Agenda item

The Panel received report  which provided an update on the Council’s

Transport Planning programmes, including the draft Walking and Cycling Action Plan (WCAP), the Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) Programme, Transport for London  funding update (post-Covid) and actions being taken to reduce congestion and improve east to west transport links. The report was introduced by Rob Krzyszowski, Assistant Director, Planning, Building Standards & Sustainability and Maurice Richards, Transport Planning Team Leader, as set out in the agenda pack at page 69.

The following arose from the discussion of this item:

a.    The Panel welcomed the Peddle My Wheels scheme, which the Council contributed funding to, that allowed people to try out bikes before deciding to purchase them at a discounted rate. A Panel Member commented that cycleways in neighbouring boroughs seemed to be much better and sought assurances over how recent TfL infrastructure funding had been spent. In response, officers advised that the funding received for last year included £100k of funding from the DfT for bollards and segregation of cyclists on side roads. These works were originally due to be temporary and so some further work would be undertaken to improve these. The Panel was advised that the Street Space Plan was set out on the Haringey website, and this included details of all of the successful funding bids.

b.    As part of a follow up question, the Panel sought assurances around the latest round of TfL bids given the fact they were on a first come first served basis. In response, officers clarified that they had submitted a bid under the most recent bidding process and that this was not a new competitive bidding process. Instead, it was oriented towards schemes that had been submitted previously where boroughs were already in discussions with TfL. Bids were either through the Street Space Plan or the LIP. Officers advised the Panel that they would provide updates on this round of funding bids, along with future rounds at a future meeting. (Clerk – to note).

c.    The Panel also sought clarification from the Cabinet Member about comments he had made previously on social media that other borough’s LTN’s were better than Haringey’s. The Cabinet Member clarified that the point of his remarks was that Haringey did not have any LTNs at present and to emphasise the fact that Haringey could implement schemes that were as good as other boroughs

d.    The Panel sought clarification from the Cabinet Member about whether there was any data available about who was using the different cycling schemes and whether this was concentrated in particular areas. In response, the Cabinet Member highlighted the role of the Peddle my Wheels scheme in providing an opportunity for residents to try cycling and commented that he would like to see this scheme rolled-out further. The Panel was advised that only 3% of residents cycled and the point of building cycle lanes was to provide safe cycling routes for people who felt excluded from cycling because it was considered dangerous.  The Cabinet Member advised that LTNs in other boroughs had seen increases in bike ownership because people felt safer and more able to cycle to work, school, doctors’ surgeries etcetera.

e.    The Cabinet Member agreed to circulate a breakdown by area on take-up levels for the various different cycling schemes that were in place. (Action: Cllr Hakata/Rob Krzyszowski).

f.     The Chair noted that the delivery Plan for the Cycling & Walking Action Plan did not seem to be fully up to date and commented that a number of projects that did not have funding were RAG rated as amber. Furthermore, the Hornsey cycle way, which was part of Liveable Crouch End, was listed as green even though the funding had stopped. The Chair requested that officers updated the delivery plan and that rolling updates on the progress of projects contained within the delivery plan be brought to future panel meetings. The Chair also commented on the fact that cycle hangers for residential parking was also unfunded in the delivery plan. In response, the Cabinet Member acknowledged that the plan was slightly out of date due to the nature of the projects and that the delivery plan would be updated following the latest funding update. The Cabinet Member advised that he would be seeking to produce a rolling delivery plan and that this would  help feed into the Panel’s request for regular updates. (Action: Cllr Hakata/Rob Krzyszowski).

g.    Officers advised that the Walking & Cycling Action Plan was approved by Cabinet as a draft, which would then go out to public consultation and engagement. Officers emphasised the importance of consulting with residents on this document and advised that an updated version would be produced following the engagement process. In regards to having projects on the plan that did not have funding, officers advised that listing those on the plan was beneficial as it supported the submission of future funding bids to TfL and allowed the authority to point to those bids having been engaged upon with residents. Officers noted that some TfL funding had been secured for the design work of the Hornsey cycle way but funding for the implementation had not been secured yet.

h.    The Chair followed up to reiterate the point that officers should look at the RAG rating again on the delivery plan, as it was felt that listing a project as being amber, even though it did not have funding secured, did not seem to accurately reflect the level of risk for that project. The Chair also requested further information at a future meeting about how talks with TfL bus planners were going as the borough had not had any new bus routes in a very long time. The Chair also commented that she would like to see officers engage with residents about where new bus routes should be implemented as well as the prioritisation of locations for development of step-free access at key stations and how far officers had got with these discussions. (To note - Rob Krzyszowski).

i.      The Panel requested further information about cycle storage hangers. In response, officers advised that a bid had been submitted for this year under the LIP but due to TfL’s funding situation this was currently suspended. A bid had been resubmitted through an alternative funding pot.

j.      The Panel queried whether the funding formula with the company that implemented cycling hangers could be re-examined as it was felt this was quite an expensive process. The Panel enquired whether this was something that could be brought in-house. Officers advised that this work steam was being looked at, including the potential for in-house delivery and that officers were keen to maximise cycle hanger delivery around the borough.

k.    The Panel emphases the importance of buses and bus routes reflecting the needs of residents. It was commented that there were a whole range of people who were physically unable to use cycle lanes and that in that regard public transport should be seen as just as high a priority as cycling provision.

l.      In regards to cycle storage on housing estates, the Cabinet Member advised that conversations with HfH had taken place and that HfH were looking to re-provision some existing storage/garage facilities to support this.

RESOLVED

That the update was noted.