Response to the Draft Cumbria Transport Infrastructure Plan (CTIP) 2022-2035
We have been busy writing a response to this consultation document.
There is nothing wrong with its vision: "The development and delivery of accessible, sustainable and connected transport networks is necessary to support communities and economic growth. This needs all modes of transport to be effectively integrated with each other, and with land uses, in a manner that respects our world-class environment."
Nor indeed the objectives of creating a clean and healthy, well-connected Cumbrian community.
However we have seen similar ambitions set out in various Transport Plans over the past few decades. Its ten years since, disillusioned by the lack of progress, we wrote our own Green Transport Plan in 2011. You can read it here our ten year old plan. Much, if not all, of this is still relevant. In fact even we are amazed at how forward looking it was and even more frustrated that still the objective of clean transport hasn’t been achieved.
Roads
The only concrete plans in the draft CTIP are for road building, as in previous transport plans. These include
- a Whitehaven Relief Road and "improvements" at Bothel and Grizebeck all aligned to the desire to support "inclusive growth".
- a Carlisle Southern Link Road and improvements to the A689, linked to growth of the airport
- a Kendal Northern Access Route from the A6 to the A591 is proposed to support HGV movements.
- the desire for the "essential" enhancement of the A66 west of Penrith maximising opportunities for the Port of Workington and industrial growth on the coast.
The Heart of the Lakes is the only identified strategic transport route which escapes road development, presumably because it would not be allowed inside the National Park.
The plans for road "improvement" are much more developed than those to improve infrastructure for cycling, walking, bus and train travel. Other than increased digital home working the picture painted seems to be one of increased growth of vehicles and travel. Whilst this may not fall within total control of Local Authorities it would be good to see them
- a) outline to central government the necessity of reducing the volumes of car and road and
- b) develop their own strategy for limiting rather than accommodating growth in vehicle numbers.
However the focus of case studies is on technical innovation in the field of private car travel (M-Sport and driverless pods) not the praiseworthy examples of better infrastructure for walking, cycling and public transport.
There is an acceptance that road freight will grow. Larger lorries on the road network which blight towns like Aspatria, with a resultant call for bypasses through farming land, should be replaced by central depots at the ports and railheads with far shorter journeys being undertaken inland by electric haulage.
Good road maintenance and ensuring safety for communities to travel sustainably should be the priority rather than new roads. We would only support the intention for effective maintenance and promote delivery of walking and cycling infrastructure. The proposals for new roads totally undermine the claimed aims and objectives of the Transport Plan.
Integrated travel
The requirement to tackle integrated travel is mentioned only in relation to Carlisle city centre. Integrated travel between different modes needs to be much more widespread, if people are to use private cars less.
An example of disincentive is the lack of connection between buses and trains at Carlisle to take passengers to Cockermouth, or to places down the coast which do not have railway stations. It is disappointing that neither 600 nor 300 services have a stop anywhere near the railway station, let alone within the station forecourt.
Through ticketing remains a problem for bus users.
To summarise: the transport plan recognises the problems of increasing car-use but does not follow through on actions to restrain growth of road and air transport. In fact the only definite proposals add to growth of both sectors, and the recurring theme is of specifics outlined for expensive road projects.
Speed limits
Electric or fossil fuelled cars have a big impact through speed and volume, acting as a deterrent to sustainable modes of travel: walking, cycling and, hopefully to come, the affordable electric scooter which could be a huge asset to travel in that it may well attract younger members of the population and they can be used as a link to bus and rail services where they can be easily stored and carried.
This can be readily addressed by a blanket speed restriction of 20 mph in ALL residential communities, 30 mph on rural roads, 40mph on major B roads , with cycle provision separate, 50mph on A roads, with separate cycle provision. There is considerable anxiety in local communities about the speed of traffic on rural roads and though villages. We have begun to ask what issues concern local people and this, and the impact of inappropriate parking, is the number one issue. Neither of these will be addressed by simply exchanging fossil-fuelled cars for EVs. Proactive change would be very popular and would also encourage reduction of car use by making a switch to cycling and walking safer.
Cycling and walking
Without a dedicated cycling officer, cycling remains the poor relation in wheeled transport. If roads were made safer through reduced speed limits, then electric bike and scooter use could grow to a significant level, increasing the current miserable level of 4% of Cumbrian commuting journeys under 5km
Cumbria has the potential to be a fantastic cycling area but the infrastructure, both historic and current, is an embarrassment compared with other counties and countries. Hadrian's Wall cyclepath is one example. Currently sections along the coast around Seascale have disappeared and are often poorly way-marked. The recently constructed Allonby to Silloth section is great in sections, but suddenly the dedicated cycle path leads onto the busy coastal road with no restriction of speed on that road to reflect the introduction of cycles. This puts everyone in danger. It is not a route to cycle if you are inexperienced or with young children.
The creation of new footways and cyclepaths should take priority over new roads and road widening. These key proposals have been on the wish list for many years but they remain aspirations without proper planning and finance for organising and delivering them.
The post of dedicated cycle officer for the County should be re-instated as a matter of urgency. The Bicycle Mayor of Cumbria and his group do stirling work but this should not be left to volunteers. The recent overhaul of the electric bike charging guide was delivered by volunteers from the County’s sustainable groups, many of them members of our organisation. This should have been a job for the cycling officer.
We are not convinced that Councillors, who control so much Highways action through their Area Committees, recognise the importance of cycling and walking. Education of all Councillors in the importance of the hierarchy of road-users and how to deliver it safely must be a priority.
The digital economy
We urge caution with regard to the rush for digital dependency, as a way of reducing our impact on the climate and avoiding the need to travel. As with so much technological innovation the repercussions are often not properly explored in advance leading to mental, physical and environmental degradation. Climate change, being the current international area of action and concern, a consequence of global industrialisation over centuries, we need to recognise that the digital economy is not without climate impact - a report published in June this year "Digital Economy and Climate Impact" predicts IT-sector related electricity demand is expected to increase by nearly 50% by 2030.
Creating sound local communities with employment, education, health, shopping and leisure facilities within easy reach is a more robust means to reducing the need to travel. This was identified and appreciated during the recent lockdown periods when travel was constrained. It is our belief that fifteen minute communities (where everyone is able to access the above-named basic services by sustainable transport means within 15 minutes) are a top priority for creating healthy societies.
Electric Vehicles
We support all efforts to improve decarbonisation but do not support any measures which increase the volume of car use. The language of Electric Vehicles (EVs) in this section does not appear to include electric bikes or scooters which could support decarbonisation without the detrimental impact of congestion, associated emissions and deaths.
Again so far it has been the sustainable groups that have led on creating a network of electric bike charging points in the County.
In our work with local communities we have identified both concern about inappropriate parking and opposition to the taking of valuable habitat and open-countryside for car-parking to accommodate increased car-use. Neither of these will be solved by replacing fossil-fuelled vehicles by EVs.
International Travel
We are very disappointed to see Freeport designation given to any of the ports without a sustainable freight transport network, by rail put in place in advance.
Likewise we should not be encouraging growth in air transport by supporting the expansion of use of Carlisle airport. Nationally we should be concerned with reducing air freight not encouraging it. Commercially we have had no shortage of international visitors to boost tourism over the past decades. If traffic into Carlisle airport were to grow, it would increase pressure for access to the Lake District from Carlisle. Currently rail puts them in the central Lakes at Windermere or close to it at Penrith.
Bus travel and Rail travel
There is no current integration of bus and rail timetables. There are even poor connections between services run by the virtually single bus company, and work progresses slowly to reduce waiting times at Carlisle station for services to Newcastle despite them being run by the same company. We had hoped that the Transport Plan would outline measures to pressure private companies to provide better services, instead of making glib assurance that visitors will have integrated bus and rail travel.
Cumbria is fortunate in being encircled by a rail network and having a coastline with ports. For decades it has been appreciated that there are significant opportunities in moving freight by sea and rail into the County but little has been achieved. We cannot rely on improvements via HS2 given that HS2 is unlikely to get beyond Birmingham much before 2038, if at all.
With regard to passengers, the comment is made regarding low line speeds "rail journeys are often unattractive when compared with travel by car". However this appears to perpetuate a myth. The coastal line is attractive, usually warm with the opportunity to work en route, and relatively frequent. In that it scores over the tortuous, dangerously fast roads down the West Coast, which are often congested around Sellafield. If car speed were curtailed as outlined previously, travel by rail especially to and from Sellafield would be more viable and attractive.
If we are serious about increasing bus use there are some simple actions
* more bus shelters
* better seating provision in bus shelters
* better advertising of services
* better provision of timetables to tourist venues
* insistence that all venues advertise their accessibility by bus routes.
* secure undercover bicycle storage at bus shelters
Bus service provision will not reduce the impact of the car in the Lake District until car congestion is tackled. Currently high visitor use of buses is deterred by lack of information, poor timekeeping due to being caught in congestion and high fare prices.
Currently Stagecoach and LDNP offer a great bus ticket deal for five car passengers but it’s poorly advertised even at the car parks and not promoted at visitor accommodation. The County Council needs to work with Cumbria Tourism, The National Park Authority and other relevant authorities to incentivise and/or ensure that comprehensive public transport is being advertised and promoted at accommodation venues. They struggle even to acquire bus timetables at the moment.
Centreparcs have been running a dedicated workers bus from West Cumbria to their Penrith site for years. The Transport Plan needs a strategy to encourage other tourism businesses to combine to do the same and bring in workers directly and comfortably from further afield, especially from the coastal areas of relatively high unemployment?
We need to see strong support for a park and ride so that tourists and residents can use their cars for the shortest possible journeys. From our community work, we know that there would be strong support for such a scheme in the environs of Keswick.
There are so many simple actions which could help only requiring some imagination and effort! However we fear that once again the County has missed the opportunity to promote real, clean, active and public transport.
Jill Perry and Dianne Standen
