A View from the Handlebars: Only Active Travel can solve Hull’s congestion problem
Hull City Council has no evidence that its proposal to reduce the operating time of bus/cycle lanes on major routes into the city will do anything to reduce congestion on Hull’s roads. But it will make active travel a lot less attractive and threaten future funding. In this blog post, we lay out, in detail, our objections to the council’s proposal and make a plea for Hull’s nascent active travel provision to be improved, not removed.
Show us the evidence
Hull City Council’s justification for proposing the change to bus/cycle lane operating times is that it will reduce congestion. But the council has no objective evidence that its proposed solution will work. To get accurate, objective data on the current congestion levels and on the projected levels if all-day bus lanes were removed, it would need Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras to track vehicle travel times or else phone data that could be mapped against the network. The council has neither of these.
The only ‘evidence’ the council has, is based on the subjective findings of its 2022 Hull Transport survey, in which 86 per cent of respondents said congestion had got worse, with 80 per cent blaming road works or road improvement works and 62 per cent blaming ‘too many cycle lanes on the roads’.
But this survey is flawed and the conclusions drawn from it are erroneous for several reasons:
It was carried out Aug-Sep 2022, focusing on the change in congestion following the Covid lockdowns of 2020. Congestion was bound to have increased against this historic low point. Covid was a short-lived blip in a trend of ever-increasing car use – in 2019 there were 792 million vehicle miles travelled on roads in Hull, up from 698 million in 2010.
It took no account of various temporary factors in the city that were adding to congestion, such as the National Highways A63 Castle Street improvement scheme and the upgrade of the Stoneferry corridor.
Respondents were only asked about 2 possible solutions to congestion problems: changes in the bus lanes and how they wanted Hull CC to balance the speed of repairs.
The options were presented as a ‘zero-sum’ choice: either roads could be improved for pedestrians and cyclists, or journey times could be reduced for motorists. No mention was made of the fact that a modal shift towards active travel would increase road capacity for motorists who had to drive.
No questions were asked about the reasons people made their transport choices, their willingness to change their mode of transport, what provision would be needed to make that change, or how else congestion could be reduced.
There were no safeguards against people submitting multiple online entries.
Reducing bus lane operating times won’t reduce congestion
If the council’s proposal is carried out, bus lanes will remain in place with peak flows during rush hours, so any congestion alleviation will be minimal. Moreover, anecdotal evidence is that most cars didn’t use bus lanes when they were permitted to.
Critically, countless studies have shown extra road space allocated to cars will soon be used up through the phenomenon of induced demand. In other words, any gains will be short-lived and only exacerbate the problem in the future.
The proposal will make cycle use and public transport less attractive, forcing more and more people into their cars.
The stand-alone cycle paths along the routes would continue to exist. But maintaining green coloured surfacing and bike symbols within the bus lanes would offer no protection outside of peak hours. As anyone who cycles can tell you, green paint is not infrastructure. Indeed, the evidence shows that shared lane markings are more dangerous than no road markings.
Bus journey times, which have fallen by 9% since the all-day lanes were introduced, will once again likely rise to their pre-Covid level.
Meanwhile, downgrading Hull’s active travel infrastructure could threaten existing and future active travel funding for the city.
Hull CC received £2.2m in 2020 from the Local Enterprise Partnership’s Getting Building Fund, to deliver two cross-city routes, £3.95m in 2021 for road maintenance schemes in the city, aligned with £1m in 2021 The Active Travel Fund. All this funding could be clawed back by DfT.
Future funding for active travel is now dependent on a council’s Active Travel England (ATE) rating, ranging from 0 to 4 – the higher score, the more funding a local authority will receive. Councils with a score of 0 will not be able to apply for active travel funding. Hull CC has a score of 1. The removal of active travel provision would threaten its precarious ATE score and so jeopardise any future active travel funding.
The proposal undermines local and national responses to the climate and health emergencies, which emphasise the importance of active travel.
In 2023, the second national cycling and walking investment strategy (CWIS2) reaffirmed the government’s commitment to making walking, wheeling and cycling the natural choices for millions more journeys, with an ambition for 50% of all journeys within towns and cities to be by active travel by 2030.
The Government’s Gear Change, 2020, recognised that active travel benefited health, well-being, the environment, air quality, climate change targets, and the economy. But in order to achieve those benefits, cyclists and pedestrians must feel safe and active travel must be seen as convenient and accessible for all.
Hull CC has declared its own climate emergency and pledged to be carbon neutral by 2030. Transport is the largest contributor to the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, producing 27%, more than half of which comes from cars. Hull CC had previously aimed to provide a safe and convenient active travel network to achieve its net zero target and improve health.
Hull CC has responsibilities to help achieve these active travel targets and has several plans and objectives to do so.
Hull CC’s Local Transport Plan recommends active travel for shorter journeys to free up capacity for essential car trips.
Hull CC’s latest Bus Service Improvement Plan includes the objective ‘of ensuring buses are prioritised in order that they have free flow’ and to assuring ‘accessibility and journey times are retained or improved’.
Hull CC’s Air Quality Strategy set out the council’s strategy and priorities for improving air quality, to improve the environment and public health. Its strategies include promoting active travel, re-prioritising road space away from cars and prioritising buses.
Hull is currently England’s 11th worst authority for excess weight and Hull CC’s Physical Activity Strategy includes ensuring cycling and walking are the natural choices for shorter journeys.
Better active travel infra would reduce traffic congestion, while simultaneously contributing to climate goals and improving health.
Facilities that encourage active travel and public transport use would encourage modal shift and reduce congestion.
BUT cycling has to be seen as safe to enable a modal shift. Improved cycling infrastructure will achieve this. The removal of all-day bus lanes won’t.
What evidence is there for this?
All-day bus lanes have already produced active travel gains. Benefits have included:
A reduction in journey time and punctuality improvements to Hull’s bus services, over pre-Covid measurements.
Making a statement about choosing sustainable transport for short journeys, reducing emissions.
Providing marginal safety improvements for cyclists resulting in stronger active travel figures. The provision of further improved safety, including more and better cycle routes, will encourage more modal shift.
Enabling easier filtering especially for e-cargo and adaptive cycles.
Lowering casualty figures for cyclists using them.
Covid measures have also shown the potential for modal shift in the city.
Cycle use increased at the peak of Covid when public transport was not being used and there were lower car traffic levels, making roads appear safer.
A large increase in cycle use showed that modal change, though difficult and challenging, was achievable in the right conditions.
2022 monitoring figures show increased cycle usage on routes with active travel interventions.
The flawed 2022 Transport Survey does not recognise the high level of public support for active travel measures in Hull, revealed by many other council surveys:
· Hull CC’s March 2016 People’s Panel Climate Change and Transport survey showed that:
o 66% rated the threat of climate change as high.
o 71% thought that buses should be prioritised.
o 61% thought that cycles should be prioritised.
o 56% thought that pedestrians should be prioritised.
o Only 32% thought that cars should be prioritised.
· Hull CC’s April 2019 Vox Pop showed that:
o 80% were or were willing to change their driving habits and drive less.
· Hull CC’s June 2019 People’s Panel Climate Change survey showed that:
o 64% agreed that there was a climate emergency.
· Hull CC’s July 2021 People’s Panel Roads and Traffic survey showed that:
o 76% thought that shifting travel from cars would be better for the environment.
o 70% thought that shifting travel from cars would reduce air pollution.
o 68% thought that shifting travel from cars would reduce congestion.
o 66% thought that shifting travel from cars would improve health.
o 93% thought that the best way of encouraging modal shift was by making public and active travel easier to use.
· Hull CC’s September 2021 People’s Panel Transport survey showed that:
o 75% would prefer to cycle on dedicated cycle tracks next to or away from roads. This figure rises to 86% for potential cyclists.
o Only 6% would prefer to cycle on roads without cycle lanes.
o 45% of people had access to a cycle.
o Although 86% said that they knew how to ride a bike, only 54% were confident to do so. 34% were not confident. 70% said they could travel at least 2 miles on a cycle.
o 47% thought that traffic congestion could be reduced with an improved bus network.
o 93% thought that the best way of encouraging modal shift was by making public and active travel easier to use.
· Hull CC’s December 2021 People’s Climate Change survey showed that:
o 59% thought that shifting all car travel to cycling would reduce carbon emissions.
· Hull CC’s January 2022 People’s Planning survey showed that:
o 46% wanted more cycling and walking infrastructure, as opposed to 12% who wanted less.
· Hull CC’s April 2022 Climate Change survey showed that:
o 80% were already or were willing to use alternative travel methods to cars.
o 55% of journeys to work were under 3 miles.
o 77% thought they had a duty to be environmentally friendly.
In addition, the 2021 Census showed that 35% of households in Hull do not own a car or van. Removing active travel infrastructure would therefore discriminate against this large group, which includes some of the poorest people in the city, reducing their ability to get around in a healthy and affordable way. (Conversely, improved active travel conditions would provide a massive benefit for them and the city.)
The public have said what they want: safe cycling infrastructure to encourage modal shift and counter climate change. Instead of considering the evidence from these surveys, the council is proposing to remove cycle infrastructure, based on responses to one question in one flawed survey.
--
The proposal to remove the all-day bus/cycle lanes fails to offer leadership or vision on modal shift.
The current council administration recognises the need for modal change. They acknowledge that it is needed for Hull to meet its decarbonisation targets and to bring about better environments for people to live in, with fresher air and quicker movement around neighbourhoods and across the city. They accept that what is happening now in Hull is unsustainable, and that future funding for road repairs is now at risk.
But, with an eye to political expediency, they say their role is to follow public opinion, not to lead it. Thus, they give excessive weight to the loud but minority voice against active travel, despite knowing it will be harmful to Hull.
The strategy they have chosen for themselves has several weaknesses:
1. It Is too slow. We are in a climate emergency and Hull will never achieve the 2030 carbon neutral target the council has set by relying on gradual change. That is why councils have been set legal and challenging targets.
2. It does nothing to change public perceptions or demands.
3. Most importantly, it is based on a snapshot of public opinion from the faulty and biased 2022 Transport Survey.
--
Changes in legislation since the all-day bus lanes and cycle lanes were introduced means that a switch can’t be flipped to revert to how it was.
In July 2021 local transport note (LTN) 1/20 was published. It has imposed conditions on councils that were not previously present and would have to be considered with any proposed changes. These include:
o 1.6.1 (3) Cyclists must be physically separated and protected from high volume motor traffic, both at junctions and on the stretches of road between them.
o 1.6.1 (8) Cycle infrastructure must join together, or join other facilities together by taking a holistic, connected network approach which recognises the importance of nodes, links and areas that are good for cycling.
o 1.6.1 (21) Schemes must be consistent. A scheme is only as good as its weakest point. Strenuous effort should be made to avoid inconsistent provision.
o 4.2.9 Not only must cycle infrastructure be safe, it should also be perceived to be safe so that more people feel able to cycle.
o 4.4.1 On the roads of the type where there are bus lanes in Hull, there must be at least light segregation to avoid excluding potential users or those with safety concerns.
o Councils have a responsibility to ‘work out every technical aspect of a proposal thoroughly and in detail before you present it and get it as right as possible at the beginning… Proposals must be clear and unambiguous, as detailed as possible, and frank about the disadvantages.’
o 6.4.1 cycle lanes are marked with a solid or broken white line.
What is being proposed ignores all these conditions.
The removal of all-day bus lanes will mean that Hull CC will fail to meet its targets on a range of objectives.
They don’t meet Hull CC’s obligations under The Traffic Management Act 2004
They don’t meet Hull CC’s Carbon Neutral Strategy objectives.
They don’t meet Hull CC’s Local Transport Plan objectives.
They don’t meet Hull CC’s Bus Service Improvement Plan objectives.
They don’t meet Hull CC’s Air Quality Strategy objectives.
They don’t meet Hull CC’s Physical Activity Strategy objectives.
They don’t meet Hull CC’s obligations in the Climate Change Act 2008
They don’t meet the Government’s national transport strategy and design guidance, and so could result in reduced funding.
They don’t meet the Government's 2017 cycling and walking investment strategy objectives.
They don’t meet the Government’s Gear Change 2020 objectives.
They don’t meet the Government’s National Bus Strategy 2021 objectives.
They open the possibility of previous active travel funding being clawed back.
They jeopardise the possibility of future active travel funding.
They potentially fall foul of equality legislation. (Ethnic minorities are less likely to drive and more likely to use public transport than white people. Disabled people are less likely to drive a car and more likely to use public transport.)
Above all, they work against the necessity of modal change that is the only solution for alleviating congestion.
CONCLUSION: The removal of all-day bus lanes is not a solution that will work. Hull CC must meet its many plans and objectives with leadership and vision, with solutions that would reduce congestion, improve health, and make Hull a better city to live in.
At a time when we are facing a climate emergency this proposal is entirely the opposite of what Hull CC should be doing. Of course, people think congestion is getting worse – it has been getting worse year after year, except during the pandemic.
The decision to provide only one solution - removing all-day bus lanes, on the basis of a flawed consultation - points to weak leadership and vision. And it does nothing to tackle the root cause - over-dependence on private cars.
Hull remains wedded to car use – partly as a result of poor planning and development decisions made by the council. Cheap car parking, in particular, is recognised by senior council officers as ‘horrific for the city’ because it ‘bakes in’ car dependency.
With a growing population and increased car ownership, congestion levels will only get worse. Congestion is caused by cars. The solution is not to provide more road space to be filled by yet more cars.
Fortunately, there is a solution that works - modal shift!
The growth in active travel when other options were limited during the Covid pandemic, shows the potential for modal shift when it is supported locally and nationally.
But more people will switch to cycling only if they perceive it to be safe. By removing the limited protection that shared bus lanes offer, and forcing cyclists to share space with cars and lorries, Hull CC will increase the perception of danger and make modal shift less attractive.
Moreover, the removal of cycle lanes within bus lanes will rip the connectivity out of Hull’s most important cycle routes. This will leave pockets of (at best) light segregation separated by lengths of shared space with cars. Such scattered infrastructure will be far less likely to receive government funding.
Talk to us and give LCWIP a chance
We are always willing to work with the council on ideas which help to increase modal shift to create a cleaner, greener, healthier, and less congested city. CycHull has contributed to discussions around returning Freetown Way to two lanes each way for motorised traffic with segregated cycle infrastructure alongside it.
We agree that active travel infrastructure should be regularly reviewed and, if necessary, changed. But this should be done to fit a longer term strategy, not in an arbitrary way, as with the bus lane proposal.
A structure exists to guide this long-term strategy: the Local Cycling, Walking and Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) which sets out the broad shape of a city’s active travel network. Hull CC’s LCWIP has existed in draft form since 2019 and it is a good one – but it has yet to be consulted on. Before any further changes are made to the existing cycling infrastructure, the council needs to consult on its LCWIP and then implement its proposals.
This would demonstrate that the council has a serious long-term commitment to developing its active travel network. Having a long-term plan for reducing congestion, improving health and meeting net zero goals would greatly increase Hull’s access to active travel funding and enhance life for its citizens.
FINALLY …
We strongly urge Hull City Council’s cabinet to show they are on the right side of history. Instead of pandering to a vocal minority who oppose active travel, even as the planet burns, they have the chance to show leadership and vision by retaining and improving Hull’s nascent active travel network for the benefit of all its citizens.
Keep the all-day bus/cycle lanes and give active travel in Hull a chance.