" with cars, but in practice you only very rarely see a car using them. There is a parallel road with a higher speed limit which takes the through traffic, and the only cars which use the minor road are those which are accessing properties along it."

Proposals for cycling infrastructure often highlights the two polar opposite positions that can divide the cycling communities - from the "roads are the cycle network, all cycling infrastructure is unecessary" to the "people will not cycle until there is a totally segregated cycle network".  On top of this faultline is the shockingly poor quality of much of the cycling infrastructure that is installed on Greater Manchesters roads.  From my experience, the cycling communities in the UK often seem to spend more time arguing amongst themselves and campaigning against things, rather than working towards developing the (longer term) measures that are essential for normalising cycling.

David Hembrow argues that: "What cyclists need to fight for is better conditions for cycling, which result in more cycling. Spending time in defending a position of being allowed to use roads which the majority of the population find unpleasant may slow the decline of cycling, but it will never grow it. The best defence is a good offence. In the case of cycling, growth comes by fighting for cycling conditions with a level of subjective safety such that everyone will want to cycle, and direct routes which make cycling efficient. The Dutch have done this for a while now, with great success relative to other countries." This reflects a recent article on the I Bike London blog which considers what the cycling communities can learn from the gay rights movement as well as the debates surrounding the setting up of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain.

I don't agree totally with David Hembrow and think that we need to get much better at being able to focus on delivering short-term (here and now) measures as well as developing and implementing the longer-term (where do we want to get to) measures.  After all, the Dutch and Danes have been implementing their pro-cycling policies for over 60 years....

So... looking forward and recognising that a network of traffic-free cycle routes, or cycles routes on quiet roads is one of the most commonly stated factors that people (who do not currently cycle) highlight as a factor that could encourage them to start cycling.


One of the objectives in the draft Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan (LTP3) is to:  "further develop a ‘core cycle network’, that will be implemented locally, on which people will be able to cycle with ease, convenience and safety. This will involve not only the creation of cycle lanes, but improvements at large junctions, roundabouts or pinch points that create barriers for cyclists. We see the completion of a ‘core cycle network’, over the long term, as the key intervention needed in order to create a pro-cycling culture in Greater Manchester." (Section 4.4.2.1)


To achieve such a core cycle network - the soon-to-be formed Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) and local councils will need to implement more "road space re-allocation" to help encourage active travel (walking and cycling) and other forms of sustainable transport.

The Greater Manchester Local Transport Plan (LTP2) included the following Short term Measure (2002 – 2005): "Road Space Reallocation to more sustainable modes and improved traffic management" as well as this Medium term measure (2006-2011) " Continued road space reallocation and further development of pedestrian and cycle initiatives."  We will need to continue lobbying to ensure that the new Local Transport Plan (LTP3) actually implements these measures.


To ensure that any core cycle network provides coherent, consistent and continuous routes will require long-term planning and constant oversight. The unfortunate siting of a major supermarket slap bang in the middle of the Fallowfield Loop highlights the need to ensure that any future plans for cycling infrastructure are embedded into the long-term planning frameworks across Greater Manchester.

 
One route to acheive this will be to lobby for core cycling infrastructure provision to be incorporated into the GM Spatial Framework  which should be open for consultation in June 2011. For all those that have not yet had the delights of encountering this concept the following description may help: "The GM Spatial Framework is not a fully comprehensive plan for Greater Manchester, but focuses on key agreed opportunities. The Framework will be a concise and selective guide to inform investment decisions by public and private sector partners, drawing from district core strategies and other local strategies and concentrating on issues and proposals which are important for the conurbation as a whole and may require a joint commitment, for example to secure necessary supporting infrastructure." (Page 2).

This might all sound very dull and not as much fun as cycling but if we want to develop levels of cycling similar to the Netherlands and Denmark we need to work together with a range of local government agencies, businesses and community groups to embed pro-cycling policies at all levels in Greater Manchester. Together we are stronger.....

What would mass cycling in Greater Manchester look like ?

Well its 10 years since the last Census and very soon the forms for the 2011 (and possibly the last ever) Census will be delivered to your door. You may have seen some of the adverts in local newspapers or billboards explaining why the Census is important for helping local councils and public sector agencies effectively plan local and national services. (Although not everyone is convinced).

Amongst the wide range of data collected, the 2001 Census provided some interesting data for the "Method of Travel to Work" used by people in Greater Manchester (See graph below).

Basically, 20582 people (out of a GM total of 1.78 million) reported that in 2001 they used a bicycle to travel to work. This was about 1.16% of the Census respondents.

Hardly, a mass level of commuter cycling and lets hope that the figures for the amount of people cycling to work from the 2011 Census data (whenever they are published) show a big increase.

What is also interesting (yes I know it may be a little data geeky) is that the 2001 census data on a whole range of subjects - including Travel to Work modes - is available right down to what are known as Lower Layer Super Output Areas.

The map below is the Trafford 001B Lower Layer Super Output Area and the Travel to Work data (KS15) shows that of the 560 people in this area (aged 16-74, in employment) that 21 (3.75%) used a bicycle to travel to work.

This level of data, whilst 10 years old, is available for all areas within Greater Manchester and could provide a useful tool to measure any increase (hopefully, not a decrease ! ) in the levels of people cycling to work in very specific areas near to you.

The data is available on the Office for National Statistics - Neighbourhood Statistics website.

Meanwhile, Greater Manchester is putting the final touches to its Local Transport Plan (LTP3) and is also starting to draft a bid for up to £50 million from the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (bid deadline 6th June 2011).

In our efforts to increase cycling levels in Greater Manchester we can learn useful lessons from European countries such as the Netherlands and Denmark. The video below has been produced by video blogger Mark Wagenbuur who uses YouTube to show us what can be achieved, if we really start to think big.  

 

Lets hope that the soon-to-be formed Transport for Greater Manchester can learn some of these lessons.

Growing the "low carbon" economy

A graphic from the US National Building Museum highlights figures from the American Automobile Association which estimates that: "Americans spend on average $8,485 each year on their cars."

Seems like a lot of money, doesn't it? What is intriguing is that the think-piece highlights how most of the money spent on cars leaves the local economy and asks the question: 

"What if you were able to get rid of a car and spend-or invest-that money in your community and city?"

Given all the lovely words being written in the Greater Manchester Strategy and various Climate Change Action Plans about the need to develop a "low-carbon" economy it would be fascinating to pull together comparable data for Greater Manchester.

A recent blog by Elly Blue "How bicycling will save the economy (if we let it)" starts to sketch out how such a bicycle economy might look.

On a subject, dear to this blog's heart, Elly highlights how "Bicycle parking is the indicator species of this new economy, with a business's enthusiasm for its two-wheeled clientele being easy to gauge by the quantity of bike racks out front." 

Examples are provided of Portland, businesses who arelining up to replace their car parking with on-street bike racks. And of one local grocery store who recently opened at a location with more parking for bicycles than for cars.  Am looking forward to businesses across Greater Manchester following this lead.

Her blog article promises that the next in the series will provide "A realistic, conservative funding proposal for bicycle economic development."  Am looking forward to reading that...

Micro brewery... BIG bike!

Available now on the streets of Portland, USA...the Bike Bar from Hopworks Urban Brewery - Portland’s first Eco-Brewpub.

According to the Hopwork's website the 20-barrel brewery produces 6,000 barrels a year and offers "handcrafted organic beers and fresh, local ingredients, all served in a sustainably built and operated building."

Anyone know what the licencing laws would be for operating one of these on the streets of Manchester?