LTT 634

LTT634 front page_LTT634_p01 01/11/2013 07:48 Page 1

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

Variable speed limits for trunk roads?

POLICY | PLANNING | FINANCE | DEVELOPMENT

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

THE HIGHWAYS Agency is exploring whether features of managed motorways could be implemented on some of England’s busiest A roads.

The use of mandatory variable speed limits and the greater use of electronic signs and traffic

detection equipment will be among the features considered in feasibility studies on two dual carriageway trunk roads in the Midlands: the A500/A50 in the Stoke-on-Trent area and the A38 from the A5 Weeford junction, through Burton-on-Trent, to Toyota Island, the junction with the A50, just south of Derby.

An HA spokesman told LTT previous work had concluded that managed motorway features would offer little in the way of capacity gains on trunk roads but that there could be a case for implementing measures on the grounds of safety and resilience.

The studies will be undertaken

by a joint venture of consultants Parsons Brinckerhoff and Pell Frischmann. Each of the contracts is worth just under £20,000 and the work is due to be completed next March.

Managed motorways have just been renamed smart motorways on the instruction of transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin.

Revised values for time savings herald wider appraisal shake-up

APPRAISAL

by Andrew Forster

MAJOR CHANGES to how transport projects in England are appraised were announced this week by the DfT, along with promises of further significant reforms in the near future.

The most eye-catching of the changes introduced is a reduction in the value of business travel time savings. This follows persistent criticism of the DfT’s business case for high-speed rail, which assumed that business travellers don’t work on trains and that speeding up their journey would therefore convert unproductive time to productive time.

Values for car travellers have been cut by 20% and for rail passengers by 33%.

The Department is promising a new analytical strategy that will outline a major research programme to inform further changes to appraisal.

A transport modelling and appraisal panel is also to be set up early next year, bringing together the country’s top appraisal experts. The Department will convene a seminar of practitioners before the end of this year to kick-off the new work.

Accompanying this week’s announcements, the DfT has issued a restructured version of its WebTAG transport appraisal guidance in an effort to make it more user-friendly for practitioners. The DfT says the guidance “improves the clarity” of how wider economic impacts and regeneration impacts of transport schemes should be appraised.

A major area of research inter-

The DfT wants to better understand how transport investment, such as HS2, affects economic growth and patterns of land-use

est for the Department is the impact transport investment has on economic growth. A “comprehensive survey” of the latest theoretical and empirical evidence into the growth impacts of “nationally significant” transport infrastructure and programmes of expenditure is proposed.

Evaluations will also be conducted of the economic impacts of recently delivered or soon to be delivered transport schemes.

“A key issue to address will be evidence of the extent of causality between changes in transport connectivity and measures of economic impacts such as productivity and employment density,” says the DfT. It promises new guidance on estimating the impacts of transport on the location of economic activity.

It also wants to use land-use transport interaction (LUTI) models to better understand the spatial impacts of transport investment. “We will examine how estimation of land-use

changes can be considered in a way that is consistent with the transport models used in transport appraisals.”

The revamped WebTAG guidance also recommends practitioners apply sensitivity tests +/-25% to values of time in their project appraisals.

Further time savings research is promised. This DfT will consider the merits of changing the way business values of travel time are estimated. It plans to collect fresh revealed and stated preference evidence for both business and non-work travellers’ willingness to pay for journey time improvements.

The Department also proposes introducing differentiated values of time savings for different types of transport project. “There is compelling empirical evidence that willingness to pay for travel time savings varies with journey distance,” says the DfT. HS2 Ltd has just applied higher values as a sensitivity test in the latest economic case for the high-speed rail

investment (see page 4).

The Department promises new guidance on a risk-based approach to managing uncertainty in project appraisal. It will also revisit assumptions about market saturation, such as the demand cap applied to rail schemes, and how scheme benefits are extrapolated over the appraisal period.

A feasibility study will be commissioned into developing a Spatial Computable General Equilibrium approach to estimating the economic impacts of transport. The DfT says that, in theory, this offers the “most comprehensive framework for modelling these impacts” but that it is complex and has huge data requirements.

The Institute for Transport Studies at the University of Leeds has played a lead role in the research underpinning this week’s announcements. Professor Mark Wardman said: “I am very pleased that the Department has accepted many of our conclusions and recommendations including the commissioning of new studies to reassess the values used in transport appraisal and reduce the margin of uncertainty.” >> READ MORE?

HS2 appraisal

p4

Understanding and valuing the impacts of transport investment – latest DfT technical research and next steps in transport appraisal is available at http://tinyurl.com/kd3jct4

TransportXtra.com/ltt

PROVIDING INDEPENDENT NEWS & ANALYSIS SINCE 1989

12 Feature: London Gateway gets ready for business

3 Rail bodies to get road responsibilities 9 Consultants sought for HS2 cycleway

10 Network Rail’s new five-year plan

READER DRAW

LTT has three copies of columnist Paul Salveson’s new book, Railpolitik, to give away. Email books@landor.co.uk with ‘Railpolitik’ in the subject line by 22 November for a chance to win a copy.

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:32 Page 2

LTT634 page 3_LTT634_p03 01/11/2013 06:41 Page 3

Rail Regulator and Passenger Focus poised to oversee roads TransportXtra.com/ltt

ROADS

by Andrew Forster

THE OFFICE of Rail Regulation and rail passenger watchdog Passenger Focus will be given an oversight role of England’s strategic road network as part of plans to shake-up the way the Highways Agency network is managed.

The reforms will see the HA turned into a Government company with five-year road investment strategies (RIS’s) setting out a guaranteed funding allocation for the company plus an investment programme and performance specification.

The ORR will scrutinise how efficient the company is in delivering its activities and could also settle disputes between the Government and the new company over how much can be delivered with the available funding. Passenger Focus will survey the priorities and satisfaction levels of road users.

The reforms were published for consultation this week and build on the recommendations of Alan Cook’s review of the strategic road network in 2011. Cook concluded that the HA needed more independence from Government and more certainty about future funding. The latter reform is expected to drive down prices from the HA’s supply chain for maintenance activities on the network. The new company will be freed from civil service pay scales and so be better able to attract the best staff.

The five-year funding deal is copied from the rail industry. The initial RIS will be published next year and run for more than five years, to 2021. This will reflect the outcome

HA’s route-based strategies progress

of this year’s spending review, which has already fixed capital investment in the strategic road network (SRN) up to 2021/22, and included a commitment to fund the resurfacing of 80% of the SRN. The DfT plans to review the first RIS in 2017, partly to take on board findings of the route-based strategies currently underway across the HA network and due to be completed in 2015 (see below).

Giving the ORR a role is a cost-effective option, says the Department. “In the absence of any charges on [road] users or price regulation, creating a fully-fledged economic regulator for roads would be unnecessarily costly and would not generate sufficient benefits to justify the additional bureaucracy.”

The DfT has just commissioned research into the impacts of introducing an access charge for motorists using the strategic road network (LTT 20 Sep). But the Department insists there are no plans to implement charges. “The Government remains firmly committed not to introduce tolls on existing road capacity,” it says. “We will not be making any changes to existing law around tolls and road charging, and we are not giving the company any new powers to introduce its own tolls or other charges on road users.”

The ORR will monitor the new company’s cost and efficiency performance against

THE HIGHWAYS Agency’s route-based strategies are providing small, short-term contracts for transport consultants.

Parsons Brinckerhoff has won a £24,529 contract to provide project management support to the route-based strategy programme until the end of the year. It has also been awarded an £18,324 contract to provide support for phase one of the Kent corridor to M25 route-based strategy and a £19,598 contract to lead the write-up of phase one of the London Orbital and M23 Gatwick route-based strategy. PB is also working on the Solent to Midlands strategy.

Consultant CH2M Hill has won contracts for phase one work for strategies including the London to Wales corridor, Birmingham to Exeter, and South West Peninsula. The contracts are valued at £14,338, £14,930 and £14,809 respectively.

An HA spokesman said the majority of work was being done in-house. “We are keen to enhance our capabilities but we have been commissioning some work to support us. So far, the outsourced work has mainly been facilitation services for the stakeholder events.”

The strategies will identify packages of improvement works to address existing problems and cope with forecast demand. Stage one reports are due to be completed in February, with final reports to be published in 2015.

domestic and international comparators. “In the event of any substantive disagreement on the requirements of the RIS and the available funding, either the company or the Department could request a review by an independent expert, such as the ORR,” the DfT explains. It notes that the ORR would need to undergo some organisational change to perform its new role.

Passenger Focus will have to undergo “branding and organisational changes” to reflect its widened remit. It would survey users of the strategic road network, seeking views about network performance and priorities for investment. Bodies such as the AA, RAC and freight organisations would be given a formal role in guiding its activities.

The HA’s role in reviewing planning applications may change. The consultation suggests the company be given powers to respond to local planning proposals but that the Secretary of State should decide planning cases of “national importance”.

A Bill will be published next year.

Consultation closes on 20 December.

Consultation on transforming the Highways Agency into a Government-owned company is available at http://tinyurl.com/mz5sugd

News 3

Local Transport Today provides fortnightly coverage of the total urban and regional UK transport scene from the viewpoint of planners, policy makers, traffic engineers, analysts, investors and managers of resources involved.

Editorial Office Apollo House 359 Kennington Lane London SE11 5QY. Tel: 0845 270 7875 Fax: 0845 270 7961 Email: ed.ltt@landor.co.uk Publisher/Editorial Director Peter Stonham Editor Andrew Forster Contributing Writers John Helm, David Crawford Design & Production production@landor.co.uk Managing Director Rod Fletcher Client Partnership Manager Daniel Simpson Tel: 0845 270 7861 Advertising Office Tel: 0845 270 7861 Fax: 0845 270 7960 E-mail: ads.ltt@landor.co.uk Subscriptions Tel: 0845 270 7900 Fax: 0845 270 7920 E-mail: subs@landor.co.uk Subscribe on line TransportXtra.com/ltt Address for subscriptions HPC Publishing Drury Lane, St Leonards-on-Sea East Sussex TN38 9BJ Accounts Irina Cocks Tel: 0845 270 7854 Fax: 0845 270 7960 359 Kennington Lane London SE11 5QY LTT is available on subscription only.

The annual UK subscription rate is £140 including dispatch by first class post and supply of special supplements.

The overseas rate is £180 for Europe and £220 for the rest of the world.

Printed by Hastings Printing Company Ltd Drury Lane St Leonards-on-Sea East Sussex TN38 9BJ. ISSN 0962 6220. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission of the publisher.

LTT is published by Landor LINKS Ltd. © Landor L|I|N|K|S Ltd 2013

LTT634 pp4-5_LTT634_p04 and 5 01/11/2013 06:35 Page 4

4 News

Here’s a better way to spend £50bn, say HS2 critics

HIGH-SPEED RAIL

LOCAL AUTHORITIES opposed to HS2 have published an alternative strategy for spending £50bn, which they say would deliver economic growth to the whole country more quickly.

The strategy drawn up by the 51m group of 19 local authorities features: • £14bn to maintain and upgrade roads • £2bn to upgrade north-south rail connections • £10bn to roll-out ultrafast broadband and 4G mobile • £7bn of funding devolved to local enterprise partnerships • £17bn-£19.5bn for a Core Cities infrastructure fund (up to £3bn for Birmingham/West Midlands; £3bn for Bristol/Wales; £3bn for Leeds city region; £3bn for Liverpool/Manchester/North West; £3bn for Newcastle and North East; £2.5bn for Nottingham and East Midlands; and £2bn for Sheffield.)

The report suggests transport projects that the Core Cities infrastructure fund could deliver.

Martin Tett, leader of Buckinghamshire County Council and chair of the 51m alliance, said: “We are so confident of our programme that we challenge the DfT to ask the people by allowing the country to vote between HS2 and our alternatives at the time of next year’s European elections.”

The 51m alternative infrastructure investment strategy is available at http://tinyurl.com/lk588lh

West Mids propose £2bn HS2 package Local authority leaders in the West Midlands conurbation are calling on the Government to help fund a £2.1bn investment in local public transport schemes to support HS2. Measures include capacity improvements on the Snow Hill lines, the reintroduction of passenger services over the Camp Hill line in south Birmingham; Shrewsbury line electrification; Metro extensions from Wednesbury to Brierley Hill and through Birmingham’s Eastside district to the proposed HS2 station; and a “metro/rapid transit” link from the proposed HS2 station at the airport/NEC to Coventry.

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

Reduction in business travel time values fails to hit HS2 case HIGH-SPEED RAIL

by Andrew Forster

CUTTING VALUES of time for business travellers has had virtually no impact on the value for money of the Government’s highspeed rail plans, the project’s revised business case reveals.

The results of using the DfT’s new recommended values of business travel time savings are presented in a new economic case published this week. The appraisal takes on board a number of the National Audit Office’s criticisms about the previous business case published in August 2012.

The value of business travel time savings has been cut by almost a third, from £47.18 an hour to £31.96 (2010 prices). But commuting time values have increased from £6.46 to £6.81 and leisure travel time from £5.71 to £6.04.

Point estimate benefit:cost ratios (BCRs) for phase one and the whole Y network are now complemented with risk analysis presenting a distribution of BCRs based on different assumptions about economic growth, construction costs and values of time.

Other changes include the use of more up-to-date evidence on the relationship between economic growth and rail passenger demand (from version 5 of the Passenger Demand Forecasting Handbook); revised economic growth forecasts; and revised costs set out in the 2013 spending round.

HS2 Ltd says that although some of the changes made to the appraisal are significant in themselves, the overall impact of all the changes taken together has been minimal. The point estimate benefit:cost ratio for phase one (London-West Midlands) is 1.7:1 – the same as the August 2012 appraisal. The BCR for the full Y network (London-West Mid-

lands-Manchester and Leeds) has fallen from 2.5:1 last August to 2.3:1. These results are based on a 60-year appraisal (to 2093) and include an estimate for the wider economic impacts of the project.

For reasons that are unclear to LTT, a comparison of the 2012 and the new BCRs shows that, despite the significant reduction in the value of business travel time savings, the calculated benefits of HS2 to business travellers have actually gone up, from £12.6bn to £16.9bn for phase one and from £34.3bn to £40.5bn for the full Y network.

The Department says the risk analysis shows that “even if a raft of downside risks materialised, the full Y network will still deliver ‘medium’ value for money [a BCR of 1.5-2]”.

However, critics of the project are likely to look closely at the assumptions used in the risk analysis. The maximum construction cost used in the analysis for phase one is £21.2bn (2011 prices) – the current limit of the Treasury’s funding envelope for the project. Some critics believe the project will end up costing far more.

HS2 Ltd says that the assumptions used in the standard appraisal are actually conservative. It says a literature review by the Institute for Transport Studies at the University of Leeds suggests higher value of business travel time saving for high-speed rail services would be justified because people are willing to pay far more for time savings when making long journeys.

“This is not to say that business travellers do not try to make best use of their time whilst travelling, rather that businesses have a clear preference for not having their most productive staff stuck in transit,” it says.

HS2 Ltd has therefore tested the impact of a business value of time saving of £45 an hour (2010

prices), 40% higher than the DfT’s new recommended value of £32, and only just below the value of £47 that has been used in rail appraisal until now. “Under these assumptions, HS2 delivers a return that is greater than £2 for every £1 invested in virtually all the tested scenarios, even those with the most pessimistic economic growth, cost and demand forecasting assumptions,” says HS2 Ltd. The standard appraisal also assumes that passenger growth of 2.2% a year ceases in 2036, just three years after the Y-network is completed. HS2 Ltd says this demand cap is a “conservative approach”. Shifting the cap to 2040 or 2049 delivered BCRs in excess of 2:1 in 99% of tests.

HS2 Ltd says the appraisal is artificial because it assumes a fixed pattern of land use. “Given the transformational nature of the improvements that will be delivered by HS2 it seems inconceivable that there will be no changes in behaviour that will affect future patterns of land use,” it says. It cites extensively the report commissioned from KPMG on the economic impacts of the investment (LTT 20 Sep).

HS2 Ltd recommends further work to consider whether the standard approach to appraisal

can be “developed further to capture a fuller understanding of these impacts on economic geography”. It is also planning new research on whether high-speed rail could make the UK a more attractive place for multinationals to invest.

On fares, HS2 Ltd says it is impossible to know how train operators will respond to highspeed rail. If they reduce fares to compete with the high-speed services, revenues on HS2 could fall but these will be “broadly offset” by an increase in revenue on conventional rail. “The value for money of the scheme, which takes into account both effects, is therefore not significantly impacted by such behaviour,” says HS2 Ltd. A new report on alternatives to high-speed rail has also been published by the DfT. The Department says building HS2 is “the only option that allows us to leap ahead of demand and reshape the economic geography of the country”.

France shows the “extremes of success and unrealised opportunity”.

“Lille is a recognised success story whereas Gare de Creusot hasn’t lived up to its original vision,” it says. “Developing Gare de Creusot’s TGV station was expected to regenerate an old industrial area and create a centre of economic activity.”

It adds: “We want to understand why some stations in

Spain, such as Ciudad Real, experienced a wide range of urban development but others didn’t.”

The impacts of high-speed rail on land-use are also explored in a new report by the Independent Transport Commission.

“We believe that HSR has the potential to change the geography of the UK by creating a new mega-city region, bringing the Midlands and Manchester/York-

shire into the orbit of London,” says the report, written by a team led by John Worthington, a director of the Academy of Urbanism.

Business travel: the value of time saved by rail business travellers has been reduced by a third

The strategic case for HS2 is available at http://tinyurl.com/n2xvyya The economic case for HS2 is available at http://tinyurl.com/p2rlqjc

Task force seeks to learn HS2 lessons from abroad HIGH-SPEED RAIL

A GOVERNMENT taskforce set up to explore how high-speed rail stations can deliver local economic growth is looking at international examples of best and worst practice.

In an interim report, the taskforce led by Lord Deighton says HS2 stations on their own will not be enough to guarantee economic development and that

HS2 Growth taskforce: the challenge is available at http://tinyurl.com/mxw5f8z The spatial effects of HS2: capturing the opportunity is available at http://tinyurl.com/lxhemqw

LTT634 pp4-5_LTT634_p04 and 5 01/11/2013 06:35 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Labour could wreck Boroughs seek clarity on CCTV parking ban HS2, warns PM PARKING

HIGH-SPEED RAIL

THE HIGH-SPEED rail project will collapse unless the Labour Party gives its full backing to the plans, the Prime Minister has said.

“These multi-year, multi-parliament infrastructure projects, they can’t go ahead without allparty support – you won’t get the investment, you can’t have the consistency,” said David Cameron last week. He was responding to the uncertainty about whether the Labour Party will switch from supporting the project to opposing it.

The shadow chancellor Ed Balls is sceptical about the project. Speaking last week he said: “At this stage, I genuinely don’t think that the evidence is there, the case has been made, the National Audit Office has been very critical and the Government can’t answer the questions.

“In those circumstances, it would be irresponsible for me to say, ‘Regardless of the benefits, we are going to pull the plug’.

But it is also really irresponsible for me to say, ‘Well ok, whatever it costs and however obscure the benefits, we will go ahead anyway.’”

Dropping support for the project would allow Labour to propose reallocating billions of pounds of expenditure to other policy areas in the 2015 General Election battle.

But some in the party such as Manchester MP Graham Stringer are pressing the leadership to maintain their support for

Balls: an HS2 sceptic

the project, pointing out that HS2 was originally proposed by the last Labour Government.

Responding to the revised business case for the project published this week, Labour’s new shadow transport secretary Mary Creagh said: “Labour has always supported HS2 because we must address the capacity problems that mean thousands of commuters face cramped, miserable journeys into cities like Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds and London.

“However, we cannot give a Government that is mismanaging this, or any project, a blank cheque. Our message to David Cameron is clear: get a grip on this project get control of the budget and get it back on track.”

The CBI has given guarded support for the project. “This new business case goes some way towards helping people understand the need for HS2 and will also reverse some of the damage done by ministers’ previous obsession with journey times,” said chief policy director Katja Hall.

Only 5% of HS2 users will switch from car or air

HIGH-SPEED RAIL

ONLY 5% of high-speed rail passengers on the full Y network are expected to transfer from road or air, according to HS2 Ltd. In 2036, three years after the full Y network is expected to open, HS2 Ltd expects 69% of HS2 passengers to have switched from conventional rail services, 26% to be trips generated by the existence of the new line, 4% to be mode shift from car, and 1% to be mode shift from air.

In terms of numbers, HS2 Ltd expects the line to generate 20 million new long-distance trips a year.

The 225mph trains will dramatically cut journey times.

London to Birmingham will fall from 1hr 21 minutes to 49 minutes; London to Manchester from two hours eight minutes to one hour eight minutes; and London to Edinburgh from four hours 23 minutes to three hours and 38 minutes.

Construction of the LondonWest Midlands route could start in 2016/17, with the line opening in 2026. The extensions to Manchester and Leeds are anticipated to open in 2033.

The DfT says the LondonWest Midlands line will require 338 residential property demolitions, the spur to Manchester 139, and the spur to Leeds 139.

LONDON COUNCILS is seeking clarification about what types of CCTV parking enforcement ministers plan to ban.

London Councils says all the capital’s 33 boroughs use some form of CCTV for parking enforcement, with the exception of the Royal Borough of Greenwich and the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea.

Communities and local government secretary Eric Pickles and transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin announced plans to ban CCTV for on-street parking enforcement in September (LTT 4 Oct).

“Currently, officers do not know if the ban covers just mobile camera cars or fixed CCTV for parking as well,” London Councils transport officer Andrew Luck told councillors. He said it was also unclear if ministers wanted to ban CCTV enforcement of moving traffic offences such as

bus lanes and yellow box junction infringements.

“Some of the language used in the media has been unclear but it should be clear that any ban on the use of CCTV for bus lane and moving traffic contraventions would render these unenforceable, especially as the police now have no enforcement powers in these areas,” said Luck.

London Councils is gathering information about the effectiveness of CCTV enforcement from boroughs and will send it to the Government.

Luck also voiced concern that the Government may bring forward plans forcing councils to compensate motorists if the parking adjudicator cancels their penalty charge notice on appeal.

Luck said this would incentivise motorists to lodge appeals against PCNs, adding to the administrative costs of both boroughs and PATAS, the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service.

Improve parking policies, MPs urge councils PARKING

MPs WANT the DfT to instruct councils to offer motorists fiveminutes of grace before they are issued with a penalty charge notice for overstaying in a parking bay.

The House of Commons transport committee praises Cambridgeshire County Council for already deploying the policy and says the DfT should recommend it to all councils through statutory guidance.

The recommendation features in a new report on parking enforcement in England. Committee chair Louise Ellman said there was a “deep-rooted” public perception that parking enforcement was used as a cash cow by councils. But she pointed out that it was illegal for local authorities to use parking charges or fines specifically to raise revenues.

Many local authorities do, nevertheless, make a surplus. Its estimated size varies, with the Local Government Association and RAC Foundation reporting the surplus for councils in England in 2011/12 of £411m and £565m respectively.

The committee says councils making surpluses should explain why they do so to the public. London Councils told

the committee that surpluses were generated because of the pressure of parking demand, explaining: “Boroughs are advised to set parking charges so as to secure about 85% occupancy of spaces, and where demand is particularly high this results in charges of up to £6 per hour.”

The committee gives mixed messages on the Government’s plan to ban CCTV enforcement of parking (LTT 4 Oct). It “welcomes” the plans to consult on the idea but says it recognises that camera enforcement can be helpful for enforcing in areas where using a civil enforcement officer is impractical.

The committee says the Government should freeze the current maximum penalty charge notice for parking, noting that the current £130 maximum in London is much higher than the fine for speeding.

The committee suggests councils offer a 25% PCN discount to motorists who pay up within seven days of losing a PCN appeal.

Local authority parking enforcement is available at http://tinyurl.com/levy48l

News 5

In Brief

Scots electrification timetable published Transport Scotland has outlined delivery dates for the electrification of lines in central Scotland. The dates, reported this week by Strathclyde Passenger Transport, are: May 2014: Glasgow-Cumbernauld; summer 2014: Whifflet; December 2016: Edinburgh to Glasgow via Falkirk High; December 2018: Dunblane, Stirling and Alloa; and 2019: Glasgow to Edinburgh via Shotts.

Edinburgh’s streets free of tram works Edinburgh’s streets have become free of tram construction works for the first time in six years as the opening date of the line nears.

The £776m line linking Edinburgh Airport with the city centre is scheduled to open next May.

LSTF to boost Wilts rail services Rail service frequencies between Swindon and Westbury in Wiltshire are to be enhanced with funding from the DfT’s Local Sustainable Transport Fund. First Great Western plans to launch extra services in December (and no later than next March) with Wiltshire Council providing financial support for the first three years using a portion of its LSTF allocation. The council will pay £595,000 in 2013/14, £628,000 in 2014/15 and nothing in 2015/16 (LSTF expires in March 2015). Wiltshire hopes the DfT will subsequently incorporate and fund the services in the next Great Western franchise. Wiltshire’s principal transport planner Robert Murphy said the services were likely to disrupt plans of GO-OP, an open access operator, for a two-hourly Westbury to Birmingham Moor Street service because of capacity constraints on the single track section of the Swindon-Westbury line. He said GO-OP had made a formal objection about FGW’s enhanced service to Network Rail in September.

DfT evaluates local major schemes The DfT is commissioning research into the effects of local transport major schemes delivered since 2006. As a minimum, the DfT wants the research to answer four questions: are schemes delivered on time (if not, why not); are schemes delivered on budget (if not, why not); how well do schemes deliver their stated objectives; and what are the main benefits of major schemes and how does this differ by scheme context and type? Consultants are about to be appointed and will submit their final report before Christmas.

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:32 Page 6

LTT634 page 7_LTT634_p07 01/11/2013 05:43 Page 7

TransportXtra.com/ltt

TfGM probes feasibility of using Earnback for Trafford Metrolink LIGHT RAIL

TRANSPORT FOR Greater Manchester appears to be unsure if a £350m extension of the Metrolink to the Trafford Centre shopping complex can be delivered using the conurbation’s pioneering Earnback funding agreement with Government.

TfGM wants to deliver the extension by 2019 and is planning to submit a Transport and Works Act Order for the line to the DfT next summer.

But there is uncertainty about the scheme’s delivery because of TfGM’s plan to use Earnback to fund the extension.

Under Earnback the conurba-

tion authorities will receive capital grant to invest in infrastructure if they satisfy economic performance criteria agreed with the Government.

The model operates in a series of five-year control periods running for 30 years. It will be worth a maximum of £45m in the first five years (ending 2019/20) and thereafter up to £30m (nominal) a year until 2030 and £40m (nominal) thereafter.

TfGM chief executive Jon Lamonte and Manchester City Council chief executive Sir Howard Bernstein told the Greater Manchester Combined Authority last week: “There will be discussions with the Govern-

ment on the capacity of the Earnback formula to absorb the funding of this project, and over what timescale, over the coming months.” These, they said, would determine the “timing of any commitment to proceed with the full capital investment of the Trafford Park extension”.

In the meantime, TfGM plans to immediately procure the ten light rail vehicles needed to run the Trafford service with the vehicles being used in the shortterm to ease congestion on the existing network. TfGM believes that procuring the vehicles now will save £5m compared to ordering the vehicles at a later date.

In all, TfGM plans to spend £36.9m on the vehicles, concluding the scheme business case, and making the TWA Order application for the extension.

TfGM has also revealed plans for a phased construction and opening of the £165m Metrolink second city crossing. The first phase will create a spur from Victoria to Exchange Square and should be completed by June 2015. This will enable a sixminute service frequency from Shaw and Crompton (on the Rochdale line) to the city centre.

The crossing is anticipated to be completed in winter 2016/17.

Metrolink contractor MPT will deliver the works.

Multi £billion plan for SE Wales Metro Cambs sets

PUBLIC TRANSPORT

AMBITIOUS PLANS to develop the public transport system in South East Wales have been presented in a report commissioned by the Welsh Government.

Key features of the South East Metro proposal include high-frequency electric local rail services, more stations, new fixed track rail or tram routes, tram-train vehicles, and bus rapid transit.

The plans have been prepared by a team led by Cardiff-born businessman Mark Barry who runs consultancy MGBarryConsulting. Other team members were Capita, Steer Davies Gleave, Jones Lang LaSalle, and Powell Dobson Urbanists.

Welsh transport minister Edwina Hart has announced that a working group will be set up to examine how the package, which has an estimated cost of £1.97bn, can be implemented. As a first step the Welsh Government last month announced £62m to take forward transport improvements in the area.

The report recommends a new fixed track system – possibly tram-train – from Cardiff Bay via the city centre to the north-west of the city and on to Llantrisant and Talbot Green. Tram-trains are suggested for operation between Cardiff Bay and the city centre, replacing trains on the Queen Street to Cardiff Bay service.

Cardiff’s ‘City Line’ and the Coryton branch could also be candidates for tram-train technology, say the consultants.

They suggest running high-frequency rail services between

Severn Tunnel Junction and Cardiff (via Newport) on the relief lines of the Great Western Main Line. A west-east bus rapid transit corridor is proposed between Pontypridd and Pontypool.

The £1.97bn price tag excludes commitments such as electrification of the Valley Lines.

The executive summary of the report outlines possible sources of funding, saying EU Cohesion funding could provide a “major component”. More funding ideas are explored in a report that has yet to be made public.

The report recommends setting up a Metro board and a Metro Delivery Authority. Edwina Hart said an announcement on governance arrangements for the wider South East Wales City Region agenda would be made in the “near future”.

A Cardiff capital region metro: executive summary is available at http://tinyurl.com/l4jsu4q

MPs voice Thameslink delivery fears

RAIL

MPs HAVE voiced concern about the DfT’s handling of the Thameslink project to deliver more north-south rail capacity through the capital.

Thameslink comprises £3.6bn (2006 prices) of new infrastructure plus a private finance initiative deal to supply new trains with a capital cost of £1.6bn.

The project is due to be completed in 2018 but the House of Commons public accounts com-

mittee expresses doubts about the timetable, noting that the order for rolling stock was placed with Siemens over three years late.

The committee also believes the DfT’s project team is stretched. The team comprises five staff whose leader is about to move into the HS2 team.

More generally, the MPs state: “We question whether the Department has enough people with strong project management and commercial skills necessary to take forward its very ambitious

portfolio of big projects.”

The committee is also concerned that the DfT is ill-prepared to award the new Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise as a management contract (LTT 4 Oct). The Department has never let a management contract before.

Progress in delivering the Thameslink programme is available at http://tinyurl.com/p9qtwfs

busway inquiry questions PROCUREMENT

CAMBRIDGESHIRE COUNTY Council is hoping the DfT will jointly-fund the review of the council’s guided busway contract because of the lessons it could provide other councils.

The Cambridgeshire guided busway opened two-and-a-half years late in August 2011 and cost about £117.7m – about £34m more than the target price of £84m. The dispute between the council and contractor BAM Nuttall about who was to blame for problems was finally resolved this summer when BAM repaid the council £33m (LTT 6 Sep).

BAM Nuttall was appointed in 2006 on a design and build target price contract whereby the contractor bids a target price for the work and the client then pays the actual cost of works plus an agreed fee. At the end of the contract the difference between the final cost plus fee and the target price is shared using a pain/gain mechanism.

The £20,000 review will consider the appropriateness of the contract. Other questions include: • whether suitable mechanisms were put in place between client, project manager (Atkins) and contractor to oversee the contract • if other public sector bodies have used this form of contract and experienced similar problems • if the form of contract created incentives for the contractor to increase spend and delay • what alternative forms of contract could have been used

News 7

In Brief

DfT approves two road improvements The DfT has given final approval to local major transport schemes in Birmingham and Leeds. The £11.7m improvement to the A452 Chester Road in Birmingham includes widening and junction improvements. The Department is contributing £8.3m. Leeds City Council will receive £16m towards the £25m cost of repairing the Woodhouse tunnel on the city’s inner ring road. The Leeds works will start immediately, with completion due in March 2016.

£115m boost for roads in NI The Northern Ireland Executive has announced a £115m boost for road improvements and street lighting, with £40m this year and £75m in 2014/15. Projects to benefit include the A31 Magherafelt bypass, the A8 Belfast to Larne improvements, and a fourmile dualling of the A26 Frosses road at Glarryford.

Walsall and HA in talks on M6 funding Walsall Council and the Highways Agency are exploring jointly funding a £40m project to increase capacity at junction 10 of the M6. Works could include new four-lane bridges over the motorway, larger circulatory areas, and improvements to local authority junction approach roads. Matt Crowton, Walsall’s transportation strategy & policy manager, said the HA had indicated it may provide about £10m for the project, which could be procured through the HA’s supply chain. Walsall has yet to identify how the rest of the funds could be raised.

Name change for South Hants body The Transport for South Hampshire and Isle of Wight joint committee is to be renamed Solent Transport and is to incorporate the functions of the Solent local transport body.

Wiltshire boosts road maintenance Wiltshire Council is planning a £52m increase in road maintenance spending over the next six years to tackle a backlog of repairs. The council currently receives £12.3m a year from the DfT for road maintenance but councillors last week approved plans to spend £21m a year for six years from 2014/15. Wiltshire proposes to cover the additional costs with borrowing. Consultants Atkins and WDM have helped develop the council’s proposals.

LTT634 page 8_LTT634_p08 01/11/2013 05:56 Page 8

8 News

In Brief

MPs launch local transport inquiry The House of Commons transport committee is inviting evidence for its new inquiry into local decision-making on transport expenditure. Committee chair Louise Ellman said: “We want to investigate the complex network of bodies involved in local transport decisions and find out how they work together both within and across local authority boundaries.” Issues the committee is seeking evidence on include: the capacity of local bodies to assess, prioritise and deliver schemes; arrangements for cross-boundary schemes; the role of the private sector; and the impact of the Single Local Growth Fund. The deadline for written submissions is 13 December.

Review the Climate Change Act – FT The Financial Times has called on the Government to amend the Climate Change Act, saying the requirement to cut carbon dioxide emissions by 80% by 2050 against 1990 levels is driving up energy prices and could wreck Britain’s economic recovery. “Politicians portray these policies as the inevitable consequence of legally binding commitments,” said the newspaper’s comment column. “Such wilful naivety gives an unintended meaning to Prime Minister David Cameron’s pledge to lead the greenest government ever. If the UK’s environmental policy is defensible, it should be defended. If not, the Government should repeal or renegotiate the laws and treaties in which these commitments are enshrined.”

York launches journey planner The City of York Council has launched its own journey planner, offering journey times and directions by different modes as well as estimates of calorie consumption and carbon dioxide emissions.

The journey planner can offer advice on trips to/from anywhere in the UK to destinations within 15 miles of York. It was developed by consultant Steer Davies Gleave, with funding from the DfT’s Local Sustainable Transport Fund. Visit http://www.itravelyork.info/planner/

Boost for East Lancs rail services Network Rail has begun building a new railway curve and junction to facilitate better services in east Lancashire. The Todmorden West Curve, funded by the Government’s Regional Growth Fund, will allow direct services to operate between Manchester, Todmorden, Burnley and Blackburn.

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

TfL’s claim of speed camera casualty benefits ‘nonsensical’ ROAD SAFETY

by Andrew Forster

TRANSPORT FOR London has been criticised for claiming that speed cameras are ten times more effective at reducing killed and serious injuries than speed indicator devices (SID).

The claim appears in a paper considered at October’s finance and policy committee meeting.

“Safety cameras have ten times the impact of speed indicator devices in reducing killed and serious injuries (KSIs) by improving compliance with safe speed limits,” Leon Daniels, TfL’s managing director of surface transport, told the committee. He added: “The camera network is proven to be the most effective tool to manage down speedrelated KSIs.” The calculation is based on comparing the actual decline in casualties recorded at speed camera sites with an estimate of the decline that could be expected at SIDs based on a speed-casualty relationship.

Crucially, the calculation assumes that the 57% reduction in KSIs at fixed speed camera sites is entirely attributable to the cameras. This ignores factors such as regression to the mean (RTM), which is generally accepted as playing a major part in explaining observed casualty declines at camera sites if cameras were installed on the basis of a site’s accident record (as they are in London).

The UK Statistics Authority recently ruled that the Scottish Government’s failure to acknowledge factors such as RTM in its reporting of casualty trends at camera sites meant its data were unfit to be classified as official statistics (LTT 12 Jul). The Advertising Standards Authority’s independent reviewer has also concluded that publicity suggesting all the decline is due to cameras is “substantially flawed” (LTT 18 Oct).

Malcolm Heymer, traffic management adviser to the Alliance of British Drivers, said TfL’s report was “nonsensical”. On the failure

to acknowledge the influence of factors such as RTM, he said: “That such claims continue to be made, despite rulings by the ASA and statistical authorities that they are misleading, shows how shameless the camera fanatics are.”

Heymer also criticised TfL’s method for estimating that SIDs cut casualties by 5.6%. This was calculated using two TRL reports.

One, published in 2008, The effectiveness of speed indicator devices on reducing vehicle speeds in London, found that vehicle speeds at SID sites fell by an average of 1.4mph. The other, published in 2000, The effects of drivers’ speed on the frequency of road accidents, concluded that a 1mph fall in speed on urban medium speed roads (mean speed 25-35mph) would lead to a 4%. fall in collisions. A 1.4mph reduction would therefore reduce collisions by 5.6%.

Heymer said the figure was “purely hypothetical” and said TRL’s 2000 report had been “comprehensively discredited by

the ABD and others”.

TfL is making a major investment in digital fixed spot speed cameras to replace obsolete wet film cameras. A report will be taken to the committee this month seeking approval for average speed cameras on some roads.

Addressing the committee’s concerns about the public acceptability of average speed cameras, Daniels said they allowed drivers to vary their speed along a route.

“This diminishes the likelihood of their being prosecuted by a temporary and/or marginal increase in speed above the limit.”

He said an 18-month before and after study of average speed cameras installed on the A13 in East London in 2010 had found total KSIs fell from 17 to seven and DfT analysis of 15 average speed camera systems installed between 2000 and 2008 found an average KSI reduction of 73%.

But Heymer said the ASA had accepted that this latter figure was not entirely due to the cameras in a ruling earlier this year.

given a high priority within Europe. Furthermore, Snelling voiced fears that these amendments could become bogged down in a wider discussion about amending the Directive to allow longer and heavier lorries on Europe’s roads. Environmental groups and the rail freight lobby are resisting such measures.

“If the Brussels-based institutions do not prioritise this initiative, or tie it in with other measures so that its introduction is delayed, a huge opportunity to radically improve safety on our roads in the most efficient fashion will be missed,” said Snelling.

“The danger is everything is lumped together and no progress is made on anything.”

The EU work is separate from the Transport for London working group to design construction lorries with high visibility cabs (LTT 18 Oct). But Snelling said this work was complicated by European emission requirements for trucks. Manufacturers have increased the size of radiators to comply with the Euro VI emission standards, which come into force from January. This conflicted with the desire to design a truck in which the driver had a low riding position, he said.

ROAD SAFETY

in the driver’s blind spot.

Hassell says the unbordered blue strips of carriageway on parts of the cycle superhighways may lull cyclists into a false sense of security that they have priority.

Furthermore, cyclists may choose to cycle on the blue strips even if they are not the safest position, “particularly when going round a roundabout”.

Hassell also urges the mayor to do more to educate cyclists and motorists about safe riding techniques. She says cyclists should be told that it is sometimes safer to ride in the middle of a lane rather than the left-hand side, and they should be warned about the dangers of overtaking on the inside of vehicular traffic on the approach to junctions.

Innovative solutions are needed to reduce the incidence of collisions between cyclists and large vehicles, she adds. She highlights the ‘Cycle Alert’ equipment recently installed on some buses in York as one possible measure (LTT 04 Oct).

The mayor has to respond to the coroner’s report by 16 December, outlining what action he has taken or proposes to take, or explaining why no action is proposed.

Prioritise lorry safety rule Improve cyclist safety, changes, FTA tells EU coroner urges Mayor

ROAD SAFETY

PLANS TO make lorry designs safer and more aerodynamic risk becoming bogged down in the EU, the Freight Transport Association has warned.

A European Commission working group met last week to discuss proposals to amend EU Directive 96/53, which covers the weights and dimensions of lorries.

The group includes representatives of the UK Government, Transport for London and the Freight Transport Association.

Among the items on the agenda are revisions to the Directive to make lorries safer and more aerodynamic.

Chris Snelling, the FTA’s head of urban logistics and regional policy, told LTT safety design changes could include giving a curved front to lorries so that, in the event of a collision with a vulnerable road user, the person would be more likely deflected to one side rather than pushed underneath the vehicle. He said such a design would extend the length of a vehicle by a “few centimetres”, hence the need to amend the Directive.

The FTA is concerned changes to the Directive are not being

Bow roundabout: fatality

A CORONER has urged Transport for London to review the use of unbordered blue strips of carriageway to mark out sections of the capital’s Cycle Superhighways.

Coroner Mary Hassell makes the recommendation in a report sent to London’s mayor, Boris Johnson, about the deaths of two cyclists on Cycle Superhighway 2 in east London. One death occurred on Bow roundabout when a tipper truck turned left across the path of the cyclist. The other occurred on Whitechapel High Street when a cyclist joined the carriageway from the pavement just in front of a lorry, and

LTT634 page 9_LTT634_p09 01/11/2013 05:38 Page 9

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Consultants invited to design a cycleway to parallel HS2 route

CYCLING

by Andrew Forster

THE DFT is seeking consultants to develop plans for a cycleway along the proposed High Speed 2 railway from London all the way to the West Midlands, Manchester and Leeds.

The £70,000-£90,000 feasibility study will examine “how we might create a cycleway, and link or upgrade existing cycleways and footpaths, on a route that broadly follows the proposed HS2 corridor,” explains the Department.

The cycleway – already dubbed Slow Speed 2 – should be within three miles of the railway, says the DfT, and should provide “modern and international standard cycling infrastructure, which could serve both leisure and utility

A pleasant ride beside HS2?

cyclists and walkers, linking people to local stations, urban centres, countryside and tourist attractions close to the HS2 route”.

The route won’t be included in the Hybrid Bill for constructing the railway.

Capital’s bike hire use down 14% year-on-year CYCLING

THE NUMBER of cycle hires made in London this year is running about 14% below levels made in 2012, according to Transport for London statistics.

Total hires of the Barclayssponsored bikes in 2012 had reached 7,422,080 by the end of September. But total hires to the end of September 2013 have only reached 6,404,255, a fall of 14%.

London Assembly green member Darren Johnson has voiced particular alarm at September’s statistics showing hires were 32% below the corresponding month of 2012: 692,762 versus 1,015,145. He suggested

the drop could be due to TfL increasing access fees in January from £1 to £2 a day, £5 to £10 a week, and £45 to £95 for annual.

But a TfL spokesman played down the impact of the higher charges. Focusing on the September comparison, he said this September had been colder and wetter, and last year’s figures had been boosted by the Paralympic Games taking place in the capital.

Furthermore, the bike hire was largely out of action for a day in September this year while the system’s software was upgraded.

The software upgrade will allow TfL to launch corporate and group accounts for the cycle hire scheme next year.

Mayor selects borough to pilot electric bike hire

CYCLING

LONDON MAYOR Boris Johnson has identified a hilly part of North London as the location to trial an electric bike hire scheme.

The scheme will be focused on the Muswell Hill in the London Borough of Haringey. It will operate in a similar way to the Barclays cycle hire scheme though the bikes will not be interchangeable between the two.

People will also be able to hire

electric bikes for a day or a week.

TfL and Haringey are undertaking a feasibility study to identify which corridors the scheme should operate on, where the docking stations should be located, and what type of electric bike technology should be used.

TfL will fund the project but commercial sponsorship will also be sought.

The mayor has also announced plans for a new network of ‘Quietway’ cycle routes across the borough. More details will follow.

The deadline for expressions of interest in the seven-month contract is 4 November. The selected consultant will be expected to deliver a final report on the London-West Midlands route by April next year and the West Midlands to Leeds and Manchester routes by June.

The DfT also wants the consultant to train a small team of officials in how to map and promote walking and cycling routes in rural areas.

“We are considering a pilot for how a small team of DfT staff might be provided with skills training in how to map existing walking and cycling networks in smaller rural communities,” the DfT explains.

“This would include how to produce engaging illustrations and dialogue for the creation of improvements to networks.”

The tender notice adds: “Please provide a priced option to train a pilot team of up to five DfT staff in the mapping of possible cycle routes, and on community dialogue, and how they might gain expertise in costing the creation of off-road infrastructure, and the marginal cost of running high quality cycle lanes alongside or on maintenance tracks used for major rail or highway infrastructure.”

It adds: “This could inform thinking about the costs and benefits of cycle-proofing new road, rail infrastructure or other public transport infrastructure such as guided busways.”

DfT civil servant Shane Snow is leading the Department’s work on both the HS2 cycleway and on cycle-proofing roads.

CYCLING

maintenance of the scheme for a period of six years with a potential three-year extension.

The city council is also to seek a sponsor for the scheme, initially for three years, but with potential to be extended to six or nine years.

York is inviting tenders for the supply and operation of a proposed citywide scheme (LTT 26 Jul). The deadline for bids is 25 November.

Belfast and York seek bike hire providers BELFAST AND York city councils are inviting tenders for public bike hire schemes.

Belfast wants a scheme in the city centre launched by April 2015, with initially about 300 bikes available from approximately 30 docking stations. The contract covers the design, supply of bikes, docking stations and terminals, plus the operation and

TfL seeks to strengthen modelling capabilities

MODELLING

TRANSPORT FOR London wants to make more use of location data supplied by technologies such as mobile phones and GPS devices in its transport modelling.

The data could be used to build matrices of travel demand and estimate travel times and speeds for different routes.

TfL also wants to improve its accessibility planning capability.

Public transport accessibility is currently measured using PTALs – public transport accessibility levels. Journey times are measured using the CAPITAL accessibility model.

TfL says it wants to enhance these methods and also develop “new methodologies to better

assess accessibility in London by all modes (walk, cycle, public transport, private vehicle) and accommodate for increased computer functionality and capacity”.

“We are also keen to update our accessibility models to reflect access experienced by the mobility impaired and other user groups (the elderly, parents with children etc),” it explains.

The proposals are mentioned in a tender notice for TfL’s new professional services framework for transport planning. The framework will run for two years and could be extended for a further two. There are 19 separate lots.

The deadline for submissions is 19 November.

News 9

In Brief

Birmingham unveils 20mph limit plan Birmingham City Council is consulting on introducing 20mph speed limits across the city’s residential streets and on busy high streets. Implementation of the signed-only limits would take five to seven years to complete, says the council, with areas prioritised on the basis of their accident record. The council suggests 20mph limits could be appropriate on high streets such as the A435 in King’s Heath, the Alum Rock Road, and the A41 Soho Road.

The council estimates that the cost of the programme would be about £7m, of which £800,000 has been secured from the city’s successful bid to the DfT’s Cycle City Ambition Grant. Consultation closes on 29 November.

20mph limit for West Mids town centre Councillors in Sandwell have approved plans to introduce an area-wide 20mph limit in West Bromwich town centre. Sandwell’s highways services manager, Robin Weare, said the lower limit would improve road safety in an area with high levels of casualties, complement urban realm improvements, and encourage walking and cycling.

HSE fines airport for pedestrian crossing The Health and Safety Executive has ordered Luton Airport and a design subcontractor to pay £372,695 in fines and costs for safety failings identified during an investigation into a fatal accident on a pedestrian crossing. The HSE found that the crossing, designed by C-T Aviation Solutions Ltd, was badly positioned and did not conform to regulations that apply to public roads. TRL advised the HSE in its investigation.

Scots fatalities fall but NI fatalities rise Road accident fatalities in Scotland fell 6% to 174 last year, according to figures published by the Scottish Government. Car occupant fatalities dropped from 89 to 73 and motorcycle fatalities from 33 to 21 but pedestrian fatalities rose from 43 to 57 and cyclist fatalities rose from seven to nine.

The number of serious injuries recorded by the police rose for car occupants, motorcyclists and cyclists but fell for pedestrians.

Meanwhile, Northern Ireland’s environment minister Mark Durkan this week voiced concern about rising road accident fatalities in Northern Ireland, with 45 recorded so far this year compared with 34 at the same point last year.

Reported road casualties Scotland 2012 is available at http://tinyurl.com/p5xbkbs

LTT634 page 10_LTT634_p10 01/11/2013 05:34 Page 10

10 News

In Brief

PTE plans £5 fee to recharge electric car Electric vehicle users on Merseyside could have to pay as much as £5 to charge their vehicles at railway station car parks. Merseytravel is proposing to install charging points at four rail stations and the Seacombe ferry terminal. It says a £5 charge would be double the £2.50 cost of the electricity but the fee would help cover administration and back office costs for the conurbation’s electric charging point scheme.

The Office of Low Emission Vehicles recently awarded the Liverpool city region and Cheshire West and Chester Council £465,000 towards a £680,000 project to install 68 charging points. The councils have yet to settle on a fee for using their charge points though – unlike at railway stations – an hourly rate could apply.

Plug-in car grant claims pass 5,000 The number of claims made to the Government’s Plug-in car grant scheme had reached 5,702 by the end of September, up 1,149 since the end of June (LTT 26 Jul). The scheme was launched in January 2011, offering motorists purchasing an ultra-low emission car a grant of 25% towards the cost of the vehicle, up to a maximum of £5,000.

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

Electrification and re-openings in Network Rail’s five-year plan RAIL

by Andrew Forster

THE OFFICE of Rail Regulation has published its final determination of Network Rail’s funding requirements for Control Period 5 (2014/15 to 2018/19).

The determination includes provision for £12bn of enhancements to the rail network and £21bn of funding for the day-today running of the network.

About £11bn is earmarked for enhancements in England and Wales. Of this, £3.1bn is for the ongoing projects of Thameslink and Crossrail and a further £1.2bn is for ring-fenced funds (including level crossing closures and improvements, and improvements to the strategic rail freight network). The remaining £6.7bn is for major new enhancement projects.

In Scotland the settlement provides £1.4bn for enhancements, of which much is for ongoing improvement projects: £490m for Edinburgh-Glasgow improvement project (including electrification) and £174m for the Borders rail line re-opening. A further £145m is for ring-fenced funds.

East West Rail: re-opening

About £3bn of the new enhancement projects in England and Wales are electrification schemes: the Great Western Main Line; Midland Main Line; TransPennine route; Welsh Valley lines; and commuter lines in the North West of England.

Other enhancements include: the Northern Hub to increase train capacity on routes into and through Manchester; the East West Rail re-opening (OxfordMilton Keynes-Bedford); redevelopment of London Waterloo; and western access from the Great Western Main Line to Heathrow Airport.

The delivery of some of these enhancements, including Valley

Lines electrification and the Heathrow access, will extend into the five-year Control Period 6 (CP6), beginning in 2019/20.

Spending on new enhancements in Scotland in CP5 includes: £191m for improvements on the Aberdeen to Inverness line; £117m for journey time reductions on the Highland main line between Perth and Inverness; and £156m for a rolling programme of electrification in the Central Belt.

Because so many of NR’s new enhancement projects are at an early stage of development, the ORR’s funding allocation to them is provisional at this stage.

The ORR noted this week that since NR published its strategic business plan in January, the costs of the Great Western electrification, Midland Main Line electrification and the East West rail project have collectively increased by £376m.

As costs become more certain and risk profiles more accurate, Network Rail will resubmit projects for review. The ORR will grant NR more funding for “efficient cost increases” to projects but, likewise, may adjust project costs downwards. The ORR plans

to set final costs for most the projects by March 2015.

Councils in the North of England fear the scope of the Northern Hub project could be reduced. The ORR has cut the project budget in CP5 from £620m to £498m because of what it sees as an unacceptable level of risk included in NR’s estimates.

The ORR has also cut funding for the East West Rail project.

NR had planned to complete Midland Main Line electrification in CP6; the ORR expects electrification to Sheffield within CP5.

The ORR is less clear about whether the entire ‘Electric Spine’ project, from the East Midlands to Southampton via Oxford, will be completed in CP5. It notes that many of the Electric Spine schemes are at a “low level of maturity”.

NR has until 7 February to accept the ORR’s determination or appeal to the Competition Commission.

Periodic review 2013: final determination of Network Rail’s outputs and funding for 2014-2019 is available at http://tinyurl.com/k3wfytx

Revamp for road risk mapping ROAD SAFETY

THE ANNUAL risk mapping of Britain’s motorways and A roads is to be revamped because too many roads are now scoring the best marks even though little has been done to improve their safety.

The European Road Assessment Programme (EuroRAP) methodology is used in 20 European countries and classifies stretches of road into colour-coded risk bands based on the number of deaths and serious injuries recorded and how much traffic they carry.

UK charity the Road Safety Foundation, which conducts the assessments in Britain, says: “Since the risk bands were defined, road deaths have broadly reduced by 50% across the countries. This improvement has come mainly from factors other than improved infrastructure safety. The result is that the ‘low risk’ band is now an exceptionally soft target and risk in all other bands is substantially understated.

“Too much British improvement relies on improving vehicles, not systematic improvement in infrastructure safety,” the Foundation adds.

Chairman Lord Dubs said he hoped the Government’s reforms to the Highways Agency, including a new five-year funding deal and performance specification, would help. “We need to give our road managers not just the certainty of money but the

goals and tools to measure and manage.”

The Foundation says a EuroRAP consultation will propose new risk bands and suggest that the high risk banding should capture the 5% highest risk roads.

This year’s British report, released last week and covering motorways and A roads outside urban areas, says single carriageway A roads are seven times more dangerous than motorways.

It identifies the top ten roads with the highest risk and the top ten roads with the best improvement based on comparing performance between the periods 20022006 and 2007-2011.

The road with the highest risk is the A537 between Macclesfield and Buxton, a seven-mile road across the Peak District National Park. The Foundation says the road has seen a 66% rise in fatal and serious injury crashes in the last five years.

Two-thirds of crashes involve motorbikes.

The most improved road is a seven-mile section of the A4128 in Buckinghamshire between Great Missenden and High Wycombe, where the council has reviewed speed limits, improved signage and road markings, and introduced traffic calming in villages.

Measuring to manage: tracking the safety of Britain’s major road network is available at http://

LTT634 page 11_LTT634_p11 01/11/2013 05:30 Page 4

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Cover up A13 and build new rail branch, says London borough FUNDING

by Andrew Forster

THE LONDON Borough of Barking and Dagenham is pressing Transport for London to roof over part of the A13 and wants ministers to approve a £150m rail extension to serve new housing on the bank of the Thames.

Roofing over some of the capital’s major roads was recommended by the mayor’s Roads Task Force as a way to reduce community severance and support development (LTT 12 Jul). TfL has pledged to review possible locations by the middle of next year.

Barking and Dagenham says an approximately three-quarters of a mile section of the A13 dual carriageway at Ripple Lane (between Lodge Avenue and Gale Street) is a “prime candidate” for the treatment.

Daniel Pope, the council’s development planning group manager, said covering over this part of the road would enable the council to proceed with a “trans-

formational masterplan” for the area, as well as reduce delays on the A13 caused by junctions.

Barking and Dagenham is meanwhile hoping the Government will approve plans to build a short extension to the rail network from Barking to Barking Riverside, where outline planning permission was granted in 2007 for 10,800 homes.

Extending the Gospel OakBarking London Overground railway to Barking Riverside is a low cost alternative to the £750m extension of the Docklands Light Railway from Gallions Reach to

Dagenham Dock, which was originally supposed to have provided rail access to Barking Riverside. This project was dropped in 2009 on affordability grounds.

Pope said almost 700 homes would be completed on the site by 2015. “However, progress beyond this point remains dependent on a fixed rail link and funding... for road infrastructure within the development.”

He said TfL was developing a business case for the rail extension and was hoping for a Government commitment in this

autumn’s spending review. The Chancellor announced £115m for the electrification of the Gospel Oak-Barking line in the Budget earlier this year and Pope said this included provision to fund feasibility work on the extension.

The borough believes the line could open by 2018.

Barking and Dagenham is also to fund a feasibility study of remodelling Forest Gate railway junction that connects Barking to Stratford. Trains currently have to cross the Greater Anglia lines, precluding peak period services between Barking and Stratford.

DfT urged to delay Lower Thames Crossing decision

The DfT is being urged to delay a decision on the preferred location for a Lower Thames Crossing until after the Airports Commission reports in the summer of 2015.

The DfT consulted on three options for the crossing earlier this year but the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham says it would be pre-

mature to make a decision on which to pursue until Sir Howard Davies has made his airport capacity recommendations.

London mayor Boris Johnson has told the Airports Commission that a crossing at the most easterly of the three options – option C – would help provide road access to his suggested

hub airport on the Isle of Grain or in the Thames Estuary (LTT 18 Oct).

A DfT spokeswoman told LTT this week: “The Department is currently considering the results of the consultation and intends to make an announcement this autumn.” She said the aim was to open a crossing in 2021.

DELIVERY

future projects,” he said.

A working group will develop proposals for sharing staff.

Palmer said this could include secondments; job swaps; staff working on a number of projects across multiple organisations; graduate placements; and apprenticeships. Another option is for senior managers to shadow a peer in a partner organisation for, perhaps, three to ten days.

Rob Leak, the London Borough of Enfield’s chief executive, will chair the working group. He is London Councils’ lead chief executive for transport.

Make this the last flyover Boroughs and TfL explore repair, borough tells TfL sharing transport staff

ROAD

TRANSPORT FOR London has begun a £77m programme to strengthen the A4 Hammersmith flyover in west London.

The work will ensure the structure remains fit for purpose for decades to come and will not need significant maintenance for the next 20 years.

But the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham wants the flyover demolished with the road placed in tunnel long before the next maintenance programme becomes due. “This needs to be the last time TfL spends such a large amount of money on this divisive, ugly old structure,” said council leader Nicholas Botterill.

The flyover was closed in December 2011 for emergency repairs after investigations revealed the post-tensioned cables in five of the flyover’s 16 spans had deteriorated.

The new works, which are due to be completed in summer 2015, will install additional post-tensioning in the remaining 11 spans; replace the bridge bearings; replace the drainage system; and waterproof and resurface the flyover deck. Costain is carrying out the work, with the design led

by consultants Ramboll and Parsons Brinckerhoff.

Leon Daniels, TfL’s managing director of surface transport, said the maintenance works had a benefit:cost ratio of 12:1 based on a ten-year appraisal.

The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham says demolishing the flyover and placing the A4 in tunnel will reconnect Hammersmith with the River Thames and create land for redevelopment.

Speaking to LTT, a council spokesman played down the idea of placing just the flyover in tunnel, saying this would deliver limited regeneration benefits. He said a “more reasonable” option would be to place the A4 in tunnel all the way from the Hogarth Roundabout in Chiswick to Earls Court, a distance of about 2.5 miles. “That could release a lot of very valuable highway land,” he said.

The borough is also considering placing the north-south route of Shepherds Bush Road and Fulham Palace Road in tunnel beneath Hammersmith Broadway.

The council will submit ideas to TfL in March. Consultant CH2M Hill is assisting the work.

LONDON COUNCILS and Transport for London are looking at ways of sharing transport expertise to ensure the continued delivery of projects in the capital.

Spencer Palmer, London Councils’ new director of transport and mobility, told councillors that financial pressures had forced TfL and boroughs to cut transport staff numbers. “This is starting to affect the delivery of current programmes and will certainly limit the ability of boroughs and TfL to deliver

TfL ‘needs long-term bus plan’ BUSES

THE LONDON Assembly is urging Transport for London to prepare a long-term plan for the capital’s bus network to cope with population growth.

Bus passenger journeys in the capital rose 64% between 1999/2000 and 2012/13 – from 1.4 to 2.3 billion. The assembly’s transport committee says TfL is predicting a further 7% rise by 2022 – equivalent to 167 million additional journeys. The committee believes this may be a

conservative estimate, given forecast population growth.

It wants TfL to publish a longterm strategy for the bus network by next March, including proposals for more orbital and express bus routes.

The operating costs of London’s bus network were £1.9bn in 2012/13, of which £1.4bn was met by fares income and £463m by subsidy.

Bus services in London is available at http://tinyurl.com/nokokkyt

News 11

In Brief

Electric double deck bus for York A double-deck sightseeing bus in York is to become the first in the country to be entirely battery powered. The City of York Council has received £75,000 from the DfT’s Clean Bus Technology Fund to convert the Transdev-owned vehicle. The DfT has just awarded a further £1.4m from the fund to six councils for fitting selective catalytic reduction technology to exhaust systems. Brighton and Hove City Council will receive £750,000 for 50 buses; Sunderland City Council and Durham County Council will share £275,500 for 19 buses; Oxford City Council £200,000 for 11 buses; Swale Borough Council £150,000 for ten buses; and City of York Council £23,700 for two buses.

Capital’s fares evasion slumps Fare evasion on London’s bus network has halved from a recent high of £39.5m in 2010 to £19.4m in 2012/13, according to estimates made by a consultant for Transport for London. Steve Burton, TfL’s director of enforcement and on-street operations, said a number of factors explained the reduction including: withdrawal of articulated bendy buses that had multiple entry/exit points; targeted enforcement by TfL’s team of 254 revenue protection inspectors; the prevalence of Oystercards that reduce opportunities for forged or fraudulent tickets; and the Zip card for young people. “Economic recession and rising costs of living have, historically, triggered an increase in fare evasion but this has not been seen during the current downturn,” said Burton. He said the figures should be viewed as an estimate of fare evasion, not revenue loss “as it would be unlikely that all fare evaders would make the same travel choices if they were to pay for their journey”.

Green walls outside London schools The London Borough of Redbridge is planning to install ‘green walls’ of vegetation outside two primary schools to absorb nitrogen oxides and trap particulates. The £255,000 investment is part-funded by a £100,000 grant from London mayor Boris Johnson’s Air Quality Fund.

London First runs aviation campaign Business lobby group London First has launched a pro-aviation campaign, Let Britain Fly. Members include the Canary Wharf Group, Sir Robert McAlpine, the Berkeley Group, John Lewis, and Segro. The Corporation of London is to become a member, contributing £25,000.

LTT634_p12-13_feature_LTT634_p12-13 01/11/2013 04:01 Page 12

Will London Gateway be the freight industry’s first port of call?

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

12 Feature

The new London Gateway port in Thurrock will receive its first scheduled container ship this month. John W E Helm explains the impact the port could have on freight movements and the threat it poses to other container ports in the South East

B

The London Gateway port, showing the land available for warehousing

illed as the largest single construction project after Crossrail, DP World’s new £1.5bn London Gateway container mega-port could change the map of freight transport in Britain. The massive terminal complex will allow the largest container ships to dock within 25 miles of the capital, and the MOL Caledon will be the first scheduled ship to use it upon opening on 7 November.

London Gateway is situated on the site of the old Shell Haven oil refinery at Coryton on the north bank of the River Thames. The terminal is being opened in stages, but when fully operational, it will have six berths, 24 ship-toshore cranes, 2.7kms of river-facing quayside, and be capable of handling 3.5 million twenty-foot equivalent unit (TEU) containers a year. It also comes with the largest logistics park in Europe, with over nine million square foot of storage and warehousing.

As ships get bigger, so do the ports that have to accommodate them: container vessels are measured in terms of TEUs. In the 1980s, 5,000 TEU was considered large.

Now the largest ships can carry 18,000 TEU and are 400metre long. And there’s talk of even bigger ships to follow...

The reason for the inexorable increase in size is due to economies of scale: the larger the ship, the lower the individual slot costs per container, as more units can be carried.

However, ports have also to be upgraded to handle them, but only the largest ones, or the ones most favoured by nature are in a position to do this.

The impact of London Gateway will be felt far and wide: not just on the four main South Eastern ports facing competition – Felixstowe, Southampton, Tilbury and Thamesport – but also on the landward side as well, with road and rail operators adjusting service patterns to match new traffic flows.

DP World has won its first shipliner customer (and also claimed its first scalp) by persuading a consortium to transfer services from Tilbury.

The big question is whether London Gateway will simply extract traffic from rival ports (and possibly put them out of business), or stimulate additional traffic that otherwise might not materialise.

New distribution model

London Gateway is not simply another large container terminal serving even bigger container ships, however.

There’s much more to it than that: it’s pioneering a new distribution model that could transform the onward movement of containers on the landward side. ‘Portcentrics’ is the buzzword for this new concept. Currently, a disproportionately large number of maritime containers are shipped inland by train or truck from the container ports such as Felixstowe, Southampton or Tilbury to distribution centres in the Midlands, then tripped back out again to the final point of destination.

The bulk of these distribution hubs lie within what is called ‘the golden triangle’ – the area bounded by the M1, M6 and M42 motorways, home to some 1,400 logistics companies, including 700 road haulage operators. This Northamptonshire hub lies within three hours truck driving time of Felixstowe, Southampton, Liverpool and London (the main UK container ports), and within four hours trucking time of 95% of the UK’s population.

London Gateway’s main selling point is that this distribution model is wasteful and inefficient, especially as the bulk of the UK population and GDP growth is located in the South East, which has fewer distribution centres. Its portcentric approach aims at re-orientating the hub away from the Midlands motorway centre and locating it at the

container port end: hence the reason for the huge investment in warehousing and storage facilities at the new logistics park. Marks & Spencer has already signed up to construct a distribution terminal there.

London Gateway says that the new mega-port and logistics park will cut out unnecessary lorry mileage and achieve substantial cost savings.

However, the distribution element is only one part of London Gateway’s case: the rest is based on growth forecasts. It believes UK container traffic will nearly double to 15.6 million TEU by 2030, so additional capacity will be needed by then. It the cake continues to expand, then there may be room for all, but if not, some ports could go to the wall.

Depressed market conditions

Currently 95% of all cargo movements by tonnage into the UK are sea-borne, and it’s likely to remain so in the foreseeable future: if something is manufactured and not too big, then it’s likely to have come here in a box and been transported half way round the world by a container ship.

However, the container shipping & port industry is notoriously fickle and subject to wide cyclical movements of boom and bust, which is not particularly conducive for long-term investment planning. London Gateway is a good example: its public inquiry began in 2003 and construction got underway four years later, but that was when times were good and traffic was growing. Now things have gone the other way and there is a serious glut in the number of container ships (2012 being one of the worst years on record).

Container throughput in the UK ports has also fallen for three consecutive years: 2012 (7.980 million TEU),

LTT634_p12-13_feature_LTT634_p12-13 01/11/2013 04:01 Page 13

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Feature 13 CONTAINS ORDNANCE SURVEY DATA © CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2013

2011 (8.141 million TEU), 2010 (8.222 million TEU), down more than 10% since the 2007 high (8.874 million TEU) before the world financial crisis. The top 10 UK container ports account for around 95% of UK container traffic, and although market-leader Felixstowe bucked last year’s downward trend, the latest statistics reflect the depressed market state (see table below).

So it’s an inauspicious moment for opening another terminal, though an upturn could be just around the corner.

Rail and road upgrades

DP World (DPW) estimates that more than 30% of London Gateway’s containers will be despatched by rail.

Access to the terminal is by the four-mile single-track Thameshaven branch, which connects with the Tilbury loop on the London, Tilbury & Southend line near Stanford-le-Hope. DPW has underwritten the costs for double tracking and undertaking other infrastructure works.

Access will be open to all freight operators: DB Schenker is committed to running at least four trains daily, each way, to regional inland distribution centres (traffic volumes permitting), and Freightliner is providing services to Bristol and Daventry from day one.

Unfortunately, all traffic will have to be routed through the heavily-congested rail networks in London.

9ft 6in high containers can be routed onto the West Coast Main Line via the (soon to be electrified) Gospel Oak-Barking line using standard wagons. However, access to the East Coast Main Line via the North London Line will only be possible by using low-liner container wagons (on account of the more restrictive W8 loading gauge).

DPW also agreed to fund road improvements – principally at the Junction 30 interchange between the M25 and A13 (at Thurrock), and between the A13 and A1014 (at Stanford-le-Hope) – to alleviate the problems caused by additional road traffic. Schemes include widening slip roads, installing traffic signals and altering bridges.

Thought to cost £100m, it is part of the original planning agreement that DPW signed up to but subsequently tried to get out of.

In addition to these works, the Chancellor released a further £150m in the 2012 Autumn Statement for extra road improvements in the area.

Port wars

While DPW has spent the last ten years fettling up its plans for a new super port, its rivals have not been idle.

They have been hatching plans of their own, but the end result could be over-capacity in the industry (matching that on the seaward side).

Felixstowe is taking this threat to its long-enjoyed preeminence very seriously. Two new large berths were added in November 2011, and further developments will take place in 2015 to enable the port to handle two 18,000 TEU UK Top 10 Container Ports

Port Felixstowe

Southampton

London (Tilbury) Liverpool

Group

HPH

DPW FP

PP

Medway (Thamesport)

HPH

Teesside

PDP

Belfast

ICG

Forth Hull

Grimsby & Immingham UK – total

FP

PDP

ABP

TEU (000s)

%

2012

3,367 42.2 1,473 18.5 687

8.6

293

3.7

635 264 252 244

211

174 7,980

Source: DfT, UK Port Freight Statistics, 2012

8.0 3.3 3.2 3.0 2.6 2.2

TEU (000s)

%

2011

3,249 39.9 1,590 19.5 736

9.0

402

4.9

664 245 263 220 219 125 8,141

8.2 3.0 3.2 2.7 2.7 1.5

The South East is served by five major container ports

ships simultaneously. Felixstowe has also doubled its rail capacity by opening of a third rail terminal this June (and now has 60 daily train movements). Felixstowe lies closer to the main shipping routes than its rivals.

Southampton is also constructing a new terminal capable of handling 18,000 TEU container vessels, which is scheduled for completion early next year. Southampton’s selling point is that the port benefits from a unique double tide, advantageous for handling ships, and is also closer to the ‘golden triangle’ than either Felixstowe or Tilbury.

Tilbury (also known as the London Container Terminal) enjoys a unique mix of deep sea and short sea container traffic, and a niche market in the reefer (refrigerated) trades. This should make it (at least theoretically) less susceptible to DPW competition. However, analysts have expressed surprise at the recent announcement by shipping consortium SAECS to switch traffic from Tilbury to London Gateway. (That’s because it’s a north to south (South African) service using smaller ships, whereas DPW

is mainly targeted at the European-Asia trades deploying larger vessels; cost is thought to have been the deciding factor).

Thamesport is the newest, and the only automated UK container port terminal. However, it is probably the most vulnerable, having recently lost some its services to both Felixstowe and Southampton, and has few deep sea services left. Container throughput has plummeted from a peak of nearly 800,000 TEU in 2008, to less than 300,000 TEU in 2012. (This is even before factoring in the London Gateway threat). Thamesport faces problems with inadequate river draft (preventing larger vessels from accessing), and also in refurbishing some of its massive ship-to-shore cranes (as some of the manufacturers are no longer in business).

Container port expansion is also underway in Liverpool with a new deepwater terminal planned for 2015, and engineering group, Babcock, wants to turn a derelict site in Rosyth, in Fife, into a new container development.

Ports – who owns what?

UK port sector ownership – like its airport counterpart – is highly fragmented. However, unlike airports, it is not subject to independent regulation, and there is no statutory framework for controlling port access charges. Although there are numerous municipal and trust-owned ports operating in other trades, the container port sector is dominated by six large conglomerate groupings, accounting for nine of the top ten ports in the country (see table).

State-owned Dubai Ports World (DPW) owns London Gateway, and is one of the world’s largest marine terminal operators and container specialists, with over 60 terminals in six continents. London Gateway originated as a P&O/Shell joint venture, and only came into the DPW orbit following its acquisition of P&O, the famous British shipping company, in 2006. UAE-based DPW also runs Southampton Container Terminals (SCT), the UK’s second container port terminal, though the rest of Southampton port is under Associated British Ports (ABP) ownership.

ABP is the largest UK port grouping, owning 21 ports. Privatised in the 1980s, ABP also owns and operates Britain’s busiest inland rail freight terminal at Hams Hall in the Midlands, and is now owned by a private international consortium.

Hong Kong-based Hutchison Whampoa Ltd subsidiary, Hutchison Ports Holdings (HPH), is another multinational conglomerate with 52 ports in 26 countries. It acquired Felixstowe in 1991, London Thamesport in 1998, and also owns the Harwich International Port.

Forth Ports (FP) owns the port of Tilbury and its specialised container arm, as well as seven other Scottish ports on the River Forth. DPW and ABP shareholdings in the Tilbury container operations passed to FP in 2012.

FP was acquired by Arcus Infrastructure Partners in 2011, which also controls the Angel and Alpha train leasing companies as well as Brisa, the European road toll operator.

Peel Ports (PP) is the second largest UK port group, and part of the Peel Group (a large property and investment company with a wide portfolio of interests, including airports). Peel acquired the Manchester Ship Canal in 1987, and the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company (Port of Liverpool) in 2005.

PD Ports (PDP) operates the container sites at Teesport and Hull, and since 2009 has been owned by a Canadian asset management company. A seventh company, the Irish Continental Group (ICG) operates container terminals in Belfast and Dublin, and the shipping line Irish Ferries.

LTT634_p16-18_viewpoint and letters_LTT634_p16-18 01/11/2013 04:34 Page 14

16 Comment

VIEWPOINT

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

Car clubs hit all the right notes, so why aren’t policy-makers beating the drum?

Chas Ball Carplus Trust

It was refreshing to hear the enthusiasm of Baroness Susan Kramer, the new transport minister whose remit covers car clubs, at the London launch of E-Car Club in Tower Hamlets last week. “Pay-as-you-go car clubs don’t just help us improve air quality, reduce traffic noise and cut carbon, they also give Londoners more choice about the journeys they take, reduce the cost of transport to individuals and businesses and promote more efficient use of cars,” she said.

A growing number of people now recognise the vital role car clubs can play in achieving carbon reduction and improved local air quality. However, in the absence of a strategic approach, there are few places in Britain where car clubs and bike-sharing are part of mainstream measures – and almost nowhere where they offer effective integration with public transport.

Shared mobility – including car clubs and bikesharing – are clearly a growth sector with new models emerging. Some operators are now beginning to diversify into electric vehicles and there are signs that new one-way models of car-sharing are creating a new market, although we do not yet have evidence of how far they contribute to environmental targets.

At Carplus Trust, the national organisation for shared mobility, we are pleased to report a growing network of car clubs in over 30 larger cities and towns. However, only in parts of London, Edinburgh and a few other medium-sized cities do we see high density of provision and recognition of the car club as part of urban mobility. This is testament to the political leadership of

Only in parts of London, Edinburgh and a few other mediumsized cities do we see recognition of the car club as part of urban mobility.

In Passing

Two years ago the future of Strathclyde Partnership for Transport looked bleak. With the Labour-controlled body rocked by expenses scandals, Derek MacKay, the Scottish National Party leader of constituent council Renfrewshire, urged Scotland’s first minister Alex Salmond to abolish the organisation. MacKay didn’t get his way and SPT remains an important player in west of Scotland transport to this day. But perhaps Mackay, who is now Scotland’s minister for local government and planning, will enjoy a wee chuckle at the news that Transport Scotland has approved Network Rail’s plan to redevelop Glasgow Queen Street railway station and its environs, including SPT’s Consort House headquarters. It seems that for SPT it’s more a case of demolition than abolition.

How do consultants price tenders? Highways Agency has just awarded a Parsons Brinckerhoff/Pell Frischmann joint venture two contracts to investigate applying managed motorway concepts to trunk roads. But

some local politicians and effective partnership working on the part of the main operators. So far, there has been a lack of strategic support from successive governments, as I will explore later.

In contrast, car clubs are growing in many cities in mainland Europe and North America where they complement public transport – facilitating modal shift and reducing car dependency. In Germany, VDV (the association of public transport operators), in a recent manifesto, encouraged members to extend the range of mobility services to include shared cars, bikes and taxis – so as to strengthen core services. This is already happening in cities such as Hannover.

The development of a portfolio of alternative modes – including the use of shared electric vehicles in the car club fleet – is not really on offer in Britain. Competition to the private car could be achieved but it needs to be well-presented, easy to use and pay for, and make good sense to drivers if it is to be a real option.

Creating a closer relationship between shared mobility services and public transport is much more problematic when public transport is so fragmented – and not so “public”. Moves outside London to adopt smartcards for use by different operators and drive cash out of the system have yet to provide a significant platform for a cross-sector approach.

Carplus has produced evidence of significant modal shift as a result of the growth of car clubs, showing how each car club car results in at least 12 cars removed from the community. In addition, recent analysis of car club vehicle emissions indicates that they are significantly cleaner and lower carbon than the cars people joining car clubs give up or opt to defer purchase. Typically, car club fleets are over 30% cleaner than the national average car and 15% lower than the car club fleet reported in 2011/12. Yet despite six years of consistent evidence, independently produced with full support of operators, we have yet to see any real strategic support from national government.

Car clubs need to be recognised as part of public policy, providing pay-as-you-go, low and ultra low emission shared cars. In delivering sustainable transport, accredited operators already benefit from

permit-based dedicated parking, providing residents and employers a low-cost, low hassle alternative to private car use. They are keen to achieve a higher profile as a service provider – like visible signage, public transport mapping and websites – as well as securing preferential status in the congestion charging area.

Strategic support from Transport for London and Transport Scotland has helped the network to continue growing and improve its visibility, but relatively little has been achieved in making car clubs part of the urban mobility strategies of other English cities apart from a few early adopters such as Bristol and Brighton & Hove. So what could make a difference over the next five years?

If the health impacts of traffic emissions were properly recognised and given as much importance as carbon reduction, we would surely by now have made substantial progress with the introduction of Low Emission Zones (LEZs). By prioritising an effective national strategy to meet EU Air Quality standards we could start promoting shared mobility as just one of the measures to invest in to improve air quality.

Taken together with real incentives for establishing inter-modality as part of ‘end-to-end’ transport policy, more effective use of planning for low-car and car-free development, a strategy on air quality that introduces LEZs could make a significant difference to our approach to urban mobility.

Not until we detach more people from car ownership and ensure car-sharing through car clubs is a mainstream option will we achieve wider use of the electric vehicles for local and regional trips. This means more car clubs, more shared electric vehicles and a greater role in providing pool cars for employers.

whereas the A500/A50 study will cost £19.945.26, the A38 study is an extra £2.26, coming in at £19,947.52. Why?!

agreement – after all, the MP for Ruislip has just written to transport minister Robert Goodwill, complaining about HS2’s impact on his constituency.

Politicians, pundits and pressure groups have been queuing up to give the Government’s high-speed rail plans a kicking in recent weeks. But a verbal assault on the project was probably the last thing Government minister for civil society, Nick Hurd, was expecting when he went along to a meeting with London teenage gang members organised by the Evening Standard. But that’s just what he received, as the paper reports: “Gang member Derek, 18, stood up and snapped: ‘Why is £50bn being spent on super-fast railways from London?

Why do we need to get to Manchester in an hour? These are plans for people who make £100k a year, cos only them kind of people need to be in two places at once.

How can 20 minutes off your train journey be more important than providing basics for people like us with nothing?’” Mr Hurd may have found himself nodding in

Chas Ball set up one of the UK’s first communityowned car clubs in Leeds and has been chief executive of Carplus since 2011. He will be stepping down early next summer as a first step to retirement. Car clubs will feature in an LTT-sponsored conference on 13 November in London, ‘Urban mobility& alternatives to car ownership’. Visit: www.transportxtra.com/shop

One of the unwritten rules of journalism is that when the Government publishes a thick report, the best story may be in a footnote on page 93 rather than in the executive summary. And so, whenever possible, LTT tries to read the documents in full. But even we will draw a line at the forthcoming environmental statement on the London-West Midlands high-speed rail line, which, the DfT informed us this week, will be “almost 50,000 pages long”. It’ll be quicker to build the line than read this mighty tome!

An email arrives from the House of Commons transport committee: “Arrangements for the transport committee’s first evidence session on transport’s winter resilience have been revised because of transport disruption caused by today’s storm.”

LTT634_p16-18_viewpoint and letters_LTT634_p16-18 01/11/2013 04:34 Page 15

TransportXtra.com/ltt

If the ASA can’t rule on camera ad, it can’t rule on 20mph

So Brighton and Hove Council, together with other organisations promoting 20mph speed limits across that city, believe there is “masses of evidence” that 20mph limits make roads safer (‘Motorists angered by Brighton’s green policies’, LTT 18 Oct). They are so incensed by claims to the contrary from the campaign group Unchain the Brighton Motorist that they have reported an advertisement by the group to the Advertising Standards Authority.

In fact, the evidence about signed-only 20mph limits and casualties is very mixed, based on the results of schemes implemented in Portsmouth and elsewhere.

Some categories of road user casualty have increased markedly. Other local authorities realise this and are not so enthusiastic as Brighton & Hove.

For example, Norfolk County Council has rejected the widespread use of 20mph limits (‘Area-wide 20mph limits are not for us – Norfolk’, LTT 4 Oct). The county council’s director of environment, transport and development, Mike Jackson, is quoted as saying: “Within Norfolk at present, the commitment of funds to the implementation of ‘blanket’ 20mph schemes would not offer good value for money compared to other measures to reduce casualties. The council should continue to prioritise schemes that target reductions in killed and serious injuries and should not divert resources to areawide 20mph speed restrictions, which offer little benefit in this regard.”

In York, Liberal Democrat councillors are aware that 20mph limits are not a road safety panacea, as reported

by LTT in July (‘Lib Dems criticise blanket 20mph speed limits’, LTT 26 Jul). They are quoted as saying “We continue to support a targeted use of 20mph limits at known accident blackspots and in areas such as outside schools and shopping areas.” But they say evidence for the effects of blanket 20mph limits is “very mixed in regards to accident levels, reducing speeds, helping produce a modal shift away from car use and in reducing emissions. The evidence from the UK’s first city-wide 20mph scheme [Portsmouth] showed that serious accident levels went up slightly, the average reduction in speeds was just 1.3mph, and the scheme made little difference to the majority of respondents in the amount they travelled by their chosen mode.”

It will be interesting to see if the ASA is prepared to take up Brighton and Hove Council’s complaint about the campaign group’s advertisement. Directly above the Brighton story in the last issue was the report that the ASA had belatedly decided that an advertisement on the Scottish Safety Camera Programme Office’s website was outside its remit, as it was “not an advertisement ... directly connected with the supply or transfer of goods or services” (“Review finds ASA speed camera ruling was ‘substantially flawed’”, LTT 18 Oct). The advertisement by Unchain the Brighton Motorist must come into the same category so, for the sake of impartiality, the ASA must surely refuse to become involved. We shall see.

Brighton’s green administration is currently languishing in third place in local opinion polls, behind Labour and the Conservatives. It should be a lesson for other councils that anti-car policies are not favoured by most voters, and the pressure groups that promote those policies do not speak for the majority.

Malcolm Heymer Traffic management adviser Alliance of British Drivers Dereham Norfolk NR20

A different Crossrail route could have eased WCML pressures

In his letter about high-speed rail, Keith Rogers points out that the Chiltern line could provide additional capacity between London and Birmingham (LTT 18 Oct).

In both the Central London Rail Study and the Cross-

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

rail Parliamentary Bill in the 1991-92 session it was proposed that Crossrail should absorb the Chiltern line service to Aylesbury.

This would provide a more balanced Crossrail by avoiding the need to terminate so many services at Paddington and release capacity at Marylebone station and on the route between Marylebone and Neasden. As well as making fuller use of the expensive tunnelled infrastructure of Crossrail, this could release 40 train paths a day in each direction between London and Birmingham, providing about 16,000 additional seats.

Any rational examination of the need to provide more rail capacity between London and the Midlands would have looked at such a Crossrail+ scheme before plumping for HS2.

David Bayliss Beaconsfield HP9

Doing the sums shows KPMG’s HS2 report doesn’t add up

David Smith’s letter of 18 October has the headline “We need high-speed rail but HS2 must be reconfigured”.

Rather than that here is a denouement.

The KPMG report of September 2013 claims annual Wider Economic Benefits (WEBs) of £15bn a year for the ‘Y’ network. The report contains an introductory letter of apology that states: “This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties.”

In the light of that, how lacking in confidence can the authors be? The January 2012 economic assessment of HS2 reports present value wider economic benefits in the range £5.7bn to £12.3bn. These represent the discounted sum over the 60-year evaluation period ending in 2093 with the base year set to 2011. If we assume that the corresponding annual WEBs are constant then the annual value has the range £0.4bn to £0.9bn a year, 17 to 38 times less than the £15bn now canvassed!

This vast increase in the WEBs suggests desperation on behalf of those promoting the scheme, a desperation that may be becoming acute. At any rate the bosses of the main railfreight companies were reported in The Times of 28 September as making the risible claim that the proposal would keep food prices down (for heaven’s sake); an incredible notion bearing in mind that only 8.5% of the nation’s freight goes by rail and that most of it is raw materials or bulk.

In any event, the HS2 forecasts provide a total of 380,000 trips per day, of which 24%, i.e. 91,000 are “generated”. It is only those new trips that could generate the alleged £15bn since, by definition, all the other trips, and their WEBs pre-exist. Dividing the £15bn by the 91,000 and by 300 effective days per year provides £550 for each generated trip, or £1,100 for each round trip.

That leaves HS2 Ltd to either: (a) explain why a high-speed rail trip, generated merely because a journey has been shortened somewhat, should provide vastly more benefits than any other journey on the rail network ever could (a task made doubly difficult since generated trips are likely to have lower values, perhaps half, those associated with existing trips); or (b) concede that the analysis is ready for the waste paper basket.

> CONTINUED ON p18

SEND letters to be considered for publication to: Local Transport Today, Apollo House, 359 Kennington Lane, London SE11 5QY Fax: 0845 270 7961 Email: ed.ltt@landor.co.uk (Letters may be edited)

Comment 17

A transport dilemma for EU No one would doubt that urban transport and its quality are major factors in national economic and social development. Cities are often the engines of growth and of national identity but poor transport can harm their economies and their image.

The argument that urban transport is an issue of general importance has been a driver of European Union interest in recent years and the European Commission has increasingly regarded its remit as going beyond strictly trans-European issues. The European transport White Paper flagged up the potential significance of urban transport in delivering a number of other EU policy objectives, for instance reducing carbon dioxide emissions and supporting the economic performance of member states and the Union as a whole.

But Brussels’ interest in urban matters raises the issue of subsidiarity and whether it is appropriate for a European-level policy to apply to something that is essentially local in its delivery and experience. There has been a long-standing programme of research in urban transport issues within the EU and many acronym-laden projects such as CIVITAS and POLIS have brought together cities and universities to examine common concerns and solutions. European Commission guidance on sustainable urban mobility plans (SUMPs) took this a step further in setting out a desired approach to decision-making and policy frameworks that the EU believes should be in place to underpin decisions about urban transport, if not to guide the decisions themselves.

New advice on urban transport is currently being considered in the form of an urban mobility package drafted by the Commission within the last few months and now being finalised to go before the Commission as a whole and then the council of transport ministers. The politics of this are interesting. At a time when the popularity of the EU in member states is weaker than it has been and with European Parliament elections coming up next year, whether it is appropriate to launch this new initiative is problematic.

How this game of delicate balancing of the local and the general pans out will be an interesting test of the future role of the EU within the total transport equation.

LTT634_p16-18_viewpoint and letters_LTT634_p16-18 01/11/2013 04:34 Page 16

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (continued)

18 Comment

Why is it that no one at KPMG or HS2 Ltd bothered to do the above sum? After all, had they done so surely they would not have been stupid enough to publish the £15bn forecast.

I have pointed out in these columns that the £44.1bn benefits of HS2 cited in the economic analysis are sourced as follows: £5.2bn from improved reliability, as though the trains cannot be made to run on time without building a high-speed network; £5.5bn from other rail user impacts, meaning better access to stations; £6.7bn from reduced crowding, largely solvable in other ways; and £24.5bn from time savings, on the discredited assumption that time on a train is entirely wasted.

Hence, rather than those classical benefits amounting to £44.1bn, £20bn would be nearer the mark although even that presumes the ludicrous passenger forecasts actually arise.

Taken together could there be any more powerful demonstration that the nation has lost its head than the fact that this scheme ever arrived on the drawing board, let alone that it is currently supported by all political parties, all of them seemingly impervious to the nonsense that the supporting “analyses” are?

Perhaps penalties should be imposed upon those who have led the analysis, irresponsible as it is in all its detail, thereby putting tens of billions of pounds at risk.

Paul Withrington Director Transport Watch Northampton NN2

HS2 is too controversial – let’s pause and re-think the route

Following on from recent contributions to LTT about the route of HS2, it has never been obvious why it is proposed to plough up the Chilterns, rather than following the M1.

The populations living along the M1 route provide physical obstacle, but these should not be insurmountable and the big populations provide an obvious attraction for the route too. The Chiltern route has managed to attract huge opposition without providing value to anywhere south of Birmingham, and yet it has cost much in mitigation (tunnelling, soundproofing etc) to pacify people (many of whom, one suspects, don’t mind about intrusion when it’s them inflicting the noise and pollution of their own vehicles on to others).

The point is this: is the Chiltern route really the best option?

Whether one looks at the HS2 website or the DfT website, everything points towards Phase One (London to Birmingham) being evaluated in isolation, with no consideration for anything beyond. Then, Phase Two is compiled on the assumption that Phase One is built.

Surely it cannot be right that the whole route was not given consideration first, and then broken down into its constituent parts?

Consider then, the major population centres along the M1. We could consider Milton Keynes, but at just 50 miles it’s arguably too close to London to warrant a new high-speed service, especially when it already has a frequent service taking just half an hour to the capital.

Northampton is next (66 miles from London), and with a population of over 200,000 it’s bigger than anywhere on the East Coast Main Line south of Newcastle.

It takes longer to get from London to Northampton by train than it does to get to Rugby, which is 25% further away from the capital.

Leicester’s population (99 miles from London) is half as big again as Northampton, but for decades it has been on the slowest of the three long-distance routes heading north out of London.

The present HS2 design will (just about) serve Nottingham (125 miles from London) and Sheffield (160miles) but why go via the Chilterns to do so?

While the very fact that the M1 route is well popu-

lated inherently presents problems for a new rail route, the UK never did have an available route that was going to be free from controversy. It was always going to be a challenge to get HS2 built, but given that it has taken so long to get the political appetite for it, at least let’s get the route right, and preferably with less bad taste than the Chiltern route is producing.

Driving down the A1 to Paris and getting overtaken by the Eurostar, TGV and Thalys trains travelling at over 100mph faster than your car is doing, provides a huge incentive to use the railways. A route parallel to the M1 could provide a similar incentive. A spur following the M6 route to Birmingham, Manchester and Liverpool makes similar sense, and a Liverpool to Leeds connection (probably slower than HS2, but faster than the present route) would facilitate the mythical Northern Way corridor.

People were unwilling to listen when the M1 route was proposed many years ago, but perhaps it’s now worth taking a couple of backward steps in order to go forwards. And if there really is a convincing case for not changing now, then let’s at least stop playing around with the date of 2026 and get on and build it to open by 2020. And properly, i.e. all the way to Scotland.

Chris Oldham Shewsbury SY4

The privatised railway gives good value to taxpayers

I note Julie Boston’s enthusiasm for re-nationalising the railways, which she shares with Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and the railway unions but I feel it is time to expose the myth that by removing the need to pay dividends to shareholders it would save £1bn a year (Letters LTT 04 Oct).

In 2011/12, the grand total of profits earned by all Train Operating Companies (TOCs) came to £91m after tax and East Midlands Trains, Chiltern Railways and First Great Western all made a loss. There is therefore no way dividends could have reached anywhere near £1bn and it should be noted that TOC profit margins are generally no more than about 3% of earnings even in a good year, which leaves no room for error.

In total, in the same year 12 TOCs paid £1.481bn in premium payments. After subsidies and cap & collar support this left the Government with a net surplus from the TOCs of nearly £200m and the year before the surplus was £372m.

Clearly, it is not shareholders who are creaming off TOC profits but the Government. This is in addition to the significant amounts paid by the rail industry through taxes, many of which did not even exist in BR’s days, plus over £200m a year paid by Network Rail for Loan Guarantee Fees charged by Government.

All this means that the actual cost to the taxpayer of the railways is somewhat less than the figure being used unfairly by the DfT to justify continued above-inflation fare increases.

On top of this, at the behest of the Government, Network Rail is required to fund investment in enhancements from bank loans in order to keep the debt off Treasury books with the result that interest charges and loan repayments now cost Network Rail well over £1.5bn a year with the total debt now standing at about £30bn. Re-nationalising the railways would presumably require the Government to write-off this huge debt, which I would have thought is unlikely.

Furthermore, BR did not pay insurance as the Government covered the risk as a nationalised company. By contrast, not only is insurance currently paid for by all companies engaged in running and maintaining the rail network but insurance tax is paid as well.

Finally, I should mention Industrial Buildings Tax, another one that did not exist in BR’s time. This tax is charged on such things as tunnels, embankments,

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

viaducts and bridges etc. In 2009 this tax cost Network Rail £512m and it will soon be due for payment again.

Can anyone see a re-nationalised railway having to pay this?

Norman Bradbury (Former head of policy group, Railfuture) Worcester Park Surrey KT4

Has Nottingham really cracked a multi-operator smartcard?

On page 5 of the last issue you carry the seemingly good news that my home city, Nottingham, is to get £11.3m in Better Bus Area funding. However, I am left wondering how (if at all) this grant relates to the lead front page story in the Nottingham Post for 1 October.

This story said that Nottingham was to have an ‘Oystercard’ ticket valid on all public transport and sold from 88 kiosks built “across the Nottingham area from next February”. I wrote to the Post: “How is the proposed Nottingham Oystercard going to be implemented? Currently the three largest bus operators each have their own incompatible smartcard system (Easyrider, Mango and Genie), while the smaller operators and the tram have none for fare-paying passengers.

“All bus operators in Nottingham will have to fit their vehicles with the same ‘Oystercard’ reader, perhaps in addition to their own company-specific readers. NET must either fit its trams with readers, or have readers at the stops (as in Croydon).

Have the transport operators already agreed to install Oystercard readers? And exactly who is going to pay for the 88 kiosks, and their staffing?”

This letter was published on 12 October. However, I have read nothing else of substance on Nottingham ‘Oystercards’, and I cannot find anything on the city council website.

What on earth is going on? The whole country is entitled to know. If the Nottingham Oystercard is affordable and workable (I have my doubts) then it would set a precedent for other cities.

Roger Sexton Nottingham NG1

Electric buses and rail freight hold keys to better air quality

Messrs Laxen and Moorcroft ably chronicle the failure to effectively tackle the problem of outdoor air pollution (‘Air quality action plans aren’t delivering their promises – but don’t blame councils’ Viewpoint LTT 18 Oct).

Relying on engines becoming less polluting was rather naive in the face of rising traffic volumes, particularly of diesel-engined vehicles. In the 1990s Parliament passed two Traffic Reduction Acts but governments have done nothing to implement them.

The key to tackling the problem is providing people with attractive alternatives to cars and lorries. Public transport could be considerably improved in most of the country and, even in a town the size of Shrewsbury, there is scope for converting busy bus routes to trolley bus operation. Modern trolley buses have auxilary diesel engines to work away from the wires, but these could be replaced by batteries. Battery-powered buses are to be trialled in Milton Keynes and Network Rail has begun work on an electric multiple unit train with batteries. It seems that battery technology is becoming more viable.

Reducing lorry use is more difficult but is likely to require more urban railfreight depots like the one in Telford. Trains would be likely be shorter than the current operators prefer, so would require government action. Delivery should be by electric vehicles.

David HT Smith The Thursfield Smith Consultancy Shrewsbury SY3

LTT634_p19_Paul Salveson_LTT634_p19 01/11/2013 03:53 Page 19

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Comment 19

PAUL SALVESON # 15

Being a councillor has been interesting, but too many transport issues are hampered by petty politics

I

’ve surprised quite a few friends by standing down as a local councillor. The pressures of other commitments, many of which – ironically – have come out of being a councillor, have forced what was a tough decision. There’s a by-election set for 21 November and naturally I’m hoping my Labour successor will win. The campaign is now in full flow. On this very wet and windy Monday morning motorists driving into Huddersfield through Golcar were met with posters demanding ‘Stop Labour’s Gridlock’. It isn’t clear exactly what gridlock they mean. There’s a regular ‘gridlock situation’ in Milnsbridge, which goes back many years.

Maybe they mean the ‘gridlock’ caused by a new bus lane along Manchester Road. It’s a very modest affair and I can’t say I’ve noticed much evidence of traffic chaos resulting from it. But in an election, any stick to beat the governing party will do and I’d be a hypocrite if I said my own party didn’t stoop to it on occasions.

It’s interesting that whilst there is a growing consensus that rail investment is ‘a good thing’ (apart from HS2 on which opinion is increasingly divided), what to do about local roads is far more controversial. However, it isn’t always a party political split. Sometimes it can divide parties themselves. Bus lanes and traffic calming are a good example. The Liverpool (Labour) mayor’s decision to abandon bus lanes in the city has been opposed by many councillors and Labour Party activists whilst being supported by some politicians on the right. Here in Kirklees, proponents of 20 mph speed limits cross party lines, with some Labour and most Liberal Democrat activists being in favour but many Labour councillors being less than enthusiastic. Meanwhile, the national ‘20s Plenty’ campaign is led by a Labour councillor over in York. On Kirklees Council, the strongest supporter of cycling is a Conservative and I hope he won’t mind me calling him a Thatcherite to boot! This year he is the mayor and has been doing a great job to promote cycling, supported by a small cross-party group of councillors including, as you would expect, Greens but also a few Labour.

One of the things that has most annoyed me about being a councillor is the knee-jerk reaction from many politicians to rubbish anything that comes from ‘the opposition’. So 20 mph speed limits are far too easily dismissed as ‘a Lib Dem issue’ whilst bus lanes are part of ‘Labour’s war on the motorist’. Cycling is for lentileating middle class Greens. It’s tedious stuff and little wonder that voter turn-out is going down and down. I was elected on a 32% turn-out and that was regarded as pretty good. There are far too many examples of puerile sectarianism that simply turn off the general public and

confirm their views that politicians are the lowest of the low, ‘only in it for themselves’. My experience of being on the council suggests that the picture is far more complex.

Many councillors, of all parties, are dedicated to their communities and work extremely hard. Yet there is something about the current political system that pushes them into negative mind-sets, especially when it is coming up to election time.

Am I being naïve? I don’t think so. It’s good that we have democracy, and I’d like to see more of it – at a very local level. People should have the choice of different political menus so politicians are not dismissed as ‘all the same’. We aren’t. The differences may well be over issues that do not feature on the traditional left/right spectrum, such as bus lanes versus free car parking, or pro-cycling measures against faster roads. Beyond transport, one of the most significant differences in politics that transcends traditional left and right is about centralism versus localism. My forecast is that this will become a much more important question in the next few years as councils struggle to find ways of balancing the books and have to restructure. Kirklees is not untypical in facing a 40% cut in its budget and some services will disappear and others will have to change fundamentally.

So should services be centralised in ‘super authorities’?

That’s clearly the way things are going in the metropolitan areas, with the emergence of ‘combined authorities’ (CAs). And transport is one of the key areas that the existing CA (Greater Manchester) has responsibility for; West and South Yorkshire are going down the same road. This is not necessarily a bad thing – but with several caveats. The combined authorities are not directly elected bodies and there seems to be little appetite to make them so. They will be controlled by the leaders of their constituent local authorities and the reality is that there will be limited accountability to the grassroots. They have the potential to become major sub-regional bodies with powers approaching the old metropolitan county councils (which were of course elected). When this has been debated in my own council the only questions raised at ‘full council’ came from the Liberal Democrats so the scrutiny that the combined authority issue needs fell somewhat flat.

Local government over the next few years is going to change dramatically and it’s vital that any change does not make it less accountable. Alongside that we need a cultural shift so that councillors recognise the public mood and are seen to work collaboratively, regardless of party. I choose my words carefully as very often they do work very well together in private and slag each other off in public. If people do want ‘combined authorities’ they should have the opportunity to vote for them being set up and for direct elections once established. At a more local level we need to review the experience of the post-1974 settlement and reverse the trend towards ever-greater centralisation. People need units of local government they can identify with. The French and Germans seem to manage to do that quite well, whereas we keep moving in the opposite direction, with a parallel drop in public

engagement. The two are not unrelated.

So we need a new ‘Redcliffe Maud Commission’ that can review local government in England. And it is an ‘English Question’ since the Scottish and Welsh Governments now have prime responsibility for local government issues. A commission for English local government needs to look at the entire political settlement and start off with a serious evaluation of regional government. To an extent that determines what happens below, though emphasis should be on that odd word ‘subsidiarity’ – that is, ‘devolve as much as you can to the most appropriate level’. That implies looking at taking power out of Whitehall and Westminster to the regions. Transport should be at the top of the list; already the Government is contemplating handing over rail franchising powers to a consortium of 33 local authorities in the North. Much more sensible to have one accountable body. Sub-regional authorities for major conurbations or traditional counties again make sense for some services, including strategic planning and economic development, social services, education and other areas. But then let’s go really local and bring back units of governance that relate to people’s lived identities. Huddersfield. Colne Valley. Ashton-under-Lyne.

Ikley. Barrow-in-Furness. Don’t be frightened of looking at small units of local government, with populations of 50,000 or less. And if people want them, flexible and responsive units of community governance at a village level that really empower people.

To finish: last Saturday afternoon I attended a meeting in Slaithwaite where about 30 local people talked about meaningful forms of community governance, with examples from as far afield as Colombia and Kerala.

Village councils, parish councils, community councils – they had made a massive difference when they had real power and committed people involved. Some of my centralist colleagues would dismiss all this as ‘parish pump politics’. But I’d put it another way and see us as the cranks that can start a revolution.

Life beyond council politics? You bet!

Paul’s book Railpolitik: bringing railways back to communities is published by Lawrence and Wishart price £14.99. To get £3 off go to www.lwbooks.co.uk and type in ‘railpolitik’ at the discount code on check out.

Paul Salveson is a councillor for the Golcar ward on Kirklees Council in West Yorkshire and a visiting professor at the University of Huddersfield in the department of transport and logistics. He played a leading role in the formation of the Association of Community Rail Partnerships (ACoRP), has worked for Northern Rail as head of government and community strategies, and in 2008 was awarded an MBE for services to the rail industry.

Paul’s website is www.paulsalveson.org.uk. You can follow him on twitter @paulsalveson and on facebook.

He can be contacted at: paul.salveson@kirklees.gov.uk

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:32 Page 20

LTT634_p21_John Dales_LTT634_p21 01/11/2013 03:55 Page 21

TransportXtra.com/ltt

JOHN DALES

STREETTALK Comment 21

Not seeing the wood for the security trees Measures to keep us safe from crime risk encouraging us to stay indoors

M

anifestations of the ‘one-track-mind’ approach to street design may be as comprehensive as entire philosophies, like: “segregation should be the keynote of modern road design”, which was enshrined in UK highway design policy from 1946. Or they may be a fixation with just one mode of transport, like: “we need more/free parking”; pedestrianisation that makes whole streets (even whole centres) dead after the shops shut; excessive bus priority zeal; or an unwillingness to engage with the impact of better cycling provision on the walking environment.

Sadly, bad street and space design can also arise from a lack of proportion in the deployment of just a single type of street furniture. My thoughts in this direction have been influenced by the recent ‘official’ opening of the new ‘square’ at King’s Cross station (‘official’ because the work’s still not finished; and ‘square’ because that’s not its shape). Specifically, I have been dismayed by the installation within the space of several tens of ‘security’ bollards (‘security’ because their role in that regard is, at best, partial). When the construction hoardings finally come down, I think there’ll be at least 100 of these big, bright, shiny blighters.

Another way in which security considerations can have an adverse impact on street design is in relation to the use of CCTV. This relates not just to the visual intrusiveness of the kit involved, or to where it’s located, or even to the plethora of signs that are used to ‘reassure’ people that they’re on Candid Camera. It also concerns the influence that CCTV officials can wield over where street trees should go. In my experience, a typical view from this perspective is that trees are, frankly, just a nuisance.

Now, let it be very clear that I am very grateful that there are people who strive very hard to try and protect me and my fellow citizens from the harm that some would inflict on us if they were able. While I therefore have no problem with such security considerations being an influence on street design, they are one of many; and a security ‘trump card’ should be played no more often than any other single-mode or single-issue trump card. Which is never.

The essential problem we face in this regard is exemplified by a response I received to an outburst of mine on Twitter concerning the King’s Cross bollards.

My correspondent said he didn’t get the “I would prefer to risk being blown up than swerve 10cm” argument and had previously described his take on the King’s Cross situation as “Risk of car bomb very high. Impact of bollards very low. Impact on freedom zero”. Which is fair enough, of course, as a subjective statement. But, when it comes to getting the design right, we need, if we can, to be able objectively to weigh security risk against other factors, such as impact on pedestrian movement.

The latter (i.e. the “swerve 10cm” factor) can be quantified fairly meaningfully, such as through using Transport for London’s Pedestrian Comfort Levels modelling technique. But the former (i.e. “risk of car bomb very high”) is just a statement. Similarly, while it is possible to assess the positive qualities of trees on the street environment in reasonably quantifiable fashion – through reference to their influence on micro-climate and people’s expressed desire for beauty, shade, etc, we don’t have the same ability to know what the impact on crime in any given street of blanket CCTV coverage will actually be.

We hear phrases such as ‘Safety is Paramount’ so often that we’ve forgotten that their meaning is obscure, to say the least. Usually, they’re simply used to make the speaker sound really, really concerned for our well-being and to imply that the action taken under the cover of the phrase is incontrovertibly for our definite benefit. But is it? How do we know? What are the options? And to what extent are people prepared to accept constraint or loss of amenity to achieve what they judge to be an acceptable level of personal security?

In respect of the last of those questions, it’s clear from the huge public fuss that’s raised at the prospect of having our bad driving habits checked, and of regular media complaining about ‘the Nanny State’, that the answer is complex. That’s a real pain; but it’s also a fact that we need to deal with, not a problem to wish away.

There’s also the matter of the extent to which specific measures, such as a bollard cordon or a particular CCTV installation, do achieve their intended purpose.

The King’s Cross bollards will stop narrow, four-wheeled motor vehicles laden with explosives. But, as we see too often in the news, there are many means other than such vehicles by which terrorists can import ordnance to their targets.

We ought to be able to take this into account when determining the impact of the security measures on factors like, in the case of King’s Cross Square, the setting for the two fine listed station buildings and the obstruction of pedestrian activity at peak times. Imagine the scene when multiple train- and tube-loads of passengers converge, in combination with the heavy flows of people going to and from buses and simply walking through the square between the numerous local trip generators. Now add wheelie-cases, buggies, the odd wheelchair and a small army of newspaper/magazine distributors into the mix, along with a decent proportion of visitors who’ve no idea where they are and need to orientate themselves.

Exactly.

The current Mayor of London once wrote about “pointless street furniture… reducing people’s enjoyment of public space”. When it comes to security paraphernalia, we know what the point is – we just seem unable to assess how important it is on a case-by-case basis. And if we fail to get the balance right, an overlooked risk is that we’ll reduce people’s enjoyment of a street or space to the extent they’ll go somewhere else next time. Or just stay at home in front of the computer.

Gaaah! Those buildings spoil my visual enjoyment of the bollards

It’s not like King’s Cross gets busy, or anything

Another victim of CCTV zeal (OK, it was “The Storm of ‘13”, but…)

John Dales is streets design adviser to local authorities around the UK; a design review panelist for both Transport for London and Urban Design London; a trustee of Living Streets; a Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety committee member; and transport advisor to the Prince's Foundation for Building Community. He is director of Urban Movement.

Tweet John @johnstreetdales

An archive of John Dales’ columns is available on TransportXtra.com/reports

LTT634 page 22_LTT634_p22 01/11/2013 04:13 Page 22

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

BUSINESS BRIEFING

22 Comment

Consultant Jacobs Engineering has won a £2m contract from the Highways Agency to assist the team developing the £1.5bn package of road improvements on the A14 between Cambridge and Huntingdon. The contract runs to 29 February 2016. Meanwhile, Chris Blandford Associates has won a contract worth £114,860 to provide masterplanning and ‘place-maker’ services to the project. Its contract runs to 30 October next year.

Universities invest in Heathrow Airport Britain’s universities’ pension fund has bought a stake in Heathrow Airport. The Universities Superannuation Scheme has bought 8.65% of the shares in a deal worth £392m. The shares were sold by Spanish infrastructure giant Ferrovial, whose shareholding falls from 33% to 25%.

DfT seeks bidders for East Coast The DfT has kicked-off the competition to run the East Coast rail franchise from February 2015. A pre-qualification questionnaire has been published with a view to shortlisting in January and the issue of an invitation to tender in February. The franchise is currently operated by state-run Directly Operated Railways.

Consultants win franchise advice The DfT has appointed three consultants to act as financial advisers for rail franchise competitions and direct award negotiations to extend some franchises.

A DfT spokesman said PricewaterhouseCoopers would advise on Northern, Great Western, Essex Thameside and East Coast. Grant Thornton will advise on Greater Anglia and First Capital Connect direct awards plus the new Thameslink, Great Northern and Southern management contract. Ersnt & Young will advise on TransPennine Express.

Hertz expands Uni car club coverage Hertz Corporation has launched a car club at Oxford Brookes University, offering staff use of the vehicles during working hours, and students access to vehicles in evenings, weekends and holidays. The club has no membership fee and rental rates are £5.50 per hour. Hertz operates car clubs at Imperial College London, Reading University, and London’s Brunel University, as well as at over 50 universities in the United States.

Stagecoach appoints TfL bus director to lead council relations

STAGECOACH HAS appointed Transport for London’s former director of performance, Clare Kavanagh, to its UK Bus division.

Kavanagh joins as service development director and will lead the firm’s engagement with local authorities as well as driving forward Stagecoach’s smart ticketing strategy.

Robert Montgomery, managing director of Stagecoach UK Bus said: “Clare has an excellent track-record of making improvements that benefit passengers. She has a real understanding of the importance of partnership between operators and transport authorities and the need to deliver sustainable solutions.”

One of her top priorities is likely to be persuading Nexus to drop its plans for bus Quality Contracts in Tyne and Wear.

Stagecoach’s latest six-month results reported like-for-like 5% revenue growth in its UK regional bus operations. Growth was strongest on commercial operations, with concessionary, tendered and school revenues growing but at a lower rate.

Revenue growth rates (as compared to the same period in

the last financial year) for Stagecoach’s other divisions were: • North America (including Megabus.com) 7.3% • Virgin Rail Group 6.1% • UK rail 3.0% • UK London buses –1.6% The UK results are for the 24 week period ending 13 October 2013; the North American figures relate to the five months to 30 September 2013.

The decline in London bus market revenues is partly attributed to the non-recurring revenue from the London Olympic and Paralympic

SOMERSET COUNTY Council is to extend its highways works contract with Skanska for at least one year and probably two.

Skanska inherited the Somerset contract after purchasing the operational services part of Atkins’ UK highways and transport business in February this year (LTT 28 Feb).

Atkins had signed a contract with Somerset in 2010 running to 2015 but with the option of extending it to 2020.

Councillors have now approved a contract extension with Skanska to the end of March 2016.

Recommending the extension, Somerset’s strategic commissioning manager for highways and transport, Mike O’Dowd Jones, said that the schedule of rates in the original contract were “extremely competitive” due to the state of the market when the contract was

signed.

“There is a strong likelihood that if contracts were simply retendered on a like-for-like basis, that rates would go up,” he said.

He added that extending the contract to 2017 would make sense because this would give time for the council to explore innovative and collaborative procurement models. Specifically, Jones said 2017 would see the end dates for contracts in several neighbouring authorities and so the benefits of a collaborative procurement for the next contract could be explored.

Rather than award Skanska a two-year extension immediately, Jones said it would be sensible to initially extend the contract by a year so that the firm’s service delivery performance could be reviewed.

The annual value of Somerset’s contract is between £25m and £30m.

Games in 2012. Stagecoach expects the performance to improve in the second half of 2013/14 as a result of nine new contracts won last financial year. From 1 October, the London bus operations no longer receive Bus Service Operators Grant but this will be offset by a corresponding uplift in the contract prices paid by Transport for London.

Rail performance was in line with expectations. Stagecoach remains in talks with the DfT about planned extensions to its SouthWest Trains and East Midlands Trains franchises. It is

one of three bidders still in the race for Transport for London’s Docklands Light Railway franchise competition; and it is bidding for the new Thameslink, Great Northern and Southern management contract.

Stagecoach said it would consider bidding for the East Coast franchise in conjunction with Virgin, with whom it has a joint venture on the West Coast rail franchise.

Virgin Rail Group (VRG) continues to earn a fee equivalent to 1% of revenue from the West Coast rail franchise with the DfT taking the risk that revenue and/or costs differ from those expected. VRG and the DfT are in discussions about revised commercial terms that could see Virgin Rail Group take greater revenues and cost risk from a date to be agreed through to April 2017 for a commensurate financial return.

The North American Megabus operation is the fastest-growing part of the Stagecoach Group, turning in a revenue growth of 23.7%, partly attributed to rapid expansion in Texas and California.

THE UK’S first all-electric car club has been launched in East London.

E-Car Club has teamed up with the Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association to launch the scheme. Members will pay £5.50 an hour to drive Renault Zoe and Fluence cars, with a 100-mile journey within the range of a single charge.

E-Car Club co-founder Christopher Morris said local authorities, colleges, residents’ groups, social landlords and business parks were the firm’s preferred partners. Schemes with neighbourhood initiative Low

Carbon Oxford North, the University of Hertfordshire and the Maylands Business Park in North London are in the pipeline for launching in 2014.

The East London scheme launch follows pilots in Luton, led by the borough council for its own staff and residents or businesses near the town centre; and Milton Keynes, for employees of rail engineering group Knorr-Bremse Rail Systems.

Both schemes remain operational.

E-Car Club was founded in 2011 with financial support from the Technology Strategy Board and low-carbon technology investors Sustainable Venture Development Partners. ● Learn about the latest developments in car clubs at the ‘Urban mobility & alternatives to car ownership’ conference at the KIA Oval, London on 13 November. Book online at www.TransportXtra.com/shop

Stagecoach bus: 5% revenue growth

Somerset grants Skanska UK’s first all-electric car road contract extension club launched in London www.mattphoto.co.uk

Jacobs wins A14 advice contract

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:32 Page 23

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Conferences & Courses 23

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:32 Page 24

24 Conferences & Courses

Conferences & Courses

To list your event and view more details on other events visit www.TransportXtra.com/ltt

Email your listings to the editorial team at ed.ltt@landor.co.uk

November 2013 November 11 More motorcycles could reduce road casulaties One-Day free conference at the Department for Transport in London Contact Phone: 01209 613 442 E-mail: safetyconf@rowanpublicaffairs.com November 12

Going for Growth – Building bus patronage in tough economic time CILT Members event to be held at Essex County Council Contact CILT. Tel: 01536 740104 Email: membership@ciltuk.org.uk November 19-20 Highway drainage systems, design installation and maintanance Training course organised by PTRC in London Contact PTRC. Tel: 020 7348 1970 Email: info@ptrc-training.co.uk Website: http://www.ptrc-training.co.uk/ November 20-21 Public enquiries and appeals Training course organised by PTRC in London Contact PTRC. Tel: 020 7348 1970 Email: info@ptrc-training.co.uk Website: http://www.ptrc-training.co.uk/

Upcoming LTT events November 5 LEPs and the New Transport Agenda Conference in London organised by Landor LINKS in association with ADEPT and the LEP-Network Contact Landor Links. Tel: 020 7091 7894 Email: conferences@landor.co.uk Website: http://www.transportxtra.com/events/ November 13 Parking World Conference in London organised by Landor LINKS Contact Landor Links. Tel: 020 7091 7865 Email: conferences@landor.co.uk Website: http://landor.co.uk/parkingworld/home.php November 13 Cycling & Walking Infrastructure that Works Conference in London organised by Landor LINKS Contact Landor Links. Tel: 020 7091 7865 Email: conferences@landor.co.uk Website: http://www.transportxtra.com/events/ November 13 Urban Mobility and Aletrnatives to Car Ownership Conference in London organised by Landor LINKS in partnership with Carplus Contact Landor Links. Tel: 020 7091 7865 Email: conferences@landor.co.uk Website: http://www.transportxtra.com/events/ December 3 Mapping and Information for Smarter Travel Conference in Manchester organised by Landor LINKS Contact Landor Links. Tel: 020 7091 7865 Email: conferences@landor.co.uk Website: http://www.transportxtra.com/events/ December 3-4

Mainstreaming Smarter Travel LSTF National Conference Conference in Manchester organised by Landor LINKS in association with the DfT Contact Rory McMullan at Landor Links. Tel: 020 7091 7894 Email: rory.mcmullan@landor.co.uk Website: http://www.landor.co.uk/smartertravel/

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:32 Page 25

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:33 Page 26

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

26

Consultants & Researchers

TransportXtra.com/consultants

Action Streets consultancy supports clients to improve sustainable access to employment and education by bike, walking and public transport including LSTF projects. We enable clients to regenerate streets and urban centres through practical studies, street audits, workshops and training.

Please contact Richard Smith Tel: 07850099517 Email: richard.smith@actionstreets.co.uk

Air Quality Consultants Ltd provides independent expert advice on ambient air quality. Established in 1993, the Company has completed many assessments of road, rail, shipping and airport schemes. Its staff have presented expert evidence at numerous Public Inquiries. The Comapny plays a central role in the development of air quality management and assessment in the UK and abroad, and has developed guidance and many of the tools used for assessment.

Bristol contact: Prof. Duncan Laxen on 0117 974 1086 London contact: Stephen Moorcroft on 020 8673 4313 Email: aqc@aqconsultants.co.uk www.aqconsultants.co.uk

We are one of the UK’s leading civil engineering consultancies, with an enviable reputation for quality, reliability and value, providing Transport Planning & Traffic Engineering, Transport Assessments, Road Safety & Mobility Audits, Travel Plans, Highway & Civil Engineering Design, Traffic Management & Parking, Flood Risk Assessment & Drainage Strategy, Development, Masterplanning, Code for Sustainable Homes Assessment, and Expert Witness services.

Please contact: Swindon: Rob Bowley T: 01793 619965 Email: rbowley@coleeasdon.com Bristol: Doug Hickman T: 01454 800474 Email: dhickman@coleeasdon.com Warrington: Brett Farmery T: 01925 661707 Email: bfarmery@coleeasdon.com Find out more about us at www.coleeasdon.com

Curtins is a leading team of transport planners, engineers and consultants. We have developed design consultancy services nationally with a strong local presence across the UK. We provide innovative transport and highway solutions to both private and public sectors developers. Our proactive and commercial approach is focused upon responding to clients’ needs by providing a personable service with highly experienced specialists.

Offices at: Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Douglas, Edinburgh, Kendal, Leeds, Liverpool, London, Manchester, and Nottingham.

Please contact: Tony Dolan on 0161 236 2394 Email: tony.dolan@curtins.com www.curtins.com

Specialist consultancy providing highway, traffic and transportation advice to both the public and private sectors. Transportation Strategies, Transport Assessments, Sustainability Appraisals, Travel Plans, Policy Advice, Expert Witness Support.

Forester House, Doctor’s Lane, Henley-inArden, Warwickshire, B95 5AW Tel: 01564 793 598 Fax: 01564 793 983 inmail@dtatransportation.co.uk www.dtatransportation.co.uk

ITP is a dynamic consultancy specialising in sustainable transport planning and research. We offer expert advice and solutions in: Smarter Choices; Demand Management; Sustainable Transport Strategies; Public Transport; Transport and Climate Change; Market & Social Research; Consultation; Rural Transport; Accessibility Planning; Mobility for Disabled People; and Concessionary Travel.

Offices in Birmingham – Milton Keynes – Nottingham Please contact Nick Ayland Tel: 0115 988 6905 Email: ayland@itpworld.net www.itpworld.net

Specialists in all aspects of traffic signal design, analysis and training. As the producers of industry standard software such as LinSig, JCT is unrivalled in its ability to offer clients correct and appropriate solutions to their traffic problems. In particular, JCT is highly regarded for its expertise in signal roundabout and complex junction design having been involved in numerous projects and providing advice to Government at both National and Local level.

JCT Consultancy Ltd, LinSig House,

Deepdale Enterprise Park, Nettleham, Lincoln LN2 2LL Tel: 01522 751010 Fax: 01522 751188 Email: anthony.gerundini@jctconsultancy.co.uk www.jctconsultancy.co.uk

Introducing our SmarterTravel Service.

Our Smarter Travel Team provides the full range of sustainable transport services: school, work and individualised travel plans, travel surveys, business travel networks, promotion & marketing and much more. All schemes are managed by our in house specialists, with additional resource taken from our pool of over 450 registered sustainable transport professionals. This flexible consultancy model provides excellent value for our clients at a cost of up to 50% less than other traditional consultancies.

Specialists in the provision of transportation planning, highways, traffic and infrastructure engineering, and working for the public and private sectors. The services provided range from initial appraisals and feasibility studies, transport assessments and analysis, traffic modelling and travel plans through to detailed highway and infrastructure design and supervision of construction projects.

PFA Consulting Ltd, Stratton Park House, Wanborough Road, Swindon, Wilts SN3 4HG Tel: 01793 828000 Fax: 01793 835500 Email: admin@pfaplc.com www.pfaplc.com

Delivering modern sustainable mobility: travel plans, transport and the NHS, active travel, carbon reduction planning, parking management schemes, car clubs, accessible and community transport.

Transport and travel service design and start-up: consultation services, transport events, workshops and conferences, business planning, social enterprise development, website and graphic design.

More about us: www.ratransport.co.uk Office: +44 (0) 161 368 6603 Contact: Richard Armitage Mob: +44 (0) 7973 538 556 Email: richard@ratransport.co.uk

Please contact: Peter Mattinson Tel: 020 7960 2551 Email: pjm@mattinsonpartnership.com www.mattinsonpartnership.com

The leading independent Transportation Consultancy. Travel Plans, Accessibility Studies, Highway and Infrastructure Design, Transport Assessments, Noise and Vibration, Air Quality, Public Transport Planning, Streetscape Solutions, Road Safety, Pedestrian and Cycle Networks, GIS Modelling and Evaluation, Regeneration Studies, SuDS and Integrated Transport Plans.

Woking Office: Tony Brown, Paul Stocker Tel: 01483 750 508 Highway & Infrastucture Design: Tim Moore Tel: 01483 750 508 Strategic Group: Ian Mitchell Tel: 0207 874 1580 London Office: Paul Zanna Tel: 0207 874 1574 Leeds Office: Geoff Blackburn Tel: 0113 248 1414 Newcastle Office: Nigel Dyson Tel: 0191 230 8005 North West Office: Mark Butt Tel: 01524 382 522 Bristol Office: Adam Padmore Tel: 0117 925 1027 Birmingham Office: Paul Zanna Tel: 0121 224 7630 West Midlands Office: Stephen Checketts Tel: 07787 523397 Isle of Wight Office: Ken Fry Tel: 01983 866 234 Cardiff Office: Leigh Fotiadis Tel: 02920 263653

A central London transport planning consultancy specialising in global sports stadia and major events, central London development planning and international stations and transport interchange. We enjoy what we do, and deliver outstanding value and technically excellent advice by employing the best consultants and empowering them to solve our clients’ most complex challenges.

Tel: 020 7242 0228 Email: info@momentum-transport.com Twitter: @Momentum_TP_Ltd www.momentum-transport.com

Mott MacDonald is a leading consultancy shaping transport solutions around the world. We provide a comprehensive range of services combined with a real understanding of local conditions to find the right solution in all stages of the planning and implementation process for all modes of urban and inter-urban transport.

Mott MacDonald Limited, 35 Newhall Street, Birmingham, B3 3PU. United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)121 234 1509 Email: jo.baker@mottmac.com

To get your profile in print and online call us on 0845 270 7861 or email info@transportxtra.com

Stratageeb Ltd assists businesses develop strategic visions and positioning, thus, allowing for stronger, more focussed growth. Based on the experience of its MD Giles Bailey, who brings 20+ years of knowledge in strategy, innovation and marketing at organisations including TfL, its activities include work with digital starts-ups, business mentoring, university lecturing, public speaking and proposal refinement.

Tel: 0203 589 8618E: info@stratageeb.co.uk Twitter: stratageeb1 www.stratageeb.co.uk

Specialists in innovative ways of developing and promoting sustainable transport, covering every step from strategies to implementation. We can offer advice and solutions on a range of sustainable transport options: cycling & walking projects, cyclist training, professional training for cycling & walking practitioners, public consultation, travel plans, promotion & marketing, active leisure and much more.

Office 4, 145 Islingword Road, Brighton BN2 9SH Tel: 0845 345 7623 Email: info@transport-initiatives.com www.transport-initiatives.com

The Transportation Consultancy (ttc) is a dynamic and innovative transportation consultancy that specialises in transport planning, traffic engineering, sustainable transport and transport economics. Our people have over 100 years of combined technical knowledge and can offer you expert advice covering the whole transportation sector, helping you to make sound decisions in today’s complex environment.

Our advice is underpinned by innovation, technical excellence and expert opinion, enabling our clients to make sound decisions in what is often a complex and challenging environment. “ttc” has a set of values that guides us in our everyday business and continues to drive our ambition to provide unrivalled advice that helps deliver the best transportation solutions to our clients.

Please contact Alan Bailes Tel: 07803894686 Email: info@ttc-transportplanning.com www.ttc-transportplanning.com

TTR are sustainable transport experts who provide high quality transport consultancy and research services. TTR also helps local authorities and partner organisations to gain access to European and national funding. What we do: • Freight Transport Policy • Health, Environment & Climate Change • European Projects and Bids • Smarter Choices • Travel Information Services • Transport Demand Management • Market & Social Research • Transport Accessibility & Equality.

Please contact Chris Douglas Tel: 01543 416416 Email: enquiries@ttr-ltd.com www.ttr-ltd.com

URS provides transport consultancy and planning solutions across the investment and project lifecycle for local and central government, infrastructure operators and private sector clients. Core services include business case, demand and revenue forecasting, transport assessments, sustainability, technology, road safety engineering and travel planning.

For further information please contact: Caroline Brock Tel: +44 (0)121 212 3035 Email: caroline.brock@urs.com www.ursglobal.com

Waterman is a leading engineering and environmental consultancy with specialist skills in transport planning, traffic engineering and infrastructure design consultancy. We work in partnership with both public and private sector clients to deliver sustainable and affordable solutions on projects throughout the UK.

Offices in Belfast, Birmingham, Brentwood, Bristol, Cardiff, Derby, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness, Leeds, Lingfield, London, Manchester and Nottingham.

Jonathan Hoare: Tel: 0121 212 7700 Email: jonathan.hoare@watermangroup.com Mark Jackson: Tel: 01277 238100 Email: mark.jackson@watermangroup.com www.watermangroup.com

Transport Organisations

The CIVINET UK & Ireland Network is the sustainable transport network for local authorities.

Members can access European and national funding information, comprehensive sustainable transport expertise and networking events. Private organisations are welcome as associate members.

Tel: 0117 907 6520 Email: civinet-uk-ireland@civitas.eu www.civitas.eu/civinet-uk-ireland

ITS United Kingdom is the society for all who work in the Intelligent Transport Systems sector in the UK. ITS technology delivers transport benefits in terms of reducing congestion, lessening the environmental impact of transport, and real time and accurate information to travellers and managers.

ITS (UK) has 170 corporate members, ranging from UK Government departments to systems suppliers, consultants, and academic institutions. ITS (UK) is the voice of the ITS community

Tel: 020 7709 3003 Email: mailbox@its-uk.org.uk www.its-uk.org.uk

The Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership is an action and advisory group established in 2003 to take a lead in accelerating the shift to low carbon vehicles and fuels in the UK and to help ensure that UK business can benefit from that shift. The LowCVP now has over 300 member organisations from sectors including: energy; automotive; government; academia; environment campaigns and road user groups.

Tel: 020 3178 7859 Email: secretariat@lowcvp.org.uk www.lowcvp.org.uk

20’s Plenty For Us is the national charity that supports local 20’s Plenty campaigns across the country. Implementing lower speeds that work requires far more than highway engineering. 20’s Plenty For Us can offer practical advice on how to work with communities to maximise driver compliance and community ownership of lower speeds.

Tel: 07973 639781 Email: info@20splentyforus.org.uk www.20splentyforus.org.uk

Carplus is the national accreditation body for car clubs in the UK and co-ordinates annual data collection and research for this sector. We provide information, advice and consultancy to regional government, local authorities, transport professionals and community groups on car clubs and ride-sharing. Carplus is a membership organization and registered charity with offices in Leeds and Edinburgh.

Tel: 0113 234 9299 Email: info@carplus.org.uk Twitter: @CarplusTrust www.carplus.org.uk

The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (UK) is the leading professional body for individuals and organisations involved directly and indirectly in transport, logistics and supply chain management.

As a member of CILT you will receive a wide range of products and services to support you throughout your career. These benefits represent an outstanding return on your initial investment and will help you to make a noticeable impact at all levels within your organisation.

Tel: 01536 740 100 Fax: 01536 740 101 Email: enquiry@ciltuk.org.uk www.ciltuk.org.uk

PTRC Education & Research Services Co Ltd is a company within CILT (UK). PTRC is the leading international organisation specialising in the training of transport, highways and planning professionals.

Tel: 020 7481 970 Emai: info@ptrc-training.co.uk www.ptrc-training.co.uk

Your company here?

Please contact Daniel on: 0845 270 7861 or email: daniel@landor.co.uk

The Transport Planning Society facilitates, develops and promotes best practice in transport planning and provides a focus for dialogue and debate between all those engaged in it, whatever their background or other professional affiliation. TPS works closely with its four partners ICE, CILT (UK), IHT and RTPI to further the profession and in the development of transport planning qualifications.We run a programme of events across the country.

Tel: +44 (0)20 7665 2238 Email: info@tps.org.uk www.tps.org.uk

The Transport Statistics Users Group brings together users and producers of transport statistics to develop understanding, identify problems in provision and suggest solutions.

The TSUG organises a series of regular seminars and publication of newsletters and a Yearbook, all of which are free to members.

For more information, visit: www.tsug.org.uk, email membership@tsug.org.uk or phone 0203 054 0874

Specialists

View their full CVs at TransportXtra.com/consultants FINE Ann

Fine Reports Professional policy and strategy development including clear and concise report writing.

Experience in local transport plans, Highway asset management plans, Parking and Enforcement plans, Road safety plans, Network Management reports and plans, Freight Transport Strategies, School Travel Plans, data management, report writing and bidding.

Tel: 07815 526068 Email: ann@finereports.co.uk www.finereports.co.uk

HURDLE David. DipTP, MA, MRTPI, FCILT

Transport Planning Consultant Travel Plans, Transport Policies/Strategies and Active Travel Audits.

Broomfield, 20 Holt Road, Sheringham NR26 8NB Tel/Fax: 01263 822300 Mobile: 07808 533165 Email: d.hurdle@btinternet.com www.davidhurdle.co.uk

STAVELEY Peter. MSc CMILT

Public Transport Consultancy Railway and bus operational planning, public transport strategy, railway timetabling, capacity studies, software development, data manipulation.

247 Davidson Road, Croydon, CR0 6DQ Tel: 07973 168742 Email: Peter@PeterStaveley.co.uk www.PeterStaveley.co.uk

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:33 Page 27

TransportXtra.com/ltt

The LTT Directory 27

To place an advertisement call the sales team on 0845 270 7861 or email ads.ltt@landor.co.uk

The next issue of LTT will be published: Friday 15 November Advertising booking deadline: Tuesday 12 November

To advertise please contact Daniel on: 0845 270 7861 or email: daniel@landor.co.uk

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:33 Page 28

28 The LTT Directory

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:33 Page 29

TransportXtra.com/ltt

The LTT Directory 29

Online access to the latest business-critical transport policy & planning intelligence is available in monthly–annual subscriptions: from just 25p per person, per day. RSS feeds and email newsletters are free.

No small print

www.TransportXtra.com/subscription

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:33 Page 30

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

30 Recruitment

The best jobs for transport specialists starts here

Below is a selection of the top vacancies currently advertised on the UK’s leading transport jobs board: www.Jobs-in-Transport.com

Field Service Engineer Nottingham Job requirements include installation of equipments (e.g. for ticketing, AVL and RTPI ) in buses, trams and light rails as well as on associated wayside platforms, system monitoring as well as remote and on-site diagnostics / troubleshooting and repair on component level and technical maintenance.

Highways Development Control Officer – Melksham £28,922 - £31,160

Operations Manager

We are looking for someone who can bring experience and a range of skills to our Highways Development Control Group, in a role dealing with risks and opportunities arising from development proposals. In particular, we are looking for someone to identify transport impact mitigation and infrastructure requirements; negotiate effective planning agreements to secure requisite solutions; to maximise community advantage, and to ensure that the transport and highway interests of all stages of development are delivered to an appropriate standard and in accordance with agreed terms and conditions.

Tunbridge Wells

Closes: 13th November

Responsibilities include the day-to-day leadership of the depot’s operational team, control of budgets, liaison with local Trade Union representatives, resource planning and management of all aspects of employee performance and discipline. You will also liaise with internal and external customers, including local authorities and other key stakeholders, as required.

Head of Transportation & Highways

Closes: 5th November

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/oybq4cm

Closes: 4th November

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/parlejg

Regional General Manager Southern Home Counties The Regional General Manager will have accountability for engineering and operational delivery across a number of depots which will run a sizeable fleet and employ 500 or so staff in a challenging commercial environment.

Closes: 28th November

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/np5yoly

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/lxuf9eb

£92,000 We need you to evolve our recent success stories, develop new ones, build practices and prioritise infrastructure that will continue Thurrock’s programme of regeneration. With an impressive track record in a similar role, you’re ready for a diverse remit: everything from overseeing strategic transport to public rights of way. But whatever the challenge, you’ll work with a hugely motivated senior management team, against a backdrop of opportunity and enterprise.

Closes: 18th November

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/p7axe75

LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31_LTT634_p02,06,20,23-31 31/10/2013 16:33 Page 31

www.Jobs-in-Transport.com

Recruitment 31

LTT634 back page_LTT634_p32 01/11/2013 07:01 Page 40

Editorial

Tel: 0845 270 7875 | Fax: 0845 270 7960 | Email: ed.ltt@landor.co.uk

Advertising

Tel: 0845 270 7861 | Fax: 0845 270 7960 | Email: ads.ltt@landor.co.uk

Next issue

Published 15 November

LTT634 01 November - 14 November 2013

Milton Keynes to test driverless pods on pedestrian routes

TransportXtra.com/ltt People

News

TECHNOLOGY

PLANS ARE being drawn up for on-street trials of autonomous pods in Milton Keynes.

The electric vehicles with capacity for two passengers would operate between the city’s railway station and the city centre, a distance of about a mile. They would travel on the ‘redway’ pedestrian routes between the two locations, rather than on road.

The project is part of the Milton Keynes Low Carbon Urban Transport Zone (LUTZ) initiative, backed by the Government’s new Transport Systems Catapult, which is based in the city.

John Beasley, the Catapult’s demonstrators programme director, told LTT that an extensive set of safety and other tests would have to be undertaken before the pods could be introduced in the city. “There’s a whole load of things to be qualified before putting them on the redways.”

Initially the vehicles are likely to operate end-to-end journeys

between the plaza in front of the railway station and the city centre.

But Beasley said the vision was for the vehicles ultimately to operate on demand, for instance picking up users outside their office and dropping them exactly where they wanted to go.

The pods may have a driver in the early days of the trial in order to boost public confidence in the concept. But the target is to subsequently move to full automation.

“We’d like about 100 pods in the trial though it would start off smaller,” said Beasley. “If the trial is successful then you could see them in a town near you in the future.”

Beasley said the pods project had been initiated by John Miles, leader of the Automotive Council’s intelligent mobility group.

A pod manufacturer has yet to be identified but a prospectus for the wider LUTZ programme has just been issued to organisations who have expressed interest in it.

Another project in LUTZ will develop apps and street displays

giving real-time information about the city’s transport networks.

The Catapult is keen for UK firms to big play a part in LUTZ. “It is an opportunity for UK businesses to showcase their technologies,” said Beasley.

A spokesman for Milton Keynes Council said: “The council is supportive of the LUTZ programme identified by the Transport Catapult, we need to work with them to ensure that the trial delivers what is needed in MK to support its transport and development priorities.”

The Catapult centre had just received confirmation of a £46.6m grant from the Government’s Technology Strategy Board to help fund activities over the next five years. This will complement a £16.9m five-year injection from the DfT.

encouraging, another sign that transport planning is recovering well from the difficulties caused by the recession and austerity measures,” said TPS director of skills Martin Richards. “Many more graduates have been recruited this year and there has been an increase in the number of transport planners following the TPS Professional Development Scheme.

But Richards said the sector still faced problems: “We must recognise the budget challenges

that local authorities continue to face, and the depressing effect of some public procurement on professional standards.”

Almost half (45%) of students are from outside the EU – 153 of the 337.

Universities participating in the survey are: Cardiff; Edinburgh Napier; Imperial College/University College London; Leeds; Loughborough; Newcastle; Salford; Southampton; University of the West of England; and Westminster.

Transport Systems Catapult: five-year delivery plan to March 2018 is available at http://tinyurl.com/kj7yjr7

Labour’s new transport team named Labour has announced the names and responsibilities of its new shadow transport team, after Mary Creagh replaced Maria Eagle as shadow transport secretary (LTT 18 Oct). Lillian Greenwood, the only survivor of Eagle’s team, takes the shadow minister of state role and has responsibility for the rail sector, including HS2. Richard Burden, the MP for Birmingham Northfield, has been appointed a shadow undersecretary of state with responsibility for local transport including buses, cycling and road safety plus all roads and vehicle matters. Blackpool South MP Gordon Marsden has also been appointed a shadow undersecretary of state with responsibility for aviation, the localism/devolution agendas, and maritime. Mary Creagh’s adviser is Juan Leahy, who has transferred with Creagh from her previous job shadowing the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Leahy told LTT more advisers would be appointed.

MacColl replaces Hebditch at CBT James MacColl has been appointed head of campaigns at environmental transport charity the Campaign for Better Transport, replacing campaigns director Richard Hebditch who has become assistant director for external affairs at the National Trust. MacColl will join the CBT at the beginning of December from green energy trade association RenewableUK where he is head of public affairs. He has previously worked on public and parliamentary affairs for General Motors, the RSPB and the Campaign to Protect Rural England.

Mouchel appoints Oldham to transport role Infrastructure and business services group Mouchel has appointed Darren Oldham to the new post of operations and development director in its highways and transport team. Oldham joins from Amey where he was an associate director responsible for transport planning.

He was previously highways director of Brookhouse Group and is a former chief executive of consultant JMP.

Vinsome leads transport knowledge centre Adrian Vinsome has been appointed interim director of the Technology

Transport Masters numbers increase

Strategy Board’s transport Knowledge Transfer Network (KTN). He joins from Cenex, the Centre of Excellence for Low Carbon and Fuel Cell Technologies, where he was head of programmes. Vinsome is taking over from Neil Ridley, who is moving to a new role as director of business development with the Transport Systems Catapult, the newly established technology and innovation centre backed by the Technology Strategy Board.

THE NUMBER of students studying for a transport Masters degree has increased for the first time since 2009, according to an annual survey of ten universities conducted by the Transport Planning Society.

Student numbers have risen to 337 full-time equivalents, up 15 on last year, and the number of UK students starting a course has increased by 14 to 79.

“These findings are very

Former DfT civil servant Kate Mingay has joined consultant Cambridge Economics Policy Associates as a senior adviser. Mingay was appointed the DfT’s director of commercial and technical services in January 2011 but left the Department in April this year amid controversy over her role in the aborted West Coast rail franchise competition. Since then she has advised the Government’s Transport Systems Catapult.

EDUCATION

Andrew Herring has joined global law firm Eversheds as a partner from Greenberg Traurig Maher where he led a team advising Birmingham City Council on the redevelopment of New Street station.

Ruud Haket has joined public transport operator Keolis as chief operating officer from Abellio where he was managing director of the Greater Anglia franchise.