Local Transport Today Issue 795

LTT795 front page.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 08:47 Page 1

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

POLICY | PLANNING | FINANCE | DEVELOPMENT

TransportXtra.com/ltt

£167m for buses as virus destroys travel demand

PROVIDING INDEPENDENT NEWS & ANALYSIS SINCE 1989

13 Plan to relocate Sheffield’s inner relief road

10-11 Micromobility consultation opens

15 Cambs transport powers wrangle

BUS OPERATORS in England were thrown a financial lifeline by the DfT this week, with a £167m emergency fund to help them survive the Covid-19 virus pandemic that has seen travel demand collapse across all transport modes.

The Covid-19 Bus Services Support Grant will be paid over the next three months at a rate of up to £13.9m a week.

It comes on top of the Government’s commitment to continue paying operators Bus Service Operator Grant on the basis of pre-virus service levels.

The DfT has also urged local authorities to maintain operator reimbursement for the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme at pre-virus levels, and to continue payments for tendered service contracts.

The £167m will be paid to operators on the condition that they maintain services at a level sufficient to meet the much reduced demand. They must also allow adequate space between passengers on board to minimise the risk of the virus spreading.

Transport secretary Grant Shapps said: “We have been very clear during the outbreak that the best way to stop the spread of the virus and protect the NHS, is to stay at home if possible. “[But] Our buses are a lifeline for people who need to travel for work or to buy food – including our emergency services and NHS staff – and it’s vital we do all we can to keep the sector running.”

Confederation of Passenger Transport chief executive Graham Vidler said the funding would “plug the gap between the cost of running essential routes and revenue being received, and will help the country through the outbreak, allowing critical journeys to continue”.

Travel demand has collapsed following the Government’s introduction of travel restrictions to control Covid-19’s spread. On 23 March the Prime Minister announced that people would only be allowed to leave their home to: shop for basic necessities; one form of exercise a day; any medical need; and for travelling to and from work, but only where this is absolutely necessary and cannot be done from home.

Businesses including pubs, cinemas, theatres and casinos were ordered to close on 21 March. Shops selling non-essential goods were ordered to close on 24 March.

Road traffic levels have slumped and passengers have deserted buses and trains. The London Underground was this week carrying just five per cent of the passenger volume it carried this time last year.

The DfT has taken temporary control of all remaining rail franchises. It cannot take control of the buses because the industry is largely privately-owned.

One bus operator this week highlighted the financial peril the industry would be in without a rescue package, telling LTT that patronage was down 90 per cent but service levels were down only 40-50 per cent. “There would be a point in time when we would all have gone bust. It’s just basic arithmetic.”

Stagecoach and FirstGroup have both put non-essential capital expenditure on hold.

Stagecoach directors are sacrificing 50 per cent of their salaries/fees for a period of time.

The pandemic is certain to delay FirstGroup’s plan to sell its North American businesses, which have also been badly affected by the virus.

The Urban Transport Group is calling for Government funding for its members, who operate tram, Metro and Underground systems. The UTG is also doing some initial thinking about what the funding and organisational structure of England’s bus industry should look like once the virus has been brought under control.

“We’re looking at an industry that is going to be kept on life support,” a participant in the discussions told LTT. “Operators are going to stop investing in new fleet, so it doesn’t put them in a condition to come out all guns blazing after the crisis is over. It’s too early to say where all this leads.”

The bus industry had appeared to be on the cusp of a renaissance with ministers announcing billions of pounds for bus priority in February and promising a national bus strategy. >> READ MORE?

Covid-19 news

pp2-5

TOP10

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

WSP and AECOM to merge?

Double deck electric buses for Manchester

More car parking needed in new housing estates – Wigan Welsh Government publishes bill to reform bus industry

London Councils suspends London lorry control scheme Virgin withdraws open access rail bid

TfWM reveals the details of its enhanced partnerships

Review of HE’s role in the conurbations Net zero ‘the next Brexit’

10. Leeds’ Clean Air Zone could outlive city’s air quality breach

most read LTT stories on

20 March - 02 April 2020

COVID-19

21 Phil Goodwin: Net Zero requires a road programme rethink. But how?

LTT795 pp2-3.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 09:01 Page 4

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

2 News: Covid-19

In Brief

Councils receive extra £1.6bn The Government has awarded councils in England £1.6bn to help respond to Covid-19 pressures.

The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is assessing the net additional costs to Scottish local government of the pandemic.

Liverpool: full speed ahead for bus reform The Covid-19 pandemic will not affect the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s work on bus regulatory reform, which is likely to recommend franchising (LTT 21 Feb). A report on the pandemic presented to the combined authority on 20 March recommended additional funding for the bus regulatory reform work. “Continuity of funding over the next few months is crucial so as not to lose momentum or time in delivering this organisational priority especially within the current pandemic,” said chief executive Frank Rogers and mayor Steve Rotheram. “Indicative costs for the organisation to complete this outline business case are in the region of £2.2m.” As well as franchising, the work will consider an Enhanced Partnership.

Herts retains school transport payments Hertfordshire County Council is continuing to pay school transport operators but with a possible slight reduction due to no, or less, wear and tear to their fleet.

Stagecoach E Mids runs NHS services Stagecoach East Midlands has launched shuttle bus services for exclusive use by NHS staff in Mansfield and Hull. Buses will depart from King’s Mill Hospital in Mansfield at the main shift change times from afternoon into evening.

The service will operate flexibly, stopping in safe places on main roads that are close to the passengers’ homes. At Hull Royal Infirmary, four pairs of daily departures are operating at the end of shifts, one bus serving east Hull and the other west Hull.

Free weekend bus travel withdrawn The Welsh Government has temporarily withdrawn universal free weekend travel on its Traws Cymru bus network. Transport minister Ken Skates said the Welsh Government-funded policy was incompatible with the instruction that people stay at home.

Welsh air service withdrawn The Welsh Government has withdrawn the air service between Cardiff and Anglesey for three months, blaming Covid-19.

Councils told to keep p BUSES

by Andrew Forster

THIS WEEK’S DfT pledge of £167m for England’s bus operators comes on top of last week’s announcement that operators should continue to receive existing payments for concessionary fares, supported services and Bus Service Operator Grant.

The Government’s position on these payments was set out in a letter to councils from Stephen Fidler, the DfT’s director of local transport.

“We understand the importance of bus services to communities, key workers and people taking essential journeys, and we are determined to support them,” he said.

The DfT will continue paying BSOG to operators on the basis of estimated service levels before the virus outbreak.

Turning to what local authorities can do, he said: “Ministers hope, and expect, that as part of your response, you will want to support vital local bus service providers so that they can continue to play a central role in your communities after this pandemic “In particular, we would urge you to continue to pay bus and coach operators for tendered services and home-to-school transport at the levels before any downturn in service provision or patronage, for at least the period of the outbreak.”

Fidler points councils to the Government’s emergency guidance on procurement, Procurement Policy Note 02/20 – Supplier Relief Due to COVID19.

“This means that contracting authorities should continue to pay suppliers for the next three months (even if service delivery is disrupted/temporarily stopped) in order to ensure business continuity and protect jobs.

Fidler: continue making tendered service and reimbursement payments

“Authorities should also pay invoices immediately on receipt to support cashflow.

“We would also urge you to continue to pay operators for concessionary fares at levels before any downturn.

“Nothing in the above should stop you from, as part of this funding, seeking to ensure that

bus operators make an appropriate offer to passengers, for example by protecting vital services that connect communities to lifeline services such as supermarkets, or link key workers to their employment,” said Fidler.

“We understand that local authorities are also under financial pressure, hence the recent Government announcement of an additional £1.6bn support to local authorities to respond to coronavirus.”

The DfT has worked with the Office of the Traffic Commissioner (OTC) to make it easier for operators to adjust service levels (see panel).

Said Fidler: “The secretary of state is clear that he expects that, as bus operators amend their timetables, they should continue to provide appropriate service levels for key workers, most particularly to hospitals, and that buses are not heavily loaded because of reduced service patterns.”

“In doing so we would expect bus operators to do all that they can to ensure that they are always providing the services that local authorities consider are required.”

Operators will be able to send applications for temporary variation of services made at short notice to both the Traffic Commissioner and relevant local authority at the same time.

“As part of this process, we are asking local authorities to limit the time for consulting them to 24 hours instead of 28 days.”

Fidler said local authorities may want to rethink how they spend their share of the £30m of additional bus service support for 2020/21 that the DfT awarded them in February (LTT 07 Feb & 20 Mar). The grant was supposed to be for fund new or restored bus services.

“Given the circumstances, local authorities may wish to use this funding to support bus operators to run minimum service levels during this time.”

Emergency timetable guidance SENIOR TRAFFIC Commissioner Richard Turfitt has issued emergency guidance emphasising that commissioners will support bus operators’ short notice applications to change bus timetables because of Covid-19.

Operators normally have to give 70 days notice of timetable changes in England and Scotland (28 days to local authorities and then 42 to Traffic Commissioners) and 56 in Wales.

Legislation allows operators to seek short notice dispensation from a traffic commissioner in certain circumstances.

The new guidance encourages operators to make use of these short notice provisions.“The temporary variation might be treated as akin to a holiday service, where the registration automatically reverts back to the original route timetable at the expiry of the given period,” says the Senior Traffic Commissioner.

“Traffic commissioners must consider each

case on its own merits but will be alive to the challenging operating environment. The commissioners will work with the Office of the Traffic Commissioner management to ensure that there is enough capacity to process an increase in applications.”

Hundreds of operators have reduced their timetables in the last fortnight, some on more than one occasion, as demand plummets.

Most are trying to provide a service to key workers and people who rely on public transport to access facilities such as shops.

The Oxford Bus Company and Stagecoach in Oxford have temporarily agreed to accept each other’s bus tickets on some routes where they compete.

Contingency and emergency planning – temporary updates to statutory documents no.2, 3, 4, 9 & 14 is available at https://tinyurl.com/uwc6y76

Welsh bus funding continues to be paid

BUSES

THE WELSH Government has announced a £29m package of support to help the bus industry through the Covid-19 pandemic.

The scheme will see the Government pay existing Bus Service Support Grant, concessionary fares reimbursement and payments under the MyTravelPass scheme as if the virus outbreak had not occurred.

Transport minister Ken Skates has also written to the Welsh

Local Government Association recommending that councils continue to pay a minimum of 75 per cent of the contract value for school and other contracted local passenger services.

To receive the Government’s support, operators must commit to the following for the next three months: • scheduled services will operate a foundation timetable (contracts to be agreed with local authorities), sufficient to allow key workers to get to work and those

without a car to get to shops for essential food and medical supplies • no bus will carry more than 50 per cent of its maximum capacity • all NHS workers who use a scheduled bus service will travel free of charge, matching what the Welsh Government has agreed for rail services • each operator will provide the Government and councils with a weekly report showing what routes have been run, what times buses arrived at each stop, how

many passengers alighted, what the fare each passenger paid, etc.

Industry body CPT Cymru said: “While this funding is a welcome step towards meeting operators’ costs, with an unprecedented fall in passenger numbers operators across Wales, additional support will be required to cover their costs to provide the service levels envisaged by the Welsh Government.”

Stagecoach South Wales has withdrawn all Sunday services until further notice.

LTT795 pp2-3.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 09:01 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News: Covid-19 3

paying bus operators Operators riled as TfGM attaches 11 conditions to tendered services cash TRANSPORT FOR Greater Manchester has attached 11 conditions to some of its support for the bus industry during the Covid-19 lockdown. An operator said TfGM had “put a gun to operator’s heads”, a view that LTT understands is shared by other operators in the conurbation.

TfGM chief executive Eamonn Boylan wrote to operators on 27 March, following receipt of the DfT’s guidance letter (see left) and taking into account the Government’s Procurement Policy Note 02/20 – Supplier Relief Due to COVID-19.

“We are now able to confirm our position on payments for tendered services and concessionary reimbursement for the forthcoming month of April,” said Boylan. To help operators with cashflow, payments were made on the 1 April rather than the normal date of 15 April. “During April we will continue to review appropriate arrangements for subsequent months.”

April’s reimbursement payments for the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS) will be based on the average level for the last three months.

Operator reimbursement for all local concessions wil reflect the impact of Covid-19.

Payments for tendered bus services will be made at the same level as paid in March, subject to 11 conditions.

Julian Peddle, a director of High Peak Buses, which operates in the conurbation, said this week: “TfGM has put a gun to operator’s heads by saying it will withhold this money, which would have been paid on 1 April, unless operators agree to an 11-point list of demands.”

He criticised TfGM’s response to the pandemic more generally. “Many school buses are still operating despite schools being closed and tendered bus services still appear to operate without change.”

Peddle said little had changed since High Peak issued a press release on the 25 March saying: “Buses are running around completely empty under instructions from TfGM. One operator is being ordered to run 27 school buses every day without carrying a single child, another reported that a bus was running

for five hours yesterday evening and carried only one passenger.”

Another operator this week concurred with Peddle’s assessment, telling LTT: “We are certainly not all in this together. Clearly to some in Greater Manchester a national crisis is just an opportunity for a bit of bureaucratic posturing.”

The 11 conditions are: 1. No changes to an operator’s network should be made unless expressly agreed with TfGM and these agreed levels will be maintained. Should the network be forced to close due to further Government restrictions we reserve the right to review payments 2. The operator agrees to work flexibly and proactively with TfGM to redeploy resource as required and react to specific times of day or areas of demand as they become apparent 3. Continued acceptance of ENCTS customers before 9.30am on weekdays at no additional cost or enhanced charges as would otherwise be considered, and to continue to work with TfGM to consider and support the implementation of further temporary concessions as the need arises 4. The operator agrees to share with TfGM its workforce plan, including specifically

any plans for furloughing staff 5. The operator maintains adequate financial records and agrees to comprehensive open book access 6. The operator agrees to repay any monies that could not be demonstrated to have been needed 7. The operator agrees to remain flexible in terms of potential operations within the Easter holiday period 8. Social distancing on transport should be implemented and communicated in line with national guidance. This may preclude the use of smaller vehicles. Revised capacities or vehicle types should be discussed with TfGM 9. Commit to enhanced cleaning standards of touch-points in vehicles to ensure virus spread is controlled 10. Updated timetable information is provided at the earliest point to TfGM 11. Day-to-day service disruption must be communicated to Traveline and/or in the agreed format to TfGM Commenting on the conditions, Peddle said: “The effect of these would see TfGM seek control of the bus route network and bus operators’ employees, whilst leaving the ongoing cost risks with the bus operators. Any director agreeing to such proposals would be breaching his or her responsibility under the Companies Act, as they could be trading whilst insolvent.

“I understand bus companies have sought, without success, a discussion with senior officers of TfGM. There is a real possibility that unless there is a compromise, many services will cease to operate, leaving NHS and key workers without bus services.”

Boylan said TfGM would also give operators financial relief in the coming months by: • suspending April’s increase to bus station departure charges for the foreseeable future • giving operators who occupy accommodation at TfGM facilities a threemonth rental holiday “We are also continuing to explore other aspects of current operations where operator relief may be appropriate,” said Boylan.

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: 0207 091 7875 Email: ed.ltt@landor.co.uk Publisher/Editorial Director Peter Stonham Editor Andrew Forster Design & Production natalie.clarke@landor.co.uk Managing Director Rod Fletcher Commercial Director Daniel Simpson Tel: 0207 091 7861 E-mail: daniel@landor.co.uk Advertising and Recruitment Sales Executive Jason Conboy Tel: 0207 091 7895 E-mail: jit@landor.co.uk Subscriptions Christina Pierre (Mondays-Thursdays 10:00-17:00) Tel: 0207 091 7959 E-mail: subs@landor.co.uk Subscribe on line TransportXtra.com/shop Accounts Irina Cocks Tel: 0207 091 7854 Registered office 359 Kennington Lane London SE11 5QY LTT is available on subscription only.

The annual UK subscription rate is £130 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 Stephens & George Print Group Goat Mill Road Dowlais Merthyr Tydfil CF48 3TD Tel: 01685 388888 www.stephensandgeorge.co.uk 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 LINKS Ltd 2020 www.landor.co.uk

BSOG and concessions stay in Scotland BUSES

THE SCOTTISH Government will provide bus operators with additional assistance to maintain essential services during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Transport Scotland said the intention was to maintain concessionary travel reimbursement and Bus Service Operator Grant pay-

ments at the levels forecast prior to the impact of the virus.

Cabinet secretary for transport, infrastructure and connectivity Michael Matheson said: “Figures from Transport Scotland analysts show that concessionary bus journeys in particular had dropped by 81 per cent in the last two weeks – and I would expect this to fall even further in light of the latest

guidance.”

The Convention of Scottish Local Authorities has issued guidance recommending that councils continue to pay operators for home-to-school transport.

Paul White, director for the Confederation of Passenger Transport in Scotland, welcomed the Government’s funding pledge.

“Operators are working tirelessly

to ensure that Scotland’s bus network is robust enough to keep communities connected, providing socially necessary services and facilitating commuter trips for essential workers. To this end, we will continue to prioritise key routes such as those that serve medical centres and hospitals, with timetables that recognise NHS shift patterns.”

Landor LINKS Ltd is a member of the Independent Press Standards Organisation: www.ipso.co.uk

LTT795 pp4-5.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 08:55 Page 4

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

4 News: Covid-19

In Brief

Petrol stations ‘could go bust’ Many petrol stations could go out of business because of the slump in road travel resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic, the Petrol Retailers Association said this week.

Virus could stall EV chargepoint spend Business spending on electric vehicle chargepoints could slump because of Covid-19. A consultant to the sector told LTT that companies such as hotels and business parks would regard chargepoints as “luxury” expenditure. The attractions of electric vehicles will also be hit by the collapse in oil prices. Petrol was this week on sale at less than £1.10 a litre.

DfT asks councils for virus traffic data The DfT wants to source transport data from councils to understand the impact Covid-19 and the associated travel restrictions are having on movement. Consultant White Willow Consulting is co-ordinating the data collection exercise.

It is especially keen to receive data for local roads such as: traffic counts; trip lengths; origin/destinations; parking; and cycle and pedestrian movements. Contact Andy Graham: andy@whitewillow.biz

Less traffic ‘fuels speeding’ Many drivers in London are taking the opportunity of less traffic on the roads to break speed limits, according to the Metropolitan Police’s officer in charge of road safety. Andy Cox, vision zero superintendent, said: “Fifty locations show average speed at least 50 per cent above the limit.” On the 20mph Bishopsgate in the City of London, average speeds of 37mph at night and 36.8mph during the day were recorded.

Cyclists banned in Richmond Park The Royal Parks has temporarily banned cycling in Richmond Park, west London, partly because some cyclists were failing to observe the Government’s social distancing guidelines of staying two metres apart.

Gatwick closes North Terminal Gatwick Airport closed its North Terminal and cut the operating hours of its runway this week because of the slump in flights due to Covid-19. The airport’s runway will only open for scheduled flights between 14.00 and 22.00. North Terminal will be closed for at least a month.

Easyjet has grounded its entire fleet of planes.

Social distancing brings work on transport projects to a halt

INFRASTRUCTURE

CONSTRUCTION WORK on most major transport schemes has ground to a halt as employers follow the Government’s social distancing guidelines and instruct staff to stay at home.

London’s east-west Crossrail project is one of the major schemes affected. It is already running years behind schedule, with the central tunnelled section now officially supposed to open in summer 2021.

Mark Wild, chief executive of Crossrail Ltd said: “While we are doing everything we safely can to keep the Crossrail programme on track, Covid-19 will have an impact – it’s too early to tell what

that impact will be.”

Transport for London says construction work has halted on all of its projects.

In Edinburgh, construction of the tram extension from the city centre to Newhaven in the north has stopped. The city council said it was following advice from Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon that all construction sites should close, unless the project being delivered is essential.

Surprisingly, preparatory works have been continuing on HS2 phase one between London and the West Midlands.

This has prompted criticism, including a robust statement from the Royal Society for the Protec-

‘Cut speed limits to ease burden on NHS’ SPEED LIMITS

THE NATIONAL speed limit should be cut to 50mph and in urban areas to 20mph to reduce pressures on the NHS during the Covid-19 pandemic, say a group of health researchers.

“We suggest an immediate reduction in motor vehicle speed limits,” they say in a blog article published by the British Medical Journal. “In England alone there are around 35,000 non-fatal admissions to hospital every year related to road traffic accidents; more than one in ten of these are serious and likely to require intensive support, including anaesthesia and surgery.”

Evidence from around the world shows that lowering speed limits can lead to major reductions in injuries, they add.

“In Canada, for example, lowering the speed limit from 40km/h to 30km/h was associated with a 28 per cent decrease in pedestrian-motor vehicle collisions and a 67 per cent decrease in major and fatal injuries.

“We suggest that the Government urgently explore an emergency reduction of all national speed limits to 50mph, and to 20mph in urban areas.

“We expect that the public would support this proposal for a limited time period if it was communicated appropriately in relation to the current NHS emergency.”

Rod King MBE, founder of campaign group 20’s Plenty for

tion of Birds.

“We have closed our nature reserves to protect people,” it said. “So why have HS2 Ltd contractors not stopped work yet?

How can destroying ancient woodlands be ‘essential’ in this Covid-19 crisis? Saving nature is essential. Destroying it is not.”

HS2 critic Lord Berkeley has written to the Prime Minister urging him to instruct HS2 Ltd to cease work for six months.

Berkeley sent Boris Johnson photographs of contractors on the project failing to comply with the social distancing guideline of keeping two metres apart.

“The work cannot be considered in any way urgent since there must be questions about

Tube patronage down 95%, bus use by 85% LONDON

20mph: reducing burdens on the NHS

Us, welcomed the call. “The Welsh Government already has 20mph as nationally agreed policy. It’s been signed up to by the UK in Feburary’s ‘Stockholm Declaration’ as global best practice. Every road injury is a preventable and unnecessary drain on emergency services and NHS at a time when both are facing critical Covid-19 workloads.

The researchers also call for more effort to cut tobacco consumption and for minimum pricing for alcohol, saying these too could reduce baseline demand on the health service.

They have launched a website LowerTheBaseline.org, and are inviting contributions of ideas, evidence, and analysis.

The researchers include Robert Hughes, a clinical research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

demand for transport in the future,” said Berkeley.

He has taken the opportunity to urge Johnson to rethink whether the project is necessary.

“I am sure that ministers will want to look at the finances for HS2 and/or its cheaper alternatives in the light of the Government’s unexpected expenditure on supporting business and people as a result of the coronavirus, before deciding whether to allocate over £100bn to HS2.

“Ministers may also wish to consider whether, as a result of people getting used to working from home or remotely, demand for transport in the future will be reduced to the extent that HS2 in its entirety is no longer needed.”

PASSENGER NUMBERS on the London Underground were almost 95 per cent lower on Thursday morning (2 April) than the same time last year, says Transport for London, as people follow the Government guidelines to stay at home.

Tube patronage has progressive fallen since the travel restrictions were introduced. A TfL spokesman told LTT that on Monday 23 March patronage was 85 per cent below last year, and that on Friday (28th) it was 93 per cent below.

He said that, in raw numbers, Tube patronage had dropped from about four million a day to just 210,000.

The capital’s bus patronage has shown a similar downward trend. On 23 March it was 69 per cent lower than the same time last year. On Friday 28 March it was 82 lower. On Thursday morning this week it was 85 per cent lower.

Road traffic volumes are down too, but not by as much. On Tuesday 31 March, the estimated number of kilometres travelled on the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) was 48.1 per cent lower year-on-year.

Transport for London was criticised last week for not running more Tube trains after images emerged of packed services, making it impossible

for passengers to comply with the Government’s social distancing recommendation to keep at least two metres apart.

Service intervals on the Victoria Line at 18.20 on 24 March were every four to six minutes.

Health secretary Matt Hancock said there should be more Tube trains running to ensure the crush scenes were not repeated. There were also renewed calls for people to travel only if absolutely necessary.

Transport for London faces difficulties in providing a frequent service because about 30 per cent of its drivers, station staff, controllers and maintenance teams are off work, many because they are self-isolating or ill with coronavirus.

Bus use: down 85 per cent

LTT795 pp4-5.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 08:55 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News: Covid-19 5

In Brief

We need financial support too, say city transport authorities

URBAN TRANSPORT

by Andrew Forster

THE URBAN Transport Group has asked the Government for financial support for its member authorities as passenger numbers on trams and metro systems slump in response to the Government’s Covid-19 travel restrictions.

The focus of the Government’s transport assistance has so far been on train operators, which have been taken under greater state control (see below), and bus operators, who are receiving financial support.

The UTG represents seven public authorities: Transport for London; Transport for the West Midlands; Transport for Greater Manchester; Merseytravel; Nexus; South Yorkshire PTE; and West Yorkshire Combined Authority.

TfL manages almost all of London’s public transport and takes the revenue risk. Its annual fare revenues are about £5bn. It also receives revenue

from the congestion charge, the ultra-low emission zone and low emission zone, all of which have all been suspended because of Covid-19.

TfL’s initial estimate was that the virus would lower fare revenues by £500m (LTT 20 Mar) but the loss is now expected to be greater because the disruption to society looks set to continue for months.

Transport for the West Midlands operates the Midland Metro light rail network, Greater Manchester operates the Metrolink light rail system, and Nexus operates the Tyne and Wear Metro. Merseytravel manages the Merseyrail network and takes the revenue risk on its operations.

“We are taking unprecedented hits to our revenue while continuing to make payments for services that are not being provided,” said the UTG. “Nor do we benefit from any additional financial support for the bus or rail sectors.”

Although the Government has

provided English councils with £1.6bn to respond to the crisis, the UTG said none of the funding would flow directly to its members. They will instead have to hope that councils pass some of the funding to them.

“We have significant financial exposure on metros, trams, light rail, heavy rail and concessions, as well as experiencing a loss of income in other ways such as from shelter advertising and in our role as landlords.”

The group has written to the DfT and the Chancellor requesting financial support.

The UTG also wants the Government to give local transport authorities the freedom to spend transport funds that they do have on responding to the virus.

It has asked for “legal comfort and support” to keep services running through “clear legal guidance and greater freedoms and flexibilities to pool currently separate funding pots so that finance can be best directed to the overall task of

responding to this emergency in the most appropriate way locally”.

The UTG said that, outside London, it was “particularly concerned that the short-term viability of bus services is already under threat”.

“As a result, we face the very real possibility of, in different areas and at different times, operators ceasing to provide any services overnight, or rapidly scaling back to below the level of service that is necessary for the provision of a critical public transport network for essential users.

“The deregulated framework for bus service provision outside London presents major challenges for transport authorities to step in and provide services directly or coordinate what services are still being provided by the private sector to ensure a coherent network overall.”

The UTG’s members are holding regular virtual meetings to discuss developments. Its bus group is meeting daily.

Government suspends all rail franchises RAIL

THE GOVERNMENT has suspended all remaining rail franchise agreements for at least six months as passengers desert the rail network in droves because of Covid-19.

The change sees the Government take on the revenue and cost risks for the franchises.

Franchise holders will continue to run the services for a “small pre-determined management fee”.

This is set at a maximum of two per cent of the franchise’s cost base before the pandemic began.

The DfT said this would result in “far less than recent profits earned by train operators”.

The DfT’s operator of last resort companies will step in if any operator does not accept the new arrangements.

Passenger services across the rail network were reduced from Monday 23 March, the day the Prime Minister ordered Britons to stay at home in order to limit the spread of the virus.

The DfT said rail patronage had dropped by up to 70 per cent by that date. Passenger numbers have fallen further since then and service levels have been cut further in places.

The devolved administrations

citing not only the Government’s lockdown on movement but the increasing numbers of station, depot and onboard staff who are self-isolating. From 2 April trains will only operate on the network between 07:00 and 19:00 Monday to Saturday and 08.0019.00 on Sundays, with services every 30 minutes across all lines.

Wales: £40m rail aid

in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and Transport for London and Merseytravel have all reduced services too.

Welsh transport minister Ken Skates has announced a package of support for the rail industry worth up to £40m over the next few months.

“This funding will assure the skeleton service we are now operating, and will safeguard the future of rail service operations in Wales and the Borders,” he said.

“We are working closely with our partners in Transport for Wales and TfW Rail Services on the details of the mechanism, which I expect to evolve further over the coming weeks.”

The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority has cut services on the Merseyrail network,

Service reductions have affected all sorts of lines, not just those with high frequencies. The lines from Inverness to Wick and Kyle of Lochalsh have seen their daily train services cut from four each way to two.

Open access operator Hull Trains has suspended all of its services.

Website shows service cuts Thousands of passenger train services have been withdrawn across the country as people follow Government orders to stay at home.

The Real Time Trains website documents the reduction in services. The following data shows passenger trains calling or passing stations between 07.00 and 08.00 for three Tuesdays in succession: 17 March (when services were largely unaffected), 24 March and 31 March: Clapham Junction: 166 - 114 - 91 London Bridge: 124 - 79 - 59 London King’s Cross: 26 - 13 - 13 Stratford, East London: 81 - 38 - 36 Reading: 60 - 29 - 25 Cardiff Central: 42 - 12 - 12 Birmingham New Street: 58 - 29 - 31 Manchester Piccadilly: 61 - 22 - 23 Leeds: 71 - 47 - 35 Edinburgh Waverley: 50 - 23 - 21 Glasgow Central (High Level): 77 - 36 - 33 Twenty-four hour train count data for four stations shows: Swindon: 221 - 116 - 102 Crewe: 487 - 336 - 335 Berwick upon Tweed: 118 - 75 - 53 Inverness: 83 - 51 - 48

Khan suspends Ccharge, ULEZ & LEZ Transport for London has suspended all road user charging schemes in the capital until further notice because of Covid-19. The action took effect on 23 March and covers the congestion charge, the ultra-low emission zone, and the low emission zone.

London mayor Sadiq Khan said the suspension would help key workers travel easily, with driving being the “simplest option” for many in current circumstances.

“This is not an invitation to take to your cars,” said Khan. “To save lives we need the roads clear for ambulances, doctors, nurses and other critical workers.”

Councils ask for delay to CAZs Birmingham City Council and Leeds City Council have written separately to the Government requesting permission to delay the introduction of their clean air zones because of Covid-19. Both schemes are due to be introduced this summer, imposing charges on non-compliant vehicles.

Oxford zero emission zone postponed Implementation of a zero emission zone in central Oxford has been postponed because of Covid-19.

Oxford and Oxfordshire councils had planned to launch the zone in December, despite opposition from freight bodies (LTT 10 Jan). A consultation has been halted and will restart towards the end of the year. The councils are targetting implementation next summer.

“Amid the current situation with coronavirus and with the Government acknowledging an economic crisis, both councils recognise that businesses and residents across the city need to focus all of their attention on managing the current and potential impacts on their trade and way of life,” said the councils. They said they remained “wholly committed” to the scheme. The city council has just received £150,000 from the Government for a mobile automatic numberplate recognition system to enforce the zone.

Mersey road tolls removed Tolls on the Mersey Tunnels and the Mersey Gateway Crossing have been suspended because of Covid-19 by Liverpool City Region mayor Steve Rotheram and Halton Borough Council respectively.

Councils suspend parking charges Many councils have suspended parking charges and restrictions because of Covid-19. Buckinghamshire councils have removed charges from their car parks and lifted most on-street restrictions.

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:36 Page 6

Your favourite magazine continues to be published (Printers and Royal Mail permitting)

LTT digital download Staying at home? Don’t worry we have made LTT free to download from Issuu, visit: issuu.com/landorlinks

Transport Responds A new regular ebulletin bringing together the news and personal stories about the impact of COVID-19 on the sector and how transport is responding. Sign up today at: bit.ly/transportresponds

Plus!

TransportXtra will still provide all regular content from LTT and Parking Review and many articles exclusive to TransportXtra.

All articles since 1st March are free to view without logging in.

Go to: www.TransportXtra.com

LTT795 page 7.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 09:07 Page 4

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 7

In Brief

Net Zero Transport Council to advise DfT on decarbonisation NET ZERO

by Andrew Forster

TRANSPORT SECRETARY Grant Shapps is to chair a new Net Zero Transport Council, which will advise on how to eliminate carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector.

The council will include representatives from each mode of transport, people with “behavioural insights”, technology experts, academics and environmental pressure groups.

The proposal is explained in a new DfT policy paper on how the transport sector can help achieve the UK’s statutory target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The DfT plans to publish the final version of its transport decarbonisation plan in the autumn.

The Department admits it does not currently know how to fully decarbonise transport. A chart shows a yawning gap between what current transport policies are expected to achieve

The DfT’s current projection is way off Net Zero

and what is needed to deliver the target.

“It is clear that the UK must go much further in reducing domestic transport emissions than currently projected if we are to meet the emission levels set out in the [2017] Clean Growth Strategy 2032 scenario (there is an estimated gap of 16MtCO2e between this and the DfT’s current projection in 2032), and to meet our legal obligation to reach net zero emissions by 2050,” it says.

Turning to policy prescriptions, travel behaviour change is a key component in the Government’s thinking, alongside technological developments.

“Public transport and active travel will be the natural first choice for our daily activities,” says Shapps in his foreword to the report. “We will use our cars less and be able to rely on a convenient, cost-effective and coherent public transport network.”

He also says he wants to

develop “a universally recognised measure so that in future, people can easily compare how much CO 2 different forms of transport emit over a certain distance”.

The report gives some encouragement to supporters of rail electrification. The section on rail freight, for instance, says: “The main way to achieve rail freight decarbonisation is to stop using diesel traction, through direct government intervention to roll-out further electrification.”

On freight generally, the Department is to publish a cross-modal freight strategy later this year. It will feature the Government’s final response to the National Infrastructure Commission’s Better delivery: the challenge for freight report.

Decarbonising transport: setting the challenge is available at https://tinyurl.com/s2ohyd9

Ecofascism a growing ‘Punish people who problem, say greens don’t back Net Zero’ NET ZERO

CLIMATE CHANGE campaigners have expressed concern about ecofascism in their ranks.

Ecofascism is the idea of an authoritarian government requiring individuals to sacrifice their own interests in favour of nature.

The Scottish branch of climate activist group Extinction Rebellion raised concerns about the problem last week after the group’s East Midlands branch welcomed the Covid-19 virus outbreak that has seen a big reduction in urban air pollution as populations go into lockdown.

“Earth is healing,” tweeted ER East Midlands. “The air and water is clearing. Corona is the cure. Humans are the disease.”

Extinction Rebellion UK immediately distanced itself from the message and claimed the tweet might be a smear by a “white supremacist movement”.

“This account is not managed

by Extinction Rebellion UK or Extinction Rebellion East Midlands, and these messages are in no way a representation of the principles and values held by the movement and so are not the movement,” it said. “We are investigating this now.”

ER East Midlands responded: “We are the official XR East Midlands group and have been involved in environmental activism for years. The fact that our action has turned so many heads is only evidence that we’re good at it. You may not like that the Earth is healing thanks to Corona, but it’s true. Viruses are a part of nature. Humans are apart from nature.”

The Scotland branch of Extinction Rebellion said the climate change movement had a problem.

“Eco-fascism is dangerous and deadly. It’s sliding into environmentalism and not enough of us are calling it out.”

The Global Warming Policy Foundation said the East Midlands ER tweet showed the organisation was a “green death cult”.

Another Twitter user said: “Extinction Rebellion are a truly filthy death cult that rejoices in the destruction of everyone and everything you love. Keep your kids away from this mob.”

Environmentalist George Monbiot said the East Midlands tweet had damaged the climate movement. “Several thousand people [reply]: ‘You see, all environmentalists are fascists’.”

NET ZERO

PEOPLE WHO fail to support the law of net zero greenhouse gas emissions should be “identified and penalised”, according to a climate change citizen’s assembly set up by the London Borough of Croydon.

“We want the majority of socially responsible residents supported and recognised for contributions they make,” says the assembly’s position statement.

“We also want to see those who let us down identified and penalised.”

Asked for its views on the statement, a council spokesman told LTT: “The assembly is an independently-run and organised group and was due to report back to the council’s cabinet at the cancelled meeting on 23 March. The report will be bought to cabinet at the next available opportunity.”

The assembly comprised 42 members of the public and was organised and managed by The Campaign Company.

Croydon appointed an advisory board to ensure assembly members “were provided with information to allow them to deliberate in an informed manner”.

The four-person board included Tim Coombe of climate protest group Croydon Extinction Rebellion. Its other members were: Polly Billington – director, UK100 Cities; Shifa Mustafa – Croydon Council’s director of place; and Richard Jackson – director of environmental sustainability at University College London.

On transport specifically, the assembly concluded: “We are open to the idea of charging people at a reasonable level who have highly polluting cars more, on condition that efforts are made to improve public transport and those who adopt greener solutions (like walking, cycling car sharing and electric vehicles are rewarded).

“But above all we want to see fewer cars in total on the borough’s roads with shorter journeys [by car] in particular being cut.”

Croydon Council is now working with the New Economics Foundation think tank through a Croydon Climate Crisis Commission. It will advise on actions to cut emissions. The commission is chaired by Miatta Fahnbulleh, chief executive of the New Economics Foundation.

Virus delays Climate Assembly The Covid-19 pandemic has caused the postponement of the fourth and final weekend of the Climate Assembly UK, the citizens’ assembly set up by the House of Commons select committees to consider how the UK meets its net zero greenhouse gas missions commitment. “The discussions and votes due to take place on weekend four will still take place at a later date to conclude the work of the assembly,” said the organisers.

Glasgow UN climate summit postponed The United Nations has postponed the 11-day climate change conference (COP26) that was due to be held in Glasgow in November. The event will be rescheduled for dates in 2021, with Glasgow remaining host city.

UN climate change executive secretary Patricia Espinosa said: “Covid-19 is the most urgent threat facing humanity today, but we cannot forget that climate change is the biggest threat facing humanity over the longterm.”

Virus ‘could provide clues to CO2 rise’ The global economic downturn due to the Covid-19 pandemic could provide insights into how much of the rising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide are due to man. In a blog posting, Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Hunstville, says: “It will take considerable evidence to convince me that the long-term rise in not anthropogenic [due to man]. Maybe the current ‘coronavirus experiment’ will provide some contrarian evidence.” Spencer said the monitoring location for CO2 on Mauna Loa in Hawaii was at a high elevation in a persistent subtropical high pressure zone “that should be able to detect large emissions changes in several weeks time as weather systems move around the world”. “I’ve analysed the Mauna Loa CO2 data (updated monthly) through February 2020 to see if there is any hint of a CO2 concentration downturn (or, more accurately, a reduced rate of rise). The short answer is: No… at least not yet. While an anthropogenic source of CO2 can explain the long-term rise in CO2, the trouble with finding an anthropogenic signal on a timescale of a few months to a couple years is that natural variations swamp any anthropogenic changes on short timescales.” Is the Covid-19 economic downturn affecting atmospheric CO2?

Mauna Loa Data Say, Not Yet is available at https://tinyurl.com/s6fjy2n

LTT795 page 8.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 08:10 Page 5

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

8 News

Nottingham to invest in depot EV upgrade

ELECTRIC VEHICLES

NOTTINGHAM CITY Council is to fund an electricity capacity upgrade for its Eastcroft depot, which is becoming a centre for electric vehicle activities.

The depot houses the majority of the council’s vehicle fleet, about 140 (30 per cent) of which have already been converted to battery electric, funded by the Office for Low Emission Vehicles. Nottingham has purchased two electric refuse vehicles for delivery this autumn.

The council has also secured funding from the EU’s Interreg North West Europe CleanMobilEnergy project to run what Nottingham says will be the UK’s largest vehicle to grid (V2G) trial, with 40 chargepoints allowing the bidirectional flow of electricity, from the grid to vehicles and from vehicles to the grid and adjacent buildings.

A large lithium-ion battery is proposed for installation at the site to supply electricity at peak times.

Eastcroft will also house what the council says will be the UK’s first ULEV service centre run by a local authority – Nottingham Electric Vehicle Services – that will offer services to the general public.

Katie Greenhalgh, the council’s enegy projects manager, said the site’s electricity supply could not support all these demands.

Working with Western Power Distribution, the council has developed proposals to consolidate the six existing supplies of electricity to the depot into a single high voltage cable with a new substation.

The council has not revealed the cost of the works.

In Brief

£2.2m for council air quality projects The Government has awarded £2.2m to councils in England for air quality improvement projects.

Projects include retrofitting at least 20 buses to Euro VI in the West Midlands; funding for anti-idling campaigns on a Canterbury school route; a traffic light ‘countdown’ feasibility study in Colchester; and particulate matter data gathering and mapping in Islington and Leicester.

Environmentalists vent their spleen over WECA road plans

PLANNING

LOCAL AUTHORITIES in the Bristol area have approved a new local transport plan for the conurbation amid a heap of criticism from climate change campaigners who say it contains too many road improvement schemes.

The West of England Combined Authority and the West of England Joint Committee adopted the final draft of the fourth Joint Local Transport Plan (JLTP4) at their joint meeting on 20 March. In doing so, however, members immediately signalled a start of work on a new LTP (JLTP5), which appears likely to give added emphasis to environmental issues.

JLTP4 covers the four unitary authorities of Bristol, South

Gloucestershire, Bath and North East Somerset, and North Somerset. The first three are members of the West of England Combined Authority led by elected mayor Tim Bowles.

North Somerset has not joined WECA but is a member of the West of England Joint Committee.

The meeting received eight questions from the public about the plan and a further 35 statements criticising the plan’s contents. One of the statements was by Steve Melia, a senior lecturer in transport and planning at the University of the West of England. He is behind a petition on the 38 Degrees website that says: “Scrap the road building and widening plans in the Joint Local Transport Plan. In a climate emergency any available funds

must be used to improve public transport, walking and cycling.”

Councillor Stephen Clarke, chair of the combined authority’s overview and scrutiny committee, spoke at the meeting, saying that JLTP4 appeared to have been written by a “number of different people”. The scenesetting parts of the plan appeared to be “carbon aware”, he said, yet the detailed chapters contained “numerous major road building schemes”.

Clarke expressed confusion about the expected lifespan of JLTP4, saying officers had implied it was a “stopgap” and that work on JLTP5 would start straightaway.

The meeting also heard that the combined authority had taken legal advice about JLTP4’s consistency with the Paris Agreement on climate change in

the aftermath of the Court of Appeal’s ruling that the Government’s support for a third runway at Heathrow had failed to consider the Paris Agreement (LTT 06 Mar). The legal advice said the LTP was in alignment with Paris, subject to adding some statements that the meeting approved.

Alongside approving JLTP4, the combined authority did approve that officers should start preparations for JLTP5.

Councillor Dine Romero, the leader of Bath and North East Somerset Council, said that, though JLTP4 was not perfect, it was important to approve it so that the councils could “move on to working on the next iteration of the plan (JLTP5) as quickly as possible”. This would “develop a much better plan for the future”.

Bristol CAZ – more info requested Green light for Newcastle CAZ AIR QUALITY

THE GOVERNMENT has asked Bristol City Council for more evidence to support its clean air plan that features a class C clean air zone (CAZ) and a city centre diesel car ban.

The council’s proposed class C CAZ would cover a large part of the city and see charges imposed on non-compliant buses, coaches, taxis, private hire vehicles, lorries and vans (LTT 08 Nov 19).

The diesel car ban would cover a smaller area including

the city centre. It would operate from 07.00 to 15.00 seven days a week and be the first such restriction in the country. It is controversial, particularly because the council says it should apply to all diesel cars including Euro 6 models.

Environment minister Rebecca Pow has now issued a direction to the council requiring it to submit further options appraisal, including transport, air quality and economic modelling by 10 April “in order to provide assurance that the local plan for NO2 compliance will deliver compli-

ance in the shortest possible time and by 2023 at the latest”.

Says the Government: “The revised air quality modelling provided must demonstrate the applicable class of charging clean air zone, appropriate behavioural assumptions, and what (if any) additional measures, or adjustments to the local plan for NO2 compliance would need to be implemented by the authority to deliver compliance in the shortest possible time.”

Bristol must submit a full business case for its plan to Government by 18 September.

Liverpool to buy hydrogen buses

BUSES

THE LIVERPOOL City Region Combined Authority is to purchase 25 hydrogen fuel cell buses, which are likely to be deployed on the conurbation’s busiest bus corridor.

Matt Goggins, Liverpool City Region Combined Authority’s assistant director for bus, told councillors that, subject to agreement with operators, the buses would be introduced on the St Helens – Liverpool corridor, the “most well-used bus route in the Liverpool cityregion”.

Bus manufacturer Alexander Dennis and Stagecoach have already tested a hydrogen fuel bus on the corridor.

A hydrogen refuelling station will be built at the BOC Group’s Linde plant in St Helens, which already produces hydrogen for industrial customers.

“The new hydrogen refuelling station will initially deliver 500kg of hydrogen every day,” said Goggins. “The project aims to demonstrate the commercial viability of a model that installs refuellers for high-use fleets to develop a network for future use by passenger cars and other vehicles.”

Goggins said fuel cell buses had a range of 300 to 450km (188-281 miles) and offered “almost the same flexibility as diesel buses in day-to-day operation”.

“While some buses still

consume well over 20kg of hydrogen per 100km, newer fuel cell buses now use only eight to nine kilogrammes per 100km.”

The majority of the capital funding will be secured from the city-region’s Transforming Cities Fund allocation.

Goggins said Bus Service Operators Grant needed to be reformed to support hydrogen buses. “Failure to see reform in bus subsidy presents challenges to the viability of the project (BSOG currently benefits the use of diesel over hydrogen or electric). As such, in addition to ongoing discussion with Government on this issue, the project will be designed on a ‘worst subsidy case’ basis.”

AIR QUALITY

THE GOVERNMENT has approved a clean air plan for Newcastle featuring a Class C charging clean air zone plus reductions to road capacity on the Tyne Bridge.

Newcastle and Gateshead councils prepared the plan to bring nitrogen dioxide concentrations down to within EU legal limit values.

The CAZ, due for implementation next January, will cover Newcastle city centre and the Tyne crossings into Gateshead.

Non-compliant buses, coaches and lorries will be charged £50 a day. Non-compliant taxis, private hire vehicles and vans will be charged £12.50.

The plan also includes temporarily reducing road capacity on the Tyne Bridge to allow a major maintenance project to be implemented.

Meanwhile, changes to the road layout on the Central Motorway will prevent traffic merging on and off the slip lane between the New Bridge Street and the Swan House junctions.

The Government says the package must bring forward compliance to 2021.

LTT795 page 9.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:03 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 9

Dockless byelaw may not eliminate borough patchwork, warn operators BIKE HIRE

DOCKLESS BIKE hire operators have raised concerns about London’s proposed byelaw for dockless vehicle hire schemes.

The byelaw being prepared by London Councils and Transport for London will apply to bikes as well as modes such as escooters if the Government approves their use.

The law will ensure that: • dockless operators only offer for hire vehicles that are safe • dockless vehicles are parked only in parking spaces agreed by TfL and councils • operators share data to monitor compliance with TfL and councils In practice, there will be two byelaws because the City of London is covered by separate legislation.

Dockless bike operators have voiced concern that the proposals do not do enough to overcome the patchwork of different borough policies.

In December London Councils told LTT that individual boroughs would remain free to procure their own contracts with dockless bike hire operators, thereby preventing other operators from using designated parking spaces (LTT 20 Dec 19).

In a report last month summarising operators’ concerns about the byelaw, London Councils says: “At present, some boroughs have existing arrangements with particular operators whereby in exchange for a financial contribution from the operators towards the cost of managing dockless operations in the borough, boroughs have selected preferred operators

Parking, enforcement, and borough boundaries among operator concerns

who they support to operate in their borough.

“This has led to issues for users when they cross borough boundaries, as some boroughs select operators that their neighbours have not selected, and therefore users often find themselves unable to end their hires that they started in another borough.”

London Councils says operators have “questioned whether these existing agreements with boroughs would continue once the byelaws come into force”.

It goes on: “In the absence of powers to be able to grant licences to specific operators, one intention of the byelaw is to ensure that vehicles from any operator are safe, parked responsibly and that data is shared with TfL and boroughs as required,

regardless of which operators are active.

“It is intended that by introducing [these] minimum parking and safety requirements in the byelaws that all operators must comply with, individual boroughs can be less concerned with which individual operators can park in their borough and that they can transition away from operator-specific dockless parking spaces.

“This will improve the situation for users and reduce the likelihood that operators have to comply with a range of different requirements to be able to operate across London.”

Operators are also concerned that individual boroughs may not provide enough parking spaces to meet demand. In response, London Councils says guidance to accompany the byelaws will contain a section on the principles for designating parking spaces and the density of spaces.

“This guidance is being drawn up in consultation with the boroughs, which should minimise discrepancies in approach, and therefore reduce additional regulatory burden for operators.”

Operators also want to understand more about the enforcement regime for bikes left in unauthorised locations.

“The byelaws are intended to improve the parking situation, not to unreasonably penalise operators,” says London Councils.

Guidance will “set out the timeframes during which operators should ensure that their vehicles are parked appropriately”.

“All operators have a live view of where each of their vehicles is and will have the opportunity to rectify any noncompliant parking before any action is

taking by local authorities or TfL. “Local authorities and TfL will be expected to apply reasonable judgment in their enforcement.”

The penalty for bikes left outside authorised parking areas will not exceed level 2 on the standard scale (£500).

London Councils says there is a “compelling” case for the byelaw. The capital currently has five dockless bike operators: Mobike and Beryl providing pedal bikes, and Lime, JUMP and Freebike providing e-bikes. “We are aware of at least five further companies considering launching,” says the borough association.

The legalisation of e-scooters could add a huge number of micromobility vehicles to London’s streets.

“If e-scooters were made legal in the coming months/years, the prospective rental market in London could be very large. In Paris, for example, there are already 20,000 e-scooters.”

Implementation of the byelaw could be delayed by Covid-19. The draft byelaw and supporting documents were due to be presented to London Councils transport and environment committee (TEC) on 19 March but this was cancelled due to the virus.

Following TEC’s approval, the documents will be reviewed by a QC before being presented to TEC for final approval and then submitted to the Government for its approval.

If Government support is forthcoming, a public consultation will be held. The final decision about the byelaw will be taken by the TEC.

You’ve read LTT – now join in an online conversation!

It’s a challenging time for both the world of local transport, and for those of us as professionals needing to isolate ourselves from colleagues and fellow practitioners under the lockdown in response to the Coronavirus pandemic.

At LTT we recognise the important need for a place for individuals to still ‘meet’ and explore the current unprecedented potential impacts of the CV19 crisis on transport in both the short, medium and long terms.

So on Thursday 9 April at 2pm, we will be holding our first Local Transport Today 60-minute online conversation with an expert team of panelists to lead a discussion: including Keith Mitchell (Director, Community Development and Infrastructure at Stantec), Richard Walker (now seconded from DfT to DecarboN8 Network team at ITS Leeds) and Cliff Edwards (psychologist and personal and corporate behavioural analyst) plus others now being confirmed. Andrew Forster, LTT’s editor, will chair.

The theme is: WHAT ARE WE LEARNING FOR THE FUTURE OF TRANSPORT FROM THE CV19 CRISIS? The format will be an informal and friendly gathering on Zoom where some initial ideas will be put on the table by the panelists and participants then invited to raise questions and comments.

We’ll incorporate an opportunity for some semi-social connections to be made, and for participants to exchange thoughts on productive ways of working in the current circumstances, and share creative ideas about other online frameworks that can help keep us all connected.

After the Forum next week, there will be a Podcast version of the event available online for others to watch and listen to, and we’ll be picking up on the material raised in the discussion in the next issue of LTT. Please join us for this important step in transport professional interaction!

If you have any thoughts or suggestions on how we can make the best of this opportunity, please get in touch with Peter Stonham at: stonham.hastings@landortravelpublications.com Make a date for: 2pm Thursday 9 April

Book online at: www.TransportXtra.com/events See you there!

LTT795 pp10-11.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:11 Page 4

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

10 News

Regulatory review to unleash REGULATORY REVIEW

THE GOVERNMENT is inviting views on regulatory reforms to facilitate micromobility modes such as escooters, and encourage the spread of flexible bus services and mobility as a service (MaaS).

A call for evidence has been issued on these three forms of transport as part of the Government’s wider transport regulatory review. In all, the review has three modal themes – roads (including autonomous vehicles), aviation (including drones), and maritime – and two crosscutting themes of MaaS and transport data.

In general, the review will only consider regulations or powers that remain held at UK level.

The call for evidence is badged a DfT document but in a sign that the review is as much about business as transport, responses by email and post are being handled by the DfT but the online survey is hosted by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.

The DfT sets out nine principles that will be followed “as far as possible” for mobility in urban passenger and freight transport: 1. New modes of transport and new mobility services must be safe and secure by design 2. The benefits of innovation in mobility must be available to all parts of the UK and all segments of society 3. Walking, cycling and active travel must remain the best options for short urban journeys 4. Mass transit must remain fundamental to an efficient transport system 5. New mobility services must lead the transition to zero emissions 6. Mobility innovation must help to reduce congestion through more efficient

use of limited road space, for example through sharing rides, increasing occupancy or consolidating freight 7. The marketplace for mobility must be open to stimulate innovation and give the best deal to consumers 8. New mobility services must be designed to operate as part of an integrated transport system, combining public, private and multiple modes for transport users 9. Data from new mobility services must be shared where appropriate to improve choice and the operation of the transport system Writing the report’s foreword, transport minister Rachel Maclean asks: “One of our first tasks is to try to understand the true benefits, and costs, of each new technology or service. How, for instance, can e-scooters make life cheaper, more convenient, and maybe a bit more exciting? But also: how safe are they, for their riders and for other road users, and how sustainable?

Will they really reduce traffic, or will they reduce walking and cycling more?

“How can self-driving cars open up new travel possibilities? But also: what do they mean for road space and congestion in our cities if people switch en masse from buses and trains? Should the rules about micromobility and new car-based services be the same in congested city centres as they are in low-density suburbs?”

The Government is keen to see real-life trials of innovations take place, which may require legislative change (see panel).

The Future Transport Zones (formerly Future Mobility Zones) will play a key part. The West Midlands Combined Authority was named the first authority to host a zone in 2018 and three more were named last month: Solent Transport, the West of England Combined Authority and Derby and Nottingham (LTT 20 Mar).

The areas will share £90m of Government funding.

“Each Future Transport Zone will be a

globally significant demonstrator of new mobility services, modes and models, creating a functioning marketplace for mobility, combining new and traditional modes of transport,” says the call for evidence. “The Future Transport Zones will be at a scale that is appropriate for testing regulatory issues.”

The DfT describes the regulatory review as a “once in a generation opportunity to reform regulation in transport”.

“We expect the review as a whole to take place over three years. Some areas of the review will be completed ahead of that timeframe and we will act sooner if needed on our most significant and pressing findings.”

The deadline for responses is 22 May. Future of transport regulatory review – call for evidence is available at https://tinyurl.com/s9f7bvp

Shake-up for council transport powers?

Important legislative changes for local government could flow from the Government’s transport regulatory review.

Legislation is likely to have to be relaxed to allow local authorities to host technology trials.

“There is little flexibility within current legislation to accommodate the trialling of new technologies easily and efficiently,” says the DfT. “For example, for Future Transport Zones to fulfil their full potential, it is likely to be necessary to seek exemptions to certain regulations so that certain modes, such as electric scooters, can be lawfully trialled.”

Governance arrangements could also be shaken up.

The DfT describes current responsibilities for regulation as “highly complex, with single-tier and two-tier local authorities, combined authorities and the Greater London Authority having a range of relevant responsibilities across the UK”. It is working with the Ministry of Housing,

Communities and Local Government to consider the case for reform.

The call for evidence asks: • with regard to managing new transport technologies and services, are there powers currently held by national government, which you think should be devolved to local authorities, combined authorities or the Greater London Authority?

• where the local transport authority and the local highway authority are separate local authorities (such as in London and the combined authority areas), what should be the balance of powers and responsibilities to maximise the benefits of future transport?

• in this context, what role might sub-national transport bodies most usefully play?

Flexible bus services

A SHAKE-UP to flexible bus service regulations could encourage more such operations, the DfT believes.

This section of its call for evidence applies only to England because bus service registration, and taxi and private hire vehicle (PHV) licensing are devolved matters in Scotland and Wales.

“We would, however, welcome views from respondents in Scotland and Wales on other areas of the bus, taxi and PHV framework that we should consider in future stages of the regulatory review,” the DfT adds. “The call for evidence will inform further work looking at how the bus, taxi and PHV regimes are converging and what legislative framework might be appropriate in future.”

The terms ‘flexible bus services’ and ‘demand responsive transport’ (DRT) are often regarded as interchangeable but a

specific legal definition of ‘flexible bus service’ was introduced in England and Wales in 2004 as an amendment to the Public Service Vehicles (Registration of Local Services) Regulations.

“We are interested in the wider context of DRT and would welcome comments on services that go beyond the strict legal definition of a flexible bus service, particularly on how the two might be brought together.

“How do you think we should define the area of operation for a flexible bus service?” the DfT asks. When registering a flexible bus service, operators are currently required to register fixed stops and/or a geographical area of operation. A flexible service can “serve one or more local communities or neighbourhoods within a specific geographical area”. “Existing guidance states that an area of operation covering

PickMeUp: premium prices on Saturday nights

the large part of a county could not be said to fall within this definition,” says the Department.

Flexible bus services must arrive at each individual passenger’s pick-up and destination within a maximum 20 minute time window. This can work in two ways: • a period specified by the operator (for example, between 10.30 and 10.50) or • in reference to an agreed time (no more than ten minutes before or after the agreed time – e.g. the

booking is made for 10.40 and can be between 10.30 and 10.50).

Asks the DfT: “Does the 20 minute time window to arrive at each passenger pick-up remain appropriate?”

On pricing, PHVs can vary their prices according to demand but flexible bus services cannot.

They can, however, charge different fares at different times, reflecting the likely demand and costs of operating at that time.

For instance, the Oxford Pick-

MeUp service charges a premium on Saturday nights.

“The ability to use flex pricing is one attraction of the PHV regulatory regime over the flexible bus regime for new entrants to the market and encourages ‘regulatory shopping’.”

The DfT acknowledges that allowing bus services to deploy flexible pricing could “create problems for passengers, especially those on tight budgets, who may be unable to plan trips with certainty about whether they will be affordable”.

When introducing, changing or withdrawing a flexible bus service, an operator has to give at least 42 days’ notice to the Traffic Commissioner. A further 28 days’ pre-notification must be given to any local authority served by the service.

The DfT asks if this remains “appropriate for routes that, by their nature, are already more flexible than standard [bus] services”.

LTT795 pp10-11.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:11 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 11

h transport’s innovating spirit Paving the way for new forms of micromobility THE DFT seems intent on permitting new forms of micromobility such as electric scooters onto UK roads.

“We are looking to experiences from cities around the world to determine the best way of fitting electric scooters and micromobility vehicles into existing transport networks and managing the potential downsides,” says the regulatory review call for evidence.

A range of micromobility devices exist – e-scooters, hoverboards and electric skateboards to name just three – and the Government will not necessarily authorise them all. For instance, the document floats the idea of requiring any devices to have a handlebar.

Most micromobility vehicles cannot currently be used legally on the road or footways because they are ‘motor vehicles’ in law. This requires them to meet a wide range of requirements that, by their design, are hard to comply with.

The call for evidence asks for views on: • vehicle requirements – minimum design standards and how vehicles should be approved • user requirements – what requirements users must meet to use micromobility vehicles • use on the road – whether micromobility vehicles should be permitted on roads, cycle tracks, cycle lanes or pavements • service provider requirements – what rules should apply to businesses operating micromobility vehicle hire schemes and the powers local authorities should have to manage such schemes.

“If legalised, micromobility vehicles would be permitted to use the road, though not motorways,” says the DfT. “Locally, highway and traffic authorities have powers to determine whether legally-permitted vehicles can be used on specific routes.”

The DfT asks if micromobility vehicles “should only be permitted to

E-scooters: should helmet-wearing be mandatory, asks the DfT

use lower speed roads, for example those with speed limits of 20mph or 30mph”.

It asks if micromobility vehicles should also be permitted to use dedicated cycle routes. “In general, their speed is similar to that of pedal cycles and their maximum speed would be comparable to electricallyassisted pedal cycles (EAPCs).

Permitting use on cycle routes is likely to encourage greater take-up of micromobility vehicles among those who are less confident using them on the road.

“Not all cycle infrastructure may be suitable for all micromobility vehicles, particularly if they are wider than a typical pedal cycle.”

Micromobility devices should not generally be permitted on pavements (footpaths), the DfT suggests. “No vehicle is [currently] permitted to use the pavement, except some pedestrian-operated street-cleaning vehicles and mobility scooters. In

Mobility as a Service (MaaS)

THE DFT wants to know what regulatory barriers stand in the way of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) platforms that provide a one-stop-shop for journey information and ticket purchase through an app.

The first question in the MaaS section of the regulatory review asks, “in the development of Mobility as a Service platforms, what should be the role of local authorities, central government, or other transport

authorities?”

MaaS requires service timetabling and fares data to be interoperable and available to platform providers, along with the ability for consumers to purchase tickets digitally.

“There are often commercial or regulatory arrangements between MaaS platform providers and mobility providers underpinning access to this data that regulation needs to be aligned with,” says the DfT.

general, we believe this principle should continue.” Exceptions could be made for technologies that provide an aid for people with disabilities, and electrically-assisted handcarts used for deliveries.

The Department expects to set specifications for all micromobility vehicles. As a minimum, these are likely to include: • a maximum speed of 12.5-15.5 mph (20-25 km/h) • specified braking requirements • requirement for lights and reflectors They could also include: • maximum power output • minimum wheel size and ground clearance • maximum vehicle dimensions • indicators or ability for the user to indicate • a requirement to have a handlebar “The minimum specification may allow some micromobility vehicles to be used but prohibit others. For example, if there is a requirement to have handlebars, this would allow electric scooters and e-cargo bikes to be used but would prohibit hoverboards or uni-wheels.

“While we are consulting on setting a specification for all micromobility vehicles, in some cases we may consider setting specific requirements for an individual vehicle type.”

Motor vehicles have to be registered with the Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency. “We are interested in views on whether it would be beneficial to establish a register of micromobility vehicles and whether registration requirements for these vehicles and their users should differ from that of other motor vehicles.”

Safety regulations could also be placed on users. These could include: • requiring a licence, or user training, or both • personal liability insurance • having to wear a pedal cycle helmet • keeping to a maximum speed of

“One possible risk is that incumbent mobility providers with market power could refuse to deal with MaaS platform providers, with the intention of restricting competition, limiting disruptive innovation, and preserving profits.

“What competition concerns do you think Mobility as a Service might present that could be difficult to address through existing regulations?” the DfT asks.

12.5-15.5mph either by setting a road speed limit or by limiting the design speed of the device The DfT points out that the minimum user requirements for electrically-assisted pedal cycle users include a minimum age of 14, but they do not require driving licences.

“Similar user requirements would appear proportionate for speedlimited micromobility vehicles,” it says.

Nevertheless, “we are concerned that users could have little experience of using micromobility vehicles or driving on the road, particularly if a minimum user age of 14 is applied.”

Other options for licensing include giving unique entitlement for micromobility vehicle use to those who hold any category of driving licence or who have completed some form of specialised driver training.

“Motorcyclists and moped users take compulsory basic training during their learning process,” the DfT points out.

Helmet use is not mandatory for EAPCs – the Government merely recommended their use.

“Micromobility vehicles could be treated like mopeds rather than EAPCs for the purposes of helmet use, which would make helmets mandatory.” If so, the DfT asks if helmets should be cycle-standard or motorcycle-standard.

“We are keen to understand whether a mandatory helmet requirement would reduce the usage of micromobility vehicles.”

The DfT asks for views on the safety risk posed by micromobility vehicles “to determine whether they should be treated like mopeds rather than EAPCs for insurance purposes”.

“This would require users to have some form of insurance. This could be motor insurance or a third party liability and personal accident insurance product, similar to the insurance that some cyclists seek voluntarily.”

“We also recognise the use of MaaS platforms could present a potential risk to accessibility, particularly if they do not allow users to specify they are disabled. For example, for users who require wheelchair accessible vehicles or an assistance dog on their journey, there may not necessarily be an option to communicate this with the mobility operator.

“Given the wide range of regulation underpinning transport services, we will also consider whether guidance or a code of practice would be useful to

clarify the roles and responsibilities for different levels of government, mobility providers and MaaS platform providers.”

The DfT asks if standardisation and interoperability of data, for example routing, ticketing and timetabling data, is needed to deliver MaaS. In this respect, the British Standards Institute is carrying out a scoping study to map the existing data landscape and explore whether current standards are fit-for-purpose in the Government’s ‘Future of Transport’ context.

LTT795 page 12.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:18 Page 4

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

12 News

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

THE FIVE West Yorkshire district councils are preparing to merge their urban traffic management and control (UTMC) services into a single entity managed by Leeds City Council.

UTMC services are currently delivered independently by each of the authorities with the exception of Calderdale, which procures the service from Leeds.

The four West Yorkshire UTMC teams (Leeds, Bradford, Wakefield and Kirklees) work in different locations to varying service level agreements, with some limited formal crossboundary operations, such as shared maintenance, supply and installation contracts.

The project has three parts: • joining up all districts’ UTC/UTMC computer systems into one system located in the “cloud” (circa £2.3m) • improvements to UTC equipment at key junctions on the West Yorkshire Key Route Network (circa £4.0m); and • consolidating the four West Yorkshire UTC under TUPE provisions (circa £1.0m) The service will take over responsibility for the design of new traffic signal installations and be responsible for procurement, installation, operation and maintenance. Each district will retain ownership of its traffic signal assets and be responsible for paying associated energy costs.

The service will have 34 fulltime equivalent staff. Bradford says this is enough to allow all staff in post across West Yorkshire to obtain an equivalent position in the joint service.

“With the addition of the management fee by Leeds City Council the joint service model is significantly more expensive to operate than the council’s current arrangements,” Steve Hartley, Bradford’s strategic director of place told councillors. “[But] The joint services model provides many benefits in terms of more efficient and cohesive management of traffic. Staffing of UTMC engineers has always been difficult given the specialist skillset. The proposed staffing structure of the joint service provides a framework which has sufficient critical mass to allow training of graduates and apprentices to these roles in the future, thereby assuring the future viability of resources.”

West Yorks CA may be handed control of key motorway links GOVERNANCE

by Andrew Forster

THE WEST Yorkshire Combined Authority could take over the ownership of two sections of motorway from Highways England.

The idea features in the detailed paperwork for the West Yorkshire devolution deal that was announced by the Government last month (LTT 20 Mar).

Discussing how the devolution deal could evolve, the Government says it will “consider any case that the city region may bring forward for de-trunking part or all of the M606 and M621, or exploring alternative ways in which management of these roads can be made more responsive to local priorities”.

The M606 connects Bradford to the M62 transpennine motorway. The M621 connects the M62 to Leeds.

Last month the DfT announced it would launch a study into the role of the Strategic Road Network in combined authority areas, which could lead to “improved collaboration on operations and changes in road ownership” (LTT 20 Mar).

The deal document explains the transport powers and funding that will be conferred on the West Yorkshire Combined Authority in return for it moving to an elected mayor model of governance.

The funding elements of the deal include: • £38m a year for 30 years into a West Yorkshire Investment Fund, with a 25/75 per cent capital/revenue split • a Government commitment to work with West Yorkshire to develop a “modern mass transit system through access to a new five-year integrated transport settlement”. The settlement will commence in 2022/23 with £4.2bn available to eight areas (LTT 20 Mar) • £317m from the Transforming Cities Fund to improve public transport, cycling and walking.

Kirklees Council, a member of the WYCA said this represented “a larger allocation, both in cash and per head, than any of the other areas that submitted a bid”.

A mayoral election will be held next May. The first mayor will be serve a three-year term.

From 2024 the term will last four years.

The mayor will have the

power to: • prepare a local transport plan • introduce bus franchising • pay grants to bus operators • request local regulations requiring large fuel retailers to provide electric vehicle charging points.

The combined authority will have the power to designate a Key Route Network of the most important local authority roads.

Operational responsibility for the roads will remain with the constituent councils. The combined authority could operate a permit scheme on the KRN and apply to the Government for lane rental powers for the network.

The combined authority can also seek ministerial consent to introduce a Strategic Infrastructure Tariff on new development to fund transport and other infrastructure.

On planning, the CA will have statutory spatial planning powers to produce a spatial development strategy.

Voting members of the mayoral combined authority will be the elected mayor; the leaders of the five districts (Leeds, Bradford, Wakefield, Calderdale and Kirklees); and three elected members agreed by constituent

councils to reflect the balance of political parties across the combined authority area.

Non-voting members will be an elected member appointed by the City of York Council, which will remain a non-constituent member of the combined authority, and the chair of the Leeds City Region Local Enterprise Partnership.

The Government has agreed to provide £200,000 in 2020/21 to support the establishment of a Yorkshire Leaders Board “in recognition of the ambitions for closer collaboration across Yorkshire”.

Most Yorkshire local authorities, including those in West Yorkshire, had backed the idea of a combined authority for the whole of Yorkshire led by an elected mayor.

The Government has rejected this idea at least for now, instead pushing for sub-regional devolution deals across Yorkshire. A deal for South Yorkshire was struck in 2015 and is now finally on the verge of being operationalised. North Yorkshire and the City of York councils are exploring the case for a combined authority (LTT 07 Feb).

Diesel bus conversion Design competition to EVs branded failure for Leeds’ City Square BUSES

A PROJECT in York to convert diesel tour buses to battery electric operation has been a failure.

The City of York Council received funding in 2013 to convert six of Transdev’s opentop buses from diesel to battery electric. The first bus was converted in 2014 and three more conversions took place over the following two years. Conversion of the final two buses has never taken place, however, and £190,000 of the grant remains unspent.

Neil Ferris, York’s director of economy and place, told councillors: “Unfortunately, despite best efforts, performance of the retrofitted electric buses on the ground has not met an acceptable threshold of reliability, and vehicle availability has been poor, causing operational issues for the service – particularly the need to maintain a parc of diesel spare buses to step in to provide the service when availability of the electric buses is poor.

“Regrettably, the operator’s costs and operational challenges are so high it has concluded that the project has not been successful in its primary objective.”

Ferris said York’s experience was not unique “with a project at another historic UK city suffering problems with the supply of retrofitted electric buses”.

The diesel tour buses will soon be non-compliant with York’s bus-based clean air zone. From 31 January next year buses will have to be Euro VI diesel or better.

The failure of the retrofitting has not put the council off electric buses. The park-and-ride network is becoming fully electric with 21 buses being delivered.

York is to prepare a bid to the DfT’s electric bus town competition. “Longer routes may not be suitable for conversion to fully electric buses, but would instead use hybrid technology to operate under electric power in the York urban area, but diesel in the rural areas surrounding York,” said Ferris.

Tim Green

W Yorks councils merge UTMC

PUBLIC REALM LEEDS CITY Council is to hold a design competition to transform the current roaddominated City Square outside the railway station into a pedestrian space.

City Square currently features roads on three sides, including the four-lane Wellington Street that has to be crossed to access the station. Traffic flows into Wellington Street from the

south via Bishopgate Street and Neville Street that passes under the railway.

Leeds says proposed improvements to the Armley Gyratory, west of the city centre, to be presented to councillors later this year, will facilitate the closure of City Square to general traffic.

The council is to work with the Royal Institute of British Architects on the competition to appoint a design consultant.

LTT795 page 13.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:24 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 13

Plan to relocate Sheffield inner relief road behind rail station

URBAN TRANSPORT

by Andrew Forster

A HUGE engineering project to move Sheffield’s inner relief road from in front of the city’s railway station to round the back is the centrepiece of a new plan to regenerate the station and its vicinity.

The draft Sheffield Midland station and Sheaf Valley development framework has been prepared by consultant Atkins for a steering group including the city council. The proposals are envisaged for delivery over 15-20 years.

Atkins says the area around the station is in need of redevelopment and “has a large amount of unrealised development potential”.

Currently the South Yorkshire Supertram route to Herdings Park and Halfway in the south of the city runs down the back (the east side) of Sheffield Midland railway station. The plan is to reroute the tram down Pond Street on the west side of the station via an alignment that will also pass through Fitzalan Square, Sheaf Square and Granville

Sheffield: the purple line shows the proposed new route of the inner relief road and the orange shows the new tram route

Square.

This would free up the old tram alignment for the A61 inner relief road (Sheaf Street), which separates the railway station from the city centre.

“Moving the tram to Pond Street opens up the once-in-alifetime opportunity for a new inner relief road route to the east of the station,” says Atkins.

“Moving the inner relief road allows Midland station to become a truly integrated part of the city. By removing the road barrier, and opening up new

green space, the station will be better and more safely connected with the bus station and the city core.”

The report acknowledges that the proposals are a “complex and challenging proposition” but says it is “technically feasible and is a game-changing opportunity for a vastly more efficient inner relief road and tram network and the transformation of this part of the city centre”.

Sheaf Street, Suffolk Road and other adjacent roads would all be re-purposed with greenspace,

dedicated walking and cycling routes and high-quality public realm.

The proposals would allow Park Square roundabout north of the station to be reconfigured, creating a large new area of development land from what is currently road space.

Other proposals in the framework include a new landscaped bridge from Sheaf Street across the station and the new inner relief road alignment.

The bus station on Pond Street would be reconfigured. Long stay car parking for the station would be moved to a multi-storey car park at Granville Square.

The steering group for the framework comprises the council; the Sheffield City Region Combined Authority; the DfT; the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government; HS2 Ltd; Transport for the North; South Yorkshire PTE; Network Rail; and London and Continental Railways Ltd (LCR).

The following consultants have assisted Atkins: Quatro, Faithful Gould, Lambert Smith Hampton, and Cushman & Wakefield.

SYPTE likely to take over tram operation

LIGHT RAIL

SOUTH YORKSHIRE Passenger Transport Executive looks likely to take over the operation of the South Yorkshire Supertram network when Stagecoach’s concession for the system ends in 2024.

The Sheffield City Region Combined Authority is preparing a plan for a major renewal of the system in the period 2024-2028, which will include a new fleet of vehicles.

The Supertram network opened in stages in 1994 and 1995. An extension to Rotherham Parkgate using tram-train technology opened in 2018.

Patronage peaked at 15 million in 2010/11 and fell to 11.5 million in 2014/15, partly because of essential rail replacement on the highway sections of the route.

Ridership recovered to 12.6 million in 2016/17 but the trend has been downward since then.

The network is currently operated and maintained by South Yorkshire Supertram Ltd (SYSL), a subsidiary of Stagecoach. Its concession agreement began in 1997 and is due to end in March

Stagecoach’s contract for the tram ends in 2024

2024.

A report explaining the outline business case for the renewal of the network was prepared for last week’s Sheffield City Region Combined Authority meeting.

The meeting was cancelled because of Covid-19.

The combined authority envisages purchasing 28 new vehicles by 2027. This would result in a non-tram-train fleet of 31 (three of the seven trams in the tramtrain order delivered in 2015/16 are actually used on the rest of the network). The new fleet could deliver an increased service fre-

quency of 7.5 trams an hour on the core route.

A renewal of infrastructure is also proposed.

Peter Elliot, SYPTE’s principal programme planning and delivery manager, said the best value for money operating model during the renewal works would be for the PTE to establish an arm’slength organisation to operate the services and maintain the network and fleet.

“Market testing shows that during the period of the renewal works, there is no-one willing to take the revenue risk as SYSL do

now,” said Elliot.

Nevertheless, “an option to enter into a short-term (four to six years) operating contract with a private sector operator (the public sector retaining revenue risk) will [also] be assessed,” he said.

The long-term operating model for the network would be reviewed after renewals are complete in 2028.

The estimated final capital cost for the overall renewal programme is £312.5m at 2018/19 prices, or £439m in outturn prices (i.e. including inflation).

An outline business case for the programme has been prepared and will be submitted to the DfT. The combined authority is proposing that the £312m costs are met by a DfT contribution £290.6m and a local contribution of £21.9m.

The following consultants have helped prepare the outline business case: Turner and Townsend (quantity surveyor); AECOM (engineering and rolling stock); Grant Thornton (financial); DLA Piper (legal); SYSTRA/AECOM (modelling and appraisal); and AECOM (outline business case oversight).

Nottingham light rail extensions proposed LIGHT RAIL

COUNCILLORS IN Nottingham have authorised the preparation of outline business cases for three short extensions to the Nottingham Express Transit tram network.

An eastern route from Nottingham railway station would run initially as far as the Racecourse park-and-ride facility (2.5-3km) and ultimately to Gedling. The route would serve the ‘Island site’ where 1,750 homes and 55,000 sq m of office space are planned,

and the Waterside regeneration area, which could accommodate 3,000 homes and 150,000 sq m of employment land.

A 1.5km extension is planned from the Toton parkand-ride site to the proposed HS2 Toton station. This route could be extended to Long Eaton.

A 1.8km route south from the Clifton park-and-ride site would take the tram through the Fairham Pastures development site for 3,000 homes and 100,000 sq m of employment land.

Steve Head, Nottingham’s acting director of transport projects and public transport, said preliminary analysis suggested all the extensions were worth building. The intention is to complete the outline business cases by autumn 2021. Opening of the lines is envisaged is 2028/29.

Nottingham regards routes from Toton HS2 station to East Midlands Airport and Derby, and east towards Gamston, as longer term projects.

The city council will provide officer support to Broxtowe Borough Council on a preliminary assessment of extending NET from the current Phoenix Park terminus to Kimberley and Langley Mill, northwest of Nottingham.

NET carries nearly 19 million passengers a year.

LTT795 page 14.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:32 Page 4

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

14 News

Build two Lower Thames crossings – SELEP

INFRASTRUCTURE

ANOTHER NEW crossing of the lower Thames estuary will have to be built after the Government’s proposed Lower Thames Crossing road tunnel is completed, according to the South East England Local Enterprise Partnership (SELEP).

Responding to Highways England’s consultation on detailed aspects of the Lower Thames Crossing, SELEP chairman Christian Brodie says: “It is perhaps reflective of the foresight and ambition of the senior politicians and senior business leaders on the South East LEP board, that we have also looked beyond the Lower Thames Crossing – specifically to the longer term requirement for multimodal crossings further east to accommodate the sustained growth of our area and further improve north-south connectivity.

“We would wish to engage in those conversations with the DfT and Highways England in due course.”

In Brief

£1.5m rail grant for Scots cement plant Transport Scotland has awarded Tarmac a £1.5m Freight Facilities Grant to expand rail freight facilities at the company’s Oxwellmains cement works near Dunbar in East Lothian. The facility sends out cement by rail to Aberdeen, Inverness, Glasgow, Seaham Harbour south of Sunderland, and Thurrock in Essex.

Amey and Bear win Scots road contracts Transport Scotland has awarded road maintenance contracts for trunk roads in the southeast and southwest of Scotland. BEAR Scotland Ltd will take over the South East Unit and Amey OW Ltd will operate the South West Unit. The new contracts will commence on 16 August and run for a minimum of eight years, with the option of an extension of up to four. The contracts are estimated to be worth up to £720m and £690m respectively if the four-year extensions are granted.

Leics threatens to reject HIF roads cash in planning dispute ROADS

by Andrew Forster

LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY Council is threatening to turn down a Government funding offer for a new road unless a borough council agrees to let the county lead on preparing masterplans for a town’s development.

Leicestershire and Melton Borough Council are in dispute about plans for Melton Mowbray, putting at risk the Government’s £15m Housing Infrastructure Fund grant offer for the £28m southern section of the Melton Mowbray Distributor Road.

Leicestershire says it will turn down the grant offer unless Melton Borough Council allows the county to lead masterplanning for two new neighbourhoods, in the north and south of the town.

The DfT has separately awarded Leicestershire £49m for the northern and eastern sections of the road through its Large Local Majors Fund. These sections have an estimated cost of £70.3m. Construction is due to begin on them next summer, with opening in 2023.

Leicestershire remains committed to progressing these sections, having already spent £5m on them and with a further £16m earmarked.

The county expects Section 106 developer contributions from new housing developments to bridge the funding gap for all the sections of proposed road. Leicestershire will, however, have to forward fund much of the local

Melton: masterplanning dispute

contribution, only recouping its expenditure as the developer contributions are secured.

The planning dispute between the two councils is explained in a county council report prepared by Leicestershire’s chief executive John Sinott; director of corporate resources Chris Tambini; and director of environment and transport Ann Carruthers.

They say Melton Borough Council has failed to develop a masterplan for the town’s northern and southern new neighbourhoods.

“Without these masterplans there is too much uncertainty about development in Melton for the county council to commit to forward fund the cost of the southern section of the Melton Mowbray Distributor Road at a time of increasing financial uncertainty.”

Melton Borough Council has advised the county that masterplans are being prepared by developers with interests in the northern neighbourhood and by developers jointly with Melton Council for the southern neighbourhood.

“A draft for the south is said to have been produced,” says

Leicestershire’s report. “However, the county council has not been formally engaged in discussions relating to either masterplan and has not had sight of any draft document.

“As a developer in the north sustainable neighbourhood, the county council has not been approached.”

The officers criticise the borough council’s whole approach to the masterplanning exercise.

“To ensure objectivity and alignment with Melton Borough Council’s aspirations, it is good practice for the local planning authority to take the lead on producing its masterplans.

“Allowing the developer to take the lead, which appears to be Melton’s approach, can produce a framework that is biased towards commercial interests. This creates uncertainty about what will eventually be produced and whether the county council’s interests will be protected.

“This is especially pertinent given that Melton is suggesting that the masterplans will not be produced as Supplementary Planning Documents and therefore will not be subject to the level of

collaboration that is necessary to ensure the documents are robust, as set out in planning legislation.

This includes full public consultation and demonstrating how consultation responses have been taken into consideration.”

Leicestershire is offering to allocate the required £13m match-funding for the southern section of the road if Melton Council accepts the county’s plan to lead on the masterplanning for both neighbourhoods.

The county council is concerned that, under the current masterplanning arrangements, Section 106 contributions for the road will not be forthcoming on the scale required.

“The county is dependent on Melton Borough Council having an effective planning process to ensure that Section 106 income is maximised,” said Leicestershire’s director of corporate resources Chris Tambini. “There are clear problems getting a risk-sharing agreement that Melton finds acceptable and in addition there are major planning risks that reduce confidence that all the required Section 106 monies will be received.

“This risk applies to both the northern/eastern and the southern sections of the road. With the southern section the risk is more pronounced as a result of the HIF grant conditions and scale of infrastructure investment required.”

About £7m of S106 contributions have been secured for the northern and eastern sections of the road so far.

Birmingham’s CAZ income could fund rail FUNDING

REVENUE RAISED from Birmingham’s clean air zone (CAZ) could be used to pay for rail schemes in the city.

Birmingham City Council is proposing to offer a capped revenue contribution from CAZ income towards three public transport projects being promoted by the West Midlands Combined Authority.

The council could pay £5.2m towards the £52.2m cost of new stations at Moseley, Kings Heath and Hazelwell on the Camp Hill line in the south of the city.

A £3.4m contribution could be made to the proposed £42.9m project to increase passenger capacity at University rail station.

University station: capacity increase

The third contribution would be £4.2m towards a £28.5m programme of bus priority measures for cross-city bus scheme. The DfT announced the remaining £24m for this project last September.

All the council’s funding pledges depend on the CAZ raising sufficient funds and the funds being available at the necessary time.

“Where insufficient CAZ net proceeds have been accumulated by the time funding contributions are required or where prioritisation has been given to other schemes, West Midlands Combined Authority will be responsible for securing alternative gap funding for the delivery of the schemes and any related costs (including borrowing),” John Myatt, Birmingham’s transport planning and investment manager told councillors. He said the council’s first priority for CAZ revenues was to ensure that compliance with the mandatory

nitrogen dioxide limit value is met.

Reopening the Camp Hill line to passenger trains faces a number of hurdles. A risk register says there is a “high likelihood” that it will prove impractical to operate services from the line into Birmingham New Street. Further timetabling work by Network Rail and West Midlands Trains is due to report this month. The project also has a funding gap of £39.6m.

The University rail station works are due to start in January 2021 and be completed in August 2022. The works include a new station building; a footbridge across platforms; a footbridge over the canal; platform works; and landscaping.

LTT795 page 15.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:40 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 15

In Brief

Palmer’s CAM edict prompts debate about transport powers

GOVERNANCE

by Andrew Forster

THE QUESTION of who governs transport in Cambridge has come to the fore following Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority mayor James Palmer’s instruction that the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) ceases work on a bus rapid transit corridor.

Palmer told the GCP in February to cease work on the proposed Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro (CAM) route between Cambridge and the town of Cambourne to the west (LTT 21 Feb). In a letter to GCP chairman Aidan Van de Weyer, the mayor said: “I do not support the scheme as currently proposed; I therefore do not support the outline business case that is being put to you for decision; and I do not expect the GCP to pursue this scheme any further. A rethink is needed, and as the transport authority the combined authority will provide the leadership required.”

His statement has now prompted an exchange of letters between the GCP and the combined authority over who has what powers to plan transport in the city.

The GCP comprises Cambridge City Council, South Cambridgeshire District Council, Cambridgeshire County Council, and the University of Cambridge. It predates the combined authority, having been formed to take forward the Greater Cambridge City Deal struck with Government in 2014, which includes up to £500m for transport infrastructure. The GCP has its own transport officer team.

On 6 March the combined authority’s transport and environment committee, chaired by Palmer, approved the commissioning of a sub-strategy for CAM that will provide the framework for decisions about individual routes (LTT 06 Mar).

The combined authority’s overview and scrutiny committee called-in the decision, raising a number of items of concern.

These were subsequently fleshed out in a letter sent by councillor Aidan Van de Weyer, deputy leader of South Cambridgeshire District Council and GCP chair, to combined authority interim monitoring officer, Dermot Pearson.

Van de Weyer asked in “what capacity, and using what

Palmer: GCP must deliver to combined authority’s agenda

powers”, Palmer wrote to him “halting the [Cambourne to Cambridge] scheme and taking over responsibility for the route”. In addition, Van de Weyer asked “what powers you believe the combined authority has to construct either the Cambourne to Cambridge scheme or indeed the [wider] CAM Metro”.

The CAM network is expected to extend from Cambridge into wider Cambridgeshire and will include a tunnelled section in Cambridge city centre upon which the combined authority launched a consultation last month (LTT 06 Mar).

Van de Weyer’s letter goes on to discuss the respective powers of the combined authority and the GCP. “The CA was created by the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority Order 2017 as a body corporate and only has the powers which have been conferred on it by legislation,” said Van de Weyer.

“The GCP, whose powers derive from the City Deal, has the benefit of highway powers delegated to it pursuant to section 102 of the Local Government Act 1972 from the county council and pursuant to section 9EB of the Local Government Act 2000 from the city council.”

He also points out that the combined authority’s own local transport plan (LTP), approved on 29 January, includes a passage stating: “Along the A428/A1303 corridor, the Cambourne to Cambridge scheme being led by the Greater Cambridge Partnership will deliver a segregated public transport corridor from Cambourne.”

In his response to Van de Weyer, the combined authority monitoring officer Dermot

Pearson says the combined authority is the strategic transport authority for the area and, as such, has responsibility for developing the CAM strategy.

Pearson said the combined authority had not made a decision to deliver Cambourne to Cambridge itself. Instead, it “made a decision which ensures that the delivery of Cambourne to Cambridge is in accordance with the local transport plan”.

Pearson said preparation of the new CAM strategy would ensure that the project complements the Government’s East West Rail project. The Government recently announced that the East West Rail route between Bedford and Cambridge will run via Cambourne (LTT 07 Feb).

“The announcement of the East West Rail alignment would of itself have required some reconsideration of Cambourne to Cambridge by the GCP regardless of the mayor’s letter to you,” said Pearson.

He said the preparation of the CAM strategy, as a sub-strategy of the local transport plan, was “a proportionate response to the announcement of the East West Rail alignment and the mayor’s expressed concerns about whether the current Cambourne to Cambridge proposals reflect the overall aims for the CAM project”.

Pearson said it was “a matter for the GCP whether to follow the mayor’s expectation that it should not now proceed with the outline business case [for Cambourne to Cambridge]”.

“If work were to proceed then that could be in conflict with the [CAM] sub-strategy when adopted. If that conflict did arise then the combined authority’s view is that the altered local transport plan would prevail and that the Cambourne to Cam-

Van de Weyer: chair of the GCP

bridge project could not lawfully proceed in a manner contrary to the LTP.” Pearson has reminded Van de Weyer of the mayor’s statement to the 6 March transport and infrastructure committee meeting that: “There is [an] absolute commitment from this transport committee and from me as mayor that we will deliver a metro system for Cambridgeshire and Peterborough and there is absolute commitment that will include Cambourne and it will include West Cambridge. There is absolute commitment that we will build tunnels under the city of Cambridge.”

Addressing Van de Weyer’s question about what powers the combined authority has to construct CAM, Pearson said: “The likely mechanism for delivery of the CAM project would be via an Order under the Transport Works Act 1992. Such an Order would be available to the combined authority.”

In addition, he said the 2017 Order creating the combined authority gives it various powers under the Highways Act 1980.

“These include the power to enter into agreements with local highway authorities.”

Pearson said the GCP lacked the power to build the Cambourne to Cambridge scheme.

“Any highways powers delegated to GCP by the county council would not be sufficient for GCP to deliver Cambourne to Cambridge given that it is a transport scheme.

“The delivery of any transport scheme within the combined authority area would have to be in accordance with the local transport plan and any sub-strategy incorporated within it.”

Pearson emphasised that “there is no current proposal for the combined authority to construct Cambourne to Cambridge in place of the GCP. It is the GCP which carries out the delivery role.”

He added that, “given the GCP’s stated completion date for Cambourne to Cambridge is 2024-25, it is not clear that an alteration to the LTP will affect the overall timescales for delivery of Cambourne to Cambridge”.

“The combined authority remains committed to the content of its LTP and to the delivery of Cambourne to Cambridge in collaboration with the GCP,” said Pearson.

SPT’s capital budget reduced The Scottish Government has explained why Strathclyde Partnership for Transport’s general capital budget has been cut by £3.7m (19 per cent) in 2020/21. Transport secretary Michael Matheson said capital budgets for regional transport partnerships were part of the overall local government capital settlement agreed with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. “In the event that the overall local government settlement funding is reduced, as is the case in 2020/21, each of the elements of the capital settlement is reduced accordingly, and consequently, the budget is reduced,” he told Edward Mountain, convenor of the Scottish Parliament’s rural economy and connectivity committee. Matheson said SPT’s 2019/20 budget of £23.1m included a one-off pay-back uplift of £4.1m. “Accordingly, the reduction on the baseline budget of £19m is £3.7m. It will be for SPT to determine how it prioritises the funding for its capital programme.” The Scottish Government is continuing to provide SPT with separate funding for modernising the Glasgow Subway, with £55.1m being paid in 2020/21.

Active travel bridge plan dropped The Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority has dropped a plan for a pedestrian and cyclist bridge over the River Great Ouse in St Neots. Cambridgeshire County Council has received a report costing the project at £7.4m, twice the £3.7m available budget.

MK alerts market to DRT opportunities Milton Keynes Council is setting up a five-year dynamic purchasing system for shared taxi and demand responsive transport operators that could be used to replace traditional bus routes. Says the council: “The council is seeking shared taxi/DRT providers to cover a variety of possible contracts including but not exclusively emergency transport provision and longer-term shared ride alternative services in the place of more traditional bus routes.” In January the council began reimbursing DRT operator ViaVan for carrying English National Concessionary Travel Scheme passengers in the Emerson Valley area of Milton Keynes. The area is also served by an infrequent subsidised bus route. The council is assessing whether the DRT route provides a more attractive option for bus users, to inform a review of the entire tendered network in October (LTT 24 Jan).

LTT795 page 16.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:45 Page 4

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

16 News

Glasgow revokes an AQMA AIR QUALITY

ONe OF Glasgow’s three air quality management areas (AQMAs) is to be revoked and a second could be revoked next year. But the council says a low emission zone (LeZ) covering all vehicle types will be necessary to eliminate the third.

The AQMA approved for revocation last month covers Parkhead Cross, a junction of five roads in the city’s east end. The AQMA was declared in 2007 for nitrogen dioxide. Monitoring shows concentrations have been below 40μg/m3, the annual mean air quality objective, since 2014.

The Byres Road/Dumbarton Road AQMA was declared in 2007 for NO2 and in 2016 for particulate matter (PM10). PM10 concentrations have been below the 18μg/m3 annual mean objective level for several years. The AQMA is being amended to remove this pollutant.

The last recorded NO 2 exceedance in this AQMA was in 2017. “Policy guidance recommends a minimum of three years of monitored compliance before revoking an AQMA,” George Gillespie, Glasgow’s executive director of neighbourhoods and sustainability, told councillors. “if the monitoring trends continue it is expected that this AQMA could be eligible for complete revocation in 2021.”

This would leave just the city centre AQMA. During 2018, the council measured concentrations of NO2 above the annual mean objective at one city centre automatic monitoring station (61μg/m3) and seven diffusion tube sites (range of 41-63μg/m3).

The city centre AQMA broadly covers Glasgow’s LeZ introduced in December 2018. This currently only applies to buses but will be extended to all vehicles from the end of 2022.

Asked if this was essential to revoking the AQMA, a council spokeswoman said: “Detailed modelling conducted by SePA showed that, as the biggest single source of emissions of oxides of nitrogen, introducing the LeZ in a phased manner to improve bus compliance rates would provide the fastest method of reducing NO2 levels in the city centre. however, the modelling also clearly showed that an LeZ that only targeted scheduled bus services would not lead to sufficient reductions to meet the objectives throughout the AQMA.”

Borough plans to link parking fees to accessibility, NOx & CO PARKING

by Andrew Forster

The LONDON Borough of Merton has published proposals to revamp its parking charges so they are linked to accessibility and a vehicle’s carbon dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions.

Under the Labour administration’s proposals, which have yet to go to consultation, the cost of a parking permit for residents (and other permit types) would feature three components: • an accessibility component based on the location’s public transport access level (PTAL) and the number of hours in the day that the controlled parking zone (CPZs) is enforced • a vehicle’s CO2 emissions • a vehicle’s nitrogen oxide emissions, based on the criteria used for Transport for London’s ultralow emission zone The accessibility component of the permit charge has been oper-

ating since January and has three tiers.

Tier one covers Wimbledon town centre. here, the charge will be £150 where CPZs operate 1214.5 hours a day; £120 for CPZs operating six to ten hours a day; and £110 for CPZs operating one to four hours a day.

Tier two zones cover part of Colliers Wood, plus South Wimbledon, Raynes Park and Morden. here the charges are £130, £110, and £100 depending on CPZ hours.

Tier three zones covers Mitcham and part of Colliers Wood. here the charges are £90, £80 and £70 depending on CPZ hours. in all zones 100 per cent electric vehicles only pay £20.

The carbon dioxide component of the permit charge will be based on the Government’s Vehicle excise Duty bands, from A (lowest emissions) to M (highest). The vehicle’s band adjusts the accessibility-based

permit fee.

A vehicle in band G (111130gCO 2 /km) would pay the standard rate of accessibilitybased charges listed above.

Vehicles in lower emission bands (A-F) would pay progressively less and vehicles above (h-M) progressively more.

For instance, a vehicle in Band J (171-190gCO2/km) would pay £300 in a Wimbledon town centre CPZ with 12-14.5 hours of enforcement. At the very top, a vehicle in band M (over 255gCO2/km) would pay £540.

The third component of the charges is the NOx charge. This will replace Merton’s existing diesel surcharge.

The NOx charge uses the criteria of the ULeZ. A £150 charge will apply to all vehicles manufactured before 2006 (primarily rated euro 1, 2 & 3s) and diesel vehicles registered between 2006 and September 2015 (euro 4 and 5).

No NOx charge will apply to

2

petrol vehicles registered between 2006 and September 2015, nor to euro 6 diesel cars (manufactured since September 2015).

Merton also plans to introduce emission-based charging for payand-display on-street and council-owned car parks. A oneoff charge of £1.50 will apply on top of the cost of each short-term parking session if a vehicle fails to comply with the ULeZ criteria.

For this to work, Merton must replace its current stock of pay & display machines as they are incapable of determining vehicle type.

The new machines will allow drivers to enter a vehicle registration number, with the machine calculating the fee.

The council plans to reduce the number of machines from 450 to 100.

The current RingGo parking system, which is used by the majority of drivers, is already capable of charging a fee based on vehicle emissions.

York to increase tariffs for EV charging

ELECTRIC VEHICLES

The CiTy of york Council is to increase the tariffs at its electric vehicle charging points.

The current 15p/kWh tariff, which was set in 2013, will rise to 20p/kWh for fast chargers (722kW) and to 25p/kWh for rapid (44kW AC and 50 kW DC) and ultra-rapid (more than 150Kw) chargers. in a report to councillors, Neil Ferris, york’s director of economy and place, said the new tariffs reflected the council’s standard tariff for electricity (at the moment 15p/kWh but which will increase in 20/21) plus an additional charge to cover operation and support costs.

The current 15p/kWh tariff was, for a car consuming 200Wh/km, the equivalent of a petrol car achieving 120 miles per gallon or a diesel car achieving 125 mpg, he said.

The 20p/kWh tariff was equivalent to 90mpg (petrol) and 94 (diesel).

The 25p/kWh tariff was equivalent to 65mpg (petrol) and 68mpg (diesel).

Ferris said the new tariffs were cheaper than the offerings of most commercially-operated eV chargepoints. “For rapid and ultra-rapid chargers the commercial tariff will generally be

between 30 and 45p/kWh. For fast chargepoints the commercial tariff will generally be between 18 and 30 p/kWh.” A tariff of 45p/kWh was equivalent to 40mpg in a petrol car and 42mpg in a diesel. york is to introduce parking fees in fast charging bays. “This will dissuade users who currently plug-in to get free parking when they have a nearly full battery and don’t need to use the chargepoint,” said Ferris.

Residents will be eligible for a regular user discount pass, costing £30 for two years, entitling them to free overnight parking in eV charging bays within council car parks.

Rapid and ultra-rapid charging bays will have a 90-minute time limit, after which a £10 overstay

York: EV parking charges

fee will be charged. For every additional 60 minutes a further £10 fee will apply. eV users can access york’s network of chargepoints through either the Charge your Car or Polar Network services, using web-based apps or dedicated access cards.

New rapid and ultra-rapid chargers will allow customers to use a bank card without the need to join a network.

The Charge your Car service is a pay-as-you-go service. Users access a web-based app or pay an annual fee of £20 for an RFiD access card.

The Polar Plus network allows users to pay a monthly subscription of £7.85 and then pay a reduced tariff for the electricity they use. in york’s case this will

be 12p/kWh (fast), 15p (rapid) and 20p (ultra-rapid).

Polar Plus provides access to about 10,000 chargers around the UK, including Charge your Car chargers. Both services are operated by BP Chargemaster.

Ferris said fewer than 50 per cent of the city’s chargepoints were operational in early 2019 due to a combination of “lifeexpired charge points, lack of proactive maintenance, and lack of expertise within the council to provide effective oversight of the network”.

Actions were taken to improve matters and 100 per cent of chargepoints were available by the end of 2019.

But he added: “Despite this dramatic short-term improvement, there remain significant underlying issues that need addressing including life-expired chargers, an insufficient number of chargers overall, poor geographical distribution, issues with the number and location of rapid chargers, no ultra-rapid chargers to support next generation cars, and poor communication between back office provider, hardware provider, and maintenance provider.”

The council’s new eV strategy aims to overcome these problems.

LTT795 page 17.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 11:10 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 17

In Brief

Speeding points ‘must remain under a decriminalised regime’

SPEED LIMITS

DRIVERS MUST continue to receive penalty points on their licence for all speeding offences even if low level offences are decriminalised, borough association London Councils has said.

London Councils is campaigning to persuade the Government to decriminalise speed limit offences if drivers exceed the speed limit by less than a given threshold (LTT 17 Dec 18 & 25 Oct 19). In such instances, the revenues collected from offenders would flow to councils.

The boroughs say decriminalisation would allow enforcement to be increased and relieve pressure on stretched police resources. The Metropolitan Police, opposes the idea, however.

London Councils transport manager Andrew Luck set out the latest developments in the work to the organisation’s transport and environment committee (TEC) last month.

Luck said it would be “important that decriminalised speed enforcement continues to carry the same impact as criminal enforcement as a deterrent to speeding motorists”.

“Boroughs delivering speed enforcement should not be perceived as reducing the seriousness of such offences. A key component of any decriminalised enforcement would be the ability to retain the endorsement of offences, or points on the driving licence.

“Legal counsel has indicated that if the proposal was for the penalty points system to be retained, then this would require authorities to inform the DVLA [the Driving and Vehicle Licensing Agency] where penalty points are to be made. In principle there is no reason why this could not be done but would require legislative change.”

Luck said London Councils’ counsel, Clive Sheldon, had suggested that speeding offences could be separated out between the

Calls for the civil enforcement of speed limits have increased as the coverage of signed-only 20mph limits has grown

civil and criminal regimes, with offences over an threshold defined as criminal, and those below the threshold defined as civil.

Sheldon has said the most obvious way to achieve the change will be by amending the Traffic Management Act 2004, Part 6 of which covers the civil enforcement of traffic contraventions.

“What changes would need to be made to the legislation to make it appropriate in a partial decriminalisation scenario are unclear. This will be explored further,” said Luck.

“By utilising the Traffic Management Act as opposed to extending existing powers under the Local Government Act 1972, any surplus revenue generated could be used by the authority for traffic and safety management purposes,” he explained.

Luck said that, if the Traffic Management Act were used, then London Councils’ TEC would have the power to set the level of penalty charge.

Currently, the maximum penalty for a higher level parking and traffic infringement in the capital is £130. Luck said this was “likely” to be “insufficient” for speeding offences.

In addition, the penalties for parking and traffic infringements can be halved if paid within 14 days. Discussing the idea of offering such a discount to speeders, Luck said: “It is likely that this may not be appropriate.”

Boroughs are keen to offer speed awareness courses to drivers caught exceeding the limit under a decrimininalised regime.

“Legal advice indicated that authorities could offer diversionary courses, but exactly how this may work utilising the Traffic Management Act 2004 needs to be explored further.”

London Councils has still to persuade the Government to legislate for decriminalisation.

“The DfT indicated that London Councils would need to make a very strong case outlining the reasons why partial decriminalisation is the answer for future speed enforcement in London,” said Luck.

Any changes to primary legislation were likely to “take several years, even if there is Government support”.

“Whilst we are aware that the police do not currently support the move to partial decriminalisation, it is important to discuss plans on how such a regime may work in the future,” he added.

Representatives from London Councils were due to meet Liberal Democrat peer Baroness Pinnock last month to discuss her Private Member’s Bill, the Traffic Management (Amendment) Bill, which is seeking to add speeding contraventions to the Traffic Management Act. The bill had its first reading on 27 January.

Utility firms criticise council’s permit charges

STREETWORKS

A COUNCIL has defended its decision to impose permit charges for streetworks across its entire road network.

Companies say the policy of the recently created unitary authority of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (BCP) contradicts DfT guidance.

Permits give councils more power to co-ordinate streetworks activities than the noticing system they replace. The DfT requires local highway authorities in England to introduce a permit scheme from this month or as soon as practical thereafter.

The DfT’s 2015 guidance on permitting states: “It is most likely that schemes will apply permits to 100 per cent of the

network, with permit fees being waived or discounted on lower priority roads. Schemes may also choose to operate permits only across the areas largely defined by its strategically significant streets.”

BCP’s scheme, which is due to commence on 1 June, will see permit fees set at the maximum allowable, ranging from £60 to £240 depending on the traffic classification of the road affected.

The council’s “prudent” estimate is that 8,000 permits will be issued a year, generating annual income of £623,825. This will pay for administration, including six permit officers and two permit inspectors.

Responding to a consultation on the proposals, Openreach, a

wholly-owned subsidiary of BT Group, says the council’s plan to charge for all streets “goes against the ethos” of the DfT guidance.

Virgin Media concurs. Pointing to the DfT’s 2015 guidance, Virgin says: “Permit authorities must encourage works promoters to work wholly outside of traffic-sensitive times by offering discounted fees.”

Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSEN) has told the council: “We are disappointed you have chosen to charge on all roads and charging the maximum fees for all streets.

SSEN believes that there is less co-ordination required on nontraffic sensitive streets and do not agree charging maximum fees is required.”

Responding to the criticisms, the council said: “We acknowledge and follow all advice and guidance offered but must note that the highway network of Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole is of a heavily urban nature and therefore nearly all the street network can be strategically significant at times.

“Typical examples of this are that local traffic will always tend to avoid main distributors, not just at traffic sensitive times, and use streets of a lower classification.

“Therefore, officers coordinating road space activities must ... expend similar resource considering all road space booking requests, hence why [we] are charging maximum fees across the network.”

Dedicated speeding team for Met Police Transport for London and the Metropolitan Police Service are preparing to launch a dedicated speed enforcement team. London transport commissioner Mike Brown said it would complement speed enforcement activity undertaken by the Met Police’s 2,000strong Roads and Transport Policing Command team, which is part-funded by TfL, as well as enforcement through the safety camera network. “The [new] team, equipped with the latest laser video speed enforcement technology, will maximise coverage across London, responding to intelligence and local community concerns about speeding on residential roads,” he said. The team’s launch had been due this month but has been delayed because of Covid-19. London Councils reported last year that the intention is to increase the annual number of speeding offences processed in the capital from 160,000 to more than one million (LTT 21 Jun & 25 Oct).

E Sussex increases road marking spend East Sussex County Council is to increase its expenditure on road markings for a year in response to concerns raised by a council scrutiny committee. The council’s current road maintenance contract, held by a Costain/Jacobs joint venture, includes £165,000 for one road marking gang to renew markings. They give top priority to safety markings. In addition, the council has a machinelaid programme of markings work, which was expected to cost £66,000 in 2019/20. A review board of councillors has concluded that an initial injection of one-off funding, plus two road marking gangs, and a machinelaid programme would be needed to bring markings up to standard and keep them in good condition.

The councillors have welcomed the council’s decision to use a portion of an extra £1m road maintenance funding in in 2020/21 to fund an additional road marking gang. “Road markings are a very visible, relatively cheap and costeffective way of supporting road safety and promoting traffic movement,” say the councillors.

TfL awaits DfT’s lane rental decision TfL is waiting to hear if the DfT will approve its application to reform the capital’s lane rental scheme that see daily charges imposed on companies digging up parts of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN). Following a consultation last autumn (LTT 25 Oct 19), TfL has applied to (among other things) extend lane rental coverage from 56 to 72 per cent of the TLRN and introduce charges on the 20 busiest footways.

LTT795 page 18.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:52 Page 4

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

18 News

Cash to transform Runcorn station link

RAIL

THE LIVERPOOL City Region Combined Authority is to contribute £18.2m towards transforming the land outside Runcorn station from its current road-dominated state.

Halton Brough Council’s Runcorn Station Quarter project will take advantage of the changes to traffic flow that

have occurred since the new Mersey Gateway Crossing opened in 2017.

The network of roads outside the station feed the Silver Jubilee Crossing, which, since the Mersey Gateway opened, has been closed for refurbishment and remodelling. The road is due to reopen this spring and will feature a road carriageway of just two lanes, with better provision for pedestrians and cyclists. It is only expected to carry 20 per cent of crossMersey traffic, with the Mersey Gateway handling 80 per cent.

Highway structures will be removed, improving access between the station and Runcorn’s Old Town.

A new ‘piazza’ area will be built outside Runcorn station and bus interchange facilities improved. Footways and cycleway improvements are also planned.

In Brief

HS2 searches for station people mover Government company HS2 Ltd has commenced market engagement on plans to build an automated people mover between Birmingham Interchange HS2 station, the National Exhibition Centre, Birmingham International railway station and Birmingham Airport. A market questionnaire was issued last month. The tender process is expected to commence on 13 October.

Euston development partner may be about to quit – Berkeley HIGH-SPEED RAIL

by Andrew Forster

A CRITIC of HS2 has called on the Government to stop preparatory work for the project at London Euston, amid speculation that the station’s development partner may be about to quit.

Lord Berkeley has written to Andrew Stephenson, the DfT minister in charge of HS2, demanding a halt to the works.

Berkeley says he has picked up rumours that Lendlease, the master development partner for the redevelopment of Euston and the surrounding area, “has indicated that it wishes to terminate its development agreement on the grounds of engineering design uncertainty and escalating cost”.

“Perhaps you can clarify Lendlease’s position but if my information is correct, there is even greater pressure to cease all temporary works until matters are resolved.”

Berkeley cites Doug Oakervee’s review of HS2, which

said: “The existing planned construction of the approach has taken the form of a tunnelled dive-under, which is expensive and exposes major risks to the existing railway and services during construction.”

In February the Prime Minister said new delivery arrangements would be created for the “grossly behind schedule” Euston plans.

Berkeley supports the Government’s decision to remove the Euston station area from the responsibility of HS2 Ltd. “I fully support such a move but suggest that it would be a very brave minister who authorised the continuation of the

Preparing for HS2 at Euston

current HS2 Ltd high risk and unnecessarily expensive scheme [at Euston] when there are good and cheaper alternatives. And why is HS2 Ltd continuing such work when responsibility for this part of the HS2 project is to be removed from them?

“Ministers have said that they wish the HS2 and Network Rail stations [at Euston] to be developed together. The Oakervee report recommends an in-depth study into improving the efficiency of Euston station as a whole, avoiding the complicated HS2 approach to Euston and minimise risk. I support all these recommendations.

“With a reduced [HS2] specification to 320kph maximum [speed] and not more than 14 trains per hour, a much simpler layout can be achieved; it could enable approach platforms [lines? - Ed] to be shared between Network Rail and HS2 line trains and significantly reduce the construction risk for the HS2 approaches, as well as allowing Network Rail trains to continue to operate during most of the construction period unaffected.”

Responding to a question from Berkeley in the House of Lords last month, transport minister Baroness Vere said: “In relation to HS2 works in the area around Euston, in order to avoid further delays to implementation of the HS2 project, HS2 Ltd and its contractors will continue with the current programme of enabling and early works; only where such works will be required regardless of design changes that may arise in response to the outcomes of the Oakervee review.”

DfT creates High Newcastle-York rail investment proposals Speed North company

RAIL

NETWORK RAIL has identified a programme of investments to accommodate more services between Yorkshire and Newcastle, including Northern Powerhouse Rail and HS2 services.

Network Rail’s investigations have examined the railway between Newcastle and Church Fenton between Leeds and York, where the HS2 line is proposed to join the existing rail network.

The two-track section of railway between Northallerton in North Yorkshire and Newcastle is already a bottleneck.

Tobyn Hughes, managing director for Transport North East presented a summary of the findings in a report for the North East Joint Transport Committee.

Listed from south to north they are: • platform lengthening at Church Fenton • new platforms and an improved track layout at York • additional track between York and Skelton Junction, where the Harrogate line branches off • options to move passenger calls from the main line platforms at Northallerton

• new through and bay platforms at Darlington • rerouting freight off the East Coast Main Line between Northallerton and Ferryhill by running trains via Eaglescliffe and the Stillington branch that rejoins the main line at Ferryhill • reinstating the Leamside line from Ferryhill northwards either in part of full; the line could rejoin the ECML north of Durham or join the Sunderland to Newcastle line east of Heworth • unspecified options to increase capacity on the Durham Coast line (Hartlepool-SunderlandNewcastle) for additional passenger services • new track near Bensham Curve in Gateshead (separating freight from passenger services) • lengthening bay platforms at Newcastle Central to accommodate HS2 and NPR trains (Newcastle City Council is currently leading on station redevelopment plans) Hughes said the next stage of the exercise would see local authorities, Transport for the North and Network Rail develop a “phased approach to progressing the business cases for the interventions identified”.

RAIL

THE DFT has established a new company, High Speed North, which could lead the promotion of HS2 Phase 2b and Northern Powerhouse Rail.

The company was registered with Companies House on 28 February and has one director Kamal Patel, the DfT’s head of corporate finance. A separate company, High Speed Northern Ltd, was registered on the same

day. Patel is also its director.

Tobyn Hughes, managing director of Transport North East, said: “It is thought that High Speed North will likely cover HS2 Phase 2b and Northern Powerhouse Rail.”

Hughes said Transport for the North was aiming to produce a strategic outline business case for the whole of the Northern Powerhouse Rail network, along with a sequencing and phasing programme, in November.

Franchises extended

RAIL

THE DFT has extended FirstGroup’s contract for the Great Western rail franchise, and Govia’s for Southeastern.

FirstGroup’s new direct award for Great Western is for three years to 31 March 2023, extendable to four. Remarkably, this is FirstGroup’s fourth extension to the franchise, which was originally awarded for seven years commencing in April 2006.

The new contract eliminates most of the revenue risk for FirstGroup. A forecast revenue mechanism (FRM) will apply if

revenue variances differ from target in the bid assumptions, outside of a ‘nil rate’ band. Payments or receipts occur when actual revenue is 1.5 per cent higher or lower than the expected FRM revenue, at 90 per cent of the revenue difference.

Govia’s extension for Southeastern runs from 1 April to 16 October 2021, with the option to extend to 31 March 2022.

The agreements run concurrently with the DfT’s new emergency measures agreement announced because of Covid-19, which will run for at least the first six months (see page 5).

LTT795 page 19.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 10:54 Page 1

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 19

BUSINESS

Brighton reviews options for city’s public bike hire scheme BIKE HIRE

by Andrew Forster

BRIGHTON & HOVE City Council looks set to award a one-year contract extension for its public bike hire scheme as it reviews longer term options for the operation.

Brighton & Hove Bikeshare was launched in September 2017 with upfront funding of £1.16m from the Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership and £290,000 from the council. The funding paid for a fleet of 450 bikes and 50 docking stations. A further 150 bikes have been purchased since then and the number of docking stations has increased to 70, with the scheme now extending from Portslade railway station in the west and Rottingdean in the east. The council owns all the infrastructure.

Hourbike has a three-year concession contract that expires on 31 August. The contract includes the option of two extentions of up to two years each.

Brighton: in-house operation?

Bike hire demand has been far below the original forecast. The business case prepared in 2014 predicted 5.6 trips per bike per day but actual demand has averaged just over two trips a day.

Usage is highly seasonal, peaking in the summer months when usage can reach four trips a day. As of 31 January this year the scheme had registered 873,742 trips in all.

Councillors were being recommended to approve a 12-month extension to Hour-

bike’s contract last month but the meeting was cancelled because of Covid-19. The council was also being asked to provide revenue support after Life Natural Spring Water ended its sponsorship contract last week.

Nick Hibberd, the council’s executive director for economy, environment and culture, said “positive discussions” were ongoing with potential new sponsors but these had “not been conclusive”.

“The past few years have seen a decline in this kind of placement sponsorship in favour of investment in online marketing spend,” said Hibberd.

Wider changes in the micromobility market could affect the future of the bike hire scheme.

“Such changes include the possibility that the DfT will derestrict the use of e-scooters on the public highway,” said Hibberd. Dockless e-bike hire was a threat too.

“Both factors could attract alternative providers of dockless systems outside the council’s

control, damaging the viability of the council’s own Bikeshare scheme in its present form.”

He pointed out that bike hire schemes in Lincoln, Derby, Northampton and Reading have all closed down in the last year.

The council is reviewing options for after Hourbike’s contract ends. One possibility is to take operations in-house.

The review will also explore introducing e-bikes, and expanding scheme coverage to neighbouring councils. The district councils of Lewes and Adur & Worthing have both expressed interest in bike hire.

Brighton & Hove has purchased 200 electric bikes from Derby City Council’s now defunct bike hire scheme.

Derby’s scheme was launched in 2018 but Hourbike suspended the operation last year because of high levels of vandalism. Only 80 of the bikes are functional.

Brighton plans to use some for spares for its existing bikes, as well as for potential trials of ebikes.

Brent changes bike storage unit supplier

Tactran names MaaS platform builders

THE LONDON Borough of Brent has changed the supplier of its secure bike storage units for residential streets.

Brent has traditionally used Cyclehoop’s Bikehangars. These provide lockable and sheltered parking for six bikes and take up the area of one vehicle parking space. Brent installed its first unit in 2016 and now has 20.

Last November, TfL awarded Brent funding for 38 more storage units, requiring them to be installed by the end of March.

Brent says Cyclehoop had an influx of demand and could not guarantee delivery by the deadline. The council consequently used a London Borough of Walham Forest framework to procure units from Falco UK Ltd. Amar Dave, Brent’s strategic director of regeneration and environment, told councillors that Falco’s Falcopods actually had a number of design advantages.

They were a “more inclusive design”, able to accommodate “non-standard cycles, such as upright, Dutchstyle bikes and

THE TAYSIDE and Central Scotland Transport Partnership has named the contractors who are helping deliver its Mobility as a Service (MaaS) project.

In December Tactran’s ENABLE project received £550,000 from the Scottish Government’s £2m Mobility Innovation Fund (LTT 10 Jan).

The partnership is building a regionwide MaaS platform featuring realtime journey planning data and booking/ticketing and payment facilities for different transport modes.

The platform will also have the ability to host user accounts, enabling travel subsidies (e.g. for education or hospital visits) to be directed to users.

Three apps will be developed using the MaaS platform and piloted with: • Perth Royal Infirmary, focused on the new regional centre for urology • the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park, focused on the southeast of the park • Dundee & Angus College

CYCLING

bikes with children’s seats”.

Falco’s units were also “more secure”. “Cyclehoop has experienced some issues with their Bikehangars being targeted by vandals and the locks destroyed, with bikes reported stolen,” said Dave, though only one break-in has taken place to a Brent unit.

Falco’s units had a different lock design, which made them more secure, he said. In addition, the council can apply its own logo to Falco’s units.

A Falco unit costs £3,283.

Delivery and installation costs a further £1,150 per three. Annual service/maintenance costs are £200 per unit.

A Cyclehoop units cost £3,420.

Delivery and installation costs £1,200 per three. Annual service/maintenance costs are £432 per unit.

Brent residents pay £36 annual rental for a Cyclehoop space and £30 for a Falco unit in the first three years. These fees reflect a 50 per cent subsidy by Brent.

After three years, the rental rises to £72 and £60 respectively.

The suppliers manage rentals and take the revenue risk.

MAAS

All the apps were due to be launched later this year. It is unclear if the Covid-19 virus will impact timescales.

Fife-based Fuse Mobility, which specialises in MaaS products, holds the contract to develop the MaaS technical platform and co-design the interfaces for the National Park and college pilots. Fuse is sub-contracting work to a group of partners: Miconnex, Ember, and Merkle.

This part of the work programme has an estimated value of up to £590,000.

Sympatric will develop the interface for the NHS scheme in a contract worth £31,000.

The pilots are supposed to run for nine months.

Tactran senior strategy officer Jonathan Padmore told councillors: “Notwithstanding the pilot timescales, we are confident that ENABLE is commercially viable, and will be developed with the intention of providing long-term solutions for the planning, booking and paying for transport to improve access for residents and visitors across the region.”

NXWM’s bus depot relocation cost soars The cost of relocating a bus depot in Birmingham to make way for the Commonwealth Games athletes village has more than doubled. Birmingham City Council originally put the cost of relocating National Express West Midlands’ Perry Barr bus depot and a Job Centre at £13.1m but now says the cost will be £28.8m. Of the £15.7m increase, £13.8m relates to the new bus depot. The council will meet the additional cost from capital reserves. “This cost has now been agreed with National Express and is no longer at risk of increasing unless there are additional costs incurred by National Express as a result of Birmingham City Council defaulting under the terms of the funding agreement,” says the council.

East West Rail seeks to lease trains Government-owned East West Railway Company is tendering a lease contract for 12 to 14 threecar diesel multiple units to operate services over the western section of East West Rail between Oxford, Milton Keynes, Bedford and Aylesbury. The trains will be leased for four years, with the option to extend for two more.

HE to tender for spatial planning Highways England is preparing a tender for spatial planning advice from next year. Consultants will assess the traffic, safety and environmental implications for the Strategic Road Network of regional strategies, local development frameworks and planning applications. The contract will have six lots: East of England; Midlands; Yorkshire and North East; North West; South East; and the South West. The invitation to tender should be issued in May.

Swarco wins NE EV charging contract Swarco has won the contract to install, operate and maintain ten rapid electric vehicle chargepoints for taxis in northeast England. At least one will be provided in each council in the North East and North of Tyne combined authority areas. The chargers should be operational by August and will be owned by individual councils. The chargers are funded by the Office for Low Emission Vehicles.

Journey planner for Leicestershire Leicester city and Leicestershire county councils are procuring a journey planner for use on their ‘choose how you move’ website and an app. The five-year contract is due to start on 1 September.

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:33 Page 20

LTT795 Phil Goodwin.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 09:14 Page 23

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Comment 21

PHIL GOODWIN

Net Zero requires reappraisal of the road programme: but how?

I

n February the Court of Appeal ruled against Heathrow’s third runway proposal because it had not taken account the Government’s legal commitments to reduce carbon emissions. The Government decided not to appeal. Now the DfT has published its important new Decarbonising transport: setting the challenge report, which, as transport secretary Grant Shapps wrote in the foreword, implies significantly reducing car use and reinstating public transport, walking and cycling, as the preferred modes of choice.

There have been widespread suggestions of a dissonance between the decarbonisation strategy and the ‘largest ever’ road programme, which has planned expenditure of £27bn over the next five years. I’m aware of current plans from voluntary organisations to initiate a similar legal challenge to the road investment strategy, while scenario work by the CREDS project, led by the Institute for Transport Studies at the University of Leeds, suggests the need for car use reductions for longer distance trips as well as shorter urban ones.

There is also a report expected shortly on the carbon effects of the whole programme by the respected environmental consultancy Transport for Quality of Life.

I would argue we need a thorough reappraisal of the road programme as a whole, and its component parts, and its alternatives. Here I consider just one of the changes that would be necessary, namely the way in which carbon dioxide emissions are estimated and valued in formal road appraisal.

Currently, promoters of road projects report the quantity of carbon resulting from the project, give it a money value, and compare it with the value of intended time savings. There are three problems with this approach.

First, the carbon arising from fuel is included, but the embedded carbon, in manufacturing the vehicles and for construction and maintenance of the highway, are not included in the

benefit:cost calculation because it is argued that they have already been paid for in buying carbon credits.

Second, it is assumed that most of the carbon emissions from traffic using the road are due to a background trend of traffic growth, with only a small proportion, the induced traffic, actually being attributed to the scheme. But what if the background traffic has been systematically overestimated, and its structure oversimplified, while the induced traffic has been correspondingly systematically underestimated? This happens because while the best models may include some mode shift and changes of destination, they do not include changes in the level and type of car ownership, the number or frequency of trips, styles of ownership and sharing, or consequential changes in land-use patterns, nor do they comprehend the dynamic build-up of these responses over time.

Third, the nominal money value of the carbon that is counted is not derived in a similar way to any of the other social costs in the appraisal. It is not high enough to be the price that, if it were charged, would deliver the legally determined carbon target. It has no connection to an idea of a public ‘willingness to pay’ to avoid the climate consequences of excessive carbon. It does not measure the economic costs of those consequences. It is instead based on an estimate of the cost of the cheapest available method, in theory, of reabsorbing the (small) amount of carbon attributed to the project, but this at present remains a notional cost without a price being charged, and without an intention to do so, specific plan, budget, or (critical for carbon) a timescale.

The practical effect is that each project appraisal has separately reported that its carbon is a microscopically small percentage of the total carbon budget for the whole economy (in the order of a thousandth of one per cent). Note that this is a unique comparator: no equivalent comparison against a whole economy resource total is ever made for any other impact of a road, e.g. employment, time, or national income, though the same minute percentages would inevitably apply. In practice, it always leads to the conclusion that carbon impacts are not material. They have no impact on the choice whether to approve the project or not.

So for individual schemes, carbon is taken to be close to irrelevant, but this depends on assumptions that the forecasts are right, and that somewhere else the carbon credits system is working perfectly, with properly set prices. Since the targets are now more stringent, and we know there is a gap between the

current and necessary demand trajectories, that would imply that the price of carbon credits will have to be materially increased, and the shadow cost to road users converted into a real price. The later this is left, the higher the increase, drastically so as the target date approaches. Until that is done, appraisal will be faulty. The wider point is that even if this works for individual schemes, it does not for the whole programme. It is not credible to assume that ‘the biggest road programme ever’ would have no effect on trip rates, car ownership or land-use.

Up to now, all road scheme appraisals have taken a baseline forecast of growing traffic (even during periods or for places where it has been decreasing).

The new decarbonisation strategy requires that we will use cars less, by a substantial amount. So the appraisals to date are all based on a future that is dif-

include the interactive effects of other transport policies.

The signs are that the present road programme, if it is implemented, reduces the possibility of success of the carbon strategy, by encouraging rather than reducing traffic growth. But if, nevertheless, the carbon strategy succeeds, aspects of the road programme will have been unnecessary and do not give good value for money.

Where does that leave the ‘value of carbon’? Maybe it becomes less relevant. Laws such as which side of the road to drive on, or how much pollution vehicles are allowed to cause, or that vehicles must be insured, are often subject to cost-benefit calculation before they are agreed. But the law, once passed, becomes a prior condition, not a trade-off.

More fundamentally, there are some choices that are different in principle.

Up to now, all road scheme appraisals have taken a baseline forecast of growing traffic. The new decarbonisation strategy requires that we will use cars less, by a substantial amount. So the appraisals to date are all based on a future that is different from the one in the strategy.

ferent from the one in the strategy. The implicit paradigm for road construction at a time of high traffic growth – ‘slowing down the pace at which congestion gets worse’ – does not work for carbon emissions, which actually have to be reduced in absolute, not relative, terms, (whether they are paid for or not). This is similar to the way permitted levels of noxious emissions affecting health are defined as standards, not just as seeking to reduce the pace at which they get worse.

Questions for the reappraisal would be how do the programme, and its individual schemes, contribute to success of the strategy? And how would they perform in a future where the behavioural changes necessary for the decarbonisation strategy to be successful had been made? The review would need also to track the quantities of embedded vehicle and construction carbon; should take account of both induced and trend traffic growth; increase the allowance for induced and reduced traffic; appraise the programme as a whole allowing for a wider range and timing of short and long-term effects on traffic, land-use and behavioural effects than has been applied to separate schemes; and

Consider our experience of the commitment of funds, as a policy decision, at an unprecedented scale, and with evident public support, to cope with the coronavirus crisis. The idea that it might be ‘better for the economy’ if the virus were allowed to kill as many as were vulnerable, was mooted, for a while, but we are given to understand that such calculus was never Government thinking, or has been firmly rejected, or both.

For marginal changes in commensurate costs and benefits the idea of essentially economic trade-offs can be entirely legitimate. But slavery, child labour, forced marriage, famines, plagues, racial discrimination and murders also all have economic consequences. Human societies have found other ways of determining what to do about them than submitting them to an economic benefit:cost ratio, and if we do not get the policies right, current understanding is that climate change will force the pace in the most unpleasant way.

Phil Goodwin is emeritus professor of transport policy at both the Centre for Transport and Society, University of the West of England, Bristol, and University College London. Email: philinelh@yahoo.com

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:34 Page 22

RESCHEDULED EVENT CALENDAR We look forward to seeing you again in the Autumn 21 OCTOBER

4 SEPTEMBER

Council House, Nottingham

City Hall, Bristol

WORKPLACE PARKING LEVY CLEAN AIR ZONES

15 SEPTEMBER

STEAM: Museum of the Great Western Railway, Swindon

26 - 27 NOVEMBER

Holiday Inn, Brentford Lock, London

The 2nd SWHA conference

23 SEPTEMBER

1 DECEMBER

Council House, Birmingham

Manchester Conference Centre, The Pendulum Hotel,Manchester

25 SEPTEMBER

Fairfield Halls, Croydon

2020

Liveable THE

NEIGHBOURHOODS

2 DECEMBER

Manchester Conference Centre, The Pendulum Hotel,Manchester

CONFERENCE 2020

15 - 16 OCTOBER

Edgbaston Stadium, Birmingham

3 DECEMBER

Manchester Conference Centre, The Pendulum Hotel,Manchester

2020

Correct at time of going to press.

Further events to be announced.

Plus more, for further information visit:

www.TransportXtra.com/events

LTT795 Peter Stonham.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 09:13 Page 23

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Comment 23

PETER STONHAM

We may hate the virus but some think we ought to hate ourselves

This week LTT begins a series of articles exploring the impact that the Covid-19 pandemic may have on the world of transport – and beyond. Landor editorial director Peter Stonham begins by asking if human behaviour may be disrupting things in ways we might be failing dangerously to recognise.

W

hen we’re hit by events that seem to have come out of the blue, and have thrown us violently off course, contrasting professional perspectives are often deployed to make sense of things.

The current Covid-19 pandemic has certainly brought the concept of being guided by the medical science to the fore – but there are philosophers and social scientists also bringing their concepts to the discussion.

It’s still early days in terms of passing judgment on the exact origins and circumstances that led to this virus rampaging across the planet so quickly and aggressively. And also for anyone trying to draw a moral, rational or even mystical basis for judgment of what’s been visited upon us.

Great thinkers often approach subject matter from extremely leftfield positions, and one such has been James Lovelock, the staunchly independent scientist, environmentalist, and futurist, best known for proposing the Gaia hypothesis, which postulates that the Earth functions as a self-regulating system. Lovelock, now 100 years old, is not engaging in the current virus discussions, but his amazing life’s work may have something to teach us in our reflections on the current crisis.

With a PhD in medicine, Lovelock

began his career performing cryopreservation experiments on rodents, including successfully thawing frozen specimens. His methods were influential in the theories of cryonics (the cryopreservation of humans). He invented the electron capture detector, and using it, became the first to detect the widespread presence of CFCs in the atmosphere. While designing scientific instruments for NASA, he developed the Gaia hypothesis.

Also known as the Gaia theory or the Gaia principle, it proposes that living organisms interact with their inorganic surroundings on Earth to form a synergistic and self-regulating, complex system that helps to maintain and perpetuate the conditions for life on the planet.

Co-developed by Lovelock with the microbiologist Lynn Margulis in the 1970s, he named the idea after Gaia, the primordial goddess who personified the Earth in Greek mythology.

Topics related to the hypothesis include how the biosphere and the evolution of organisms affect the stability of global temperature, salinity of seawater, atmospheric oxygen levels, the maintenance of a hydrosphere of liquid water and other environmental variables that affect the habitability of Earth. In the 2000s, Lovelock proposed a method of climate engineering to restore carbon dioxide-consuming algae.

The Gaia hypothesis was initially criticised for being teleological and against the principles of natural selection, but later refinements aligned the approach with ideas from fields such as Earth system science, biogeochemistry and systems ecology. Lovelock also once described the “geophysiology” of the Earth. Even so, the Gaia hypothesis continues to attract criticism, and other scientists consider it to be only weakly supported by, or at odds with, the available evidence.

Lovelock has been an outspoken member of Environmentalists for Nuclear, warning of the dangers of global warming due to the greenhouse effect. But ever the iconoclast, four years ago he seemed to radically revise his position on climate change, suggesting that CO2 was going up nowhere near as fast as the experts thought it would, questioning the basis of the models used and the impossibility of “anyone trying to predict more than five to ten years ahead”.

And perhaps very perspicuously, he added the thought that before the consequences of global warming can

impact on us significantly “something else” will have made our world unrecognisable, and threaten the human race.

Lovelock is a great survivor himself, passing his hundredth birthday last year and still giving interviews at the time. Though his written output has now seemingly ended, ten years ago, in April 2009 he published the book The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning, (Basic Books, April 2009), in which he argued that humanity is “Earth's infection” and that, effectively, we are the viruses.

Lovelock explored the idea that whilst it has sometimes been feared that the human race might end up apocalyptically actually destroying the planet it inhabits, it's not such a stretch to imagine us making it a place that doesn’t support humans.

The planet would go on, the thinking

the planet is simply too overpopulated to halt its own destruction. In order to survive, mankind must start preparing now for life on a radically changed planet,” was his sanguine prognosis.

Has Lovelock been onto something? Is Covid-19 an important warning about our own vulnerability and overconfidence as the Earth’s dominant species?

If nothing else, is the inability of humankind to amend its behaviour in the face of what the experts have long been saying about the inevitability of viruses, not a great indicator of the hubris of homosapiens?

What was it/is it about our failure to learn from the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, from SARS or Bird Flu, that seems to lock us into our own self-destructive spiral?

In the wake of the Covid-19 upheaval, might it be time to take on

Ever the iconoclast, four years ago Lovelock seemed to radically revise his position on climate change, suggesting that CO2 was going up nowhere near as fast as the experts thought it would, questioning the basis of the models, and the impossibility of ‘anyone trying to predict more than five to ten years ahead’. goes, but it would get rid of us “much like we shake the flu”, as it was said – now with chilling prescience – at the time.

Lovelock’s thinking is that our increasing presence is getting things so out of kilter that, in the manner of a human immune system, the planet has no choice but to respond.

“Individuals occasionally suffer a disease called polycythaemia, an overpopulation of red blood cells,” wrote Lovelock. “By analogy, Gaia’s illness could be called polyanthroponemia, where humans overpopulate until they do more harm than good.”

His thinking prompted others to join the discussion, with University of Washington palaeontologist Peter Ward offering an alternate new theory: Earth is set up to kill off life, including us, when it spreads too widely.

But we’re an ever so clever species, are we not? And surely have the skills to fix things up? Lovelock has his doubts. “There is nothing humans can do to reverse the process;

board more of the thoughts of people such as Lovelock, and address what might be some fundamental faultlines in the way we approach our patterns of behaviour and their appropriateness for a self-sustaining stewardship of our home planet?

Intense urbanisation, hyper-connectivity, dependence on technology, experimenting with bio-science and profligacy with resources, to name just a few.

Or maybe we should put all that to one side while we seek to face down the current so-called ‘silent killer’ – at least until the next time that something rears its ugly head to disrupt our overconfidence in the way we run our lives on Earth individually and collectively? Or, as Lovelock would put it, “something else” makes our world unrecognisable and threatens the human race.

Peter Stonham is chairman and editorial director of LTT and Landor Group.

LTT795 Viewpoint and letters.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 08:13 Page 26

24 Comment

VIEWPOINT

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

The UK is ready to take the e-scooter journey to transform city centres Fredrik Hjelm Voi Technology

Imagine a UK city centre, free from cars, from fumes and from the noise caused by vehicles large and small.

That vision has come another step closer with the Department for Transport’s new consultation on how e-scooters and other technology could make journeys easier, smarter and greener.

At Voi we have seen how UK riders have experienced e-scooters abroad and would love to have the opportunity to try them on UK streets, as a supplement to public transport in urban centres and a greener alternative to cars and taxis.

We will participate fully in the Government’s consultation and look forward to working closely with local authorities so that together we can find the best way to implement this new form of transport.

Our experience in other major cities in Europe has shown us that where e-scooters are regulated well, it encourages safe and responsible usage. E-scooters have the potential to be transformational, easing the pressure on a strained transport system and filling in the gaps where cars at present are being used.

Since their launch in September 2017 in California, these vehicles have taken the world by storm. In 626 cities in 53 countries, millions of riders have tried this small, fun electric-powered vehicle. They are being tried four times faster than e-bikes.

In Europe just three countries – the UK, Ireland and the Netherlands – have yet to embrace e-scooters. In not doing so, they risk being left behind in a mobility revolution which could significantly help to lower congestion and pollution in urban centres.

We are happy to see regulation but we want it to be smart regulation. Some requirements are just not economic for operators to deliver. For example, taking all the e-scooters off the streets at night.

In Passing

A whole university course could be taught about the politics of transport in Cambridgeshire, such are its labyrinthine plots. Things became even more confusing last month when the combined authority’s major James Palmer gave answers to two questions about the future of the Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro project the wrong way round. The combined authority’s monitoring officer set the record straight in a letter to the Greater Cambridge Partnership: “The mayor had prepared answers to the two public questions asked on the local transport plan and Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro item but in responding to the second question the mayor gave the answer intended for the first question and vice versa. It was not the mayor’s intention to give the assurance

Today’s cities are facing alarming air pollution and carbon dioxide emission rates – with cars as the main driver. Decarbonising urban transport is now a central focus of global, national and city climate plans. Cities must reduce pollution, congestion and noise while meeting the mobility demands of a growing population and a modern economy.

We are at the beginning of a major shift in cities, both small and large. In two cities where Voi operates we see this in action. In Paris the mayor Anne Hidalgo has set remarkable targets: zero diesel cars by 2024 and zero fossil fuel cars by 2030. The city is creating 1,000km of cycling lanes across Paris and will release 72 per cent of parking spots in Paris for other uses.

Oslo in Norway is aiming to be Europe’s first carfree capital.

Two years into the launch of e-scooters in Europe we are seeing transport and city authorities taking a much closer role in how scooter companies operate.

Germany brought in its own vehicle standards, when it changed the law to allow e-scooters, covering brakes and lights.

Paris is in the middle of making a decision on which operators should provide its e-scooter services. Amsterdam, Rome and Turin are also planning tenders and at least ten cities have now gone down the tender route, to bring in regulated services.

The UK consultation will consider such questions as whether helmets should be worn, should there be a minimum age, and what insurance will be required.

The review will also consider if local authorities should have extra powers to manage the impacts of escooters on public space, for example where they can be parked.

At Voi we are happy to see regulation, but we want it to be smart regulation that recognises the practicalities of how scooters are used and the importance of economics.

Some requirements are just not economic for operators to deliver. For example, taking all the e-scooters off the streets at night adds considerably to costs.

Having too few scooters in any city can also render operations unviable.

Cities are varied in their efforts at regulation: some such as Marseille have opted for just three licensed operators – chosen by public tender – while others opt for a larger number of operators.

Another area that requires close collaboration between operators and city authorities is how e-scoot-

ers work with other transport providers. This is both a question of space – can they share bike lanes and bus lanes? – and a question of how services connect in a way that is useful for the user.

We want to see e-scooters as a supplement to public transport, and in particular connecting that difficult last and first mile of a journey. In particular, as we experience the most extraordinary times because of coronavirus, we want to do everything we can to help people keep moving safely. We have been able to put more e-scooters outside hospitals and have helped restaurants in Stockholm and Oslo make food deliveries.

Collaboration between public transport and escooter operators is becoming common, ranging from data-sharing and passenger deals to integrated payment and Mobility as a Service solutions. A recent partnership between Hamburg’s Hochbahn and Voi aimed to improve mobility offering reach in suburban areas. Hochbahn customers living in Poppenbüttel and Berne benefitted from reduced ride prices (no unlocking fee and reduced price per minute) on their daily commute during a pilot phase. The first three-month evaluation concludes the partnership was a great success, enabling 40,000 commuter trips to and from public transport hubs.

To maximise the potential of e-scooters, we have to improve infrastructure. Mobility hubs, protected lanes for electrified vehicles and lanes for autonomous traffic will be needed in future. We need to build cities that are designed for shared and sustainable mobility.

We believe strongly that micromobility will transform our cities for the better. But we’re not under any illusion that e-scooters are a silver bullet. In all the countries that we operate we have constant conversations with governments and city officials to make sure that we are bringing a useful and sustainable mode of transport to their streets.

If e-scooters are to live up to their potential, there need to be clear regulations that foster responsible and sustainable behaviour. Only then can cities take advantage of the opportunity e-scooters provide to improve quality of life and sustainable mobility across the globe.

requested by the member of the public that ‘the Greater Cambridge Partnership’s preferred route will be confined to the scrap heap’ and that is not his or the combined authority’s position.”

reminded us of was deputy prime minister John Prescott’s 1997 pledge: "I will have failed if in five years' time there are not many more people using public transport and far fewer journeys by car.” Wisely, perhaps, Shapps did not end his statement in the way that Prescott did: "It's a tall order, but I urge you to hold me to it."

With the nation grimly fixated on the Covid-19 pandemic, transport secretary Grant Shapps was going to have to say something pretty eye-catching in the DfT’s new Decarbonising Transport report to get any social media interest. And he jolly well succeeded by declaring: “Public transport and active travel will be the natural first choice for our daily activities. We will use our cars less and be able to rely on a convenient, cost-effective and coherent public transport network.” The first thing it

Fredrik Hjelm is co-founder and chief executive officer of Voi Technology.

The DfT has rebranded its Future Mobility Zones ‘Future Transport Zones’ and the Future Mobility Regulatory Review the ‘Future Transport Regulatory Review’. But why? “We are rebranding the programme so that the language reflects the importance of putting people at the heart of our approach to future transport technology and business models.” We’re still none the wiser.

LTT795 Viewpoint and letters.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 08:13 Page 27

TransportXtra.com/ltt

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Legend has it that a Scots-NI link is a waste of money

This proposed tunnel between Scotland and Northern Ireland (“NI link ‘will be a tunnel’” LTT 20 Mar) is a romantic project – setting the skills of 21st century tunnelling engineers against the aspirations of Finn McCool who, in antiquity, allegedly built a Causeway from County Antrim to the Isle of Staffa in the Scottish Hebrides, only to later rip it up.

The North Channel between Portpatrick and Larne is about the same width as the Channel between Dover and Calais, so it is tempting to draw comparisons! However, looking at the depths of water shows a huge difference – right in the middle of the North Channel is a deep rift called Beaufort’s Dyke which has a depth of over 1,000 feet, more than four times deeper than the English Channel above that tunnel.

The Dyke is amongst the deepest waters on the continental shelf – and it is also about three miles wide.

Assuming any such tunnel would be an electric rail tunnel with suitable gradients it is easy to see that the tunnel length could exceed 40 miles – much longer than the Channel Tunnel. It could be amusing to compare the relative ‘benefits’ of the two tunnels using the made-up formula: B = P1 x P2 / L2 Where:

- B is the benefit of the link - P1 & P2 are the populations at each end of the link - L is the link length

Using the very approximate figures in the table below: Channel Tunnel

P1 P2 L (million) (million) (miles) 50

NI / Scottish Tunnel 5

500 50

30

40

The ‘Benefit’ for the Channel Tunnel would come out as: 50 x 500/ 900 = 27.8

The ‘Benefit’ for The Irish/Scottish tunnel would come out as: 5 x 50 /1600 = 0.156

Perhaps we can learn from Finn’s mistake!

Alasdair Macmillan Lyndhurst Kent KT24

A real emergency delivers brief respite from climate doomsters

The ‘Green Blob’ are clearly frustrated that a real emergency in the form of a deadly pandemic has resulted in daily climate doom-mongering being displaced by Covid-19 updates.

That said, every cloud has a silver lining for misanthropes who think that the temporary serious disruption of the economy and transport should be a permanent way of achieving Greta’s climate communism utopia. The resultant falls in emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter have replaced the gleeful exploitation of the victims of extreme weather events.

Meanwhile, personal isolation transport such as cars, motorbikes and bicycles avoid the virus transmission risk of public transport, while lorries and vans maintain the essential supply chain to food shops.

I’m lucky because I live within easy walking distance of two small local food shops and I have no desire to drive to larger supermarkets to compete with potential virus-carrying panic-buyers. For now I’ll just buy what’s available locally.

I retired ten years early and my wife has worked from home for the past 20 years. There’s not much to look forward to at the moment under ‘lock down’, although it’s a small price to pay given the seriousness of the current situation. It’s frustrating that at a time when petrol/diesel prices have fallen and the weather has dramatically improved we can’t go anywhere. The domestic holidays we had planned in our motorhome are cancelled and our Greek holiday at the end of May is unlikely to happen.

When the situation inevitably returns to normality, including daily climate doom-mongering, perhaps people will have a had a glimpse of what Net Zero greenhouse gas emissions will look like in terms of the economy and lifestyle.

Meanwhile, I had the symptoms of coronavirus in December/January, but I have no way of knowing if Covid-19 was the culprit. Maybe I should ask Covid19 self-diagnosing Greta Thunberg, who seems to have added medicine to her unqualified climate expertise!

Paul Biggs Environment spokesman Alliance of British Drivers Tamworth, Staffs B77

Commandeer bus fleets and hotels for hospital staff

As the Covid-19 outbreak continues, may I humbly suggest – to allay public transport health concerns – that some of the buses, coaches and taxis made redundant by this crisis be commandeered (and sanitised) by the Government, then used to move NHS and other key workers to and from their places of work?

That would obviate the need to use public transport.

Better still, why not commandeer hotels and other large buildings within walking distance of major hospitals and health centres to provide temporary makeshift accommodation for said workers? Then they wouldn’t have to travel far at all.

Meanwhile, if working hours were staggered, then workers who can’t work from home but who still need to use public transport would not all be travelling at the same time.

John Helm Chatham ME4

The more things change, the more they stay the same

What a delight to receive a pdf copy of LTT in my inbox last week! Having been with you from Issue 1 until a few years ago, I had got over my withdrawal symptoms after a few months. But it was like I’d never been away: West Yorkshire consulting on light rail systems, FirstGroup declaring it would fashion its business around UK bus operations, and even a letter from Paul Withrington declaring the UK would be a better place if railways were turned into roads. I almost wanted to be back, except I'd be working from home!

Well done to Peter Stonham and his team for recognising that sometimes quality briefing and industry intelligence is more important than short-term commercial considerations. While it lasts, I shall enjoy my fortnightly fix. May you all come through Covid-19 safely, and may LTT continue to inform and nurture debate for a further 30 years.

Tim Larner Harrogate HG1

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

Comment 25

Change in the air?

Streets are quiet and the thoughts of both citizens and their political leaders are focused on a single issue that is transcending party boundaries. But as well as the suspension of normal politics, perhaps we are at a point where there is a suspension of normal policies too – and not just those affecting the fight against the Covid-19.

Perhaps surprisingly, the Government last week pressed on with its work on shaping a strategy to decarbonise the UK’s transport system by publishing its Decarbonising Transport: Setting the Challenge document. It was not the top of the news agenda, but it was noticed – and particularly for the fact that transport secretary Grant Shapps seemed ready to go rather further than might have been expected from a Conservative Government traditionally very sensitive to not treading on the toes of the public’s freedom to travel as they wish, and in particular, protecting the interests of motorists.

The first step towards a Transport Decarbonisation Plan to be published later in the year, the document recognises that current policies will not be nearly enough to bring transport in line with net zero greenhouse gas emissions, and begins to lay the groundwork for a wide range of stronger measures.

This is just a first step of course. And it will be some time before the vision outlined becomes a committed plan. But as visions go, it was “rather impressive” in the words of the Campaign for Better Transport, not always the Government’s greatest fans.

Particularly significant seems to be an acknowledgment that already announced steps towards greater electric mobility and ending sales of petrol and diesel vehicles do not go far enough.

The new document sets out the need for a major modal shift, with fewer journeys being made by car and more being made by public transport, on foot and by bike.

Shapps himself says that, with transport having a huge role to play in the economy reaching net zero, “the scale of the challenge demands a step change in both the breadth and scale of ambition and we have a duty to act quickly and decisively to reduce emissions”.

The document was of course prepared before Covid-19. The big question is, what will the country’s appetite for this agenda be in a potentially shattered post-virus economy?

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:35 Page 26

Consultants, Researchers & Suppliers

26

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

To get your profile in print and online call us on 020 7091 7895 or email jason@landor.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: Penny Wilson on 0117 974 1086 London contact: Chris Whall on 020 3873 4313 Email: aqc@aqconsultants.co.uk www.aqconsultants.co.uk

C4ST is independent, clear-eyed, and practical. We provide you with the analysis, evidence, advice and the support you require at the point where key elements of modern transport meet – energy efficiency, vehicle emissions, “mobility as a service”, shared mobility services and demand reduction. C4ST is lead by two very experienced transport professionals who often work together but take separate commissions around their special interests.

Visit: www.c4st.uk Chris Endacott PhD: +44 (0)1743 366 182 Richard Armitage FCILT M: (0)7973 538 556 Incorporating Richard Armitage Transport Consultancy and Gfleet Services

CEC are a civil engineering consultancy with over 30 years’ experience, and an enviable reputation for quality, reliability and value. We provide transport planning, water management and civil engineering detailed design services including; access appraisals and feasibility studies, technical input to masterplans, Transport Statements & Assessments, Travel Plans, Travel Plan Co-ordinator role, Road Safety Audits, Flood Risk Assessments, drainage strategies, river modelling, highways and drainage detailed design, highway condition surveys and expert witness services.

Please contact: Swindon: Brett Farmery Tel: 01793 619965 Email: bfarmery@coleeasdon.com Bristol: Doug Hickman Tel: 01454 800474 Email dhickman@coleeasdon.com www.coleeasdon.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, Henleyin-Arden, Warwickshire, B95 5AW Tel: 01564 793 598 Fax: 01564 793 983 inmail@dtatransportation.co.uk www.dtatransportation.co.uk

Gateway TSP

Gateway TSP offers cost effective and comprehensive Road Safety Engineering consultancy advice including:

• Road Safety Auditing • Road Safety Studies and Assessments (AIP) • Design of Local Road Safety Schemes • Walking, Cycling and Horse-riding Assessment and Review

Contact us on: 01483 679350 or by email at: info@gateway-tsp.co.uk Gateway TSP, 84 North Street, Guildford GU1 4AU www.gateway-tsp.co.uk

Independent sustainable transport planning and research consultancy, formed in 1998.

Our expert team of professionals works in partnership with public, private and third sector clients around the world, specialising in: • Sustainable Development • Data & Analytical Tools • Policy & Strategy • Public Transport • Smarter Travel • Research Web: Contact: Tel: Email:

www.itpworld.net Nick Ayland 0115 824 8250 ayland@itpworld.net

Intelligent Data are the market-leading providers of Traffic, Transport and Environmental data. To find out more about our ATC, MCC, ANPR, Environmental Data and Parking surveys please contact: info@intelligent-data-collection.com or call: 0845 003 8747

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

Mayer Brown is a leading Consultancy for Transport Planning, Infrastructure Design and Environmental Assessment in the UK. Services include Transport Assessments, Travel Plans, Transport Planning, Accessibility Studies, Highway and Infrastructure Design, Air Quality and Noise Assessments, Road Safety Audits, Pedestrian and Cycle Networks, Regeneration Studies, SuDS, Drainage and Flood Risk Assessments, Topographical Surveys.

Offices in Woking (head office), London, Bristol, Birmingham, Leeds and Isle of Wight Contacts: Paul Stocker (Transport Planning) pstocker@mayerbrown.co.uk Tim Moore (Highway and Infrastructure Design) tmoore@mayerbrown.co.uk Tel: 01483 750508 www.mayerbrown.co.uk

Transport economics and logistics consultancy providing research services, freight transport modelling and advice to the public and private sectors since 1982, based on maintaining trade and transport databases and the specialist expertise of its consultants. Owner and operator of the GB Freight Model (GBFM), which forms the freight module of the DfT’s National Transport Model. Multimodal expertise in road, rail and urban freight, ports and shipping, ferries and inland waterways, air freight and warehousing The consultancy’s services for public sector clients in the freight and logistics sector include:

• Freight strategy and policy development at a regional, sub-regional and town/city level • Freight transport modelling using the GBFM • Regional and sub-regional analysis of international trade in goods • Forecasting of the strategic supply and demand for warehousing • Freight demand forecasts, capacity analysis and feasibility studies for freight terminals, infrastructure networks and freight services • Evaluation of user and non-user benefits of freight projects and strategies • Global supply, demand and economic analysis of ferries and container shipping • Rail, planning and commercial advice concerning the development of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges.

Contact Chris Rowland Tel: 01244-348301 Email: chris.rowland@mdst.co.uk

Nationwide Data Collection (NDC) provides specialist data collection services for transport planning, traffic engineering and market research. Our staff have unrivalled experience in organising large scale data collection exercises with particular expertise being available in conducting manual & automatic traffic counts, roadside interviews, pedestrian counts & interviews, ANPR, Infrared video, radar speed surveys and parking studies.

UK offices in Scotland, Ossett, Warwick and London. Ireland offices in Dublin and Athlone. European office in the Netherlands enquiries@nationwidedatacollection.co.uk www.nationwidedatacollection.co.uk

We are a transport planning consultancy, covering all modes of transport including railways, public transport, highways, cycle, walk and air transport. We specialise in advanced multi-modal transport modelling, forecasting and appraisal together with its market research and computer software.

Over 25 years experience in a wide range of UK and international projects including specialist toll road model audits. Our innovative transport planning software, Visual Choice for advanced demand modelling and Visual-tm for everything else combines fast, powerful multi-modal modelling with a friendly user interface.

S2, S3, S4 Audley House, Northbridge Road, Berkhamsted, Herts HP4 1EH Tel: +44 (0) 1442 879075 mail@peter-davidson.com www.peter-davidson.co.uk

PFA Consulting has over 30 years’ experience of providing development advice and solutions to the public and private sectors. Services include: access appraisals and feasibility studies; transport assessments and statements; junction assessment and microsimulation modelling; sustainable transport and travel plans; planning appeals and expert witness; flood risk assessment and drainage strategies; highways and drainage design; walking, cycling and horse-riding assessment and review; input to legal agreements; and construction supervision and management.

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

Q-Free offers a complete range of ITS products, solutions and professional services based on the most advanced and cost-effective technologies with an established UK Office and Production Facility based in Weston-Super-Mare in the South West of the UK. Products, Solutions & Services include: Traffic Counters & Classifiers; Cycle & Pedestrian Monitoring; Bluetooth™ Traffic Monitoring; Weigh-In Motion Systems; Tolling Systems; Parking Systems & Solutions.

Contact us: Tel: 01934 644299 Email: sales.uk@q-free.com www.tdcsystems.co.uk

Severnside TDC specialise in the provision of Transportation Data Collection Studies.

Our client focus and attention to customer satisfaction allows us to provide a professional service for every piece of work. Our services inlude but are not restricted to Video based Transport Surveys, ANPR, Drone Surveys, Public Transport, Cycle/Pedestrian Studies & Parking Studies.

Contact: Stephen Jones Email: steve@severnsidetdc.co.uk www.severnsidetdc.co.uk

Specialists in all types of Traffic and Transport Survey and Data Consultancy Operating throughout the UK, Ireland and internationally, we utilise the best and most appropriate technology, techniques, skills and experience available to deliver data solutions. Our central support and technology teams together with our network of operational bases employing over 200 full time specialists allows us to deliver some of the largest and most complex data collection contracts in the UK alongside individual local projects all utilising the innovation and skills Tracsis are known for. Technologies we use include digital ANPR, Video, Bluetooth, WiFi, ATC, Video Analytics, GIS asset management and Mobile Phone Network Data Analytics. See our website for local office details or contact our Head Office at: Tel: +44 (0)1937 833 933 Email: TaDS@Tracsis.com www.TracsisTraffic.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: 07803 894686 Email: info@ttc-transportplanning.com www.ttc-transportplanning.com

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

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 7348 1970 Emai: info@ptrc-training.co.uk www.ptrc-training.co.uk

Join the Transport Planning Society – the professional home for transport planners and transport planning qualifications!

The TPS 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), CIHT and RTPI to further the profession and in the development of professional qualifications, such as the Professional Development Scheme (PDS) and the Chartered Transport Planning Professional (CTPP). We also hold great events, bursary competitions, awards and much more – check out our website for details.

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

Specialists

View their full CVs at TransportXtra.com/consultants

BURGESS Peter. M.Sc. (Econ), B.A.(Ind.Econ), Cert.Dip. AF, MCILT Transport Economics Limited DfT Business Case Support. Economic Impact Reports. Mode Split Revenue Support Grant. Waterbourne Freight Grant.

European Funding (Evaluator): (INEA) Connecting Europe Facility; (EASME): HORIZON 2020 (SMART cities and Urban Mobility).

Innovate UK bid support: Economic and Environmental Impact criterion Email: peter.burgess@transportecon.com www.transportecon.com 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: 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

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:35 Page 27

TransportXtra.com/ltt

The LTT Directory

The LTT Directory 27

Learning Intelligence Networking & Knowledge Sharing

www.landor.co.uk

//Automatic Traffic Surveys

// Skilled and dedicated teams throughout the UK

Tube/Radar/Bluetooth

Full national coverage

// Manual Surveys

TRAFFIC + TRANSPORTATION

Roadside Interviews / Public Transport / Cycle & Pedestrian Surveys / Parking Studies / Market Research

// Video Surveys ANPR / High Mast / Covert Studies/ Journey Times Surveys

THE DATA COLLECTION SPECIALISTS

Contact Joe Maclaren or Jeremy Rowlands

surveys@ctstraffic.co.uk // 01772 251400

WWW.CTSTRAFFIC.CO.UK

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:35 Page 28

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:35 Page 29

TransportXtra.com/ltt

The next issue of LTT will be published: Friday 17 April Advertising booking deadline: Tuesday 14 April

The LTT Directory 29

For recruitment advertising please contact Jason on: 020 7091 7895 or email: jit@landor.co.uk

For display and directory advertising please contact Jason on: 020 7091 7895 or email: jason@landor.co.uk

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 14:35 Page 30

LTT795_p06,20,22,26-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 02/04/2020 15:05 Page 31

www.Jobs-in-Transport.com

Recruitment 31

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

Low Traffic Neighbourhoods Programme Lead P04: Starting salary £41,466 pa This post attracts the 7% market supplement that the service currently offers its professional transport team officers 18 months fixed term opportunity with possibility to extend This is an exciting opportunity to join the Transport team, playing a key role in delivering this flagship programme for Lambeth’s ambitious new Transport Strategy. We are looking for a candidate with motivation and capability to match this ambition.

To advertise please contact Jason Conboy: jason@landor.co.uk

Low Traffic Neighbourhoods aim to reduce traffic on residential streets in Lambeth and in doing so transform conditions for walking and cycling, improve air quality, reduce emissions and make our streets safer. We need to carefully consider changes to the local road network and work closely with local communities to ensure a successful outcome.

It’s not just about what the project delivers, but also how we go about it. We are committed to an inclusive approach that reaches out across our diverse communities and provides opportunities for local people to get involved. This is a behaviour change project and every step of the process needs to reflect this, raising awareness, providing opportunities to do things differently and supporting people through change along the way.

Working with senior staff in the Transport team, senior management and Members, you will be responsible for leading on LTNs at a number of locations in Lambeth, making sure that the benefits are realised and shared by our many local stakeholders. Providing advice, oversight and support, you will work with a wide range of internal and external partners to help us deliver the programme.

This role is initially offered as a 18 month fixed term contract from 01 April 2020, with the strong potential to extend for the right candidate.

The candidate: l Will demonstrate experience of playing a key role in complex, high value transport projects. l Will demonstrate a thorough knowledge of local, national and international transport policy approaches and an appreciation of best practice in the implementation of walking, cycling, and neighbourhood improvement schemes. l Will have experience of programme management. l Will demonstrate a systematic approach to project management as well as political awareness and excellent stakeholder engagement skills. l Will have a thorough understanding of the complexities of transport planning and operating in a local authority context. l Will have excellent communication skills, the ability to build strong working relationships, internal and external, and to contribute to the development of the service. l Will demonstrate commitment to deep and meaningful community engagement and innovative approaches to achieve this.

Closes: 26th April

APPLY NOW: http://bit.ly/3aCqiRT

Jobs-in-Transport.com has been an invaluable resource over the years and in today’s unc ertain Local Government wo rld provides the comfort of knowin g that, should the axe fall, I wil l be amongst the first to hea r of an appropriate vacancy. Alt hough I haven’t found a post for myself, I passed on vacancies to colleagues, one of wh om is now enjoying a new life in New Zealand! The best ben efit of the notifications is that you will never end up seeing a job ad in a journal that is a perfect fit… 3 days after the closing date!

Steve Brown Transportation Officer Streetpride

LTT795 back page.qxp_LTT759_pXX 03/04/2020 08:21 Page 40

Editorial

Tel: 0207 091 7875 | Email: ed.ltt@landor.co.uk

Advertising

Tel: 0207 091 7895 | Email: ads@landor.co.uk

Next issue

Published 17 April 2020

TransportXtra.com/ltt

LTT795 03 April - 16 April 2020

News

People

CIHT demands new fund for local highway networks

ROADS

THE GOVERNMENT is being urged to create a £15bn ten-year fund to improve the condition of local highway networks in England.

The Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation (CIHT) calls for the new fund in a report that calls for a “new vision” for the nation’s local roads.

Any new fund should be additional to the current annual capital and revenue funding that local authorities receive for highway maintenance, says the CIHT. Total local road maintenance expenditure in 2017/18 was £3.65bn.

Under the Institution’s plan, an initial £7.5bn would be allocated

over five years and distributed to local authorities on a yearly increasing basis alongside the introduction of a new national asset conditions database.

The remaining £7.5bn would be allocated in the second fiveyear period, with distribution taking account of local authority performance, asset conditions, road function and increasing length.

The CIHT calls for an improved system of monitoring to give clarity on local highway network performance. An outcome-based service specification should set out what road users can expect from the network, it says.

Another recommendation is a standard measure to calculate

Scots free youth bus travel ‘from next year’

BUSES

THE SCOTTISH Government is targeting January next year for the launch of free bus travel for young people aged 18 and under.

The ruling SNP administration gave in principle agreement to the Green Party proposal as part of the deal to secure the passage of the Scottish Government’s 2020/21 budget.

In a letter to Green Party MSP Patrick Harvie, Scotland’s cabinet secretary for finance Kate Forbes says: “I am happy to give an in principle

commitment to a national concessionary travel scheme for free bus travel for those aged 18 and under, subject to the completion of the necessary preparations, including research and due diligence.

“We will aim to have this work completed in time to allow the expansion to begin in January 2021 and have allocated £15m to the budget to enable this.”

The policy is likely to have a knock-on negative impact for patronage on the railways, the Glasgow Subway and the Edinburgh tram.

required funding for networks based on common standards of serviceability from a customer perspective.

On funding, the CIHT says the Government “should identify and develop alternative and additional sources of revenue to finance the future funding of local highways, including moves to where utilities pay the real cost of reinstatement”.

The CIHT also sees opportunities for road pricing to address congestion, reduce carbon and provide a potential funding source.

Improving local highways – the route to a better future is available at https://tinyurl.com/qwaqxck

Highway alliance formed

ROADS

A NEW group bringing together highway-related industry trade bodies and societies has held its first meeting. The Highways Industry Alliance brings together the Association of Road Traffic Safety and Management; ITS (UK); the Institute of Highway Engineers; ISA UK; REMA (the body for retroreflective safety product manufacturers); the British Parking Association; and the Highways and Construction Training Association.

Brown is Arriva’s communications chief Arriva Group has appointed David Brown as director of communications. Brown was managing director of train operator Arriva Rail North until the Government took over the troubled franchise last month. He was previously chief executive of Transport for the North (2015-2017), chief executive of Merseytravel (2013-2015), and director general of South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive (2008-2013).

Loader joins Northants from WSP James Loader has joined Northamptonshire County Council as section leader (transportation). He moves from consultant WSP where he was an associate. Loader worked in transport for Buckinghamshire County Council from 2004 to 2013.

Saunders takes road & rail role at Stantec Andrew Saunders has joined Stantec’s environmental services team as sector director for UK highways and rail. He moves from Arcadis, where he was a senior technical director for environmental planning and Development Consent Orders.

Saunders most recently led the environmental planning process for the Lower Thames Crossing and HS2 Phase 1 planning applications.

Kershaw joins Costain as transport MD Sue Kershaw has joined Costain as managing director of its transportation division. She was managing director of KPMG’s Infrastructure Advisory Group. Her previous positions include director of rail, Europe at consultant CH2M, and deputy director of transport for the London 2012 Olympic Delivery Authority. Kerhsaw is currently president of the Association for Project Management; a member of the Mayor of London’s Infrastructure Advisory Panel; and a visiting professor at the Bartlett School of Construction and Project Management, University College London.

Kirkbride made transport foundation fellow Alastair Kirkbride has been made a fellow of the Foundation for Integrated Transport. He is working on the transport implications of Julian Glover’s Landscapes Review, published by the Government last summer. Kirkbride is a former executive director of shared mobility charity CoMoUK.

Tuohy to leave Cycling UK Paul Tuohy, the chief executive of charity Cycling UK, is to leave the role after five years. An interim chief executive will be appointed until a permanent appointment is made.

Pocklington takes top job at MHCLG Jeremy Pocklington has been appointed the permanent secretary at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), succeeding Dame Melanie Dawes who left the civil service in February. Pocklington became MHCLG’s director general for housing in August 2018. Before that he was director general for energy and security at the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy.