Battle lines are drawn over sustainable cities in Europe

A fascinating poll of #mayors in European cities shows that urban leaders are aware of a sharp division of opinion among citizens over the policy agenda to make #cities more #sustainable.

Published on 27 May, two weeks ahead of the European parliamentary elections, the second annual Eurocities Pulse Mayors Survey, which collated results from 92 mayors in 28 European countries, shows that climate remains the top challenge and priority with 67% picking it among their top three (up from 29% last year).

But scratch beneath the surface and mayors are less confident they are bringing their citizens with them. Almost seven out of 10 mayors say the majority of local residents strongly or partially support and prioritise decarbonisation policies. But 38 per cent are “concerned about backlash from citizens against local climate policies”.

Source: Eurocities Pulse Mayors Survey

While one has to be careful when drawing conclusions out of survey questions, it may be an echo of recent high profile examples of public opposition to specific climate policies. The 15-minute city, an urban planning concept in which someone can access work, shopping, education, healthcare and leisure amenities with a quarter-hour walk, cycle, or public transport, has become the focus of hostility.

First outlined in 2016 by Carlos Moreno, a Colombian professor in urban planning at the Pantheon-Sorbonne University in Paris, it was adopted by cities including the French capital, as well as other world cities such as Seattle in the US, Bogotá in Colombia, Melbourne in Australia and Shanghai in China. British cities such as Oxford, Bristol, Birmingham and Canterbury have also embraced the idea.

However, last year opposition coagulated around conspiracy theories that the 15-minute city was being used to contain citizens within their local zone. These often linked it (without any proof) to restrictions to tackle the Covid-19 pandemic and claims around the vaccine programme. In the UK it was conflated with the low traffic neighbourhoods that barred motor traffic from certain streets and installed video cameras to enforce them. One Conservative MP hailed the 15-minute city as an “international socialist concept”.

Last year also saw dramatic images of tractors driven up to government buildings by farmers protesting at European green agriculture policy. Thousands of tractors have brought Berlin’s city centre to a standstill, blocked the A1 motorway between Lille and Paris and clogged up the streets of Brussels. Farmers were angry at German plans to cut subsidies for diesel in farmyard vehicles, new French regulations and taxes, and Belgian moves to limit emissions of nitrogen, respectively.

The survey’s compilers say that interviews with mayors give a more nuanced interpretation of the numerical findings. Several mayors explained that while they were concerned by a “potential backlash from a minority of residents,” they were still focused on the 2050 climate targets.

That is laudable but, nevertheless, the finding is a reminder that city leaders will need to retain ownership of the messaging around pro-climate policies and prevent the agenda being overtaken by conspiracy theorists.

It also highlights the importance of ensuring that there is a just transition towards a more sustainable city. More than 30 years ago the Rio Declaration of 1992 that was part of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development set out the three pillars of sustainability as economic, social and environmental — also dubbed profit, people and planet.

Often it is the social/people aspect that gets forgotten even as policies succeed in delivering on an environmental agenda without harming (and sometimes benefitting) the local economy. The Eurocities survey may be a warning of the danger of ignoring the third leg of the sustainability tripod.

One death is one too many: 10 gear changes to make urban cycling safe and sustainable

The love-hate relationship between #cities and #cycling has been thrown into sharp focus following the death of a pensioner who was hit by a cyclist. The awful event is a reminder of the need for the UK to invest in #sustainable infrastructure.

In July 2022 an 81-year-old woman stepped out into the path of a cyclist who was part of a peloton riding round Outer Circle, a circular 4.5km (2.8 mile) road in London’s Regent’s Park. She passed away two months later, and the subsequent inquest ruled it was an accident that the cyclist had no time to avoid.

Despite that, the tragedy has stirred up long standing mutual resentment between pedestrians, who witness cyclists breaking rules and laws, and the cycling community infuriated at pedestrians walking out across a road while looking at their phone. The news emerged as MPs were voting to bring in a new offence of causing death and injury by dangerous cycling.

Both groups have a point but in a perfect world, as the head of a Regent’s Park cyclists group, said, cyclists and pedestrians “should be trying to work together to advocate for safer travel”. (Full disclaimer: I bike around Outer Circle in full cycling gear, but my age means I seldom exceed 20mph).

The aggravated relationship is due in part to the failure over decades to invest sufficiently in safe, sustainable cycling infrastructure that keeps those on two wheels apart from those on four or on two legs. According to the IPPR think-tank, figures for England show that spending on “active travel” — which includes walking — takes up just 2 per cent of the total transport spend, leading to some of the lowest walking, wheeling and cycling rates in Europe.

According to Cycling UK, spending corresponded to £24 per head annually in London between 2016 and 2021, while the rest of England spent only £10 per head. This compares to spending on roads amounting to an equivalent of £148 per person per year. Campaigners have had to go to court to challenge a government decision to cut the UK active travel budget by £200 million over the next two years.

Inevitably, northern Europe and especially the Netherlands and Germany are home to the cities deemed the safest for cyclists. British tourists will notice the ubiquitous segregated cycling lanes in cities such as Utrecht, Munster, Antwerp and Copenhagen that regular top the tables of safe cycling cities.

An 10-spoke plan

From a public policy perspective, cycling should be encouraged as it causes a miniscule fraction of the pollution of other forms of transport while the users benefit in terms of exercise and fitness. So, what policies should re-elected London Mayor Sadiq Khan and a new Westminster government put in their panniers? Here are 10 measures that could between them have a positive impact.

that could between them have a positive impact.

The first is installing more segregated cycle lanes. Building conduits for cyclists that run along roads but are physically separated from vehicle traffic by low, 10cm high walls keep the two groups apart in a way that painted lines alone do not. They should be wide, well-marked and continuous to provide a safe and comfortable space for cyclists.

Second is improved junction design. Many, often fatal, cycling accidents happen at junctions and intersections. By redesigning junctions with features like advanced stopping areas for cyclists — increasingly common in London —bicycle-only traffic signals, and dedicated cycling lanes through intersections can reduce conflicts between cyclists and cars.

Third is more infrastructure to just make cycling easier and more comfortable. Key would be more bicycle parking facilities and especially secure and covered parking areas at key destinations that can address concerns about bicycle theft. Fourth are  more traffic calming measures. Admittedly these have become highly contested in the wake of low traffic neighbourhoods, but speed humps, chicanes, and narrowed streets can help reduce vehicle speeds in residential and commercial areas, making them safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

Fifth would be tightening laws to make them cycle-friendly along with greater enforcement. Laws that protect cyclists' rights on the road and enforcing them strictly can encourage more responsible behaviour by motorists. A recent example is the change to the Highway Code to allow cyclists to ride in the middle of their lane rather than cling to the left. Others are harsher penalties for parking in cycle lanes and adopting a Dutch rule that mandates drivers open their car door with the hand further away from it (which forces them to look behind them).

Number six is more education and awareness campaigns for both cyclists and motorists in safe cycling practices, rules of the road and the importance of sharing the road. Seven is better integration with public transport such as allowing bicycles on buses — currently a no-no in London — and trains, to make cycling a more practical option for longer distances.

Having clearly colour-coded cycle maps dotted around the city — similar to tube and Underground maps — would be my eighth, while my nnth would be more water refill stations (good for both walkers and bikers).

The 10th and final gear shift is more publicly funded cycling training programmes, particularly for children and adults new to cycling that can improve cycling skills, confidence, and safety awareness. Taken together, this package could help reduce the tension between cyclists and both pedestrians and drivers and thus reduce the chances of another terrible accident.

Thames Barrier’s mid life crisis raises retirement questions

Turning 40 is a tricky time for anyone, but even more so when you are the barrier protecting 1.4 million Londoners and £321 billion of property from a deadly deluge. On 8 May 1984, the late Queen officially opened the Thames Barrier, which had actually been in operation for the previous 18 months.

Despite being 520 metres long and consisting of 10 steel gates each weighing some 3,100 tonnes, it is not in the average Londoner’s radar in the way that the Houses of Parliament, the O2 Millennium Dome and the London Eye — all of which the barrier protects from aquatic destruction — very much are. Paying a visit on Saturday 12 May, I saw few others coming to have a look.

Over its 40 (or 42) year life, it has been closed 221 times and has not, it seems, ever suffered a technical failure. As the government, which paid 75 per cent of the £2.4 billion cost in today’s money, said “without the barrier, storm surges and frequent tidal flooding … submerge buildings along the river as well as the Underground”.

But the barrier will go into retirement at some point; it was originally envisaged to need replacing in 2030, but a reassessment has extended its working life to 2070 when it will be 86.

A decision about the Thames post-2070 must be made in 2040. The Environment Agency, which has responsibility for flood protection, has identified seven options. The first is to upgrade the existing barrier. The review is silent on merits and demerits, but that is unlikely to happen. Raising the height of the gates will involve a very complex and expensive operation that would mean effectively reconstructing the entire structure.

The second alternative is a second set of gates at the existing site plus locks to allow boats to pass during closures.

There are then three options for new barrier downstream of the existing one. The nearest  ones are at Long Reach, with a single set of gates, matching the incumbent, and another with a second set of gates and locks. A few miles towards the sea are a set of two matching proposals at Gravesend in Kent. Again, no details, so no costs.

Finally there is a proposal for four tidal flood storage areas on four marshes along the estuary that would store flood water, enabling the barrier (which would be upgraded “at a later date”) to cope with surges.

Nature based solutions

One of the big debates within academia is over the growing prominence of engineering solutions such as dykes and barriers over more nature based solutions (NBS) such as flood reservoirs. Given that the engineering solution was selected in the 1970s out of 31 designs —were any of them NBS? — it is hardly surprising that it will likely be a battle of the barriers.

But the presence of at least half an NBS option is a relief. It would be interesting to know if a full NBS option without a barrier upgrade was ever on the table. The barrier has been a great success and imitated by other cities. But as sea levels are forecast  to rise and tidal surges more likely thanks to climate change, will the UK need yet another, longer barrier further downstream after another 86 years.

Given that the decision is still 15 years away, there is still an opportunity to start a debate about the potential for NBS such as floodplains, rainwater harvesting, sustainable urban drainage systems, and flood retention systems within the city itself.

It is the least we can do as the Thames Barrier enters the second half of its life.