Written evidence submitted by Brighton & Hove City Council (ATR0060)
Executive summary
Brighton & Hove City Council wishes to make the following recommendations to the Select Committee via this submission:
Full response:
1.1 The need for integrated budgets
1.1.1 Brighton & Hove City Council has benefitted from combined revenue and capital funding for projects which has achieved many benefits and successes. Future funds should give better consideration to behavioural measures as well as infrastructure improvements – as they can achieve so much more when implemented together. The best example of this is the Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) funding, compared to the current Access Fund which is revenue only. The Lewes Road corridor LSTF project in Brighton delivered a 14% increase in cycling and a 7% increase in bus use within two years. The DfT’s own independent research shows that projects with integrated infrastructure and behavioural change are more likely to succeed, with lessons learned as follows: “Strategically, all projects should have a travel awareness element, with the right budget, resources and skills from the outset.” (Local Sustainable Transport Fund ‘What works’ report – Summary, DfT (2016)) as well as research noted in the Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIP) – Technical Guidance, DfT (2017): “Research has demonstrated that investment in both [behaviour change and infrastructure schemes] can help to maximise increases in cycling and walking.”. It is therefore suggested that, based on the LSTF evidence and success, future funding sources should be combined revenue (for behaviour change measures) and capital (for infrastructure measures).
1.1.2 The importance of revenue budgets therefore cannot be understated. LSTF projects generally had an average of 54% spend on revenue measures, showing the importance of these measures alongside capital improvements (Hiblin B, Taylor I and Sloman L (2016) What Works? Learning from the Local Sustainable Transport Fund 2011 - ‐2015 Report to the Department for Transport).
1.1.3 Allocation of DfT funding in other (“non-walking / cycling”) areas should always give due consideration to the implications of associated aspects of investing in these forms of travel, for example, maintenance budgets.
1.1.4 In recent years, council officers and managers have begun partnership working between its Public Health and Transport teams through bi-monthly meetings, in particular to focus on joint working to promote and encourage active travel as the means to enabling physical and mental health and wellbeing. This has involved some joint funding arrangements to secure the ‘Bike it’ project in primary schools, and developing joint infographics for campaigns to improve air quality across the city, as well as through joint working on Personalised Travel Planning & Healthy Lifestyles, school travel and health, workplace wellbeing and active travel, and addressing air pollution in the city. This has all worked well in integrating the health and travel agenda, and exploring how projects can be aligned. Future funding opportunities which encourage participation by both sustainable transport and Public Health professionals has greater combined potential to maximise health and active travel outcomes than each alone.
1.2 Increased certainty / length of funding
1.2.1 Decreasing council revenue budgets in particular have placed pressure on local resources delivering important stand-alone or complementary behavioural change projects across the city. Notwithstanding this, the council has managed to successfully continue revenue-based sustainable travel projects in the city over the last ten years. However, the future remains uncertain and therefore increased certainty / length of funding is needed in order to gain and sustain momentum for revenue-based projects or combined capital / revenue budgets.
1.2.2 All competitive DfT funds should give appropriate weight to walking and cycling projects / improvements, commensurate with the nature of the fund
1.2.3 Better consideration and weighting should also be given to Active Travel in economic appraisal, modelling and business case processes, as well as to the disbenefits of private motorised travel on health and the environment.
2.1 Cycling and walking offer consistent journey times and numerous health, environmental, social and societal benefits, however there are also many barriers to their use which need to be addressed for them to be fully understood and utilised – both by government and the wider public.
2.2 The Brighton Bikeshare scheme, which launched in September 2017 and now has nearly 55,000 members and over 350,000 journeys made, is helping to overcome two key barriers to cycling – bicycle ownership and bicycle theft. The 2018 Collaborative Mobility (CoMo) UK Bikeshare survey showed that 49% of Brighton Bikeshare users noted that due to the scheme they are now cycling again after a break from cycling, with 26% of these stating that they hadn’t cycled for over five years. One third of users don’t own their own bicycle, and an additional 7% no longer own a bicycle since joining the scheme. Therefore, the scheme opens up cycling as an option to those who can’t afford a bike / can’t store a bike securely (the latter a particular barrier in a constrained urban area). Furthermore, 28% of respondents stated that the bus forms part of their wider journey when using the hire bikes, showcasing the importance of multi-modal infrastructure and information.
2.3 In Brighton & Hove, the council has taken a long-term approach to personalised travel planning (PTP) over the last ten years and have linked this with Access to Employment Opportunities. This has been successful in engaging in nearly 4,000 in-depth travel conversations, with almost 300 individuals receiving intensive support to access employment and training since 2015. By working closely with JobCentre Plus, jobseekers have been supported with targeted free bus tickets to enable attendance at training courses including ESOL Courses, Computer Courses, attending job interviews, Digital Accelerator courses, and traineeships. The successes of this project are largely down to the longevity in terms of maintaining momentum and partnerships, despite it being across different funding streams and periods.
2.4 Other recent successful projects in Brighton & Hove supported by LSTF, Transition and Access Fund grant funding include holding around 100 travel events for employees of local employers, with over 3,000 employees receiving travel to work advice, as well as support for school travel planning. In 2017/18 for primary schools intensively worked with, the number of children being driven all the way to school has decreased – from 36% to 33%, while park & stride has increased from 6% to 12% (91 extra pupils using park & stride). Since 2015 we have held regular Cycle Maintenance and Training courses for residents and employees, with over 1,500 adults trained in cycle maintenance, and nearly 390 adults Bikeability trained. Additionally, to help ensure bikes are safe and fit for use, we have fixed nearly 1,300 cycles in Dr Bike Sessions.
2.5 We have also worked closely with Love to Ride to run regular cycle challenges, the most recent challenge in September 2018 was successful in getting over a hundred organisations registered, with almost 1,000 employees across the city logging a ride during the month, and approximately 103,000 miles cycled. Most encouragingly the challenge encouraged 86 employees to cycle who identified as a new rider. These projects are examples of relatively low cost, revenue-based interventions.
3.1 The approach to CWIS and LCWIP is welcomed in terms of strategic planning for walking and cycling; however, sufficient resources are key to successful delivery. Inconsistency of walking and cycling routes and associated networks can be a problem locally and across borders; therefore an appropriate and proportional, strategic approach is welcomed.
3.2 As well as strategic planning for walking and cycling it is also important that walking and cycling are not simply considered alone but within wider schemes and as part of longer journeys. Active travel can be considered in all transport schemes, as well as schemes not directly related to walking and cycling but involving wider travel demand management measures (which can indirectly influence uptake of active travel). For example in Brighton & Hove there is a good level of bus service provision, as well as 24 Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs), covering much of the city. Only 41% of residents drive a car to work, compared to 57% in England as a whole (Census 2011 travel to work data); and cycling to work in the city has doubled within a decade (Census 2001 and 2011). Additional measures and powers would ensure that these excellent rates of sustainable travel use are maintained – for example pavement parking is a key issue and barrier to (more and safer) walking. An effective approach to tackling this, through the provision of appropriate powers for local authorities, would help to greatly improve walking conditions and likely uptake.
3.3 Walking and cycling form an important element of trips by public transport. They provide access to and from public transport termini such as stations, bus stations, bus stops and other interchanges. This provides a vital opportunity for positive health outcomes compared to the same A to B journey by private car, where very little physical activity may be undertaken; and allows for active travel to be fitted in to journeys where walking or cycling the whole way is not possible. For walking and cycling to be more integrated with public transport, this would improve the journey experience for the passenger, which would in turn improve the perception of non-car modes amongst the general public.
3.4 For rail journeys, provision of a greater quantity and better quality of storage for bicycles on trains should be the standard and should be consistent across operators and routes. Further consideration should also be given to providing for bicycles on peak hour trains where there is known demand. Both of these could be achieved through provision of rolling stock suitable for carrying larger numbers of bicycles easily and specifically. In addition, provision of sufficient resource for high quality bicycle parking at stations (e.g. secure individual lockers, purpose-built cycle hub facilities) would encourage more commuting journeys by bike/rail as commuters would have more confidence in their bike being left at the station for a long period. For example, the Cycle Hub located at Brighton Station (http://www.nplusone.bike/cycles#storage ) has capacity for 500 bicycles in a secure area, open 24/7 to keycard holders only, and is typically at least 60% full during weekday operation. It also provides changing and shower facilities, which address another key barrier to cycling in many workplaces. Provision of both on- and off-train cycling facilities should also be future-proofed in order to cater adequately for future demand.
3.5 For bus journeys, as well as bus travel in the city being popular and on the increase (40.9million bus journeys in 2009/10, up to 49.7million bus journeys in 2016/17 ) the council has partnered with the primary bus company in the city, Brighton & Hove Buses, to adapt three buses to allow spaces for two bikes on all journeys on the weekend ‘Breeze up to the Downs’ services between the city centre and Stanmer Park (service 78) and Ditchling Beacon (service 79) which are within the South Downs National Park. These services have proved popular for those undertaking multi-modal journeys and also linking to leisure walking and cycling journeys. Promotional material for the ‘Breeze’ bus initiative can be found here: https://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/sites/brighton-hove.gov.uk/files/Service%2079%20to%20Ditchling%20Beacon%20timetable%20and%20travel%20guide%20from%2016%20September%202018%20%281MB%29.PDF
3.6 More broadly in terms of public transport, wayfinding and signage between interchange points, (stations, bus stations, bus stops, cycle hire docking stations, etc) and for general walking directions, is an important part of the whole journey and encouraging elements of the journey by active modes. Providing destination information in the form of the time it will take to get there rather than the distance to travel is also a more helpful means of directing people or enabling them to make other decisions.
October 2018