active travel (wales) bill sustrans response
TRANSCRIPT
Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Yn cyflwyno Sustrans
Mae Sustrans yn gwneud dewisiadau teithio gwell yn bosibl, yn ddymunol ac yn anochel. Rydym yn
elusen flaenllaw yn y DU yn galluogi pobl i deithio ar droed, beic neu drafnidiaeth gyhoeddus ar gyfer
rhagor o’r siwrneiau a wnawn bob dydd. Rydym yn gweithio gyda theuluoedd, cymunedau, llunwyr
polisi a sefydliadau partner fel y gall pobl ddewis siwrneiau iachach, glanach a rhatach, gyda gwell
lleoedd a gofodau i symud drwyddynt a byw ynddynt.
Mae’n bryd i ni gyd wneud dewisiadau gwell yn y ffordd yr ydym yn teithio. Cymerwch y cam a
chefnogwch Sustrans heddiw. www.sustrans.org.uk
About Sustrans
Sustrans makes smarter travel choices possible, desirable and inevitable. We’re a leading UK charity
enabling people to travel by foot, bike or public transport for more of the journeys we make every
day. We work with families, communities, policy-makers and partner organisations so that people
are able to choose healthier, cleaner and cheaper journeys, with better places and spaces to move
through and live in.
It’s time we all began making smarter travel choices. Make your move and support Sustrans today.
www.sustrans.org.uk
Sustrans Cymru
123 Bute Street
Cardiff Bay
Cardiff
CF10 5AE
Head Office
Sustrans
2 Cathedral Square
College Green
Bristol
BS1 5DD
© Sustrans August 2012
Registered Charity No. 326550 (England and Wales) SC039263 (Scotland)
VAT Registration No. 416740656
Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Table of contents
Sustrans’ Response to the Active Travel (Wales) Bill White Paper....................................................... 1
One Page Summary......................................................................................................................... 1
Executive Summary: Headline Proposals ........................................................................................ 2
Introduction.................................................................................................................................. 2
Enable: ......................................................................................................................................... 2
Engage: ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Encourage: ................................................................................................................................... 3
Exemplify:..................................................................................................................................... 4
Full Response: Sustrans’ Response to the Active Travel (Wales) Bill White Paper .............................. 5
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Tackling poverty........................................................................................................................... 5
21st century healthcare.................................................................................................................. 5
Education ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Environment and sustainability..................................................................................................... 6
Growth and sustainable jobs........................................................................................................ 6
Response to specific questions ....................................................................................................... 7
Question 1. ...................................................................................................................................... 7
Enable .......................................................................................................................................... 9
Engage....................................................................................................................................... 12
Encourage.................................................................................................................................. 13
Exemplify.................................................................................................................................... 13
Question 2. .................................................................................................................................... 14
Question 3. .................................................................................................................................... 15
Question 4. .................................................................................................................................... 17
Compulsory Purchase Orders: ................................................................................................... 17
Speed limits (20mph and 40mph):.............................................................................................. 18
Strict liability:.............................................................................................................................. 19
Question 5. .................................................................................................................................... 19
Question 6. .................................................................................................................................... 20
Question 7. .................................................................................................................................... 21
Rural communities...................................................................................................................... 21
Shared infrastructure for walking and cycling............................................................................. 21
1 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Sustrans’ Response to the Active Travel (Wales) Bill White
Paper
One Page Summary
Sustrans warmly welcomes the proposals outlined in the White Paper for the Active Travel (Wales)
Bill. However, we strongly believe the duty on local authorities should be target-driven, specifically
requiring local authorities to increase the number of people choosing to travel on foot or by bike. To
this end, the overarching duty should be “to raise levels of walking and cycling in their areas by [a fixed percentage amount]”
1.
The White Paper is clear that a long-term cultural shift is needed and encourages the use of the Four
Es framework2. However, of the 19 interventions listed within the framework, only five are addressed
by the measures outlined in the current proposal for legislation. If population-wide travel behaviour
change is to be achieved a more holistic package of “mutually supportive” measures will be required2.
Enable:
• It will be vital for the plans to be underpinned by robust guidance and best practice design
standards
• Better access to good quality training, particularly cycling training, will also be crucial in
enabling people to use the facilities provided3
• Professional development training schemes to support key personnel within each local
authority to understand the new duty and the accompanying guidance framework should also
be developed
Engage:
• The need for meaningful end user engagement is clear. Importantly, this engagement should
be with people who don’t currently walk and cycle as well as with those that do4
• From a strategic perspective, this Bill should be seen as a catalyst for engaging policy
agendas in both national and local government; naming additional public bodies as statutory
partners would achieve this
Encourage:
• Infrastructure will be an important part of the long-term cultural shift away from car use but
the Bill should also explicitly require local authorities to implement a range of softer measures
that reward behaviour change in their local communities
• Encouragement will be needed at a strategic, as well as individual, level. Consistent
monitoring and evaluation systems should accompany infrastructure interventions to ensure
the desired results are achieved
• The proposal to use existing funding as an incentive for the development of these plans is
sound, but to be most effective funding and resource levels need to be increased
”proportional to target levels”1
• Where results are not achieved, there should be a provision that enables the Minister to seek
additional enforcement powers should these be needed
Exemplify:
• At a national level, the Welsh Government should ensure that there is a consistency across all
policies, that reflects the clear emphasis that the Government places on walking and cycling
• This Bill ought to be linked to an overarching framework across government to encourage a
similar, joined-up approach at a local level
2 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Executive Summary: Headline Proposals
Introduction
Sustrans warmly welcomes the proposals outlined in the White Paper for the Active Travel (Wales)
Bill. The aim of this Bill to “make walking and cycling the most natural and normal way of
getting around”5 is admirable and represents the first time a Government anywhere in the world has
sought to enshrine such an ambition in legislation. We are particularly delighted at the opportunity
this Bill presents to raise the profile of active travel amongst policy makers and delivery
organisations across Wales.
We welcome the decision to name the legislation the ‘Active Travel (Wales) Bill’. Wales has some of
the highest childhood obesity in the world – the recent Health Behaviours in School-Aged Children
report ranked the nation fourth behind the US, Canada and Greece6. The figures revealed one in five
15-year-olds in Wales are either overweight or obese. For boys alone, this figure rises to 26%. The
Bill is a practical response to the growing obesity epidemic and has the potential to be one of the
most effective public health interventions since the creation of the National Assembly.
If properly implemented and supported the Act will not only be a fitting practical expression of the
National Assembly’s duty to promote sustainable development, and the Welsh Government’s
commitment to reduce greenhouse gasses year on year7. It will also assist local authorities in
fulfilling their duty to promote health and wellbeing. Indeed, the Bill is already recognised as one of
the most important public health initiatives to have been undertaken since devolution8.
Moreover, the potential this Bill has to bring new life to our communities, both through opening up
access to jobs and opportunities to those in our poorest neighbourhoods, and through boosting
Wales’ tourism offer, demonstrates the promise of this new law to support the achievement of much
wider policy goals.
However, to achieve these aims we must do more than simply “allow the majority of shorter journeys made in Wales to be made by walking and cycling”5. We need to make walking and
cycling possible, desirable and, ultimately, inevitable – the common sense choice for short journeys.
The duty on local authorities should be reworded to reflect this.
The need for this new law to incite a long-term cultural shift is referred to several times within the
White Paper, and the ‘Four Es’ framework is identified as the model for this approach. However, of
the 19 interventions advocated within the Four Es framework, only five are addressed by the
measures outlined in the current proposal for legislation. If population-wide travel behaviour change
is to be achieved, by the White Paper’s own reckoning it is clear that a more holistic package of
“mutually supportive” measures will be required2.
Moreover, in recognition that this Bill is seeking to instigate cultural shifts at both government and
grassroots level, each component of the model should be considered from a community and
strategic perspective.
Enable:
Community perspective: The Bill represents a laudable first step in removing some of the key
barriers to walking and cycling, requiring local authorities to provide more and better facilities that
will enable people to travel more actively. But to truly achieve this goal, it will be vital for the plans to
be underpinned by robust guidance and best practice design standards, which will ensure the
infrastructure and nature of the routes developed, are of a quality that will inspire people to change
their travel behaviour.
3 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Better access to good quality training, particularly cycling training, will also be crucial in enabling
people to use the facilities provided3. Yet the provision of training only features once in the
consultation document as an intervention that “could” be delivered alongside the Bill5. Targeting children and young people, in particular, will support them to adopt travel behaviours that will remain
with them into adulthood, creating a new, more active generation in Wales3.
Current cycle training varies in standard and provision across Wales. This provision must be
standardised and local authorities should be required to ensure the delivery of National Standard
Cycle Training (to Level 2 or above) in all primary schools under their jurisdiction. This training
should also be available to older children and adults too.
Strategic perspective: Professional development training schemes that focus both on the need for
and provision of walking and cycling routes should also be developed to enable key personnel within
each local authority to understand the new duty and the accompanying guidance framework.
Engage:
Community perspective: The White Paper is right to “strongly encourage early engagement (at
pre-design stage) to fully understand the routes and facilities that people would prefer”5. The
need for meaningful end user engagement featured consistently in the feedback from the roundtable
discussions held at the Sustrans facilitated Active Travel (Wales) Bill Conference in June9.
Importantly, it is clear that this engagement should be with people who don’t currently walk and
cycle as well as with those that do4.
To achieve this level of engagement, many local authorities will need support; for many transport
officials this will be outside of their area of expertise. Resources and advice on who to consult and
where local authorities can go to receive support in delivering this consultation process should be
provided in the guidance accompanying the Bill.
Strategic perspective: This engagement should also extend beyond a requirement for local
authorities to work with community groups and individuals. Specifically, there should be provisions
within the Bill to require cross-departmental working in order to discourage the silo working
practices that continue to dominate and disadvantage walking and cycling schemes. This Bill should
be seen as a catalyst for engaging policy agendas in both national and local government9. Naming
additional public bodies as statutory partners in the delivery of the Bill, either through making these
bodies subject to the duty or through requiring them to have regard to the plans prepared, will be
crucial in encouraging this cross-sector working.
Encourage:
Community perspective: Infrastructure will be an important part of the long-term cultural shift away
from car use and ownership but encouragement goes beyond the provision of routes or maps.
Indeed, information campaigns reliant on raising awareness as a means of changing behaviours
“frequently have little or no effect”10. Instead, the Bill and accompanying guidance should explicitly support and encourage local authorities to implement a range of softer measures that reward
behaviour change in their local communities.
Local authorities should be required to offer support to help build confidence in inexperienced users,
to implement targeted measures that will help underrepresented groups become more active and to
deliver innovative schemes that reward travel behaviour change.
Strategic perspective: Encouragement will be needed at a strategic, as well as individual, level. Consistent monitoring and evaluation systems should accompany infrastructure interventions in
order to ensure the desired results are achieved.
The proposal to use existing funding as an incentive for the development of these plans is sound but,
to be most effective, a recent report from the British Medical Association established
4 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
that funding and resource levels need to be increased ”proportional to target levels”1. Moreover, the division of transport budgets into capital and revenue funding streams will constrain local authorities
and regional transport consortia in their ability to deliver the duties within this Bill. Wales should
seek the power to define transport budget ratios in Wales. Alternatively, guidance accompanying
the Bill should encourage and support local authorities to work proactively with other departments
likely to benefit from the measures outlined in this Bill (such as health partners) to achieve greater
freedom in the spending resources available to them.
Where results are not achieved, there need to be robust governance arrangements to ensure that the
ambition outlined in the White Paper is matched by effective action across Wales. To achieve this,
there should be a provision in the Bill that enables the Minister to seek additional enforcement
powers should they need to do so, to ensure that local authorities fulfil the duties required of them.
Exemplify:
The White Paper is right to highlight that “as a Government we need to set the example for the
kind of culture change we wish to see through consistent and clear messages”5 However, the details for how this will be achieved are vague.
At a national level, the Welsh Government should ensure that there is a consistency across all
policies, that reflects the clear emphasis that the Government places on support for sustainable
travel in general, and walking and cycling in particular. Notably, this should include a review of the
WelTAG appraisal system which has been shown to disadvantage walking and cycling schemes11.
In addition, in a recent reprioritisation exercise of the National Transport Plan, the Walking and
Cycling Action Plan was dismissed as a mere ‘policy’ intervention and therefore had neither a
dedicated budget nor was regarded something that the Welsh Government was responsible for
delivering. This must be addressed in the upcoming review of the activities and targets set out in the
Walking and Cycling Action Plan, and the measures and resources need to be put in place to
achieve any commitments made.
Crucially, national Government should lead by example in illustrating the importance of a
collaborative approach and demonstrating how this can be achieved. Improving rates of walking
and cycling will require strategies that go beyond a narrow conception of transport policy and this
Bill ought to be linked to an overarching framework across government.
Finally, as major trip generators themselves, local authorities should also be required to exemplify
best practice, implementing ambitious travel plans to encourage and ‘lock in’ travel behaviour
change amongst staff members, visitors and service users. Such an approach will help councils
achieve their Corporate Health Standard ambitions, as well as lowering car parking costs and
reducing absenteeism12.
5 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Full Response: Sustrans’ Response to the Active Travel
(Wales) Bill White Paper
Introduction
Five years ago, Sustrans Cymru along with BT, the Royal Mail, the British Medical Association and a
range of Welsh organisations submitted a petition calling for Welsh Government to match their
existing obligation to develop and maintain a network of roads, with a similar commitment to provide
for pedestrians and cyclists.
We were delighted that it formed part of the Government’s Legislative Programme announced in July
2012. And we believe the approach outlined in the White Paper, mirroring a similar scheme
implemented by Cardiff Council, is a practical and achievable way of increasing levels of walking and
cycling across Wales.
We are particularly pleased with the potential this Bill has to raise the profile of active travel amongst
policy makers and delivery organisations across Wales. Transport is central to our daily lives. It
affects how we access goods and services, our access to jobs, training, to family and to friends. But
too often transport is dismissed as a technical issue.
The outcomes of the Active Travel (Wales) Bill have the potential to reach far beyond transport policy
goals. Indeed, given the appropriate tools and support, we believe the Bill will directly contribute
towards five of the twelve themes outlined in the Programme for Government.
Tackling poverty
The cost of buying and maintaining a car is prohibitive to many families; and as fuel prices are
pushed higher many more families will be priced out of car ownership or forced into debt13. In 2003,
the UK Social Exclusion Unit (SEU) reported that transport is ‘a significant contributing factor’ in the
exclusion of many low-income groups and communities14. It acts as a barrier to the take-up of
employment, is also linked with low participation in post-16 education and college dropouts, and can
lead to failed health appointments and associated delays in medical intervention14. The problem is
particularly acute in rural areas but is also prevalent in the urban periphery on low-income estates.
The role that well planned investment in walking and cycling can play in tackling social exclusion and
in regenerating low-income neighbourhoods is clear. Integrating these travel choices into transport
provision focused on access by all, rather than simply mobility for those that can afford it, will create
a more equal, affordable and accessible range of travel options.
21st
century healthcare
Modern lifestyles can be highly sedentary and physically inactive lifestyles can have serious health
impacts. Physical inactivity is linked to one in five incidents of coronary heart disease, one in six
cases of colon cancer and diabetes, one in eight strokes and one in ten diagnoses of breast cancer,
making this one of the leading causes of death in developed countries15. Obesity is now also a
serious public health concern. Even relatively small increases in physical activity are associated with
some protection against chronic diseases and an improved quality of life; and active travel is a way
of people embedding physical activity into their daily routines.
Education
Public space has been overrun by cars. This loss of habitat has had a dramatic impact on young
people. They are less physically active, less independent, and having less fun than they would like16.
We have given up their freedom for that of cars. The biggest concern of adults when it comes to
children playing outside and walking and cycling to school, is traffic danger17. This fear has driven
parents to remove children from their natural habitat of the local community, and indoors to play, or,
for those with access to a car, into the backseat to be ferried around. At 08.35am nearly one in
6 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
every five cars in urban areas is taking children to school, typically a distance of a couple of miles18.
With investment in slowing traffic speeds, and creating more walking and cycling networks to
schools and beyond, we could get children out of cars and walking and cycling instead.
There are clear academic benefits in encouraging more students to walk and cycle. Through our
existing schools programme we know that children and young people who cycle or walk to school
are more alert and ready to learn than those who travel by car, and many schools implementing
physical activity programmes have seen positive effects on academic performance.
Environment and sustainability
Transport emissions account for 20% of the developed emissions (excluding aviation) from Wales,
and greenhouse gas emissions from transport have increased in recent years. The Climate Change
Strategy for Wales estimates that, by 2020, emissions from transport can be reduced by 1.3
MtCo2e. However, to achieve these targets, stabilising and then reducing transport emissions must
clearly be a priority. Personal behaviour change towards low carbon forms of transport, including
walking and cycling, is critical to the reduction of CO2 emissions, not least because it can be
implemented more quickly than other interventions19.
Growth and sustainable jobs
Finally, the Active Travel (Wales) Bill has significant potential to improve access to work and
stimulate economic growth in Wales.
Access to work: Two out of five jobseekers say that a lack of transport is a barrier to getting a job14.
Transport costs and access are also key areas of concern for those managing the transition into
work and costs can easily wipe out a meagre financial gain from entering or returning to work.
Improving accessibility on foot and by bike in our communities is one of the most equitable ways of
opening up access to employment and training opportunities.
The wider economy: In urban areas, the congestion which occurs when demand for road space
exceeds supply has traditionally been the prime focus for transport professionals, and the economic
consequences as a result of the delays and unreliability suffered by road users are well documented.
Facilitating more walking and cycling is likely to be the most cost-effective means of adding to
Wales’ overall transport capacity.
Moreover, our way of life, particularly how we transport ourselves, is currently highly dependent on
cheap, readily available oil supplies. As fuel prices continue to rise and become more volatile it will
become increasingly important to have a transport network that is not reliant on car ownership.
Instead it is clear that a resilient economy would best be served by greater investment in sustainable
transport measures. Countries who fail to develop a transport strategy that is not reliant on cars in
an oil-short future will suffer economically, and Wales is no exception.
There is also robust evidence documenting the benefits of walking and cycling investment on
individual sectors within our economy. Retail vitality and increased footfall are frequently linked to
the provision of an attractive shopping environment20. Whilst it is traditional for retailers to pursue
more car access and parking, and to resist measures to promote walking, cycling and public
transport use, research suggests that retail vitality and regeneration would be best served by traffic
restraint, public transport improvements and a range of measures to improve the walking
environment21.
This investment will also bring benefits to Wales’ tourism industry. A report by The Institute of
Transport & Tourism and The University of Central Lancashire (commissioned by Sustrans) found
that the level of expenditure by users of the Celtic and Taff Trails amounted to more than £75million
per year in the local economies of South Wales. 1,399 jobs could also be directly attributable to the
existence of the Trails.
7 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Response to specific questions
Question 1. What are your views on the proposals for Local Authorities to have a duty to:
• identify and map the routes within their areas that are safe and appropriate for
walking and cycling;
• identify and map the enhancements that would be required to create a fully
integrated network for walking and cycling and develop a prioritised list of schemes to deliver the network;
• deliver an enhanced network subject to budget availability and following due
process;
• consider the potential for enhancing walking and cycling provision in the development of new road schemes?
Sustrans is broadly supportive of the approach and duties outlined. Cardiff Council has already
demonstrated the effectiveness of this approach and is on course to achieving what will be required
of every local authority22. Their success demonstrates that the duties outlined above are both
realistic and achievable, though it is worth noting that the Council is fortunate to have sufficient staff
capacity and, through the Sustainable Travel Centre project, access to funding.
We would, however, advocate for the overarching duty on local authorities to be reworded. The duty
on local authorities should be specific to the desired change the new law hopes to achieve,
especially if the opportunities outlined in our introduction are to be exploited. To this end, we believe
the requirement on local authorities should be more explicit, and the duty should be “to raise levels of walking and cycling in their areas by [a fixed percentage amount]”:
“Ambitious growth targets for walking and cycling should be set at national and regional levels, with increased funding and resources proportional to target levels.”1
Regional Transport Consortia should then be required to demonstrate how their Regional Transport
Plans contribute towards achieving these targets.
The targets set within this new duty should mirror those set in the revised Walking and Cycling
Action Plan, to ensure this Bill and the duties within it are closely tied to the delivery of this Plan.
Using the targets set in the current Walking and Cycling Action Plan as an example, the requirement
would be on local authorities to:
• Increase the percentage of children who walk to school by approximately 20%;
• To triple the percentage of children cycling to school;
• To double the percentage of people who walk to work;
• To triple the percentage of adults whose main mode of travel to work is cycling;
• To increase the number of people undertaking walking for recreation by 25%; and
• To double the percentage of adults cycling for recreation
Please note, we are not advocating for these to be specific targets to be set, merely that the targets
that are set should match those within the Walking and Cycling Action Plan. Indeed, given the long-
term nature of the Bill, these targets should be ambitious, similar to those set in recent legislation
pertaining to the collection, transport, recovery and disposal of waste23, and to eliminating child
poverty across the UK24.
Adopting a target-driven duty would ensure the overarching strategy developed and implemented by
local authorities would focus on encouraging more people to travel on foot or by bike, in keeping
with the success criterion highlighted in the White Paper:
“Ultimately, this Bill will be a success if it leads to more people walking and cycling.”5
8 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Adopting this approach would also help to ensure that this Bill is relevant in all settings, recognising
that existing levels of walking and cycling vary within and between communities across Wales.
The duties outlined in the current legislative proposal should then sit below these overarching
targets. This would enable local authorities to implement the most appropriate strategy according to
the needs of their local communities, whilst still ensuring the ambitious aim of the Bill is achieved.
We would also recommend that an additional duty is added to the existing list of four to better reflect
the complexity of measures needed to influence pro-environmental behaviours2. Specifically, local
authorities should have a duty to “identify and deliver a range of interventions that encourage and enable more people to walk and cycle”, promoting the network the current legislation will obligate them to provide.
We welcome the identification within the White Paper for this new law to incite a long-term cultural
shift, and the recommendation of the ‘Four Es’ framework as a model for this approach.
DEFRA, 2008 A Framework for Pro-Environmental Behaviours
However, of the 19 interventions advocated within the Four Es framework, only five are addressed by
the measures outlined in the current proposal for legislation. To achieve this Bill’s full potential, it is
clear that a number of supportive measures will need to run in parallel with this duty:
“There is not one but a multiplicity of ways of promoting greener lifestyles, confirming the need for packages of mutually supporting measures”2
Moreover, whilst the Four Es approach is a useful framework for how best to encourage people to
adopt pro-environmental behaviours, the health benefits inherent in encouraging more people to
travel actively should not be overlooked. Guidance for planning, delivering and evaluating public
health activities aimed at changing health-related behaviours, such as those outlined in the National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence’s public health guidance, should also be considered25.
9 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
To highlight gaps in the recommended approach, we have framed our response using the four
headings employed in the model: Enable, Engage, Encourage and Exemplify.
Enable
The Bill represents a laudable first step in removing some of the key barriers to walking and cycling,
requiring local authorities to provide more and better facilities that will enable people to travel more
actively.
Walking and cycling: Sustrans fully supports the approach taken in the White Paper that specifically
emphasises the importance of promoting walking and cycling, rather than adopting a broader
‘vulnerable road users’ approach. The health benefits of walking and cycling have been definitively
proven and walking and cycling are some of the most equitable forms of active transport. It is
therefore right that the focus of this Bill should remain on these groups, whilst recognising that where
appropriate these routes can also be made available to other more vulnerable road users, including
horse-riders. Broadening the definition risks a loss in focus and may result in inefficient investment
of already limited resources.
As it currently stands, we are confident that the duties outlined in the White Paper would ensure that
existing efforts to encourage greater levels of active travel are exercised more strategically. It is not
uncommon for projects to be provided with grant funding within a single financial year, or for funding
to be provided relatively late in the year as part of under-spend arrangements. This can lead to
money being spent inefficiently and infrastructure designed around delivery constraints rather than
best practice. Through ensuring that each local authority in Wales has a prioritised list of schemes
that have been identified as having the potential to encourage more people to walk or cycle, this Bill
has the potential to ensure existing transport investment is spent to greatest strategic effect.
However, it will be vital for the plans to be underpinned by robust guidance and best practice design
standards, which will ensure the infrastructure and nature of the routes developed, are of a quality
that will inspire people to change their travel behaviour. This will be addressed more fully in our
response to question five of the consultation.
Maps: Lack of information about the alternatives to the car is a key barrier to change. For new
walking and cycling routes to achieve their full potential, it is essential that local authorities take into
account the need to raise awareness of new routes. The duty on local authorities to produce and
promote maps of the current facilities will go some way to supporting this, providing people with the
information they need to make informed travel choices.
The quality of the maps produced will have a direct impact on people’s perceptions of walking and
cycling in their local areas. Therefore, the process adopted by local authorities in developing these
maps should receive specific guidance.
The importance of continuous and direct routes: More detail is also required within the existing
duties outlined. Notably, replacing the phrase “safe and appropriate for walking and cycling”5 with “continuous, direct, safe and comfortable for walking and cycling” would ensure that the routes developed are not only safe, but also follow the most desirable routes for walkers and
cyclists. If we want long term culture change then we need to make active travel options more
attractive, pleasant and convenient than using a car for short journeys. Admittedly, these words do
feature later in the White Paper, but we would argue they also need to be explicit in the duty.
“The bicycling networks in all these cities [Amsterdam, Groningen, Copenhagen, Odense, Berlin and Muenster] include numerous off-street short-cut connections for cyclists between streets and
traversing city blocks to enable them to take the most direct possible route from origin to destination. The result of such a wide range of facilities is a complete, integrated system of bicycling routes that
permit cyclists to cover almost any trip either on completely separate paths and lanes or on lightly traveled traffic-calmed residential streets.” 3
10 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
One of the most effective tools for creating more convenient and popular walking and cycling
networks is to reduce ‘permeability’ for private motorised traffic whilst simultaneously increasing it
for active travel modes. This means that people using cars have limited access to many of the key
destinations people want to get to, while people travelling by sustainable and active transport means
are able to get right to where they want to, as quickly and conveniently as possible. Sustrans
advocates full permeability for active transport modes, semi-permeability for public transport and
reduced permeability for private motor traffic.
Each of the terms used in the duty should also be fully defined to overcome any ambiguity. These
definitions should include what is meant by ‘continuous improvement’ as well as the terms ‘safe’,
‘convenient’ and ‘comfortable’9. Arguably, the most important of these is a definition of the term
‘network’. Establishing a common understanding of what is meant by a network will be crucial in
ensuring that walking and cycling are promoted as a legitimate alternative to car travel for people’s
everyday journeys.
Traffic-free routes and permeability: Sustrans is also wholly supportive of the approach that the
routes included in the network should consist of a combination of traffic-free routes, on-road
provision and access through public spaces such as parks. However, we are concerned that later in
the White Paper, the importance of traffic-free routes in instigating travel behaviour change is
undermined. Specifically, point 62 states the following:
62. Local Authorities will not be expected to develop a large network of new traffic-free
routes to deliver this Bill….Not only are the resources lacking to deliver an extensive
network of traffic-free routes, it would also be counter-productive to the main aim of
changing culture.
It is a mistake to be so dismissive of traffic-free routes. Approximately one third of the National
Cycle Network26 is traffic-free, yet these traffic-free routes account for more than 80 per cent of the
number of walking and cycling trips undertaken across the Network in the UK. Indeed, our
monitoring work suggests that traffic-free routes attract at least ten times the usage of a roadside
route simply because they are attractive for pedestrians as well as cyclists, and for every kind of
journey27.
Safe and pleasant surroundings are particularly important for novice or returning cyclists, and traffic-
free sections are the perfect place to learn or rediscover cycling; this is particularly true for women28.
The focus of this Bill must remain on wider society, not on enthusiasts, if the desired change in travel
behaviour, and the consequential health and societal benefits, are to be realised. To achieve this,
the routes developed should cater for the needs of people who don’t currently walk and cycle, not
those who are already competent and confident cyclists and pedestrians. Traffic-free routes are
very popular for local journeys, as destinations in their own right, as the one place in the area where
the individual can learn to cycle again, and as an effective catalyst for change in local transport
policies. We would therefore like to see greater recognition given to the importance of traffic-free
routes as part of a broader network in the White Paper and its accompanying guidance.
We recognise that traffic-free routes are not always the most appropriate or realistic option available,
particularly in urban areas. The Cardiff Cycle Design Guide uses a hierarchy of provision that looks
at slowing traffic speeds first and off-road routes last29. Sustrans would welcome the adoption of this
hierarchical approach in the standards accompanying the Bill, providing the importance of traffic-
free routes in tackling one of the principal barriers people face in walking and cycling is given greater
recognition.
Maintenance: We also welcome the approach taken by the White Paper with regards to the
maintenance of the routes:
63. The routes identified on the maps will be adopted by the Local Authorities so we are
also not proposing a new duty to maintain the infrastructure that will be put in place, as this
11 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
would be covered by the Highways Act 1980. This covers highways maintainable at public
expense, including footpaths and cycleways.
If routes are not maintained they cease to be attractive and comfortable. Route maintenance is
therefore a crucial element in making walking and cycling safe and viable alternative to the car.
For new routes to be effective, and to avoid long-term future revenue liabilities, maintenance should
be carefully considered in the design stage. The better the route, the higher quality the surface and
the more complete the drainage, the less will be the need for major repair works in the future.
Sustrans maintains a considerable length of the National Cycle Network, in both urban and rural
settings. Routine maintenance costs vary between £1,000/km per annum for wholly rural and
recreational routes, to £7,700/km for inner city traffic-free routes, with additional costs incurred for
the periodic replacement of the actual path wearing surface. The variation of these costs represents
the importance of the consideration of maintenance needs during the initial route design stage. By
investing in the best possible design and construction, subsequent maintenance requirements can
be minimised. The Welsh Government should provide local authorities with best practice guidance
on maintaining routes, including preferred construction specifications to ensure maximum possible
use, as well as guideline estimates for the potential future costs associated with different design
approaches.
At present most councils do not have a specific maintenance regime for traffic-free paths. The
guidance accompanying the Bill should also require local authorities to set out a maintenance plan
for its strategic network.
Walking and cycling infrastructure provision on new road developments: Finally, with regards to
the fourth element of the duty, Sustrans believes that the duty to provide walking and cycling
provision in the development of new road schemes should be much bolder, with a presumption that
walking and cycling infrastructure will be provided.
Walking and cycling infrastructure should be provided at a level which makes active transport
options more visible to members of the local community, to ensure they will have the greatest
impact. Therefore, every opportunity to advance walking and cycling infrastructure should be seized
and local authorities implementing new road developments should seek to identify how their
development could link new communities/facilities into existing parts of the active travel network.
An example of where this has been successfully achieved is the traffic-free route that has been
developed as part of the Church Village by-pass in Rhondda Cynon Taff. The path is away from the
road and provides an attractive alternative route which recorded 86,000 trips in its first year. Paths
away from the carriageway attract more users than those placed directly next to the road, therefore
when constructing new road schemes consideration should be given to providing attractive routes
away from traffic.
Demonstrating demand for walking and cycling infrastructure is not always either obvious or easy,
especially where the opportunities for walking and cycling simply do not exist at present and so are
not part of any local person’s routine journey. For example, until Pont y Werin was constructed to
link Penarth with Cardiff Bay, levels of cycling between the two areas were very low, however, since
the creation of a direct, safe and comfortable route usage figures have consistently been between 35,000 – 45,000 trips per month.
Existing WelTAG guidance can compound this further. Indeed, the predict and provide approach to
managing traffic growth, still used by many transport planners, involves predicting future transport
demand in order to provide the network for it, often by building more roads. This approach is
frequently inappropriately applied to the provision of walking and cycling infrastructure: the model,
using input data from a setting where active travel has been suppressed, predicts little or no walking
and cycling in the future. Provision should be designed in these circumstances to encourage use.
The inadequacies of this guidance are addressed in more detail later in this response.
12 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Training: Better access to good quality training, particularly cycling training, will also be crucial in
enabling people to use the facilities provided3. Yet the provision of training only features once in the
consultation document as an intervention that “could” be delivered alongside the Bill5. Targeting children and young people, in particular, will support them to adopt travel behaviours that will remain
with them into adulthood, creating a new, more active generation in Wales3.
Current cycle training varies in standard and provision across Wales; and playground-based training
continues to dominate, contrary to best practice. This provision should be standardised and local
authorities ought to be required to ensure the delivery of National Standard Cycle Training (to Level 2
or above) in all primary schools under their jurisdiction. Welsh Government should consider if this
would best be achieved through integrating cycle training in the school curriculum.
Older children and adults should have the opportunity to access this on-road training too.
Professional development training will also be needed across transport and planning departments at
both a Welsh Government and local authority level9. Local decision makers, partners and local
champions should receive training to increase their awareness of the local challenges in relation to
walking and cycling and how their own work can contribute to the success in raising levels of active
travel. Specifically, training schemes that focus both on the need for and provision of walking and
cycling routes should be developed to enable key personnel within each local authority to
understand the new duty and the accompanying guidance framework. They should also be given
opportunities to develop their community engagement skills to encourage local solutions (addressed
in more detail in our response to question three).
Engage
The White Paper is right to “strongly encourage early engagement (at pre-design stage) to fully
understand the routes and facilities that people would prefer”. We address the importance of
meaningful end user consultation in more detail in our response to question three of this
consultation.
Silo working: This engagement should also extend beyond a requirement for local authorities to
work with community groups and individuals, to address the silo working practices that continue to
dominate and disadvantage walking and cycling schemes. This isolated approach prevents funding
and expertise synergies being capitalised on between departments in national and local government,
as well as with other bodies and external agencies such as the NHS. This Bill should be seen as a
catalyst for engaging new policy areas in both national and local government with the walking and
cycling agenda.9
Proposals for how this can be addressed at a national level are set out under the heading
‘Exemplify’. Locally, the importance of integrating action on walking and cycling within other local
agendas needs to be emphasised, encouraging and supporting partnership working at both strategic
and operational levels.
The White Paper recognises the importance of a joined up approach, stating:
“Delivering a network of the scale that is envisaged goes beyond transport planning; it would
need to consider land-use, housing, educational programmes commercial developments,
regeneration schemes, historic buildings and tourism schemes.”5
But the new law needs to go further than this if it is to achieve the cultural shift intended. Naming
additional public bodies as statutory partners in the delivery of the Bill, either through making these
bodies subject to the duty or through requiring them to have regard to the plans prepared, will be
crucial in encouraging this cross-sector working. These bodies might include Local Education
Authorities, Local Health Boards and the new single environmental body, but consideration should
be given to who best to name in order to facilitate a more joined-up approach.
13 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
In addition, the adoption of suitable project management processes by local authorities would help
to ensure that stakeholder interests, particularly those within local authorities themselves, could be
considered during the development stages. A senior management led approach to scheme
development and delivery should be adopted, supporting a strategic, system-wide approach to
raising levels of active travel. ‘Start up’ meetings involving all affected parties within a project
delivery group should also be instigated at scheme inception as standard. Local authorities should
ensure partner organisations are clear about their contribution and responsibilities, and should
consider asking them to sign a memorandum of agreement that pledges specific relevant actions in
the short and long term. Transport teams should also be encouraged to establish methods for
involving private organisations in the implementation of the strategy.
Formal mechanisms, which endorse this partnership working and approach to project leadership,
should be clearly advocated within the Active Travel (Wales) Bill30 and accompanying guidance.
Encourage
Infrastructure will be an important part of the long-term cultural shift away from car use and
ownership; for example recently improved connections in Newport have led to 26,000 more people
travelling actively on the newly constructed routes. If there are good safe routes to use then
travelling actively becomes easier to envisage and a more appealing option.
However encouragement goes beyond simply infrastructure or the provision of maps and
information. Indeed, information campaigns reliant on raising awareness as a means of changing
behaviours “frequently have little or no effect”10. This is recognised in the White Paper, which states
“more is required than just providing a suitable route or showing people a map.” In spite of this,
no specific provisions or directions are made regarding these ‘softer’ measures, leaving it to
individual local authorities to decide if and how they will address this crucial aspect of behaviour
change.
The additional duty Sustrans recommended earlier in this response (on page eight), requiring local
authorities to identify and deliver a range of interventions that encourage and enable more people to
walk and cycle, would help to address this deficit.
Changing people’s attitudes and tackling negative perceptions of walking and cycling will be crucial
when seeking to influence the way people approach sustainable travel and their everyday journeys.
To achieve this, softer measures need to be included in the Bill that will encourage individual
behaviour change, including measures that will both encourage and ‘lock in’ modal shifts in travel
behaviour.
The new law and accompanying guidance should require and support local authorities to adopt
more innovative ways to reward behaviour change in their local communities and must provide the
resources they need to achieve this. This should include targeted as well as more universal
approaches if the full potential of the Bill to tackle health and wealth inequalities is to be achieved.
Encouragement mechanisms will also be needed at a strategic level. These are addressed in more
detail in our response to question two of this consultation.
Exemplify
The White Paper is right to highlight that “as a Government we need to set the example for the
kind of culture change we wish to see through consistent and clear messages.”5 However, details on how this will be achieved are vague.
At a national level, Welsh Government should ensure that there is a consistency across all policies,
that reflects the clear emphasis the Government places on support for sustainable travel in general,
and walking and cycling in particular.
14 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
This should include a review of the WelTAG appraisal system, which has been shown to
disadvantage walking and cycling schemes11. An appraisal system that favours schemes that
increase car use will inevitably support the funding of schemes that increase car use. To create a
genuinely level playing field for making decisions on transport funding, Welsh Government should:
• Re-evaluate the process by which the multiplication of small time-savings are able to accrue
a value far beyond their worth to each of us in our daily lives;
• Address the anomaly in the current system which counts a loss of fuel sales as a cost within
schemes that reduce car use;
• Use the World Health Organisation’s Health Economic Assessment Tool (HEAT) as a means
of estimating the economic value of the health benefits arising from walking and cycling
schemes31.
Lessons must also be learnt from the failure of the Walking and Cycling Action Plan 2009 – 2013 to
achieve “the significant growth that [Welsh Government] had hoped to deliver.”5
In a recent reprioritisation exercise of the National Transport Plan, the Walking and Cycling Action
Plan was dismissed as a mere ‘policy’ intervention and therefore had neither a dedicated budget, nor
was regarded as something that the Welsh Government was responsible for delivering. This lack of
dedicated resources, identified delivery agents and monitoring systems needs to be addressed in
the upcoming review of the activities and targets set out in the Walking and Cycling Action Plan, and
appropriate measures and resources should be put in place to achieve any commitments made.
National Government must also illustrate the importance of a collaborative approach, and
demonstrate how this can be achieved. Improving rates of walking and cycling will require strategies
that go beyond a narrow conception of transport policy and it is essential that this Bill is linked to an
overarching framework across government. Notably, the Department for Education and Skills, the
Department for Health and Social Services and the Department for Environment and Sustainable
Development should all be involved in the development and delivery of this new law.
Finally, as major trip generators themselves, local authorities should also be required to exemplify
best practice, implementing ambitious travel plans to encourage and ‘lock in’ travel behaviour
change amongst staff members, visitors and service users30. Such an approach will help councils
achieve their Corporate Health Standard ambitions, as well as lowering car parking costs and
reducing absenteeism32.
In a project coordinated by Sustrans, staff at the Unviersity Hospital of Wales and at Velindre Cancer
Centre were encouraged to travel more actively. In evaluating the project, staff travel survey data at
the University Hospital of Wales found that staff arriving to work in the car on their own reduced by
8% between 2010 and 2011 and the number of staff cycling to work over the same time period
increased by 267%. The Velindre Cancer Centre enjoyed similar results with a reduction of 15% in
car use and a 100% increase in staff cycling.12 Using research conducted by the London School of
Economics, which showed regular cyclists take on average one sick-day less per year33, promoting
‘active travel’ has saved the Local Health Board more than 450 sick days per year – equivalent to an
additional two full time members of staff. At Velindre cancer care, in a workforce of just 1,300, 52
days per year have been gained as a direct result of active travel promotion. Not only this, but by
reducing single car occupancy at both sites (by 8% and 15% percent respectively), some 400 car
parking spaces were freed up for patient parking every day.
Question 2. How do you think the duty should be enforced?
Consistent monitoring and evaluation systems should be implemented to ensure the desired results
are achieved. Monitoring and evaluation are essential to understanding the value of a project but
they are frequently excluded as an ‘unnecessary’ cost, preventing local authorities from learning
from experience in the development of routes.
15 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
As stated in the White Paper, the success of the strategic walking and cycling networks should be
measured by their impact on the number of people walking and cycling for their everyday journeys,
as opposed to the length of any new routes developed. For this success to be measured there
should be a requirement that the development of all new routes include monitoring systems, and
guidance should be provided to local authorities on how these outcomes should be measured.
Routes that are constructed as part of Sustrans coordinated projects, such as the Valleys Cycle
Network and the Big Lottery funded Connect2, include automatic route counters as standard.
Routes funded through Regional Transport Plan funding or Safe Routes often do not.
Results should be collated by a central resource, creating a positive feedback loop that ensures
lessons are learnt and good practice is shared across Wales. Not all local authorities currently have
baseline data to report against and it is likely that support will be needed in this area.
The Welsh Government should oversee the development and implementation of the strategic
walking and cycling networks to ensure that a consistent approach is adopted throughout Wales.
This should also feed into the reporting of the Walking & Cycling Action Plan. The statutory link
between the proposed maps and the Regional Transport Plans will assist this process, whilst also
enabling more collaborative working between local authorities and providing an opportunity to share
data.
As discussed earlier in our response (page nine), the move to limit access to funding based on
whether it can be demonstrated to contribute towards the delivery of the integrated network is also
welcomed by Sustrans. And will be a useful incentive for local authorities to fulfill the duties required
of them. However, to be most effective, funding and resource levels need to be increased
“proportional to target levels”1. The Netherlands, Germany and Denmark are often revered as models of best practice in promoting a sustainable walking and cycling culture. This has only been
achieved through implementing a total reformation of their transport, urban and land-use planning3.
The Active Travel (Wales) Bill offers an invaluable opportunity to instigate a step change in the travel
behaviour of communities across Wales. However, to achieve its full potential it is clear that greater
investment in walking and cycling is needed. Welsh Government need to prioritise transport budgets
in a manner that reflects the transport choices they wish to see people make. Specifically, the Welsh
Government need to be working towards spending 10% of the transport budget (equivalent to the
cost of building three miles of road) on walking and cycling schemes every year for a generation.
The concentration of transport funding into capital schemes and the paucity of revenue funding,
dictated by Whitehall, also constrains our ability to invest in the softer measures that will be needed
alongside the changes in infrastructure outlined in the White Paper. Welsh Government should seek
the power to define transport budget ratios in Wales. Alternatively, guidance accompanying the Bill
should encourage and support local authorities to work proactively with other departments likely to
benefit from the measures outlined in this Bill (such as Local Health Boards) to achieve greater
freedom in the spending resources available to them.
Consideration should also be given for how performance can be overseen and regulated, and of
what steps can be taken if local authorities are felt to be underperforming or not fulfilling the new
duty. To achieve this, there should be a provision in the Bill that enables the Minister(s) responsible
to seek additional enforcement powers should they need to do so, to ensure that local authorities
fulfil the duties required of them.
Question 3. Do you think the type of routes and facilities that Local Authorities be required
to map should be specified in guidance or regulation?
The baseline travel behaviour data collated in Cardiff last year as part of the Personalised Travel
Planning (PTP) project suggests there is significant potential for change and that people in Wales are
receptive to the idea of travelling more sustainably34. The data shows that large numbers of people
are using their cars for short local journeys34 and that a large share of these car trips are relatively
short and made at low speed. Moreover, just over one fifth (21%) of all trips by Cardiff and Penarth
16 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
residents are no further than one kilometre and 49% are no longer than three kilometres34. These are
trips that could easily be walked or cycled.
One of the barriers to individuals changing their travel behaviour, revealed by the research
underpinning the PTP project, is a false perception of journey times and a lack of information about
alternatives to the car, for example a lack of awareness of the walking and cycling routes in their
local area. Duties on local authorities to effectively map current and potential routes are therefore
key to the success of the Bill, and establishing best practice guidelines around all elements of route
development will be vital.
With regards to the strategic walking networks detailed in the duty, most authorities will need to
concentrate their efforts on raising standards as opposed to the provision of new facilities, especially
in urban areas. If people are to choose to walk rather than drive, the pedestrian environment must
be more than just functionally adequate. It needs to be of high quality so that the walk is a pleasant
experience. Therefore the Bill will need to address issues of quality and suitability of the existing
network, particularly for children and people with a mobility impairment.
Indeed, for these walking networks, reviewing priorities, making selective modifications and
providing occasional missing links rather than planning completely new networks is likely to be the
most appropriate response. The need for design standards for walking routes that have same legal
status as the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges is addressed in more detail in our response to
question five of this consultation.
Regarding the requirement to develop a cycling network, Cardiff Council has already undertaken
what will be required of every local authority22 and provides a useful model of how this duty could be
delivered. The Council used Acorn data35 to identify where to focus interventions in order to target
those most likely to take up cycling, before combining this data with the locations of major trip
generators and safety ‘hot spots’ to strategically plan the routes that would generate the greatest
change22. The routes were then listed in priority order, to be built as and when funding becomes
available. This approach not only recognises the importance of catering for latent as well as existing
demand, but also the need to ensure routes link people to popular destinations via the most
comfortable and direct route possible. Sustrans is highly supportive of this approach to developing
a strategic cycling network and would advocate that this model of best practice should be
encouraged wherever possible.
Indeed, arguably more important than specifying the facilities local authorities will be required to
map, should be stipulating the process by which these facilities should be identified. Too often
walking and cycling routes are constructed where they fit, not where they are required and there is a
failure to plan in terms of trip generation points, leading to the underuse of the new infrastructure.
Local authorities should be required to consult major trip generators in their local area to identify
where walking and cycling routes are most needed.
“The most important approach to making cycling safe and convenient in Dutch, Danish and German cities is the provision of separate cycling facilities along heavily traveled roads and at intersections…
Providing such separate facilities to connect practical utilitarian origins and destinations promotes cycling for work, school and shopping trips as opposed to mainly recreational cycling.”3
The process adopted by local authorities in developing and delivering these networks will be vital to
the success of the Bill in instigating change. To this end, the Bill should include a requirement for
local authorities to meaningfully consult existing and potential users, including young people9. To
achieve this level of engagement, support will be needed. For many transport departments end user
consultation may be a relatively new concept and it is likely that additional guidance will be needed
in an area that is outside of their traditional expertise. Specifically, resources and advice on who to
consult and where local authorities can go to receive support in delivering this consultation process
should be provided in the guidance accompanying the Bill.
17 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
This will not only help ensure the routes developed are culturally appropriate and relevant to
everyday journeys for local populations, but will also help foster community ownership of the route.
Sustrans’ experience has demonstrated that when a community takes ownership of a route they will
be motivated to look after it, defend it against abuse, clear up rubbish and raise funds for additional
features and improvements.
Question 4. What are your views about revising rights of way definitions, for example
allowing cyclists to use footpaths, or equestrians to use cycle paths?
Current rights of way legislation will restrict local authorities in fulfilling their duty.
More specifically, there are several flaws in existing Cycle Track Conversion Order legislation, which
enables local authorities to convert Public Rights of Way to allow cyclists to use them. In common
with all changes proposed to Public Rights of Way, all interested parties are required to be
consulted. But in the case of Cycle Track Conversion Orders, any objection will automatically result
in the matter being referred to the Secretary of State for a decision. This process can take up to two
years to complete.
Once a Cycle Track Conversion Order is in place, it automatically results in removal of the previous
footpath from the definitive map, even though the right of access on foot remains, as there is no way
currently to show a footpath with additional cycling rights. This invariably results in automatic
objections from walking groups, meaning that most orders have to be referred to the Secretary of
State. As a result the Order is rarely implemented despite the essence of the legislation being
sound.
We would welcome the Welsh Government considering changes to be made to the regulatory
framework relating to Cycle Tracks Conversion Orders and Rights of Way. Specifically, we would
like to see a removal of the default assumption that rights of way should exclude cyclists, whilst
recognising that there will be cases where it is inappropriate for cyclists to use footpaths (and for
equestrians to use shared traffic-free walking and cycling paths).
To ensure that this change in regulation is not to the detriment of walkers, there would also need to
be a commitment to best practice (specifically in relation to the different space requirements) and to
consult relevant user groups ahead of any conversion of use.
Compulsory Purchase Orders: In addition to changes to the Rights of Way legislation,
consideration should also be given to what additional tools would support local authorities in
implementing their duty. Specifically, consideration is needed on the current Compulsory Purchase
Orders system.
Land access agreements inevitably cause large delays to scheme implementation and, if agreement
cannot be reached, can make it impossible to implement key schemes. Overpriced land (particularly
where agents act on behalf of landowners) and unreasonable legal and agent fees can also add
considerably to scheme costs. In addition, where land owners sub-lease, the land-holding company
may not be willing to commit to anything beyond the current lease in the fear that it may compromise
the land's future value.
A Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) allows certain bodies, including local authorities, to obtain land
or property without the consent of the owner. However, in order for a Compulsory Purchase Order
to be granted, local authorities are required to demonstrate that no reasonable alternative route is
available. In the case of walking and cycling routes this can prove difficult as there may often be one
or more alternative, albeit lower-grade, route options, leaving local authorities vulnerable to
challenge.
The majority of local authorities are therefore reluctant to invoke Compulsory Purchase Order powers
for active travel infrastructure due to the assumption that any inspector will find alternative options
are available. The process can also be very lengthy, taking upwards of two years and leading to
18 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
unnecessary delays. Greater guidance and support is needed for local authorities on the tools they
can use in the development of their walking and cycling networks. Changes should also be made to
the current process for implementing Compulsory Purchase Orders, enabling local authorities to use
these Orders in the creation of traffic-free routes.
Specifically, the process for implementing Compulsory Purchase Orders for walking and cycling
routes should only require local authorities to define a single option through feasibility studies and,
provided there is a reasoned approach for arriving at a preferred option, this should be able to be
determined favourably via a Compulsory Purchase Order process without undue risk.
Speed limits (20mph and 40mph): Traffic speed and volume is a major concern for residents across
Wales and one of the primary barriers to people walking and cycling in their local communities.
Reducing traffic speed to 20mph or less in residential areas is a crucial first step in reversing this
trend.
“There need to be effective restrictions on traffic speeds, parking and access on all residential roads and other routes without segregated cycle and pedestrian paths so that both cyclists and pedestrians
feel that they have a safe and convenient environment in which to travel. This could include 20mph speed limits and resident-only access by car in some areas.” 4
Slower speeds benefit large numbers of non-car users, reducing noise and pollution levels, and
allowing better urban design standards. A recent study conducted by the North West Public Health
Observatory found that 140 children a year in the North West of England would potentially not have
been killed or seriously injured if 20mph limits had been in force36. Extrapolated to give a Great-
Britain-wide figure, 20 mph limits in residential areas could potential save 578 children from death or
serious injury each year. With Wales facing escalating numbers of child pedestrians being killed or
seriously injured37, 20mph limits as a means of reducing both the collision frequency38 and fatality
rates39 on our roads should be considered a priority.
The British Social Attitudes Survey also demonstrates that there is wide public support for this
measure. The 2005 survey reported that 71% of the British public support 20mph speed restrictions
in residential areas40. We therefore welcome the following comment in point eight of the White
Paper:
8. Where pedestrians or cyclists would be in proximity with motorised traffic, there should
be provisions in place to make these routes safe for pedestrians and cyclists, for example
through traffic calming, 20mph zones or through segregated routes.
We would like to note, however, that some traffic calming features can be detrimental to creating a
supportive environment for cyclists, and 20mph should be clearly stated as the preferable approach.
Local authorities have the power to implement 20mph limits and zones in their local communities but
the complications they face in exercising this power often discourage them from doing so. To
support them in implementing this duty, greater guidance is needed. Importantly, local authorities
should be encouraged to implement area-wide 20mph limits as opposed to just isolated streets.
This will ensure that through-traffic is displaced to arterial roads (designed to handle it) and not
simply shifted from one residential street to another, to the detriment of other walkers, cyclists and
residents3.
We would also encourage the Welsh Government to consider lobbying UK parliament for the powers
to implement a default 20mph speed limit in all residential areas (including town centres) across
Wales.
In addition, discussion is underway on granting local authorities more power to stipulate 40mph
speed limits on rural roads41. We fully support local authorities being granted these new powers and
would urge Welsh Government not only to support this initiative, but, once granted, to also actively
encourage local authorities to use these new powers in their local areas.
19 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Strict liability:
“Forms of ‘strict liability’ are adopted in much of continental Europe and while not changing criminal responsibility they place a civil responsibility on drivers to obtain insurance that will pay vulnerable victims independently of fault. This may act as an incentive for car drivers to behave in a way that
protects the most vulnerable road users.” 4
Strict liability laws denote that a car driver is held legally responsible for the damage and loss caused
to more vulnerable road users by his or her acts and omissions, regardless of culpability. In some
countries, this has been demonstrated to reduce the number of pedestrian and cyclist casualties
when implemented and to raise levels of walking and cycling. The Welsh Government should seek
powers to allow the implementation of strict liability laws in Wales.
“Traffic laws in the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany give special consideration to the especially vulnerable situation of cyclists. Thus they generally require the motorist to make special efforts to
anticipate potentially dangerous situations and proactively avoid hitting cyclists. Moreover, motorists are generally assumed to be legally responsible for most collisions with cyclists unless it can be
proven that the cyclist deliberately caused the crash. Having the right of way by law does not excuse motorists from hitting cyclists, especially children and elderly cyclists… In combination with the
comprehensive and rigorous training of motorists and cyclists, the strict enforcement of traffic laws surely contributes to safer driving behaviour by motorists and safer cycling by cyclists.” 3
Question 5. What are your views of the proposal for new design guidance?
The design guidance accompanying the Bill needs to have comparable status to the Design Manual
for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) and be specifically endorsed by Welsh Government in order to
achieve the culture shift needed. A voluntary set of guidance will do little to change the current
culture amongst highway authorities who often default to road design standards in the development
of walking and cycling routes. Therefore, we would like design standards for walking and cycling
routes to have the same legal status as the DMRB. This would allow for a documented departure of
standards and would ease road safety audit issues. This guidance should be a succinct, clear,
signposting document making it easier to update in line with current good practice and should
approach walking and cycling standards separately, recognising there can be different needs for
each set of users.
To ensure that the aims of the White Paper are achieved it is essential that the design standards are
applicable to all schemes, including those which do not explicitly aim at pedestrian or cycle traffic.
Local authority engineers will often apply different standards to schemes with different stated aims,
for example, a ‘road safety’ scheme will be treated differently to a ‘cycling scheme’. This is one of
the reasons why users encounter sometimes bizarre design details which frequently bring investment
into ‘cycle schemes’ into disrepute.
These design standards should be drawn up as a matter of priority. Importantly, the advice of
independent experts in the field should be sought in developing these standards to supplement the
expertise already held within the Welsh Government transport division.
Professional development training schemes should be developed to enable key personnel within
each local authority to understand the new duty and the accompanying guidance framework.
Specifically, there is a need to educate professionals on the likelihood of successful liability claims
and to emphasise the actual evidence for appropriate and proportional designs. To achieve this, the
training should encourage a willingness to depart from standards that do not apply to walking and
cycling schemes.
20 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
At the Sustrans Active Travel (Wales) Bill Conference held in June, it was identified that that this
guidance should cover not only the standards of the routes developed but also the process by which
the network is identified and how the success of the network can best be measured:
“This guidance should include: a set of desired outcomes and guidance on how to measure these locally; a decision framework for the prioritisation of routes; a definition of key terms including what is
meant by continuous improvement, as well as the terms safe, convenient and comfortable; the level of public consultation required; an outline of the approvals process that Welsh Government will
adopt; and guidance on the timescales to be used by both Welsh Government and local authorities”.9
The guidance should also address how existing routes can be adopted into the network.
Specifically, it should outline how design standards apply to these routes, as retrofitting may not
always be appropriate on what may prove to be critical routes in the network.
Question 6. What would the costs and the benefits of these proposals be to you or your
organisation (or the people your organisation represents)?
Sustrans’ vision is a world in which more people can travel in ways that benefit their health and our
environment. And our mission as a charity is to provide better facilities that will encourage more
people to enjoy the benefits that walking and cycling can offer. Our volunteers and supporters, who
are at the heart of everything we do, are frequently keen walkers and cyclists. In this respect, this
Bill will be of great benefit to our supporters and the people our organisation represents. However,
we believe strongly that this Bill must retain its focus on shifting the behaviour and perceptions of
people who don’t currently walk and cycle, as opposed to those that already do.
We recognise that local authorities are under increasing pressure to deliver more for less and that
some may see this Bill as being an additional financial pressure. However, it is also acknowledged
that this duty is not designed to put additional pressure on already tight resources, but rather to
ensure that existing investment is better directed. Forward-thinking local authorities already
recognise the benefits this Bill has the potential to deliver; at our conference held in June, which was
attended by many local authority representatives, the response to the White Paper was wholly
positive.
The NHS in Wales spends £1m every week treating obesity related illness and, because of its links to
heart disease, cancer, diabetes and strokes, physical inactivity is now one of the leading causes of
death in developed countries. A report, due to be released on the 14th August, estimates that
approximately £517million could be released from the NHS Wales budget over a 20 year period
through increasing active travel in urban areas of Wales.42
Indeed, the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers, the National Institute for Health and Clinical
Excellence (NICE) and the Foresight study on obesity, all consider measures to increase ‘active’
travel through walking and cycling for everyday journeys as a crucial element in tackling sedentary
lifestyles. And the public health sector has been explicit in calling for transport investment to be
switched to the active, health enhancing modes of travel43. NICE, in its guidance on cardiovascular
disease prevention, says:
“Apportion part of [local transport budget] to promote walking, cycling and other forms of travel that involve physical activity. The proportion allocated should be in line with growth targets for the use of these modes of transport.”
44
Interventions to increase levels of walking and cycling are known to be cost-effective. Research
endorsed by the Department for Transport shows that for every £1 spent on promoting cycling, there
are savings of £4 from falling congestion45 and, when health benefits are taken into account, savings
in the order of £931. This compares favourably to road spending which often fails to show a return of
£1 for every £1 invested.
21 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
Question 7. We have asked a series of specific questions. Is there anything else that you
would like us to consider as part of the development of the Active Travel Bill, or wider activity
to encourage walking and cycling?
Rural communities
There is a danger that the Bill may only have an impact in towns and cities, deepening the rural-
urban divide. It would be easy to dismiss this Bill as irrelevant to rural areas or to indicate that local
authorities with large rural communities should only focus on the potential tourism benefits the Bill
could provide. However, this would neglect the opportunity this Bill has to cater for everyday
journeys in rural populations.
A relatively large number of people in rural areas live close to market towns. Smaller communities
may only be a few miles from a town centre but there is often little incentive or facilities for
individuals to walk or cycle. For example, pedestrians and cyclists have to compete with motor
vehicles on busy roads and the experience can be unpleasant and dangerous – particularly for older
people and families with children.
Traffic-free paths from outlying communities to the ‘hub’ town and other measures, such as traffic
calming and lower speed limits, can create a safe and attractive route for everyone including the
most vulnerable users. An example of where a new walking and cycling path has had a positive
impact on the lives of a rural community is the village of Llanyre in mid Wales. Despite being only
two and a half miles from the busy market town of Llandrindod Wells in Powys, the only alternative
to car use for the residents of Llanyre was to walk or cycle along a very busy main road. Thanks to a
grant from the Welsh Government Safer Routes scheme, a new traffic-free path is now used
frequently by the whole community. At peak times in the morning and evening, the route is occupied
by people walking and cycling to school, work or for leisure. The path also links up to the National
Cycle Network, connecting the town to communities and destinations further afield.
A project in Northern Ireland was also successful in raising levels of walking and cycling from 25% to
40% in rural areas; here, the integration of soft and hard measures was central to these results.
Schemes like these should be highlighted, along with opportunities for integrating cycling and
walking provision with public transport to help ensure more rural local authorities recognise the
relevance of this Bill to their communities.
Shared infrastructure for walking and cycling
Walkers and cyclists, both identified as vulnerable road users, are often assumed to have identical
needs. However, whilst many of their concerns, such as safety and fear of traffic, are similar,
conflicts can also arise.
The provision of shared routes is, in many cases a practical approach for local authorities to adopt in
fulfilling their duty. An independent review of research commissioned by Sustrans confirmed that
traffic-free routes are vitally important if cycling and walking are to be encouraged and that there
should be a presumption in favour of completing the network46. It also demonstrated that it is not
generally feasible to provide wholly separate pedestrian and cycle routes; most routes will have to
cater for both types of user, as well as other groups such as equestrians.
The guidance documents reviewed for this report indicated that the actual level of conflict between
pedestrians and cyclists on traffic-free paths is small, and that many of the social conflict issues that
other interest groups put forward are based on perceptions of meeting cyclists, as opposed to the
reality of actually meeting them. The review highlighted the importance of best path design in order
to help overcome some of the differences in needs.
Sustrans recognises that shared use of infrastructure can lead to conflict, but we would strongly
advocate that this issue should be addressed by local authorities on a case by case basis and that
22 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Sustrans' response to the White Paper consultation August 2012
the Bill should not neglect the many advantages shared, traffic-free routes can offer to walkers and
cyclists alike – including users with disabilities.
1 British Medical Association, 2012 Healthy transport = healthy lives 2 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, 2008 A Framework for Pro-Environmental Behaviours 3 Pucher & Buehler, 2008 Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from The Netherlands, Denmark and Germany 4 Pooley et al, 2011 Understanding Walking and Cycling: Summary of key findings and recommendations 5 Welsh Government, 2012 Consultation on Active Travel (Wales) Bill 6 Currie et al, 2012 Social determinants of health and well-bring among young people. Health Behaviour in School-aged Children (HBSC)
study: International report from the 2009/10 survey 7 Welsh Government, 2010 Climate Change Strategy for Wales
8 Sustrans, 2012 The Highways and Transport (Wales) Bill: One of the most significant public health initiatives to be undertaken in this term of the Assembly…? Summary of roundtable discussion of leading public health professionals in Wales 9 Sustrans, 2012 Active Travel (Wales) Bill Conference: Conference Report 10 McKenzie-Mohr, 1999 Fostering Sustainable Behaviour: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing
11 Sustrans, 2010 Creating a level playing field: Making transport appraisal in Wales fair
12 Sustrans, 2011 NHS Sustainable Travel Project impacts, outcomes and future 13 Citizens Advice Bureau, 2003 Rural Transport Futures
14 Social Exclusion Unit, 2003 Making the Connections
15 Department of Health, 2004 At least five a week: Evidence on the impact of physical activity and its relationship to health
16 Play England, 2008 Playday 2008 Opinion Research Summary 17 Play England, 2010 Playday 2010 Opinion Poll Summary 18 Department for Transport, 2010 National Travel Survey 2009
19 Hickman and Banister, 2005 Looking over the horizon, Visioning and Backcasting for UK Transport Policy 20 Wales Online, 2009 Capital Investment Pushes Cardiff Up Retail Rankings 21 Sustrans, 2006 Shoppers and How They Travel 22 Cardiff Council, 2010 The Plan: Cardiff Cycle Network
23 EU Waste Framework Directive, 2008 24 Child Poverty Act, 2010 25 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2007 Public Health Guidance 6: Behaviour change at population, community and
individual levels 26 The National Cycle Network consists of over 13,600 miles of signed walking and cycling routes, with a third on traffic-free paths and the
rest following quieter lanes or traffic calmed roads. 27 Sustrans, 2012 The real cycling revolution: How the face of cycling is changing 28 Sustrans, 2010 Bike Belles: For women who want to cycle
29 Cardiff Council, 2011 Cardiff Cycle Design Guidance
30 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2012 Public Health Draft Guidance: Obesity – Working with communities
31 World Health Organisation, 2011 Health Economic Assessment Tools (HEAT) for walking and for cycling: Economic assessment of transport infrastructure and policies 32 Sustrans, 2011 NHS Sustainable Travel Project impacts, outcomes and future 33 LSE, 2011 The British Cycling Economy: ‘Gross Cycling Product’ report
34 Socialdata, 2011 Travel Behaviour Research in Cardiff and Penarth: Baseline Survey 2011 35 Please note: Whilst the use of Acorn data is proving highly successful in instigating positive shifts in travel behaviour, it has also been
shown to increase health inequalities. Caution should therefore be used in advocating this as a blanket approach across Wales. 36 North West Public Health Observatory, 2011 Road traffic collisions and casualties in the North West of England 37 Welsh Government, 2012 Pedestrian Road Casualties 2011
38 Transport Research Laboratory, 2000 The effect of drivers’ speed on the frequency of road accidents 39 Institute of Transport Economics, 2004 Speed and road accidents 40 National Centre for Social Research, 2005 British Social Attitudes Survey 41 Department for Transport, 2012 Setting local speed limits 42 Jarrett et al, 2012 Effect of increasing active travel in urban Wales on costs to the National Health Service
43 Association of Directors of Public Health, 2010 Take action on active travel 44 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2010 Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease 45 Sloman et al., 2010 The Effects of Smarter Choice Programmes in the Sustainable Travel Towns: Research Report 46 Jones, 2011 The Merits of Segregated and Non-Segregated Traffic-Free Paths: A Literature-Based Review