Held remotely using Google Meet on 11th October 2022. This was the meeting postponed for a month in anticipation that more information relating to the level of funding that Sutton is likely to receive for the borough’s revised LIP plans would be available.
No updates were received until an hour before the meeting, unfortunately this epitomises the approach of our local council.
The previous meeting notes from 14th June 2022 held on Google Meet.
Summary (provided by Colin Quemby):
Not much of a meeting. Online were Helen, Barry Lewis, Paul Garside, Kevin Williams and myself with little to discuss.
Colin
Some more detail of the latest eBike hire scheme – first 10 minutes per day free then 17p per minute; should return to parking bays or £1.50 penalty if not; £5 penalty if taken out of area. (I have seen several parked on pavements, one took four or five days before it disappeared), Kingston have a launch event planned for Oct 18.
School Streets – see report to E&ST cttee.
Hitesh is dealing with the LIP programme.
Suggested that Sarah Rye attend these meetings and try to avoid regular date clashes. Helen will circulate a Doodle sheet with possible dates.
finished by 10.20.
Received via email ahead of meeting:
Thanks for your email, and due to the unfortunate timing of these meeting there always seems to be a clash with a long-standing Highway Programme Board meeting which means I cannot attend, so maybe I will talk to Helen about changing the date/time, if that is okay with everyone as I am keen to attend.
On your points below, I had provided Kevin with some information for this morning’s meeting which would have answered some of the points you raised, but I have provided some high level thoughts below.
many thanks
—-
Ian Price
In reply to:
Hi Ian,
Given that there are now only 2 working days ahead of this meeting, do you think we should rethink our approach to all of this? I’ll share a snippet from what I’ve seen drawn from other borough’s experiences below, maybe we can divide up the work/conversations to be had over the next few weeks, I fear sharing a list of LIP schemes with some allocations next to them ahead of Tuesday’s call wouldn’t be the best use of everyone’s time.
below slightly edited, taken from discussion @LCC – hope this aligns with your understanding and provides a base for us to work together better.
LIP and the 80m active travel funding are two separate pots. Confirmed, the borough pots are £69m for each of the next two years,with one element fixed through the formula process for determining Safer corridors and Neighbourhoods – the cycling and bus priority settlements have been identified for 23/24 but not for 24/25.
My email from 6th October – Ian Price’s comments inline
- Initial LIP funding allocations are now with boroughs. Funding has represented what is deliverable, bold, aligns with MTS, but also where boroughs are at in their cycles – some progressive boroughs have bid low basically and only want to do feasibility work this year etc. The funding received covers the current financial year, and the expectation is that boroughs will deliver programme in less than six months, effectively fromm a standing start – which is unreasobale given the level of feasibility design, engagement – wih councillors, stakeholders and residents, detailed design elements – so it is lieky that feasibility and engagement will be a realistic focus this year, so I can understand the point made here.
- There is 69m available for LIP funding per year – that goes straight to boroughs, and is for ‘schemes that align with aims of MTS’ – so they don’t need to be exclusively walking/cycling schemes but most will (other things might be for instance station upgrades or interchange improvements, bus priority etc.). There is an allocation for the current year – 22/23, which was approved by E&ST Committee in Dec 21 (https://moderngov.sutton.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=651&MId=5650&Ver=4) and the current focus is to review this list to ensure that what is on are still a current priority with councillors, and given that lack of time to deliver in 22/23 it is very likely that most of these schemes will need to be rolled over into 23/24 for completion.
- That is entirely separate from the 80m per year active travel only funding – this will be disbursed by TfL direct or spent direct by them with support from boroughs. We’ve heard of some exciting schemes coming under this umbrella and we should hear a lot more before year end. Right now TfL are sounding out boroughs on these schemes – do they want them, will they support them etc. Confirmed, they are separate pots – TfL have approached the borough asking to discuss their 20mph plans on some sections of the TLRN and also around our Bus Priority schemes.
- Remember, any funding allocated, LIP or otherwise, will still be ‘gated’ from now on also. Boroughs will get a small chunk for feasibility, a small chunk for consultation or trial and only get the full construction funds when TfL are assured they’re ready for it. I am not sure this is the case for all TfL pots, but will check – but it is likely to be the case for Cycle Network and BP schemes
- Every borough is effectively in a competitive bidding war for funds. Every borough will get funds. And the door is always open if Bromley or K&C want to up their game. But weak schemes won’t be funded, basically. TfL are keen to fund borough’s who are proactive, and we are seeking to keep engaged with TfL wherever possible.
And an attachment with copy of email to LBS (their comments prefixed LBS:>>)
Notes from the previous meeting
The news of funding is good, but unless the current or future bids represent robust schemes compliant with LTN 1/20 guidance I fear we know what the result will be.
Quote:
Transport for London – Long-term Funding Settlement (DfT > TfL, 30 August 2022) – letter from Grant Shapps, Secretary of State for Transport, to Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-settlement-letter-30-august-2022.pdf “20. Enhancements – Active Travel: We expect TfL to continue to deliver throughout the Funding Period their active travel programme including funding for the London Boroughs under the Local Implementation Plan process. On average, £80m each year of the amounts in paragraph 15 will be ringfenced over the period of this settlement for active travel, defined as walking and cycling. Any cycle schemes implemented or supported under this funding shall be fully compliant with LTN 1/20 cycle infrastructure design guidance. We expect TfL to collaborate with ATE to ensure standards in Active Travel are consistent with the rest of England. [My emphasis]
There’s quite a lot of actions we didn’t address back in June or are ongoing, the SCF members are here to give early feedback on proposed schemes, so looking forward to the bid process will be the bids going in this November? so would that include placemaking for BH & WP? Foresters drive?
Are we confident they are robust and LTN 1/20 compliant schemes that will attract funding? It’s not been shared what came of the “Stage 2 informal consultation programmed for Summer 2022.” for either place making scheme. Can you share the bid that went forward in with the LIP? KW Not sure what is being asked for here – but can provide link to our Dec 21 TfL Report to E&ST Committee if that is what is benign asked for
LBS:>>Important to note that the £80M mentioned above is ringfenced for TfL programmes and is not borough money.
LBS:>>Pls reassure Sutton cycling colleagues that any Design element of a TfL scheme will be designed to LTN 1/20
LBS:>>KW update on Programme change/planned actions for Nhood Placemaking -with review of consultation content at this stage
LBS:>>KHW – can you please make the point that at the TfL bidding stage our schemes do not contain the level of detail required in LTN 1/20 to affect our bids; it is as important at feasibility stage that we are seen to be engaging with T^fL and making use of the TfL supporting information – which we are doing to support the development of schemes around the town centre and in those areas of the borough
Future scheme suggestions [that we’ll need to design/consult on ASAP to get funding] will be required, Kevin was adding schemes to a 3 year plan; Paul Garside was going to share an online folder to collect suggestions from all; Ian Price was going to recruit additional engineers, and also involve SCF in 23/24 schemes; I saw an easy LTN opportunity (my email to you 30th Aug), did you consider further?
Also Human Forest eBike hire is planning to launch on 22nd Sept. Their Green Bays (i.e. free parking spots) are still being decided on, we’ve been in touch with them with suggestions, would be good to share ideas and also check LBS Comms are gearing up for the launch.
Ongoing SCF Actions, a lot of my emphasis.
From June
- No TfL funding will be available unless robust schemes (LTN 1/20) are bid for | KW advises that LBS is compiling a 3 year plan and would like SCF input. LBS:>>KW looking to put in robust schemes. Need to explain that the way the funding has worked out that our 23/24 list is likely to include many unfinished schemes from 22/23, but happy to hear from them about other areas they want to look at – noting that our strategic focus will be on Morden to Sutton (STC elements up to Grennell road)
- Ian Price mentioned “forward planning for submissions to TfL for 2023/24, which will be needed by November 2022” – request update
Action – KW will raise with Ian P and would like to include SCF in these discussions. LBS:>>Yes, but as above this is limited in scope?- “Opportunity for the Forum to share any info or ideas” …plans that could start these conversations? [for] 22/23?
- KW will consult with SCF as a stakeholder as schemes develop.
- Action – KW will raise with Ian Price and get back to Marcus. Currently recruiting for additional Highways Engineers and there should then be resource to discuss these potential schemes in the next 2/3 months to progress this.
- Action – Paul Garside has offered to manage a folder of potential schemes/photos of locations that could be improved. SCF members etc to contribute.
- Audit of wayfinding signage – identify gaps in the route 75 signage between Cheam & Ewell has gaps. Colin Q – has details to send to us. LBS:>>Currently a vacancy for a Public Rights of Way (PROW) Officer who could be asked to check cycle signage when they out in the borough, hoping to recruit soon. PRoW role is still to be determined, but happy to pick up amy ideas where we can, funding aside.
From March
- Action Ian Baker will investigate possibility of a closure report and keep Cllrs Lewis & Burke informed of the outcome.
- Ian Baker advises no updates from TfL at the moment, we expect to hear in 2 weeks time. If there is no money from this source then we must look elsewhere.
- Previous advise from Simon Munk, London Cycle Campaign is that TfL will fund LCN 1/20 schemes but boroughs must have consulted beforehand in order to submit a bid.
- SCF ask whether funding be assigned to maintaining cycle infrastructure e.g. Ewell Road Cycle track needs maintaining & is in need of repair from Cheam Village to Nonsuch Park gates (borough boundary). Is this TLRN or borough responsibility ? LBS:>>TfL responsibility
- Forresters Drive consultation – Kevin offered to update – what can we share about this scheme? Need update from KW (Action: Hitesh will ask KW). LBS:>>KW/HW to provide updates
- Ian B suggests an audit of signage around school streets – wayfinding project?
Can this be included as a task within the school travel planning ? Or can the ST team resource it? Use School Catchment maps that Phil Crockford produced?Previous\Other
- secure bike storage / Cyclehoop
Reply: Ian B – do you have any info on our Cycle Parking
- new school streets / wayfinding & safe routes to/from
LBS:>>New proposals included in the E&ST report to October 22, and happy to consider with them.
- LBS Comms / e-Cargo hire promotion etc
We are working with colleagues in our
Word document: Sutton Cycling Forum – Update by Friday 7 October.docx (received 11th Oct)
- Removal of barriers
Get Sutton Cycling 
[…] The previous meeting notes from 11th October 2022 held on Google Meet. […]