Commissioned by our friends from @lambeth_council and authored by the South Bank Employers’ Group, my suspicions were that the Draft South Bank and Waterloo Cycle Strategy 2010 - 2012 was going to be yet another classic case of the local authority listening to the needs of business rather than residents.
But at 103 pages long, I was prepared to give the Report some analysis and see if there is anything positive to be found within for Lambeth cyclists. I hoped that by the time I reached page 103, I hadn’t read the rallying call for cycling to be banned along the riverbank.
Um, major spoiler alert…
Whoops.
“In 2009 we commissioned the South Bank Employers’ Group to draft a cycle strategy for the South Bank and Waterloo area.
The unique aim of the strategy was to consider all aspects of cycling from a neighbourhood perspective rather than addressing any particular theme, such as cycle safety or cycling behaviour.
We are interested in hearing your comments on the strategy.”
OK…
First off it is the very good Councillor Nigel Haselden who has written the above forward for the report. He goes by the rather fancy title of Deputy Cabinet Member for Sustainability and Transport. Forget that - Nigel is a passionate a cyclist who knows his stuff.
“With the Mayor’s Cycle Hire Scheme and Cycle Superhighways being launched, an increasing drive towards sustainable travel, and rising cycle theft, the report should represent part of an ongoing conversation with key stakeholders [urgh] about how to deliver services to encourage people to take to their bikes.”
Interesting times ahead. It should be noted however that the Boris Bikes bare very little relevance to the wider needs of cyclists within Lambeth.
There is the geographic issue of the Boris Bikes only touching the very North tip of the borough. Plus the provision of a public bicycle hire scheme has been implemented for short-term immediate needs, and not to address the needs of the wider cycling community.
Trying to find somewhere to park your bicycle safely in Streatham, having had to fight the near motorway madness that is Streatham High Road, is a very different cycling experience compared to taking out a Boris Bike at Kennington and then making the short hop to Waterloo and dropping it off at a well defined docking station.
The significance of Waterloo as the hub [urgh] for Lambeth cyclists shouldn’t be understated either. This is the location where Critical Mass rolls out once a month, and the area is also home to a high concentration of bicycle shops.
This shouldn’t mean however that the needs of other Lambeth cyclists from Stockwell up to Streatham are overlooked, all at the expense of the perceived sexiness of cycling along the South Bank.
The report makes some good points, such as:
“The area suffers from particularly pronounced levels of cycle theft, and there is some debate as to whether this reflects a basic correlation between high numbers of available cycles and high thefts, or whether it also reflects a lack of resource for cycle crime prevention and detection.
Sentences for cycle thieves are relatively lenient, and often served within the community. For this reason, court injunctions and Anti Social Behaviour Orders served on convicted cycle thieves might be considered as part of the toolkit to combat this crime.”
Also part of this toolkit [urgh] is displacing the crime to other parts of the borough no doubt.
But let’s fast-forward to the money shot, and the conclusions reached by the community embracing South Bank Employers’ Group:
“The debate about cycling on the River Walk is polemical. The River Walk is not a designated cycle route and private landowners in the study area recommend that a ban on cycling in this location be enforced.
Although it is technically illegal to cycle on the River Walk, the London Borough of Lambeth have indicated that they do not wish to see enforcement against cyclists on the Albert Embankment section between Westminster and Lambeth Bridges, for which the Council is responsible.”
Which is basically saying we’ll turn a blind eye at policing our statutory requirements, and then wash our hands over what we’re not legally obliged to provide. Which pretty much sums up Lambeth Council policy en masse.
The reason behind this is explained in the telling line of:
“Relatively limited funding is available to implement the recommendations.”
This is of course the role of the South Bank Employers’ Group, who did after all author the report:
“Private landowners Southbank Centre and Coin Street Community Builders to support enforcement of no cycling rule on the River Walk between Oxo Tower Wharf and London Eye. Should no enforcement support be agreed with police, landowners should support the signage plan.”
And so no surprises that a report authored by the South Bank Employers’ Group concludes by supporting business through the process of trying prevent people from cycling. And it only took 103 pages to reach this viewpoint.
But in-between there are some fine observations. Recommendations in relation to bike theft are extremely positive:
“Bike marking / registration days in central areas and at major employers, police-supported scheme with local cycle shops asking customers to register cycles with national property register, lock discount scheme at workplaces.”
Let us not forget that this type of report, attempting to recommend what steps can be taken to make cycling more appealing, would have been pretty much non-existent even a decade ago.
It is a step in the right direction, as long as you overlook the vested interests of the anti-cycling lobby that is the South Bank Employers’ Group.
Oh - and a few more bike stands wouldn’t go amiss outside Lambeth Town Hall.
