Agenda item

Tim Nicholson (PDNPA) – Transport Policy Planner and Matthew Eglin (PDNPA) Sustainable Travel Officer, gave a presentation on the project to produce a PDNP Walking and Cycling Plan in order to seek the Forum’s assistance in its development.

Tim gave some background detail of the Sustainable Transport Project.  The PD National Park is a complex location, with many constituent authorities, and currently four Mayoral regions.  13.5 million people live within 1 hour of the PD National Park by car.  Visits have increased after Covid.  The majority of visits are by car, and there is less public transport provision since Covid.

A public transport accessibility study was undertaken in autumn and early winter 2022.  138 random postcodes outside the park were generated, travelling to 21 key locations in the National Park.  The journeys had to meet certain criteria, such as  staying at the destination area for at least 2 hours, and less than 30 minutes walking time to get on public transport.  This generated nearly 3 thousand journeys.  On average using public transport involved 3 separate services, with 23 minutes walking time between transport stops.  Total travel time was 3 hours and 49 minutes, allowing for 3 hours and 17 minutes time available at the destination.

Public transport access was compared to access by car, including costs.  This looked at where people were setting out from, and which locations in the National Park they visited.  The research found that there are a number of villages and recreation hubs that can’t be accessed by scheduled public transport.  Visits by public transport in comparison to travelling by car showed that more time was spent travelling than spent at the destination. 

An online survey was carried out asking respondents about their most recent journey.  A significant number travelling by car visited more than one PD destination, which is a much more difficult proposition for people using public transport.  Cost wasn’t the main reason given for opting not to use public transport.  Frequency of service and location of stops were seen as more significant.  Almost a third of respondents visited on a weekly basis, with almost two thirds visiting at least every 2 weeks.   Encouraging frequent visitors to use public transport or active travel would reduce the negative effects of visitor travel on the National Park.

A Transport Symposium took place in February 2023 to look at promoting increased use of public transport, which resulted in the establishment of a 3 year fixed term Sustainable Travel Officer Post, and provision of a £50k budget to support the project.  Matthew Eglin then spoke about delivery of the project. His role as Sustainable Travel Officer is aimed at addressing the need to reduce transport emissions, and to  look at ways to increase access to the NP by active travel and reducing carbon intensity of journeys.

Matthew advised that car ownership in the NP is high, and provision of public transport is low.  Commuters into the Park make up a substantial amount of travel undertaken in the Peak District.  Sustainable Travel Plans need to take into account the needs of residents, visitors and commuters.  The current project phase will gather data, and is looking for funds to support research and programmes which improve travel, whilst both protecting the Park’s special characteristics and encouraging enjoyment of the PDNP. 

Tim talked about the Active Travel England (ATE) bid in 2024 where each English National Park was successful in securing £100k funding from ATE.  This has to be used to develop a Local Walking & Infrastructure Plan within 12 months.  The work falls into 4 areas.  Producing the plan, data and evidence collection, facilitation and consultation, and scheme development.  Tim went on to ask for LAF support to establish a sub-group to help produce a plan, and to widen out the project to difficult to access groups.

Geoff Nickolds asked about the figure of 26 million visitors per year, which seems high.  Tim responded that the information comes from STEAM data for all National Parks looking at visits of 3 hours or more of 13 million, plus an equivalent number of 1 hour visits.  This is a pre-Covid figure.  What we’ve seen in the last year is on particular days, especially with good weather, there have been very high visitor numbers to certain sites.  Matthew added that these figures are correlated with traffic data, and although exact figures are difficult to record, what can be gathered from the data is the frequency of visits going up or down over periods of time.  Susan Hobson, who is a cyclist and an occasional bus user, said that the reliability of buses affects the number of people using the service.  Transport providers should be part of the wider sub group.  Given the number of visitors to the NP, the level of online survey response (362) was poor.

Craig Best commented that this was good research, and as some of the sites fall under National Trust ownership, it is useful information to include in NT plans.  The National Trust secures good income from car parks which is all re-invested.  Craig felt that it was a short period to come up with a plan, and suggested that NT could contribute project manager time.

Alastair Harvey said it was good to see the figures, and welcomed the idea of setting up a sub-group.  The responsibility for provision of sustainable routes lies with local authorities, where there is a tendency to work in silos.  Wider strategies are therefore a good idea.  Yorkshire Water are looking at permissive routes around their sites.  It might be possible to establish an off road, or quiet roads cycling route from Stockton to Langsett.  They sponsor a bus in the north of their region, and are looking at sponsorship to other areas, but options are limited.  Managing cars is a headache and parking charges don’t seem to put people off visiting.

Jez Kenyon stated that cars give people freedom, and that cars will become greener.  Improving access to car users increases access to a lot of people.  This is about managing cars and we shouldn’t be anti car.  Understanding the total journey picture indicates that emissions due to visitor impact are low.  The focus needs to be where the biggest emissions are.

Tim advised that the current project and related discussions are not anti car, but the impact is higher in some places than others.  The provision of alternatives to car use has become less over time, and there are groups who can’t afford to own a car.  The aim is to give a choice and enable people to visit.  Jez added that we should be positive about managing cars and parking as it brings in money.  Matthew Elgin confirmed the point about emissions is correct.  The discussions aren’t anti car, but if people can use public transport it frees up roads and parking areas.

John Towe said that public transport is useful for people with disabilities.  For some countries this provision isn’t a problem, but globally there is a disconnect.  There are some people who can’t access the National Park.  Tim advised that the project will be looking at accessibility issues, including walking, cycling and wheeling options. The trails are accessible for most users, but people need to be able to access the Park in the first case to access them.

Martin Bennet expressed an interest in being part of the sub group.  He highlighted the Netherlands where people cycle everywhere, travel is integrated, with a good standard of public transport.  Paul pointed out that the Netherlands is flat.  Martin responded that wind is a factor though – and there are electric bikes for hills.  The model for effective public transport systems is there.  Paul also added that there are cost implications with electric bikes.  In order to increase cycle use into the PDNP, there should be reclassification and upgrade of some off road routes.

Tim set out that the first year development of the plan will be high level rather than the detail, but he will be working with constituent authorities to identify gaps in the network getting into the PDNP.  It’s a long process to change the status of a footpath to a bridleway.  Paul added that the provision to carry bikes on public transport is poor.

Clare mentioned that there is useful data on where people go, through heat maps and working with STRAVA.  This data can be used for managing parking.  For example, the village of Wetton has a small car park, and parking can be a problem.  A farmer has opened up a field for parking, but this information isn’t generally available.  There is no publicity for ad hoc parking places.  Tim advised that there is a policy for ad hoc parking areas, so that people are aware what they can do without requiring planning permission, but then these locations aren’t recorded.  It could be useful to find a way to make this information more publicly available.

Craig mentioned the National Trust’s 10 year strategy for Carbon reduction and ending unequal access to nature.  Cars are used to carry kit that people need when they are travelling and visiting the area, but cycling and walking will be encouraged in relation to access rather than emissions.  STRAVA data comes from a certain demographic, so we need to look at how data is collected.  There is an anti-car perception from how the information is presented.  We need to get over it.  Money from car parking benefits people by improving access.  It’s questionable whether 28 days is enough for temporary parking provision. Roadside parking causes damage and maybe this could be formalised in some way, as well as potentially charging vehicles to park there.

In the case of Wetton car parking, Charlotte Leech said that the farmer opening up a field for parking helped the farmer both financially and with their own access issues.  Promoting parking there could swamp the area with visitors.  Car owners may want to use public transport, but it is too expensive. 

Tim said that the ticketing system should be made easier, through transport authorities talking to each other and combining tickets.  There could be a potential for more integrated working with the new mayoral authorities.  Car use should be accepted, and the wider use of vehicles generally, such as camper vans.  Paul added that increased traffic takes a toll on the roads, and road maintenance projects can cut places off for periods of time.

Action: 

Charlotte Gilbert, as Chair for the next LAF meeting, will move the Peak District LAF Sustainable Transport Project sub-group forward.  Craig Best, Alastair Harvey, Martin Bennett, Susan Hobson, Charlotte Leech, Jez Kenyon, Paul Richardson and Geoff Nickolds expressed an interest in being part of that sub-group