Click on the picture above to download the Draft Strategy document and to send in your comments and suggestions to KCC.
Here's what SPOKES says:
Here's what SPOKES says:
Was the Active Travel Strategy document easy to understand?
Very easy to understand document thank you. However few cycle routes in the county are complete, do not follow desire lines, broken at junctions and all to often cyclists are dumped on to the busy roads . Cycle paths especially in the urban environment are of poor quality and rarely allow continuous travel with cyclists frequently having to dismount and navigate through barriers. Parked cars on roadside segregate cycle routes is also a major problem. To see an increase in active travel good quality infrastructure needs to be designed and built at the start not as an afterthought which is so often the case. If KCC is serious about increasing active travel then we believe a roots to branches policy change is needed.
Very easy to understand document thank you. However few cycle routes in the county are complete, do not follow desire lines, broken at junctions and all to often cyclists are dumped on to the busy roads . Cycle paths especially in the urban environment are of poor quality and rarely allow continuous travel with cyclists frequently having to dismount and navigate through barriers. Parked cars on roadside segregate cycle routes is also a major problem. To see an increase in active travel good quality infrastructure needs to be designed and built at the start not as an afterthought which is so often the case. If KCC is serious about increasing active travel then we believe a roots to branches policy change is needed.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the Active Travel Strategy’s ambition to make ‘active travel an attractive and realistic choice for short journeys in Kent’?
Making active travel an attractive and realistic choice is about infrastructure! infrastructure!, infrastructure!
Along with infrastructure KCC needs to address road speed and traffic calming. The bottom line should always be that if a residential road or street is not safe for a child to cycle then neither will it make walking and cycling attractive and a realistic alternative for adults.
Making active travel an attractive and realistic choice is about infrastructure! infrastructure!, infrastructure!
Along with infrastructure KCC needs to address road speed and traffic calming. The bottom line should always be that if a residential road or street is not safe for a child to cycle then neither will it make walking and cycling attractive and a realistic alternative for adults.
The Active Travel Strategy identifies three action areas to encourage more people to walk or cycle for short journeys in Kent (pages 6 to 8).
While we agree with the measures outlined, will this strategy really influence commissioning decisions and ensure cycling and walking are prioritised. We've seen many strategies and consultations over the years and little progress has been made in real terms. All aspects of active travel must be prioritised and play a major part in the planning process, the design process and build process. Trying to build good quality infrastructure within the existing built environment rarely provides the same good quality infrastructure found in new development areas. Sadly so many of the golden opportunities are now lost to us because of the car-centric approach to town planning and transport.
While we agree with the measures outlined, will this strategy really influence commissioning decisions and ensure cycling and walking are prioritised. We've seen many strategies and consultations over the years and little progress has been made in real terms. All aspects of active travel must be prioritised and play a major part in the planning process, the design process and build process. Trying to build good quality infrastructure within the existing built environment rarely provides the same good quality infrastructure found in new development areas. Sadly so many of the golden opportunities are now lost to us because of the car-centric approach to town planning and transport.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the measures outlined in Action 2: Provide and maintain appropriate routes for active travel?
Spokes has been campaigning for cycle routes for years and along with partners have sown the seeds that have created most of the key landmark cycle routes in the Eastern half of the county. The popularity of these routes is proof enough that providing the infrastructure encourages demand and promotes active and sustainable travel modes. While off road shared use paths are safer they may not always meet the needs of the user and the desire lines of the majority of users. KCC needs to rethink road space where appropriate and look at segregation, road speed, and be proactive rather than reactive to road safety issues. Many streets and roads could be made far more safer and attractive to non motorised traffic if KCC supported lower speed limits such as 20 mph. There are plenty of reports and manuals such as DfT's "Manual for Streets". Our European neighbours have been doing it for years and we've barely started!. KCC would do well to follow in the footsteps of continental good practice rather than trying to reinvent the wheel with home grown designs.
Maintenance of cycle infrastructure is again another issue and one that can have a negative effect on active travel if the route is not well maintained. The same could also be said for the actual construction of shared space/ cycle routes. The surfacing and the base layers should be built to the same high standards as roads but this is seldom the case.
Spokes has been campaigning for cycle routes for years and along with partners have sown the seeds that have created most of the key landmark cycle routes in the Eastern half of the county. The popularity of these routes is proof enough that providing the infrastructure encourages demand and promotes active and sustainable travel modes. While off road shared use paths are safer they may not always meet the needs of the user and the desire lines of the majority of users. KCC needs to rethink road space where appropriate and look at segregation, road speed, and be proactive rather than reactive to road safety issues. Many streets and roads could be made far more safer and attractive to non motorised traffic if KCC supported lower speed limits such as 20 mph. There are plenty of reports and manuals such as DfT's "Manual for Streets". Our European neighbours have been doing it for years and we've barely started!. KCC would do well to follow in the footsteps of continental good practice rather than trying to reinvent the wheel with home grown designs.
Maintenance of cycle infrastructure is again another issue and one that can have a negative effect on active travel if the route is not well maintained. The same could also be said for the actual construction of shared space/ cycle routes. The surfacing and the base layers should be built to the same high standards as roads but this is seldom the case.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the measures outlined in Action 3: Supportactive travel in the community?
While we do need to encourage and promote active travel most people do have the skills to cycle but lack the motivation mainly because of the lack of infrastructure and confidence because of traffic speed. Unless KCC gets to grips and starts dealing with road speed, traffic calming etc. and builds infrastructure either on or off road that is safe and meets user desire lines then little will change in the county. Few parents will ever allow their children to cycle on Kent's busy roads between home and school regardless of cycle training and the space outside our front doors is all to often a no go zone for children because of traffic related dangers.
While we do need to encourage and promote active travel most people do have the skills to cycle but lack the motivation mainly because of the lack of infrastructure and confidence because of traffic speed. Unless KCC gets to grips and starts dealing with road speed, traffic calming etc. and builds infrastructure either on or off road that is safe and meets user desire lines then little will change in the county. Few parents will ever allow their children to cycle on Kent's busy roads between home and school regardless of cycle training and the space outside our front doors is all to often a no go zone for children because of traffic related dangers.
Please tell us if there is anything else you’d like to see in this Active Travel Strategy, or if you have any other comments to make.
Use Public Health England's recent guidance to local authorities on how 20 mph can achieve significant increase in cycling and walking. Existing KCC policies have acheived very little over the years and sadly cycling is often seen by KCC councillors as a minor sporting activity rather than a means of reducing ever growing gridlock and pollution.
Replace existing guidance for cycling and walking with the TfL "Manual for Streets". Sustrans has also produced a design manual and The Cambridge Cycling Campaign document "Cycling in New Develoments" is an excellent guide and one the county would do well to take notice of.
Follow the Department for Transports 2013 guidance to local authorities on setting local speed limits and introduce " more 20 mph speed limits and zones, over time, in urban areas and built-up village streets that are primarily residential, to ensure greater safety for pedestrians and cyclists".
Cycling UK'S "Space for Cycling Campaign's" six key points must be taken on board by Kent if we are to see growth in active travel and a rise in commuter and utility cycling including children riding to school. The key points are:
1) Protected space on main roads.
2) Removing through motor traffic in residential streets
3) Lowering Speed Limits.
4) Cycle friendly town centres.
5) Safe routes to schools
6) Routes through green spaces. Without these measures being implemented and being written into
KCC policy active travel will never be anything more thn the journey from the front door step to the car for most people.
Use Public Health England's recent guidance to local authorities on how 20 mph can achieve significant increase in cycling and walking. Existing KCC policies have acheived very little over the years and sadly cycling is often seen by KCC councillors as a minor sporting activity rather than a means of reducing ever growing gridlock and pollution.
Replace existing guidance for cycling and walking with the TfL "Manual for Streets". Sustrans has also produced a design manual and The Cambridge Cycling Campaign document "Cycling in New Develoments" is an excellent guide and one the county would do well to take notice of.
Follow the Department for Transports 2013 guidance to local authorities on setting local speed limits and introduce " more 20 mph speed limits and zones, over time, in urban areas and built-up village streets that are primarily residential, to ensure greater safety for pedestrians and cyclists".
Cycling UK'S "Space for Cycling Campaign's" six key points must be taken on board by Kent if we are to see growth in active travel and a rise in commuter and utility cycling including children riding to school. The key points are:
1) Protected space on main roads.
2) Removing through motor traffic in residential streets
3) Lowering Speed Limits.
4) Cycle friendly town centres.
5) Safe routes to schools
6) Routes through green spaces. Without these measures being implemented and being written into
KCC policy active travel will never be anything more thn the journey from the front door step to the car for most people.