Home
Campaign for Better Transport says we don't need to resort to sprawling suburbs to tackle housing shortage...

The Government urgently needs to integrate cycling, walking and public transport into its house building programme and other new developments to avoid gridlock, warns the Campaign for Better Transport (CfBT).

In a letter to the new Secretary of State for the Department for Communities and Local Government (DGCLG), Greg Clark, the campaign says planners need to move away from new development designs that risk "jamming up the roads" and "forcing people to drive everywhere".

A report released by the CfBT yesterday, gives examples from across the country where people are being incentivised out of their cars, from an £18m public transport interchange in Kingston upon Hull to restricted car parking and bus vouchers in new developments. According to the figures from the Valuation Office Agency 795,000 homes have been built since 2009, 173,000 of those between March 2014 and March 2015.

CfBT Chief Executive, Stephen Joseph, said: "You can tackle housing shortages and support new development without resorting to more sprawling suburbs, acres of car parks and big new roads. Our research shows that across the country new housing and retail development planned around public transport is successfully creating better, more economically productive places."

"There is clear evidence that when people are offered high quality public transport a lot of them use it. National Government, local authorities and developers urgently need the vision, skills and support to make this kind of development the norm.”

The report recommends the government issues stronger guidance for minimum standards of sustainable transport for new developments and that it updates its transport modelling to promote sustainable transport rather than, it says "reinforcing past trends". 

The report says local authorities need support working with rail and bus companies "where skills and experience are often currently lacking". It also says planning and decision making need to be joined up, in cases where one authority is responsible for land-use planning and another for transport planning.

Shawfair, a new town in Scotland, is cited as a success story, albeit a flawed one. Being built around a new station on the re-built Highlands Railway, a 10 minute journey from Edinburgh, the "self-sufficient community" will nonetheless still be built to conventional standards with high levels of parking at retail parks. At a meeting last night in Edinburgh, held by campaign group Spokes, it was revealed the refurbished Highland Rail trains will only be able to carry two bikes at a time.

The report also highlights city centre regeneration in Kingston upon Hull, of which public transport and public realm are an integral part, including an £18m transport interchange linking the bus and train with a new shopping complex, and further pedestrianisation of the city centre as part of the Capital of Culture event in 2017.

However, it warns car use must be curbed to encourage people out of their cars, citing Stevenage as an example where the network of bike lanes are largely unused as it remains too easy to drive.

In Maidstone, a DCLG-approved project will see the only cycle route across the river removed to cope with extra traffic expected to be generated by a new shopping centre.

A DCLG spokesman said: "The Government welcomes the Campaign for Better Transport's report and will give it proper consideration.

“However it is already a key principle of planning (as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework) to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling."

10 comments

Avatar
danthomascyclist [341 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

The penny has dropped. "We must do something about this" they exclaimed. For the hundredth time.

And alas, nothing happened.

Avatar
Ramuz [309 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

This government's cuts have led to the decimation of rural bus services, which will in the long run lead to more cars on roads.

March this Saturday from the City of London at 12 noon against Austerity.

http://www.thepeoplesassembly.org.uk/end_austerity_now_national_demonstr...

Avatar
panyagua [12 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Highlands Railway? I think you mean the Borders Railway - completely the opposite direction! Unfortunately, the key point that the units will only accommodate two bikes is true.

Avatar
panyagua [12 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Highlands Railway? I think you mean the Borders Railway - completely the opposite direction! Unfortunately, the key point that the units will only accommodate two bikes is true.

Avatar
CGT [44 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I also think the Borders railway (misnamed Highland in the article) missed a good opportunity by not putting in a bike path along the railway line.
The railway line is actually taking away a lot of bike paths as they were built on the unused line.
The Borders is a good place for cycling and it would have been good for people to cycle out to the borders on an off road path and get the train home or to ride the train to one station, then cycle to another to get on the train to come home.

Avatar
brooksby [2583 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

I'm not sure what councils and the government can do when the railways and the bus companies are all private or public limited companies which only exist to make money for their shareholders. The "public good" doesn't factor into it. The 'public' transportation needs to be back in the hands of the public, if councils are to start planning like this properly.

Avatar
nowasps [519 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

Translation of DCLG response: Not Remotely Interested. Go Away.

Avatar
nowasps [519 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
brooksby wrote:

I'm not sure what councils and the government can do when the railways and the bus companies are all private or public limited companies

Anything they wanted, but we won't see a Conservative government re-nationalising anything. The Railways were in profit before they sold them off to their mates and now we spend a fortune subsidising them. It's Ideology before Reason.

Avatar
tarquin_foxglove [164 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes
brooksby wrote:

I'm not sure what councils and the government can do...

Through NPPF & Local Plans they can restrict development in unsustainable locations & of unsuitable forms. They can encourage development in sustainable locations & of denser & higher rise forms. ie reduce the number of detached homes being built on greenfield, greenbelt & rural areas and increase the number of homes being built in the urban environment.

They can plan & fund infrastructure projects that support active travel first & sustainable travel second not projects that facilitate peak demand for cars during rush hour.

According to the CTC 50% of commuters are within 5 miles of work give these people a convenient & safe alternative and they will switch to it, while the car is the most convenient & (bar cycling & walking) the cheapest why would they switch?

Avatar
patto583 [53 posts] 2 years ago
0 likes

It's all very well putting new developments close to train stations, but if it takes 7 hours to travel the same journey as would take 2 hours in a car, and costs double what the fuel would cost, then people are going to use a car. Journeys need to be viable, and at the moment they are a long way from that when you are making any journey which uses different rail operators in particular (it drives up the price).