A London borough’s proposals for its long-term transport strategy have been heavily criticised by the council’s opposition for treating cycling and walking as an “afterthought”, despite strong support from residents for safe, protected cycle lanes and infrastructure.

The draft transport strategy, introduced this month by Richmond upon Thames Council, has also been panned by the borough’s Green Party for its focus on encouraging electric vehicle use as a “key strategic pillar”, which the opposition says will not address congestion or road safety.

This week, the south-west London council unveiled the key priorities that it will focus on as it develops the borough’s ‘Transport Strategy 2040’, which will be published next year and will aim to implement a “step-change in transport infrastructure and service”.

> Cyclist hit by driver turning into no-entry road “should be prosecuted”, says Mr Loophole – but Jeremy Vine claims motorists who believe cyclist was at fault “should have their driving licence rescinded”

The Liberal Democrat-controlled council’s publication of its transport priorities comes after a web-based public consultation process between March and May, which saw 1,749 residents leave comments on a map of the borough, while 516 people also responded to a questionnaire.

When asked about what changes they wanted to see implemented over the next 15 years, cycling was the third most popular answer, after buses and trains. Cycling was also the topic mentioned the most when respondents were asked what they were unhappy about when it comes to the borough’s existing transport conditions.

Meanwhile, of the 414 locals who responded to the question, ‘What would make you cycle more?’, over 70 per cent highlighted the need for safe, protected cycle lanes. Over half also mentioned ‘reduced traffic’, while over 30 per cent called for increased cycle parking. Just under 30 per cent stated that ‘nothing’ would encourage them to ride a bike more often.

However, while cycling proved to be a popular topic during its public engagement exercise, it was not included as a ‘key pillar’ in the borough’s draft plans, with the council noting that it is “not possible to prioritise every issue raised during the consultation”.

Instead, the ‘key pillars’ published this month include improving public transport services, improving the “look and feel” of town centres, addressing the quality of interchange between travel modes, and ensuring that river, rail, and road crossings operate effectively.

The council also says it will work to ensure residents are “supported in transitioning to electric vehicles”, while recognising the benefits of “new and innovative means of transport”, such as improvements to communication and automation.

Cyclists in Richmond Park with London skyline
Cyclists in Richmond Park with London skyline (Image Credit: Simon MacMichael)

Cycling is mentioned, however, as part of three of the council’s key transport pillars. The first focuses on the role that “parks, open spaces, and the towpath currently play and could play in supporting walking and cycling in safe, car-free environments”.

The second involves sustained investment in roads to “ensure safety for all road users and to provide improved cycling, protected from motor traffic where possible”.

And finally, the local authority said it will support “sustainable and safer last mile deliveries, including by supporting better regulation of delivery riders, [and] support for freight consolidation and cargo bikes”.

> The Telegraph continues campaign against ‘dangerous’ cycling in London parks — but collision data actually highlights “dangerous driving” and “serious collisions” caused by drivers

The council also said it will prioritise funding for routes “providing most utility to pedestrians in terms of accessing town centres and transport hubs”.

In its latest update on its forthcoming transport strategy, Richmond Council acknowledges that “much of the key transport infrastructure in the borough is over 100 years old and much of it of Victorian age, which brings with it challenges of lack of capacity, resilience, accessibility and flexibility.

“A step-change in transport infrastructure and service is needed to address transport inequalities and the climate emergency, and to support thriving communities.

“Therefore, it was agreed to produce a transport strategy which would be an ambitious attempt to look further into the future than annualised programmes and budgets and beyond single administrations, to unlock big changes over time that will transform the lives of borough residents, support sustainable growth and ensure that the borough remains a great and inviting place to live, work and visit.”

> Kids threatened with fines for cycling in London park

However, despite the local authority’s stated aim to produce an “ambitious” transport strategy for the next 15 years, the plans have been criticised by Richmond’s Green Party leader Andrée Frieze, who claimed that their key, strategic pillars overlook the issues raised during the consultation and do not match residents’ priorities.

During a meeting of the council’s transport committee, Frieze, the leader of the opposition, argued that the strategy misses an opportunity to “deliver a bold vision for cycling”, Twickenham Nub News reports.

“Residents in every ward, bar one, highlighted the lack of safe cycling infrastructure. This is a borough-wide issue and it deserves a standalone pillar with clear commitments and funding,” Frieze told the meeting.

The opposition leader also questioned the practicality of relying on towpaths and parks for walking and cycling routes, arguing out such routes can become “unsafe or inaccessible” during winter or after dark.

Frieze also said walking has been treated as an “afterthought” in the strategy, criticising the lack of action on issues such as pavement parking, unsafe crossings, overhanging vehicles from driveways, and poorly placed street furniture.

“Most concerning is the near-total absence of any reference to disabled access. A truly inclusive transport strategy must prioritise accessibility for all residents, including those with mobility and sensory challenges,” she said.

Finally, the Green councillor questioned the decision to include electric vehicles as one of the strategy’s key pillars, despite them barely featuring in residents’ responses to the consultation.

“EVs are not a mode of transport, they are a type of vehicle,” she said. “They don’t address congestion, road safety, or the pedestrian experience. Their inclusion as a pillar is misplaced.”

Urging the Liberal Democrats to revise the strategy’s pillars, to make them more in line with local wishes, with the Greens sharing their own recommendations.

These include prioritising walking and accessibility, with targeted action on barriers; creating a dedicated cycling pillar with funding and clear targets; ensuring infrastructure is safe and usable at all times; and viewing EVs as part of wider car use, rather than a standalone priority.

“This Transport Strategy is described by the Lib Dem administration as a co-production with residents. Yet the pillars they have chosen ignore the overwhelming views of respondents,” Frieze said.

“I continue to push them to reassess the pillars to make them more reflective of residents’ wishes.”