Enterprise and Business Committee inquiry into Integrated Public Transport

Evidence from the Chartered Institute of Logistics and

Transport (UK) Cymru Wales

1. Is there a need for a Bill aimed at enabling more people to walk and cycle and generally travel by non-motorised transport? Please explain your answer.

The Institute recognises the importance of walking and cycling as an important part of the overall transport network, as highlighted in our Vision 2035 document which gives a future perspective on transport and logistics systems. However, we raised concerns in the consultation on this Bill as to whether establishing a legally binding requirement on local authorities to deliver this is perhaps onerous. The Wales Transport Strategy includes reference to walking and cycling, and so should be reflected in the Regional Transport Plans produced by the four consortia. Alternatively, it may be more appropriate to incorporate the intentions for this Bill within the forthcoming Sustainability Bill or even a future Planning Bill.

We would advocate that the Welsh Government retains a systems view of transport, including walking and cycling, rather than separating it into a different piece of legislation. As it currently stands in the Bill (s6), there is no requirement for the active travel networks to take into account connectivity with other transport modes, but there is a requirement for transport policies to take into account the active travel network. This should be a two way relationship rather than just in one direction.

As a start, the Welsh Government may be better placed to develop an updated Cycling and Walking Strategy, especially as the current document runs until 2013. This could then be enacted within the current legislative framework, in the same way as the Wales Transport Strategy.

2. What are your views on the key provisions in the Bill, namely:

· the requirement on local authorities to prepare and publish maps identifying current and potential future routes for the use of pedestrians and cyclists (known as “existing routes maps” and “integrated network maps”) (sections 3 to 5);

· the requirement on local authorities to have regard to integrated network maps in the local transport planning process (section 6);

· the requirement on local authorities to continuously improve routes and facilities for pedestrians and cyclists (section 7);

· the requirement on highway authorities to consider the needs of pedestrians and cyclists when creating and improving new roads (section 8)

The main outcome from the Bill is the creation of a series of maps to highlight walking and cycling routes, and potential investments to improve their attractiveness. Our view is that there is a need to ensure that the maps remain user friendly, which may be a challenge if a large number of routes are included. We have also questioned the extent to which the public will engage with the map and change how they travel – after all, bus companies have long produced maps showing their routes but many people still prefer the car. The previous consultation did not indicate the importance of providing maps in changing people’s behaviour.

The second map will then identify opportunities for improvement for cyclists and walkers. There is a need to ensure that, because these are aspirational, they should still remain deliverable and appropriate for the nature of pedestrian and cycling flows along particular routes. A key theme in the consultation document was the introduction of traffic calming, with an emphasis on protecting cyclists and pedestrians. Here, an integrated approach that considers all transport modes would be better suited. While obstacles such as speed humps slow the progress of cars, they also have a detrimental impact on buses, making the car a more attractive proposition if journey times are lengthened or comfort reduced. There are also examples where bus drivers have reported back pains as a result of repeatedly driving over the humps. Equally, many of the traffic calmed areas are likely to be near local centres where the logistics industry needs to make deliveries. There is therefore the potential for these measures to make the delivery of goods more difficult.

With cycling, the consultation document particularly focused on facilities along the route and at the destination. We advocated that some thought to the start of the journey also needs to be given. Bicycles theft is an issue as they are perceived as easy to steal. Therefore, secure storage is needed at both ends of the journey. This is particularly true in low income areas, where crime rates are higher and where many people are in transport poverty. If people do not have sheds or garages, they will need to keep the bicycle in the house. This may not be practical, especially if they are flats. The summary of responses to the consultation produced by the Welsh Government suggests that this may be included within future guidance.

3. Have the provisions of the Bill taken account of any response you made to the Welsh Government‟s consultation on its White Paper? Please explain your answer.

It is clear from the summary of responses provided by the Welsh Government, there is evidence of our response being considered. However, we cannot discern any significant changes within the Bill that direct result from points we have made. As noted above, considering storage facilities at the start of the journey may be included in future guidance for ‘related facilities’ but this is not within the wording of the Bill itself.

4. To what extent are the key provisions the most appropriate way of delivering the aim of the Bill?

The aim of the Bill, as stated in the original consultation document, is to increase the use of cycling and walking as an alternative to the car. However, the Bill only sets out to improve the level of information available to the public and, through this, deliver an improved network of pavements, footpaths and cycle ways. The issue with this is that it only addresses one aspect of getting people to change their behaviours. In order to fully achieve this goal, there is a need to integrate with other transport modes (so as to enable end-to-end journeys) and with land use planning to ensure that amenities and facilities (shopping, leisure activities, medical centres) can be accessed easily and without reverting to the car.

We would highlight recently published research by academics from a consortium of UK universities. Their journal paper, entitled “Policies for promoting walking and cycling in England: A view from the street”[1], sets out five policy objectives to encourage active travel. These are:

· Creating a safe physical environment where users do not feel exposed to undue risk;

· Increasing the awareness of motorists in relation to pedestrians and cyclists;

· Changing the spatial planning of cities so everyday activities are within walking/cycling distance;

· Social change to make active travel seen as suitable for certain journeys;

· Creating an environment where active travel is seen as ‘normal’.

The contents of the proposed Bill would seem to only address the first of these points. Therefore, assuming the Welsh public are not dis-similar to the English public, there appears to be the potential for the Bill to have limited impact on the use of active travel.

5. What are the potential barriers to the implementation of the key provisions and does the Bill take account of them?

One challenge, and particularly for urban areas, will be developing the maps in such a way that they are understandable to the public. There is the potential for a significant number of different routes that may be included. Further, clear guidance will be needed as to the nature of related facilities that are considered.

In the previous consultation, we raised the issue of a focus on facilities at the end of the journey, without taking into account that there may be storage issues for bicycles at the start of the journey (for example, in flats). This issue still remains, although the Bill does not make any specific mention as to where the related facilities are provided.

Guidance related to the requirements for the active travel network would bring consistency across the whole of Wales. However, this may mean that some areas receive pathways and cycle ways to a ‘gold’ standard that is inappropriate given their location and usage. Therefore, it is important that the guidance allows flexibility to encompass this, and possibly defines minimum standards only. It is also unclear what the cost/benefit expectations would be from any investment related to active travel.

6. What are your views on the financial implications of the Bill (this could be for your organisation, or more generally)? In answering this question you may wish to consider Part 2 of the Explanatory Memorandum (the Impact Assessment), which estimates the costs and benefits of implementation of the Bill.

The cost of producing the maps appears, at least in relation to other transport investments, relatively modest at around £1 million. However, as highlighted earlier, investing in the maps alone will not change behaviour and infrastructure investment will also be needed. The costs here are less well defined as they will be dependent upon the nature of investments needed. Our members have also raised concerns that, by developing the maps, there may then be an expectation of funding for the improvements. This raises the question as to where this funding will come from, and whether trade offs will be necessary within local government budgets or if additional central funding will be made available.

There is an opportunity to reduce the costs of producing maps. The current timescale sees the first map produced within three years of the Bill coming into force, and every three years thereafter. Our members have highlighted that costs would be reduced if the maps were synchronised with the Regional Transport Plan timescales. Therefore, the first maps would be produced in 2015 and then every five years thereafter. This may also assist in active travel being seen within the context of an Integrated Transport system, rather than as a separate element.

In terms of the benefits, there is a need to fully understand the extent to which the research contained in the Explanatory Memorandum reflects situations found in Wales. For example, mention is made of Dutch examples, but the Netherlands is a nation that has a greater acceptance of the bicycle as a transport mode. Some of the other studies quoted, while highlighting potential benefits, do not identify the policy interventions needed to achieve these, and therefore the findings can only be considered valid if the targets are considered achievable. The Explanatory Memorandum (paragraph 134) does highlight one study which does calculate the health benefits for urban Wales. This is an extension of a study for urban England and Wales but we have not been able access this study to consider whether the scenarios developed are reflective of the Welsh context.

It has also been noted that, in the breakeven analysis (paragraphs 144 onwards), the calculations are solely based around the initial mapping exercise, even though the Bill requires the additional Integrated Network map.

7. To what extent has the correct balance been achieved between the level of detail provided on the face of the Bill and that which will be contained in guidance given by the Welsh Ministers?

We would consider that the Bill provides a framework for developing an active travel network. This gives the potential opportunity for the guidance to address some of the issues identified but not addressed within the Bill, as well as allowing for flexibility in the future. However, it is difficult to judge the extent to which balance has been achieved, given that the guidelines are still to be developed. It will also be important that the guidelines are subject to appropriate scrutiny to ensure that they are appropriate for the intended purpose.

---

[1] Pooley et al. (2013) Policies for promoting walking and cycling in England: A view from the street, Transport Policy, 27, 66-72.