Peterborough. Rights of Way Improvement Plan ( ) Peterborough. Highway Services. Creating the UK s Environment Capital.

Transcription

1 Peterborough Rights of Way Improvement Plan ( ) Creating the UK s Environment Capital Peterborough Highway Services Delivered by

2 Executive Summary This document is Peterborough City Councils updated Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) that is expected to last until In addition to being a statutory requirement for organisations in charge of local Rights of Way (RoW) this document will build on the accomplishments of the previous plan which ran for ten years until During the last RoWIP over 150,000 has been invested in new infrastructure and approximately 413 routes with a total length in the region of 250km were maintained. This new RoWIP will outline a series of updated policies and measures that will lead to additional investment in local RoW. Following completion of the plan it is anticipated that there will be additional improvements on the local Public Rights of Way (PRoW) network. To ensure that these measures are appropriate to local users, an extensive consultation process was undertaken which involved key stakeholders and the public. The information gained from this process has identified a clear series of requirements that included; The continued maintenance of existing routes; Creation and development of additional circular routes, and; Improved accessibility for all visitors to the local countryside. Within this context and following discussions with key stakeholders including the Local Access Forum, four Core Actions have been identified. It is also proposed that a series of circular walks will be developed over the course of the next five financial years. In doing so, and by undertaking additional promotion under the Travelchoice brand it is expected that there will be a visible and measurable impact on the RoW network prior to the next publication in Glossary of Terms CA Core Action CIL - Community Infrastructure Levy CRoW - Countryside Rights of Way Act (2000) CTC - Cyclists Touring Club DEFRA - Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs DfT - Department for Transport DMS - Definitive Map and Statement LHA - Local Highways Authority LSTF - Local Sustainable Transport Fund ( , ) LTTS - Long Term Transport Strategy ( ) LTP4 - Fourth Local Transport Plan NFU - National Farmers Union PCC - Peterborough City Council PECT - Peterborough Environment City Trust PHS - Peterborough Highways Services PLAF - Peterborough Local Access Forum PRoW - Public Rights of Way RoW - Right of Way RoWIP - Rights of Way Improvement Plan S106 - Section 106 SoA - Statement of Action Peterborough Highways Services 1 May 2016

3 Contents 1.0 Importance of the RoWIP Legal Framework, Statutory Duties and Responsibilities Related Policies and Strategies connected to RoWIP The Existing PRoW Network Assessing the needs of different users Defining User Classifications Statement of Action and Objectives Finance Prioritisation of Network Enhancements Rights of Way Definitive Map and Statements Lost Rights of Way Securing Funding and Delivering Improvements Monitoring the RoWIP Summary Annex 1: Legal Definitions of the Rights of Way Network Annex 2: Responses from the Consultation process 2015/ Annex 3: Prioritisation of Routes and Methodology Annex 4: Existing Rights of Way Peterborough Highways Services 2 May 2016

4 1.0 Importance of the RoWIP The Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP) is a vital document which seeks to enhance Peterborough City Council s PRoW network. Most of these Rights of Way (RoW) are located within the rural area and are distributed over 413 routes. The total length of these in the region of 245km and also encompasses numerous styles, bridges, steps and other infrastructure designed to make the network as accessible as possible to those who wish to use it for work, education or leisure. A summary of the networks length is in Table 1 below and a comprehensive list is also located within Annex 4. The value of these routes to Peterborough and the surrounding area should not be underestimated as they act as a readily accessible series of routes to key user groups including Walkers, Cyclists and Equestrians. By maintaining and improving these routes it is expected that more local residents will be able to undertake additional journeys using sustainable modes, reduce dependency on the private car and enjoy access to the countryside. By also has associated health benefits. Finally, through the consultation process for this document, residents from across Peterborough have been able to comment and tell Peterborough Highways Services (PHS), an organisation comprised of Peterborough City Council and their delivery partner Skanska, what they wish to see implemented. This ensures that any routes prioritised for enhancement are done so with the public s feedback at the core of what schemes are undertaken. Total Length (km) Total Percentage Total Bridleway 54 22% Total Footpath % Total Byway 7 3% Sum Total % Table 1 - Rights of Way Route Length Summary Though the RoWIP document has been published during 2016, it is expected that will be treated as an active document and it will be used by those in charge of the PRoW network, the PLAF and also individuals interested in Rights of Way. It will be continuously reviewed, and if appropriate further information will also be added. Peterborough Highways Services 3 May 2016

5 2.0 Legal Framework, Statutory Duties and Responsibilities The Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act, 2000 requires all Local Highways Authorities (LHAs) in England and Wales to publish a RoWIP for their area which has to be updated every ten years. Therefore this draft is expected to last until Should it be agreed that this Plan is still relevant to Peterborough after 2026, a report can be drafted and published outlining the justification for this decision. As part of the Plan, preparatory duties must be undertaken by the Local Highways Authority which identify; The extent to which local Rights of Way meet the present and likely future needs of the public; The opportunities that local Rights of Way provide to the public for exercise, other forms of open air recreation and for the enjoyment of the area; The accessibility of the Rights of Way to blind or partially sighted people and others with mobility problems, and; Any other matter that the Secretary of State may direct them to assess. Furthermore, section 60 of the CROW Act states that a RoWIP must include an assessment of the network and also a Statement of Action (SoA), these will be addressed within the appropriate sections of the RoWIP. Peterborough Highways Services 4 May 2016

6 3.0 Related Policies and Strategies connected to RoWIP It is important to recognise that whilst the RoWIP is a standalone document it should not be considered in isolation. There are several additional policy and strategy documents which are relevant to the RoWIP and are summarised below. Peterborough City Council Biodiversity Vision Statement Though it is not an official policy document it is important to acknowledge the aspirations of Peterborough City Council regarding wildlife and education. By protecting local wildlife, in addition to raising awareness of the countryside it will assist the Council as it aspires to become the UK s Environment Capital. Peterborough City Council Strategic Priorities Peterborough City Council has seven Strategic Priorities which outline how the city will continue to grow sustainably. These are outlined below; 1. Drive growth, regeneration and economic development; o To bring new investment and jobs o To support people into work and off benefits o To boost the city's economy and the wellbeing of all people 2. Improve educational attainment and skills; o To allow people to seize opportunities of new jobs and university provision o To keep talent and skills in the city's economy 3. Safeguard vulnerable children and adults; 4. Implement the Environment Capital agenda; o To position Peterborough as a leading city in environmental matters o To reduce the city's carbon footprint 5. Support Peterborough's culture and leisure trust Vivacity; o To deliver arts and culture to all people 6. Keep all our communities safe, cohesive and healthy, and; 7. Achieve the best health and wellbeing for the city. The RoWIP has strong connections to many of these Priorities. Over the life of the Plan, it is anticipated that any improvement works that are undertaken will directly contribute to improving the health and wellbeing, community cohesion and Environment Capital agenda for Peterborough. There are also a possibility if the right partnerships be established, that educational attainment and skills, particularly concerning the environment can also be enhanced. Peterborough Highways Services 5 May 2016

7 Peterborough City Council Core Values In addition to the seven Strategic Priorities, the Council also possesses five Core Values. These summarise how the Authority and its delivery partners will treat their customers and partners when undertaking any works within the city. They are; o Expertise - We recognise the value of differences, skills, knowledge and experience of all our colleagues; o Trust - We are honest and open in all our dealings and deliver on our promises; o Initiative - We are proactive and use our creativity to identify and resolve problems; o Customer Focused - We understand and aim to meet our customers diverse needs, treating them fairly and with respect, and; o Work Together/One Team - We work with colleagues and partners to deliver the best services possible. The RoWIP and the maintenance of existing routes, or creation of new ones will be open, transparent and will have the support of local consultee groups. This will include local Parish Councils, third party organisations and the PLAF. The Fourth Local Transport Plan (LTP4) This document outlines the plans to deliver transport schemes and associated activities within Peterborough over a five year period that are based on the Long Term Transport Strategy (LTTS). In addition to these plans, there are a series of high level policy objectives for Peterborough as shown below; o Tackle climate change; o Support economic growth; o Improve quality of life and promote a healthy natural environment; o Contribute to better safety, security and health, and; o Promote equality of opportunity. As it can be expected, there are firm links between LTP4 and RoWIP. By making routes along the RoW network more accessible it will allow walkers, equestrians and cyclists to access; o New or existing housing areas; o Local amenities including schools, hospitals and shops; o Places of work and industrial areas, and; o Places of education and training. In addition, by undertaking and wherever practicable, improving access across the network it is anticipated that health and economic benefits will be unlocked by those utilising the facilities on a regular basis. This message will also be reinforced through increased positive marketing campaigns under the recognised local sustainable transport brand; Travelchoice. Peterborough Local Plan ( ) An important document to refer to is concerned with the planning and development that is projected to occur is the Peterborough Development Plan Document (DPD). This statutory local planning document sets out the vision to 2026 and beyond for the Authority and indicates where. Specific policies would include Policy CS19 (Green Space and Infrastructure) in which; The Council, working in partnership with local communities, developers and statutory agencies will seek to develop an integrated network of high quality and multi-functional green infrastructure within and linking urban and rural environments across the City... The RoWIP will assist in delivering this policy, by acting as both a reference and working document which can be referred to by Council staff, members of the public and where applicable, third party developers. Peterborough Highways Services 6 May 2016

8 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) This document has been created in order to support LTP4, in accordance with National and European law. This SEA ensures that a range of environmental factors are considered during the creation of a local policy or strategy document and frameworks to monitor the impacts of new policies are suggested. Issues that are considered during the SEA include the following; o Population, communities and human health; o Historic environment; o Landscape and seascape; o Soils; o Water; o Air and climatic factors; o Critical infrastructure and material assets; and o Biodiversity (includes flora and fauna). This document determined that the transportation projects, including support for Rights of Way would have either a neutral or negligible impact on the local environment. Peterborough City Council Biodiversity & Green Infrastructure Strategy This document supersedes the older Green Grid Strategy and acts as a supporting document to Peterborough s Local Plan. Within this strategy, a series of deliverable local Green Infrastructure (GI) projects are to be identified that are located across the unitary area, as well as linking into neighbouring Counties where appropriate. Over the course of the Plan it is hoped that many of these projects will receive the necessary resources to ensure that they are completed. Case Study - Grimeshaw Wood Access Improvements, 2015 Whilst not a Right of Way, Peterborough City Council with the assistance of LSTF grant funding undertook route improvements within Grimeshaw Wood, North Bretton as part of an ongoing initiative to improve access to ancient woodland within the authority. Prior to the scheme the area was served by informal, narrow footways that were inaccessible during the winter months. Furthermore, the two existing footbridges in the area were also narrow and did not comply with current accessibility standards. The project proposal involved creating a defined, wider aggregate footway and the replacement of two small bridges with wider, modern facilities to accommodate pedestrians and other users such as cyclists. The total cost of the scheme was approximately 12,500 and was completed during the spring of Peterborough Highways Services 7 May 2016

9 4.0 The Existing PRoW Network Feedback over the last ten years from users and the LAF indicate that the PRoW network is generally accessible to many. However, a range of shortcomings have been identified that are likely to affect access to the network, either on a permanent or a seasonal basis. The network is fragmented, with severance of some routes from the urban to the wider rural area by the city s Parkway network, the East Coast Main Line, and the River Nene. This has effectively limited the number of routes crossing these obstructions and reduce the connections from Peterborough to the wider rural network. Furthermore, within the rural area changes in route status may sometimes occur part way along the length of some routes for example, bridleways may become footpaths; or routes come to an abrupt end. Other challenges to the network can include; Most villages have a good Rights of Way network around them but there are cases where there is no direct link between settlements and the RoW network; Routes can also start and finish in the countryside instead of a settlement, thereby hindering use; There are perceived barriers to the PRoW network, especially for the less mobile. This is largely due to many routes passing through an agricultural landscape where structures are required for stock-proofing and public safety; There is currently a lack of specific provision and allowance for people with disabilities including those with mobility problems or who are blind or partially sighted; The majority of routes around Peterborough have natural surfaces that are prone to damage in poor weather, especially in the winter. This means, more than a third of all routes cross arable farmland and are likely to be affected by wet weather, ploughing and cropping; Whilst evidence shows that the network is consistently signed, way marking can be inconsistent, and; There isn t a consistent approach for RoW promotion with a number of different information sources that are fragmented between several local organisations. These issues will be addressed within the plan and specifically within Sections 6.0 and 7.0. Peterborough Highways Services 8 May 2016

10 5.0 Assessing the needs of different users In order to determine what RoW users wish to see on their network during the life of this plan, a consultation was undertaken between October 2015 and February 2016; a duration of approximately 24 weeks. To ensure that the consultation process was open to the maximum number of respondents the following methods were used; A questionnaire was created that was based on the one used for the previous RoWIP consultation. This was also available as an electronic questionnaire via the Peterborough City Council website. Both the paper and electronic questionnaires were then promoted to ensure as many local interest groups, statutory consultees and members of the public had the opportunity to comment. In total 2,000 copies of the questionnaire were distributed in public buildings throughout the authority, in addition to being available to members of the public who contacted the PHS. These could be returned free of charge at a later date using an enclosed freepost self-addressed envelope. In accordance with statutory guidance outlined by DEFRA there are a range of statutory consultees which must be consulted as part of the development of a new RoWIP. This included, but wasn t limited to; Adjoining Local Highways Authorities; The British Horse Society (BHS); Cyclists Touring Club (CTC); The Environment Agency; Local health service and leisure providers; National Farmers Union (NFU); Local Parish Councils; Peterborough Environment City Trust (PECT); Nene Park Trust (NPT); Peterborough Local Access Forum (PLAF), and; Sustrans. Copies of the questionnaire were also sent to these organisations. Several of these groups, in addition to submitting a questionnaire also returned detailed responses that were considered as part of the Plan. Furthermore, the RoWIP was also promoted at six public LTP4 consultation events during The events were evenly split between daytime and evening sessions and were located within Peterborough Town Hall. Questionnaires were distributed to the public and staff were also available to answer any questions that arose. In total 357 responses were received from members of the public, a more detailed summary of the questions and responses from members of the public can be found within Annex 2 of this document. Finally a focus group was held in March 2016 with several members of the Local Access Forum to discuss in depth their priorities for the RoWIP over the life of the plan. Peterborough Highways Services 9 May 2016

11 This information proved useful as it outlined what residents of Peterborough, in addition to key stakeholders would wish to see developed on the local RoW network. During this process the following conclusions can be made; Over 70% of the questionnaire respondents access the local countryside at least 2/3 times per week; There is a strong correlation between the length of an ideal walk and how long users typically spend in the local countryside. This was found to be between 1 hour and 2 ½ hours; Most respondents wish to see Rights of Way that are clear from obstructions and litter free, and; Many of the public responses were over 45 years of age. With the highest percentage of respondents being over 65. Case Study - RoWIP Footbridge Enhancements, Yaxley During 2013 Peterborough City Council undertook a project near the authority boundary between Peterborough and Cambridgeshire near Yaxley. The site was an important location to access the nearby Rights of Way network, however as can be seen, it was only served by an informal wooden crossing point that was inaccessible to those either on horseback or wheelchair users. As a result a new footbridge, approximately 3 metres in width was installed to allow all non-motorised users access to the local countryside. The scheme was delivered during 2013 in partnership with Cambridgeshire County Council, the neighbouring Highways Authority for the benefit users in both administrative areas. Peterborough Highways Services 10 May 2016

12 6.0 Defining User Classifications During the consultation period, a wide range of individuals and user groups submitted opinions which were reviewed and will be developed as part of the RoWIP and can viewed within Annex 2. Whilst user groups have an interest in the countryside and the existing PRoW network, it is important to recognise that all users legally cannot utilise every route for business, education or leisure purposes. Some groups such as Equestrians and Cyclists are able to use routes classified as bridleways, however they aren t permitted to use footpaths. This section considers the range of users who responded during the consultation period and outlines their general needs. These needs will then be considered as part of any route enhancements during the life of the RoWIP which can be seen in Section 8.0 and Annex 3. In addition, a full list of legal definitions associated with PRoW can be found within Annex 1; Legal Definitions of the Rights of Way Network. Walkers Including dog walkers, this is the sole user group to have complete access to the RoW network. This activity requires minimal specialist equipment and can be undertaken exclusively on footpaths which comprise approximately 75% of the total network. Whilst this is the case it is recognised that in order to fully utilise the PRoW network in Peterborough, individuals need to know where to go, how to behave and also be confident that the routes which they use are safe to use. This can mean increases in wayfinding provision or ensuring that routes do not intersect with for example, busy roads. Cyclists Cycling is an increasingly popular activity within Peterborough, the numbers of cyclists using the network for business, education or leisure is increasing, but they are only able to use approximately 25% of the total RoW network. Cycling is discussed in great detail within LTP4, however the key requirements for cyclists include providing better quality surfaces fewer obstructions that may require a cyclist to temporarily dismount and these should be emphasised, particularly on commuter routes. Additional facilities also include better long distance routes which that avoid busy roads and dual carriageways. Equestrians Routes for Equestrians, like cyclists only account for up to 25% of the RoW network. Nevertheless they should be readily accessible from local liveries and stables, be free from obstructions and where practicable allow sufficient width for horses to turn around. Additional design features will also include natural surfaces for galloping and routes away from motorised traffic. For design advice regarding the widths of new surfaces and the recommended heights, these can be found within the PHS Active Travel Design Guidelines that were updated for Peterborough Highways Services 11 May 2016

13 Visually or Mobility Impaired Individuals This group is wide ranging and could include a range of physical impairments; the actual extent of this has not been evaluated. Nevertheless, when creating new routes it is assumed at a principle of easy access for individuals with mobility impairments will be recognised within the design. This will include minimal barriers, improved surfacing and dropped kerbs to improve access by wheelchairs and mobility scooters. Other facilities such as toilets were also suggested and will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Local Residents Many responses where received from local residents during the consultation period. This groups is particularly important and will likely make up the majority of RoW users locally. Many residents recognised that that increased connectivity between for example public transport services and RoW could lead to additional routes being utilised by locals, in addition to visitors. Volunteers and engagement with schools may also be useful for improving and fostering local interest in RoW. Local Landowners It is recognised that many PRoW routes are not on land currently owned, but are managed by PHS. It is therefore important to recognise that the needs of local landowners must be taken into account. By establishing, and maintaining good relationships with these important third parties it is anticipated that the local RoW network can be enhanced to the satisfaction of all who use it. Peterborough Highways Services will always welcome proactive discussion with local landowners to ensure new routes can be created from the outset of a new development or issues concerning existing sections can be resolved. Peterborough Highways Services 12 May 2016

14 7.0 Statement of Action and Objectives The Statement of Action (SoA) sits at the heart of the RoWIP and will underpin the development of the network throughout the life of the plan. This section sets out the suggested approach and contents of Peterborough s SoA and has been developed from the assessment made in previous sections. An Action Plan has been created that outlines a number of strategic Core Actions, each with a range of supporting tasks. This Action Plan identifies: Outcomes (i.e. what will be delivered by the Core Action); Key Issue Addressed, making reference to the consultation process as outlined within Section 4.0 and relationships to specific questions shown in Annex 2; Proposed Supporting Tasks (actions and projects) to help deliver the Core Action; The main beneficiaries of the Core Action (in summary), and; Potential partners in the implementation of the supporting Tasks. As such Peterborough City Council, during the life of the RoWIP will endeavour to; Core Action A - Reduce the number of unnecessary physical barriers to the network and improve the means of way marking to help users and landowners; Core Action B - Promote the Countryside around Peterborough to Residents and Visitors; Core Action C - Develop functional and well maintained routes into the countryside and to nearby settlements for local use, and; Core Action D - Help people wishing to improve or maintain their health by maintaining a range of circular off road routes. Table 2 below will outline the Core Actions and the specific Action Plan which will be used during the life of the RoWIP. Within this table it will also refer to the consultation questionnaire and to which question each Core Action seeks to address, a full description of these questions and the data gathered during the consultation process can be found within Annex 2. Peterborough Highways Services 13 May 2016

15 Core Action A Core Action B Core Action C Core Action D Option Outcome Consultation Question Addressed Proposed Supporting Tasks Main Beneficiaries Possible Partners Outcome Consultation Question Addressed Proposed Supporting Tasks Main Beneficiaries Possible Partners Outcome Consultation Question Addressed Proposed Supporting Tasks Main Beneficiaries Possible Partners Outcome Consultation Question Addressed Proposed Supporting Tasks Main Beneficiaries Possible Partners Response There will be a reduction of physical barriers and increased amounts of way marking during the RoWIP. 5a,5b,6,7,8a,8b,9, Installation of additional wayfinding markers and signposts on the RoW and wider, accessible surfacing or street furniture. Walkers, Equestrians, Cyclists, Visually or Mobility Impaired, Local Residents. Local Landowners, Third Sector Organisations, Parish Councils, Local Volunteers, Community Groups. Residents and visitors to Peterborough will become increasingly aware of the local countryside s benefits. 2,3,4,5a,5b,6,8a,9, Design and distribute a range of relevant materials promoting the RoW network and key routes. Walkers, Equestrians, Cyclists, Visually or Mobility Impaired, Local Residents. Local Leisure Organisations, Local Health Trusts, Third Sector Organisations, Parish Councils, Local Volunteers, Community Groups. Local people will have increased access to new, well maintained routes during the RoWIP. 2,3,4,5a,5b,6,8a,8b,9, Develop a range of new circular routes with various Possible Partners. Continue to maintain existing RoW and ensure litter and excess vegetation is removed. Walkers, Equestrians, Cyclists, Visually or Mobility Impaired, Local Residents. Local Landowners, Local Leisure Organisations, Neighbouring Highways Authorities, Parish Councils, A number of circular routes will be developed during the RoWIP for public use. 2,3,4,5a,5b,6,7,8a,8b,9, Improving wayfinding, surfacing and accessibility and connecting isolated Rights of Way. Walkers, Equestrians, Cyclists, Visually or Mobility Impaired, Local Residents. Local Landowners, Local Leisure Organisations, Local Health Trusts, Third Sector Organisations, Community Groups. Table 2 - Core Actions and RoWIP Action Plan Peterborough Highways Services 14 May 2016

16 Case Study- Peakirk Paths for Communities Project, 2014 The Northern Footpath Forum, progressed a scheme to create a new Right of Way between Peakirk and Maxey. The aim was to create a new route to ensure local residents could access nearby villages and the countryside. The project included scope for the installation of new information boards, two footbridges and two benches for public use. Working with agencies including DEFRA, the European Union and local Landowners the project was completed during 2014 and took 23,000 in addition to over 140 volunteer hours to complete. This new route now provides a seamless off road link between rural villages, north of Peterborough and is part of a circular route approximately 1.8km in length. It can also be used as part of longer journeys within the north of the Authority. Peterborough Highways Services 15 May 2016

17 8.0 Finance An important part of the RoWIP is the availability of funding. This is required to ensure that the Action Plan as outlined within the Section 6.0 will be realised. An indicative budget for the RoWIP can be found within Table 3 which is outlined in full within LTP4. These figures assume at the time of writing that the Integrated Transport Block, the funding PHS receives from the Department for Transport for new transportation schemes is maintained up to financial year 2020/2021 and no other funding can be identified. The data in Table 2 does not include routine maintenance and inspections of the RoW network which is allocated separately. Year 2016/ / / / /2021 Budget ( 000 s) Table 3 - Expected RoWIP Core Funding Given the level of core funding available to develop the network over the next five financial years, a pragmatic approach needs to be taken in order to deliver the maximum benefit to the network whilst ensuring budgets are not exceeded. One such solution is to concentrate resources to develop, for example, several new circular routes in accordance with the SoA. Should additional funding through lone or partnership working be identified to assist enhancement of the RoW network, additional schemes can also be progressed towards delivery. A range of potential sources have been outlined within Section Peterborough Highways Services 16 May 2016

18 9.0 Prioritisation of Network Enhancements Sections 6.0 and 7.0 highlighted the wishes of local people to see improved routes on the RoW network. However, given the level of anticipated funding over the next five years it is important to recognise what can be achieved and manage expectations accordingly. Therefore, a pragmatic approach needs to be undertaken in order to deliver the maximum benefits to the network at a realistic cost. In order to achieve this it is proposed that the network will be categorised into Priority routes using a numerical system as outlined within Annex 3. By doing this it is expected that routes will be upgraded and maintained with differing frequencies. Whilst this may mean that some routes will receive more attention that others, it will ensure that those routes that are developed will be in full accordance with the four Core Actions. This proposals, in addition to the consultation data were presented in full were taken in conjunction with the PLAF during March It is expected that this group will play a substantial role in developing the prioritisation of the routes and assisting PHS in creating a forward plan of works that will enhance the network over the next three to five years. It is also anticipated that by creating a forward plan, complete with realistic costs, PHS will be in a stronger position to leverage further funding to develop the network; either from the Council or third parties. These routes, once completed these routes will also be promoted throughout the life of the plan in accordance with Core Action B. These activities will be undertaken in partnership with the relevant partners and will be promoted under the widely recognised sustainable transport brand Travelchoice. Peterborough Highways Services 17 May 2016

19 10.0 Rights of Way Definitive Map and Statements In accordance with the CROW Act, 2000 the definitive map of all rights of way within the jurisdiction of Peterborough are to be recorded within the RoWIP. These are located electronically on Peterborough City Council s website under the heading Public Rights of Way. Within this section there is a link to Hawkeye, Peterborough City Council s online mapping tool, by clicking on this hyperlink all of the Rights of Way located within Peterborough will be displayed and these can be viewed by members of the public. Peterborough City Council Public Rights of Way webpage; Hawkeye Public Rights of Way mapping layer; Scale=19.843&CH=N&BM=SV 11.0 Lost Rights of Way Under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (the 'CROW' Act), provision was made for closing the Definitive Map to historical claims after This was seen as an opportunity to bring more certainty for the public and landowners alike as to what and where the recorded Public Rights of Way were. Claims can still be made after the 1st January 2026 for routes that have acquired long usage (twenty years or more) since 1949, equally claims to upgrade an existing route can be made on this basis. This could mean that routes that may presently be used by local residents and visitors to Peterborough could disappear. Therefore, Peterborough City Council will work in partnership with local groups, the PLAF, local Landowners and also neighbouring LHA s to ensure that any relevant, but presently informal RoW are recorded on the Definitive Map. Peterborough Highways Services 18 May 2016

20 12.0 Securing Funding and Delivering Improvements Crucial to the development of an improved RoW network within Peterborough and the surrounding area is the ability to secure funding. This section aims to highlight several funding streams that may be of use in order to deliver infrastructure enhancements or promotional campaigns and in addition to the funding specified in Table 2. Community Infrastructure Levy Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a charge against developments that may be raised against a Landowner or the relevant appointed body. Once received, authorities must spend this levy on health, transport and education infrastructure that is needed in the area surrounding the development. Crucially, this can be used either to create new infrastructure or enhance the existing facilities, such as those seen on nearby PRoW that are subject to negative impacts because of new developments. Further information on this can be found using the link below; Internal Funding The principal source of funding for Local Authority highway led schemes is through the annual Capital Programme of Work (CPW). This is an annual allocation of funding from central government which the Peterborough highways Services uses to develop many of their schemes. These include many of the Walking, Cycling, Congestion and Road Safety highway improvements. Planning Obligations These legal agreements compel a developer either to contribute financially or in kind works in order to mitigate the impact of development within a specified area. Typically these works fall under an agreement known either as a Section 106 (S.106) or Section 278 (S.278). These are legally binding and should be reasonable in planning terms. In the past funding of this nature has been used to contribute towards new infrastructure used on the highway, for example footbridges and pedestrian crossings at no cost to the LHA. External Funding Peterborough Highways Services has a proven track record of being able to leverage funding in order to promote and develop active and sustainable travel across the Authority. In the last several years over 6 million has been gained from external sources in. key organisations for gaining funding include Central Government Departments such as the Department for Transport (DfT). These sources will be explored throughout the life of the RoWIP in addition to other types of grant funding from nongovernmental bodies such as the Heritage Lottery Fund. Peterborough Highways Services 19 May 2016

21 13.0 Monitoring the RoWIP Critical to measuring success over the course of the plan is the marketing and monitoring of the Rights of Way network. Once a route has been completed during the annual program of works it shall be advertised through multiple methods under the Travelchoice brand to promote a routes availability for public use. In addition, data will be collected before and one year after the works to determine to what extent the improvements have boosted walking on the local network. This data will arrive from a variety of sources and will include; National datasets and Indicators; Neighbouring LHAs; Peterborough Local Access Forum; Routine PHS inspections or records; Members of the public, and; Local Rights of Way surveys (if applicable). A five year progress report is also suggested which aims to evaluate the projects undertaken during the first five years of the RoWIP. Alternatively, it will be recorded and published in the next iteration of the RoWIP which will need to be undertaken prior to Case Study Box- Nene Park Enhancement Project, 2015 As part of the annual program during financial year 2014/2015 Peterborough Highways Services undertook a footpath widening project at Ham Lane, within the boundary of Nene Park Trust. Whilst it was not classified as a Right of Way it did connect to a series of existing routes which are popular for walkers and cyclists, for commuting and leisure. The scope of the project included; increasing the width of the footpath from two to three metres, installing solar studs for improved wayfinding and replacing the existing pedestrian barriers with a series of bollards (pictured). Working in partnership Nene Park Trust, the project widened over 800 metres of surface was undertaken during the winter months; a period when lower visitor numbers to the site are lower. This meant that disruption to nearby organisations including the Nene Valley Railway and Caravan Club kept to a minimum. These upgrades have ensured that increased numbers of visitors and commuters that regularly visit Nene Park can be comfortably accommodated. Peterborough Highways Services 20 May 2016

22 14.0 Summary This document outlines Peterborough Highways Services aims and aspirations for the RoW network until the next version of the RoWIP is published prior to Within this document, a range of likely user groups have been identified and their needs have been reviewed following a period of extensive consultation. This process identified which features users expect to see on the network in addition to what schemes should be progressed within the short-medium term. These features include; Rights of Way that are clear of obstructions and litter; Routes that are clearly signposted to ensure increased use, and; Routes that cater for the needs of a range of, such as Equestrians and Cyclists, not just Walkers. In addition, there is a clear focus within the document for developing the RoW in a focussed manner without compromising existing levels of service. Furthermore, and if necessary the RoWIP can be amended in partnership with external bodies to reflect changing priorities for the city. Nevertheless, the four Core Actions that PHS will be progressing are; Core Action A - Reduce the number of unnecessary physical barriers to the network and improve the means of way marking to help users and landowners; Core Action B - Promote the Countryside around Peterborough to Residents and Visitors; Core Action C - Develop functional and well maintained routes into the countryside and to nearby settlements for local use, and; Core Action D - Help people wishing to improve or maintain their health by maintaining a range of circular off road routes. These will be the guiding principles behind future programmes of work that seek to develop a series of enhanced routes throughout the life of the RoWIP. With the assistance of partners to develop new routes, these positive actions will be followed by increased promotion of improved PRoW under the Travelchoice brand. It is anticipated that these actions will have a visible impact on the network and in accordance with local transportation and planning policies assist in creating a greener, healthier and more accessible Peterborough. Peterborough Highways Services 21 May 2016

23 15.0 Annex 1: Legal Definitions of the Rights of Way Network Public Rights of Way (PRoW) are highways that allow the public a right of passage. Ancient Common Law states that you can pass and re-pass along highways at all times. Footpaths, bridleways and byways are all highways. They only differ from other forms of highways, such as roads, by the type of traffic entitled to use them and the variety of surface types. Once a PRoW has been established it will remain until there is a legal event to either close, divert or extinguish it as a PRoW. Lack of use has no effect on the legal existence of a Right of Way. Local rights of way are defined by section 60(5) of the Countryside and RoW Act 2000 as: The footpaths, cycle tracks, bridleways and restricted byways within the Authority s area, and The ways within the Authority s area which are shown in a Definitive Map and Statement as restricted byways or Byways Open to All Traffic. PRoW provides a convenient means of travel primarily for short journeys. They are used on a daily basis for walking, cycling and riding for recreation and health improvement, as well as for visiting local shops and facilities. Public Footpaths provide you with the right to walk with any normal accompaniment (e.g. dog, pram or a wheelchair), however, you do not have the right to ride or wheel a bike, nor to ride or lead a horse, or to drive a horse drawn carriage along these paths. Footpaths are shown on the Definitive Map & Statement. Public Bridleways allow you the right to walk, ride or lead a horse or to drive animals. You do not have the right to take a horse drawn vehicle along a bridleway. Bridleways are shown on the Definitive Map & Statement. BOATs (Byway Open to All Traffic) provide rights to walk, ride a horse, cycle and drive a vehicle (motorised or horse drawn). BOATs are shown on the Definitive Map & Statement. RUPPs (Road Used as a Public Path) are highways that are used by the public mainly for the purpose for which footpaths or bridleways are used. Some carry rights for motorised users. RUPPs are shown on the Definitive Map & Statement. Restricted Byways are a new category of Right of Way that will replace RUPPs. Restricted Byways will have rights for pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and horse drawn carriage vehicles but not mechanically propelled vehicles. Peterborough Highways Services 22 May 2016

24 Other Routes with Public Access There are a number of routes that do have public access as a right and are not illustrated on the Definitive Map and Statement. Cycle Tracks are routes specifically designated for cyclists. It is normally permitted to walk along cycle tracks except when they are in or by the side of a made-up carriageway. Cycle Tracks are not shown on the Definitive Map & Statement. There is no single source describing cycle tracks in the county. Permissive Routes are paths accessible by permission of the owner a permission that has no legal status, no permanent rights and can revoked by the landowner, subject to conditions, at any time. Public access is usually for a limited period of time (normally 10 years). It is the responsibility of the landowner to maintain these paths. Green Lanes are a term with no legal meaning. It is a physical description of a usually unsurfaced track, normally hedged, and often, but not always, of some antiquity. It may be a footpath, bridleway or carriageway or may carry no PRoW at all. Footways or pavements are legally defined as being different from footpaths even though they both have a public right of way on foot only. Peterborough Highways Services 23 May 2016

25 16.0 Annex 2: Responses from the Consultation process 2015/2016 Summary of Responses Online Responses 55% Postal Responses 45% Graph 1 Summary of Responses Graph 1 outlines the summary of responses that was received during the RoWIP consultation. In total 357 responses were received. The majority of responses (196) were received from the online questionnaire whilst 191 were received from paper questionnaires that were distributed in public buildings throughout the authority. RoWIP Response Summary Age Category Female Male % 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Percentage Graph 2 RoWIP Summary of Respondents Peterborough Highways Services 24 May 2016

26 This graph is a population pyramid that outlines the age and gender of the questionnaire respondents. It can be seen there is a clear bias towards older members of the public who have completed this survey; the most over represented category for both genders is 65 and over, whereas those aged between16-24 are the least represented age category. In addition to these figures, a further 4 respondents (1% of the total questionnaires received) chose not to specify either their age or gender % 30.00% 25.00% Approximately how often do you 'use'/visit the local countryside? Percentage 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Daily Once a week 2/3 times a week Once a month 2/3 times a month Several times a year Less often Never Option Graph 3 Approximately how often do you use / visit the local countryside? Question 1 within the consultation document sought to outline how frequently consultees visited rural areas. This concluded that the majority of the survey respondents were frequent users of the countryside with over 70% of respondents visiting the rural area, at least on a weekly basis. Given the relative age of the respondents, the majority of which are likely to be retired and will have more time to visit the countryside. Peterborough Highways Services 25 May 2016

27 If you never visit the countryside, or don t go as often as you like to, are there any particular reason(s) for this? 18.00% 16.00% 14.00% Percentage 12.00% 10.00% 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% 0.00% Option Graph 4 If you never visit the countryside, or don t go as often as you like to, are there any particular reason(s) for this? Question 2 was used to determine the reasons why respondents, who did not visit the countryside on a regular basis. Whilst many individuals stated that they were either too busy or had other, more pressing interests Other was also a popular category within. Responses to Other typically included issues with public transportation in order to access rural areas and also low levels of connectivity between rural routes and surrounding villages. Peterborough Highways Services 26 May 2016

28 25.00% 20.00% What is/are the main reason(s) why you use or visit the countryside surrounding Peterborough? Percentage 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Option Graph 5 What is/are the main reason(s) why you use or visit the countryside surrounding Peterborough? Question 3 sought to identify of those who did use the countryside regularly what were the reasons for doing so. The majority of the respondents (19%) chose walking followed by cycling (16%) and health and fitness (14%). Other modes of leisure such as horse riding or motorised were not particularly popular. However, visiting the countryside to pursue water based activities such as canoeing or boating were also mentioned by five respondents. Peterborough Highways Services 27 May 2016

29 40.00% 35.00% 30.00% How do you usually decide where to walk/ride in the countryside? Percentrage 25.00% 20.00% 15.00% 10.00% 5.00% 0.00% Ask friends, colleagues or family Follow a path and see where it goes Use a map to plan a route Option Follow a leaflet or guide book Join an organised walk Other Graph 6 How do you usually decide where to walk/ride in the countryside? Within Question 4 the aim was to identify how respondents chose their route to undertake a visit to the countryside. The majority of those who responded (34%) decided to use a map prior to selecting a route, however a further 24% of respondents chose decided to select a path and see where they would end up. For those who chose Other several respondents relied on others and were part of mountain biking groups which helped identify a particular route. Peterborough Highways Services 28 May 2016