The Revolution Will Not Be Motorised, #150

Pedal-power powers change

This week communities are pushing back against the narrative that everyone wants to drive everywhere, all the time. Plenty of us want safer streets, and transport choice, and this week is for the heroes lending their voices to the fight. Plus, a funding klaxon.

BIG STORIES FOR CYCLING ADVOCACY

IT’S MY TOWN TOO AND I WANT A CYCLE LANE. From Road.cc’s live blog, the residents of Todmorden in West Yorkshire are pushing back against claims a proposed cycle lane is unpopular. Following a petition and fundraiser to ‘save’ the local car park, residents have launched a counter-petition supporting the proposals, making the point that it’s their town too and they want to cycle in safety.

£291M FOR ACTIVE TRAVEL. Long-awaited funding for walking and cycling was announced this week. The investment, across England, will fund approx 300 miles of new footpaths and cycle tracks, and 30 million more walking and cycling trips per year. The funds, allocated to local authorities and metro mayor regions, will support the delivery and development of routes across England.

SPEND IT WELL. New homes risk locking in car dependency, but there is a way out of this trap. We’re still building housing estates next to cycle routes and failing to link them up, this piece finds - thanks to lacking legislation and a lack of local capacity and knowledge to insist on certain standards. If homes are to be truly affordable, Laura Laker argues, ignoring a cheap, accessible transport choice, or lack thereof, is a massive oversight.

A SAD LOSS FOR THE INDUSTRY. The news cargo bike delivery giants, Zedify, was entering administration has ‘sent ripples through the green logistics industry’, Zag reports. Announcing the news the company had failed to win the funding needed to continue CEO, Rob King, described it as ‘a founder’s worst nightmare’. Industry leaders blame competition with zero-hour, gig economy companies, creating a race to the bottom on price.

WHO BEGAN THE CULTURE WAR ON CYCLING? Zoe Williams asks the question after meeting Henk Swarttouw from the European Cyclists’ Federation. Rather a rhetorical question, it’s one that’s worth posing - if only to remind ourselves the whole thing is a rather pointless construct, albeit one with real-world consequences.

OTHER HEADLINES

WHO’S LIABLE FOR FASTER ROAD SPEEDS? This interesting piece by 20’s Plenty for Us, poses an interesting question - can residents object to Welsh council proposals to reverse 20mph speed limits on local roads. This piece states that while, on some roads, 30mph makes sense, simply increasing speed limits based on inaccurate statements or evidence might leave room for objection. Welsh councils reversing 20mph limits could, they say, open the highways authority up to civil liability, if the decision wasn’t made with ‘reasonable care’.

INTERESTING GRAPH OF THE WEEK:

Active Travel England launched its guidance on consulting communities about road space changes this week. This, from York, shows what that might look like in practice. Source.

ACTIVE TRAVEL WORD OF THE WEEK:

Stockholm Declaration. In 2020 the UN adopted a resolution, as part of its decade of action for road safety, to cut road deaths by 50% by 2030. Requirements include default 30kph where people walk and cycle, and the prioritisation of safe street design. Wales was among the signatories: https://www.20splenty.org/global_ministers_mandate_20mph

Until next time,

Adam

Adam Tranter

Founder, #BikeIsBest