Cllr Lindsay Rawlings was
welcomed as the Call-In lead and presented reasons for issuing the
Call-in.
·
The Call-in reasons and responses are detailed in
the report.
·
Activity 1, paragraph 1 the emphasis in the report
of most of the activities is on improvements to the cycling
infrastructure with pedestrians second best.
·
Paragraph 2 if the intention is to increase cycle
hubs at stations that the word existing should be
removed.
·
Paragraph 4 believes that this should be a holistic
framework not just about cycling and walking without including
public transport. Not sure how many residents are aware of the
number of bus routes that can be used. On a number of areas where
there is poor connectivity a more joined up approach would allow
more people to see where they can get to with public
transport.
·
Activity 2 paragraph 1, anecdotally that the rise of
illegal use of e-scooters, riding cycles on pavements and also
through public open spaces does put people off walking around.
Rather that look at pure statistics for accidents would rather see
data collected on changing habits of pedestrians because of
perceived problems on pavements. Even with the increase in safe
segregated cycle routes in the borough there does not appear to be
less people riding on the pavements.
·
Activity 3 thought needs to be given in how to
engage with more people need to gain the views of a wider range of
residents.
·
Activity 4 pleased that the activities are not
ranked in order, but this should be made clearer in the report. A
wide range of views are needed on this.
·
Activity 6 point 10 the response does not give
reasons for providing so few references to public transport
throughout the report. One of the main thrusts of healthy streets
cannot assume that getting people cycling or walking will get them
to leave their cars behind some journeys will need to be taken by
public transport.
·
Point 41 whilst agreed that other improvements can
relate to pedestrians they do not do so obviously. Others reading
the report may miss these.
·
Point 55 there should be an indication of much or
how little people need to change their mods of travel in order to
make a difference such as leaving the car at home one day a week,
etc. If residents could see how making a relatively small change
could make a difference to climate change, they may be more
inclined to do so.
·
To sum up not totally against the healthy streets
initiative and am pleased that the emphasis has moved away from
just cycling to include walking and public transport. This report
needs to show residents that it is serious in its support for
walking across the borough.
The Chair thanked Cllr Rawlings
and asked the Deputy Leader Cllr Ian Barnes and officers to
respond.
- With regards to the point favouring
cyclists over pedestrians throughout the report it talks about
improving conditions for walking and cycling. The overall purpose
of the report is to provide a framework for healthy streets. There
are 10 indicators, and these achieve a balance between walking and
cycling.
- To clarify regarding cycling hubs at
stations this is not expansion of the cycle hubs already in place
without evidence of demand but an increase in the number of good
quality secure cycle parking spaces such as those found at station
hubs are needed at other stations that do not currently have this
facility.
- The paper relates to public
transport as programming to facilitate walking and cycling. Most
public transport trips will begin on foot. The focus of TfL’s
healthy streets approach is walking and cycling journeys.
- With regards to people walking or
cycling to Town Centres spending more than those arriving by car or
public transport with no data to support this assertion. Links have
been put in the response where the evidence can be read.
- Danger from motor vehicles to
pedestrians and from the increasing use of e scooters and cyclists
riding on the pavement. The response contains data on relative risk
from different modes of transport. It was agreed that the use of e
scooters and cycles on footways does cause distress to some people,
this is a police matter. One of the reasons that Enfield did not
take part in the e scooter trial scheme is that we want to see the
results first.
- Fear of traffic is a reason that
people often give for choosing not to walk or cycle. The National
attitude survey is included which has a focus on walking or
cycling. Segregated cycle lanes help with safety.
- With reference to where the report
states that we will seek to involve those with protective
characteristics. Everything will done to try to increase
participation across these groups. The report mentions the
establishment of a Healthy Streets Disability Reference group
(HSDRG) this consists of 15 people with representation from various
disabilities.
- Regarding point 10, the
administration fully supports public transport and will do
everything they can to expand this.
- Community engagement a variety of
methods are used including leaflets, paper versions of the
consultation and documents posted through doors and try to help
residents with different languages.
- The comment on the mix of metric and
imperial measures is noted.
The Chair invited questions and comments from
Members, relevant to the call-in reasons
- In a response to a request for more
information on the HSDRG officers advised that they are working
with Transport for All which is a pan disability charity focuses
specifically on the transport sector. The annex in the report sets
out the equalities approach. The report sets out to make a
commitment on how the council will engage with those with
protective characteristics.
- A
comment was made that it is hoped that the points made in the call
in will be taken on board. Going forward the linguistics and the
way it is being communicated needs to be softened. Softer language
is needed to engage people with the behavioural and cultural shift
needed. Public transport is a major part of the report. Members
were advised that the next step is to look at how this can be
communicated in a softer way. Engagement with Councillor Rawlings
would be welcomed on this.
- Activity 2 one of the main issues
raised with Councillors is road safety. One of the frustration
residents raise is that the accident rate is not high enough, and
speeding is a policing issue. It is very difficult to get even
modest measures put in place. Officers advised that funding is a
challenge in order to best determine where to allocate scarce
resources on road safety there has to be a tool to prioritise where
the greatest need is. It is acknowledged that there are issues in
other places and a wider more holistic approach is taken in these
areas. The council receives lots of requests for road safety
measures.
- How do we engage with groups who do
not naturally engage? Members were advised that it will be the role
of the HSDRG to reach out, they will be mentored by Transport for
All. It was acknowledged that this will be a challenge.
- East of the borough the junction at
Hertford Road/ Ordnance Road is challenging with cars parking at
junctions, heavy traffic, issues with cycle lanes and the
perception that this not safe. This is very confusing and there are
also traffic signalling issues which have been raised with TfL.
Officers agreed to look at this scheme.
- Following a query, it was confirmed
that the putting in good quality cycle storage is resident
led.
Cllr Rawlings in summing up said that there is
not enough mention of public transport within the report. The links
provided in the responses should be in the report. Agree with the
data re accidents but need to investigate what stops people
walking. Felt that there is too much emphasis on national surveys
should focus Enfield specific. Different ethnic groups have their
own reasons for not cycling or walking. The report needs to make
clear that the points are not in order. Language used to be made
gentler and more friendly. Cllr Rawlings happy to work with
officers in making the report suitable for the public.
Overview & Scrutiny considered the reasons
for the call-in and the responses provided.
Councillors Aksanoglu, Anyanwu,
Demirel, Guzel and Levy voted in favour of the above decision and
Councillors David-Sanders and Hockney voted against. The original
Cabinet decision was therefore agreed.