This report was undertaken by the Department of Sociology of the University of York
Copy of R2G Final Draft University Report
Railway to Greenway:A Research Report
Laura Parkes, Samantha West,
Daryl Martin and Sarah Nettleton
Department of Sociology, University of York
Table of Contents
Summary of Key Findings 3
The National Cycle Network 5
The authors would like to thank Peter Huxford, Audrey Harmer, Egg Cameron, Sheridan Piggott, John Grimshaw, Seb and Lily for their advice, assistance and encouragement during the study and production of this report.
Summary of Key Findings
In Summer 2018, we asked users of the cycle path between Selby and York to tell us what they liked and disliked about the path, and also for their suggestions for developing the path in the future. This report summarises the findings of our research:
● Our respondents liked the path’s accessibility as a primarily car-free environment; its rural and peaceful qualities, and its sculptures, artwork and Solar System trail as points of interest whilst they used the space to keep fit.
● Our respondents particularly praised the Naburn Trust Hut, because of the work of the facilitator, as a space which was welcoming to all.
● Cycle users noted the lack of enough amenities along the route, such as bins, benches, signage and toilets, and called for better maintenance to tackle the issue of tree roots beneath the path.
● Suggestions for improvement in future included widening of the path to deal with high levels of use and making the entirety of the path car-free.
Implications of the research include the need for:
● More support by local tourism agencies to create greater awareness of the path, its artworks and sculptures, in order to increase use of the path by visitors and local communities alike.
● Increased support by local government to build up amenities along the path and extend existing cycle paths in both Selby and York.
● Greater working with national government in order to prioritise maintenance of this path, and the National Cycle Network more generally, in recognition of its wider environmental and social benefits.
1.1 The Railway to Greenway project is a Heritage Lottery Funded scheme, led by York Greenways volunteers. Railway to Greenway explores the history and current uses of the car-free route from Riccall to York, which was once part of the East Coast Main line that connected London and Edinburgh. It was closed to make way for the Selby coalfield in the 1980s. Sustrans owns a 6-mile section of the path, along which the Solar System Greenway is located. The wider path is owned by a variety of stakeholders and agencies (such as the Highways Agency), but Sustrans manage their section of the path as part of its National Cycle Network (NCN). The work of maintaining the path involves community groups, volunteer organisations (such as York Greenways), agencies and partners with a stake in the health and wellbeing of the local population.
1.2 The Railway to Greenway project includes a range of separate but related research strands and community schemes. The Sociology Department was involved as a partner in the original Heritage Lottery Fund application. In this, we committed to carrying out research with those who use the York Greenway route for regular recreational purposes. The research consisted of a number of walking interviews along the path, as well as an online survey sent to path users. The research was carried out in Summer 2018 by two students, Laura Parkes and Samantha West, supported by two members of the Sociology department, Daryl Martin and Sarah Nettleton.
1.3 By carrying out this research, we wished to know more about
a) how different groups use the Greenways;
b) why they use the route in the ways that they do, and
c) whether they have recommendations for how the routes can be developed for future users.
1.4 This document is a report of our research findings. The report begins with a short review of the history of the NCN, and the importance of the York to Selby path in its history, in Section 2. Section 3 describes our study methods. Section 4 offers a summary of our findings, from interviews we carried out along the path and an online survey we sent to users of the path. Section 5 offers a discussion of our findings. Section 6 offers our recommendations for future uses of the path.
The National Cycle Network
2.1 The York to Selby cycle path is part of the National Cycle Network (NCN), which was established in 1995 to link together a UK-wide network of car-free routes and quiet roads open to the public. The Network was established by Sustrans, an organisation which had been developing walking and cycling routes throughout the UK since 1977. The 1995 Network was a step change in connecting local projects with hundreds of further sections nationally. The NCN currently comprises more than 16,500 miles of traffic-free paths and on-road routes .
2.2 The NCN has been described as ‘a significant policy intervention aimed at creating a cycling culture’ in the UK . John Grimshaw, the founder of Sustrans, argued that in order to encourage higher rates of cycling, people need to become confident through cycling for leisure purposes initially, rather than work purposes . Grimshaw suggested that NCN paths should be thought of as ‘travelling landscapes’, valuable for the views they offered and artworks they hosted, rather than purely commuter routes . Sustrans has positioned the national initiative alongside local leisure networks and tourism strategies, as well as commuting patterns and wider environmental goals of biodiversity along the route.
2.3 The overarching principles of the Network have been summarised as follows:
1. Planning and design techniques should make best use of existing resources whilst having regard to minimal impact on the environment.
2. The network should generate positive economic and social impacts for the communities through which it passes.
3. The system should have the capability to decrease the number of car based recreational trips, hence reducing pollution and energy consumption .
2.4 Estimates of the NCN in its early years suggested that 50% of the network was on disused land from the railway, canal and forestry industries . The York to Selby route was largely built between 1985-1987 and includes the York to Riccall stretch that was once part of the East Coast Main Line between Edinburgh and London. Managing this path was instrumental in the development of Sustrans from its early roots in South-West England into a national body. Its history gives a sense of the complexity of negotiating access to land owned and maintained by multiple stakeholders, including local authorities, public bodies and private sector industries . In addition, it afforded an opportunity for Sustrans to carry out one of its largest landscaping schemes in its history, and to re-use discarded building materials from the railway along the route.
2.5 In the following section, we outline our methods and research design, before presenting our findings in greater depth in the main section of the report.
Fig. 1: Artwork on the cycle path, which is also part of the Trans Pennine Trail
3.1. We used three research techniques to collect data: walking interviews, observation of cycle path use and an online survey with community groups who use the cycle network. We outline our methodology more fully below.
3.2 Walking interviews involved the research team talking to respondents as we walked with them on the path. We recruited participants during fieldwork based at the Naburn Station ‘Trust Hut’ in July 2018. For our walking interviews, there were 16 participants – some interviews were with individuals, and some interviews were with two or three people walking together. Overall, we interviewed 9 males and 7 females in July who were all over 18 and identified as white British. In October 2018, we arranged a final in-depth interview with 1 previous participant, as well as the facilitator of the site, in order to discuss the findings.
3.3 Observation involved the research team spending time on the path and writing notes about how the path was used and detailed descriptions of the environment. The research team were based on the path for 7 days in July 2018. We observed the path at various times of the day, such as early morning, lunchtime and late afternoon. We also observed the path during weekdays and weekends, and at times when there were special events. This gave us the opportunity to observe young families’ use of the path, and people using the network for leisure purposes, as well as everyday commuting purposes.
3.4 Based on the themes and responses of this initial stage of research, we designed an online survey that ran for four weeks in August and September. We contacted 2 groups that use the pathway to distribute across their members and networks: York Bike Belles, a walking and cycling community group, and the York GoodGym network, a running and fitness community group. The survey had 32 responses in total. Participants were aged between 18 and 65, mixed gender and all identified as white British.
3.5 The research was approved by the ELMPS Ethics Committee at the University of York. Whilst acknowledging that our findings are based on the use of the path during Summer 2018, and thus statistical inferences cannot be made on the basis of our data, we report on findings from all of these sources in the next section.
4.1 Participant Demographics
4.1.1 This section describes the characteristics of participants in the interviews and the online survey. The gender of all participants is displayed in the pie chart, showing 27 (57%) were female and 20 (43%) were male. 8 females and 10 males completed interviews whilst (of those who volunteered their gender) 19 females and 10 males completed the survey. The age of all participants is shown in the bar chart, indicating most were aged between 36-45 years old. The interview participants tended to be older than survey particpants, as 50% of interviewees were aged over 66 years old. No one aged over 66 completed the survey and 50% of survey respondents were aged between 36-45. All were white British.
4.1.2 All participants were asked about their caring responsibilities. 25 respondents (58%) reported having some form of caring responsibility. The most common form for interview participants was caring for a spouse/partner, with 4 respondents selecting this. The most common caring responsibility for survey participants was for children, with 12 respondents selecting this.
4.1.3 Survey participants were additionally asked to provide some information on their employment status. Of those surveyed, 16 (67%) were employed full-time in a variety of professions including: accounting, engineering, managerial roles, printing, teaching, psychology, tutoring, consultancy, civil service, data administrating, education, speech and language therapy and investment.
4.2 How Participants use the Path
4.2.1 The most common way for participants to use this section of the pathway was to cycle, with 58% of users citing this. Walking was the second most popular use with 21% of respondents stating this, whilst running was third with 17%. The study took place along a section of the path within easy walking distance of Bishopthorpe and Naburn, during a period of very warm weather close to the school holiday period, and this may have affected the responses of the survey participants.
4.2.2 During the interviews, several participants described using the pathway for multiple or alternative uses. One user said, “It depends on the day. If I’m tired I’ll walk a bit, then I’ll cycle” (Interview, 4, Male ). Participants also reported that their use of the pathway changed throughout their life stages (see Box 1 below).
4.2.3 The survey participants were asked to specify for which purposes they use the pathway. The results are indicated in the bar chart below, showing leisure and exercise were the most common use. 19 survey participants visited the pathway with their spouse or partner, whilst 18 used it with their friends, and 14 with their children.
4.2.4 Data was also collected from the survey participants on how often they have used the cycle path in the last 12 months. This is displayed in the bar chart. Most survey participants were regular users of the pathway, with 17 respondents (53%) citing they have used it more than 10 times in the last 12 months.
4.2.5 Most interview participants were also regular users of the pathway, with 78% of interviewees describing visiting the pathway on multiple or regular occasions. Two interviews were conducted with first time users of the pathway. Of these participants, 2 were from Shipley and were walking on the pathway with a family member who lived in the York area and regularly used it to walk her dogs. The other 2 participants were cyclists who had found the pathway online. They were visiting from Cumbria specifically to cycle on the path. Whilst conducting the research we had brief conversations with, and took field notes from, people who were not willing to complete an interview. This included a family who had come from Harrogate to use the pathway and several groups of people holidaying in York, some of whom were camping nearby and cycling or walking on the pathway to explore the area.
4.3 Feelings of Safety
4.3.1 Survey participants were asked about how safe they felt when using the pathway. Twenty three survey respondents (72%) ‘always felt safe’ on the pathway, whilst the remaining 9 (28%) felt safe ‘most of the time’. There was no significant gender difference in how this question was answered, with roughly the same split in how female and male respondents answered.
4.3.2 Good Gym survey participants were also asked to specify whether their use of the pathway affected their feelings of safety. The pie charts below demonstrate 60% of Good Gym participants ‘always feel safe’ when cycling. 20% ‘always feel safe’ when walking, and 10% when running, demonstrating Good Gym users felt the safest when cycling on the
4.3.3 The interview participants generally felt safe when using the pathway, describing it as a “safe environment” for cycling (Interview, 1, Male). One cyclist viewed the pathway as safe because “it’s quite open, you can see what’s happening” (Interview, 4, Male).
4.3.4 Often, safety was viewed ambivalently as respondents described feeling safe most of the time, but felt this was compromised at times. The location of the pathway was one reason for this. One participant explained, “It is a bit remote in parts so I don’t go there by myself” (Survey York Belles, 9, Female), whilst another said, “I am aware of very isolated sections. Can feel a bit scary” (Survey York Belles, 3, Female). Certain areas along the pathway were considered less safe by participants. An interview participant stated, “On one hand it’s overgrown and it’s brilliant because of all the wildlife vegetation. On the other hand, you can have idiots hiding in there” (Interview, 1 Male).
4.3.5 Many participants made references to how the pathway can be “very dark at night” (Survey York Belles, 2, Female) which led them to feel less safe when using it. “In the dark when other cyclists refuse to dim their lights I feel unsafe” (Survey York Belles, 13, Female). One survey participant stated they “would avoid using it when it’s dark” (Survey Good Gym, 5, Female), whilst another said they felt safe “always, except after dark” (Survey Good Gym, 6, Female). This was viewed to make the pathway less appealing in winter, “because it’s darker isn’t it earlier, so you’re not going to use the path as much then” (Interview, 1, Female).
4.3.6 Other cyclists on the pathway were viewed as a safety issue. One participant said, “cyclists often go too fast and don’t take into account other path users” (Survey Good Gym, 10, Male) whilst another stated they “occasionally had incidents with careless/impatient cyclists” (Survey Good Gym, 2, Male). Feeling unsafe due to other cyclists was also reported during the interviews, as this participant describes, “They should be on the road, that’s what they do when they want to go fast and they don’t stop for anyone. Even other bikers, you know? I’ve had a couple of close shaves with them, so there is that, there is that safety element” (Interview, 8, Female).
Fig. 2: Art mural by York Bike Belles along the path.
4.4 Key themes and issues
4.4.1 This next section of the report will present six key themes derived from the interview and survey data, focused upon how and why participants use the pathway and which aspects they enjoy. The themes explore the ‘Accessibility’ of the pathway, the ‘Nature and Countryside’ surrounding it, the participants’ use of the pathway for their ‘Wellbeing’ and their ‘Health and Fitness’, the ‘Art, Sculptures and Planets’ along the pathway, and finally the ‘Trust Hut and Amenities’.
4.5.1 One key theme drawn from the research was the participants’ focus on the accessibility of the pathway. It was described often in terms of its easiness to use, by walkers and cyclists. Frequently, this ease of use was attributed to its flat, traffic free nature, which was considered positively by participants. The traffic free nature of the pathway was viewed to make it accessible for children practicing cycling. One survey participant described it as ideal for “Off-road cycling with a flat route, great for children who have just got off their bike stabilisers” (Survey York Belles, 14, Female).
4.5.2 The flat and traffic free aspects of the pathway were deemed to make it work well for people of all ages. Our participants reported visiting the pathway with different generations of family members, because of the car-free environment. One interview participant said that “young to old, it works” (Interview, 4, Male).
4.5.3 The pathway’s accessibility was also attributed to its locality in York and the way it connects surrounding areas together. Several participants noted the benefits of the path linking separate villages together whilst for other respondents a major advantage was the link between these villages to York. This connectivity was viewed positively as it allowed traffic free access into the city of York. “It’s nice as well because it links up with the Knavesmire, so you can actually walk into York” (Interview, 9, Female).
4.5.4 The participants raised some concerns about the accessibility of the pathway. Escrick was cited as an area where the pathway is quite difficult to get onto. One interviewee said, “a lot of people don’t cycle from Escrick into York because cycling on the A19 is just dangerous and to get down onto here takes a lot of effort”. She also described how it “puts you off getting on your bike just because the A19 is awful to cycle along” (Interview, 2, Female). One first time user viewed the section of pathway in Selby to have poor access. “But the Selby end was all a bit vague and sort of just disappeared into a housing, a new housing estate” (Interview, 6, Male). This finding was echoed by other participants (see box 3).
4.5.5 Several participants shared their thoughts on how accessibility could be improved. One survey participant said the pathway way should be “made wider to allow multiple users to pass with less conflict/proximity” (Survey York Belles, 16, Male). Another survey respondent suggested there could be “wider, smoother access points” (Survey Good Gym, 1, Male) to make getting onto the pathway easier.
4.6 Nature and Countryside
4.6.1 A second theme drawn from the data focused on the location of the pathway in the countryside, offering a pleasant environment that is close to nature. One participant explained that “that’s why I come every day because you’re just surrounded by beauty aren’t you?” (Interview, 11, Female).
4.6.2 The participants frequently spoke about enjoying viewing the surrounding countryside. Some participants noted how much they liked the views of the river from the bridge, whereas others noted the connection with farming in the area. A first-time user of the pathway described how she liked “to see what crops are growing” and watching “a combined harvester down there, through a gap in the trees” (Interview, 6, Female).
Fig. 3: View of the River Ouse, from the cycle path.
4.6.3 The interviews were predominantly conducted in July of 2018 when the weather was particularly hot and sunny. Several participants drew upon this to articulate why they enjoyed the trees and vegetation which surround sections of the pathway (see Box 5).
4.6.4 At times, the surrounding nature was viewed to hinder the surface of the track. Almost all participants spoke about the effect of tree roots and the damage they had caused to sections of pathway. The tree roots were viewed to be more problematic in certain sections of the track, as participants described how there are “a lot of bumpy parts at the Riccall end” (Survey York Belles, 8, Male). This was viewed to be especially troublesome for cyclists. “The roots are breaking the tarmac surface and some sections are very rough on a bike” (Survey York Belles, 16, Male).
Fig. 4: Cracks along the cycle path, near Riccall.
4.6.5 Despite this, the participants felt the pathway was fairly well maintained. There was a recognition that to resurface large sections of the pathway would very costly and the participants were grateful for what had been achieved already. “And, I think the thing is, they’re maintained by volunteers, aren’t they? It’s a charity, Sustrans and it’s hard to criticise them really because, you know, they do it for nothing” (Interview, 6, Female).
4.7.1 Many participants viewed the countryside surrounding the pathway to have a positive effect on their wellbeing, as walking on the path was such a peaceful experience. Cyclists also noted the benefits of the path as allowing them to feel more relaxed and less stressed.
4.7.2 The participants often compared the peaceful nature of the pathway to the fast pace of life elsewhere. They often viewed this to contrast with the city. One participant described the pathway as offering “a retreat from the urban” (Interview, 3, Male). One person who used to cycle and now walked on the pathway said, “I think for anyone, who just wants, even if they’re on their own and just wants to get away from everyday life, just to walk. It’s an ideal place” (Interview, 9, Male).
4.7.3 The pathway was viewed to offer a safe space for vulnerable people, particularly those who are lonely or homeless. This was attributed to the unique form of public space it offers, as the Trust Hut facilitator explains below (Box 7).
4.7.4 The path was also seen to provide a friendly and social environment. Several participants described using the pathway for interaction with friends, as a place for meeting up from different villages and parts of the city. The path allowed afforded opportunities for less deliberate and informal social encounters. As one user described, “when I come here there’s always be somebody cycling or with a dog to talk to you” (Interview, 3, Male).
4.8 Health and Fitness
4.8.1 Throughout the research, participants made frequent references to using the pathway after recovering from health complications (see Box 8). The Trust Hut facilitator confirmed this, reporting that “a number of people cycle twice a day up to Riccall and back because they’ve had cancer and they see this as their way of combating it and keeping themselves healthy and active”.
4.8.2 The Trust Hut facilitator also described increasingly seeing older people using the pathway to build up their fitness more generally. She spoke about the risks of this at times, particularly during the hot summer when several older runners collapsed or experienced medical problems. She suggested that the route could be better served by the provision of firsts aid resources and a defibrillator.
4.8.3 A number of participants detailed how they used the pathway for training. One described it as “nice and flat for training” (Survey Good Gym, 6, Female), whilst a cyclist spoke of using it to build upon his fitness to successfully complete the Trans Pennine Trail for charity (see box 8).
4.8.4 Those who were using the pathway to build up their fitness and for training purposes described the importance of having marked miles along the track. This was observed by several survey respondents and interviewees: “Mileages signs I think are good for those people who like to be competitive in themselves and go faster and do it quicker and things like that, or just to have a sense of achievement” (Interview, 10, Male).
4.9. Art, Sculptures and Planets
4.9.1 This theme focuses on the participants’ comments about the art, sculptures and planets on the pathway. Central to the NCN is its series of public artworks and site-specific sculptures to create what John Grimshaw describes as the “travelling landscape” (2018). One participant, when referencing the sculpture of a fisherman on top of the bridge said, “I find the metal man on top artistic and it’s just a nice route to go and then you know where you are with the orbital route bit” (Interview, 4, Male).
Fig. 5: The Fisherman sculpture, on the bridge along the path.
4.9.2 The Solar System Greenway, which also forms part of the Trans Pennine Trail, was a particularly popular feature, as participants enjoined learning more about each planet. The scale, size and distance of the planets were cited as useful for cyclists to track their distance. “It was really interesting and proportionally the distance you rode was relative to the distance between the planets” (Interview, 6, Male). One cyclist described it as a “self-sense of achievement, like you know we did all of the planets” (Interview, 10, Male).
4.9.3 Frequent references were made to how much children could learn from the Solar System Greenway. The planets were also said to encourage children to cycle, and to give them a sense of achievement as they become more confident cyclists (Box 10).
Figs. 6 and 7: Jupiter and Saturn!
4.10 Amenities and the Trust Hut
4.10.1 The participants often discussed the facilities they use on the pathway and their thoughts on what could be added or improved. Numerous references were made to a lack of bins along sections of the pathway, with participants expressing the view that more should be added. There was a shared view that more seating at different points along the pathway would also be beneficial. “Yeah there is the odd bench, but a few more benches might work” (Interview, 2, Female). This was particularly if benches were placed out of direct sunlight. “If we could say anything, maybe, some of the seats could be like planted in the shade (Interview, 9, Male).
Fig. 8: Honesty Café at Naburn Station.
4.10.2 The Trust Hut at Naburn was one facility which participants frequently discussed using when walking, running or cycling along the pathway. During one interview with three cyclists, they detailed why they regularly used the Trust Hut. They stated, “the most important thing of the pathway is the café” and described it as a “good stop off point”. This was because it provides a good place for cyclists to have a break and some refreshments, as well as shelter from the weather. “Yeah, and it’s nice if it’s really raining because you can just dry off a little” (Interview, 5, Male).
4.10.3 The Trust Hut was spoken of very positively by all participants, with several identifying its naturalness and non-commercial ethos (see Box 10). It was described as a “pretty cool spot” (Interview, 5, Male) and as “something a bit quirky” (Interview, 6, Male). One participant stated, “The Sustrans cafe with the stick insect is awesome!” (Survey York Belles, 10, Female). The service it provides was very valued by the participants who viewed it as an important feature of the pathway. “Huge respect to the trust hut folk – an institution!” (Survey Good Gym, 7, Male).
Fig. 9: Now-time at the Naburn Trust Hut.
5.1 From our research, we observed that the cycle path was a well-used resource, used frequently by members of the surrounding communities, Selby, York and, indeed, from further afield, bringing visitors from as far away as West Yorkshire, Cumbria and even Scotland to cycle there. So it is a path used by both communities and tourists alike.
5.2 Cycling was the foremost reason amongst the respondents we spoke to across all strands of the research, but equally clear was the variety of purposes that participants in the study used the path for – especially for walking and running.
5.2 We asked respondents to tell us what they liked and disliked about the path, and also for their suggestions for developing the path in the future: we will draw together their responses below.
5.3 In terms of what participants liked best about the path, many spoke positively about:
● its accessibility as a car-free environment;
● its links from larger urban areas, especially York, to rural environments;
● its peaceful nature of the path and relaxing qualities;
● its use as a source to help users to keep fit;
● its sculptures, artwork and solar system planets;
● the Naburn Trust Hut, because of the work of the facilitator, as a space which was welcoming to all.
5.4 In terms of what participants did not like about the path, the following comments were raised:
● the lack of enough amenities along the route, such as bins, benches, signage and toilets;
● safety was an issue along the path, because of its isolated location;
● tree roots growing beneath the path, causing significant bumps on the track.
5.5 In terms of participants’ suggestions for how the track could be improved in the future, the following was suggested:
● smoother access points to the path;
● widening of the path to deal with high levels of use;
● making the entire path completely car-free;
● improved signage, especially to help those using for fitness to measure their achievements.
6.1 We conclude our report with a series of recommendations that articulate the aspirations of the cycle path users who spoke with us and responded to our survey. As Sustrans own and is responsible for maintaining only part of the route, some of these recommendations will involve funding from outside agencies and local authorities and thus will be more difficult to achieve than others. In raising them, we recognise the value of the path as a vital community asset, and a significant connecting route for its nearby villages, towns and cities.
● Plans to create special events around the artworks and sculptures (e.g., by illuminating the Planets for special events on winter evenings) should be encouraged, in order to increase use of the path by surrounding communities.
● Wider awareness of the path as a community asset should be encouraged, to build on the efforts of local volunteer groups such as York Greenways, who in collaboration with York Bike Belles are involved in a new initiative, ‘Cycling Without Age’, to extend use of the path by older residents.
● Tourism agencies, especially in York, could do more to increase awareness of the path and actively promote it as an accessible resource for all who come to the city.
● Local authorities could do more to facilitate a wider network in the surrounding town of Selby and city of York, such as developing paths that would connect schools to each other and then out again to the wider network.
● There is scope for greater involvement of local authorities in building up amenities along the path (e.g. toilets, benches, bins and better first aid provision, such as defibrillators, etc.) to make it accessible for as many users as possible in the future. On this point, it is worth acknowledging that, in January 2019, Sustrans has undertaken work funded by the City Council to reduced Tree Root Damage near Bishopthorpe. Also, there are plans to build 7 junior football pitches straddling the path, which will involve improvements to the path in order provide pedestrian and cycle only access to the pitches.
● National agencies, such as the Highways Agency (who own and are responsible for sections of the path), need to work with the NCN to improve the quality of its routes. Practically, for this particular path, it would mean better maintenance in areas where tree roots make it difficult to cycle.
● The path is already close to physical capacity at busy times and will require long term planning to widen it at points to accommodate all those who wish to use it, for leisure or commuting purposes.