Public Access Strategy - Key Principles Providing Access for All

It is important that access networks meet the needs of users of all ages and abilities, given that this has been increasingly recognised as a central requirement of any access strategy.  This is reflected in the overall emphasis that this strategy places on inclusive access.  The general principles of barrier free access, and in the development of the least restrictive option should, where possible, be applicable to all of the proposals set out here.

However, it is not necessarily desirable and probably impractical for the entire network of paths in North Lanarkshire to be accessible for all types of user, and a degree of pragmatism is likely to be required.  The aim should be to explore the potential to extend access where it brings maximum benefits to the type of user concerned and where any adverse effects (for example conflict with other users or issues of land management) are minimised.  Key factors influencing the pattern of access provision are likely to include:

• Discussions with user groups.  Discussions with different user groups should be used as a means of identifying the areas where additional or improved access is desired, the kind of routes that would be welcomed by different groups, and the particular requirements in terms of parking provision, gradient, gates etc. Discussions should be realistic, reflecting the resources that may be available and should aim to avoid raising expectations which may not be met.
• Use of existing paths.  The use of existing paths by different types of user may provide an indication of where attention should focus. Heavy use of certain routes by cyclists or horse riders, for example, may indicate the need for additional or alternative provision, particularly if conflicts with other users are occurring.  It is also logical to concentrate new provision in areas that are already used by the group in question, thereby creating or improving existing networks.  Consolidating networks in this way is likely to be most important for cyclists and horse riders.  Extensive networks may be less appropriate for less mobile walkers.
• Environmental conditions and site potential.  Some areas are likely to be more or less suited to different kinds of user as a result of topography or ground conditions.  Many cyclists, horse riders and less mobile walkers are likely to favour shallow gradients over steep hills.  Ground conditions may also be important.  Poorly draining areas are likely to be more sensitive to heavy use, particularly if paths are used by cyclists and horse riders, in addition to walkers. While these problems may be overcome by providing surfaced tracks, it may be more resource efficient and environmentally sensitive, to concentrate activity in more robust areas.  Forested areas, for example, have considerable potential to absorb off-road cycling and horse riding activity.
• Sources of demand.  As with walking more generally, access for special needs groups is likely to be effective if it is related to sources of demand.  Many horse riders, for example, are not able to transport their animals and therefore need paths close to the location of stables.  People with walking difficulties are most likely to use appropriately designed paths where they are located close to their homes or to a car park or other access point, where they lead to a point of interest such as a viewpoint or other feature, and where they do not require the negotiation of obstacles such as major roads.
• Site management.  Providing routes for cyclists or horse riders can open up areas to access by other groups including off-road motorcyclists or even joy-riders.  It can also result in abuse including fly-tipping or vandalism.  It is therefore important to consider the likely implications of improving access for particular groups and concentrating it where suitable barrier can be provided and where any incidences of abuse can be monitored and addressed.  This could also be linked with initiatives to improve community ownership of paths.
• Resource implications.  Extending the level of access to the path network for different user groups, while clearly desirable, can carry considerable resource implications in terms of the costs of both construction and subsequent management.  It is therefore important to judge the overall level of provision that can be sustained and to concentrate this expenditure in areas where it will achieve the greatest benefits.  The resource audit showed that specifically targeted funds are increasingly being made available which could be used to realise this objective.

Access provision in North Lanarkshire could be broadened to accommodate a wider range of user groups in the following ways:

• Further clarification of where horse riders currently go in the area, prior to securing more concrete agreements with land managers where appropriate.  At present we are aware of very few horse riding routes in the area.
• Development of off-road cycling routes where feasible.
• As explored in more detail in the Action Area Plans, where off road routes are not feasible, scope for improving traffic calming on key roads should be considered, particularly in the areas of farmland where there are fewer off road opportunities for cyclists.
• Local community groups for young and old people with special needs should be consulted on areas they already, or would like to, visit.  Local, community based disability groups have an important role to play in motivating local people to be more actively involved in developing this aspect of the strategy.  More generally, access for the less mobile should be concentrated near settlements, at key access points such as bus stops or car parks, and where points of interest can be reached relatively easily.  Such routes should have shallow gradients, higher quality surfaces and where practical, should not be shared with cyclists or horse riders.

More detailed and practical guidance for planning and developing inclusive access, is provided in national advice, produced by bodies like the Paths for All Partnership, and under programmes like BT's Countryside for All.  Funding may be available from the Fieldfare Trust where it can be shown that access initiatives aim to take into account the needs of disabled users.