APPENDIX 29
Memorandum submitted by the London Cycling
Campaign
INTRODUCTION
The London Cycling Campaign has been the voice
of cyclists in London for 25 years. We have over 9,000 members
and are the largest urban cycling campaign in the world, working
on behalf of the 650,000 people who cycle regularly in London.
We welcome this opportunity to comment on the London Olympics
Bill at a time when cycling is enjoying an unprecedented growth
in popularity.
Our original submissions concerning the then
Olympics[5]5
bid were made at a time when cycling was already increasing fast
in London. The subsequent growth in cycling has outstripped forecasts
and expectations. It clearly shows the viability of cycling as
the original mode of mechanised individual mass transportation.
The possibility of cycling as an integral part
of delivering the Olympics in London deserves serious investigation.
This is not only because public transport capacity is going to
be inadequate for the travel demand during the Olympics. It is
also because as currently envisioned the vast majority of journeys
associated with the London Olympics would be inactive travel.
As one of the most important aims of the Olympic movement is to
promote public health through exercise, a high modal share of
journeys for walking and cycling is vital.
In this submission, we focus on aspects of the
Olympics that need to be addressed at Bill stage as part of the
wider regulatory framework for the successful delivery of the
Olympics. We would be delighted to provide Committee members with
copies of our other submissions, which go into considerably greater
detail as appropriate to their context.
We believe that all of the suggestions below
would cause London to gain significantly from the Olympics, enable
the ODA to deliver a much better Olympics, and would have wide-ranging
benefits beyond the Olympic Games themselves.
Finally, we address the following questions
as set out in the call for submissions:
— How will the transport projects needed
for the Games fit into an integrated and long term transport plan
for London? Will the transport legacy be appropriate to the needs
of east London in the next two to three decades?
— What effect will the Games have on
security, congestion, overcrowding, air quality and emissions
in London? What impact will there be on transport in the interim?
— What might be in the Olympic Transport
Plan?
— Will the Olympic Delivery Authority
have the necessary powers, funding and expertise to plan and deliver
the transport infrastructure and services required?
ACTIVE SPECTATOR
GAMES
The London Cycling Campaign is a key stakeholder
in the successful delivery of the Olympics. We suggested the adoption
of an "Active Spectator Games" strategy, which was welcomed
by London 2012 and included in the successful Candidate File.
The Active Spectator Games Strategy must be addressed at Bill
stage to form part of the wider regulatory framework for delivering
the Olympics, as it is an innovative and extremely beneficial
initiative. It is not currently reflected in the primary legislation
to which the Bill makes reference and therefore needs to be included
in the London Olympics Bill itself.
The need for regulation is also readily apparent
when considering the conclusions of the Wanless Report 2004, which
revealed the considerable economic cost of lack of physical activity,
and is at any rate adequately supported by other key government
strategies, such as the Government's "Game Plan"",
designed to increase physical activity, the new Active Travel
Action Plan, which encourages cycling and walking initiatives,
the cross-Whitehall review of Physical Activity by the Activity
Co-ordination Team, and the White Paper on Public Health.
From the Candidate File:
"An active spectator programme will encourage
access to Olympic venues by bicycle and on foot, with a safe network
of cycle paths and footpaths and secure bike storage at each venue."
Key to the Active Spectator Games Strategy is
not the concept, but putting it into practice. We are fully confident
that a modal share of 10-20% for cycling during the Olympics is
a SMART goal. This modal share target for a high-profile special
event contrasts favourably with the modal share of everyday cycling
in several large and small European countries[6]6.
Modal shift towards cycling is also occurring in London at a very
high rate.
Delivering this strategy will be significantly
more efficient than attempting to achieve transport capacity by
public transport and Park-and-Ride. London and the venues for
the Games are ideal for cycling around and to. Special routes—main
roads designated as Olympic Spectator Routes for Active Travel,
pleasant and safe—from and between the centre of London,
the venues and accommodation hubs will allow visitors to really
engage with the host city, exploring and spending time (and money)
in it, and making the Olympics truly visible to Londoners, unlike
many other major events. They will be using a means of transport
that not only gives them complete freedom but will also relieve
the pressure on all the other modes of transport that may otherwise
be struggling to cope. It will change the image of London as a
city choked by motor traffic forever.
It will also address a number of important public
health imperatives and directly repay government investment by
promoting healthy living and thus reducing the costs to the national
purse of present lifestyle habits. Nationally, it will tap into
the major drives which are now underway to promote healthy lifestyles
and reduce obesity, especially among the young. With active spectatorship
at their heart, the 2012 Games will be a powerful catalyst to
improving the fitness and wellbeing of people throughout the UK
and indeed worldwide. They will do this by showcasing healthy
activity not just among the elite athletes participating in the
events but also—and perhaps even more importantly—by
"ordinary"" spectators attending them.
In addition, it will make London 2012 a new
kind of Olympic Games, a milestone in the development of the Olympic
idea, and a legacy by which the Olympic Ideal will be enhanced.
It will significantly intensify the value of the events in the
eyes of everyone from the IOC to visitors to local and national
businesses looking to maximise revenues from the Games.
This will especially be the case if it is prepared
and developed in the seven years remaining to the Olympics by
application to other major events in London, as hinted by Mayor
Ken Livingstone in his answer to a question by Jenny Jones AM[7]7.
Apart from the modal shift occurring in London,
there is a huge and nearby market for this kind of initiative—the
nearly 70 million people in the EU who regularly cycle. All of
these people are at most an overnight journey away by train or
ferry with their bikes. Such people may well not visit solely
for the Games, but combine these with an activity they enjoy in
one of the world's great cities.
LOW CARBON
OLYMPICS
Between 1991 and 1999, transport accounted for
21% of carbon dioxide emissions from London. The promotion of
cycling as a low carbon transport option will therefore have an
important role to play in helping London meet its target of reducing
CO2 by 20% relative to 1990 levels, by 2010.
The candidate file for London 2012 makes a commitment
to the Games being carbon-neutral. The planning agreement also
confirms commitments to reduce carbon emissions across the site
as part of the redevelopment.
It is currently intended that the "carbon
neutrality" be delivered through "offsetting" carbon
emissions through expenditure on low-carbon projects overseas,
such as wind energy projects in Africa.
However, there are exciting and significant
opportunities for bringing about carbon savings locally, through
the promotion of low carbon forms of transport to and from and
around the site—such as cycling.
Not only could this reduce the government's
expenditure on projects abroad, it will also support the delivery
of national and regional carbon targets in the UK. Importantly,
the promotion of cycling as part of the Olympic plans will help
to establish a culture of cycling in London, support the development
of cycling infrastructure around the Olympic park and encourage
a long term "legacy" of low carbon commuting from the
host boroughs to the City and the West End.
SPECIFIC COMMENTS
ON THE
LONDON OLYMPICS
BILL
8. Olympic Transport Plan
Modal share
We note that this should have regard to sustainable
modes, especially cycling. This needs to be addressed at Bill
stage, as the modal share of cycling for the Olympic events would
be envisioned as significantly higher than the modal share of
cycling envisioned by the Mayor's Transport Strategy as the main
strategy document referred to. While the Mayor's Transport Strategy
is due for revision in 2011, this would be too late to influence
the delivery of the Olympics, and the reference to the GLA Act
1999 does not cover their special role. As the existing regulatory
framework is therefore inadequate, we propose a special power
and duty for the ODA to deliver a high (10-20%) modal share of
cycling.
The Bill should also regulate the impact of
construction traffic and provide powers and duties for the ODA
to move freight by water. This is not sufficiently addressed by
8.(2).(ii) or the provisions in section 11. The main Olympic site
straddles the River Lea, the Lea Navigation and is adjacent to
a major canal system. All of these feed into the River Thames.
Land Use: Access
When we commented on the Planning Applications
associated with the Olympics, we objected to aspects of Planning
Application OLY1 (details of loop road, land bridges, ban on cycling,
temporary loss of existing facilities, loss of common land). We
objected to Applications OLY2, OLY3, and OLY4 in their entirety.
We did not object to Application OLY5.
Our objections were made on the grounds that
at present the proposals for Olympic land use was heavily based
on motor traffic, particularly for the "Olympic Family",
with the public transport system having inadequate capacity to
deliver the Olympics. While we welcome associated public transport
improvements, cycling can acquire a significant modal share. Additionally,
we are concerned about important access that may be lost to cycle
traffic for a significant period of time. There is a real lack
of E-W connections across the Lea Valley, and a number of other
alignments are also affected. Some of the most valuable resources
are the facilities along the canals and other waterways, most
of which it is feared will be lost for the construction period
and beyond.
"The Government wants to promote the inland
waterways, encouraging a modern, integrated and sustainable approach
to their use. We want to protect and conserve a vital part of
our national heritage. At the same time, we want to encourage
their best and, where appropriate, innovative use, maximising
the opportunities they offer for leisure and recreation; urban
and rural regeneration; education; and freight transport."—
Waterways for tomorrow (DEFRA, 2000)
As there is no relevant section of the Bill
to address the problem of access restrictions, Section 14 of the
Bill should be expanded to include an obligation upon the ODA
to maintain access, and/or to create equivalent replacement routes.
An example is the lack of E-W crossings around the vital A11 corridor,
which deters many people from cycling, and where before, during,
and after any works for the Olympics existing alternative routes
should safeguarded.
This would not, in effect, need to be of inconvenience
to the proposed construction works, as it is mostly a matter of
detail and sequencing of works, which can be undertaken at a more
detailed design stage. There would be no negative regulatory impact.
It would, however, prevent access restrictions from being imposed
without justification, which again must be addressed at Bill stage
to carry enough weight to be followed. Experience shows that a
lack of regulation at this stage leads to significant problems.
Land Use: Internal Olympic traffic and "owned
fleet"
Much of the internal movement about the main
Olympic site will be low speed, at distances of up to two miles,
which is ideal for cycling, and the payloads equally small compared
to the proposed regime of delivery with vehicles capable of considerably
greater speeds, and carrying considerably greater payloads.
The bicycle and pedal powered delivery vehicles
provide a system which delivers the people and packages for the
same journey times, but puts a far lower demand on resources.
Bikes costing £300 can provide the same individual mobility
as cars costing £6,000 or more. The large number of factories,
campuses, or army bases around the world, in all of which cycling
is a main mode of transport, show that cycling is ideal for this
type of site.
Throughout the "back of house" area,
use of cycles by athletes, officials and support staff should
therefore be an important mode that could greatly speed up logistics
and ensure a smoother running of the Olympics. The development
of freight bikes is highly advanced and these should be a key
component of the servicing strategy. Cycling should be encouraged
by the provision of covered cycle parking within walking distance
of all facilities. Spacing of racks should allow for the use of
cycle trailers to transport equipment, cleaning supplies, etc.
The reasons why there is a need to reflect this
in the Bill is as noted above under "Modal share".
Freight, especially construction traffic
The Government, through the report of the Freight
Study Group June 2002, is committed to seeking ways to encourage
the transport of freight by water through coordinated planning
measures.
The development of the Lower Lea Valley for
the Olympic Games offers an opportunity for innovative use of
the waterways system for site construction traffic and for post-Games
potential for continued use for waterborne freight to aid reduction
in the increase of roadborne freight in the London area as set
out in the Mayor's Transport Strategy.
In 2003, 129 million tonnes of goods were lifted
by road in London (London Travel Report, Mayor of London 2004).
Reducing lorry traffic on roads is a major component in creating
safer and more pleasant conditions for cyclists.
Recent major construction works in London have
failed to consider alternatives to road transport. The King's
Cross development, which saw the removal of spoil by road from
King's Cross to Stratford, increased large lorry movements in
east London. This produced a considerable hazard for cycle traffic
and this is therefore an important issue to be addressed at Bill
stage, as provisions under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984
and the Mayor's Transport Strategy, to which reference is naturally
made throughout, are insufficient to deal with the impact of such
major construction works. The ODA should have powers to enforce
contractors adhering to strict and rigorous standards of minimising
the impact of construction-related traffic.
9. Olympic Route Network
In addition to the Olympic Road Network designated
mainly for the use of motor traffic associated with the "Olympic
Family", the ODA should have the power to designate a route
as part of an "Olympic Active Spectator Road Network"
(OASRN), eg a major cycle route cutting across London. Direct
main roads should be designated for this purpose for the duration
of the Olympics. This should also be reflected in Section 12,
and would confer additional powers on the ODA that would assist
greatly in the delivery of the Olympics.
14. Road closures
For comments on this section, please refer to
our comments on Section 8.
CONCLUSION
We hope that these comments prove useful to
the work of the Transport Select Committee and would be delighted
to provide any further information that might be required. As
noted, we consider there to be a need for some additional regulation
to become law to successfully deliver the Olympic Games 2012 in
London. Expenditure on the solutions proposed is significantly
lower than on other solutions, and would be of significant benefit
to the taxpayer.
Such regulation of achievable regulatory impact
would benefit London immensely and help provide a catalyst to
the promotion of active travel throughout the country, meeting
public health objectives, energy efficiency, sustainability, and
spending targets.
12 September, 2005
5 Throughout this submission "the Olympics"
and variants will refer to both the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Back
6
eg, Germany, 10%; Denmark, 20%; the Netherlands, 30%. Back
7
http://mqt.london.gov.uk//public/question.do?id=5147 (28th April,
2004). Back
| 
