Local Transport Today Issue 803

LTT803 front page.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 09:35 Page 1

LTT803 24 July - 06 August 2020

POLICY | PLANNING | FINANCE | DEVELOPMENT

Wales votes for default 20mph limit p6 TransportXtra.com/ltt

Judicial review for roads programme

LITIGATION

THE HIGH Court this week granted environmental campaigners the right to bring a judicial review challenge against the DfT’s trunk road programme on climate change grounds.

The court’s decision came as campaigners pursued other pos-

sible legal cases in the increasingly fractured transport sector.

Climate litigation charity Plan B notified the Government this week of a proposed judicial review challenge over the Bank of England’s decision to give fossil fuel companies such as airlines and car manufacturers loans to prevent them going bust

during Covid-19.

FairFuelUK and the Alliance of British Drivers (ABD) have written to London mayor Sadiq Khan in the first stage of their proposed judicial review challenge against the increase in the congestion charge last month.

The ABD is also considering legal action against the London

Borough of Lewisham over road closures justified by Covid-19.

The ABD has told Lewisham: “In essence you are attempting to use the Covid-19 emergency regulations to bring in road closures that have nothing to do with a response to the Covid-19 epidemic.” l Legal news – page 12

TfN out in the cold as DfT sets up Northern Transport Council GOVERNANCE

by Andrew Forster

2 Will DfT give transport authorities Covid bus grant?

10 Freight groups attack Sunday lorry ban suggestion

11 EV charging: not so straightforward?

TfN chief executive Barry White contests a suggestion that the organisation is a ‘talking shop’

welcome an announcement of devolution of transport powers [to the council], we’ve heard all this before. Transport for the North was set up to deliver the same aims as this new body, yet it had its roles and responsibilities pulled from underneath it.”

An article in the The Sunday Times last weekend, previewing this week’s announcement, suggested ministers regard TfN as a “talking shop”.

This prompted TfN chief executive Barry White to write a lengthy defence of the organisation for its website. “Transport for the North was established

Cash for Transpennine rail The Government this week announced £589m for design and enabling works on the first stage of upgrading the Transpennine railway between Manchester and Leeds via Huddersfield.

The DfT says the first stage of the Transpennine Route Upgrade programme will include partial electrification of the line, a new through platform at Huddersfield, and about eight miles of four-tracking.

“Most of the line will be electrified, and our ambition is to go further,” said the DfT. Full electrification, digital signalling, more multi-tracking and improved freight capacity are being considered. A decision will be announced in the integrated rail plan for the Midlands and the North, which will be published in December (see page 5).

with limited powers, mainly to provide advice to Government and so, yes, we do talk,” he said.

“We talk with the North’s 20 political figureheads and business groups on their priorities and clear recommendations on the investment the North has long been promised and is well overdue. But we do not have the powers or devolved budget to instruct work or take the decisive action that we all collectively need. A situation we hope will soon change.”

TfN has argued for a devolved budget and decision-making powers. But the DfT this week indicated that it did not share this vision of a more powerful TfN. A DfT spokeswoman told LTT: “The Northern Transport Acceleration Council will give leaders from the North direct access to ministers to make sure the Department can prioritise and accelerate projects, utilising their local knowledge and expertise, and enabling them to hold ministers accountable on delivering for their local area at pace.

“The TfN board will continue to provide a useful forum for stakeholders to consider strategic

transport priorities, bringing together members and developing strategic advice for the Department.

“TfN’s statutory roles and responsibilities will continue and the Department will continue to work with them on the delivery of their statutory functions.”

Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham said this week’s announcement felt “like a gear change from the Government in the delivery of transport improvements in the North of England”.

“My top priority is to build a London-style, integrated public transport system in Greater Manchester and I look forward to working with the secretary of state on making this vision a reality.”

Following the formal announcement of the new council, TfN’s Barry White said: “We welcome the announcement of a Northern Transport Acceleration Council and a DfT North; it is important that TfN, reflecting the voice of the 15 million people in the North, and the new organisations, work in partnership to build back better and level up.”

16 Roads policing probed

TOP10

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

Operators raise bus capacity to 50 per cent after risk assessment

Beauty is only skin-deep.

We should look under the surface of walking facilities

Five-mile tunnel mooted for A628 dualling in Peak District Council may cut bus Covid-19 payments

Brighton sets out next steps of road space reallocation plan

Edinburgh to ned competition between its tram and bus firms

Teesside first in the queue for an e-scooter revolution Norfolk: a des-res for Londoners’ post-virus?

TfGM’s bike hire procurement leaves room for e-scooters too

10. First’s Covid-19 scenario work generates negative headlines most read LTT stories on

10 July - 23 July 2020

THE GOVERNMENT this week announced the creation of a Northern Transport Acceleration Council to fast-track transport projects across the region, in what is being seen as a snub to Transport for the North (TfN).

Transport secretary and Northern Powerhouse minister Grant Shapps will chair the council, whose membership will be the council leaders and elected mayors from across the region.

Its first meeting will be in September.

The DfT said the council would give northern leaders a “direct line” to ministers to accelerate transport projects and “cut bureaucracy and red tape”. It will be supported by DfT staff based in northern cities and “dedicated to delivering for the North”.

Shadow transport secretary Jim McMahon said the announcement showed subnational transport body TfN was being sidelined. “Whilst we

PROVIDING INDEPENDENT NEWS & ANALYSIS SINCE 1989

LTT803 page 2&3.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 08:38 Page 1

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

2 News

D

Covid bus fund: UTG demands a Bus operators and local authorities are awaiting an announcement from the DfT about a fresh round of Covid-19 emergency funding for bus services in England. The Urban Transport Group is pressing for changes to put local authorities in the driving seat. Andrew Forster reports

etails of a third round of Covid-19 emergency bus funding to help the industry in England (outside London) cope with continuing depressed patronage levels were eagerly awaited by local authorities and bus operators this week. The parties are keen to learn about not only the size of the funding pot but whether the Government will change the way the funding is allocated. The Urban Transport Group (UTG) has tabled a proposal that would see the funding paid to local transport authorities rather than operators.

The first 12-week round of Covid-19 Bus Service Support Grant (CBSSG) was worth £166.8m, with the lion’s share paid direct to operators (£21.5m was paid to councils for subsidised services). The grant helped operators provide about 40 per cent of normal mileage at the height of lockdown restrictions from March through to May. The second round, worth £254m, and branded ‘CBSSG Restart’ has paid for operators to increase service levels, in recognition that patronage is still way below normal and vehicle capacity is constrained by social distancing requirements. Despite a request by the UTG for the Restart funding to be paid to local authorities, the DfT chose to retain the existing system of direct payments to operators.

The 12-week CBSSG Restart ends on 3 August but the DfT has submitted a proposal for a fresh round of grant to the Treasury in recognition that patronage remains depressed. Bus operators want the Government to continue paying the funding directly to operators, but the UTG has prepared a proposal for paying the grant to its member organisations in the conurbations and, potentially, local transport authorities elsewhere too.

Political leaders in the six metropolitan areas sent the UTG proposal to transport minister Baroness Vere earlier this month. The letter was signed by Leeds City Council leader Judith Blake; Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham; Liverpool city region mayor Steve Rotheram; West Midlands mayor Andy Street; Sheffield city region mayor Dan Jarvis; and Martin Gannon, chair of the North East joint transport committee.

In the letter, the leaders refer to a previous conversation with Vere in which she apparently suggested that the way the grant is currently administered is unsatisfactory. “We are pleased that you share our view that the current arrangements are overly complex and that you have considered, and will further consider, our proposals for the medium-term,” they say. Perhaps a little optimistically, they add: “We take the ‘medium term’ to mean the end of the current CBSSG funding period (which elapses in early August).”

Vere apparently also told the leaders that any replacement to paying operators directly should be capable of being universally applied across England. But the leaders argue that this is unnecessary. “We do not think that a one-size-fits-all approach to bus funding is justified given that there are already separate arrangements for London and that wider governance arrangements for the metropolitan areas are already different from those elsewhere.

“Furthermore, such an approach, in effect means that the way in which bus funding is administered in large city regions (whose ambitions for their bus services are considerable, where transport authority investment in bus is high, and where there are relatively high numbers of bus trips per head of population) is determined by what works for small rural authorities (whose ambitions for bus services may be limited, investment levels commensurately modest, and where bus trips per head are vanishingly small).”

FirstGroup has just increased seating capacity to 50 per cent

The leaders hint that if they don’t get their way, then they may review their commitment to paying operators for subsidised services and concessionary fares reimbursement at pre-Covid-19 levels. The DfT has urged councils to continue making these payments as part of the overall package to prevent bus operators going bust.

“As a sign of our continuing commitment to supporting bus services, and as part of our collaborative approach to the wider Covid-19 crisis, we are prepared to continue to seek to underwrite a significant proportion of bus operator costs (as we do now) for the time being, on the understanding that the DfT is undertaking a credible assessment of our proposals in a way that makes their implementation in August feasible,” say the leaders.

“However, I am sure you can understand that, in the absence of such a process, it is not possible for us to continue indefinitely to pay for services that are not being provided and for concessionary trips that are not being made.”

A flawed system

The accompanying UTG paper submitted to ministers begins by critiquing the existing grant system. CBSSG Restart, paid at £1 per km, is a “blunt one-size-fits-all grant”, it says. “Every city’s bus recovery will be different. And those recoveries will oscillate considerably week-by-week for many months to come. In that context, a one-size-fits-all CBSSG rebate would lead to significant under-payment or over-payment in different cities, at different times. A single payment level will be ‘just right’ practically nowhere.”

The DfT has set up a reporting and reconcilation system to ensure operators are not over or underpaid.

The system involves extensive paperwork and operators recently submitted their first reconciliation claims.

But the UTG says: “Each operator in each local authority area may need a separate and regular reconciliation process to be conducted. This seems like an impractical and insurmountable task that cannot be performed to a reasonable standard, which could lead to accusations of misusing public money.”

The CBSSG regime is also reliant on local authorities

continuing to pay English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS) reimbursement at pre-Covid19 levels, despite concessionary trips being far below normal. Says the UTG: “There is an insubstantial legal basis for local authorities continuing these payments, and some will come under pressure to deploy this funding to other post-lockdown priorities. Local authorities also require a reconciliation process to be conducted to ensure this public money is being used appropriately to maintain bus operations and no more. The complex interplay between the CBSSG reconciliation and ENCTS reconciliation has not yet been resolved by the DfT – continuing with CBSSG would compound this complex arrangement.”

A better way

The UTG proposes that the Government grant for buses be based on the cost of operating the pre-Covid19 network across England outside London, minus, say, initially 20 per cent to account for current fare revenues.

The funding would be disaggregated between metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas and would then be allocated to each local authority according to the number of boarding passengers in their area. The UTG says all the above data can be obtained from the DfT’s bus statistics datasets.

Local transport authorities (LTAs) would then work with operators to specify the network, and operators would be handed work through contracts. To make the system work, the Government would have to relax the current limitations on de minimis contract awards (currently limited to 25 per cent of net local transport authority spend).

Authorities would be able to suspend competition between operators on the busiest corridors. “LTAs should [also] consider whether the diversion of some bus services to integrate with local rail, metro and light rail services might give better value for public money and provide better outcomes for passengers,” says the UTG. “This will be an issue for particular consideration where bus services directly compete with fixed rail systems.”

LTAs would agree fares with operators. “In many cases

LTT803 page 2&3.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 08:38 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

s a rethink

the commercial fares previously charged on a route will be adopted. In some cases it may provide better and more integrated outcomes for passengers if amended bus fares are considered, including the option of much simpler fares or good value day fares that apply to all public transport journeys irrespective of operator and mode.”

Discussing whether these arrangements should apply just to the conurbations or to all of England outside London, the UTG says: “Even if a uniform approach was not taken in the application of the policy to all local transport authorities it would still be entirely justified to apply the policy to the largest urban areas.

“If the objection [to the proposal] is the administration of setting up and running two different systems then this is a weak objection as the current system is excessively costly and cumbersome and will require significant administration to ensure value for money is to be achieved through audits and clawbacks.

“Our proposed reform will simplify the administration of bus funding for the DfT even if it was not applied everywhere as it would be applied to the most complex bus markets, which will be the most difficult to administer under the DfT’s current system.”

The UTG says its proposals remove the complicated reconcilation arrangements of the existing system.

“There will be a single reconciliation for the ‘Bus Service Recovery Grant’ that automatically takes account of the funding local authorities have in their concessionary travel budgets.” Reconciliation will be “done at a local authority level covering all operators”.

Looking ahead

The UTG sees its proposals as the first step of a broader reform to bus powers after the Covid-19 pandemic has eased. This wider reform should include: • more binding arrangements for cooperation and coordination between the local transport authority and incumbent bus operators • powers to franchise networks of services; and • powers to provide services direct (such as via municipal or not-for-profit companies) “Local transport authorities will need to consider during the recovery stage what format for bus service provision would best meet their long-term objectives once the recovery stage is over – be that direct or notfor-profit operation, franchising or some form of continuing collaboration with operators within a deregulated market,” it says.

“The recovery phase should also be when there is a long-term review of what level of revenue support will be needed in order to sustain and expand bus networks and patronage, using greener vehicles and with the simpler and more affordable fares that will attract more passengers in the longer term.”

The UTG defines the ‘new normal’ as when all social distancing guidelines have been withdrawn and bus ridership has not varied by more than five per cent for three consecutive months, taking account of normal seasonal variations.

“After these conditions have been met, bus operations in many places will return to the previous commercial operations model. But this will be in the context of a suppressed level of bus demand, and a bus industry that is financially weakened.”

The commercially rational response of operators will be to reduce the number of buses operated, shrink the bus network and maybe increase fares to protect their financial position, says the UTG. “We could be faced with a situation that will be wholly counter-intuitive to passengers, where the social distancing restrictions are lifted, bus use is freed up and is far less constrained – and the network shrinks and fares go up as a result. This is not a palatable outcome and means some form of further funding will still be needed during the new normal.”

News 3

PM ends ‘avoid public transport’ messaging COVID-19

PUBLIC TRANSPORT operators have welcomed the Government’s decision to drop the advice for people in England to avoid using public transport because of Covid-19.

The Prime Minister announced the change of messaging last Friday (17).

“In England, from today we are making clear that anybody may use public transport, while of course encouraging people to consider alternative means of transport where they are available.”

Confederation of Passenger Transport chief executive Graham Vidler said: “Operators have worked hard to ensure that buses are safe for both passengers and drivers. Moving away from the damaging ‘avoid public transport message’ will be an important step in giving people the confidence to travel and we look forward to welcoming more passengers back onto buses.

“We now need the Government to work with operators to encourage greater bus use as part of the green recovery. Without encouraging people back onto public transport we risk poorer air quality and increased congestion in our towns and cities as people continue to travel by car.”

Boris Johnson set out a timetable for opening up more parts of the economy in England as the number of new cases of Covid-19 in the UK con-

tinues to register below 1,000 a day and the number of deaths below 100 a day.

From 25 July, indoor gyms, pools and other sports facilities can reopen.

The Government’s advice on going to work will change on 1 August “Instead of Government telling people to work from home, we are going to give employers more discretion, and ask them to make decisions about how their staff can work safely,” said the PM. “That could mean of course continuing to work from home, which is one way of working safely and which has worked for many employers and employees.

“Or it could mean making workplaces safe by following Covid Secure guidelines. Whatever employers decide, they should consult closely with their employees, and only ask people to return to their place of work if it is safe.”

Turning to education, he said schools, nurseries and colleges will in September for all children and young people on a full-time basis.

“And universities are also working to reopen as fully as possible.”

“From October, we intend to bring back audiences in stadia and to allow conferences and other business events to recommence – again, these changes must be done in a Covid Secure way, subject to the successful outcome of pilots.”

Covid-19 grant for school bus services?

SCHOOL TRANSPORT

TALKS ARE continuing between governments, councils, bus/coach operators and schools to try and ensure that home-to-school transport runs smoothly when schools return after the summer holidays.

Many children travel to school on buses and coaches, using either scheduled bus services or dedicated school services.

Schools in Scotland are due to return in mid-August and those in England and Wales return in September.

In England, the Government says no social distancing is necessary on dedicated school services. But social distancing does apply on scheduled bus services.

LTT understands that a number of ways of handling school transport flows are being considered. On scheduled services that are dominated by schoolchildren, one option could be to convert them to ‘closed’ school buses. For services where there is a mix of passengers an option could be

to run duplicate services for the exclusive use of schoolchildren.

The Department for Education may provide a pot of money to cover additional costs.

The West Yorkshire Combined Authority has outlined the work it is undertaking to ensure school transport arrangements work smoothly.

It is working with local councils and transport providers to identify which public transport routes will be the busiest in September. A survey is being conducted to find out more about how parents intend their children to travel to school.

Kim Groves, chair of the WYCA’s transport committee, said: “To ensure safe social distancing we will need to commission extra buses and we are in discussions with Government on the costs of this.”

In addition to the 20,000 school pupils who usually use public buses, another 20,000 travel on dedicated school buses provided by the WYCA and its five member councils (Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds and Wakefield).

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 Contributing Writers Deniz Huseyin 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

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

LTT803 page 4.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 08:45 Page 4

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

4 News

Subway emergency aid ‘not enough’

FUNDING

THE SCOTTISH Government’s Covid-19 emergency grant for the Glasgow Subway is unlikely to be enough to avert the need for public transport cuts, Strathclyde Partnership for Transport has said.

The Scottish Government announced “up to £9m” for the Glasgow Subway and Edinburgh Trams earlier this month, saying this would “be in place from July to the end of September and will support services throughout this period”.

An SPT spokeswoman said the organisation would receive “up to £5m” for the Subway.

But she said the Government had not provided any funding to cover the losses incurred

Uncertain future for Scotland’s new £500m bus priority grant

BUSES

THE SCOTTISH Government’s £500m Bus Partnership Fund to deliver bus priority measures faces an uncertain future because of Covid-19, Transport Scotland has indicated.

The multi-year fund was announced by the Government last September in the SNP administration’s programme for government. The first grant awards were due to be made in 2020/21.

The fund’s future is discussed in a background document published last week alongside the news of a £10m fund for temporary bus priority measures.

Says Transport Scotland: “As is the case with the rest of the Scottish Government, Transport Scotland resources have been

at some point. Whilst we cannot be specific about when this will happen we will continue to keep stakeholders updated, as soon as we have more information.”

The new £10m Bus Priority Rapid Deployment Fund will pay for temporary measures such as reallocating roadspace to buses,

bus gates, traffic light prioritisation, bus stops, and associated administrative costs. It cannot be used for permanent infrastructure.

The funding will ease congestion for buses at a time when many people are expected to use cars to minimise their risk of catching Covid-19.

Grant increased for bus retrofit Transport Scotland has announced a more generous grant entitlement for the new £8.8m round of its Bus Emissions Abatement Retrofit (BEAR) scheme.

The funding helps pay for retrofit equipment to bring mid-life buses up to Euro VI emissions standard, supporting Scotland’s low emission zones programme for Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dundee.

LTT reported last year that Transport Scotland was offering grants of just 40-60 per

cent for retrofit equipment whereas many local authorities in England were meeting the full costs (LTT 01 Feb 19).

The European Commission has now cleared Transport Scotland’s new offer that will see operators receive up to 95 per cent grant funding towards the capital costs of accredited retrofit exhaust abatement retrofit technology over a five-year period.

The £8.8m should fund up to 500 buses in 2020/21. Bidding is open to 6 August.

Transport Scotland Home working a threat probes home working to public transport

HOME WORKING

between March, when the Covid lockdown began, and the end of June.

SPT chair councillor Martin Bartos said public transport faced a “changed landscape”, beyond September when the extra funding runs out.

“Without further support addressing the millions of pounds of losses already incurred during lockdown doing as the Government requested, and without clarity of how additional costs can be managed beyond September, I believe people in the West of Scotland will face future cuts to public transport.

“SPT will, however, continue to engage with Government and carefully consider how best SPT can support transport to meet the public’s needs over both the short and longer term.”

Martin Dean, chair of Edinburgh Trams said: “This funding will help to support our efforts and keep our services operational. However, 2020 will remain a challenging year for the organisation.”

pivoted to respond to Covid-19 and the challenges that it presents.

This has resulted in a significant reprioritisation of work within the organisation that will have an impact on a range of policy areas.

“At the time of writing, we have no indication that the Bus Partnership Fund will not resume

TRANSPORT SCOTLAND is sponsoring research into how people who work at home can continue to tap into informal networks that enhance their lives, career opportunities, and the prospects of their organisations.

The project is part of the CivTech challenge run by the Scottish Government’s digital directorate. As project sponsor, Transport Scotland staff will be the first users of any solutions.

Home working has rocketed since Covid-19 and Transport Scotland uses a number of remote working technologies such as Skype and MS Teams.

But the project brief says remote working can create problems. “Working remotely has the potential to contribute to feelings of social isolation and loneliness, particularly when it is required for prolonged periods.

“New starts may find it difficult to identify new opportunities to build experience.

“Middle management may find it difficult to build a large enough network to enable them to get things done.

“And for senior management, it may be difficult to imbue employees with a shared sense of purpose.”

Informal, chance conversations are also less likely to happen.

“Informal networks drive the sharing of knowledge, skills,

experience, expertise, and ideas,” says the project brief.

“While formal interaction is well catered for in the digital realm through applications that support online meetings and collaboration, a ‘coffee stop’ interaction, a ‘bump’ in the corridor, and an unexpected, serendipitous meeting with someone new are things that are not readily available online.”

The project brief asks, “How can tech drive the vital development of informal networks and the cross-pollination of ideas?

“We are open to a wide range of approaches, which may include ‘virtual’ interaction and/or supporting geographically-based local interactions.”

The project is overseen by Stuart Greig, Transport Scotland’s director for low carbon, and its newly appointed transformation manager, Matthew Eastwood (LTT 10 Jul).

Transport Scotland says remote working offers many potential benefits, including “making swifter progress on climate and air quality through reduced commuting”.

Transport Scotland is also working with the Construction Innovation Centre Scotland, Scottish Futures Trust and the Energy Savings Trust on innovation in, and deployment of, local work hubs “and other office space solutions to enhance workplace choices”.

HOME WORKING

PUBLIC TRANSPORT operators face long-term funding challenges as people appear unlikely to return to commuting to work five days a week when the Covid-19 pandemic ends, says Transport for Greater Manchester.

Stephen Rhodes, TfGM’s customer director, told councillors: “TfGM’s own survey found that half of workers think, once travel restrictions ease, they will change their commute frequency, with train and tram commuter frequency the least likely to return to normal.

“Only 56 per cent of those who did commute by tram for five or more days a week intend to travel the same way and with the same frequency.

“Ultimately this intelligence suggests it is unlikely that public transport patronage and revenues will return to their pre-Covid-19 levels in the short or medium term, and so there will be a requirement for continuing, likely significant, public sector financial support in Greater Manchester and elsewhere, from a combination of both local and national funds.”

The rail industry is planning to increase rail services nationwide in September to near normal levels. But Transport for the North officers said this month that there was a “risk that rail usage

will take a long time to recover due to the current capacity restrictions and reduced confidence of passengers”.

This would have “lasting financial impacts and make it harder to make the case for investment”.

“If rail demand remains suppressed for a significant period, it becomes increasingly uneconomic, and we risk facing a managed decline – as experienced in the 1980s and early 1990s.”

Analysis of mobile phone data by the Centre for Cities think tank on behalf of The Times suggests that higher proportions of people are returning to work in smaller cities than larger cities.

“Workers in the biggest cities are the least likely to have returned amid fears over the risk of long commutes on public transport,” said the newspaper.

“The ten biggest cities have seen only 14 per cent of staff go back compared with 30 per cent in cities such as Gloucester, where workers are much more likely to drive to the office.”

It reported that Royal Bank of Scotland staff can continue working from home until at least September and Edinburgh-based Standard Life Aberdeen staff can work from home until the end of the year. EY will reopen offices on 7 September but with reduced capacity and employees returning on a voluntary basis and with a desk booking system, said The Times.

LTT803 page 5.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 08:56 Page 3

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 5

In Brief

Tough choices ahead for North and Mids rail spending – NIC RAIL

STAKEHOLDER ASPIRATIONS for major rail investments in the Midlands and North of England will be collectively unaffordable and ministers will have to make tough choices on what to deliver, the National Infrastructure Commission has said.

The message is contained in the NIC’s interim report on its rail needs assessment for the Midlands and the North of England.

The final report, due to be published in November, will feed into the Government’s proposed integrated rail plan for the regions announced in February (LTT 21 Feb).

The NIC is considering the scoping, phasing and sequencing of projects and programmes such as HS2 Phase 2b, Northern Powerhouse Rail and Midlands Engine Rail, the redevelopment of Manchester Piccadilly, the Transpennine Route Upgrade, improvements to existing lines such as the East Coast and Midland main lines, and more generic interventions such as electrification and signalling.

It will prepare packages of investments with similar cost profiles between now and 2045.

Three cost profiles will be used, based on the Commission’s binding fiscal remit. The Government says the NIC must be able to “demonstrate that its recommendations for economic

infrastructure are consistent with gross public investment in economic infrastructure of between 1.0 per cent and 1.2 per cent of GDP in each year between 2020 and 2050”.

The lowest cost profile will be £86.2bn, consistent with the strategic rail spending proposed in the NIC’s National Infrastructure Assessment of July 2018.

The second will assume that the money available for rail spending is 25 per cent higher (£107.8bn), and the third assumes the money available is 50 per cent higher (£129.3bn).

The £86.2bn comprises £47.4bn on HS2 (phases 1 and 2a: £21.4bn, phase 2b: £26bn); £24bn on Northern Powerhouse Rail; and £14.9bn for the North /Midlands share of strategic rail enhancements.

The NIC acknowledges, however, that these are old costings. “The total estimated cost of

HS2, Northern Powerhouse Rail and the Midlands Engine Rail [package] is in the region of £101bn-£139bn in 2019/20 prices between 2020 and 2045.

“The + 25 per cent and + 50 per cent scenarios could be achieved through a combination of additional government spending, or reprioritisation of spending, although the Commission advises the Government not to reprioritise spending within the fiscal remit.

“While important, rail accounts for less than ten per cent of total journey miles,” it says. “This means that the recommended fiscal remit allocations to roads, local and urban transport, and other infrastructure sectors will all remain as specified in the National Infrastructure Assessment.”

The NIC says it is ultimately for the Government to decide on the level of spending on rail investments in the Midlands and the North.

“There is a lot more uncertainty now than when the NIA was published as to the amount of money available under the fiscal remit. Current estimates for GDP have higher levels of uncertainty, due to the ongoing Covid-19 outbreak. The Government has stated that they intend to review their fiscal framework ahead of Autumn Budget 2020, and the latest Budget implied a significant uplift in capital spending.”

The Commission will take a cautious approach to capital cost estimates. It points to the unhappy history of overspends on recent major projects such as the West Coast Main Line upgrade, HS2, Great Western electrification and Crossrail.

“Current allowances for optimism bias do not seem to be enough,” it says. “Therefore, rather than just accepting the current estimated costs for proposals, the Commission will undertake further analysis of optimism bias, based on historic data on rail scheme costs (reference class forecasting).”

It will also consider lessons from the Infrastructure and Projects Authority’s review of HS2 Phases 1 and 2a (LTT 21 Feb).

Each investment package presented in the final report will have a different set of potential benefits. “Some may deliver more economic growth and competitiveness benefits, and some more sustainability and quality of life benefits. Some may present a mixture of both, and some packages may benefit certain areas more than others.”

The Commission is inviting comments on its proposals by 15 August.

Rail needs assessment for the Midlands and the North – interim report is available at https://tinyurl.com/yxw45exp

Commission eschews BCRs and complex modelling The National Infrastructure Commission has rejected using conventional cost benefit analysis or sophisticated land usetransport modelling to assess its rail package recommendations for the Midlands and the North of England.

Conventional cost benefit analysis fails to fully capture the interactions between rail investments and other factors, such as skilled employment and urban development, it says. “This risks public investment in transport being channelled to areas that are already doing well, as the effects of transport in isolation are highest there.”

Meanwhile, complex models “that try to capture interactions” between transport investment and the economy “lack transparency”.

The Commission is taking a “more straightforward approach of assessing the potential for rail investments to support both economic growth and competitiveness, and sustainability and quality of life”.

“It will set out clearly what decisionmakers would have to believe to think that

this potential would be realised – for example, that other interventions in areas such as skills, governance and local transport are successful.”

For productivity impacts, the Commission will calculate agglomeration benefits from the increase in effective density enabled by greater rail capacity.

This increase will then be multiplied by the impact of greater density on productivity, for which a range of estimates already exist. The approach was set out in the Commission’s working paper Capturing the value of urban transport investments. This starts from an assumption that, in growing cities, new transport capacity is fully used. For rail, this implies that additional capacity leads to an increase in the number of passengers carried rather than a reduction in crowding.

On connectivity, the Commission says rail can enable benefits of trade between firms in more distant cities by offering faster journeys between city centres. As part of the evidence base for the National Infrastructure Assessment, the

Commission asked Prospective Labs to construct a set of measures of transport connectivity. Two sets of measures were calculated: urban connectivity (connectivity within places) and interurban connectivity (between places), for both public and private transport.

The measures were calculated using the average travel times between two places. The average travel time is divided by the time it would take to travel in a straight line between the places at an assumed speed of 50 km per hour (the crow-flies travel time). The metric is then weighted by the demand in each place (population or employment) and calibrated so that places further away are given less weight, to reflect the impact of travel time on willingness to travel.

Rail investment can also unlock investment in land around stations. The potential land value coordination benefits will be estimated based on the difference between land values around key station investments, and those in other wellconnected areas of the same city.

Flexible tickets for West Mids Metro Transport for the West Midlands has introduced new flexible tickets for the Metro light rail network. Three and four-day tickets provide unlimited travel for the consecutive period of days. A new ‘Flex and Save’ ticket provides ten days of unlimited travel to be used at the customer’s convenience. Once the first day is activated the remaining days can be used anytime over six months. The tickets are available through the My Metro app.

Northern trials smart flexi tickets Flexible multi-journey ticketing is being trialled between Leeds and Harrogate stations in a move that Transport for the North says will be ideal for passengers who no longer commute five days a week because of Covid-19. The smartcards give passengers ten unlimited travel days for the price of nine and are valid for six months.

Passengers can use both Northern and LNER services.

State-controlled train operator Northern plans to roll-out the tickets to more routes in the coming months. The tickets take advantage of Transport for the North’s investment in smart ticketing technology for rail. ‘Tap-intap-out’ systems have been installed on platforms at 90 stations and the majority of rail season ticket-holders have moved from paper to smart cards. TfN is now seeking DfT approval for the next stage to extend tap-in-tap-out to more than 300 additional stations. TfN ultimately wants to deliver London-style pay-as-you-go travel using contactless bank cards or smartphones.

£12m for university rail station upgrade The DfT is to contribute £12m towards the £56m cost of upgrading Birmingham University railway station, with works due to be completed in time for the city hosting the Commonwealth Games in 2022. Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) is leading a consortium including the University of Birmingham, Birmingham City Council, Network Rail, West Midlands Trains and the Greater Birmingham and Solihull LEP to fund the project. The investment will deliver a larger, modern station with enhanced facilities including more lifts, a ticket office, shop and public toilets. Opened in 1978, University station was designed to serve 500,000 passengers per year but now handles almost four million. The contracts for the detailed design and build of the scheme will be awarded later this summer, with works starting the autumn.

LTT803 page 6&7.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 09:40 Page 4

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

6 News

W

Wales votes to make 20mph t

Plans to change the default speed limit for most urban roads in Wales from 30 to 20mph were supported by all the major political parties in the Welsh Parliament last week. Andrew Forster reports

ALES LOOKS likely to become the first part of the UK to make 20mph the default speed limit on restricted roads after the Welsh Parliament supported the idea last week.

Assembly Members voted by 44 to five (with four abstentions) to support the Welsh Government’s proposal to consult on changing the default speed limit on restricted roads – roads with street lights at least every 200 yards (183 metres) – from 30mph to 20mph.

The Welsh Parliament’s support for the idea contrasts with the Scottish Parliament, which rejected a similar proposal last summer. The Scottish Government said local authorities were best-placed to decide where 20mph limits were appropriate (LTT 21 Jun 19). Policy in England continues to be made by individual local authorities too, despite campaign group 20’s Plenty for Us lobbying for a default 20.

Last week’s vote in Cardiff came alongside publication of a Welsh Government taskforce report into the switch. The taskforce, chaired by transport consultant Phil Jones of PJA, recommends introducing the change as quickly as possible, suggesting that legislation could be passed in October 2021 with implementation in April 2023.

The 20mph policy has been championed

by Lee Waters, the deputy minister for economy and transport, who was director of Sustrans Cymru before becoming a Labour politician.

He acknowledged last week that changing the default limit would not guarantee that drivers will drive at 20mph. “We don’t expect speed to drop to 20 mph overnight.

It will take time to change behaviour.” But

he claimed that, even a one per cent drop in average speeds was “likely to bring about a six per cent drop in casualties”.

This is based on TRL research from 1994, which the taskforce also cites.

Said Waters: “I am hugely grateful to Phil Jones for leading this substantial piece of work over the last year, systematically identifying the barriers to implementing this significant change and drawing on the experience of the police, local authorities, public health experts and the key stakeholders to devise ways through.”

He also paid tribute to the contributions from task force members Rod King, founder of campaign group 20’s Plenty for Us, and Adrian Davis, an academic at the University of the West of England/Napier University.

King said last week: “We are impressed at how stakeholders and Government, both

DfT won’t block change The DfT said this week that changing the default speed limit from 30 to 20mph in Wales was a matter for the Welsh Government alone.

The legislative change will be made under Section 81(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. It requires Welsh ministers to consult with the UK secretary of state for transport before exercising the power.

Says the Welsh Government taskforce report: “Discussions have been held with officials of the DfT to inform them of the Welsh Government’s intention to change the default speed limit for restricted roads. They confirmed that there is no definition of the form this consultation should take. It was suggested that Welsh ministers write to the minister in the DfT with responsibility for road safety once a decision to proceed with the legislative change is made.”

A DfT spokeswoman this week told LTT: “The Welsh Government has the power to make 20mph the default limit on restricted (i.e. street-lit) roads. The requirement to consult was inserted in the legislation in recognition of the fact that many roads cross the English/Welsh border, and signage changes could be needed on the English side of the border.

“The DfT recognises that this is the responsibility of the Welsh Government and remains neutral on the proposals.”

The Highway Code will also need amending, possibly in the form of a Wales addendum.

The Welsh Government is committed to revising Circular 24/2009, Guidelines for setting local speed limits in Wales. This currently advises that 20mph limits are only appropriate where existing speeds do not exceed 24mph.

local and national, have worked together in developing such a detailed, practical and insightful report that shows how this important initiative can be delivered.”

The taskforce remarks: “The significance of the change being made in Wales should not be underestimated. No country has previously chosen to reduce the default speed limit for urban areas to 20mph and there will be global interest in learning from Wales’ experience.

“Making the change to a default 20mph speed limits in most urban areas is simple in legal terms, but the ramifications are wide and complex. It should be seen as a major Government project, which will need strong and dedicated governance to ensure it is successfully delivered.”

It recommends the formation of a project board and project team, including representatives of the Welsh Government, local government and taskforce members.

Local authorities will need additional funding, it adds. “Local authorities will incur significant additional costs in engaging with local communities and stakeholders, planning the speed limit changes and defining exceptions, drafting and making the Traffic Regulation Orders and designing and implementing the engineering changes including the changes to signs. Transport for Wales has estimated that approximately 10,000 new gateway signs will be needed.”

The evidence base

In November 2018 the DfT published the findings of an in-depth research project into 20mph limits by consultants Atkins, AECOM and Professor Mike Maher. They concluded there was “insufficient evidence to conclude that there has been a significant change in collisions and casualties following the introduction of 20mph limits in residential areas” (LTT 23 Nov 18).

The DfT evaluation earns a brief mention in an appendix to the Welsh Government taskforce report, though not this

finding. On the casualty reduction effects of 20mph limits, the taskforce pays more attention to research into Bristol’s experience.

“The Bristol research provides the most thorough analysis of the effectiveness of 20mph in any one locality,” it says, citing a 2018 University of the West of England (UWE) report, and a subsequent 2019 UWE paper on the Bristol experience published in Injury Prevention. The latter quotes a city-level reduction of fatal injuries of around 63 per cent (but within a 95 per cent confidence interval range of two per cent to 86 per cent), controlling for trends over time and areas.

On whether 20mph limits encourage more active travel, the taskforce says: “There has been little research as yet which has focused on monitoring any changes in active travel as the result of introduction of 20mph speed limits in the UK, but evidence from initial pilot schemes in Bristol and Edinburgh both reported positive results. Objective counts during the piloting of 20mph in Bristol found small increases in walking and cycling. Self-reported increases in walking and cycling were also noted after implementation of the pilot 20mph speed limit in Edinburgh.”

Behaviour change

Because most roads in built-up areas will in future be subject to a 20mph limit, the taskforce say it will be impossible to reengineer all of them to make them self-enforcing. “While it will be desirable for roads to be self-enforcing it will need to be recognised that this will not be achievable in most places and that traffic calming and other engineering solutions should be targeted at locations where speeds remain unacceptably high after other means of reducing them have been applied.”

Behavioural change will be key to the success of the policy, and enforcement will be needed to ensure compliance.

“Lowering traffic speeds in urban areas should be seen as a major behaviour change project,” says the taskforce. “This will require a sophisticated communications and marketing strategy based on building social unacceptability for speeding in residential areas, and backed up with strong enforcement in the early stages.”

Organisations that receive grant funding from the Welsh Government should agee to ensure their vehicles stick to 20mph, thereby creating a class of ‘pace’ cars and helping normalise the idea that 20mph is an appropriate speed. “A workstream should be established to support a cohort of drivers who will be required to observe speed limits as a condition of their employment,” says the taskforce. “This should focus on fleet and professional drivers.”

For the new default 20mph limit to be credible the taskforce says Welsh Police

LTT803 page 6&7.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 09:40 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 7

In Brief

the default urban limit forces must give a clear statement that 20mph limits will be enforced in the same way as other speed limits. “Average speed camera enforcement is likely to be the preferred option for through routes,” it says.

Over the long-term, the taskforce believes Intelligent Speed Assistance (ISA) technology will ensure compliance. As a first step, organisations, including bus operators and public sector bodies, should be encouraged to retrofit ISA systems to their vehicle fleets, it says.

The European Union announced in 2019 that ISA will be mandatory on new models of car sold in the EU from May 2022 and on new versions of models currently on the market from May 2024. “It is likely that vehicles sold in the UK will feature these systems,” says the taskforce. “Although drivers will be able to override or switch-off the ISA system it will automatically be activated every time the vehicle is started.

“On-board data recorders will log the overriding of the ISA system and it is possible that in the event of a crash this information could be available to the police and possibly civil lawyers.”

Pilot settlements

The Wales-wide change to a default 20mph limit will be preceded by 20mph ‘Pilot Settlements Projects’ (PSPs), which will inform implementation across Wales. The Government will engage with a small number of local authorities who are “committed to 20mph limits” to select suitable PSPs. Each local authority in Wales will need to review the roads in its settlements to identify routes that should be made exceptions to the default 20mph limit. Small 30mph repeater signs may be used on these roads.

To simplify the process, the taskforce recommends a set of criteria to identify the

‘Principal Urban Network’ (PUN), as a subset of the existing 30mph roads in a local authority area, on the basis that the 20mph limit should normally be applied to all other roads. This will remove some 83 per cent of the urban road network in Wales from detailed consideration.

The criteria for defining the PUN should be refined and tested through the Pilot Settlements Project but may include routes that meet one or more of the following criteria: trunk roads; the primary route network; A and B classified roads; abnormal load routes; motorway diversion routes; dual carriageways; and important bus and coach routes.

Transport for Wales has developed a GIS tool drawing on Wales-wide datasets to produce draft maps identifying where exceptions could be justified. These were prepared for four demonstration areas: Gwynedd; Rhondda Cynon Taf; the A470 north-south trunk road corridor; and the A458/A483/A489/A470/A44 east-west route between Shropshire and Aberystwyth.

“Feedback on these maps from the relevant authorities was generally positive, with officers confirming that a set of consistently-produced maps would simplify and speed up the identification of exceptions,” says the taskforce. The GIS tool will be refined through the proposed pilot settlements project.

The taskforce points out that signage is often used at national borders to inform drivers of changes in traffic law and signage.

“A more complex issue arises where there are built-up and/or lit roads on either side of the Wales/England border. An example is Saltney, which forms a contiguous built up area with Chester, and where road conditions either side of the border are similar. It would be preferable if the speed limit did not change at the border and close working will be advis-

able with the relevant English highway authorities on local speed limits and sign requirements.”

A monitoring and evaluation framework for the change is recommended. This should focus on a representative sample of eight settlements (two per region) across Wales that will be studied in detail, with more routine data being collected for Wales as a whole.

“These eight settlements should form part of an early engagement with a number of pilot authorities that are committed to wider 20mph limits, and are willing to work with Welsh Government on developing the guidance and tools needed for Wales as a whole,” says the taskforce.

Monitoring data will also have to be gathered from eight matched control areas, one for each of the eight settlements, to identify the changes in key performance indicators that are only a result of the reduction in speed limit.

“Because this is a Wales-wide intervention it will be necessary for the control settlements to be in England, some distance from the Welsh border, and this will require the cooperation of some English local authorities,” says the taskforce.

The taskforce included representatives of: 20’s Plenty for Us; the Confederation of Passenger Transport; Disability Wales; the Federation of Small Businesses; the Freight Transport Association; Fire and Rescue Service; GoSafe; Guide Dogs; Living Streets; local authorities; the police; Public Health Wales; the Road Haulage Association; Sustrans; the University of the West of England; Welsh Government; and the Welsh Local Government Association.

Welsh 20mph task force group final report is available at https://tinyurl.com/yxa5wzwf

Sustrans revamps National Cycle Network ACTIVE TRAVEL

SUSTRANS HAS deleted about 750 miles of the National Cycle Network (NCN) because it falls short of the charity’s quality standards. A further 3,000 miles have been reclassified as on-road ‘named routes’ because they are suited to cycle-touring rather than family cycling.

The changes follow a review of the NCN in 2018. At the time, the network comprised 16,575 miles across the UK, made up of 5,273 miles of traffic-free paths and 11,302 miles of on-road sections.

The review aimed to create a network capable of being used by a sensible 12-year old travelling alone. Routes were assessed using a scoring system that considered their surface, traffic flow, signage and safety.

Sustrans concluded that one per cent of the NCN was very good, 53 per cent was good, four

Sustrans wants to raise the standard of the network

per cent was poor and 42 per cent was very poor.

A total of 12,763 miles on the NCN is now mapped and promoted for families, disabled people, people with long-term health conditions and those new to cycling. Of this, 41 per cent (5,227 miles) are traffic-free paths.

A further 3,090 miles of the

NCN (18.6 per cent) has been reclassified as on-road ‘named’ routes that are best suited for an experienced cycle-touring audience. Changes to signage are due to be completed next summer.

The named routes include the iconic Caledonia Way, C2C (also known as Sea to Sea across northern England) and Hadrian’s Cycle Route. Named routes will not appear on the NCN map but Sustrans will continue to promote them via its website.

About 4.5 per cent of the NCN, which comprises 753 miles of busy on-road sections, have now been taken off the map, with no signage assigned, as they fall too short of the quality standards that Sustrans aspires to.

Sustrans wants to double the miles of traffic-free routes from 5,000 to 10,000.

Xavier Brice, CEO for Sustrans said: “The move to differentiate paths and routes will

help us offer more targeted and relevant information on the paths for everyone choosing to walk, cycle and wheel.”

Sustrans is working with Visit Scotland, the country’s tourism authority, on an online journey planner to put Scotland’s best leisure cycling routes in front of their audience. The initiative has just launched three new cycle touring routes and 15 day trips, such as The Lochs and Glens Way, Union and Forth & Clyde Canals, and the Loch Ness 360 touring routes.

The routes are hosted on the VisitScotland.com journey planner.

Sustrans owns 500 miles on the NCN. The Network is mainly owned by local authorities and other landowners, including Network Rail, the Highways Agency, National Trust, Forestry Commission and Canal and River Trust.

Double height bike parking for Oxford?

Oxfordshire County Council may install two-tier bike racks in Oxford city centre to increase parking capacity. A double height rack could be trialled alongside the taxi rank at Gloucester Green. “If successful it could be introduced elsewhere although the appearance of double height bicycle parking may rule it out as a solution in areas where it is close to historic buildings,” Jason Russell, Oxfordshire’s interim director of community operations, told councillors.

Active travel corridor for south Edinburgh The City of Edinburgh Council is developing a £2m programme of walking/cycling route improvements in the south of the city between Cameron Toll shopping centre and the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary, along the A7 Old Dalkeith Road. Actions include a three-metre-wide bi-directional cycleway, reducing a section of the Old Dalkeith Road from three to two lanes for general traffic, ‘floating’ bus stops, and Toucan crossings. Delivery should commence next summer and be completed in spring 2022. Sustrans’ Places for Everyone fund is expected to meet 50 per cent of the cost, with the council providing the remainder. SEStran, the South East Scotland transport partnership, has funded the design work, which consultant Sweco will complete this summer.

Bidding open for Scots ebike fund Transport Scotland has opened bidding for the fourth round of its e-bike grant fund, with £900,000 available to local authorities, public sector agencies, further and higher education institutions, and community groups. Bids can be made for up to £200,000 for fleets of pool ebikes with deadlines of 28 August and 30 October.

Bids for up to £25,000 for ebike trials have bidding deadlines of 14 August, 2 October and 18 December. Businesses, charities and social enterprises are also being invited to bid to trial e-cargo bikes. Ten are available for a yearlong loan. The funding is managed by the Energy Saving Trust.

WMCA reviews active travel role The West Midlands Combined Authority is considering whether to appoint a new cycling and walking ambassador. Track cyclist Shanaze Reade was appointed to the role in March 2019 but her contract ended as planned on 31 May. “The role of cycling and walking ambassador is now under review,” said officers.

LTT803 page 8.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 09:44 Page 4

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

8 News

In Brief

Northumberland rail revival in one go?

The DfT has asked Northumberland County Council to explore restoring passenger trains to the Newcastle to Ashington line in one rather than two phases. The council had been planning a first phase with four stations and a second phase with two more stations and a passing loop to allow more services (LTT 21 Feb). But Tobyn Hughes, managing director of Transport North East said: “The DfT has recently indicated that they may wish to see the project delivered as one phase with a half-hourly timetable from the start, rather than two phases with service ramping up over time.” A final business case is due to be submitted to the DfT next spring.

The service could be launched in May 2024. Two operating scenarios are being explored, one with services as part of the Northern franchise, and the other a local concession. “The DfT plan to take a decision as to whether they favour operation within the Northern franchise, or a locally developed alternative in October,” said Hughes.

Sunderland explores Washington station Sunderland City Council is commissioning consultants to advise on the best site for a rail station to serve the town of Washington.

The town lies on the disused Leamside Line, which could be re-opened.

Cost of Wisbech rail re-opening rises The estimated cost of reopening the Wisbech to March railway has risen from £218.5m to £230.5m (2019 prices), without optimism bias, the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority has reported. The increase reflects updated utility diversion costs and adjustments to risk allowance (the latter is now £44.2m). Highway works represent £75.6m of the cost, reflecting the 22 level crossings on the line and the need for closures and road diversions.

“This is based on a maximalist interpretation of the Office of Rail and Road’s approach to level crossings and therefore indicates a cost ceiling,” Paul Raynes, director of strategy and delivery, told councillors. “Our understanding, however, is that such an approach is not mandatory national policy and DfT and Network Rail may be more open to considering alternative approaches for managing the level crossings that could address the safety risk whilst reducing costs of the highways works.” The CA regards the ‘accelerating existing proposals’ stream of the DfT’s Restoring Railways Fund (RRF) as the best opportunity for national grant funding.

Councils backs down in battle over rail freight interchange FREIGHT

A MAJOR barrier to building a new rail-served freight depot in Hertfordshire appears to have been removed, with St Alban City & District Council agreeing to revise its local plan to support the proposal.

The strategic rail freight interchange (SRFI) facility is proposed for the former Radlett Airfield in Green Belt land south of St Albans. The facility is close to the M25 and will have a connection to the Midland Main Line.

A lengthy planning battle to build the facility has pitted promoter Helioslough against St Albans Council.

In 2014 communities secretary Eric Pickles granted planning permission for the SRFI after concluding there was no other suitable location to build it.

London and the South East has a recognised shortage of rail-served warehousing.

St Albans subsequently tried to kill-off the development by designating the land in its local plan for what it called the Park Street Garden Village (LTT 22 Jul 16 & 15 Feb 19).

In January, planning inspectors examining the local plan halted further hearing sessions after raising “serious concerns” about the plan’s legal compliance and soundness. They wrote to the council in April saying the draft

plan would probably have to be withdrawn, and describing the council’s approach to the SRFI as “illogical” (LTT 01 May).

St Albans Council has now written to the inspectors, accepting that this is the only suitable location for an SRFI and proposing to remove the garden village from the plan.

“The council has reconsidered this issue and concluded that it is appropriate to seek a main modification of the plan, which would remove the Park Street Garden Village broad location policy and include a policy supportive of the SRFI and a broad location policy for the SRFI,” says the council’s letter. “The council accepts that the balance in this case, in order

Lack of support for road irks HE ROADS

HIGHWAYS ENGLAND’S frustration at the lack of vocal support for a controversial road scheme on Merseyside is revealed in information released following a Freedom of Information request.

The A5036 Port of Liverpool access scheme is a proposed dual carriageway between Princess Way, near the port, and the Switch Island Interchange, where the M57 and M58 motorways end.

The new road will relieve the existing A5036 but is controversial, particularly because it will pass through the Rimrose Valley Country Park. A campaign group, Save Rimrose Valley, is fighting the project.

Peel Ports, the owner of Liverpool port, is a supporter of the new road. In an email sent to

Peel in July 2018, an unnamed Highways England official said: “We are appreciative of Peel’s support as we are struggling for high profile advocates elsewhere.

“Others seem to be unwilling to publicly get involved in what is seen to be a local political issue despite being positive about the scheme behind closed doors.

“This is proving to be incredibly frustrating when the majority of the benefits will be hugely beneficial to Liverpool and the wider city region, and is potentially putting the whole scheme at risk.”

Sefton Council brought an unsuccessful judicial review challenge against Highways England in 2018 over its failure to include a tunnel option in a consultation (LTT 05 Mar 18 & 08 Jan 19).

Highways England’s website says a Development Consent Order application for the road is

due to be submitted to the Planning Inspectorate later this year.

The project cost range is cited as £163m-£335m.

Construction is envisaged as commencing in late-2022 at the earliest, with completion in 2025.

Protestors are continuing their campaign to stop the road. The project’s website includes a recent statement saying: “It has been brought to our attention that some notices have been posted at the Beach Road entrance to Rimrose Valley Country Park claiming to come from Highways England. These notices are fake and have not been posted by us.

“We assume these have been posted to spread alarm and confusion. Please be assured that we currently have no works planned for Rimrose Valley, and no plans to close any of the entrances.”

New delay to Stonehenge decision

ROADS

THE GOVERNMENT has delayed making decisions on two major dualling schemes on the A303 trunk road, including the section past Stonehenge.

Decisions on the Development Consent Order applications for the Amesbury to Berwick Down and the Sparkford to Ilchester sections have already been delayed once. They were due to be made this month but have now been put off until 13 November and 20 November respectively.

The Amesbury to Berwick Down section includes the tunnel at Stonehenge World Heritage Site.

Transport minister Andrew Stephenson said the new delay followed the notification of a recent archaeological find within the World Heritage Site. The extension would enable “further consultation on and consideration of this matter”.

The delay to the Sparkford to Ilchester decision will allow further information to be provided by Highways England and interested parties on outstanding

Stonehenge: decision put back to November

concerns raised by the Planning Inspectorate.

for the plan to be sound, should be in favour of the SRFI since there is the potential to identify alternative sites for housing in the Green Belt but no realistic alternative location for the SRFI, as the inspectors noted.”

St Albans hopes that, with this modification, the inspectors will allow the local plan to proceed through examination.

“Withdrawal of the plan will lead to a further, very considerable elongation of the council’s overall plan-making process, to the detriment of the local area and its residents,” it says.

LTT contacted a representative of Helioslough for comment but had not heard back by close of press.

Highways England praised

ROADS

HIGHWAYS ENGLAND has delivered significant performance improvements in its first five years since formation, according to a review by the Office of Rail and Road.

ORR chief executive John Larkinson said: “Highways England has made very good progress in its first five years, but now that it is an established company, more is expected of it in the second road period.”

The ORR notes that in roads period 1 (2015/16-2019/20) Highways England only managed to start 67 of the originally proposed 112 major improvement schemes. Many projects increased in cost, contributing to HE recording a net underspend of just one per cent on major schemes, despite the fewer starts.

RP2, which commenced in April, includes the development and delivery of 46 new projects and the continued delivery of 32 already in construction at the end of RP1. “Over the next five years, we expect an evenly distributed delivery profile and a much more stable portfolio with limited changes occurring, given the greater opportunity HE has had to develop and plan this work,” says the ORR. Annual assessment of Highways England – end of Road Period 1 2015-2020 is available at https://tinyurl.com/y3az4bdl

LTT803 page 9.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:43 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 9

In Brief

Road charges and driverless Tubes may restore TfL coffers FUNDING

ROAD USER charges and driverless Tube trains are among the policies the Government is considering to restore Transport for London to financial health.

The Government announced a review of TfL’s finances in May, alongside news of the £1.6bn Covid-19 emergency aid package to keep transport services in London running until September (LTT 29 May). More details were released by the DfT this week.

The review is led by the DfT, which has appointed consultant KPMG to assist. Three ‘levels’ of analysis will be conducted: Level one: evidence and understanding of TfL’s current financial position, including a review of current obligations and functions, current income streams, and commentary on how these have been impacted by Covid-19.

Level two: evidence and options to strengthen TfL’s financial position over the remainder of 2020/21 and 2021/22. This will include: options for short-term revenue maximisation; raising more non-fare based revenue; and further efficiencies. TfL’s approach to prioritising capital spending will also be explored.

Level three: options for more fundamental changes that could put TfL in a fully sustainable financial position by the end of the current business plan period

(2024/25). This will include: • options for maximising revenue and more non-fare based income; revenue yield choices over time; and changes to road user charging schemes as foreshadowed in the mayor’s transport strategy • further efficiencies on operating costs, including extending driverless operation from the Docklands Light Railway to Tube lines that are already automatic • reviewing the approach to prioritising capital spending

• reviewing the current operating model • reviewing the balance sheet and financing structure of TfL Conclusions will be reached by the end of August. The review will report to transport secretary Grant Shapps, with oversight from the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Findings will inform the negotiation between the Government and TfL over a fresh round of Covid-19 emergency support.

Jo Hawkes, TfL’s director of corporate finance, says in a paper to its board next week that TfL will need extra support for years.

“The need to provide a full transport service to support London while continuing with on-going public health and safety restrictions (such as social distancing), and the possibility that Covid-19 may change transport use permanently, means that TfL will require further financial support for several years to come.”

TfL launches its own financial review TRANSPORT FOR London has appointed an expert panel to lead its own financial review that will run in parallel with the Government’s (see main story).

TfL says its current model of funding is “unsustainable”.

“TfL has one of the highest proportions of fare income cost recovery in the world, at 80 per cent of the day- to-day cost of operating the network, compared to 38 per cent in New York,” says Jo Hawkes, TfL’s director of corporate finance, in a paper to next week’s board meeting.

Prior to Covid-19, TfL had reduced the funding deficit for operations, maintenance, renewal and financing costs from £1.5bn in 2015/16 to

£200m. Covid-19 is forecast to cost TfL £4bn this year alone.

The organisation, set up in 2000, now has debts of about £12bn, and “even before Covid-19 was close to its upper financing limits”.

Says Hawkes: “The user pays/cross-subsidy model is clearly unsustainable and not resilient. TfL requires a new funding model to provide both: long-term certainty to enable services; and efficient whole life asset stewardship.”

The expert panel to lead the review comprises: • TC Chew – leader of Arup’s global rail business • Stephen Glaister – emeritus professor of transport and infrastructure at

Imperial College London and a former TfL board member • Bridget Rosewell – chair of Atom Bank and the M6 Toll company, a National Infrastructure Commission commissioner, founder of Volterra Partners, and chief economic advisor to the Greater London Authority from 2002 to 2012 • Sir Jonathan Taylor – vice president of the European Investment Bank from 2013 to 2019 and previously director general of financial services and stability at HM Treasury.

Consultants Evercore and Nera will provide advice.

Initial conclusions should be provided next month, which TfL hopes will influence the DfT-led review.

Payments to be cut for London bus use back cross-GLA bus routes to 40% of normal

BUSES

LONDON COUNCILS has published proposals to gradually withdraw special Covid-19 payments to non-TfL bus operators who provide routes entering Greater London.

Seventeen bus operators provide 36 routes that straddle the Greater London Authority boundary. London boroughs normally reimburse them just under £1m a year for carrying Freedom Pass holders.

Boroughs are currently complying with the DfT’s request that councils continue paying concessionary travel reimbursement at pre-Covid-19 levels, to help stop operators from going bust.

But Stephen Boon, London Councils’ chief contractor officer, told the transport and environment committee that continuing to do so was “not financially

viable for boroughs given their own budgetary pressures”.

London Councils proposes that operators continue to be paid according to pre-Covid Freedom Pass trip rates until the end of the second quarter of 2020/21 (end of September).

In quarter three, payment will fall to 75 per cent and in quarter four it will fall to 50 per cent.

Operators will be paid according to actual journey numbers in 2021/22.

London Councils transport and environment committee will be asked to approve the final proposal in October.

The biggest recipients of Freedom Pass payments are Arriva the Shires, FirstGroup, and Arriva Kent. Their payments in each of the first two quarters of 2020/21 will be £60,844, £39,166, and £30,443 respectively.

TRAVEL DEMAND

BUS USE in London has returned to about 40 per cent of normal and Tube use is about 20 per cent of normal, TfL said this week in a report about the impact of Covid-19.

Andy Byford, TfL’s new commissioner, said about 96 per cent of normal bus mileage was now being operated and he expected the figure to reach 100 per cent by the end of August.

“Bus demand is currently around 60 per cent lower than last year’s level, having increased from a low of around 85 per cent,” he said.

“We are running an almost normal Tube service at peak times on weekdays, frequently delivering approximately 95 per cent of services, and in some instances delivering a higher level of services than pre-pandemic.”

The Tube network saw a “notable increase” in customers on 4 and 5 July, when many shops re-opened, with demand returning to approximately a fifth of normal levels for the first time since 20 March.

The Santander cycle scheme is proving popular. “The week between 25 and 31 May was the busiest week in London’s cycle hire scheme’s history, with 362,925 hires,” said Byford. “The full month of May saw 1,120,620 hires, recorded as the best May in the scheme’s ten-year history. As of 21 July, the previous seven days hires are now 16 per cent higher than the same seven days in the previous year.”

A further 1,700 Santander Cycles are being made available, taking the fleet to more than 14,000. This is the largest single increase in bikes for the scheme since 2013.

TfL consults on 24-hr bus lanes Transport for London is consulting on converting 50 miles of the capital’s bus lanes to 24-hour operation to speed up bus journeys, assist cyclists, and reduce capacity for general road traffic.

“Extending bus lane operating hours will help guard against a damaging car-led recovery [from Covid-19],” said TfL, adding that the change would also benefit cyclists. The changes apply to lanes on red routes (the Transport for London Road Network). Consultation on the changes has just commenced. TfL intends to extend the operating hours from the end of August under a trial that will run for a minimum of six months. Loading facilities will initially be retained but TfL will monitor when and how often they are used. The 24 hour operation of lanes could be made permanent.

Uncertainty over free youth travel change The London Borough of Croydon fears the Government may permanently end free youth public transport travel in London rather than ending it only temporarily. Since 2006 Londoners under 18 have been eligible for free bus and tram travel. Children under 11 can travel free on Tube, Overground and DLR too. In May the Government announced plans to temporarily suspend the policy as part of its Covid-19 emergency funding agreement for Transport for London. Stuart King, Croydon’s lead member for environment and transport, told colleagues the suspension would commence with the start of the new academic year in September. “It is not clear how long the suspension of free travel will remain in place and one influential Government adviser [unnamed] has indicated he thinks it should be permanent.” King said the suspension was a “hugely regressive step”. “Current estimates suggest that as many as 70 per cent of [school] pupils will no longer be entitled to free travel – creating a financial pressure on households at a time when many are struggling.”

Police clamp down on face coverings Police officers in London have prevented more than 35,500 people travelling on buses since face coverings became mandatory, London transport commissioner Andy Byford reported this week.

He said 127 fixed penalty notices had also been issued to passengers for not wearing a covering.

NR needs £140m more for Crossrail Network Rail needs an extra £140m to deliver its works on London’s Crossrail project, the DfT has revealed.

LTT803 page 10.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:53 Page 5

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

10 News

Portsmouth to procure car club

CAR CLUBS

PORTSMOUTH CITY Council plans to procure a car club for launch next year.

The city is not a stranger to the sharing model. Former operator City Car Club launched a scheme in Portsmouth in 2005 but withdrew in 2008, after which Commonwheels launched a small scheme with three cars. It subsequently withdrew because the operation was loss-making, says the council.

Enterprise Car Club currently has four vehicles at a site in Fratton, three at St Mary's Hospital for use by hospital staff, and four at Cosham with another employer.

Tristan Samuels, Portsmouth’s director of regeneration, told councillors that employer use was likely to be vital to a council-backed scheme. “It is likely that, initially, business use of the car club would be more commercially viable than resident’s usage, as encouraging behaviour change for residents to consider getting rid of their private vehicle to use a car club vehicle is likely to take longer to achieve widespread takeup.”

The council has £220,000 earmarked in its capital programme for a car club.

“There is a possibility that the club may have ongoing revenue costs,” said Samuels.

“The cost of this is as yet unknown and a full financial appraisal that sets out the impact and how it is to be funded will need to be undertaken prior to committing the council to any agreement.”

In Brief

Free chargepoint advice for councils UK Power Networks is offering free advice about electric vehicle charging to local authorities in its operating area of London, the East of England and South East England. The company says its staff can advise councils on meeting demand for public charge points in the most efficient way. “If a single charge point, planned for a location without an electricity cable running directly underneath, was moved to a location with existing infrastructure, the saving could be up to £20,000,” it said. .

Freight bodies criticise council for Sunday lorry ban proposal

LORRIES

FREIGHT ORGANISATIONS this week criticised Hampshire County Council’s suggestion of banning lorry movements on Sundays and banning lorries from overtaking on motorways.

The proposals appear in the council’s carbon reduction action plan presented to councillors last week.

It says: “Ban the movement of HGVs on a Sunday on highways, except for recovery vehicles (as is done in Germany for many years) along with other European countries.”

It adds: “Ban HGVs overtaking on motorways – as in Germany.”

LTT asked the council if the action plan was a draft or a firm set of proposals but had not heard back by close for press.

The Truck Parking Europe website says a number of countries already operate lorry bans on Sundays, including: Austria, Czech Republic (main roads for part of the day), France,

Deliveries: not on Sundays?

Germany, Hungary, Slovakia, and Switzerland.

Hampshire’s proposal has angered freight bodies in the UK. Duncan Buchanan, the Road Haulage Association’s policy director for England and Wales, told LTT: “The RHA calls on the council to withdraw this proposed action. Simplistic measures based on ignorance that disregard practical economic impacts are not acceptable.”

“The plan is extremely misguided. Rather than reduce carbon emissions, if implemented it would increase them.

“Banning lorries on Sundays

West Berks rules out EV charging bays

ELECTRIC VEHICLES

WEST BERKSHIRE Council has ruled out creating electric vehicle-only parking bays beside electric vehicle chargepoints on residential streets.

The council has installed 36 chargepoints on streets in Newbury and Hungerford with the help of funding from the Office for Low Emission Vehicles. But West Berkshire says usage data shows that most are infrequently used.

In March, a motion calling for EV-only parking bays beside chargepoints was presented to the full council.

The council’s executive rejected the idea last week but did agree for an experimental traffic regulation order to create a trial bay for an on-street chargepoint that sees frequent use. The trial will inform the council’s future policy.

Neil Stacey, West Berkshire’s network manager (highways) told councillors: “Dedicated bays should not be introduced too soon or before there are at least a small number of local electric vehicle owners that might make use of them, otherwise the bay risks cre-

ating resentment amongst local residents about removal of a parking space.”

The streets with chargepoints do not have marked paying bays and Stacey said a space would have to be about six metres long to allow vehicles to manouevre in and out. “Residents often park much closer to each other on congested roads than a formal individual parking bay would allow and by leaving such space it could create conflict from nonEV owners.”

Stacey said creating EV-only bays would also require changed working practices for parking enforcement officers. “Given that the majority of the usage of the chargepoints will be overnight, the issuing of penalty charge notices to non-EVs parked in an EV-only space would require a change to the working practices of the team of civil enforcement officers, who do not normally work in the evenings or into the night. Without regular enforcement, there would be no deterrent to parking a non-EV in an EVonly space.”

Bays would also require signage that could be deemed intrusive.

will force those lorries to operate on other days when roads are more congested and have more traffic. The need to move goods does not disappear by banning movements on Sundays.

“Supermarkets, hospitals, business and people all need the goods moved by our lorries. Our road system copes with Sunday operation of lorries very well.”

As well as adding to emissions, Buchanan said a Sunday ban would be economically damaging, creating “less efficient and less flexible supply chains – those same supply chains that delivered our food and medicine throughout the Covid pandemic”.

Natalie Chapman, the Freight Transport Association’s described Hampshire’s proposals as “overly simplistic” and “counter productive”.

“I’m not entirely sure how they’re going to cut carbon emissions.

“Additional restrictions on freight will be counterproductive,” she said, echoing Buchanan’s point that moving goods at less busy times of day produced fewer emissions.

Chapman said a patchwork of local authority restrictions would be disastrous for business. She questioned if Hampshire had the power to implement a Sunday ban.

The idea of a blanket ban on lorries overtaking on motorways was also misguided, she said.

Banning lorries from the middle lane on a motorway was impractical wherever there are junctions because vehicles often have to pull out to let traffic enter from a slip road.

Any such proposals should be location and time-specific.

DfT consults on new car emission rules

EMISSIONS

THE DFT is consulting on the carbon dioxide performance standards for new cars and vans from January 2021, when the transition period for leaving the EU ends.

After 31 December, subject to the terms of the future trade agreement between the UK and the EU, new vehicle registrations in the UK will cease to fall under the scope of the EU regulations.

The DfT is laying a Statutory Instrument to correct for ‘deficiencies/inoperabilities’ within a revised text of the regulation. This includes, for example, formulae that set specific CO2 targets in order to account for UK-only regulations and derogation thresholds to account for the size of the UK market rather than the EU. But the DfT says the UK regulation will be at least as ambitious as the EU one.

The EU regulations currently require average CO2 emissions of all new cars registered in the EU to be no more than 95 grammes per km by 2021. For light commercial vehicles, the target is 147 grammes per km by 2020.

In 2025, both cars and vans must meet an EU-wide fleet

average CO2 emissions reduction of 15 per cent below the 2021 baseline, following the conversion to Worldwide harmonised Light vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP). For 2030, the target is a 37.5 per cent reduction against the 2021 baseline for cars and a 31 per cent reduction against the 2021 baseline for vans.

The UK plans to retain these targets.

The EU regulations also introduce zero and low emission benchmarks of 15 per cent of a manufacturer’s fleet for both cars and vans from 1 January 2025, and 35 per cent of the fleet of new cars and 30 per cent of new vans from 1 January 2030.

EU level targets are broken down into specific targets for individual manufacturers but multiple manufacturers can pool their registrations with the pool receiving one CO2 target based on the average weight of all of the applicable vehicles.

Consultation ends 21 August.

CO2 emission performance standards for new passenger cars and light commercial vehicles is available at https://tinyurl.com/y4bsaj8x

LTT803 page 11.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:55 Page 15

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 11

Mass EV charging: is a can of worms hiding under the bonnet?

E

The Government’s push to electrify road transport and domestic heating could place major cost burdens on consumers, says a new report

lectric vehicles have become something of a panacea for politicians as they grapple with how to decarbonise the transport sector. But for some engineers, the headlong rush to electrify road transport and domestic heating too is a major cause for concern. LTT reported in May the top-down analysis of Michael Kelly, the former chief scientific adviser to the Department for Communities and Local Government (LTT 29 May & Letters 26 Jun). Now a more bottom-up analysis has been prepared by retired engineer Mike Travers. Both reports have been published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation think tank.

“It is clear that the costs of supporting all the plans the Government has for transport and homes is going to be very high, and it is going to be made worse by the fact that the changeover is not being thought through, let alone planned effectively,” says Travers. “Part of the problem is that there is no institution or organisation in a suitable position to do so. The distribution companies own the transformers and cables, but may or may not be responsible for the smart meters. They therefore have little interest in some form of smart control [of electricity demand]. As profit-making companies, they also have no interest in investing for the future load increases, as they can charge for all the upgrading work as it is required.”

Decarbonisation will place huge new demands on the electricity network, with homeowners installing electric vehicle charging points, heat pumps and electric showers. “The extra demand for electricity will overwhelm most domestic fuses, thus requiring homeowners to install new ones, as well as circuit-breakers and new distribution boards,” says Travers. “Most will also have to rewire between their main fuse and the distribution network. In urban areas, where most electrical cabling is underground, this will involve paying for a trench to be dug between the home and the feeder circuits in the street.”

The Government wants millions of electric vehicles on Britain’s roads within the next decade. Those residents lucky enough to have off-street parking, will have two main choices for charging their EVs, says Travers: slow charging using a standard 13-amp supply, or fast charging using a special 7kW (32-amp) supply.

“For those with time on their hands, the 12 hours needed to fully charge a typical battery car on a 13-amp connection may be acceptable, although there is still the cost of fitting earth fault protection, which will set the homeowner back around £250.

Most people will require fast chargers, however, and indeed the Government is considering making their installation mandatory in new homes. Homeowners

will therefore need to install a charging pillar.

“These will cost £1,200 to install in new homes, or twice that to retrofit to old ones, because the household distribution board is likely to require upgrading.”

Travers says home chargers will present residents with new social dilemmas as friends and relatives ask to recharge when visiting. “Should you charge visitors for a recharge? You might gift the cost to friends and relatives, but what about the plumber or the carer?”

Vehicle to Grid: but why?

Many EV advocates champion the idea of ‘Vehicle to Grid’ charging. This involves vehicle owners feeding electricity back into the grid from their vehicle’s battery when electricity demand is high. Travers dismisses the concept, at least for residents.

“This is unlikely to happen, not because it cannot be done but because it would be ridiculous to do. Firstly, many EVs will be on charge for 12 hours per day, and thus unavailable for supplying the grid. Secondly, it is hard to imagine why anyone possessed of a fully-charged EV would allow the battery to be drained when they might need the car at any moment, and when there was a shortage of electricity.

“Thirdly, the battery is direct current (DC), but the grid requires alternating current (AC). It is unlikely that any homeowner would be prepared to invest £800 in a DC-to-AC inverter to allow them to sell electricity, particularly since the sales value they will derive from doing so would be small. If your EV has cost £10 to charge at 15p/kWh, would you allow the grid to take half of that charge, if it had a value of only £5? The grid would have to pay an extraordinary premium to get someone to bother to connect their car up.”

EVs + heat pumps

Some of the costly problems of EV charging become apparent when combined

with the parallel drive to decarbonise homes with electric heat pumps. “As homeowners have to take on all the new electrical devices, they will create new loads on the fuse. Were they to do this without considering the implications, they would quickly find that their fuses become overloaded.”

Most homes have 60 amp fuses, though new homes often have 100 amps. Travers presents calculations to show that even a 100-amp fuse would be “blown regularly”.

“It might be possible for householders to prevent this happening by controlling when they used the shower and cooker, but the difficulties would become insurmountable if fast EV chargers become common in homes,” he says. “The upshot is that the electrics are going to need to be upgraded.

Installing a bigger incoming fuse is relatively straightforward, although it comes at a cost of £600. But further works will also be required.

“Cables become loose in terminals over time and, as the heating effect of a loose connection is the square of the current passing through it, the increased loads as we move to a net-zero world mean there is a greater risk of distribution box terminals overheating and catching fire. As a result, all new domestic distribution boxes now have to be metal, rather than the plastic that has been used in recent decades. So when the main fuse is upgraded, it will also be necessary to replace the whole distribution board, at a cost of £2,500.”

Smart meters have been championed as a way of controlling electricity demand and reducing the need for expensive upgrades to distribution networks. But Travers is sceptical. “The costs and inconveniences – and therefore the political ramifications – of utilising a demand management approach appear to be significant. It seems more likely that the distribution system will be upgraded.

“When the smart meter hype began, it was insinuated that these remote readings would enable the local power company to ‘manage’ the load in a ‘smart’ way; in other words that they would also be able to switch-off households should the distribution transformer be in danger of overload.

“The implications of doing so are disturbing. It is quite unacceptable and unsafe to switch-off entire households, say at 5pm when the family are cooking over a hot stove, and particularly to do so on a regular basis. While other loads – washing machines, tumble dryers, car chargers and heat pumps – might be less critical, to enable them to be switched off while leaving critical systems like lighting with a supply, the smart meter would need at least two contactors.”

Travers says existing smart meters have a single contactor, which can switch the supply to the house on and off. “They are

primarily aimed at allowing suppliers to remotely record consumption and switch to customers who do not pay their bills.

“The options for homeowners are: upgrade the smart meter to a two-contactor model, or fit a separate circuit for non-critical equipment, with its own smart meter.

The first option may well be cheaper, since the second would also require installation of a new distribution box. In essence though, there will need to be a repeat spend on 28 million replacement smart meters.”

This is not the end of the story. “At present there is no equipment installed between the distribution transformer and the home that could control the process of switching off a home or homes. It would therefore be necessary to install control systems on each feeder circuit. These would need to connect with the smart meters in all the houses, to read how much current each was drawing and, equally importantly, on which phase of the threephase supply.

“It would then be able to reduce demand as required, keeping the phases balanced and preventing overload of the transformer.

The formulation of the algorithm to determine which householder will be cut off will be a knotty problem. Who will decide which householder deserves priority?”

Travers says that, to increase capacity, both service cables and feeder circuits will need upgrading. “In urban areas, the homeowner will have to pay to dig a trench and maybe install a duct for the new cable.

Even a short run is likely to cost £2,500 per house, and if the work involves digging up an expensive front drive it could be considerably more.

“When the first household installs a heat pump or fast EV charger, the upgrade of the service cable is the only external work that will need to be performed. However, as more households fall into line with demands for electrification, the load on the feeder circuits will become too great, and the component cables will need to be upgraded too.

“Adding to the complexity, and therefore to the cost, is the fact that all the works will need to be done while the existing cabling is in place and in use; people can hardly be expected to live without electricity while the work is completed. This will take weeks in a single road.”

The distribution transformer may need upgrading too. “I have not attempted to put a cost on this exercise because transformers have long lifetimes and it is therefore likely that the upgrades would involve a large proportion of repurposing existing transformerss”.

The hidden cost of net zero: rewiring the UK is available at https://tinyurl.com/yyrbj9mn

LTT803 page 12.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:25 Page 4

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

12 News

Devon awaits DfT road decision ROADS

DEVON COUNTY Council has submitted the full business case to the DfT for a £93m package of improvements to the A361/A39 North Devon Link Road.

The investment includes widening 4.5 miles of the single carriageway road to 2+1 lanes between South Molton and Barnstaple, junction improvements between South Molton and Bideford, and installing average speed cameras.

Devon has identified a preferred contractor, who will be awarded the contract this autumn, subject to final approval from the DfT. The DfT has earmarked £83m of Large Local Majors grant to the project.

Devon County Council will contribute £6m, with the remainder coming from developer contributions.

Works could be completed in 2023.

In Brief

Bradford studies southeast link road Bradford Metropolitan District Council is to procure consultants to prepare an outline and then full business case for a proposed South East Bradford Link Road.

Preliminary work has identified three possible alignments for the southern section of the road, all joining the existing road network at the A650/B6135 junction.

Three options for the northern alignment all cross the boundary with Leeds City Council, joining the existing network at Dick Lane, the Dick Lane/Gipsy Lane gyratory, or Leeds Road.

Stansted road capacity plan axed A project to increase capacity of the M11 junction 8 close to Stansted Airport has been shelved. Essex County Council was leading the project to improve the junction with the A120. Works were anticipated to cost about £9m but tenders have come in above budget and the funding partners – South East England Local Enterprise Partnership, Essex, housing developer contributions, the DfT and Manchester Airport Group – do not have the cash to close the funding gap.

Judicial review granted against Government’s road programme

ROADS

THE HIGH Court has granted environmental campaigners the right to present their judicial review challenge against the Government’s trunk road programme.

The Transport Action Network is bringing the case against the £27.4bn five-year Road Investment Strategy 2 on climate change and air quality grounds.

TAN director Chris Todd told LTT this week that a High Court judge had concluded that the Government had a case to answer after considering TAN’s evidence and the DfT’s reply.

“We’re delighted,” he said Todd. The case is likely to be heard in October or November.

The challenge is being brought by the same legal team from solicitors Leigh Day who brought the successful action against the Government’s Airports National Policy Statement (NPS), and its support for

RIS2: court date

Heathrow Airport expansion.

The Court of Appeal ruled in February that the airports NPS was unlawful because it had not taken account of the UN Paris Agreement on climate change of December 2015 (LTT 06 Mar).

The roads case is similar, focusing on the Paris Agreement and the Government’s adoption last year of a net zero target for greenhouse gas emissions by

Loans to airlines and car firms challenged CLIMATE

THE GOVERNMENT could face legal action for giving loans to businesses such as airlines and car manufacturers to stop them going bust during Covid19.

Climate litigation charity, Plan B, has commenced legal proceedings by setting out the grounds for a judicial review challenge in a pre-action protocol letter to the Government.

It says the Government’s use of billions of pounds of loans to help fossil fuel corporations is in breach of the net zero target in the Climate Change Act and the Paris Agreement on climate change.

Plan B cites comments by the Governor of the Bank of England, Andrew Bailey, that climate considerations were ignored in the Government’s provision of financial assistance.

[T]he crisis has required hard decisions to be taken on competing priorities,” said Bailey. “The Bank’s lending to companies as part of the emergency response to Covid 19 has not incorporated a test based on climate considerations. This was deliberate, because in such a grave emer-

gency affecting this country we have focused on the immediate priority of supporting the jobs and livelihoods of the people of this country. We believe that the Bank’s duty to the people of this country requires such a difficult choice to be made.”

Plan B says the Bank of England’s Covid Corporate Financing Facility (‘CCFF’) had, as of 15 July 2020, provided £18.49bn in settled Commercial Papers (‘CPs’) to 67 businesses.

The CPs act as very low interest loans at a far better rate than would be available on the open market.

The loans included: £600m each for Ryanair and Easyjet, £500m for Airbus, £600m for Nissan, and £300m for Rolls Royce.

Tim Crosland, Director of Plan B, said: “The Government can either follow the scientific and economic advice and take a decisive step towards a cleaner, fairer and more sustainable economy, creating vast number of new jobs; or it can ignore that advice by prioritising its corporate sponsors and locking us into the path to climate breakdown and a future that is grim beyond words.”

2050. Leigh Day says the Government has not considered whether RIS2 is consistent with either commitment (LTT 01 May). Air quality is another aspect of the case.

Todd said £50,000 had been raised to support the legal action.

A DfT spokeswoman told LTT on Thursday this week, after the High Court had permitted the challenge: “We don’t comment on ongoing legal proceedings. We have nothing further to add.”

New Civil Engineer magazine has reported the case the DfT put to the court in an effort to have the challenge thrown out.“It is not arguable that the Paris Agreement, carbon budgets and the net zero target were so ‘obviously material’ to the decision to set RIS2 that the defendant [DfT] was legally obliged to take them into account,” said the DfT. “The ground asserts that there was a failure to take into account these

matters as mandatory considerations. But if they are not mandatory, as the defendant submits, the alleged error simply does not arise.”

The DfT added: “The decision to set RIS2 and the policy context in which it sits are firmly in the broad macro-political field. Even if, contrary to the defendant’s principal submission, all or some of the matters relied upon by the claimant were mandatory considerations, the claimant’s ground is nonetheless bound to fail because they were taken into account by the secretary of state in setting RIS2.

“It is impossible […] to say that regard has not been given to the potential carbon emissionsbased effects on the environment of RIS2.

“To the contrary, clear and comprehensive consideration has been given to how the carbon impacts of RIS2 will be tackled as part of a wide set of policy initiatives.”

Driver groups press Khan on C-charge hike CONGESTION CHARGE

MOTORING GROUPS have written to London mayor Sadiq Khan in the first stage of a possible legal challenge against his decision to increase the central London congestion charge last month.

The potential judicial review action is being taken by FairFuelUK and the Alliance of British Drivers, with legal representation from Black Antelope (LTT 12 Jun). They say the mayor should have consulted before increasing the level of the charge and extending its hours of operation.

The mayor suspended the congestion charge in March, along with the low emission and ultralow emission zones, because of Covid-19.

When they were reinstated on 22 June the congestion charge was temporarily raised to £15 a day, up from £11.50, and the hours of operation were temporarily extended to 07.00 to 22.00 seven days a week. It previously operated from 07.00 to 18.00 on Mondays to Fridays only.

The mayor is also closing the residents’ discount to new applicants from 1 August 2020.

The reintroduction of the congestion charge, low emission zone, and ultra-low emission zone, were conditions of the Government’s £1.6bn rescue package for Transport for London announced in May. Transport secretary Grant Shapps’ letter to Khan said the mayor should also “urgently bring forward proposals to widen the scope and levels of these charges”.

But the DfT has told Black Antelope the decisions to temporarily raise the congestion charge and extend its hours were taken by the mayor.

Khan said on 6 July that, because the changes were temporary and taken in the exceptional circumstances of Covid-19, “it was not practicable or required to conduct a formal lengthy consultation”. “Nonetheless, TfL and I invited responses from stakeholders and the public to understand their views.

Approximately 14,000 emails and letters were received through the TfL ‘yoursay’ email address and the Greater London Authority.”

TfL told LTT any permanent changes to the congestion charge would require consultation.

LTT803 page 13.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:17 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 13

In Brief

Gtr Manchester’s CAZ kit must have capability for other uses AIR QUALITY

THE CAMERAS and back office equipment for Greater Manchester’s proposed clean air zone (CAZ) must be capable of being used for other unspecified purposes, Transport for Greater Manchester has said. It raises the possibility of some form of road charging continuing after the area’s air becomes compliant with legal limits.

The Government has instructed the ten Greater Manchester districts to implement a CAZ to bring nitrogen dioxide concentrations down to below EU limit values. The zone will cover the whole conurbation but will not apply to Highways England’s Strategic Road Network.

In March the Government approved the councils’ plan for the CAZ to begin as a Class B scheme in 2021 covering buses, coaches, heavy goods vehicles, taxis and private hire vehicles. It will then become a Class C scheme in 2023 with the addition of vans. The delay to van coverage is intended to give time for the second hand market in compliant vans to mature.

Covid-19 has slowed preparatory work for the CAZ. A

consultation on the overall clean air plan was postponed this spring and will now be held “as soon as is feasible”. The councils say the CAZ will not be implemented until 2022.

Transport for Greater Manchester has just issued a tender notice for the CAZ service agreement, which says the zone is likely to remain in operation until “at least the second half of 2026”.

“If it is demonstrated by the second half of 2026 that two consecutive years’ of compliance with the legal limit value [of 40 µg/m 3 ] for NO 2 [have been achieved], and there is confidence that compliance will continue to be maintained, then the Greater Manchester authorities can together seek the agreement of the secretary of state to suspend the charging scheme order and commence the decommissioning of the GM CAZ,” it explains.

But the tender notice indicates that the equipment could be used for other purposes. “The Greater Manchester CAZ service agreement will enable TfGM to use the field equipment and some or all of the related services as a source of supply for other non-Greater Manchester CAZ related auto-

matic numberplate recognition (ANPR) requirements.”

All the equipment must be “future proofed” with capability to “enhance and/or expand the use of the field equipment and services; and/or re-purpose the operation of the field equipment and services to support other uses in addition to the Greater Manchester CAZ scheme”.

Asked about this aspect of the tender notice, a TfGM spokeswoman told LTT: “The estimated life of the ANPR cameras will be around ten years and we estimate that we will only use them for less than six years on the clean air zone. At the point of decommissioning of the CAZ, we want to ensure that we have the ability to reuse the cameras and the contract for other purposes, should we need to.

“However there are no current plans, or suggestions, to use the contract or the ANPR cameras for anything other than the CAZ – and the use of the language in the tender notice is to protect our rights should we eventually need to.”

One possible use of the cameras and back office facilities could be to support the conurbation’s carbon dioxide reduction

target. Earlier this year the Greater Manchester Combined Authority said transport emissions in the conurbation must be cut from 2.3 million tonnes of CO2equivalent to 1.35 million tonnes in 2025 as part of the area’s pathway to carbon neutrality in 2038 (LTT 07 Feb).

Mayor Andy Burnham said modelling suggested this would require 51 per cent of all vehicles to be zero emission and a 25 per cent reduction in remaining car journeys.

The CAZ service agreement covers: • a vehicle detection and processing service, including both fixed and mobile automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras • a CAZ office service, including integration of the vehicle detection and processing service and penalty enforcement service with the Government’s vehicle compliance checker, customer payment portal and centralised vehicle database • penalty enforcement service • operation and maintenance The contract will commence on 29 June 2021. Invitations to tender will be issued at the end of September.

Portsmouth blames Government for CAZ AIR QUALITY

PORTSMOUTH CITY Council has voiced opposition to introducing a charging clean air zone in the city as it consults on the proposal.

The Government has ordered the council to introduce a class B clean air zone (CAZ) covering a small area in the southwest of Portsea Island, including the Wightlink ferry terminal to the Isle of Wight. Modelling has suggested the CAZ is necessary to bring nitrogen dioxide down below legal limits. The CAZ is scheduled for implementation in late 2021.

Portsmouth’s Liberal Democrat council leader Gerald Vernon-Jackson has disassociated himself from the proposal. Writing the foreword to the consultation, he says: “I firmly believe the CAZ is the wrong thing to do and I have written to central government asking for the clean air zone funding to be reallocated to addressing the issue of polluting cars. I wanted to see change that would help people leave their cars at home and travel differently.

This included significant investment in a safe cycle network, a polluting car scrappage scheme, and subsidised bus travel. Central government refused and told us to implement the CAZ.” The Isle of Wight Council has said the CAZ could have a damaging effect on the island’s economy (LTT 08 Nov 19).

As things stand, the CAZ will be a class B scheme, imposing daily charges on buses,

coaches, heavy goods vehicles, taxis and private hire vehicles that fail to meet minimum emission standards of Euro 6 (diesel) and Euro 4 (petrol).

The proposed daily charges are £50 for HGVs, buses and coaches, and £10 for taxis and private hire vehicles.

Portsmouth says, however, that Covid-19 could result in the Government ordering the CAZ to be strengthened to a Class C scheme, which would also apply to vans.

“At present we are not proposing to charge vans... However, due to the uncertainty brought about by coronavirus, central government has indicated they may require the charging of vans to meet air quality objectives,” says the consultation.

Vernon-Jackson said extending coverage to vans “could be devastating to small business owners that operate in the zone”.

Portsmouth is conducting sensitivity tests on air quality modelling to assess what impact Covid-19 is likely to have on compliance with NO2 limits. “These tests will consider the economic consequences of Covid-19 by reducing the rate at which the local vehicle fleet naturally renews over the coming year,” Tristan Samuels, Portsmouth’s director of regeneration, told councillors. “The tests will also consider the impact that increased home working could have on levels of traffic on the road.” Samuels said all councils preparing

Stagecoach cuts Manchester services Stagecoach is to reduce frequencies on a number of services in Greater Manchester from the end of August. Route 11 between Stockport and Altrincham will reduce from every 15 to 20 minutes; route 42B Manchester to Woodford from halfhourly to hourly; 336/337 Ashton to Smallshaw from half hourly to hourly; 383/384 Stockport to Marple/Romiley/Bredbury from every 15 minutes to every 20.

The X30 between Stockport and Manchester Airport will be withdrawn.

No electric bus town bid for Northampton Northamptonshire County Council ruled out submitting Northampton to the DfT’s AllElectric Bus Town competition because many of the town’s routes extend some distance from the town, making electric operation impractical. The county council explored making a bid with Northampton Borough Council and operators. “When it became clear that Government required all buses operating in the area to be zero emission, it became clear that it was not practical to develop such a proposal for a town that had a large proportion of its services coming in from the surrounding area,” Graeme Kane, Northamptonshire’s executive director for strategic delivery and transformation, told councillors.

Surrey to apply for lane rental powers Surrey County Council is preparing an application to the DfT to impose charges on utility works and highway authorities’ own works (‘lane rental’). Surrey proposes that charges will apply to works that cause delay in peak hours, but not those that “keep traffic moving” or only take place during off-peak hours.

The CAZ boundary

clean air plans were conducting similar tests.

Results would be shared with the Government’s Joint Air Quality Unit.

Portsmouth has received funding from Government to contribute towards the retrofit or upgrade of some non-compliant vehicles.

“However, there is not enough money to help everyone, so we are asking in the consultation how we can help those that need it the most in a fair way,” says the council.

The Government wants Portsmouth to achieve compliance with the EU limit value for NO2 by 2022.

Portsmouth has appointed Siemens to design and deliver the CAZ, including providing automatic numberplate recognition cameras.

Consultation closes on 26 August.

Bishopsgate traffic restrictions Transport for London has started work on restricting sections of Bishopsgate in the City of London to walking, cycling and buses only. Restrictions on Bishopsgate and Grachchurch Street will operate between 07.00 and 19.00 Mondays to Fridays. Pavements will be widened and a number of banned turns will be introduced operating 24 hours a day. The restrictions are due to be completed by early August. The temporary measures will still provide access for all vehicles, including servicing and taxis for most of the corridor, except for two stretches – Middlesex Street to Liverpool Street, and Leadenhall Street to Fenchurch Street – where no motor vehicles will be permitted.

LTT803 pp14-15.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:15 Page 14

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

14 News

E

E-scooters: a mode to split -scooters are a practical, healthy and environmentally-friendly mode of transport that will help challenge the dominance of the car. Oh no they’re not, they’re potentially dangerous, will mainly replace walking, cycling and public transport trips, and cannot even be classed as ‘active travel’. These contrasting views were expressed at the e-scooters webinar organised by Landor LINKS earlier this month.

Britain’s first e-scooter rental trial was launched in Middlesbrough on 13 July. The Tees Valley Combined Authority has partnered with e-scooter firm Ginger to provide a scheme across all five local authorities, with an initial fleet of 100 e-scooters rising to as many as 500 during the 12-month trial. Trials in many more areas of Britain are expected to commence before the end of August (LTT 10 Jul).

E-scooters will continue to be classed as motor vehicles during the trials, so riders will have to possess a provisional or full driving licence and insurance (the latter provided by the rental firms). They won’t have to wear a helmet, however. The vehicles are permitted for use on the road and in cycle lanes and tracks but not on footways.

David Davies, executive director at the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS), believes that e-scooters pose a threat both to those who ride them and to pedestrians, particularly vulnerable road users such as the blind and visually impaired. “PACTS has gone from a position of not being particularly bothered about e-scooters, partly because there weren’t many in the UK, to being increasingly concerned,” said Davies. “We recognise that nothing is risk-free, we are supportive of cycling and recognise 80 per cent of deaths involve a motor vehicle, but that is not the same thing as saying it doesn’t matter. Most e-scooter injuries occur when the rider comes off, and not from a collision with a motor vehicle.”

Davies said he was “surprised and dismayed” that, following a short consultation, the Government has decided to authorise the use of faster (up to 15.5mph) and heavier (up to 55kg) e-scooters in the trial than had originally been proposed (12.5mph and 35kg).

E-scooters might replace some car journeys but could also result in fewer walking trips, said Davies. “A lot of

Neuron

With Government-backed trials of e-scooter rental schemes about to be launched across Britain, a webinar discussed the pros and the cons of this new form of mobility. Deniz Huseyin reports

Brian Deegan of Urban Movement welcomed the challenge of designing safe streets with e-scooters

analysis has ignored the trips transferred from walking and cycling and public transport to e-scooters, which is a much riskier mode.”

A more upbeat assessment was provided by Brian Deegan, a design engineer at consultant Urban Movement. “They are not particularly dangerous,” he said. “In a lot of instances it is about people being annoyed or mildly perturbed [by e-scooters]. They are not actually causing collisions. Internationally, they account for four per cent of collisions involving pedestrians. The onus is on me as a designer to keep people safe and I relish that challenge – there are a lot of shared issues with cyclists.”

Deegan challenged the view that riding an e-scooter did not count as active travel. “I would say that any time you are holding a limb up against gravity you’ll be doing some work. And, with the rental model, there will be at least two walking trips associated with every escooter trip.”

E-scootering should be seen as an “ally” to cycling, he said, with both benefitting from schemes to restrict

Police fear e-scooter free-for-all E-scooter rental trials may give people the false impression that all e-scooters can now be ridden legally on Britain’s streets, the head of the Metropolitan Police’s roads policing team has said.

“We could see a big increase in their unregulated usage, which then presents a larger number of enforcement problems,” detective inspector Dan Card told LTT. Since July 2019, Card’s team has been running Operation Hornet, monitoring the use of e-scooters in the capital. This followed the death of an e-scooter rider who collided with a lorry at a roundabout in Battersea, south-west London.

“In essence, Operation Hornet is about educating people in the first instance and having an honest conversation with them. I don’t think many people actually realise that it’s illegal to ride an e-scooter.”

Those stopped are initially let off with a warning, but if they continue to ride they face further enforcement action such as seizure of the vehicle or

prosecution for riding without a licence and insurance.

In the past year Operation Hornet has issued warnings to 560 people and seized 109 e-scooters.

Many London boroughs are preparing to host trials of e-scooter rental schemes.

“We will be talking to councils about potentially adding safety measures as the DfT has left it relatively open to local discretion,” said Card.

He believes e-scooters should be fitted with large pneumatic tyres to cope with bumps and undulations on the road. They should also be fitted with lights and a ‘fit for purpose’ braking system.

“Some scooters only have a front brake and a foot controlled rear brake, for example. What we would like to see is both brakes controlled independently.

“There is a discussion going on about whether they are mechanically propelled vehicles or motor vehicles. There is some confusion over which category they fall into.”

traffic, such as street closures for vehicles (‘low traffic neighbourhoods’) and segregated provision on busy roads. “We all want the same things – we need quiet streets and if we have quiet streets e-scooters will use them.” Deegan said that in conditions where roads were too busy, “e-scooters go on the footway, the same way cyclists go on the footway.”

Rental e-scooter schemes could support the development of mobility as a service (MaaS) systems, believes Deegan. “We are moving towards people not owning their own vehicles and choosing a more equitable share of transport. E-scooters offer local authorities a great opportunity to making inroads towards MaaS.” Deegan nevertheless said councils needed to learn from the mistakes made during the initial craze for dockless bike hire schemes a few years ago, when bikes began cluttering the streets. This point was echoed by Ceri Woolsgrove, policy officer European Cyclists’ Federation. “We are still scarred by the impact of the pirate bikes in 2016. These services imported thousands of plastic bicycles into cities. People would download an app and off they’d go. There was no redistribution and bikes piled outside places people wanted to go to. It is absolutely imperative that you have interaction between the public authorities and the operators and there are good regulations in place.”

Woolsgrove pointed to dockless bike hire schemes in Paris where authorised parking zones were created using geo-fencing. “If you park in the wrong place and you block the pavement, the operators get fined, which forces them to try and nudge the behaviour of the users.”

Geo-fencing looks set to be deployed in the West Midlands. “We can have specified geo-fenced no-go areas, for example, at particular junctions,” said Mark Collins, integration innovation lead at Transport for the West Midlands. “There is a level of technology we can potentially apply to this so we can stop pavement riding and illegal behaviour.” Monitoring safety will be a key element of the area’s trial. But there will be other benchmarks such as “levels of social inclusion, environmental benefits and how it fits in with the wider ecosystem of transport measures that we have in the West Midlands”, said Collins.

A core measure of success will be to what extent the trial results in a shift from single occupancy car journeys. “What we don’t want to do is cannablise our public transport or equally other sustainable forms such as walking and cycling.”

TfWM will be assessing how “trigger points” around the appeal of e-scooters – such as convenience, time efficiency and flexibility – may entice people out of their cars. “But success in this trial could also mean failure at the same time,” warned Collins. “We are cognisant that the only legal aspect for this trial is that people rent the e-scooters, whereas people might actually see it [an e-scooter] as a viable alternative, purchase one and use it on the road, which is illegal.”

The DfT is preparing a monitoring and evaluation plan to gather evidence from the trials. It will assess the safety risks presented by e-scooters, the mode shift to escooters from other forms of transport, public perceptions around their use, and identify other impacts that should be considered for any future e-scooter legalisation.

Covid-19 would increase the appeal of e-scooters for people discouraged from using public transport, said Lorna Stevenson of the University of Westminster’s Active Travel Academy. “There will be an interesting discussion in a year’s time when we are at the end of the trials,” she said. “Perhaps we might want to start

LTT803 pp14-15.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:15 Page 15

TransportXtra.com/ltt

t opinion nudging people back onto public transport or it might depend on what we see in terms of the carbon impact and social impact of e-scooters. We need to bear in mind our success criteria for what is good at the moment might be different from what is good in 12 or 24 months’ time.”

The ability of e-scooter rental schemes to mitigate transport disadvantage was likely to be limited, thought Stevenson. “You tend to get affluent white men, though local authorities can tweak that by having requirements about subsidised rides and where your e-scooters are distributed. It will be very interesting to see 30 to 40 different local areas potentially with a lot of variation in the requirements they put in, and then we can see which requirements seem to work to give us the most successful outcomes.”

From a health and decarbonisation point of view, cycling and walking trips rank higher than riding an escooter, she said. “E-scooters should only be used by people who can’t walk or cycle, and we accept that there are both physical and social factors that might impact on that. The evidence we are seeing from most other places is that if your area is good for cyclists it is good for e-scooters because they will have segregated lanes, and if you have secure parking for bikes you will be able to put scooters there as well.”

E-scooters could serve the transport needs of some older people, she suggested. “They could potentially be a good thing for people who would struggle to walk short distances but who would have the capacity to use an e-scooter.

“It’s about welcoming a broad spectrum of wheeled mobility, so that it doesn’t matter whether you were on a bike or mobility scooter or e-scooter – you are just a normal part of the street scene.”

Rental scheme trials should be inclusive and accessible to those living away from town or city centres, said Nick Davies from the Healthy Active Cities Research Centre at the University of Salford. “With the dockless bike hire schemes, there was a certain demographic taking up the scheme. Where the scheme was very centralised there were people unable to access it. These are things that local authorities need to think about before they implement an e-scooter scheme.

“The more you have ridden an e-scooter the less likely you are to either injure yourself or injure someone else,” he added. “So any roll-out of a scheme would have to include a lot of engagement and a lot of explaining on how to use them.”

Davies said arguments about whether or not e-scooters should be classed as active travel overlooked a fundamental aspect of riding one: “There are clearly wellbeing benefits – you can get endorphin from using one and you are outside in the fresh air as well.”

A recording of the broadcast can be found here: https://tinyurl.com/y4n2zx6r A follow-up webinar will take place on Wednesday 5 August at 10.30, sponsored by Dott, and with a focus on how to deliver a successful trial. Register here https://tinyurl.com/yxprr9ea For more information contact Daniel Simpson daniel@landor.co.uk

News 15

Only established operators wanted for capital’s trial

E-SCOOTERS

TRANSPORT FOR London wants to appoint only established operators for e-scooter trials in London.

TfL is to lead the procurement of schemes in the capital. A market sounding questionnaire says it will be looking to work with “established escooter operators who have proven experience in other cities”.

A TfL spokeswoman this week told LTT that the procurement of operators had yet to commence. It is also not yet clear if a single scheme or a number of sub-regional schemes will be procured. She said the intention was to have scheme(s) running before the end of August, in keeping with the Government’s target (LTT 10 Jul).

TfL, London Councils and boroughs have developed safety criteria to help select operators. Paulius Mackela, London Councils’ principal policy and project officer, told the

transport and environment committee last week: “There are a range of safety features now available in the market such as different wheel sizes, brake types, geofencing options to ensure lower speeds in specific areas, automatic ‘fallen over alerts’ and integrated helmets,” Participating boroughs will be responsible for matters such as authorising parking areas, setting ‘no-go’, ‘go-slow’ zones.

Mackela said numerous prospective operators had indicated that they would expect to pay fees to participate in a trial, as they do to operate in other cities around the world.

“London Councils’ officers are working together with TfL and all borough officers to understand funding requirements. Fees from operators could enable boroughs to fund the creation of parking areas and other infrastructure requirements, and cover associated administrative

costs.”

Some boroughs have declined to participate in the trials, among them Waltham Forest and Lewisham.

Clyde Loakes, Waltham Forest’s deputy leader, told LTT: “Waltham Forest has successfully taken the lead and been at the forefront of many innovative active travel developments in London over the last five years.

“We are continuing to do that by delivering and improving the muchneeded infrastructure and priority for pedestrians and cyclists – the longstanding and successful modes of active travel – such as low traffic neighbourhoods and safe, segregated cycle lanes.

“We’re therefore happy to allow others to take the lead on e-scooters, which we know still have significant issues to overcome and concerns to address, before we would consider them a valid and legitimate mode of transportation.”

E-scooter trials being delivered with too much haste, say Peers

E-SCOOTERS

THE GOVERNMENT has steamrollered through powers to permit e-scooter trials without proper Parliamentary scrutiny, a committee of the House of Lords has said.

“This is a major development in transport policy yet it was put into effect in a matter of days without any opportunity for Parliamentary scrutiny,” says the House of Lords secondary legislation scrutiny committee. “A small data-gathering exercise has turned into a major implementation programme. Similar schemes have been very divisive in Copenhagen, Berlin, Paris and other major cities, yet only two weeks were allowed for consultation on something that will affect the public generally.”

The DfT has amended road traffic regulations to allow for the e-scooter trials. E-scooters must have two wheels; be designed to carry one person; have no pedals to assist propulsion; be fitted with an electric motor not exceeding 500 watts; have a maximum weight of 55 kgs; and a maximum design speed not exceeding 15.5 miles per hour.

The legislation applies only to rental e-scooters and does not permit the use of privately-owned e-scooters.

The trials will inform possible future legislation to authorise e-scooters more widely.

The Lords committee notes that the Government initially planned to trial e-scooters in just the Future Transport Zone areas but subsequently relaxed

E-scooters in Antwerp

the rules to allow trials anywhere in Britain. Ministers have justified the relaxation in needing to have social distanced transport choices available during Covid-19.

“It is unclear what the policy objective of this instrument is, and how its outcome will be measured. Is it a pilot scheme to test the viability of a controversial vehicle on British roads? Is it a means to rapidly expand transport capacity in cities all over the country during the Coronavirus pandemic?”

The peers say the DfT’s initial assessment, based on the experience of European schemes, suggested that about a third of e-scooter journeys will transfer from walking, a third from public transport, 15-20 per cent from car, ten per cent from cycling and around two per cent will be new trips. The DfT believes social distancing requirements may cause the shift

from public transport and the proportion of new trips to be higher than these estimates.

The committee is concerned that the trials will encourage privatelyowned e-scooters too. “All e-scooters will require a tamper-proof label with the e-scooter details and a unique identification number,” says the committee. “This is welcome as it should make them more likely to be traceable in the case of an accident.”

The committee asked the DfT if escooters would be required to give way to pedestrians trying to cross a cycle lane. The DfT responded: “Escooter users will be expected to use cycle lanes in the same way as a cyclist would. The Highway Code does not give right of way to any particular group of road users. However, it says that cyclists should be considerate of other road users... They should always be prepared to slow down and stop if necessary.”

Although the trials are expected to run for 12 months, the Government says the Orders for the end date of trials may be extended “until such time as decisions are made to inform future legislation around e-scooters and other micromobility vehicles”.

Says the committee: “This implies that such schemes could operate indefinitely under these regulations.”

Secondary legislation scrutiny committee: 22nd report of session 2019-2021 is available at https://tinyurl.com/y37a4sq2

LTT803 page 16.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:04 Page 4

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

16 News

Small rise in speeds after HGV limit rise LORRIES

INCREASING THE speed limit for heavy goods vehicles on single carriageway and dual carriageway roads has had only a marginal impact on vehicle speeds because so many lorries were disobeying the original limit, a study for the DfT has concluded.

In April 2015 the speed limit in England and Wales for goods vehicles over 7.5 tonnes was raised from 40 to 50mph on single carriageways and from 50 to 60mph on dual carriageways.

The DfT appointed consultant AECOM to monitor the impact of the change on outcomes such as speed, safety, noise, air quality and journey times.

The final report says many HGVs were travelling in excess of the speed limit before the limit was raised. On single carriageway roads, before and after surveys show HGV speeds increased by a statistically significant 1.6mph, from 44.1mph to 45.7mph.

On dual carriageways, they increased by a statistically significant 0.5 mph, from 52.0mph to 52.5mph.

AECOM says there is no evidence that the change in speed limit has led to a change in collisions involving HGVs on either single or dual carriageways.

Evaluation of the national HGV speed limit increase in England and Wales is available at https://tinyurl.com/y3lvvxag

In Brief

Buses detect Kent potholes Buses and council vehicles in Kent are to start collecting data about potholes in a technology trial. Detection equipment has been fitted to 12 highways vans and eight Arriva buses and is due to begin collecting data this month. “There will be an ongoing process of developing the detection algorithm for around six months with productive output being available around March 2021,” reported officers. The project is part of the Smart Places Live Lab project being run by the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport (ADEPT) and the DfT.

Quality of roads policing is a mixed bag, says Inspectorate

ENFORCEMENT

BIG VARIATIONS in the quality of roads policing across forces of England and Wales are reported in an inspection by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary Fire and Rescue Services.

The DfT commissioned HMICFRS to review practices as part of a wider review into roads policing (see panel).

The inspectorate praises some forces but expresses concern about the quality of roads policing in others. Many forces police and crime plans make little or no reference to roads policing in their priorities, it says.

“There is a clear, and pressing, need for government, police and crime commissioners, chief officers, and the College of Policing to recognise the importance of roads policing in reducing death on the roads,” says HMICFRS. “To enable this, we urge the government to include roads policing within the strategic policing requirement.”

Police chiefs should ensure their forces have enough analytical capability for roads policing, and that road safety initiatives are evaluated, it says. They should also ensure that their force (or where applicable road safety partnerships), comply with the DfT’s circular 1/2007 on the use of speed and red-light cameras (see below).

HMICFRS studied seven forces in-depth (Devon and Cornwall; Dorset; Humberside; the Metropolitan Police; Staffordshire; South Wales; and West Midlands).

It praises the Metropolitan Police and West Midlands Police, describing them as “notable exceptions”. “Strategic leaders, officers and staff were all able to demonstrate a strong commitment to roads policing and the positive effect that this had on road safety.

“Where partnerships worked well, the police and their local partners were closely aligned; an example would be the Metropolitan Police Service and Transport for London. Contractual and financial arrangements between them create a close working relationship, with a sharp focus on road safety.”

The mayor of London’s oversight of the Metropolitan Police and TfL facilitates their close relationship, it says.

The West Midlands Police “made a considerable investment in its analytical resources, to make sure that enough were dedicated to roads policing”.

“Its analysts were clear that their job was to focus on reducing serious collisions and reducing criminal use of the roads. Intelligence briefings included details of high-harm offenders, such as disqualified and repeat drink drivers, and the use of the road by organ-

ised crime gangs.

“This force described initiatives to target repeat offenders by plotting their regular routes to allow roads policing patrols to intervene. As a result, the force was able to show it had reduced the number of casualties on its roads and disrupted criminal activity.”

The police and crime commissioner for the West Midlands is David Jamieson, a former Labour transport minister.

“Unfortunately, in others [forces] we found incoherence, with officers deciding their own priorities with little analytical support or direction.

“Enforcement activity is often unfocused and haphazard, and its effectiveness isn’t evaluated.

“We also found examples of forces removing road policing patrols from motorways and main

roads with little consultation with highways agencies.

“We found roads policing officers whose training was so inadequate they couldn’t identify and prosecute offences relating to heavy goods vehicles.”

The HMICFRS notes there is “no accredited national training programme for roads policing officers”. “The College of Policing has a range of training modules, but they aren’t mandatory, and forces have developed their own approaches. As a result, there is inconsistency in how, when, and to what level officers are trained.”

Roads policing: not optional – an inspection of roads policing in England and Wales is available at https://tinyurl.com/y9ch8dun

DfT issues evidence call THE DFT has issued a call for evidence on how roads policing could be improved in England and Wales.

Responses will inform the ongoing review of roads policing being conducted by the DfT, Home Office and the National Police Chiefs’ Council.

Among the issues the DfT invites evidence on are why road casualties have remained fairly constant in recent years; the most effective interventions to reduce casualties; the role technology can play in assisting enforcement; and whether the current structure of roads policing in England and Wales, based on 43 police forces, is appropriate. l Roads policing review: call for evidence is available at https://tinyurl.com/yddoa5fw

Speed cameras: still seen as cash machines SOME ROAD safety partnerships appear to regard speed cameras as revenue generating devices more than road safety tools, says the review of roads policing by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary Fire and Rescue Services.

“In some cases, we found that the rationale for the deployment of camera enforcement technology was open to the suspicion that it supported a self-serving approach to raising revenue,” reports the HMICFRS. The number of fixed penalty notices for excessive speed rose by 41 per cent between 2011 and 2018 to 2,105,409. HMICFRS attributes the rise to more camera enforcement, in the main conducted by road safety partnerships, of which police forces are members.

Camera enforcement is

“effective in reducing serious collisions”, says HMICFRS, comparing the rise in fixed penalty notices with the fall in the proportion of collisions in which a person was killed or seriously injured and speed was identified as a contributory factor.

Although police forces and road safety partnerships don’t receive the funds from fines and fixed penalties, they can recover costs for the administration of offences and the provision of educational schemes such as speed awareness courses, which are offered as an alternative to prosecution. “Crucially, what constitutes recovery of costs is open to interpretation,” says the Inspectorate.

The report cites “suspicion among officers, including some at chief officer level, that [camera enforcement] was intended to increase revenue

for the safety partnership.

The Inspectorate heard that the reason enforcement took place at certain locations “was that they were ‘good hunting grounds’, rather than because they had a history of collisions”.

HMICFRS says safety partnerships/police forces vary in how much they adhere to the advice in DfT circular 1/2007 Use of speed and red light cameras for traffic enforcement: guidance on deployment, visibility and signing.

It recommends that the Government refreshes the circular by August 2021 and that it should require partnerships to report annual revenue received from driver offending-related training courses and how the revenue is spent.

Speed awareness courses are part of the National Driver

Offender Retraining Scheme (NDORS) managed by UKROEd, a subsidiary of the Road Safety Trust. The trust is a charity and company whose members are the 44 police forces of England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The fee charged to attend a course varies between police forces, ranging from £80 to £100. UKROEd sets the amount forces can claim back from that fee as cost recovery.

It is currently £45.

HMICFRS says that, dependent upon police costs and the number attending speed awareness courses, there is the potential for revenue to be generated. The Association of Chief Police Officers (now the National Police Chiefs Council) has said any surplus can be used by police forces for the purpose of “policing the road”.

LTT803 page 17.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 10:59 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

News 17

DRT to replace scheduled bus services in North Wales trial

RURAL TRANSPORT

SUBSIDISED BUS services will be replaced with demand responsive services in part of rural north Wales under a trial backed by the Welsh Government.

The project focuses on the market town of Llanrwst in the Conwy Valley and involves Conwy County Borough Council, the Welsh Government and Transport for Wales.

Seven tendered bus routes will be withdrawn: 19, 42, 68A, 68B, 68C, 68D, 70. The majority operate only on particular days of the week.

The operating area for the new demand responsive services will be split into five zones, with services running between 07.00 and 19.00 Mondays to Saturdays (excluding public holidays).

The DRT will be registered as a flexibly routed local bus service.

Passengers will be picked up and dropped off at any recognised bus stop within the operating area or at ‘virtual’ stops. The latter will be

The operating area is split into five zones

safe stopping points at locations as close as possible to the passendesired pick-up ger’s point/drop-off point.

The contract specification includes some fixed arrival and departure times to ensure that DRT services connect with scheduled bus and rail services.

Says the tender: “Initially the [service] configuration will be based on ensuring that no location

is worse off in terms of availability than is the case at the moment, with priority arrival or departure times built around connecting with local bus services and trains at Llanrwst and Betws y Coed, and facilitating attendance of medical appointments, shopping, and other essential travel needs.”

Fixed arrival and departure times at Llangernyw in zone three will facilitate through travel between Llanrwst and Abergele using a combination of the DRT and scheduled bus route 43.

Fixed arrival times at Llangernyw will be 07:35, 09:00, 13:40, and 17:45. Fixed departure times from Llangernyw will be 07:45, 09:10, 13:50, and 17:55. The latter can be delayed to maintain a connection with service 43.

Conwy Council will provide three new EVM Cityline 16-seat Euro VI minibuses for the routes.

Two will be utilised on Mondays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, and all three on Tuesdays, Fridays and Saturdays when fixed

departure/arrival times will operate in zone 5 (to Corwen).

Services could commence in October. The contract will run for three years with the option of extending for two more, subject to funding availability.

Conwy Council anticipates that the daily mileage will be 185 miles. The trigger for additional mileage payments will be based on a weekly mileage of 1,420.

This represents six days of the daily allowance of 185 miles, plus an allowance of 310 miles per week for operating journeys with fixed departure or arrival times in zone 5 on Tuesday, Friday and Saturday.

Bidders can propose the rate they are paid for excess mileage.

They are also being invited to submit prices for operating on Sundays and public holidays.

Bookings and scheduling of services will be undertaken by a third party.

Conwy Council will receive passenger revenues, including concessionary fare payments.

Welsh M4 commission warms to £38m for active rail upgrade and road charges travel in Wales

POLICY

BETTER RAIL services and road traffic demand management such as road charging are among the emerging recommendations of a Welsh Government-appointed commission looking at traffic pressures on the M4 in southeast Wales.

The Welsh Government set up the Southeast Wales Transport Commission last year after scrapping the plan for the M4 relief road round the south of Newport.

It has been asked to recommend “sustainable” measures and is chaired by Lord Burns, a former Treasury permanent secretary (LTT 14 Oct 19).

The Commission’s emerging findings report says congestion on the M4 in southeast Wales is “largely a peak hours commuting problem”, with problems exacerbated by the two lane section of the motorway, the frequency of junctions, and the curvature and gradient of the road between junctions 24 and 27.

The removal of tolls on the Severn Crossings in December 2018 led to traffic increasing by around ten per cent between 2018 and 2019, it says.

The Commission sees good

potential for rail services to offer an attractive alternative for some trips. The four-track section of line between Cardiff and Severn Tunnel Junction currently operates as one pair of tracks for passenger services and the other pair for freight.

This limits the capacity of the line, says the Commission, which suggests reconfiguring the tracks so that one pair of tracks is used for new local services and the other are shared by intercity services and freight.

“With additional stations, a local, stopping service operating on this line could provide a new, local rail ‘backbone’ into which other transport modes could connect. This would support lateral travel needs between Cardiff, Newport and Bristol.”

The Commission notes ideas for new stations at St Mellons (Cardiff Parkway), Llanwern, Magor, and suggests there is a case for a station in west Newport too.

Meanwhile, discussing the M4 it says: “We believe some form of charging mechanism is necessary to encourage up-take of public transport and active travel alternatives, and moderate demand for the motorway.”

A charge could pay for subsidised public transport services.

“We recognise the difficulty in implementing any charge before new transport alternatives are in place,” says the commission.

Options could include road user charging, a workplace parking levy, or other form of parking management. The Commission will consider the review of charging options being undertaken by Derek Turner for the Welsh Government (LTT 23 Mar).

The Commission floats the idea of building an active travel corridor between Cardiff and Newport.

It will also consider institutional reforms in its final report, saying there is currently “insufficient integration across key travel modes, particularly rail and bus”.

Final recommendations will be put to ministers by the end of the year.

The other Commission members are James Davies, Stephen Gifford, Jen Heal, Peter Jones, Elaine Seagriff, Lynn Sloman and Beverly Owen.

South East Wales Transport Commission – emerging conclusions is available at https://tinyurl.com/y4kq2dmp

ACTIVE TRAVEL

THE WELSH Government has awarded £38m to local authorities to introduce schemes to encourage walking and cycling.

The Government said that, together with £15.4m announced last month, this was the largest ever investment in local active travel improvements in Wales.

The Active Travel Fund provides £20m directly for 25 larger schemes and packages of schemes in 14 local authorities.

All local authorities will receive a share of £9m to take forward smaller improvements and prepare larger schemes.

A £4.1m Safe Routes in Communities grant will support 22 schemes, specifically focused on creating safe walking and cycling routes to schools in 17 local authorities. A £3.9m Road Safety Capital grant will support 18 schemes across 12 local authorities. Schemes include: Cardiff Council has received £2.8m for its cycle superhighways project.

£17m of CBSSG for tendered services

BUSES

THE DFT has allocated £16.8m of the £254m Covid-19 Bus Service Support ‘Restart’ Grant (CBSSG Restart) for England to cover revenue losses on tendered services.

The funding will be paid to local authorities. Councils can keep the grant if they receive the revenue from tendered services (gross cost contracts), or they can pass the grant to operators if they keep the fare revenues (net cost contracts).

The DfT delayed a decision on how much to allocate to tendered services until it had completed a review of how the £21.5m in the first round of CBSSG was used. There has been concern about the fairness of the allocation process to local authorities and whether operators have received payments due from the grant stream.

A DfT spokeswoman said: “Tendered services will receive funding from local transport authorities in a similar way through the CBSSG Restart scheme as was done through the original CBSSG scheme.

Authorities are set to receive around £16.8m for the eightweek period 9 June - 3 August.”

In Brief

Hitrans studies tech for rural transport The Highlands and Islands Transport Partnership is commissioning a two-year £250,000 research project into how technology can assist travel in rural areas.The work will explore options such as demand responsive transport, car clubs, and liftsharing. Solutions could be integrated with Hitrans upcoming Mobility as a Service platform (LTT 10 Jan). The project is part of the CivTech challenge, an initiative of the Scottish Government’s digital directorate.

Face coverings for Wales bus and trains Public transport and taxi users in Wales must wear a three layer face covering from Monday 27 July. The law in Wales continues to make the two metre social distancing the default position but the Government recognises there are some situations and places where this cannot be maintained, including on public transport.

LTT803 page 18.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 09:53 Page 1

LTT803 23 July - 06 August 2020

18 News

BUSINESS

Covid will have long impact, says Stagecoach

BUSES

STAGECOACH EXPECTS Covid-19 to have a “lasting effect” on travel patterns, with an acceleration in trends of increased working from home, shopping from home, telemedicine and home education.

“We anticipate that it will be some time before demand for our public transport services returns to pre-Covid levels and we are planning for a number of scenarios,” said the company this week.

“We are continuing to review our cost base, to reduce overheads and plan for adjustments to direct and semi-direct costs across a range of scenarios.

“At the same time, we see positive drivers for our business from a renewed societal focus on health, wellbeing and the environment.”

On regulatory models, the company believes Covid-19 makes Greater Manchester’s bus franchising proposal “even more unaffordable” for local taxpayers than when the proposal was first put forward.

“We should build on the strong partnership working between the private and public sector during the Covid-19 situation to maximise the potential of the bus as a solution to the region’s economic, social and environmental challenges and opportunities,” it said.

The operator is looking at overseas public transport opportunities, including in Sweden and United Arab Emirates.

In Brief

Siemens awarded Edinburgh tram work Siemens Mobility Limited has been awarded a contract for the Edinburgh Tram extension to Newhaven in the north of the city covering electrification, supervisory control and data acquisition, telecoms and tram and road traffic signalling. Siemens will work with the main contractor, a joint venture between Sacryr, Farrans and Neopul, on the 2.9- mile extension from the current city centre tram terminus at York Place. The new route should open in 2023.

Birmingham’s PFI maintenance deal could collapse – council ROAD MAINTENANCE

BIRMINGHAM CITY Council’s 25-year PFI road maintenance contract could collapse, the council has acknowledged, as the search begins for a new sub-contractor for the remaining 14 years.

Birmingham entered into the £2.3bn highways management and maintenance contract in 2010 with special purpose vehicle Amey Birmingham Highways Ltd (ABHL). Amey Local Government (Amey LG), the main sub-contractor for the contract, became embroiled in a lengthy performance dispute with the council, which ended with the council winning a legal case at the Court of Appeal in 2018.

Last summer Amey reached an agreement with stakeholders to terminate its involvement in the PFI contract, paying £215m to do so – £160m in 2019 and £55m over the next six years.

The shareholders in the Birmingham Highways Ltd (BHL) SPV are now Equitix and Pensions Infrastructure Platform Ltd. Under the terms of the settlement with Amey, BHL is required to have a new sub-contractor in place by next June to deliver a revised PFI contract up to 2035.

As an interim arrangement, BHL has replaced Amey LG with Kier Highways (LTT 07 Feb).

Kier has signed an industry standard contract, not a PFI contract, because of the interim nature of the appointment.

Since April, Kier has been providing inspections, routine and reactive maintenance, winter maintenance and street lighting replacement. Tarmac is providing interim programmed surface maintenance work, and PTS is providing interim carriageway and footway condition surveys.

Domenic de Bechi, the council’s PFI contract manager, told councillors this month: “There clearly remain a number of challenges to procure and deliver a revised PFI contract, not least the uncertain market environment at present.

“Despite the fact that a future contract is likely to be worth around £1bn and will run for 14 years, it is clear that changes will be required to the existing contract to attract bidders.

“Whilst there was little truth in many of the media stories that have circulated regarding the financial adjustments for non-performance to which Amey were subjected, Amey did suffer signif-

icant losses.” de Bechi said Covid-19 had “added a further complication” to the procurement of a new subcontractor, noting that the pandemic had prompted companies to focus on existing work.

“It is uncertain what impact this will have on the ability of bidders to undertake due diligence and put bids together.

“Tendering a contract during significant market uncertainty can be expected to lead to exaggerated risk pricing. Whether reasonable value for money can be obtained for the council in these circumstances must remain under question.”

He added: “Ultimately, in the event that a PFI contract that is acceptable to all parties cannot be re-procured, the PFI contract is likely to end. BHL will cease to exist and money left in the company (principally, settlement payments to date from Amey) will be paid to BHL’s creditors in order of priority, starting with the outstanding lending of the banks, debt to the council and then other creditors.”

In the event of the PFI ending, Birmingham will also lose the £51.9m a year PFI grant from the Government. The council would

revert to its revenue budget plus capital spending bid under the local transport plan.

Birmingham and BHL are amending the PFI contract to make it more attractive to bidders, and to improve recognised weaknesses, such as regarding programmed surfacing works.

The business case for the revised contract must be approved by the DfT and Treasury in order to release the PFI credits. “PFI credit will not be increased, although if the revised contract does not deliver a similar level of capital investment it is possible that PFI credit could be reduced,” said de Bechi.

The PFI core investment period was expected to last five years, ending in 2015, but the programme has suffered huge slippage. BHL is under contract to deliver £50m of surfacing schemes during 2020 and 2021.

“This investment will not, however, complete the level of investment that the council expected under the PFI contract,” said de Bechi. “Further work on surfacing will still be required by a long-term replacement sub-contractor to complete the anticipated investment, probably at least three further years.”

Northants brings more Swarco wins Stoke’s transport in-house EV charging contract

DELIVERY

N O RT H A M P T O N S H I R E COUNTY Council has brought some transport services in-house under a short-term extension to the highway services contract with the KierWSP joint venture.

Home-to-school transport and bus and rail matters were transferred in-house on 1 April. The capital projects development unit, New Roads and Streetworks Act activities, travel choices, and customer services are among services that transferred on 1 July. All staff have moved under TUPE arrangements.

Northamptonshire originally appointed KierWSP to the highways services contract in 2008.

The council granted the joint venture a four-year extension in 2016 and the contract was extended again earlier this year to the end of July 2021. It could be extended to the end of April 2022 if delays are encountered procuring highway services contracts for

the unitary West and North Northamptonshire councils. They will replace the two-tier local government structure in Northamptonshire next spring.

Northamptonshire is leading the procurement of these contracts. A project team has been appointed and a steering group includes district and borough officer representatives from both the north and west unitary areas.

“Procuring services for two authorities currently progressing through a local government reorganisation makes it significantly more complicated and inevitably lengthens the process,” Graeme Kane, Northamptonshire’s executive director for strategic delivery and transformation, told councillors last week. “Covid-19 further complicates the process given the remote working of all staff, additional pressures on services in responding to the emergency, and the impact on the potential bidders.”

ELECTRIC VEHICLES

SWARCO HAS won a ten-year contract to install and operate 35 rapid electric vehicle chargepoints for the unitary authority of Stokeon-Trent, and the neighbouring Staffordshire borough councils of Newcastle under Lyme and Stafford.

The Office for Low Emission Vehicles has awarded the councils £787,500 as a maximum 75 per cent contribution towards provision of 30 rapid charging points (ten per authority), primarily aimed at the taxi trade but also available to the general public.

Swarco’s bid offered match funding of £460,569, taking the total investment to £1,248,069 and ensuring a 37/63 per cent funding split between Swarco and OLEV. The budget should pay for 35 charging points.

Under the concession contract, the councils will help select chargepoint locations and Swarco will retain ownership of the

chargepoints. A revenue sharing scheme will operate on any return on investment above about 120 per cent. The ten-year contract could be extended by three years.

The councils procured off Kent County Council’s EV charging points framework. Bids were received from three of the four suppliers: EB Charging (Electric Blue); Swarco; and Engie.

Features of Swarco’s offer include: • a discount for taxi drivers of 2p/kWh for the first 24 months of operation • A revenue sharing agreement with the councils of 4.5p per 30pkWh charge to the customer, once the agreed usage threshold is reached • open access charge points – pay-as-you-go or contract Not-for-profit organisation Midlands Energy Hub will be the councils’ delivery partner, and will identify suitable sites. It advised on the contract specification and tender evaluation.

LTT803 Richard Dilks.qxp_LTT758_p0 24/07/2020 09:50 Page 23

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Comment 19

MOBILITY MATTERS

Northern Lights Richard Dilks CoMoUK

E

ver feel yourself caught between the rock of current, sub-optimal reality and the hard place of just what different might sensibly look like at scale? Wondering what the art and science of the possible is in pivoting a country’s transport around?

Us too. We recently published a fascinating piece of work that looks at the need for Scotland to cut transport emissions and the role of shared transport in doing that.

I sometimes feel that shared transport suffers from the too-good-to-be-true syndrome. Challenging an orthodoxy can be like that. So bear with me if you react with any incredulity to some of our findings. They are extrapolations – they have to be, for if the Scotland we depict existed we would not have needed to do the work – but ones based on the latest iteration of a back catalogue of years of research and analysis, the best available public data and sensible assumptions.

The backdrop is one familiar from the rest of the UK in most part. Transport has the largest carbon emissions of any sector (37 per cent of Scotland’s total greenhouse gas emissions). The largest source of these emissions within transport is cars. These cars are mostly private cars, and they are highly inefficiently used. So far, so familiar.

The policy backdrop is more assertive than south of the border, with the Scottish Government making it policy that the solution is not just about cleaner cars, but also fewer of them.

The sale of new petrol and diesel cars there will stop in 2032. Net zero must be met by 2045. At this point we doff the cap to the Scottish Government for part- funding this work through its Smarter Choices, Smarter Places fund, alongside the EU ‘Share North’ programme that CoMoUK is part of.

We have worked in Scotland for almost a decade now, and it has been heartening to see the growth of shared transport in that time. It has also been

heartening to see shared transport pivot into action for key worker journeys during lockdown, and for bikeshare schemes to see sharply increased usage as the Scottish lockdown has eased.

However, the changes we are talking about are nonetheless dramatic. Just as they are south of the border. Let’s not get too scared though – shared transport is here to help, exploiting the startling inefficiencies of only using a private ownership model.

Singular silver bullets, as ever, need not apply. So ‘shared transport’ is not one weapon to bring to the fight, but an arsenal in itself. Other arsenals – private cycling, walking, public transport – are critical to this too.

But let’s drill into shared transport here, still an area of opportunity that does not get enough attention. We already know about the positive impacts shared transport has in Scotland from our latest research of 2019/20 in car club and bike share. For example, car club users got rid of 6,700 privately owned vehicles, while 52 per cent of bike share users reported exercise and health benefits with 36 per cent of them using their car much less.

For this report, however, we used what we know of user behaviour and fleet emissions;and then pulled in relevant public domain datasets such as the Census and Scottish Household Survey. For car clubs, we then looked at households that owned at least one car and yet where the characteristics of the household are such that the car trips could be fulfilled by a car club. This identified no fewer than 643,000 households. Switching them would save 87,000 tonnes of carbon per year through reduced mileage and the cleaner vehicles in car club fleets.

These are the sorts of scales we need to be aiming at with transport decarbonisation, not a couple of percentage points here or there.

Turning to 2+ car sharing, we found that fully 49 per cent of commuter car trips in Scotland could be shared. That would save even more carbon (135,000 tonnes per year), based on all those currently driving to work in Scotland sharing the trip with one other person.

Bike sharing offers the potential to switch out the 5km (three mile) or shorter car trips across Scotland to cycling, saving another 64,000 tonnes of carbon without all those participating needing to buy, maintain or store their own bike.

Of course these figures cannot be wholly accurate, as they seek to measure something that does not yet exist at this scale. But they are based on the best available evidence and on sensible extrapolations from that evi-

dence.

Prizes of this size surely merit further attention. How do we get to achieving them? Well, again, no one measure is going to be sufficient. It will take a collection of them. Let us at least identify the categories they fall under.

Rethinking sustainable transport funding, incentivisation and taxation.

We accept that taxpayer subsidy should go into public transport, in other words that some parts of it are commercially viable and some are not. We accept that it is desirable to invest in walking and cycling although these bring very limited direct revenue back to the public purse. We should also accept that if we want shared transport to serve areas that are not commercially viable – but do not give it any subsidy – then it will not serve those areas. A more blended approach would see significant upturns in the number of people using shared transport and turning away from the private car, as I hope I have illustrated above is possi-

spring 2021 elections, potential legislation on micromobility (which I think should be drawn more widely as a Modern Sustainable Transport Bill), COP26, and before all of those a Government decarbonisation challenge that I encourage every reader to respond to.

I am a massive Yes Minister/Yes Prime Minister fan. I have in these pages previously drawn a parallel between transport emissions and smoking. In the Yes Prime Minister episode about cigarettes (aptly called ‘The Smoke Screen’), a reforming minister (also a doctor) proposes a package of measures that aims to cut smoking by 80 per cent (“perhaps 90 per cent if we’re lucky”, says the minister with a gleam in his eye). I remember seeing this episode as a child (more about my upbringing another time!) and the measures made an impact on me then for how radical they were: banning advertising and sponsorship (then widespread, since banned); a multi-million pound anti-smoking cam-

We accept that taxpayer subsidy should go into public transport. We should also accept that if we want shared transport to serve areas that are not commercially viable – but do not give it any subsidy – then it will not serve those areas.

ble. We accept that public transport does not pay VAT; what about shared transport?

In tackling emissions we must think avoid, shift and improve, i.e. travel less full stop; emit less when we do by shifting mode; and improve the emissions of a polluting mode if we cannot shift from it. This is not just about taxpayer subsidy or about vehicle or mobility device technology. Incentives carry great power – which is why employers should be measured on employee transport emissions to, for and from work.

Turning to the built environment, mainstreaming shared transport in national and local planning policy is a mixture of carrot (designing in sustainable transport of all kinds in higher-quality places) and stick (designing out private car parking and access) and it’s vital.

Good data is also necessary, but not sufficient. It is the analysis of data that has potential power, and the change in policy and practice informed by that analysis that has actual power.

We have moments coming up in our calendar, opportunities, to press this case: the Budget, the Spending Review,

paign (done many times, perhaps even more impactful are those hideous images of negative health impacts from smoking that every packet now carries); aggressive tax rises over five years so that a packet of 20 costs the same as a bottle of whisky (not quite achieved – the whisky is still more expensive – but not far off, took longer than five years). In other words what seemed fantastical at the time – and draws both audience laughter and prime ministerial dithering due to the tax revenue and other implications in the episode – has turned into a pretty accurate description of current policy.

Smoking has fallen by 60 per cent since that episode first aired. The lesson being that what might seem a touch fantastical today can become the new normal tomorrow.

Richard Dilks is chief executive of CoMoUK, the charity that promotes the social, environmental and economic benefits of shared transport. He was previously programme director for transport at the capital’s business lobby organisation, London First. Email: richard@como.org.uk

LTT802_p12, 20,29-35.qxp_LTT_ads_master 09/07/2020 14:21 Page 20

Local Transport Today keeps on publishing

LTT digital edition

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

Transport Responds

Our regular ebulletins 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

TransportXtra

TransportXtra provides all regular content from LTT and Parking Review with the most timely articles exclusive to TransportXtra.

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

Go to: www.TransportXtra.com

LTT800 DPS copy.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 11:27 Page 1

LTT Online Reader Discussion Report

Local rail prospects clouded by virus impact modes and wider strategies were considered by Malcolm Holmes, executive director of the West Midlands Rail Executive, which plays a unique role in bringing together all the local authorities with an interest in the region’s rail network, and Transport for the West Midlands.

Finally, Dr Nicola Forsdike, a management and marketing consultant, now working at York University, explored some of the organisational and structural issues in achieving effective rail product delivery and a dynamic approach to the market.

appetite to fund rail would be potentially damaged by a lack of confidence in future ridership levels.

Independent consultant Dr Nigel G Harris of The Railway Consultancy, who has worked for Network Rail, TOCs and local authorities saw positives in the progress towards a local rail revival that has been underway in recent years (see below).

Appropriate structures for rail delivery at the local level and the potential for more community-focused thinking and stewardship were explored by Professor Paul Salveson. The practical needs of rail planning for a conurbation alongside other transport

The latest LTT online Friday discussion looked at the future of local rail services, and whether a new business model was needed in the light of the financial and patronage impacts of the pandemic lockdown. There was general agreement that preexisting arrangements for local rail service provision would need to be revised in the light of the dramatic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic amongst the four panellists at last week’s LTT online discussion.

Different perspectives were presented on ways forward, but some members of the audience thought the real issue was whether the Government’s

Positive steps have been made in local rail enhancements – but will the money still flow?

In his presentation, Dr Nigel G Harris, managing director of The Railway Consultancy, pointed out there were an estimated one billion journeys per year.of under ten miles on the UK rail network. These were spread across many TOCs, not just regional services.

Some were on InterCity services and around 500 million local rail journeys took place in the London area.

A renaissance in such local services started under BR’s Regional Railways in the 1980s, though there were fewer station/line re-openings during/after privatisation. Nonetheless, over 100 of Britain’s 2,563 stations have opened in the last 20 years.

A combination of factors had been generating interest in more local rail activity, including the Community Rail movement; high mode shares and capacity utilisation limiting rail development on some of the main lines; worsening road congestion and increasing environmental awareness; and the devolution agenda that had seen the establishment of Transport Scotland, Transport for Wales, Transport for Greater Manchester

and other new sub-regional transport bodies.

The recent political imperative to ‘rebalance the economy’ had further driven local rail up the agenda, with pressure to do things in ‘forgotten areas’; in particular, smaller schemes that were quicker to deliver, perhaps during one Parliament.

The New Stations Fund had now operated over several rounds, providing top-up/match funding, typically £20m for five stations every five years.

The Government’s £500m funding promise for ‘Reversing Beeching’ was not exactly: ‘Restoring Your Railway’, said Harris, as like-for-like replacement of closed lines would often probably not be appropriate, with new sites better located for current demand, and original ones unavailable.

Three rounds of applications had attracted 62 schemes (March), 50 (June) with another batch due in November.

Local support was an essential requirement, with bids being placed through local MPs. Documentation needed to demonstrate benefit to the local economy, meaning there couldn’t really just be re-opening for re-opening’s sake.

The funds for supporting development were encouraging local authorities to work together, and secure third-party contributions.

The project followed the traditional analytical

benefit cost approach, but greater emphasis was being placed on wider socio-economic/political factors.

The Government’s Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline approach, launched by the DfT in 2018, was meanwhile taking a new approach to enhancing the railway, creating a rolling programme of investment, focusing on benefits for passengers, freight users and the economy. The continuous approach reflected an agreement between DfT and Network Rail , moving the investment in enhancements away from a rigid five-year cycle.

It had three stages: design, develop, deliver.

The re-opening of the Ashington and Portbury lines was already being well-promoted by local authorities.

Ten of the ‘round 1’ schemes received Ideas Fund money for further work, involving Network Rail providing cost estimates, for example on the Bricket Wood passing loop on St Albans Abbey branch, and reopening Pontrilas station – providing a gateway to tourism in the Golden Valley of mid-Wales, by bringing a new station to one of the longest sections of rail line without one (Hereford to Abergavenny).

Harris saw real potential for new scheme inclusion in DfT plans with a positive case for investment, but only if the money continued to be available, which was a question mark in the light of the Covid-19 consequences.

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

Every fortnight we bring you your LTT magazine with unrivalled news, comment and analysis about the local transport scene. And now every fortnight – in the week between LTT issues – we bring you a discussion online that helps our audience of professionals keep connected with the key issues and each other during this time of isolation in response to the Coronavirus pandemic.

The local transport sector has been highly disrupted and challenged with new issues by the Coronavirus pandemic.

How have the professionals involved been affected – both those employed in local government, consultants and service suppliers, and in the other parts of the industry? Is there a risk to jobs and skills as the government’s furlough support scheme comes to an end and we move in to a recession? We will discuss different perspectives on this very important subject.

The next theme is:

CAN WE RETAIN THE TRANSPORT PLANNERS’ SKILLS AFTER THE FURLOUGH? 2pm, Friday 31 July 2020 Panellists include:

n Fred Ewing, Managing Consultant, Meridian Transport & Infrastructure n Stephen Bennett, Chairman, Transport Planning Society

The format will be an informal and friendly gathering on Zoom. Following the introductory presentations on the theme, participants will be invited to raise questions and give their comments.

If you didn’t make it last time, or for the earlier events, you can still view recordings of them on TransportXtra.

Please join us for this important opportunity in transport professional interaction!

To register your place email Tom Daldry at tom.daldry@landortravelpublications.com or visit TransportXtra.com/events.

n Tom van Vuren, Divisional Director, Mott MacDonald

We’ll be limiting the active audience to 100 people to ensure a manageable discussion.

Chaired by LTT editor: Andrew Forster

Priority is given to attendance by LTT subscribers.

Landor seeks diversity and representation in all of its events, and further panellists will be added to achieve this

Please email: tom.daldry@landortravelpublications.com for joining instructions

LTT803 Viewpoint and letters.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 08:19 Page 20

22 Comment

VIEWPOINT

LTT803 24 July - 07 August 2020

Will autonomous vehicles change our experiences of streets for better, or worse?

Obi Thompson Sargoni University College London

In case you hadn’t noticed, driverless cars are not going to be neatly delivering us about the city any time soon (despite many claims to the contrary). But while city streets respond to sudden pressures of social distancing, the technology continues to develop, carving out operational niches from which to expand – driverless shuttles in retirement villages, delivery bots in selected suburbs, and autopilot features for driving on congested highways. Expanding beyond these niches will embed new forms of algorithmic decision-making into the built environment and create a new set of pressures for city streets.

How we evaluate these algorithms depends on what we want from the city streets autonomous vehicles (AVs) might operate on. If we want to prioritise urban sustainability and health then a good approach is to create street environments that are pleasant, restorative, and enjoyable. These qualities encourage walking as a mode of transport and benefit the health and well-being of the people using the streets. By using algorithms to automate interactions between vehicles and pedestrians, AVs have the potential to change a pedestrian’s experience of city streets.

Evaluations of AV impacts must consider how they might help or hinder the creation of sustainable and healthy street environments.

The movements and interactions of road users in city streets are coordinated using a mixture of infrastructure, laws, codes, conventions, communication, and negotiation. Traffic signals and road markings are often

Just as urban planners might try to cater for different purposes by pedestrianising shopping streets or reallocating space between modes, we can consider whether AVs should operate differently in different areas.

In Passing

Say what you like about Boris Johnson as a Prime Minister but his masterly command of the English language at least made reading his transport speeches and policy statements fun when he was London’s mayor.

Boris, however, is not quite his ebullient self these days.

Quentin Letts, The Times’ political sketchwriter, despairs that our PM has become a prisoner of health experts, who have sapped him of his usual vim. Discussing his speech on opening up the economy as Covid-19 cases ease, Letts said the main news was contained in the statement: “Today we are publishing our framework for containing and controlling future outbreaks in England, which will enable national and local government to work closely

sufficient for conveying right-of-way but there are also times when right-of-way is unclear or contested. In these instances social interactions supplement the measured logic of road infrastructure and help coordinate movements. Spend a few minutes on a busy high street and you’ll probably notice this happening: pedestrians signalling and asserting their intentions to cross a road or drivers edging forwards to try and interrupt the flow of people across a side road.

This poses a major challenge to AVs. To participate in these interactions they must anticipate how other road users might respond to their actions. For example, by modelling a pedestrian’s road crossing decisions an AV might better anticipate the movements of the pedestrian and their response to the actions of the AV. This allows the AV to mimic the behaviour of a human driver.

In this mimicry we can see that vehicle automation is not simply a case of removing the driver. Instead it’s about creating a new set of driving practices and behaviours. AVs will not exactly replicate human behaviour and in some ways the objective is to purposefully not replicate human behaviour – AVs, we are told, will be safer and more efficient than human drivers.

The ways in which new driving practices and behaviours could impact pedestrians and street environments need to be evaluated. To do this we can take a broader look at the impacts of vehicles on city streets and use this knowledge to inform studies of AV impacts. Here are three important aspects of city streets and road user interaction that should be accounted for in such studies: 1. Behaviour change: road user behaviour is stable but not fixed. Significant changes to road user behaviour were produced in response to increasing numbers of motor vehicles on the roads, first in the USA and then in Britain. These changes sought to balance safety with a desire to capitalise on the speed and freedom offered by vehicle mobility. The result is our current set of infrastructures, laws, codes, conventions, communication, and negotiation that coordinate road users.

Leveraging the attributes of AVs could similarly require changes to city streets and will create new tensions between road users.

2. Different streets, different functions: Alongside appreciating the potential for behaviour change, we also need to consider where these changes might take place. We use different areas of cities for different purposes at different times of the day. One area might be

dominated by shopping, another by tourism and others by their own particular blend of activities. Different streets therefore serve different functions and do so with different amounts of space and differences in design, from pedestrianised plazas to multi-lane arteries. As a result, road user behaviour varies across the city and through the day.

Just as urban planners might try to cater for these different purposes by pedestrianising shopping streets or reallocating space between transport modes, we can consider whether AVs should operate differently in different areas. This could be through traditional regulation such as parking restrictions and speed limits or novel measures such as rules on driving style and platooning.

3. Impacts of traffic beyond safety: Ensuring the safety of pedestrians is incredibly important and an understandably high priority when evaluating AVs. But in order to reduce transport-related emissions, improve public health, and create enjoyable urban environments, AVs need to be evaluated against a broader set of measures than safety alone.

Vehicle traffic, speeds, and noise have been found to negatively impact walking experiences. In some cases, pedestrians choose longer routes to avoid a busy road or crossing. Though the inconvenience may seem small, the outcome nonetheless limits the sustainability and health of our neighbourhoods.

together.” “Boy, that’s dull!” wailed Letts. “‘Framework’, a word no sane person uses. And there is no more certain way to lose your audience than to mention ‘local government’. It bores the knackers off non-political punters.”

We’ve just checked our back catalogue at Transportxtra and see that framework has appeared 622 times. As for local government...

Everyone knows that Prince Charles is deeply concerned about climate change. But what about his younger sister Princess Anne, patron of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport? Well, it seems her views couldn’t be more different. In a rare interview to mark her upcoming 70th birthday, she told Australian Woman’s Weekly magazine: “Climate changes all the time. It has done so throughout the globe’s history, so there’s nothing new under the sun. Somehow, we’ve got to learn that our kind of life is changing. We’ve got to remember to respect what’s out there and how to live with it.”

Some may think the Welsh Government is ahead of its time in bringing forward the proposal to make 20mph the default speed limit for restricted roads. The members of the 20mph taskforce certainly seem to believe so, because their final report is dated July 2022 throughout!

Evaluating AVs in terms of their ability to help produce sustainable and healthy environments is important for understanding the potential impacts of this technology. Doing so requires developing novel metrics that take better account of pedestrian experiences.

Vehicle automation is not just about removing the driver, it’s about creating a new set of driving practices and behaviours. Unlike human behaviour, the behaviour of AVs is for us to design and control. We have seen elsewhere how new technologies can negatively impact our urban environments without proper scrutiny. We must explore the effect of these new practices and behaviours on pedestrians and city streets, and in doing so ensure that the technology can be used to create the urban environments we want rather than streets that suit the technology.

Obi Thompson Sargoni is a doctoral student at University College London’s Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis.

LTT803 Viewpoint and letters.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 08:19 Page 21

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Peak District dualling scheme would be a disaster for Park

History repeats itself – ‘Five-mile tunnel mooted for A628 dualling in Peak District’ (LTT 10 Jul). Almost 50 years ago the CPRE Peak District and South Yorkshire branch campaigned successfully against a motorway across the Peak District National Park. Today the Park is facing the same threat. The proposed trans-Pennine dual carriageway road, which would have passed under the whole of the National Park through a tunnel at least 12 miles long, has been abandoned. Although feasible it proved too expensive at £8bn-£12bn.

Instead, the powers that be are now proposing an expressway to replace the A628 Woodhead Pass and connect the M67 and M1. According to Highways England’s requirements for such expressways, single carriageway trunk roads are to be widened into 2 or 3lane dual carriageways and could ultimately be designated a motorway.

Billed as an exemplar scheme, no one has yet revealed what this means for the A628, apart from a five to six mile tunnel under the high moors. What is certain is that the Woodhead would become a bypass of the M62 motorway with huge volumes of traffic diverting onto it, only to pile up in traffic jams at the edges of Sheffield and Manchester where park-and-ride schemes are touted. The Peak Park and wider countryside would bear the brunt of all the adverse impacts of this upgraded route.

Much of the route would lie above ground within the National Park. With the fast-moving noisy and polluting heavy lorries and cars, would come the paraphernalia of road signs, crash barriers, lighting columns and CCTV. Alternative routes for two minor roads that currently link with the A628 would be needed, and where major roads interact with the expressway, such as at Langsett, grade separated junctions would be required. Who will want to picnic in Longdendale or walk up its hills with all that going on in the valley floor?

The landscapes of the Peak Park are world-class and of international standing. Their designation brings the highest statutory protection for natural and cultural heritage – including landscape, tranquillity, wildlife, recreation, historic environment and cultural traditions.

Surrounded by conurbations, they are crucial in tackling the climate emergency and biodiversity crisis, and providing opportunities for mental and physical health and well-being.

The environmental insult does not stop at the Park boundary. These impacts would be felt acutely by communities in the Green Belt that surrounds Greater Manchester, as we already know from the first step in this expressway – the proposed Mottram bypass. Its extension east is likely to require a high viaduct visible from all around. The local stunning countryside in Swallows Wood or on Hobson Moor would no longer be a place to get away from it all.

It seems the decision-makers have not yet learnt that the provision of more road capacity does not deliver a stable situation – the more capacity is increased, the more capacity increases are ‘needed’, as research repeated every decade for the last 90 years has shown.

Yes, the Longdendale communities urgently need to be relieved of traffic impacts, as they have been during the Covid-19 lockdown. But, as the majority of the traffic is locally generated, making best use of existing infrastructure through huge investment in active travel and new mobilities for mass travel offers them the best way out.

The lockdown showed what could be achieved. The DfT needs to build on that, reject any development of the A628 and use the funding saved to improve walking, cycling, trams, and bus and rail services.

Anne Robinson Friends of the Peak District and CPRE South Yorkshire Sheffield S2

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Comment 23

Covid severity and air quality – the connection doesn’t add up

It’s clear that Covid-19 is being used to attack motorised transport using weak and contrived evidence. Your news item “Air pollution ‘likely’ to worsen Covid symptoms – COMEAP” (LTT 13 Jul) is another example, albeit considerably more nuanced than articles I’ve read elsewhere.

‘Covidemiology’, as I have called it, is a new low in air pollution epidemiology research. Even the impact assessment produced by Transport for London following the ‘temporary’ changes to the central London congestion charge states in relation to air pollution and Covid-19 that: “These findings may be indicative of a direct causal link and the data for the studies are being continually updated. However, there have also been criticisms of these studies, which highlight their limitations. A number of limitations have been identified across studies especially as information continues to be gathered and assessed.”

The TfL document also provides a useful summary of the ‘hard data’ for Covid-19 fatality risk factors, which clearly have no relationship with air pollution – risk increases dramatically with age over 60 and males are twice as likely to die as females. Of course, underlying health issues such as diabetes are a factor in the severity and fatality risk of Covid-19.

If air pollution was a significant factor, we would expect to see higher fatality rates in high air pollution countries such as China and India, but the likes of the BBC report “India coronavirus: The ‘mystery’ of low Covid-19 death rates” suggests otherwise (https://tinyurl.com/y78us7q6).

I’m surprised that no one has died of embarrassment from publicising the absurd claim from Harvard that every one microgramme per cubic metre increase in PM2.5 increases Covid-19 death rates by 15 per cent, which was subsequently quietly revised down to a still nonsensical eight per cent (“Air quality-Covid19 ‘link’ sparks debate” LTT 15 May).

We have a baseline for particulate matter using the smoking of one cigarette. Aside from the nitrogen dioxide inhaled by the smoker from the combustion of the cigarette, the smoker also inhales 10,000 to 40,000 microgrammes of PM2.5 in around ten minutes, the equivalent of inhaling 50 to 200 days worth of PM2.5 in outdoor air. Yet smokers are not over-represented in Covid-19 deaths or hospitalisations. Indeed, a paper awaiting peer review demonstrates an inverse relationship between smoking and Covid-19 death rates: https://tinyurl.com/y742qwzn Countries with higher rates of smoking have lower rates of Covid-19 deaths, using actual data rather than Harvard’s epidemiological models, which wrongly assume that PM2.5 causes premature deaths.

It should also be pointed out that roadside air pollution monitors do not measure the actual exposure of individuals to outside or often much higher indoor air pollution, where we spend 90 per cent of our time on average.

If policy-makers were really interested in cleaner air then they wouldn’t be closing and obstructing roads in order to increase emissions via the resultant congestion and detours.

Paul Biggs (Retired cancer researcher, University of Birmingham) Alliance of British Drivers Tamworth Staffordshire B77

> MORE ON P24

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)

Power in the North Governments tend to want to see things happen – and to get the credit. And often they see shakeups to organisational structures as a quick-fix when they fear they are not going to have enough achievements to show the electorate in their term.

So there may be some hurt feelings this week at Transport for the North in the light of the announcement by transport secretary Grant Shapps that he is establishing a new ‘Northern Transport Acceleration Council’ dedicated to speeding up the delivery of new infrastructure projects better connecting communities across the north’s towns and cities. The new Council, led by Shapps himself, will give northern leaders a claimed “direct line to ministers” to accelerate transport projects. And Shapps also offers support to the new body’s work to drive progress across the north through DfT staff based in northern cities.

The last decade has seen a flurry of announcements about new ways of devolving power and resources to help ‘left behind Britain’, putting a plethora of sometimes competing hands on the tiller. Combined authorities; regional/metropolitan transport agencies; LEPs; mayors (city and regional); and various pots of money for individual initiatives have all been boiling away in a not always clear and logical stew.

Some of the agents have performed well, grabbed the ball and run with it, achieving identifiable outcomes of value to local citizens and economies. Others have gone round in circles, created logos and organograms, spent funds on studies and strategies, commissioned projects and initiatives – and not been able to deliver them. The multi-modal, multi-operator smart ticketing scheme, recently dropped by Transport for the North, springs to mind.

In this context, and the Government’s broader political agenda to ‘level up’ things in the north, and support its election gains in Labour’s red wall northern seats, it can’t really be surprising that ministers are stepping in personally when it once seemed that delivery would be left to new local leaderships.

Any critique by the transport cognoscenti of this seemingly pointless musical chairs is likely to be rather lost in the rough and tumble of national politics, and Downing Street’s and individual ministers’ wish to get things done. Whether they will be able to do so will become apparent in the fullness of time. But given the shifting sands of government, it’s a fair bet that Grant Shapps won’t still be transport secretary then.

LTT803 Viewpoint and letters.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 08:19 Page 22

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (continued)

24 Comment

Assessing carbon emissions from new road construction

You noted the report by Lynn Sloman and colleagues of Transport for Quality of Life (TfQL), which is concerned with the carbon emissions arising from the DfT’s second Road Investment Strategy (RIS2) (LTT 10 Jul). Their detailed analysis reaches the conclusion that the increase in CO2 from RIS2 would negate 80 per cent of potential carbon savings from electric vehicles on the Strategic Road Network (SRN) between now and 2032.

This conclusion struck me as surprising. Although annual expenditure on new capital projects for the SRN has been running at over £2bn a year, civil engineering is very costly and we don’t get much extra capacity for our money. The recent rate of addition of lane-miles to the SRN has been 0.5 per cent a year, which is less than the rate of population growth. So how could such a low rate of addition to capacity have such a large adverse impact on carbon emissions? We need to question the TfQL calculations.

TfQL argues that the RIS2 road schemes will increase carbon emissions in a number of ways, particularly by increasing speeds and inducing more traffic, both of which they believe are underestimated in conventional scheme appraisal. They therefore estimate the additional cumulative carbon emissions from these sources, both put at around six million tonnes of carbon dioxide for the period 2020-2032. But I wonder if there is not some overstating here, given that more traffic would tend to reduce speeds. For instance, for a scheme to widen part of the M25, I found that outturn traffic flows were higher than forecast, such that there was no increase in traffic speed (LTT 24 May 19).

TfQL estimates that RIS2 would increase carbon emissions by 20MtCO2 for the period 2020-2032, including carbon from construction. This is then com-

The Transport for Quality of Life report may overstate the CO2 implications of Road Investment Strategy 2, David Metz believes

pared with the difference in carbon emissions between two scenarios from the DfT Road Traffic Forecasts 2018, the Scenario 1 reference case and Scenario 7 high electric vehicle case, which amounts to a reduction of 25 Mt, hence the conclusion that the increased carbon emissions would negate 80 per cent of the benefit of the shift to EVs. There are, however, problems with this estimate of carbon reduction from EVs. Scenario 7 assumes no tax on EVs to replace fuel duty, so that the cost of motoring decreases substantially (by 60 per cent by 2050), hence a projected large increase in traffic com-

LTT803 23 July - 07 August 2020

pared with Scenario 1 (50 per cent increase by 2050 compared with 35 per cent for the reference case).

Whatever the realism of the assumption about tax, such a large increase in traffic is implausible as the consequence of electrification. Average travel time has remained constant at about an hour a day for the past 45 years at least, hence to travel further it would be necessary to travel faster, which will not happen through a change in propulsion. The problem is that the Road Traffic Forecasts derive from the National Transport Model, which does not recognise travel time constraints.

An assumption that electrification has no effect on traffic volumes would substantially increase the scale of carbon reduction under Scenario 7, to which could be added the benefit of bringing forward the phase out of non-electric cars and vans earlier than 2040, as assumed in that Scenario. And if we reduce the additional carbon from the RIS2 programme to allow for some overstating, then we could arrive at a less pessimistic conclusion than the TfQL authors about the carbon impact of this programme on future overall SRN emissions.

Nevertheless, despite these caveats, I agree with the conclusions of the TfQL report that RIS2 is anachronistic, and that cancellation would free up substantial investment for better uses, not least fast broadband to lessen the need for travel, both for commuting and on business. The SRN is under greatest traffic stress in or near urban centres during the morning and late afternoon peaks, when car travel to and from work interferes with long distance road users. The economic case for road investment needs to be reconsidered in the light of changes in daily travel prompted by the pandemic.

David Metz Centre for Transport Studies University College London London

LTT803_p25-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 23/07/2020 14:57 Page 25

LTT803_p25-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 23/07/2020 14:57 Page 26

Consultants, Researchers & Suppliers

26 The LTT Directory

LTT803 24 July - 06 August 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 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

To get your profile in print and online call us on 020 7091 7895 or email jason@landor.co.uk

LTT803_p25-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 23/07/2020 14:57 Page 27

TransportXtra.com/ltt

The LTT Directory

The LTT Directory 27

%ULDQ 'DOWRQ &0,/7 0&,+7

7HFKQLFDO VSHFLDOLVW LQ &\FOLQJ :DONLQJ 3XEOLF 7UDQVSRUW DQG 'LVDELOLW\ $ZDUHQHVV $YDLODEOH IRU VKRUW WHUP FRQWUDFWV LQFOXGLQJ SURMHFW GHYHORSPHQW DQG DSSUDLVDO WKURXJK WR LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ DQG VFKHPH PDQDJHPHQW 6HOFURIW 5RDG 3XUOH\ 6XUUH\ &5 $* 3KRQH HPDLO EUVTXLJJOH#DRO FRP

Demand Forecasts Analysis Strategy Policy Pricing Survey Design & Execution Management Plans Contact harry@parkingperspectives.com 01245 330370

www.parkingperspectives.com

//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

LTT803_p25-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 23/07/2020 14:57 Page 28

LTT803 24 July - 06 August 2020

28 The LTT Directory

The next issue of LTT will be published: Friday 07 August Advertising booking deadline: Tuesday 04 August

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

LTT803_p25-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 23/07/2020 14:57 Page 29

TransportXtra.com/ltt

The LTT Directory 29

LTT803_p25-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 23/07/2020 14:57 Page 30

LTT803_p25-31.qxp_LTT_ads_master 23/07/2020 14:57 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

Analysts Salary: National (£47,584) London (£53,044) Location: Birmingham, London and Leeds To be successful in this role you will need to have Substantial experience working within your professional field, whether in economics, statistics, operational research, transport modelling or quantitative social science. You are a confident person who enjoys building solid working relationships at all levels. We are looking for you to bring strong leadership skills to this role with the ability to coach and mentor your team and drive them to the next level. You will thrive managing a varied and challenging workload and welcome autonomy to your role.

Closes: 3rd August

APPLY NOW: https://bit.ly/2CUDMg1

Transport Operations Team Leader £43,662 - £46,662 Bristol We are seeking a dynamic individual with considerable operational experience within the field of transport to lead, develop and take overall day-to-day management responsibility for the Customer Team within the Transport Operations group providing public information on bus services, community transport grant funding, the Travelwest website and the concessionary travel scheme.

This is a key role that involves managing the available resources including budgets, developing and delivering the business plan objectives and recommending changes that contribute to service improvement, all in accordance with WECA’s vision, its values and its policy and other objectives.

Closes: 9th August

APPLY NOW: https://bit.ly/3eRmUE3

Transport Engineer and Transport Project Officer – Two Year Fixed Term Contracts If you thrive on delivering schemes, you will love Dartford. Working for an ambitious authority that is well and truly on the map, no two days will be the same. Located on the edge of London and at the heart of the Thames Gateway growth area, significant transport improvements and parking management schemes are required to support the high levels of growth taking place.

Major transformational developments are being progressed across the Borough, in particular at Dartford Town Centre and Ebbsfleet Garden City. In parallel, the Council is developing its parking management plans to effectively manage the increasing demand on the highway for parking. There are particular pressures in and around Dartford Town Centre. The challenge is to design a scheme which deals with the multiple impacts of commuter parking near a transport hub, workers and visitors in the town centre and increasing pressure from new development.

We are looking for a Transport Engineer and Project Officer, on a two-year fixed contract, to support the Principal Transport Planner to deliver comprehensive schemes to address these issues.

Transport Engineer – Salary: £41,595 per annum increasing to £43,795 per annum following 12 months satisfactory performance As a qualified and experienced Transport Engineer, you will be instrumental in designing and implementing Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO’s). This will include identifying the requirements on the basis of parking surveys and public consultation, considering traffic management options, designing specific scheme proposals and implementing the TRO. You will have extensive experience of designing, consulting on and delivering transport and parking management schemes with a proven record of implementing Traffic Regulation Orders and experience of the statutory consultation process.

You will have strong knowledge of the relevant highway and traffic regulations including the Traffic Management Act 2004 and the Roads Traffic Regulations Act 1984. Apart from being proficient with Microsoft office, a good knowledge of the ‘ParkMap’ is required.

Apply: https://bit.ly/32AXpVb

Transport Project Officer – Salary: £27,777 per annum increasing to £28,953 per annum following 12 months satisfactory performance

As the Transport Project Officer, you will lead on consultation, programme manage the project, undertake on-going liaison and publicity, administration and assist with the survey work.

You will have experience in the transport or highway field and a proven record of programme management of projects, in particular, transport or parking related.

Experience of undertaking public consultation, including public meetings and exhibitions, is also required. You will be proficient at using Microsoft Office and GIS based applications. Strong knowledge of project management principles and implementation is required and you will have a good understanding of public involvement in local projects.

This is an area of work with strong public and political interest. For both posts, strong communication, team and partnership working skills are essential. You will need to be responsive to issues raised through consultation. In addition, you must be willing to try new ideas, meet commitments, be adaptable and take pride in working for the Council. If you enjoy a challenge and like to make a positive contribution, we would love to hear from you.

Apply: https://bit.ly/3jpvEVo

Benefits

Posts attract a career average pension scheme, professional fee payment, flexible working including some remote working, free on-site parking, employee benefits package and generous leave entitlement. The Council’s offices are in a highly accessible location, next to Dartford station with frequent services from Central London (Oyster Card coverage) and North Kent. Road connections via the M25 and A2 are also excellent. Please call Lukman Agboola on 01322 343410 if you have any questions about the above vacancies.

Closing date: 16th August 2020. Interviews to take place week beginning 31st August 2020

LTT803 back page.qxp_LTT759_pXX 24/07/2020 07:58 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 07 August 2020

TransportXtra.com/ltt

LTT803 24 July - 06 August 2020

News

People

Somerset proposes unitary structure of governance

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

SOMERSET COUNTY Council is proposing a unitary structure of local government in the county. Publication of the plan comes amid speculation that cost pressures caused by Covid19 will prompt more two-tier shires to move to a unitary model.

The two-tier structure of local government can be a source of tension for transport policy.

County councils are the local transport authorities but districts have land-use planning powers, as well as responsibility for offstreet parking and their own views about transport policy and spending priorities.

Somerset says the two-tier system creates confusion for residents and adds to costs. It predicts that moving to a unitary model will have one-off reform costs of £16.5m but recurring savings of £18.5m a year.

Somerset lacks a high profile on the national stage for regeneration initiatives, it says. It points to the success of the

neighbouring West of England Combined Authority in securing Government funding for transport infrastructure.

With Government backing, Somerset says a new unitary council could be launched in April 2022, with the first elections in May 2022.

Somerset’s full council will debate the proposal next week.

If supported, talks will take place with district councils.

Some two-tier shires were replaced with unitaries in the 1990s. Recent ad hoc changes have seen the number of twotier areas reduce further.

The unitary Dorset Council was created last April following the transfer of Christchurch Borough Council into the new Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole unitary. A unitary Buckinghamshire Council was created in April. Northamptonshire County Council is due to be abolished next April, being replaced by North Northamptonshire and West Northamptonshire unitaries.

With Northamptonshire’s

demise, 24 two-tier shires will remain: Devon, Somerset, Hampshire, West Sussex, East Sussex, Surrey, Kent, Gloucestershire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire, Oxfordshire, Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire, Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, Lincolnshire, Staffordshire, Leicestershire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, North Yorkshire, Lancashire and Cumbria.

The Government is expected to state its position on reform in a forthcoming devolution and local recovery White Paper. LTT understands ministers are interested in creating more mayoral combined authorities (MCAs) – with transport powers – in shire areas.

An MCA already covers twotier Cambridgeshire and the unitary of Peterborough.

MCAs are currently being explored for two-tier Lancashire and the unitaries of Blackpool and Blackburn with Darwen (LTT 26 Jun) and for two-tier North Yorkshire and the unitary authority of York (LTT 07 Feb).

Logistics UK – new name for FTA

FREIGHT

THE FREIGHT Transport Association will change its trading name to Logistics UK on Monday (27 July).

David Wells, the organisation’s chief executive, said the change would better reflect the full range of its membership.

“The FTA is strong because of

its size and scale, and because we already represent all of logistics, a very large sector critical to the success of UK Plc. Most news programmes describe us as ‘FTA, the organisation that represents all of logistics in the UK’.

“Our media coverage and influence is growing, but sometimes our name does not help and can get in the way. The word ‘freight’

often does not really represent what our members in vans, construction, utilities, public sector, 3PLs and passenger transport actually do.

“While we are not changing what we do or who we represent, a more descriptive and impactful name will help important stakeholders and influencers outside of the industry take more notice.”

Gilligan and Moriarty join TfL board The Government has appointed Clare Moriarty and Andrew Gilligan as its special representatives on the Transport for London board. Moriarty retired from the civil service in March, having latterly been permanent secretary for the Department for Exiting the European Union and, before that, permanent secretary of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2015-2019). She previously worked for the DfT as director general of the rail executive and of corporate services.

Gilligan is the Prime Minister’s transport advisor. He served for three years as cycling commissioner for London when Boris Johnson was London mayor. The appointment of Government representatives to TfL’s board was announced in May, alongside financial support to help TfL cope with the effect of Covid19. Moriarty and Gilligan do not have voting rights.

Turner heads TfL & GLA planning teams Lucinda Turner, Transport for London’s director of spatial planning, has taken on the management of the Greater London Authority’s planning team. She will manage both teams for the next six months, reviewing the case and options for enhanced joint working and potentially integration.

Shah is Highways England’s new chair The DfT has appointed Dipesh J Shah OBE as the new chairman of Highways England, succeeding Colin Matthews who has led the Government company since formation in 2014. Shah will take up the role on 1 September. He is a former chief executive of the UK Atomic Energy Authority and has held several senior positions at BP.

Freeston oversees DfT London & south Carly Freeston has been appointed a deputy director in the DfT’s regions, cities and devolution directorate, with responsibility for London, South and housing.

Langman to retire from Network Rail Mark Langman, Network Rail’s Wales and Western region director, is to retire in December after working for 34 years for NR and its predecessor organisations.

Three new non-execs for HS2 board The DfT has appointed three non-executive directors to the HS2 board. Elaine Holt, Ian King and Tom Harris will respectively take up the roles of infrastructure specialist, government representative, and community engagement leader, to improve how HS2 Ltd is managed. Holt was a non-executive director of Highways England until April. King retired as chief executive of BAE Systems in 2017. Harris was a Labour transport minister.

Tugwell leads CIHT for extra year Martin Tugwell is serving an additional year as president of the Chartered Institution of Highways and Transportation to provide continuity during Covid-19. His one-year presidency should have come to an end in June. Deborah Sims will now become president in June 2021 and Neil Johnstone in 2022.