This is an HTML version of an attachment to the Freedom of Information request 'Surrey Cycling Strategy'.

I had previously enquired about minutes for the cycling strategy board 
as I hoped these 
would hold information on the delivery of the Council's cycle strategy 
However, neither the strategy board or cycle forum seem to have met as planned, so the 
information was not obviously available. Could you therefore please provide the following 
information about the strategy and it's implementation in Reigate and Banstead Borough:
1.  In the 5 years since the plan was agreed, can you please provide the total amount that 
the council has spent on cycle infrastructure, how much in total the council has spent 
on transport infrastructure and what the planned budget for cycling and transport 
infrastructure are for the forthcoming years? 

Expenditure on transport infrastructure 
Expenditure figures included in the table below are from financial year 2014/15 to present. In order 
to obtain these figures a number of teams across the Council have been consulted however it is 
unlikely that we have been able to cover every amount of expenditure committed by Surrey CC. We 
have excluded expenditure on Project Horizon schemes as this is expenditure entirely for 
maintenance rather than improvement of existing transport infrastructure. Costs provided include 
costs of construction, design and project management for delivering transport infrastructure.  
Proportion on 

Major Transport Projects 
Greater Redhill 
£4.9 million 
A sustainable transport project 
Sustainable Transport 
£2.5 million  
which included delivery of cycle 
Package (STP) 
Redhill Balanced 
£4.4 million  
The project focused on changes 
to key junctions and links in 
integrated within 
Redhill to tackle congestion and 
overall project 
integrated cycle infrastructure.  
Local Sustainable 
£18 million* 
Of infrastructure 
*Please note the cost figure 
Transfer Fund  
delivered in 
provided covered three Surrey 
since 11/12 
Reigate & 
boroughs and expenditure 
started in 2011/12, before the 
Surrey CC Cycling Strategy was 
Guildford, and 
half was spent on 
Reigate & 
walking & cycling 
schemes, half on 
bus infrastructure 
A217 Resilience  
£3.5 million 
A23 Resilience 
£4.9 million 
Cost figure provided is the total 
budget of the project. The 
scheme is still in delivery.  
Wider Network Benefits  £3.75 million* 
*Please note the cost figure 
provided covered four Surrey 

covering east 
boroughs, not just Reigate & 
of Surrey – 
Epsom & 
Ewell, Mole 
Valley, Reigate 
& Banstead, 
Local Area Highway Schemes 
All Local Area Highway 
Cost figures are capital spend 
from 14/15.  
Road Safety Team Schemes 
All Road Safety Team 
Planned budgets  
Funding of future Major Transport Projects in Reigate & Banstead is dependent on successfully 
bidding for funding from the Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership and other funding bodies. 
At present there is only secured funding for the A23 Resilience scheme in Reigate and Banstead. 
Surrey CC will bid for further funding when appropriate opportunities become available. To guide 
funding bids, Surrey CC has developed a list of transport infrastructure improvements required in 
Reigate & Banstead, published within the borough’s Forward Programme, which includes cycle 
infrastructure, available to view from:
The budget for Local Area Highways Schemes is set annually. The budget for 2019/20 is £211,111. 
This budget is not currently planned to deliver cycle infrastructure. 
2.  Please can you provide the following information on staffing: an FTE head count of 
council staff directly involved in cycling and walking; the job titles of staff directly 
involved in cycling and walking; an organogram showing the position of staff directly 
involved in cycling and walking within the Highways Division; and a total FTE of staff 
within the Highways Division? 

It is not possible to provide a breakdown of staff solely dedicated to work in Reigate & Banstead as 
most roles are not geographically specific. The attached documents provide the current staff 
organisational structure for the Highways and Transport Service at the council. 
Beyond cycle training, no members of staff are specifically dedicated to working only on walking and / 
or cycling. Most roles typically require officers, including planners and design engineers, to work 
across multiple modes and areas. 
There is an estimated 350.22 FTE staff within Highways and Transport. 
3.  For monitoring purposes the plan states "We will produce an annual Countywide 
report" and "There will be individual reports for Districts and Boroughs" Please can 
you provide copies of each of the reports produced for the county and for Reigate and 

The results of the 2015 countywide cycling survey conducted on behalf of the council are available 
No further annual cycling reports are known to have been produced by the council at either a county 
or district/borough level. 
4.  The plan says that "We will... consider appropriate targets". Please can you provide 
information on cycling targets set under the plan and performance against those 

There are no agreed county or borough wide targets for cycling. 
However, as part of the major schemes bidding process, any new schemes are required to conduct 
an economic appraisal based on target outcomes. A 3-year programme of monitoring and evaluation 
is then carried out post scheme completion to measure the success of the scheme against these 
target outcomes. 
5.  - The strategy states it will "Develop a cycle audit process for new highway 
infrastructure". Please could you provide information on the audit process and any 
examples where it has been used in Reigate and Banstead? 

Surrey County Council is developing design standards to inform the design of new cycling 
infrastructure. The drafted standards can guide decision making on the type and width of new cycle 
facilities based on a number of factors including: road width available; speed of traffic on roads; 
vehicle numbers on roads; footway width available; number of pedestrians using footway. Where a 
type of cycling infrastructure is not covered, the drafted standards refer to the Active Travel (Wales) 
Act 2013 Design Guidance for further advice.  
The drafted standards are referred to on new/recent schemes, however prior to this, design 
engineers would be expected to refer to other available cycle design guidance such as the Active 
Travel (Wales) Act 2013 Design Guidance, taking into account specific locational context in the 
decision making process. 
New highway infrastructure is also safety audited during the design and construction process which 
takes into account all highway users including cyclists.  
6.  The strategy set out regular Cycle Strategy Board meetings and creation of a Cycle 
Strategy Forum. From the previous request the Board appears to have been 
discontinued and the forum was never created. Can you please provide any notes, 
minutes or e-mails where it was discussed and agreed to discontinue these? 

The Medium Term Financial Plan agreed by the Surrey County Council Cabinet in March 2017 set out 
a revised council budget to cover the 2017-2020 period as a result of the ongoing financial pressures 
facing the council. As a result, a council-wide restructure of resources was subsequently undertaken 
to achieve the savings required in the revised budget which included the discontinuation of the 
council’s dedicated sustainable travel team, known as ‘TravelSmart’.  
Whilst many of the core activities carried out by the team were re-distributed amongst other teams in 
the council, a number of activities are no longer carried out - including the Cycle Strategy Board. 
Notes and minutes available of the March 2017 Cabinet meeting is available at: 
7.  The strategy details that "On busy roads, physical separation of cyclists from 
motorised vehicles and pedestrians is preferred". It also notes that "The 
appropriateness of shared use pavements will therefore depend on local 
circumstances... The drawbacks will need to be balanced against the potential benefits, 

and considered on a case-by-case basis." Can you give any information on any cycle 
routes added within Reigate and Banstead which have been segregated from traffic 
and pedestrians? If not, can you provide any notes, minutes or e-mails detailing where 
this was considered and why this was not possible?
Design of cycle infrastructure takes into account safety, road space/footway width available and 
affordability/providing a cost effective solution within budget. Some sections of cycle infrastructure 
delivered through the Redhill Balanced Network project segregates cyclists from pedestrians on the 
converted footways.   
The most recent cycle infrastructure delivered in the borough through the Greater Redhill STP 
introduced shared pedestrian/cycle paths which were deemed the most appropriate infrastructure 
based on safety, road space/footway width available and affordability/providing a cost effective 
solution within budget. Segregated two-way facilities would not have been affordable and there are 
width constraints.  

8.  The strategy details that "Cyclists going straight on should have priority at side roads 
where this can be safely accommodated." Can you give any information held on any 
schemes within the Reigate and Banstead district where cycle routes have been given 
priority at a side road? If not, can you provide any notes, minutes or e-mails detailing 
where this was considered and why this was not possible?
On road cycle lanes have priority at side roads. 
Regarding off road cycle facilities, there needs to be a balance to ensure the cycle facility is safe and 
there is sufficient visibility for motorised vehicles crossing the facility, whilst taking into account 
continuity of the cycle route. As an example, the recently constructed shared pedestrian/cycle path 
delivered along the A23 as part of the Greater Redhill STP was not able to provide priority for cyclists 
at side roads by way of give way lines, but did include the construction of five raised tables at side 
roads to slow vehicles and warn drivers of the cycle facility, whilst providing a continuous level 
surface route for cyclists and pedestrians. 
9.   The strategy states "Surrey County Council is investing in the road network through 
Operation Horizon, a five year £100 million investment programme to improve the 
condition of Surrey’s roads. As part of this there is an opportunity to integrate cycling 
infrastructure into the programme, including securing additional investment to achieve 
quality routes in line with the principles outlined above. " Can you please provide any 
information where new cycle infrastructure has been included within the Operation 
Horizon maintenance programme in Reigate and Banstead? If not, can you provide any 
notes, minutes or e-mails detailing where this was considered and why this was not 
Works completed through Project Horizon to date in Reigate & Banstead have not introduced any 
additional cycle infrastructure however we are looking at opportunities across Surrey to integrate 
new cycle infrastructure on some Project Horizon schemes.  
10. The strategy includes a number of possible infrastructure solutions including:  "One 
approach that has been very successfully adopted in European countries such as the 
Netherlands is encouraging bicycles and cars to use different roads. One way of 
achieving this is by closing roads to through traffic where there is a suitable alternative 
route, particularly shortcuts through residential areas. This could be considered where 
there is local support"; "Some local authorities have introduced approaches at difficult 

junctions such as an advanced green light for cyclists or an all-cycle green phase (to 
avoid cars overtaking bicycles while going through the junction). This could be 
considered at appropriate locations, taking into account impact on traffic flows and 
safety for other users"; "One-way streets can present an obstacle to cycling where the 
alternative is a significantly longer, busier route. Segregated contra flow cycling may 
provide a solution, where it can be safely accommodated"; "Measures such as 
removing centre markings and reducing the width of the carriageway have been shown 
to slow down traffic without the need for enforcement, creating safer conditions for 
cycling without significantly impacting motorist journey times."  Could you please 
provide any information on if any of these measures have been implemented within 
Reigate and Banstead? If not can you provide any notes, minutes or e-mails detailing 
where they were considered and why this was not possible?
The types of measures listed in the Strategy are considered and will continue to be considered when 
funding becomes available to take forward new cycle infrastructure, however solutions need to be 
appropriate for the location, taking into account the impacts on all highway users and safety.  
There are examples where investment in different types of cycle infrastructure have been taken 
forward. For example through the Greater Redhill STP project, funding was used to improve the 
National Cycle Route (NCR) 21 between Earlswood and Cross Oak Lane. The NCR 21 utilises quieter 
(residential) roads, greenways, and segregated cycle track. Funding was also used to provide shared 
paths along Woodhatch Road and the A23.  
11.  The strategy details "We will also seek to ensure that those commissioning and 
designing schemes within Surrey County Council's Highways department are suitably 
trained in the latest best practice in cycle infrastructure design, and seek expert advice 
as appropriate." Can you please provide information on any outside agencies 
consulted or specialist training received by those who have been involved in the 
design and planning of cycle schemes within Reigate and Banstead?  

As part of the DfT funded strategic and technical support provided to assist the LCWIP work in 
Surrey, Sustrans hosted a training course in Sept 18 aimed at Highway Engineers and other relevant 
staff exploring key concepts around transport design, movement and place. This training was an 
adaptation of the Sustrans “Better by Design” course. Three members of staff from the Surrey 
Highways Design & Delivery team attended the course.  
In addition a series of training workshops have been provided by DfT to train staff in the use and 
application of the Propensity to Cycle Tool. The tool identifies desire lines for cycle routes and is 
helpful in developing schemes and preparing business cases which feature cycling. A number of staff 
from across the Strategic Transport group at Surrey have attended these training sessions. 
12. I understand the council has received support to create a LCWIP. Can you please 
provide any information held about the development of this plan? 
Surrey County Council is currently developing an LCWIP for Woking. DfT funding was awarded to the 
county council last year in the form of technical support (time/expertise) from WSP transport 
consultants, with additional strategic support from Living Streets and Sustrans. Utilising this funding 
support Surrey CC Officers are currently working through the LCWIP process to identify and prioritise 
cycle and walking routes in Woking, and develop a range of measures and interventions to put for 
forward for implementation. Delivery of these schemes will be subject to additional funding. 
As supporting background information I attach the Expression of Interest bid document that was 
submitted to the DfT in application for the award of the LCWIP funded support. 

In terms of the LCWIP process itself, this is a DfT led initiative to increase levels of cycling & walking. 
This follows a formalised stepped process to identify, prioritise, design, and promote new and 
improved cycle & walking infrastructure and network of routes. More detailed information on 
LCWIPs can be found here on the DfT website:
Current timeframes are for Surrey to have a completed LCWIP report for Woking by the end of this 
year. Subject to available funding and resource LCWIPs will then be developed for other areas of the 
Apologies for the length of the request but I had hoped that it would all be detailed within the 
public minutes of the board/forum.