Review date October 2021
Responsibility Alister Linton-Crook, Cycling Projects Officer
Created October 2017
Approved by SDNPA
DOCUMENT AMENDMENT HISTORY
Version
No.
Originator
of change
Date of
change
Change Description
1.0
Alister
Linton-Crook
Oct 2017
Strategy approved
0.10
Alister
Linton-Crook
Sept 2017
Minor amendments to reflect recommendations of
Sept P&R Committee
0.9
Alister
Linton-Crook
Sept 2017
Revised draft strategy to reflect recommendations of
July P&R Committee
0.8
Alister
Linton-Crook
July 2017
Draft strategy finalised for P&R Committee
0.1 – 0.7
Alister
Linton-Crook
Mar – June
2017
Internal drafts of developing strategy
CONTENTS Page
1. Introduction and background 1
2. Evidence 3
3. Key Issues for Cycling and Walking in the National Park 5
4. The Strategy for Cycling and Walking in the SDNP 7
5. Objectives and Delivery Action Plan 2017-24 14
6. Appendices 21
Appendix i: SDNPA Partnership Management Plan 2014-19 21
Appendix ii: Reference Strategy Documents 22
Appendix iii: Recent SDNPA Access Projects 23
Appendix iv: Context for the Cycling and Walking Strategy 24
Appendix v: SWOT Analysis 27
Appendix vi: South Downs National Park Authority Vision ‘Tube Map’ of
Strategic Routes and Promoted Trails 29
Appendix vii: SDNP Access Schemes Prioritisation DRAFT 30
Appendix viii: Local Authority Administrative Map 31
Appendix ix: Glossary of Terms and Acronyms 31
Page 1 of 32
1. Introduction and background
1.1 This is the first Cycling and Walking Strategy for the South Downs National Park Authority
(SDNPA). It sets out our aim and direction for the future of cycling and walking activities
and supports infrastructure coming forward in the National Park. It is written in the light of
the National Park purposes and duty and in the context of the vision, outcomes and policies
of the Partnership Management Plan 2014-2019 (see appendix i), supported by the evidence
produced in the State of the South Downs National Park 2012 report. It provides a picture
of the cycling and walking landscape and describes the roles and responsibilities of
organisations involved in managing access in the National Park.
1.2 The underlying context for this Strategy is both local and national which is detailed in
appendix iv. In April 2017 the Department for Transport (DfT) published a Cycling and
Walking Investment Strategy (CWIS) stating the ambition for England by 2040 as "We want
to make cycling and walking the natural choice for shorter journeys, or as part of a
longer journey" alongside the ambitious targets to “double cycling activity levels by 2025
and reverse the decline in walking activity by 2020”. The DfT also produced guidance to
assist and encourage Local Authorities in the production of Local Cycling and Walking
Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs).
1.3 The Strategy is also written in relation to the DEFRA 8-Point Plan for England’s National
Parks 2016, the Sport England strategy a Sporting Future: A New Strategy for an Active
Nation 2015-22 and the Public Health England (PHE) Strategic Plan 2016.
1.4 Locally, the Local Highways Authorities (LHA): Hampshire, East Sussex, West Sussex and
Brighton and Hove are responsible for delivery against the CWIS objectives, through the
development of Local Transport Plans (LTP), which set out each LHAs approach and
priorities for Transport, Cycling and Walking Strategies and Rights of Way Improvement
Plans (RoWiPs) / Countryside Access Plans (CAP). See appendix ii for a full list of referenced
strategies and plans.
Figure 1 – The Benefits of Cycling and Walking
Page 2 of 32
1.5 The SDNPA has a role to play supporting the Government’s ambitions and producing a
strategy that will respond to increasing volumes of cyclists and walkers in the National Park.
The wider benefits of the strategy, including impacts on the local economy in the National
Park, increased opportunities for improving health and well-being, air quality and volume of
sustainable journeys are summarised in figure 1 above.
1.6 The strategy will also link to other National Park plans and strategies including the
Corporate Plan, Climate Change Adaptation Plan, emerging Local Plan and the Sustainable
Tourism Strategy.
Page 3 of 32
2. Evidence
2.1 The strategy builds on evidence of previous successful delivery programmes and partnerships
that have been developed since 2011. Through the creation of a Joint Accord for the
management of rights of way and access, we have worked closely with LHA partners to
establish ways of working collaboratively and to deliver projects on the ground. The
programmes involved a range of travel initiatives and new / improved infrastructure schemes
for cycling and walking:
Two National Parks Local Sustainable Transport Fund (2NP LSTF 2012-15) £4.5m
Transforming Cycling in SDNP (Linking Communities/Cycle Ambition 2013-16) £5.1m
Two National Parks Local Sustainable Transport Fund (2NP LSTF2 2015-16) £0.7m
See appendix iii
Table 1 – Key Evidence
DfT Cycling and Walking Investment Strategy 2017:
London has seen a 79% increase in cycling between 2001 and 2011 following substantial
investment
Nationally, only 2% of trips are made by bike (14% in Germany and 33% in the Netherlands)
There were 30% fewer walking trips in the UK in 2013 compared with 1995
The average economic benefit-to-cost ratio of investing in cycling & walking schemes in the UK
varies according to source:
19:1 { Department for Health - An Economic Assessment of Investment in Walking and Cycling 2010}
13:1 {Cycling UK}
6:1 {West Sussex County Council Walking and Cycling Strategy}
Public Health England {Public Health England (2014) Everybody Active, Every Day - An evidence-based approach to physical
activity}:
Physical inactivity directly contributes to one in six deaths and is the fourth largest cause of
disease and disability in the UK costing £7.4 billion a year to business and wider society.
SDNPA Visitor Survey 2015:
74% for walking (increase from 49% - Visitor Survey 2012)
8% for cycling (increase from 6% - Visitor Survey 2012)
76% visitor journeys by car
2.2 More locally again, is the evidence derived from working closely with LHA partners,
engagement with community groups, Local Access Forums (LAF), cycle forums, national
partners, parish councils and other national parks. Additional supporting evidence for a
cycling and walking strategy has been generated by community Neighbourhood Plans, our
Infrastructure Business Plan (IBP) and our developing Green Infrastructure Framework (GIF)
which have identified a number of desired infrastructure schemes.
2.3 The access network is utilised by a range of groups and users of varying abilities and ages,
undertaking journeys for different reasons such as leisure, utility and commuting. New
schemes and initiatives will prioritise cycling and walking, focusing on leisure and utility
journeys. However the needs of all non-motorised users (NMU) including equestrians and
disabled users should be considered and where possible the access design hierarchy will be
applied i.e. access for all; access for most; access for some.
Page 4 of 32
2.4 The strategy has been developed in consultation with an internal steering group; specialist
engagement; and staff and National Park Authority (NPA) Member workshop sessions. It is
also informed by external, informal officer level consultations with Local Highway Authority
(LHA) partners, the South Downs Local Access Forum (SDLAF); national cycling
organisations and area cycle forums.
Page 5 of 32
3. Key Issues for Cycling and Walking in the National Park
3.1 Network – History and geography has shaped the access network across the South Downs.
Originally, rights of way (RoW) emerged from peoples’ journeys to work, school and
church. Today, they function primarily as recreational routes. There is a shortage of ‘family
friendly’ paths that are suitable for inexperienced cyclists and vulnerable users who prefer
traffic free, level, easily navigable trails with prepared surfaces (all weather) that are easily
accessed. Provision for mountain bikers is currently limited and under developed and, unlike
the Lake District and other upland National Parks, the terrain in the South Downs offers few
extreme challenges for cyclists or hikers.
3.2 Severance - The A27, M27, M3 and other major roads present a significant barrier to
access into the National Park for communities along the coastal fringe and Winchester.
While there are some good NMU routes such as the Downs Link, many RoW have been
severed by major roads and where crossings exist they are often at grade and considered
dangerous to use because of volumes and speed of traffic.
3.3 Highway Crossings – Safety concerns exist for NMUs (particularly vulnerable users such
as equestrians) at RoW crossings at grade, across highways. Concerns are magnified where
strategic trails and paths meet highways where speed limits are 40mph and above.
3.4 Access routes connecting people from population centres beyond the boundary of the
National Park are limited. There are particular gaps in the network from the urban centres
Winchester, Eastbourne and the coastal fringe to the south - urban south Hampshire and
the coastal strip of Worthing to Newhaven.
3.5 Connectivity of the access network from market towns, bus stops, transport hubs (rail and
bus) and gateways within and close to the National Park are sometimes limited.
Improvements needed maybe small scale such as footways connecting RoW and visitor
attractions with nearby bus stops, or larger infrastructure schemes such as new routes from
stations such as Alton or Hassocks.
3.6 New Development within and near to the National Park presents opportunities to
encourage cycling, walking and sustainable travel by designing in connections to the access
network, open space and green infrastructure (including cycle provisions). A challenge is to
ensure that these opportunities are fully realised by working with developers and through
the planning system of both the SDNPA and neighbouring Planning Authorities.
3.7 Information about access opportunities and related products (such as route leaflets,
signage etc) for users and stakeholders is often disjointed. Users seek information about
access and local facilities via a variety of means including websites, at trailside, in
communities and at destinations. The availability and consistency of information could be
enhanced to improve the visitor experience which commences with visit planning.
3.8 Facilities and amenities suitable for a range of cyclists and walkers near to the key trails are
inconsistent and could be improved, for example: cycle parking at attractions and
refreshment / food / accommodation providers.
Page 6 of 32
3.9 User Behaviour – While there is no widespread evidence of conflict or actual collision
between users across the National Park, incidences of inconsiderate or poor behaviour have
sometimes been reported. Reports include incidences of motorists passing cyclists too
closely, cyclists riding too fast past pedestrians or horse riders and uncontrolled dogs
knocking cyclists off bikes. There is an opportunity to address this issue through the
promotion of messages which promote better understanding between users.
3.10 Cycle Hire – The cycle hire network in the National Park is fragmented. There are several
areas where visitors would be unable to hire a bike and a recent study identified an
unfulfilled demand for users seeking an A to B hire where the drop off location differs from
the start.
3.11 Resource – To develop capital schemes and support community led projects to
‘construction ready’ status requires considerable resource.
3.12 Public Transport - For some users is the prime method of access and movement to, from
and around the National Park. However, recent years have seen cuts in levels of services
which impact on people’s ability to access and enjoy the National Park.
3.13 Railway Crossings - In recent months, Network Rail has sought to close several footpath
level crossings in the South Downs and in some cases, has succeeded in its application to
extinguish the right of way across the railway line on the grounds that the risk to the public
is too great. This disruption or severance of the rights of way network has the potential to
reduce access for both visitors and local users.
3.14 Tourism – The tourism offering for cyclists and walkers is under-developed, but provides
significant opportunities to support local economic growth. As users their needs differ
slightly from other visitors in terms of information, facilities and services they require from
amenities (such as: accommodation and refreshment venues), destinations and transport
providers.
3.15 Public Health – There is a growing body of inactive people with health problems and
associated conditions, especially within urban areas near to the National Park, who could
benefit from increasing their physical activity and mental wellbeing by participating in
outdoor activities. Our challenge is to use the National Park as a resource to help address
this issue.
Page 7 of 32
4. The Strategy for Cycling and Walking in the SDNP
Our Ambition for Cycling and Walking in the SDNP is:
The National Park is home to a network of largely traffic free routes providing opportunities for a
range of users of differing abilities and ages, who are using the network for recreation and daily
utility journeys.
The network is easily reached from all communities within and near to the National Park and is
well connected to public transport.
Visitors and residents enjoy excellent cycling and walking recreational facilities and information
throughout the National Park on trails, at visitor attractions, amenities and accommodation
providers.
4.1 Vision Map – Figure 2 below shows the main access network of long distance promoted
walking trails, strategic cycle routes (predominantly level / low gradient and segregated from
traffic), the South Downs Way and the key railway stations within and near the National
Park. A simplified ‘tube map’ version of the network map is shown as Appendix vi.
4.1.2 Aspirational routes for NMUs that have been identified to date are indicated by the purple
dashed lines. The map could be used to identify other missing links or opportunities for
improving the network that could be evaluated.
4.1.3 Additional routes and schemes either known or yet to be identified, may link to and
contribute to the strategic network. The economic and social benefit of each additional
scheme and how it integrates with the strategic network will be evaluated to establish
priority schemes.