Decision Session – Executive Member for



18th January 2021

Report of the Corporate Director of Economy and Place



Active Travel Fund




1.        This paper provides an update on the projects in the Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF) programme – a set of emergency transport measures designed to promote social distancing and reduce pressure on public transport, implemented from May 2020 during the first lockdown.


2.        This paper then discusses York’s Active Travel Fund (ATF) programme, a DfT programme with funding allocated in November 2020 to encourage greater use of active travel, in line with the government’s vision to increase walking and cycling levels as expressed in the “Gear Change: A vision to increase walking and cycling” document (published July 2020).


3.        The paper also makes recommendations for the development of walking and cycling policies in York more generally, in particular development of a Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP) for York.



4.        The Executive Member is asked to:

1)   Note the updates on the Emergency Active Travel Programme schemes shown in Table 1.

2)   To make a £600k in-principle commitment to delivering the ATF programme, with a final match funding budget set following scheme costing and preparation.  Reason: this will match the original application whilst leaving City of York Council to determine the most efficient distribution of match funding once more is known about the cost and delivery timescales for the programme as a whole.  

3)   To endorse the proposed Consultation Plan.  Reason: This will ensure the best possible schemes are progressed - addressing the aspirations to increase the take up of active travel modes whilst minimising the impact on residents and other road users in compliance with DfT requirements.

4)   To give officers delegated responsibility to make decisions about how to resource the ATF programme.  Reason: this will allow timely and efficient delivery of the programme alongside existing capital programme commitments.

5)   To allow development a pipeline of future walking and cycling schemes through working with stakeholder groups to develop an LCWIP.  Reason:  this will assist CYC in attracting central government funds for active travel projects which will assist in meeting CYC’s transport, health and air quality objectives.





5.        York’s bid to the Active Travel Fund (ATF) was submitted on 4th August 2020.  At the time the fund was named the Emergency Active Travel Fund.  Confirmation of the funding was expected by the end of August, but was delayed.  Funding was announced on 13th November with accompanying guidance from the DfT that was subtly different from that provided for the initial contest in August.  In particular:

·        A greater weight has been given to consultation, with Local Authorities required to publish a consultation plan for their programmes by 11th December 2020. Details of the Active Travel Fund Tranche 2 application and the Consultation Plan are available as downloads at:

·        Delivery of schemes is now expected by 31st March 2022, (initially 31/03/21 although there is still an expectation that commitment to deliver will be confirmed by 31/3/21.

·        There is a greater emphasis on schemes being permanent – and the word “Emergency” has been removed from the fund title.


6.        From a York perspective there have also been changes in the external environment to ATF.  When the first tranche of EATF funding was announced in late Spring there was an emphasis on providing measures which facilitated social distancing or provided an alternative to public transport – at that time compromised by social distancing regulations.  However, with the roll-out of covid vaccination over the next 6 months, the focus will shift from objectives to facilitate social distancing and providing an alternative to public transport.  In York, too, transport policy has moved on, with the general adoption of an Economy and Place Covid Recovery Plan which is now being updated as part of a review of the decade old Local Transport Plan (LTP).


Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF)


7.        Table 1 sets out the measures in York’s Emergency Active Travel Fund bid, made in May 2020, and delivery progress to date.


Table 1: EATF Measures

Measure/ theme

Already in CYC Capital Programme

Implementation progress to date

Next steps

Space for Pedestrians

Bishopthorpe Rd shopping area


Trial measure implemented in May 2020, removed in July 2020

Further measures to be considered in LTP4

Pedestrian Pinch Points at Coppergate and Piccadilly


Measures implemented in June 2020.  Still in place

Decision made to explore options for making scheme permanent – October 2020.

Footstreets Enhancements

Footstreets extensions to Blake St, Lendal, Goodramgate, Colliergate, Church St, Castlegate, Fossgate


Measures implemented in June 2020

Decision by Executive November 2020 to continue this measure.

Cycle Route network improvements

Castle Mills Bridge (Westbound) pop up cycle lane


Cones for maintenance scheme of April 2020 left in place after lockdown ended.  Scheme removed October 2020.

Further options to be considered as park of city centre/ Castle Gateway project

North South City Centre Cycle Route inc. Navigation Road measures


Scheme prepared.  Report to February 2021 Decision Session

Consultation on scheme ongoing

Lendal, Ouse and Skeldergate Bridges measures to improve conditions for cyclists


Schemes in preparation – small scale lining and signing changes to be implemented


Low Traffic Neighbourhood

The Groves Low Traffic Neighbourhood


Experimental Scheme implemented September 2020.  Minor parking and closure point amendments November 2020.

Monitoring of network impact and evaluation after trial of at least 6 months.


Park and Cycle Schemes

Shipton Road – new segregated cycle lanes to support park and pedal from Rawcliffe Bar


Scheme designed (except for section between Rawcliffe Lane and Clifton Green junctions.

Scheme implementation between Clifton Green and Bootham Bar in early 2021.  Consultation on parking impact and further work required in ATF programme.

Tadcaster Road – improvements to cycle lanes to support park and pedal from Askham Bar


Implemented as part of resurfacing scheme July 2020

Scheme complete

Malton Road – remarking of cycle lanes to support park and pedal from Monks Cross



Scheme complete

Cycle Parking/ counters

City Centre – additional stands


Installation of 168 new spaces in August 2020, other suitable sites also under consideration.


Rawcliffe Bar – additional lockers


Installation October 2020 (doubling capacity from 20 to 40 lockers)

Scheme complete

Upgrade to existing cycle counter site and provision of two new sites to monitor cross-river cycle trips


Installation October / November 2020



8.        As can be seen, the majority of the schemes in the programme have now been implemented or are on the way to implementation via a consultation process.


9.        Recommendation: The Executive Member is asked to note progress with scheme delivery.


10.    Reason: this is important contextual information for considering the Active Travel Programme and its development.



York’s Active Travel Fund (ATF) Programme


11.    York’s ATF programme comprised 6 broad schemes, as set out in table 2 overleaf. 



Table 2: The ATF Programme, Costs and Funding




Cost (£k)

DfT total

DfT Revenue

DfT Capital

CYC Capital

A1237 Ouse Bridge

Cycle lanes on bridge over Ouse and ECML






Shipton Road

Improvements north of Clifton Green






City Centre

Crossing for Tower St adj St. George’s Field car park and measures to improve accessibility for mobility impaired people






University Road and Wheldrake – Heslington cycle path

Off road path between Wheldrake and Heslington (potential funding support via Sustrans bid to DfT).






Acomb Road

Cycle lanes on Acomb Road






People Streets

People Streets trial at Carr Junior and evaluation with a view to development of a People Streets programme for York as a whole.







TOTAL bid for







Actual DfT Funding awarded to CYC in November 13th letter









Funding awarded and match funding required


12.    York’s bid made a match funding pledge of £600,000 towards delivering the programme.  However, because CYC has been awarded £192k less than bid for there is a question about what match funding contribution should be made, and the consequent size of the programme. 


13.    It is worth noting that the bid in August was put together quickly in response to a funding call.  The schemes included within the bid still require detailed cost assessment, and in some cases option selection.  The costs put forward in the bid are likely to be subject to change as the schemes are developed. 


14.    A further consideration is timing.  The original fund guidelines suggested all projects should be delivered by 31/03/2021.  However, this deadline has now changed to a preference that they be delivered by 31/03/2022– with potential for later delivery if agreed with DfT (although a firm commitment to deliver schemes must be given by Local Transport Authorities by 31/03/21). 


15.    There are a number of Options to resolve the impact of the reduced DfT funding:


·        The budget for the programme could be amended by:

o   Increasing the match funding to replace the £192k not allocated to the programme by the DfT (in which case CYC match funding would increase to  £792k) – a total programme value of £1,450k.  This would allow progression of the complete programme as bid for.

o   Maintaining the match funding level identified in the bid (£600k), in which case the programme budget would need to be reduced by £192k to give a total programme budget of £1,258k. The programme could be kept within budget  by reducing the allocations for one or more schemes, or removing a single scheme from the programme. These changes could be determined now using the indicative costs or later when further feasibility work had been undertaken.

o   Increasing the match funding to £1m to accommodate possible cost increases as the detailed schemes are developed.


·        Alternatively, a commitment could be made in principle to provide the match funding of the £600k set out in the bid, with a final decision about match funding budgets and distribution between financial years to be made following an assessment of the Programme and definition of a detailed Programme Plan.


16.    Recommendation: To make a £600k commitment in-principle, with a final match funding budget set following scheme costing and preparation.


17.    Reason: this will match the original application whilst leaving City of York Council to determine the most efficient distribution of match funding once more is known about the cost and delivery timescales for the programme as a whole.  




18.    Programme delivery will broadly use CYC’s “All About Projects” methodology. These stages are set out in table 3 below.




Work undertaken by


Consultation on measures as per DfT Consultation Plan spec

CYC comms supported by i-travel team (see Appendix A of this paper)


Assess feasibility of proposed measures and calculate outline. Costs.

CYC supported by consultants




Detailed design of measures

CYC supported by consultants

Contracting and implementation

Purchase of materials etc, construction of scheme

To be decided on a scheme by scheme basis.

Post implementation monitoring and evaluation

Assessment of success or otherwise of measures, lessons learned for future projects

To be decided on a scheme by scheme basis.






19.    The success of the ATF programme will depend on effective consultation to ensure that there is a clear understanding of the objectives of the individual projects and to help determine the best solution whilst mitigating as far as possible potential impacts on residents and other road users.


20.    A generic consultation plan for the programme has been published (see Annex A) to meet the DfT’s deadline for acceptance of the indicative funding allocation, which is in line with the standard approach taken when delivering transport schemes across the city. There are two main pre-delivery consultation stages followed by a monitoring and evaluation stage:


·        Option Appraisal Consultation - Schemes with several possible delivery options

·        Detailed Stakeholder Consultation - Schemes with a single delivery option – would follow on from option appraisal stage where needed.

·        Post-implementation Monitoring and Evaluation


21.    Different approaches will be taken for the different schemes in the programme owing to the wide range of constraints. There is a need to undertake preliminary feasibility work on all of the schemes to ensure that there are deliverable potential options. For some schemes, where there are very rigid physical constraints such as the A1237 bridge where it is anticipated that there will be only one viable solution, it is proposed to undertake a single stage consultation.


22.    Recommendation: The Executive Member is asked to endorse the proposed Consultation Plan


23.    Reason: This will ensure the best possible schemes are progressed - addressing the aspirations to increase the take up of active travel modes whilst minimising the impact on residents and other road users in compliance with DfT requirements.


Delivery Resources


24.    Other commitments within CYC’s Capital Programme are fully utilising the existing staff resources within CYC’s transport team.  The ATF programme is significant and comprises a number of substantial schemes.


25.    Consequently, there are a number of options for delivering the ATF programme:


·        The programme could be delivered using the existing resources within the transport engineering and sustainable transport teams, accepting that this would lengthen delivery timescales or reduce the amount of other work which could be progressed

·        The programme could have dedicated additional resources allocated to its delivery funded from the ATF budget, with operational decisions relating to the division between CYC employees and consultants delegated to officers.


26.    Recommendation: officers are delegated responsibility to make decisions about how to resource the ATF programme in consultation with the Executive Member.


27.    Reason: this will allow timely and efficient delivery of the programme alongside existing capital programme commitments in the light of consultation and feasibility work prior to the DfT deadline.


Developing a walking and cycling schemes in the future


28.    Central Government’s “Gear Change” document makes clear the Government’s ambition to see substantial development and delivery of new infrastructure to promote walking and cycling by local authorities.  Local authorities are also challenged to deliver very high quality cycling infrastructure through the recently published LTN1/20 document setting out new design standards for cycling infrastructure.


29.    Active travel has an identified central government budget line of £2billion over the next 4 years in the most recent Comprehensive Spending Review.  This implies an expenditure of £500m per year – which is twice the expenditure made in the 2020/21 year under EATF and ATF.


30.     York has a historic “pipeline” of cycling infrastructure schemes (Approved in May 2016 and recently updated to account for delivery - attached as Annex B) and progress is currently being made on delivering this programme alongside the EATF and ATF programmes.  However, the new design standards challenge York’s historic programme and there is a need to check the programme to determine which schemes could most readily be developed in a way which is compliant with LTN1/20.  Although it is recognised that walking is the most prevalent mode of transport for city centre residents CYC does not have a separately identified pipeline of pedestrian schemes. Most pedestrian improvements are currently progressed as part of wider cycling, road safety or pedestrian crossing schemes.


31.    In 2017 Government recommended local authorities develop Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans (LCWIP).  Surrounding local authorities are already developing their plans.  North Yorkshire County Council and East Riding Council are developing settlement specific LCWIPs, whilst the five West Yorkshire authorities are developing LCWIPs at a district level.  Work commenced on a York LCWIP in March 2020, through development of an initial scoping document which examined trip making patterns in York and set out how CYC might work with stakeholders to develop an LCWIP for York.  This scoping document is attached at Annex C.


32.    Given the certainty of central government spend on active travel measures in future years, and the possibility that funding will be allocated competitively rather than allocations based on population (as ATF and EATF were allocated), it is imperative that CYC develops a programme of pedestrian schemes and LTN 1/20 compliant cycle infrastructure schemes so that it is able to attract active travel funding to increase the coherence and connectivity of York’s already comprehensive cycling/ walking infrastructure.


33.    Increasing walking and cycling in York will also advance many other areas of Council policy (and wider regional policies being developed by local Enterprise Partnerships and Combined Authorities) – for example, traffic/ congestion reduction, healthy living, obesity reduction, social equality, air quality improvements and carbon reduction policies. 


34.    Recommendation: CYC develops a pipeline of compliant future schemes through working with stakeholder groups to develop and LCWIP.


35.    Reason:  this will assist CYC in attracting central government funds for active travel projects which will assist in meeting CYC’s climate emergency strategy to decarbonise transport and improve air quality and health.





36.    Annex A to this report sets out the consultation protocol to be used in connection with the Active Travel Fund Programme.


Council Plan


37.    The measures and outcomes referred to above make a contribution to the “Travelling Sustainably” and modal shift objectives in the Council Plan, and a variety of other CYC objectives around social equality, public health, air quality and decarbonisation.



·           Financial: a match funding allocation of £600,000 is outlined in the report and will need to be identified within current Highways and Transport capital budgets. There is capacity within current budgets and proposed budget amendments will be included in future capital monitoring reports taken to Executive.

·           Human Resources (HR): there will be some recruitment to deliver the outlined programme – to be determined by Council Officers under delegated responsibilities.

·           Equalities: none    

·           Legal: the schemes outlined above will require Traffic Regulation Orders, a straight forward legal process which CYC already has significant experience in delivering.

·           Crime and Disorder: none        

·           Information Technology (IT): none

·           Property: none

·           Other: none


Risk Management


38.    No known risks – schemes are conventional.










Contact Details




Chief Officer Responsible for the report:


Julian Ridge

Sustainable Transport Manager




Neil Ferris

Economy and Place


Report Approved











Wards Affected:  [List wards or tick box to indicate all]







For further information please contact the author of the report







A.  Consultation Plan

B.  Current CYC Strategic Cycling Plan

C.  LCWIP Scoping Study


List of Abbreviations Used in this Report


EATF – Emergency Active Travel Fund

ATF – Active Travel Fund

DfT – Department for Transport

CYC – City of York Council

LCWIP – Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan


Further Reading