West Yorkshire Local Transport Plan: Vision Document

Submission by Cycle Kirklees (Kirklees Cycling Campaign)

West Yorkshire Local Transport Plan: Vision Document Submission by Cycle Kirklees (Kirklees Cycling Campaign)

1. Reducing the need for long-distance travel: A key cornerstone of the transport plan should be reducing long-distance travel. The vision should emphasise that reducing carbon emissions does not have to come at the expense of local economies – in fact, it can boost them. By promoting active travel such as walking, cycling, and greater use of public transport, we can support the revitalisation of local high streets and communities. Growth of long-distance private motor transport threatens any insufficient emission cuts made from increasing the share of EVs on the road. Shifting the focus towards local transport solutions and active travel can help ensure that we align with net-zero goals while driving local economic growth. Active travel, combined with the reduction of long-distance travel, represents an opportunity for LAs to simultaneously improve local economies and achieve sustainability targets. The objectives of social cohesion, accident reduction, climate change, and localised pollution reduction are met through functioning neighbourhoods, where travel needs are minimal. In essence, the Vision is too economically focused and overlooks opportunities to reduce the need to travel and align with planning policies and initiatives like 15-minute neighbourhoods.

2. The Vision is too pro-car: The existing LTP states ‘we need to manage the growth in car use.’ Behavioural change requires sticks as well as carrots, but the Vision is too focused on the carrots. European cities with good tram networks actively discourage car travel to city centres. Also, they prioritise trams and buses over private vehicles. There is a need for deterrents to driving using demand management. Measures such as car parking capacity reduction, slowing vehicles down with traffic calming, and road space changes. This is justified by embedding walking and cycling as they appear at the top of the road hierarchy. The Vision implicitly suggests that moving more people further, faster, and more frequently would be a public good. This is reinforced by a planning system which undervalues sustainable transport in favour of economic growth.

3. Cycling networks: A new cohesive cycle network is needed, making use of the limited cycle routes currently available. There is little ‘network’ of dedicated cycle paths in Kirklees that safely links up. There is more ‘gap’ than ‘network’. There is also a need for the cycle network to be ‘recognisable.’ That should be in the form of a network brand, recognisable route names like the London cycle ways (numbered in a similar way to trunk roads CS1, CS2), and clear branded signage. A network must include safe and secure cycle parking where it will be needed; at destinations, transit hubs/stations, and where they may be required near properties without space for bike storage (terraced streets without gardens for sheds). Separating modes with different momentum characteristics is required – not just separating fast-moving motor vehicles from cycles but also cycles from pedestrians.

4. Longer distance cycleways: Combined with the rise in ownership of e-bikes, we should be enabling people to cycle for longer journeys, with substantial carbon savings compared to driving. On the Danish Cycle Superhighway routes which have been completed so far, 25% of users previously drove. Countries such as Denmark are working with neighbouring municipalities to extend their cycle network for many miles beyond the main urban area. It should be the role of WYCA to develop its level of vision for cycling and wheeling in combination with the adjacent authorities outside of West Yorkshire. A WY adopted surface colour would aid safety (e.g. Sheffield uses red for all its cycle routes to ensure it is recognised as part of the cycle network).

5. Social justice for disabled passengers and end-to-end journeys: The removal of physical barriers for disabled users should run through the plan and acknowledge that modes of transport may need to be adapted for use by disabled people. This includes removing barriers to adapted and other non-standard bikes at the entrance to cycle routes.

6. Air quality: The focus on air quality in the Vision is too narrow. There are good statements about reducing carbon, but there is a lack of emphasis on reducing particulate pollution, as we shift to electric vehicles. With heavier vehicles and associated increases in tyre wear, the EVs also contribute to increased particulate pollution. Thus, opting out of petrol and diesel vehicles will not wholly solve the pollution problem. This reinforces our first point that we need to reduce the need to travel.

7. Driver behaviour: The Vision does not place enough emphasis on driver behaviour in tackling the climate emergency. There should be a combination of stronger application of existing tools, promoting responsible driver behaviour in driving less, combining journeys, and driving to reduce fuel use. Existing tools should include prosecutions and fixed penalties for idling and pavement parking – particularly in sensitive locations like air quality management areas, around schools, hospitals, care homes, parks, and open spaces.