ltt 635

SUSTAINABLETRANSPORTFUND

LOCAL

Supported by:Hosted by: Organised by:

3 & 4 December 2013 Manchester Town HallLocal Sustainable Transport Fund National Conference

MAINSTREAMING

smartertravel� Mainstreaming – Embedding smarter travel into general practice� Integration - New technology, buses, trains and interchange� Active Travel – Walking and cycling initiatives� Engagement – Partnership working� Monitoring and evaluation� Marketing and communications

KEY PARTNERS

Sponsored by: Supported by:

Places selling fast : Secure your place at the UK’s biggest sustainable transport event !

LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

POLICY | PLANNING | FINANCE | DEVELOPMENT

“Very interesting topics which directly relate to our work. It was great to make contacts and hearabout projects which have already tackled issueswe are all encountering as part of the LSTF”

Dawn Gilbert, Sustainable Transport Officer, BournemouthBorough Council attended the previous LSTF conference: ‘Re-booting Smarter Travel’ in December 2012

MORE THAN 300DELEGATESBOOKED

www.mainstreamsmart.co.uk

LTT635_Mainstreaming_Wraparound_LTT635 12/11/2013 15:46

2-DAY EVENT PROGRAMME

3 DECEMBER 2013 - DAY 1: OPTIONAL MORNING BONUS SESSIONS

10.30 Bonus session registration: Delegates register within the Beesarea in the Town Hall

11.00 Streamed sessionsDelegates choose to attend 1 of 4...

MediacityUK

Metrolink to MediaCityUK, a leading hubfor the creative and digital sectors, andhome for both the BBC and ITV. Visitincludes a tour of the site, andopportunities to hear about joint workingon sustainable transport.

National Cycling Centre

Metrolink to the National Cycling Centre,home of British Cycling. There will be atour of the velodrome and BMX tracks,and opportunities to hear about GreaterManchester's ambition to increase cyclistnumbers by 300% over the next 12 years.

City Tower Cycle Hub

A walking visit to the flagship City TowerCycle Hub, with the opportunity to viewfacilities and hear more about Transportfor Greater Manchester's commutercycling programme.

Option 1

Option 4 (Advance Booking Required. £65 + VAT Add-on to standard delegate rates)

Option 2

Option 3

12.30 Return to Manchester Town HallACT TravelWise Re-launch - in the Great Hall

11.30 (Note: Later departure time)

Finding your way to procure, implement and provide better travel information

10.00 Registration and Coffee

10.30 Welcome

10.35 Sustainable travel and geographical imaging inGreater Manchester David Hytch, Information Systems Director (Technology Initiatives), TfGM• Linking modes and information• Passenger information methods• Open Data to improve service• Considering the mix of modes and information –Why geographic systems work well

10.55 Lessons from experience – UK and International bestpractice in transport mappingPeter Warman, Consultant to FWT• The perspective of the traveller – how do we lookafter different user groups?

• The map as a navigation aid• Tracking and GPS. Why don’t we have ‘tom-toms’ in buses?• Where is personal navigation going?• Combining static and real-time information

11.15 ‘Information provision’ not ‘information pollution’ ontransport mapsDr. Max Roberts, Department of Psychology University ofEssex (author of ‘Underground Maps Unravelled’)• The enduring role of ‘a good map’?• The psychology of mapping• Usable versus beautiful• Cultural considerations• Some International best practices

11.35 Where is transport mapping going –what you now need to knowPeter Miller, CEO, ITO World• Navigating in the smarter city – a glimpse of the near future

• The common reality of disconnected travellerinformation (Case study)

• Delivering a consistent and coherent message acrossall transport models – on a budget

• A single mapping and information database –How Ordnance Survey, Open Data andOpenStreetMap are coming together

• Meeting the travel information needs of all users any time, any place, anywhere, any format

11.55 On-street and on-vehicle information technologySpeaker TBC• What do customers value most?• Cultural considerations – an internationalperspective on information provision

• Immediate benefits, integration and andfutureproofing

• Making the right buying decision

12.25 Question & discussion

12.30 Lunch served in the seminar room

3 DECEMBER 2013 - DAY 1: WHAT WILL THE LSTF DELIVER?

12.30 Delegate registration: Registration and light refreshments served in the exhibition area

13.20 Keynote- Mainstreaming Smart Travel in Greater ManchesterDr Jon Lamonte, Chief Executive of Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM)

13.30 Panel discussion - Mainstreaming Smarter Travel - and the LSTF

Chaired by Prof. Phil Goodwin, University of West of EnglandPanellists: Panellists: Graham Pendlebury, The Department for Transport; Greg Hartshorn, ATKINS;Peter Lipman, Sustrans & Dr Jon Lamonte, Transport for Greater Manchester

15.00 Break: Refreshments served in the exhibition area

15.40

30x case studies from LSTF projects to discuss. Held in the Great Hall and Bees Area.

17.30 Break: Break in the exhibition area

18.00 Welcome to ManchesterDave Newton - Transport Strategy Director, Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM)

18.10 Informal NetworkingLight bites and drinks party

19.30 Day 1 Close

speedlearning


LTT635_Mainstreaming_Wraparound_LTT635 12/11/2013 15:46

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Pollution thwarts M60 capacity boostTHE HIGHWAYS Agency hasput plans on ice to convert hardshoulders on part of Manches-ter’s M60 orbital motorway intotraffic lanes because the resultingtraffic flows would triggerexceedances of legal air pollutionlimits. The HA said opening up the

hard shoulder between junctions8 and 18 round the west andnorth of Manchester would havemoved traffic nearer to propertiesand attracted more vehicles to theroad. “This would have resultedin new exceedances of air qualitylevels, particularly in relation toNO2,” a spokeswoman told LTT. “This is the first time we have

taken this approach on a major

project scheme in relation to airquality,” she added.The HA has just launched a

consultation on implementingmandatory variable speed limitson this section of the motorway.But the Agency remains deter-mined to find a way to increasecapacity between junctions 8 and15, including possibly convertingthe hard shoulder to a traffic lane,

if a way can be found to reducethe air quality impact.Sian Berry of the Campaign

for Better Transport said: “TheHA has explicitly acknowledgedthat laws designed to protectpeoples’ health and the environ-ment prevent them from openingthe hard shoulder to extra traffic.This should be a precedent-setting decision.”

Cyclist deaths overshadow TfL’slaunch of safer junction designTRANSPORT FOR London hasunveiled a new design of junctionto boost cycling safety. But theplans have been overshadowedby five cyclist fatalities onLondon’s roads within the spaceof just nine days. The deaths take the total

number of cyclists killed inLondon this year to 13, onebelow the total for 2012. Reacting to the deaths, London

mayor Boris Johnson said thisweek: “Unless people obey thelaws of the road and peopleactively take account of thesignals that we put in, there’s noamount of traffic engineering thatwe invest in that is going to savepeople’s lives. Some of the casesthat we've seen in the last fewdays really make your heart bleedbecause you can see that peoplehave taken decisions that reallydid put their lives in danger. Youcannot blame the victim in thesecircumstances.”But Green assembly member

Darren Johnson said: “The mayormustn’t keep dodging responsi-bility for these tragic deaths andserious injuries on London’sroads. Four out of the five deathsof cyclists in the last nine dayshave involved either his bluepaint or his red buses.“The mayor’s comments this

morning, which targeted cyclistsbreaking the law as the primarycause of death and serious injuryis an attempt to blame thevictims, rather than tackling thereal problem of HGVs, buses and

dangerous junctions.”The mayor has just announced

the latest steps he and TfL aretaking to give cyclists greater pri-ority on the road network andmake cycling safer. The newjunction design aims to eliminateconflicts between cyclists andleft-turning traffic – a commoncause of accidents – and featuresfully-segregated approaches forcyclists and cycle-specific trafficsignals (see top image). Left-turning cyclists and

general traffic will receive a greenlight at different times. Whencyclists have a green light to gostraight ahead or turn left, generaltraffic will only have a green lightto travel straight ahead or turnright. When general traffic is given

permission to turn left, the cycletraffic would have a red light. Theimage supplied by TfL suggeststhat cyclists will be unable to turnright at these junctions. The new junction arrange-

ments will initially beimplemented on WhitechapelHigh Street in east London as partof a programme of measures toimprove safety on the BarclaysCycle Superhighway 2, betweenAldgate and Bow. The DfT has also granted TfL

permission to trial cycle-specifictraffic signals. Currently, cyclelogos cannot generally be dis-played on the red light of a signalhead. TfL says allowing the logoon red signals will give all roadusers greater clarity that the trafficsignal is exclusively for cyclists.A spokesman said the newsignals had just been imple-

mented on the Bow roundaboutwhere ‘early start’ signals givecyclists a headstart over generaltraffic. Johnson has announced that

TfL will be recruiting more than100 staff – thought to be 128 – todeliver the cycling programme.Traffic engineers, scheme design-ers and traffic modellers will allbe sought. The mayor last week opened

the first fully segregated section

of Barclays Superhighway, a two-mile extension of route 2 betweenBow and Stratford. The routefeatures ‘bus stop bypasses’where the cycle route passesbehind bus stops to allow cycliststo overtake stationary buseswithout entering the carriageway. The mayor has also announced

plans for a new north-south cycleroute across central London fromKing’s Cross to Elephant &Castle via Blackfriars Bridge.

TfL’s new junction design aims to eliminate conflict betweencyclists and left-turning traffic

Traffic lanes will be converted to cycle lanes on BlackfriarsRoad for a new north-south cycle route across central London

PROVIDINGINDEPENDENTNEWS &ANALYSIS SINCE1989

ROADS

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

2. Revised values for timesavings herald widerappraisal shake-up

3. Stagecoach appoints TfLbus director to leadcouncil relations

4. Stagecoach attacks plans to charge for Cambridge P&R

5. Multi-£bn plan for SEWales Metro

6. Electric double-deck busfor York

7. Variable speed limit fortrunk roads

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

9. TfL ‘needs long-term busplan’

10. Transport mastersnumbers increase

most read stories on

TOP10

01 Novem

ber –14 N

ovember 2013

10-11 Personal travelplanning goes digital

2-3 Academicsrubbish HS2 study

7 TfL announcesappraisal review

12 Viewpoint:Rethink road safety

15 Phil Goodwin: thecurious case of DfTcycling forecasts

CYCLINGby Andrew Forster

LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

POLICY | PLANNING | FINANCE | DEVELOPMENT

LTT635 front page_LTT635_p01 15/11/2013 00:45 Page 1

2 News LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

Sparks fly as academics contestKPMG’s analysis of HS2 benefits

IT’S NOT every day that a committee of MPs pores overthe detail of a transport consultant’s report. But that’s whathappened last week when the Treasury select committeetook evidence on KPMG’s study into the regional eco-nomic impacts of HS2. KPMG’s report, commissionedby Government company HS2 Ltd and published in Sep-tember, gave a much-needed boost to the troubled £50bnproject, containing as it did the headline-grabbing predic-tion that the high-speed railway from London to the WestMidlands, Manchester and Leeds will deliver £15bn ofannual GDP benefits for the British economy (LTT 20Sep). That conclusion has now been embedded in therevised strategic case for HS2, published by the Govern-ment last month. HS2’s critics were quick to dismiss the consultant’s

findings. Campaign group Stop HS2 claimed the figurehad simply been “made up” to further the case for theproject. But the consultant’s analysis also troubled aca-demics specialising in spatial economics too. HenryOverman, professor of economic geography at theLondon School of Economics, wrote a blog saying thatthe methodology employed by KPMG was “technicallywrong” and the size of forecast benefits was “possibly outby orders of magnitude” (LTT 04 Oct). So who is right? Last week the treasury select commit-

tee tried to get to the bottom of matters, taking evidencefrom KPMG, Overman and another critic of the consul-tant’s work, Dan Graham, professor of statisticalmodelling at Imperial College London. Graham’sresearch has played a vital role in informing the DfT’sguidance on appraising the wider economic benefits(WEBs) of transport projects, which is very differentapproach to the method used by KPMG. The hearing seemed to have all the ingredients neces-

sary for some explosions and the exchanges between theMPs and witnesses did not disappoint.

A conservative estimate First up were the KPMG duo of Richard Threlfall who,

as head of infrastructure, building and construction, leadsthe firm’s work on HS2, and Lewis Atter, a former Treas-ury civil servant who is now a partner in KPMG’s globalinfrastructure and projects group, heading up the firm’sinfrastructure strategy business. MPs first wanted to know some facts and figures about

the report, HS2 regional economic impacts. They werepleasantly surprised when Threlfall revealed the cost hadbeen £242,000 (including VAT). He added that the workhad been completed in four months by a team of sixKPMG staff as well as sub-contracted work undertakenby Connected Economics. Committee chair Andrew Tyrie wondered how confi-

dent the consultants were about their finding that the fullY-network (London to the West Midlands, Manchesterand Leeds) would deliver £15bn of GDP benefits perannum (in 2013 prices). Was that, he wondered, a “con-sidered estimate or something less than that”. “I’d say it was a considered estimate,” Atter replied.

“We’ve based our approach here on the best available evi-dence, we’ve asked the questions about what we can seein the real world in terms of different economic perform-ance between cities, how much of that is explained bydifferences in connectivity… and we’ve asked what dif-ference will HS2 make to that… So it is very considered.”To come up with the figure, KPMG examined how pat-

terns of economic activity varied across markets and

geographies and how these differences related to levelsof transport connectivity using four measures: rail con-nectivity to labour; rail connectivity to business; roadconnectivity to labour; and road connectivity to business.But the method posed challenges, notably because thefour connectivity measures were strongly correlated. Atter

explained: “Given the question we were being askedhere – what impact will HS2 have? – what you need tobe worried about is whether what you’re seeing out therein the real world data in terms of differences betweenbusiness-to-business connectivity is solely a function ofdifferences in business-to-business connectivity by rail orwhether it’s actually partially a function of labour con-nectivity by rail or partially a function of road connectivityto business or road connectivity to labour.” KPMG devised a technique to apportion the influences

between the four connectivity measures but admitted inthe report that the technique“does not have a firm statis-tical foundation”. It was this method that produced the£15bn estimate. The consultant also conducted a sensi-tivity test using another approach based on mode shares,which reduced annual GDP benefits to £8bn.Tyrie was having difficulty reconciling Atter’s confi-

dence in the results with the admission that the methodused to generate the £15bn estimate was non-standard. “Let’s just clarify where we’ve got to this morning,”

said Tyrie. “You’ve agreed that the £15bn per annumreturn for 60 years is a forecast, and you’ve agreed that it

The Government’s high-speed rail plans received a big boost when the media reported consultant KPMG’sprediction that the project would deliver £15bn of productivity benefits a year for the British economy. But twoacademic specialising in spatial economics told MPs last week that KPMG’s work contained gravemethodological errors and should never have been published. Andrew Forster reports

Committee chair Andrew Tyrie (top left) was puzzled by KPMG’s confidence in its approach to assessing theeconomic impacts of HS2. KPMG’s Lewis Atter (top right) said the £15bn was if anything a conservativeestimate of benefits. Henry Overman (bottom left) said KPMG had “made up” its methodology and DanGraham (bottom right) said he wouldn’t have used KPMG’s “strange” approach

There is no perfect wayof addressing the exam questionwe were posed. We have verytransparently set out what webelieve is a reasonable, probablyconservative, approach to gettingat the key question.

Lewis Atter, KPMG

LTT635_p2-3_HS2 inquiry2_LTT635_p02-03 14/11/2013 19:43 Page 2

TransportXtra.com/ltt News 3

is heavily based on a piece of statistical analy-sis that you initially told me was reliable andthat your description of it as reliable you feelis consistent with what appears to be a dis-claimer in your report, which is that thisapproach ‘does not have a firm statisticalfoundation’. To a layman that does seemsomewhat contradictory Mr Atter.”“We are saying that there is no perfect way

of addressing the exam question that we wereposed,” Atter replied. “We have very trans-parently set out what we believe is areasonable, probably conservative, approachto getting at the key question.”Amplifying this belief that the method had

delivered a conservative estimate of benefits,Atter pointed out that the report did notinclude HS2 Ltd’s most recent work to makebest use of the capacity HS2 will free up onthe conventional rail network. Furthermore,he said KPMG’s analysis hadn’t consideredthe impact of a station at Manchester Airport,or the benefits of HS2 for freight and interna-tional trade. On the other hand, the study alsohadn’t considered the DfT’s reduced value ofbusiness travel time savings for rail travellers,which would have the effect of driving downbenefits. But Atter said the list of things thatwould put the benefits up was longer than thelist of things that would reduce them. He saidKPMG was talking with HS2 Ltd aboutupdating the work to reflect last month’supdated economic case for the project (LTT01 Nov).Atter acknowledged that the KPMG

method was incompatible with the Treasury’sGreen Book, the bible for the appraisal ofGovernment projects. But he suggested themethod actually delivered more insightfulresults than those produced by the DfT’sWebTAG guidance. “This is very, very different from standard

DfT cost-benefit appraisals; this is asking notabout time savings, this is asking about pro-ductivity and output in the economy, relaxinga lot of the restrictive assumptions that theDfT makes,” he said. “So, for example, thestandard approach of the DfT holds land-usefixed so a transport scheme whatever it iswon’t change where people live, won’tchange where the jobs are, won’t change thekind of jobs they do. We relaxed all that, wedon’t consider time savings, we focus in onwhat we think is the fundamental first orderissue, which is the impact on GDP.” Atter said the method had been discussed

with HS2 Ltd’s advisory panel of experts. Theapproach was also similar to the way somecity-regions were looking at the economicimpact of transport investment. “It is true tosay that no other national project has beenlooked at in this way but it is not true to saythat projects on a regular basis aren’t lookedat like this. If you ask how any of our majorcities addresses the impact of transport,whether it’s a Greater Manchester, a Leeds, aSheffield, a Birmingham or Glasgow, all ofthem are increasingly looking at transportthrough this real economy lens.” KPMG hasbeen an adviser to many of these areas.

An academic critiqueTyrie thanked Atter and Threlfall for their

evidence and told them they may be asked toreturn to give further evidence at a later date.Next up were Henry Overman and DanGraham. The academics had been listening toKPMG’s evidence and Tyrie was eager toknow what they made of it. Graham spoke first. “The £15bn, to me,

may be true, but certainly nothing in thatreport indicates to me that it is true,” he said.“I don’t think the statistical work is reliable,”he added, before identifying three key con-cerns. “The way the work was done, it kind of

attributes to connectivity all the things thataffect productivity without incorporating themin the model. So if you’ve got a model that’sonly got connectivity really as the key thingthat affects productivity, you’re going toattribute lots of things to connectivity thatactually just happen to be correlated with it,that aren’t down to the connectivity itself.“The second issue is it doesn’t deal with

the problem of reverse causality: we tend toput transport in places that are more produc-tive so the relationship between transport andproductivity is bi-directional.

“The third issue is that this business ofwhat they call ‘spreading the elasticity’ isn’tdone according to any conventional statisti-cal approach that I can think of. The problemthey had was a problem called ‘equivalenceof outcomes’ where what they wanted toknow was how do we apportion the connec-tivity effects across different modes [oftransport] but the statistics wouldn’t let themdo it because all these things were so highlycorrelated. My approach to that would bedon’t try and do it, it wouldn’t be to use somestrange approach to apportion or spread thateffect.”Overman was equally scathing. “They

apply this statistical procedure, well it’s not astatistical procedure, that’s the point; theyapply this procedure, which is essentiallymade up, that provides them with an estimate.And this is something that really shouldn’t bebeing done in a situation where we’re tryingto inform public debate.”Tyrie interjected: “That’s a very serious

allegation, you’re saying they’ve just made itup.”“If you’re trying to get at something like

the impact of connectivity on productivityusing a set of statistical techniques, you needto play by the rules,” said Overman. “Thereare two technical problems with what they’vedone. Number one, they had the four connec-tivity estimates that they couldn’t separate outthe individual effects of, so they looked atthem one at a time. Looking at them one at atime will always bias upwards the impact ofany one individual effect because you willattribute to good rail connectivity the fact thatplaces with good rail connectivity also havegood car connectivity.

“Then they said ‘now that we’ve got theseindividual effects, how are we going tocombine them?’ And the way they combinedthem was completely non-standard andfurther biases up the effects. “That part of [the work] that gets to the

£15bn number ... has no statistical basis. Theyare basically doing something completelynon-standard, which gives them an estimateof £15bn.”Turning to KPMG’s sensitivity test in

which the benefits fell to £8bn, Overmansaid: “I would much rather have seen the£8bn come out as their central estimate [but]that would still be a large overestimate.” Hesaid the £15bn figure should be reduced by afactor of six to eight.Overman pointed out that the economic

case for HS2 already includes wider eco-nomic benefits (WEBs), such asagglomeration, calculated using the DfT’srecommended methodology. “I wouldn’tview those [the KPMG figures] as additionalto the WEBs that get the benefit:cost ratio [ofthe full Y network] to 2.3:1, I would see themas an alternative estimate of WEBs,” he said. Graham contrasted KPMG’s approach

unfavourably with the way the DfT’sappraisal guidance has developed.“Benefit:cost analysis has been establishedover several decades now and there’s a strongtheoretical basis for it. Over the decadeswe’ve built up empirical evidence, which hasbeen rigorously reviewed both by Govern-ment and academics through the peer reviewprocess. And that counts also for wider eco-nomic benefits, which are one of the morerecent additions to benefit:cost analysis. “Now, none of this is perfect but we under-

stand the assumptions behind it, weunderstand the theory and the empirical evi-dence gets reviewed, we can all look at it anddebate it. The problem with the KPMGapproach is it hasn’t got that history, it’s notgot the academic support, it’s not got the the-oretical support.”

Alarm bells failedOverman wondered why the DfT or HS2

Ltd’s advisory panel of experts had failed tospot the problems with KPMG’s approach.“My feeling with this is that at some pointHS2 Ltd, the DfT or the peer review panelshould have pointed out that there wereseveral parts of the report that were problem-atic and not in line with current guidance. Idon’t understand why the £15bn figure wasallowed to go out there [be published] whenwithin the report itself the sensitivity test sug-gested accounting for that one problem alonehalved the estimate [to £8bn].”Overman said it was important to discover

what the panel of experts had said about thestudy. “If it said, ‘Oh, this is all fine’, then wewant to question what happened to make thatpeer review advice fail. If the peer reviewadvice was, ‘No this is unacceptable, thismethod is non-standard, it really shouldn’t beout there’ then I think you want to understandwhether it was KPMG who said, ‘No it is,we’re not going to reply to this’ or whether itwas HS2 Ltd or the DfT that just said, ‘Ok,we’re going to publish it anyhow’.”Overman was a member of the advisory

panel but quit when HS2 Ltd’s remit changed.“I felt the change in status of HS2 Ltd fromproviding independent advice to the Govern-ment to being a promoter of the schememeant that I no longer wanted to be involvedon a consultancy basis with them.”

They [KPMG]apply this statisticalprocedure, well it’s not astatistical procedure, that’sthe point; they apply thisprocedure which isessentially made up.

Henry Overman, Professorof economic geography,London School ofEconomics

Local Transport Today providesfortnightly coverage of the total urbanand regional UK transport scene fromthe viewpoint of planners, policymakers, traffic engineers, analysts,investors and managers of resourcesinvolved.

Editorial OfficeApollo House359 Kennington Lane London SE11 5QY. Tel: 0845 270 7875Fax: 0845 270 7961Email: [email protected]

Publisher/Editorial DirectorPeter Stonham

EditorAndrew Forster

Contributing WritersJohn Helm, David Crawford

Design & [email protected]

Managing DirectorRod Fletcher

Client Partnership ManagerDaniel SimpsonTel: 0845 270 7861

Advertising OfficeTel: 0845 270 7861Fax: 0845 270 7960E-mail: [email protected]

SubscriptionsTel: 0845 270 7900Fax: 0845 270 7920E-mail: [email protected]

Subscribe on lineTransportXtra.com/ltt

Address for subscriptionsHPC PublishingDrury Lane, St Leonards-on-SeaEast Sussex TN38 9BJ

AccountsIrina CocksTel: 0845 270 7854Fax: 0845 270 7960

359 Kennington LaneLondon SE11 5QY

LTT is available on subscription only.The annual UK subscription rate is £140including dispatch by first class postand supply of special supplements.The overseas rate is £180 for Europeand £220 for the rest of the world.

Printed byHastings Printing Company LtdDrury LaneSt Leonards-on-SeaEast Sussex TN38 9BJ.

ISSN 0962 6220. All rights reserved. Nopart of this publication may bereproduced in whole or in part withoutthe written permission of the publisher.LTT is published by Landor LINKS Ltd.

© Landor L|I|N|K|S Ltd 2013

LTT635_p2-3_HS2 inquiry2_LTT635_p02-03 14/11/2013 19:43 Page 3


Council backs QCs despite fare fears London tohost electricbus trialsGATESHEAD COUNCIL has

endorsed Nexus’s bus QualityContract plans for Tyne and Weardespite concerns that manycouncil residents will end uppaying higher fares. Labour-controlled Gateshead

says the Quality Contract Scheme(QCS) “is the approach mostlikely to deliver the stable, afford-able and comprehensive networkof bus services required tosupport the council’s wider visionand objectives”.Nexus, the Tyne and Wear Pas-

senger Transport Executive, is

proposing a zonal fares system,which should result in the major-ity of passengers being better orno worse off. But Gateshead saysthe proportion of passengers whowould experience an increase ofmore than 20% to their fares ishigher in Gateshead than any ofthe four other Tyne and Wearmetropolitan districts. The council says discussions

with the PTE suggest this isbecause many Gateshead passen-gers would be crossing a zonalboundary. “Because these tripsare short they are currently someof the cheaper bus fares but underthe new system they would be

more expensive as they representa two-zone trip,” said councilchief executive Jane Robinson.“Sadly, this effect is almostinevitable in introducing a simpli-fied zonal system.”The closing date for consulta-

tion on the QCS is 22 November.Gateshead says the Labour-con-trolled Tyne and Wear IntegratedTransport Authority is due tochoose between the QCS and avoluntary partnership agreementnext March. This would be justweeks before the ITA is scrappedif the Government approves plansto set up a North East CombinedAuthority (see back page).

BUSES

Franchising backed by NI Assembly

A COMMITTEE of the NorthernIreland Assembly has urged min-isters to introduce competitivetendering for some public trans-port and to shift some of theroads budget to bus and rail.The Committee for the Depart-

ment of the RegionalDevelopment (DRD) makes eightrecommendations including:• That the DRD proactively intro-duces tendering and franchisingfor privately-owned public trans-port operators, including theBelfast Rapid Transit project.• That the previously agreed

agency model as described duringthe passage of the Transport Act(NI) 2011 – namely to removethe conflicting roles of the trans-port minister as provider, policymaker and regulator – is adopted.• That the DRD reviews futurebudget allocations to ensure abetter balance between expendi-ture on roads and public transport.• That Translink’s group chiefexecutive and chief operatingofficer cease to be full membersof the Northern Ireland TransportHolding Company board, butremain accountable to it for oper-ational matters.The report was commissioned

partly in response to criticismsabout Translink’s lack of trans-parency, and its perceived ‘cosy’relationship with the DRD. Responding to the report, NI

transport minister DannyKennedy said the 2011 Act con-tained a clause that most publictransport services would continueto be provided by NITHC/Translink.

BUSES

TfGM identifies tram-train routesbut funding challenge remains TRANSPORT FOR Greater Man-chester has identified the heavyrail and Metrolink routes thatoffer the best potential for tram-train vehicle operation.Top priority is the Marple to

Manchester Piccadilly via Bred-bury heavy rail line. Transportstrategy director Dave Newtonsaid that, upon conversion,Marple services could alternatebetween running to Bury andAltrincham. For a six-minuteheadway service, about 24 newtram-train vehicles would berequired. TfGM says it wouldcost £200m to build now (with a66% contingency). The existing Metrolink line

between Manchester and Altrin-cham is another candidate fortram-train operation. Newton saidthis could overcome the bottle-neck on the line throughNavigation Road station whereheavy rail and Metrolink services

currently run on parallel single-track routes. TfGM sees the Manchester

Piccadilly-Glossop railway as acandidate for a second phase oftram-train. “There is insufficientcity centre capacity to accommo-date both Marple and Glossoproutes at ten trains per hour,although it may well be feasiblein the long-term to accommodateboth routes either through termi-nating certain services atPiccadilly station or through oper-ating each route at a six train perhour frequency,” said Newton.

Another possibility for phasetwo would be the ManchesterPiccadilly–Hazel Grove line viaStockport. Newton said this couldbe the first stage of developing atram-train route through the southof the conurbation, connectingStockport, Manchester Airportand Altrincham.A Stockport-Altrincham line

should be considered “as part ofa possible future study of trans-port to the Manchester Airportarea”, which would consider thetransport needs of the ‘AirportCity’ Enterprise Zone and the pro-

posed Manchester Airport HS2high-speed rail station. “An inter-change at Baguley could be a keyelement, together with thewestern loop section of the Man-chester Airport extension,” saidNewton. Further examination of the suit-

ability of the Manchester-WiganWallgate via Atherton line fortram-trains is proposed.But Newton said there

appeared to be no business casefor tram-train operation over theMid-Cheshire line beyond Altrin-cham to Hale and Knutsford.

TRAM-TRAINby Andrew Forster

Town bypassespledged on A96Bypasses of Nairn, Forres, Elgin,Keith and Inverurie will be includedin plans to complete the duallingof the 99-mile A96 trunk roadbetween Inverness and Aberdeen,Scotland’s transport minister KeithBrown said this week. Only 11miles of the road is currentlydualled. Studies are underway ofeight route options for the Inver-ness-Nairn section and nineoptions for the Nairn bypass. Pre-ferred options for these sectionswill be announced next year.

Orbital road forNorwich?Norfolk County Council is to com-mission a feasibility study intoextending the proposed NorwichNorthern Distributor Road (NDR)all the way round to the A47 to thewest of the city, completing anorbital road. The council is cur-rently promoting the £148.5m dualcarriageway NDR, which willconnect the A47 at Postwick Hub,to the east of the city, round to theA1067 in the north-west. The newstudy will examine options for theA1067-A47 connection, which islikely to be environmentally contro-versial, passing through the pictur-esque Wensum Valley. The DfT isproviding £86.5m of theNDR/Postwick Hub costs with thecouncil underwriting the remaining£60m. Norfolk will submit the NDRand Postwick Hub to the PlanningInspectorate for developmentconsent in the next few weeks.The council says construction ofthe road could begin in spring2015.

HA reforms a wasteof time, says LabourThe Labour Party has criticised theGovernment’s plan to turn theHighways Agency into a Govern-ment company (LTT 01 Nov),describing it as a “policy withoutpurpose”. Shadow transport min-ister Richard Burden said minis-ters were “wasting time creatingunnecessary legislation and top-down institutional reorganisa-tions”.

Higher speeds fortractors?The DfT is consulting onincreasing the speed limit fortractors from 20 to 25mph. Con-sultation closes on 30 January.

Welsh freightpriorities exploredThe Welsh Government has set upa task force to advise on freightmatters. The group includes rep-resentatives of road freight, railfreight and shipping/ports, and willbe chaired by Brian Curtis, aformer president of the WelshTUC. It has been asked to reportback in the spring.

In Brief

South Yorkshire Integrated Trans-port Authority has endorsed theidea of banning bicycles from thenew tram-train vehicles that willoperate between Sheffield andRotherham Parkgate. Sheffield City Council and

cycle campaign groups wantbikes to be carried on the vehi-cles, being manufactured by

Vossloh, but South Yorkshire PTEsays bicycles could only beaccommodated by moving thepriority seating in the low-floorarea, to the detriment of mobility-impaired passengers.The ultimate decision will be

for operator, Stagecoach Super-tram, which has already voicedconcern about the safety implica-

tions of allowing bicycles on thevehicles. Trams are banned fromthe existing tram fleet.Vossloh is manufacturing

seven vehicles for the £60m trial,which is funded by the DfT. The tram-train services via

Meadowhall to Rotherham Park-gate are due to commence oper-ating in 2016.

Bicycle ban likely on South Yorkshire’s tram-trains

TWO ELECTRIC buses willtake to London’s streets withinthe next few weeks, the first ofthree trials of the technology inthe capital. Two 12-metre single deck

vehicles built by Chinese manu-facturer Build Your Dreams(BYD) are being prepared foroperation on routes 507 (Victoria-Waterloo) and 521(Waterloo-London Bridge). GoAhead London is leasing thevehicles, which will be chargedovernight at their depot. Transport for London is to

introduce four Optare 10.6-metresingle deck buses next spring onsuburban routes operating fromHounslow garage. They are part-funded from the DfT’s Green BusFund.TfL is also planning a trial of

four double-deck diesel-electrichybrid buses using wireless(induction) charging to extendtheir range. This is part of aproject organised by internationalpublic transport organisationUITP covering eight cities, andpart-funded by a European Uniongrant programme. The buses willoperate on a yet-to-be-announcedroute for at least a year.

PUBLIC TRANSPORT

Report on the inquiry intocomprehensive transportdelivery structures is available athttp://tinyurl.com/lm2x8mp

LTT635 page 4_LTT635_p0 14/11/2013 22:37 Page 4


LEPs get to work on setting transportpriorities but tough questions remainEngland’s Local Enterprise Partnerships are busy identifying what transport priorities to include in their strategiceconomic plans, which the Government will use to allocate the new Single Local Growth Fund. But big questionsremain about how the new system will work. Andrew Forster reports LOCAL AUTHORITIES and Local Enterprise Partner-ships across England are gearing up for the biggestshake-up in years to how local transport is funded.From April 2015 more than £1bn of local transportfunding a year will be channelled into the Government’snew £2bn Single Local Growth Fund. A proportion ofthe funding is being allocated on a formula basis but abig slice will be allocated according to the quality ofstrategic economic plans (SEPs) currently being pre-pared by the Local Enterprise Partnerships, which bringtogether local government and the business community. LEPs have to submit their draft SEPs to Government

by Christmas and so last week’s LTT conference ‘LEPsand the new transport agenda’ was an opportune timeto hear about progress and explore some of the thornierquestions that the reforms pose. There remains hugeuncertainty about the new system, said Tony Ciaburro,Northamptonshire’s director of environment, develop-ment and transport, and transport committee chair ofADEPT (the Association of Directors of Environment,Economy, Planning and Transport). Among the mostfrequent questions he was asked were, “What’s goingon, and how’s it going to work?”Graham Pendlebury, the DfT’s director of local trans-

port, provided an overview of the new system, whichowes much to Lord Heseltine’s No stone unturnedreport into local economic growth (LTT 9 Nov 12). TheDfT is the biggest contributor to the Single LocalGrowth Fund, putting in £1.19bn, of which £819m islocal transport major scheme funding, £200m integratedtransport block, and £100m Local Sustainable Trans-port Fund (the latter only for 2015/16). With noring-fencing of funding, transport projects could receivemore, the same, or less than the DfT puts in. Pendle-bury seemed not unduly concerned with thisarrangement, expressing confidence that LEPs sawtransport as a major priority for spending, a viewendorsed by David Frost, chair of the LEP Network.Indeed, Pendlebury was keen to put a positive slant onthe reforms, saying the Single Local Growth Fund gaveLEPs the opportunity to secure “some serious money”for transport projects. A team of four ministers, chaired by Cabinet Office

cities minister Greg Clark, will assess the SEPs. LiberalDemocrat transport minister Baroness Kramer will bebatting for transport, with the other members of theteam being housing minister Kris Hopkins and businessand enterprise minister Michael Fallon.Pendlebury said SEPs should be ambitious and

present clear rationales for interventions that offer valuefor money and are deliverable. He voiced concern aboutthe track record of transport scheme delivery, suggest-ing that the slippage of schemes was a “little bitendemic”. LEPs will submit their final SEPs to the Government

at the end of March, and ministers will then announcegrowth deals and funding settlements in the summer.Although the Government has guaranteed at least £2bnto the Single Local Growth Fund annually through to2020/21, the length of next summer’s funding settle-ments remain unclear. Government guidance says that,alongside grant allocations for 2015/16, ministers willaward up to £5bn of the £10bn identified for2016/17–2020/21 to multi-year capital programmes. Pendlebury said the DfT’s primary interest would be

to review the overall transport strategy outlined in theSEPs rather than scrutinising individual transport proj-ects contained within them “line-by-line”. Nevertheless,

he said the Department was likely to take a “pretty closelook” at transport projects costing “tens of millions ofpounds a pop”.

A democratic deficit?The Government’s decision to give LEPs the job of

identifying transport investment priorities has not been uni-versally welcomed by the local government communityand conference delegates heard concerns that the newarrangements will create a democratic deficit. “LEPs andlocal transport bodies are not local government,” said Pro-fessor Tony Travers of the London School of Economics.“At the margin they are less legitimate than local govern-ment, pure and simple.” Ben King, a principal transport planner at Central Bed-

fordshire Council, wondered how small-scale schemessuch as road safety measures and bus stop improvementswould be delivered in the future. These are typicallyfunded from the DfT’s integrated transport block (ITB)allocation, which is currently paid to local authorities.From April 2015, half the £400m annual ITB will beabsorbed into the Single Local Growth Fund and King pre-dicted that councils would find themselves unable to meetlocal residents’ aspirations. With the overriding focus of the Single Local Growth

Fund being the economy, many practitioners believe LEPswill prioritise road investments above public transport,walking and cycling schemes. Campaign for Better Trans-port chief executive Stephen Joseph urged LEPs to lookbeyond road improvements, stating: “Economic growthdoesn’t have to mean more traffic.” Tony Travers won-dered if part of the Government’s rationale for giving theLEPs the say in identifying transport priorities was becauseof concern that councils were a bit too interested in publictransport, whereas business leaders were more likely toprioritise roads.Pendlebury said LEPs should consider the full range of

options to foster economic growth. “It’s not just aboutshiny new roads,” he said, showing a slide listing light rail,pinchpoints, maintenance, ‘smart’ technologies and towncentre improvements as other possible interventions.Schemes such as better cycle networks could also beappropriate, he added. The Single Local Growth Fund has superceded the

DfT’s own proposals to devolve the local major transport

scheme funding to local transport bodies (LTBs) fromApril 2015. The fledgling LTBs, led by local authorities,submitted their funding priorities to the DfT this summerbut LEPs are now in the process of deciding whether theseschemes are their priorities too. Laura Shoaf, Black Country director of transport for the

Association of Black Country Authorities in the West Mid-lands, said the transport priorities in her area’s SEP wouldnot be identical to the LTB’s priorities. “The LTBs havefound the sands have shifted underneath them and that is achallenge,” she said. Shoaf wondered how the Government would compare

the quality of SEP submissions. How, for instance, wouldit assess proposals for, say, a new junction on the M25 withone on the M5 in the West Midlands, particularly if theappraisals of the economic growth benefits were madeusing different techniques. She also pointed out that the DfT’s appraisal require-

ments for transport schemes, which will continue to applyunder the Single Local Growth Fund, were more onerousthan those of other sectors that could also be seeking ashare of the cash. “Housing projects will not have to gothrough anything like as rigorous an approach as trans-port,” she said. While councils and LEPs are focused on making the

new arrangements work, Tony Travers wondered how longthe new structures would last. “I’d be very surprised ifLEPs and local transport bodies survived a change of Gov-ernment,” he said. But Alex Pratt, chairman of the Buckinghamshire

Thames Valley LEP, challenged this assessment. “There isno prospect of LEPs being removed at the next GeneralElection,” he said, based on conversations he had had withLabour politicians. LTT understands that Labour is reluc-tant to abolish the LEPs, concerned that doing so wouldsend out a message that the party is anti-business. Butformer shadow transport secretary, Maria Eagle, said aLabour Government would reform the new fundingsystem, channelling all funding to local authorities, abol-ishing local transport bodies, and giving LEPs an advisoryrole on spending priorities (LTT 20 Sep).� About 70 delegates attended the event in London, whichwas sponsored by Bircham Dyson Bell, supported by theDfT and organised in association with local authorityofficer association ADEPT, the LEP Network, and theLocal Government Technical Advisers Group (TAG).

Graham Pendlebury (left) said the DfT had no intention of scrutinising LEP transport projects “line-by-line”.Tony Travers (right) said LEPs were “less legitimate than local government, pure and simple”.

LTT635_p5_LEPs NewsXtra2_LTT634_p05 14/11/2013 19:29 Page 5


New enforcement systemfor yellow box junctions

Cycling will declineafter 2015, DfT predicts

A NEW system has beenlaunched for yellow box junctionenforcement.Developed by traffic control

specialists Vysionics ITS, theVECTOR YB is designed to giveevidentially-acceptable proof thatjunction exits were not clearwhen a driver entered a yellowbox and that the Highway Codehas therefore been broken.The system uses a combination

of ANPR cameras to identifyvehicles, and radar to locate and

track them in two-dimensionalspace in varying weather condi-tions. It then creates an evidentialrecord file containing time-stamped ANPR plate matches,offence data including box dwelltime and context views of thevehicle. Currently, the only councils

that have the powers to enforceyellow box junction offences arethe London boroughs and Trans-port for London. The LocalGovernment Association has beenpressing the DfT to extend thepowers to councils elsewhere.

ENFORCEMENT

Change travel behaviourto avoid jams, says TfL

TRANSPORT FOR London isstepping up a travel demandmanagement (TDM) programmeto try and alter travel behavioursat the busiest times of day, duringtimes of disruption to transportnetworks, and during majorevents. Building on the experiences of

using TDM techniques duringlast summer’s Olympics, TfL hasestablished a Travel DemandManagement board, whosemembership includes the DfT,Network Rail and the Associationof Train Operating Companies.The board is overseeing anemerging programme of projects. Transport commissioner Sir

Peter Hendy said TfL would bereleasing data later this yearabout the times and crowding ofthe busiest London Undergroundstations broken down into 15-minute time slots. “This data will be presented

alongside information about theoptions available to customerswho have the flexibility to makesmall changes to the time oftravel or their route,” said Hendy.This could include journey timesby foot and by bike.Hendy said that one of the

“most significant” early projectswould be to use TDM messagesfor Network Rail’s redevelop-ment of London Bridge station.

Train operators who serve thestation are involved in the plan-ning of the communicationscampaign.TfL has also begun giving

travellers advice on the southernsection of the Northern linebetween Tooting Bec andClapham North. The section isexceptionally busy between08.30 and 09.00 with passengerssometimes having to wait two ormore trains before they canboard. TfL is highlighting how small

changes to journey times couldease the jams in advance of anew signalling system beinginstalled, which will increasecapacity on the Northern Line by20%. The signalling should be inoperation next year.

TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR

Green light for Bristol BRT asinspector rejects critics’ caseTHE GOVERNMENT hasgranted Bristol and North Som-erset councils the power to buildthe Ashton Vale to TempleMeads bus rapid transit scheme. Transport secretary Patrick

McLoughlin endorsed the con-clusions of the Transport andWorks Act inquiry inspectorthat the scheme, which includesa section of guideway, wouldprovide “significant savings inoverall journey times for exist-ing and future public transportpassengers” and offered theopportunity for better reliability,frequencies and higher qualityservices.The BRT plan had been

fiercely contested by opponentsat the public inquiry, with somesuggesting that the route shouldbe changed and others suggest-ing that the plan should be

scrapped in favour of othermodes, including ultra-light rail. But the inspector rejected

their ideas. Ultra-light railwould be less flexible than abus-based scheme, he said. Hesaid installing bus priority on theHotwell Road, the existing cor-ridor used by the Long Ashtonpark-and-ride bus, was unlikelyto deliver an improved busservice because the road alreadysuffered congestion and was“likely to see further increases intraffic in the future”. Installingbus lanes on the corridor “wouldbe at the expense of kerbsideparking in some areas and a sig-nificant loss of highway capacityfor other vehicles.”Since the inspector submitted

his report to ministers, Bristol’smayor George Ferguson hasannounced a revision to the BRTroute, running it on the Cumber-land Road corridor instead oftaking it via the Harbourside and

over the Prince Street bridge(LTT 28 Jun). Bristol CityCouncil is to submit a planningapplication to itself for thechange of route early next year.The TWA inspector was scep-

tical about the CumberlandRoad option, saying it would“not provide the necessarydegree of segregation to ensurethe quality and reliability ofpublic transport for the future”. The tender for the construc-

tion contracts for the route willbe advertised before the end ofthe year. There will be two con-tracts: one for the main routeand the other for the AshtonAvenue bridge refurbishment. Once firm prices have been

obtained the councils will beable to secure full approval forthe project. The DfT has pledged£35m towards the £52m outturncost of the scheme, with localcontributions filling the gap. As well as being used by the

903 Ashton Vale park-and-rideservice, which is currently oper-ated by FirstGroup undercontract to the council, the routeis likely to be used by bus serv-ices from North Somerset, suchas FirstGroup’s X1, 354 and361. The local authorities recently

sought operator views on howthe route should be operated.One possibility is a Quality Part-nership Scheme for thepark-and-ride Metrobus service.The councils will own the

guideway section of the routeand are considering chargingtrack access charges for opera-tors to use the route, asCambridgeshire does on theCambridgeshire guidedbusway. Planning applications for the

Hengrove to North Fringe BRTscheme will be submitted toBristol and South Gloucester-shire early next year.

Avoid peak times on the Tube,says TfL

BUSESby Andrew Forster

No light at end of theWoodhead tunnelsTwo disused Victorian rail tunnelsunder the Pennines on the former‘Woodhead route’ between Man-chester and Sheffield will besealed up following the Govern-ment’s decision not to purchasethem for possible future transportuse. The National Grid recentlyceased using the tunnels for highvoltage cabling after installing newcables in the parallel Woodheadtunnel built in 1953 (the Wood-head route closed to rail in 1981).The Government consulted earlierthis year on buying the Victoriantunnels but transport ministerStephen Hammond said: “If anadditional rail route was everrequired between Manchester andSheffield, it is unlikely that even themodern tunnel would be suitablefor re-use and, given advances intunneling technology the bestsolution is most likely to be theconstruction of a new tunnel.”

NR consults onHope Valley upgradeNetwork Rail is consulting onplans to increase rail capacity onthe Hope Valley line betweenSheffield and Manchester. Thenew loops and other infrastructurein the Grindleford and Dore areaswill require a Transport and WorksAct Order and an application willbe submitted to the Governmentnext spring. The projects are partof the wider Northern Hub schemeto increase rail capacity, and couldbe delivered by the end of 2018.

Redditch rail linecapacity boost The DfT has granted developmentconsent for Network Rail’splanned capacity improvementson the Redditch railway branch inWorcestershire. The works includea two-mile double track section onthe single-track branchline.

‘Norwich in ninety’ The DfT has set up ‘Norwich in90’, a taskforce to explore ways ofcutting the rail journey timebetween London and Norwichfrom two hours to 90 minutes.

North Wales railpriorities studiedThe Welsh Government has set upa working group to study ways ofimproving North Wales rail serv-ices. An initial report will be pre-pared by the end of next monthand a final report later next year.

Wave and pay onMerseyrailMerseyrail passengers can nowuse contactless payment cards fortravel. The system currentlyaccepts MasterCard and VISA,with American Express coming onboard next year. Passengers canuse the cards to pay up to £20.

In Brief

THE DFT this week defendedforecasts predicting that theamount of cycling will declinefrom 2015. Transport minister Robert

Goodwill recently told Parliamentthat cycle trips would rise from1.2 billion in 2010 to 1.4 billionin 2015 but then fall to 1.3 billionin 2020. Cycle miles are alsoforecast to follow a similar patter,

LTT columnist Phil Goodwinquestions the forecasts in hiscolumn this week (see page 15).But the DfT this week stood bythem. A spokeswoman told LTT:

“The coalition government hasinvested more in this area thanany previous government. Sincethe beginning of 2012, we haveannounced £159m of new moneyfor cycle infrastructure. We havealso invested £600m through theLocal Sustainable TransportFund. “The National Transport

Model forecasts are based on theimpact of smarter measures. Thetable supplied [to MPs] show thepredicted level of cycling whenall other transport factors aretaken into account. These includepopulation projections and therelevant cost of motoring.”

CYCLING



TfL launches review of capital’stransport appraisal procedures TRANSPORT FOR London is toreview how it appraises transportprojects, including the treatmentof time savings, wider economicbenefits, impacts on health andthe urban realm.TfL’s appraisal methodologies

currently largely follow the DfT’sapproach outlined in WebTAG. One important difference is

that TfL weights the values oftravel time to reflect averageLondon earnings, whereas proj-ects outside London are assessedusing WebTAG’s lower values foraverage national earnings. Busi-

ness cases for projects in Londonhave to be converted to the DfTvalues of time for Governmentspending reviews to ensure proj-ects are compared on alike-for-like basis. Ryan Taylor, TfL’s business

case functional lead, this weekoutlined a work programme toreview the capital’s appraisalmethods. He distinguishedbetween changes ‘within thecurrent framework’ – such asbetter models – and more far-reaching changes ‘outside thecurrent framework’. On the latter, Taylor said: “The

DfT is open to methodologicalchange if robust evidence is pre-

sented and it does look to othertransport agencies, such as TfL,to guide the accepted methodol-ogy.”An informal working group

has been established to progresswork on possible reforms‘outside the current framework’.Taylor said a seminar withinvited academics would be runsometime within the next fourmonths. Topics for review will include:

• the treatment of journey times,including reliability, small timesavings, the productivity of time,and “forces at work eroding [timesaving] benefits”• economic benefits

• health/quality of life• urban realm/environment“If the DfT is reluctant to

include any methodology thatTfL would like to include, then itis possible to have a differingapproach so long as businesscases are converted to the DfTapproved method for spendingreviews,” said Taylor.Any reforms would take con-

siderable time to implement, headded.The DfT last month announced

a major programme to review itsown appraisal methods, alongsidelaunching a repackaged versionof its WebTAG guidance (LTT 01Nov).

APPRAISALby Andrew Forster

DfT finds more businesstravellers for HS2Council tests low-cost

journey time monitoringTHE DFT this week explainedwhy the monetary benefits tobusiness travellers of high-speedrail have shot up even though thevalue of time saved by businesstravellers has been cut by a third.Comparing the revised eco-

nomic case for HS2 publishedlast month with the version pub-lished last August reveals that thebenefits of the project to businesstravellers have gone up from£12.6bn to £16.9bn for phase one(London-West Midlands) andfrom £34.3bn to £40.5bn for thefull Y-network from London to

Manchester and Leeds (LTT 01Nov). But the new economic caseis based on a lower value of busi-ness travel time savings – £31.96an hour compared with the previ-ous value of £47.18.The DfT this week told LTT:

“The proportion of business trav-ellers expected to travel on HS2is higher than predicted in the pre-vious economic case. This is oneof the primary drivers of theincrease in benefits. Our analysisreflects the best available evi-dence on actual passenger tripsand is based on hundreds of thou-sands of trips recorded over anumber of years.”

PORTSMOUTH CITY Councilis staging the first UK trial ofBlipTrack, a low-cost, Bluetooth-and wifi-based vehicle sensor forcollecting average speed andtraffic congestion data. Via standard web browsing,

the results can inform journeytime predictions on variablemessage sign displays.Unit purchase and fixing onto

existing roadside structures costabout £2,000 for each of sixdetectors covering 12 cross-city

routes, compared with £5,000-£10,000 for each of the 12 or soANPR cameras that would other-wise need to be installed, ITS(UK) members heard at theirautumn conference.Developed by Danish firm

Blip Systems, the system hasbeen delivered by UK partnerSmartCCTV. Smart CCTV man-aging director Nick Hewitsonsaid: “BlipTrack catches upwardsof 20% of vehicles, comparedwith 95% using ANPR. But thisis statistically adequate forjourney time information.”

BIRMINGHAM CITY Councilis considering downgrading theA38 that runs across the westernedge of the city centre, connect-ing with the Aston Expressway.The council says the city’s

road network appears to havecoped much better than fearedwith this summer’s six-weekclosure of the A38 QueenswayTunnels for repairs, and that theroad’s future therefore needs tobe “debated openly”. “There is no doubt that the

A38 provides a fast route acrossthe centre for all traffic, but italso severs the centre, creating avery noisy unattractive barrier tointra-centre movement,” saysthe city’s mobility action plan,prepared with consultant WSP.The plan also suggests

exploring a city centre lowemission zone; a workplaceparking levy; and road charging.Bus priority corridors are

identified and the plan proposesusing Statutory Quality Partner-ships to improve services. Railservices could be re-introducedon the Camp Hill and SuttonPark lines and Midland Metroextended at least to CentenarySquare and the High Speed 2station at Curzon Street.

HIGH-SPEED RAIL

Revised appraisals ‘notalways necessary’ – DfT

Birmingham considersdowngrading city road

THE DfT has published guid-ance to help project promotersdecide if they need to revisescheme appraisals because ofchanges to the Department’sWebTAG transport appraisalguidance.The “proportional updates”

guidance notes that projects cantake many years to go frominception to delivery, and thatmultiple decision points requir-ing modelling and appraisal canoccur along the way. Changes tothe DfT’s WebTAG appraisalguidance during a project’s evo-lution can add cost and time tothe preparation of project busi-ness cases. The DfT says decisions on

whether changes to WebTAG

should be incorporated into aproject’s modelling and appraisalshould be made on a scheme-by-scheme basis. The case for notrevising the analysis would bestronger if:• the WebTAG changes are notmaterial to the project; • the change would require a sig-nificant increase in the cost andtime for developing the project;• there is a low risk of legal chal-lenge; and• the risk of damage to the repu-tation of the analysis, or theDfT’s wider project portfolio, islow.

APPRAISAL

POLICY

Cycle champion forthe West MidlandsA “high profile” cycling championis to be appointed in the WestMidlands conurbation to helpboost cycle trips. The proposal isincluded in a cycling charterdrafted by the seven Metropolitandistricts and Centro. They want toboost the proportion of trips bybike from 1% to 5% by 2023 andincrease public expenditure oncycling from about 25p per headof population to £10, in line withthe recommendations of the AllParty Parliamentary Cycle Groupearlier this year.

Essex seeks fixedcost reimbursementEssex County Council plans tonegotiate a new fixed cost con-cessionary fares reimbursementscheme with bus operators.Although the DfT’s guidance rec-ommends reimbursement is paidaccording to the number of tripsmade over the year, Essex says afixed cost scheme presents thegreatest budget certainty for thecouncil and operators. “In pre-vious years, the bus operatorshave offered multi-year agree-ments to the county council,” saidRichard Gravatt, Essex’s pas-senger transport strategymanager. “However, in the currenteconomic climate, the countycouncil will only be able to makean agreement covering the year2014/15.” The council’s currentfixed cost scheme costs £18.5m.

Green light forLeeds station worksThe DfT has given final approval toa £17m new southern entrance toLeeds station. The DfT will con-tribute £12.4m. Works should becompleted by March 2015.

Leeds prepares forfirst P&R facilityLeeds should have its first bus-based park-and-ride scheme inoperation next May. A preferredoperator has been selected for theservice, which will run from an800-space facility on Eland Road,beside Leeds United’s footballground in the south of the city.Services will operate 7am to 7pmMondays to Saturdays (except onmatchdays) with three busesoffering a 15-minute frequencyservice. Leeds and Metro havemade a profit share agreementwith the unnamed operator.

Bus tenderguidance revisedThe DfT has published new bestpractice guidance on tenderingbus contracts. The guidanceupdates a 2005 version andapplies to England (outsideLondon), Scotland and Wales. Itwas prepared by consultantsAtkins and the TAS Partnership.

In Brief

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Transport analysisguidance – the proportionateupdate process is available athttp://tinyurl.com/oy6r4kz

Birmingham mobility actionplan is available athttp://tinyurl.com/oy6r4kz


LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:15 Page 8


Dutch method scores station totown centre walking routesA NEWway to assess the qualityof pedestrian routes between railstations and town centres hasbeen published by Dutch railoperator Abellio Group and envi-ronmental transport charity theCampaign for Better Transport. Abellio says the ‘Fixing the

link’ method extends the conceptof station travel plans beyondtheir typical boundaries of astation and its immediate envi-rons.The method was developed for

stations in the Netherlands butAbellio has now trialled it in threetowns within its Greater Angliafranchise: Ipswich, Colchesterand Ely.Pedestrian routes are evaluated

according to four criteria: liveli-ness; human scale; legibility; andsafety and comfort. Three charac-

teristics are scored for each:• Liveliness criteria include thepresence of residences, offices,shops, leisure and educationalfacilities on the route.• The human-scale criteriaincludes scores based on thelength of the route and thenumber of buildings per block.• Legibility includes the ease oforientation, the linearity of paths,and the clarity of maps andsignage.• Safety and comfort coversfactors such as the extent ofpedestrian priority and the main-tenance of the route, includingprovision of planting and publicart.The three English towns scored

poorly in the assessment. “In eachof the three towns a large part ofthe pedestrian route to the towncentre is on A roads and othersthat carry a high volume oftraffic,” says the report.

“In Ipswich and to a lesserextent in Colchester much of theroute to the town centre is linedby substantial, single use devel-opments, often designed foraccess by car, which present along, monotonous and unattrac-tive face to the road.” At Ely, the pedestrian “emerges

from the station into a car park,partly attached to the station andpartly belonging to the neigh-bouring Tesco, which dominatesthe surrounding area”.The report recommends how

the pedestrian routes could beimproved including by usingbetter signing; more pedestrianpriority at junctions; and buildinghigher density development. It also acknowledges that the

methodology needs adjusting “totake proper account of the impactof traffic volumes on the pedes-trian route and to recommendmeasures such as changes in road

design or the provision of alterna-tive routes”.Abellio and CBT want the DfT

and other franchise awardingbodies to emphasise the impor-tance of good connectionsbetween stations and town centresin rail franchise specifications.They say local authorities shoulddevelop station master plans,including plans to improvestation-town centre routes, as sup-plementary planning documents. The report suggests improve-

ments could be funded fromsources such as the Local GrowthFund; the Community Infrastruc-ture Levy; the Government’sNational Stations ImprovementProgramme; and the Local Sus-tainable Transport Fund.

WALKINGby Andrew Forster

Edinburgh city centrebus shake-up ‘on ice’

COUNCILLORS IN Edinburghhave put plans to remove busesfrom one side of the city’spremier street, Princes Street, onice following protests fromtraders and bus operators.Critics say Princes Street

carries too many buses – con-sultant Gehl Architectsdescribed the street as a “big busstation” in a report for thecouncil in 2010. With the city’s new tram line

between the airport and the citycentre is due to begin operatingalong Princes Street from nextMay, the council consultedearlier this year on introducing aone-way system for buses in thecity centre, with east-west serv-ices operating along PrincesStreet and west-east servicesrunning on the parallel GeorgeStreet to the north. But municipally-owned

Lothian Buses opposed the plan,as did Princes Street traders whosaid the change would damagebusiness. Traders on GeorgeStreet, which has developed areputation as a higher-classshopping street, also opposedthe change, complaining that theadditional buses on their streetwould damage its environment.Councillors have now agreed

the details of a one-year citycentre traffic management trial

to be introduced next year. Bus operations on Princes

Street will remain unchanged forthe time being, allowing thecouncil to assess how the streetfunctions with both buses andtrams. Edinburgh’s director of serv-

ices for communities MarkTurley said the council and busoperators would review PrincesStreet bus operations “with aview to reducing the numberscrossing the city centre”.The one-year trial will see

George Street become a one-way street for general traffic,allowing footways to bewidened and a two-way cycleroute to be installed. The one-way direction of traffic has yetto be settled.

Signal timings at some keycity centre junctions are to bereviewed, with the aim ofincreasing pedestrian priority. Areview of city centre parkingprovision will also be conducted“with a view to maintainingcurrent levels, but creating morespace for pedestrians andcyclists”.The council is also to com-

mission a survey of origins anddestinations of people in the citycentre. “This would greatly helpto inform a longer-term strategyon bus services in the city centreto be progressed with the mainbus operators,” said Turley.

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Rethink cable car ‘flop’Lib Dems tell Johnson

HS2 LtdprobesScots link

Bus lane case goes to Europe

THE LIBERAL Democrats areurging Transport for London torethink the operating strategy forthe capital’s cable car because ofdisappointing passenger numbers.Weekly passengers on the

Emirates Air Line in Octoberwere below 30,000, comparedwith over 40,000 in October lastyear. Transport commissionerPeter Hendy said last week thatthis year’s numbers were belowforecast.Caroline Pidgeon, the leader of

the Assembly’s Liberal Democratgroup, said: “It is time the mayorand TfL admitted that they arefailing to run it either as a suc-cessful tourist attraction or as aserious form of public transport.”She said it should be operated asa privately-run tourist attraction,“or as an integral form of publictransport, where people with atravelcard or a relevant pass canuse it for free and the Oyster fare

is no more than a bus fare”.TfL has rejected the criticism.

Acting director of London rail,Jonathan Fox, said: “The Emi-rates Air Line is one of London’sreal success stories. Sinceopening in June 2012 it hascarried over three million peopleand as a vital new river crossingin east London it is alreadyplaying a key role in attractingnew investment to the area.” The cable car connects Green-

wich Peninsula on the south bankof the Thames with the RoyalDocks on the north.

CABLE CAR

DfT asks Higgins tocut HS2 costs The Government has asked newHS2 Ltd chairman Sir DavidHiggins to explore how to cut thecost of HS2 below the current esti-mated £42.6bn (2011 prices).Higgins will present his findings tothe transport secretary in March,before the second reading of theHybrid Bill for the London to WestMidlands line, which many MPsare expected to vote against.

Rail lobby groupgets behind HS2Pro-rail group Railfuture hasdeclared its support for the Gov-ernment’s high-speed rail plans.Many of the organisation’smembers have been critical of theproject but the group now says:“HS2 is the only game in town. If itis abandoned, we run the risk oflosing this investment fordecades. Therefore, we supportthe route of phase one with theexception of the HS1/HS2 link,which we believe needs to be re-evaluated along the lines of theEuston Cross proposal [of LordsBerkeley and Bradshaw]. Wesupport the proposals for phasetwo although we may want tomake suggestions for a refine-ment of some station locations onthe Leeds arm of the route.”

In Brief

Fixing the link is available athttp://tinyurl.com/oej55xy

THE EUROPEAN Court ofJustice is reviewing if Transportfor London’s policy of allowingtaxis but not private hire vehicles(PHVs) to use bus lanes amountsto illegal state aid.

The matter has been referred toEurope by the Court of Appeal,which is considering a legal chal-lenge against TfL’s current policybrought by PHV operatorAddison Lee. Transport commis-sioner Peter Hendy said adecision could take 18 months.

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Cable car: flop?

MINISTERS HAVE asked HS2Ltd to study ways of increasingrail capacity between London andScotland, and bringLondon–Edinburgh/Glasgowjourney times below three hours. DfT director general for High

Speed 2, David Prout, has set outthe work programme in a letter toHS2 chief executive AlisonMunro. “The work should con-sider high-speed options,upgrades to existing infrastruc-ture, or a combination of the two,looking at both the East and WestCoast rail corridors,” says Prout. HS2 and Network Rail will

lead the project, which will alsoinvolve the DfT, Scottish Officeand Transport Scotland. Councilsalong the routes will be consultedon a confidential basis. Scotland’s transport minister

Keith Brown said: “I lookforward to reviewing the report ofthe investigation with UK minis-ters and together deciding on thenext steps.”HS2 Ltd will submit a draft

report before next summer’s par-liamentary recess.

HIGH-SPEED RAIL


10 Feature LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

Is a hi-tech future the way aheadfor personal travel planning?

Have you ever had a visit from a personaltravel planner? No? Well, if your doorbellrings next summer (and you live inEngland), there’s a reasonable chanceyou’ll be greeted by a cheery adviser,

eager to offer you maps and advice about local cycleroutes and bus services. And, if you’re really lucky, youmay even receive a free seven-day bus ticket! Thanks to funding from the DfT’s Local Sustainable

Transport Fund, perhaps as many as 200,000 homes willbe targeted for personal travel planning (PTP) next year.For advocates of travel behaviour change, PTP traveladvisers are the frontline troops in the battle to get peopleto use their cars a bit less, whether it be to improve health,cut congestion, or ‘save the planet’. With an onus on persuasion rather than compulsion,

PTP isn’t hugely controversial. If there is a philosophicaldebate to be had, it’s about whether PTP is all a bit nannystate. Good luck to the personal travel planner who goesknocking on the door of communities and local govern-ment secretary Eric Pickles! But the most frequently raisedquestion about PTP is whether it actually delivers long-term changes to travel behaviour. Despite having been in the transport planners’ toolkit

for some years now, PTP still suffers from ‘feast orfamine’ tendencies, heavily reliant as it is on Governmentfunding. And so, although next year promises to be abumper year, the future beyond that is uncertain, with theLocal Sustainable Transport Fund only guaranteed for onemore year (2015/16) and the rules for that funding are cur-rently unclear.To find out more about the future of PTP, I’ve come to

the Basingstoke offices of consultant WSP to talk to AndyWinmill, an associate who heads the firm’s ‘smarterchoices’ team, and Andy Porter, WSP’s director – digitalservices – UK. They want to explain how putting PTP ona digital platform, as WSP intends to do from next year,could cut costs, add transparency, and boost its long-termeffectiveness. This year has been a busy one for WSP’s PTP activi-

ties, with 37,000 households covered in three South Eastlocal authorities: Hampshire, Bracknell Forest and Wok-ingham. All the work has been LSTF-funded. Winmillexplains that PTP advisers hit the streets from April to Sep-tember to capitalise on the long hours of daylight and goodweather. Next year Winmill says WSP has contracts for about

40,000 homes in the bag, and it’s pursuing a number ofother opportunities. He says WSP will typically be com-peting against the likes of Sustrans, Steer Davies Gleave,JMP and AECOM for contracts. There are “subtleties andvariations” to how PTP is delivered by different organisa-tions, he adds. “We’ve got an approach that introduces achallenge aspect into the programme – that’s about reallygetting residents to engage in a trial travel behaviourperiod.” This is one of the crucial areas in which a digitalplatform will help. Winmill outlines the basic approach to PTP. “It’s about

having a chat with a resident, finding out what theirjourney patterns are, where there are gaps in knowledgeand understanding about what their sustainable transportoptions are, and going away and putting together a packof information, it might be cycle maps, walking maps, bustimetables, and providing that information back to a resi-dent, all of it tailored to that individual.” I’m amazed people need the help of an adviser to tell

them where their local bus or cycle path goes. But Winmill

believes many people wouldn’t have the motivation to findthese things out without the visit of an adviser. “I guess alot of people drive to work and always have done, so it’snever really occurred to them to find out and that’s reallythe process of PTP – enlightening people as to what theoptions are.“The great thing about PTP is it’s not just about provid-

ing people with reams and reams of generic information,we’re actually saying, ‘We’ll tell you which bus, fromwhich stop, we’ll tell you how much the fare is, we’ll tellyou what time it leaves, we’ll tell you what time it getsyou to work’.” Similarly, WSP may prepare bespokewalking and cycling maps, showing local facilities andisochrones to indicate how long a trip would take by footor bike.

Not everyone’s cup of teaPTP doesn’t work equally well everywhere, says

Winmill, and the choice of which residential areas totarget comes down to careful analysis of populationdemographics and transport provision. “Our focus is principally on identifying clusters of suc-

cessful professionals and educated suburban familieswho are typically quite car-dependent, but on a less habit-ual basis and who are therefore more open to consideringchanges in their travel behaviour.” Sometimes, however,clients may select a different sort of target population.WSP examines population demographics using Exper-ian’s ‘MOSAIC Groups’ database. “We typically target fairly self-contained communities

well-served by access to local sustainable transportoptions, “ he adds. “Suitable areas might also have ben-efitted from new or planned investment in sustainabletransport infrastructure or improved public transport serv-ices.”

Winmill explains the different performance metrics forPTP. A contract specifying 2,000 homes is the number ofhomes to be visited, not the number of households whochoose to participate. WSP’s travel advisers are instructedto visit an address up to three times to try and catchsomeone at home. The contact rate – the number of house-holds in which the adviser manages to speak to theresident – is typically about 60%. “Of that 60% about 50%choose to participate in the programme. So from 2,000households we might get somewhere in the order of 600taking part.” The firm’s recent work in Basingstoke covered 5,300

homes, of which advisers made contact with someone at2,696, and secured the participation of 1,370, with 373 ofthese taking up the challenge element. Typically, only one member of a household will be

engaged in the PTP. “That fits a cost-effective delivery ofthe service,” says Winmill. People may decline to partici-pate for a variety of reasons. “It might be Mr BMW driverwho just says, ‘Look, naff off, I’m not interested.’ But thereare other people who will open the door in their Lycrashorts and say, ‘Hey, I’m a keen cyclist, I cycle to workevery day anyway.’”The challenge elements of WSP’s PTP programmes aims

to get residents to commit to making a behaviour change.“The challenge aspect is simply we’ll expect the residentto actually take up the challenge of leaving the car at homeat least once to experience travelling to work in a new wayand then they’ll phone or email back their adviser, to givethem a brief account of how it went. In exchange for thatwe’ll offer them some small token of thanks, such as a bikelight or a pedometer.“You get some residents who probably do it once and

decide actually I didn’t particularly like it,” admits Winmill.“But we’re getting a lot of feedback from some of our eval-uations saying, ‘this is great, I can’t believe it, I didn’t

Consultant WSP believes that technology offers huge potential to transform personal travel planning by reducingcosts, adding transparency and ensuring long-lasting travel behaviour change benefits. Andrew Forster speaks toAndy Winmill and Andy Porter about the firm’s plans

Andy Winmill (left) leads WSP’s ‘smarter choices’ work and Andy Porter (right) is director of digital services

LTT635_p10-11_feature_LTT635_p10-11 14/11/2013 21:17 Page 14

TransportXtra.com/ltt Feature 11

realise the bus ran from A to B, I’m going to carry on doingit in the future.’”LSTF PTP projects are primarily focused on journeys to

work but Winmill says that if a resident isn’t in employ-ment or if the car really is their only way to make the worktrip, an adviser can still help, for instance by offering adviceabout a shopping trip or suggesting a car-sharing schemeto cut commuting costs.So how are the achievements of PTP assessed? “When

we make the first visit to a householder we’ll record whatthey do now as a baseline [typically how the residentusually travels to work],” Winmill explains. “We’ll thenengage them in the process and then a couple of monthslater we’ll engage them in an after survey and ask themwhat they’re doing now, and we’ll look at what modal shifthas been achieved in the process. “I’ll admit to a limitation with this kind of evaluation,

and that is whether or not that change in travel behaviour,positive as it is, is being sustained longer-term beyond theduration of the project.” Again, Winmill believes a digitalplatform could help ensure a long-term benefit.PTP advisers are employed on fixed term contracts, and

many are students grateful of summer work. There’s anart to being a good adviser, says Winmill. “Typically welook for people who’ve got good inter-personal skills, whoare confident on the doorstep but not in a sort of doubleglazing salesman way. People who believe in sustainabletransport and do it themselves tends to help, and gettingpeople from the local areas is great.” WSP has about 40-50advisers on its books and used eight to deliver PTP to the5,300 households in Basingstoke this year. A first chat on the doorstep will typically last about ten

minutes but Winmill is keen to trim this down. “At the endof the day, the less time an adviser needs to be on thedoorstep to gather the information they need from some-body and still provide them with a good level of service,then the more cost-effective the PTP programme is goingto be for our clients.”So how much does PTP cost? Winmill says it depends

on the size of the scheme, with bigger schemes benefittingfrom economies of scale. “For the kind of projects we’redoing the cost per household is going to be between £18and £25 per targeted household.” Costs can also varydepending on the PTP offer. He’s worked on projectswhere the clients have purchased monthly bus tickets thatare then presented free of charge to residents who haven’tused a bus in years. Some bus operators give tickets awayfor free, others agree to sell them to the client at a discount.

A digital platformWinmill believes the digital platform for PTP delivery

can bring the cost down to about £15 per targeted house-hold for large-scale interventions. Andy Porter has beenleading the technical side of the digital development. Perhaps the most visible aspect of the change will be

that advisers throw away their clipboards and pens andstart collecting data from households with tablet devices.As well as eliminating the need for long periods of dataentry in the office, the information collected on the tabletswill be automatically captured in a database, and can beaccessed instantly by WSP’s project managers and by thelocal authority client. The digital platform can produce arange of performance data (see image above) and Winmillbelieves some of it could provide a rich source of infor-mation for clients to use in other transport planningactivities.WSP is also to offer residents the choice of receiving

their timetables and maps in paper format or by email.Winmill says participants are increasingly requesting theinformation electronically so that they can access it viasmartphones when they’re on the move. Could emailingthe information also eliminate the need for advisers to paya second visit to participating households?“That’s what we’re hoping to achieve,” says Porter. But Winmill is more cautious. “It’s an option, the issue

is whether or not the second visit may still be worthwhileto engage with a resident to check they’re happy with whatthey’ve received [by email]. Hopefully the answer will be‘yes’ but if the answer’s ‘No, I didn’t understand some-

thing,’ the adviser will still be on the doorstep with a tabletto say, ‘Ok, you’re not sure where that bus stop was, welllook, let me bring up Google Streetview and I’ll just showyou where it is.’ As things stand I think we may retain asecond visit for that reason.”Winmill and Porter are particularly excited about how

a digital platform could transform the challenge elementof WSP’s PTP offer. “With this digital platform we’re cre-ating, we’re looking to revamp the challenge element,”Winmill explains. “We’re looking at who we might be ableto partner with to introduce a new challenge process inwhich people actually register the journeys that they makeand receive some kind of reward-based incentive – points,like air miles I suppose – for each time they make thatjourney.”He points to the Strava website/app that records people’s

running and bike trips using GPS tracking from smart-phones and watches.“We can have a similar approach where for every mile

of sustainable travel you do you earn points, you accruethose points and then perhaps exchange them for someother form of reward,” Winmill explains.Is this a proposal or a commitment?“It’s the intention that we do it,” says Winmill, adding

that WSP wants to make it part of its PTP offer next year.“We’re in discussion with one reward-based app providerand we’re looking at other potential providers of theseservices to see how we might integrate them with thisdigital platform going forward.”Porter chips in. “We can already develop the apps, we

have the capability to develop smartphone and tablet appsbut other providers are already out there in the marketplace

and have got the solution already, but I think that needs tobe tailored to the PTP market in particular. “Things such as Strava will only fit in with, say com-

petitive cyclists, whereas we need something that mightbe more tailored around peoples’ needs, say, for how muchmoney they’ve saved, how many calories they’ve burnedetc etc, rather than competition.”Winmill explains how an app could be integrated with

PTP: “What we’d like to do is register people through ourprocess [on the doorstep] and then they’ll be emailed forexample how to download the app or how to enter theinformation online.”Porter thinks there could be some revenue benefits for

WSP in this. “The commercial opportunity is around theproviders of the reward, if we’re going to provide lots andlots of new users of transport, whether it’s bus operatorsor cycle shops.”But Winmill sees the app primarily as a way of build-

ing legacy into PTP programmes. “When it’s all said anddone, when all the PTP programmes have been deliveredand it comes to March 2015 and the LSTF money runsout, what’s there at the end of it all and where does it gobeyond that? If you’ve got an ability to engage with tens ofthousands of households, get a proportion of them to beginto sign up to something that’s really more about a lifestylechange and do it effectively in perpetuity, you can say toyour client at the end of the process, ‘Not only have weachieved these outcomes in terms of our performancemetrics but, you know what, there’s 500 households in thisarea that are now users of this app’.”More generally, Winmill is hopeful that all the PTP

being undertaken around the country will strengthen theevidence base for its effectiveness. And if the money runsout from Government, there’s still the opportunity to usePTP in new housing developments. “It might be verymuch in a developer’s interest to deliver a PTP scheme,£100,000 say, rather than spend £500,000 on a large com-plicated junction improvement. But for a developer to runthat argument with a local highway authority they’re goingto have to have a pretty clear evidence base that that’s whatPTP is going to achieve.”Is the evidence available yet?“As things stand, it’s not there for me at the moment.

PTP evaluations at the moment tend to be short-term eval-uations – deliver it, wait a short while, gather the aftersurvey information. But if we deliver the kind of thingswe’ve spoken about today we’ll actually be looking atpeoples’ behaviour over a much longer period.”

The digital platform gives PTP project managers and clients instant access to a wide range of performanceinformation about the programme

We’re looking to introducea new challenge process in whichpeople actually register the journeysthey make [on an app] and receivesome kind of reward-basedincentive for each time they makethat journey.

Andy Winmill, WSP

LTT635_p10-11_feature_LTT635_p10-11 14/11/2013 21:17 Page 15

Last year the DfT ministers for cycling and road safetysparked outrage by suggesting that the Dutch had aninferior cycling safety record compared to the UK. Ofcourse, in terms of cyclist deaths per 100,000 population– the conventional ‘road safety’ metric – it is worse. Butin terms of deaths per journey, distance, or time trav-elled – it is far better. From a road danger reduction point of view, as

opposed to the conventional road safety view, thepeople complaining were right. The official view inher-ently discriminates against having far more cycling,unless the death or other casualty rate goes down by agreater factor.This is not an arcane debate for professionals, but

goes right to the heart of what people want in terms ofsafety and how people adapt to perceptions of danger. A better measure than the dominant one – as has been

flagged up by cyclist groups, some enlightened coun-cils, and even central government – is one taking someaccount of exposure: journeys, time, distance travelled(incidentally, much of this article applies to pedestriansas well). It takes resources to do counts, but they arenecessary to give a meaningful indicator. Presenting theinformation this way also has the benefit of showingthat cycling, particularly in London, is far less haz-ardous than is often made out. But we need to go further. Although subject to the

usual problems of knowing exactly what happens in and

before a collision, we have a good idea of the move-ments preceding cyclists being killed or seriouslyinjured, certainly in London. As well as helping identifypreventive measures, this determines who is legallyresponsible: we thus open the discussion out into whokills or hurts whom. So we could have useful indicatorsof chances of a cyclist being hurt or killed by a cardriver legally responsible for the collision.If, by ‘cyclist safety’ we mean what cyclists can do to

other road users, we get a useful indication that cyclistsare much less likely than other road users to be involvedin incidents where others get hurt or killed. How about a‘Who Kills/Hurts Whom’ indicator, where a mode isportrayed in terms of the chances of its users being in acollision where somebody else gets hurt or killed? The debate really takes off with the idea that a given

location is/is not safe because there are few cyclistKSIs. The road danger reduction movement has longstruggled to show that there may be an absence of casu-alties because of low exposure – very often preciselybecause the location is seen as being hazardous. This is not just a subjective whim. Locations such as

large gyratories, and places where cyclists may have tocross multiple lanes of fast-flowing motor traffic, areplaces with higher than average dangers from motortraffic. In that sense, professionals dismissing the fears of

actual or potential cyclists are wrong. And we canmeasure objective danger factors: levels of Bikeabilityskills required to negotiate a junction; numbers of lanesto cross; speed of motor traffic; and so on. As BasilFawlty might say, the fact of greater danger at somelocations is often “bleedin’ obvious”, irrespective of oreven inversely related to cyclist KSI numbers. And thereare plenty of general indicators of road danger – for allroad users – that can be usefully appended: the usualpercentiles of speed, proportions of drivers unregistered,numbers of insurance claims made by motorists, etc. Where does this measuring actually lead us? Looking

at locations with so-called “accident problems” hasalways been pretty hopeless as a guide to action forcyclist safety. Quite apart from the points above, there

are issues with low numbers and non-reporting. What do we actually want? This is a moral and politi-

cal point. Road danger reduction differentiates betweenincidents such as a drunken cyclist falling off his bikeand ones where the cyclist is struck by an illegallydriving motorist. Neutralising that difference, which isthe effect of the road safety profession totting upnumbers of cyclist road traffic accidents is unscientificas well as immoral. The key point is to draw attention tothe need to reduce danger at source, namely from the(inappropriate) use of motor vehicles. After all, a safetyissue can be responded to by any kind of supposed“safety intervention”, irrespective of the chances ofactually reducing danger.Naturally, in a car-dominated society, such talk leads

to the accusatory “but it can be the cyclist’s fault”. Butthe fact that motorists can be responsible for hurting orkilling themselves has not prevented construction of the‘forgiving’ environment for them: airbags, crumplezones, seatbelts by vehicle engineers; felling roadsidetrees, crash barriers and anti-skid surfaces by highwayengineers. All of this idiot-proofing is known to haveexacerbated the idiocy, if not produced the idiots. Creat-ing a forgiving environment for cyclists (and others) byreducing danger at source may well collude with care-lessness by cyclists – but those who colluded with rule-and law-breaking by motorists can hardly argue againstdoing the same for rule-breaking that is less dangerousto others. Road danger reduction ultimately means a change of

culture – whether expressed through law enforcement,vehicle or highway engineering or just plain humanbehaviour. At the very least, aggregated cyclist KSIsmust now no longer be the dominant measure of cyclistsafety, with any targets involving measures of exposureand objective danger factors.

Robert DaviesRoad Danger Reduction Forum

VIEWPOINT

If we want safer roads for cyclingwe have to change how wemeasure road safety

In Passing

Robert Davies is chair of the Road Danger ReductionForum (www.rdrf.org.uk) and author of Death on theStreets: cars and the mythology of road safety (1993).He has worked as transport planner in localgovernment for 25 years.

12 Comment LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

How about a ‘who kills/hurtswhom’ indicator, where a mode isportrayed in terms of the chances of itsusers being in a collision wheresomebody else gets hurt or killed?

At LTT’s conference last week on Local EnterprisePartnerships, Buckinghamshire LEP chair Alex Pratt ablydemonstrated that some in the business community havegot to grips with the ins and outs of transport policy-making, discussing, amongst other things, how the LEPswere planning to form sub-regional grouping to liaise withthe Highways Agency. But if the email autoreply messagewe received from him this week is anything to go by, wefear all this work with the public sector starting to suffo-cate his entrepreneurial talents: “Nov 12th... This week I'llbe mainly in meetings reminiscing about what it used tobe like when I did things that had an immediate tangibleimpact.” LEPs stifling business? Tell that to Messrs Cableand Pickles.

Could next September’s referendum on Scottish inde-pendence have a bearing on the Government’s high-speedrail plans? The DfT has just asked HS2 Ltd and NetworkRail to examine ways of bringing the journey time betweenLondon and Glasgow/Edinburgh down below three hours.

HS2 Ltd will report back next summer, which would allowthe Government to make a costly pledge just weeks beforethe independence vote. Assuming the ‘No’ campaign winsthe referendum, the pledge will be very difficult for any ofthe pro-Union parties to back out of later on.

Richard Wellings, deputy editorial director of freemarket think-tank the Institute of Economic Affairs, isabout as straight-talking as they come. Appearing beforethe House of Commons treasury select committee lastweek to discuss high-speed rail, Wellings was quizzedabout his wider rail views by Liberal Democrat MP JohnThurso, whose north of Scotland constituency includesthe Far North rail lines to Wick and Thurso. Wellings saidthe first priority was to eliminate subsidy from the railsystem, which would inevitably lead to rural line closures.This incensed Mr Thurso who thundered, so Londonwould be fine but Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Rossmight as well join Norway! Wellings seemed to agree.“Rail’s irrelevant in those sorts of areas,” he retorted.

“Most people use cars, it’s 90-odd percent cars.” Violentscenes were only averted by Thurso’s diplomacy, the MPdeclaring: “Well, we’ll move rapidly on.”

Does any street in Britain offer more breathtakingviews than those from Edinburgh’s Princes Street?Arguably not but the street itself is a big disappointment,with crowded footways, poor quality paving, a constantflow of buses, and increasingly tatty shops. With Edin-burgh’s troubled tram due to start running along the streetnext spring, councillors are finally looking at ways toimprove the street’s image, including extending the pave-ments on the shops side of the street and allowing cafesto open up on the ground floor of premises with outsideseating. But locals aren’t altogether convinced that this isa wise idea, with the council’s summary of the consulta-tion feedback noting: “For many respondents the climateissues were insurmountable. They felt that as they had nodesire to sit outside in Scotland for most of the year, itwas unlikely that anyone else would want to.”

LTT635_p12-14_Viewpoint and letters_LTT635 pp12-14 14/11/2013 19:10 Page 12

WebTAG prevents HS2 tacklingthe North-South divideOver the last few weeks HS2 has been taking heavy fire,and not just from NIMBYs. Reports suggest that Labourwill want to look critically at regional economic benefitsrelative to costs (‘Labour could wreck HS2, warns PM’,LTT 1 Nov). But costs relative to benefits is exactlywhat economic appraisal is supposed to do, and a stringof those over the last year, from official and semi-offi-cial sources, seem to show a healthy surplus. The fundamental problem seems to be the effect on

public credibility of constant changes to the basic storyline. The original case for HS2 rested on the value oftime savings for business users (several £bn at so many£s a minute). Over the last few months it has shiftedtwice:• When it was pointed out that people often work ontrains, the focus became providing additional capacitywith minimum disruption; and • As other ways of increasing capacity emerged, thereason became tackling the North-South divide –‘regional regeneration’.I believe that only the last of these reasons potentially

provides a good enough case for spending around £50bnon high-speed rail. Unfortunately this is not a proposi-tion on which the present appraisal system can beconvincing, as the latest economic case report from HS2Ltd itself makes disarmingly clear. When I reported to Greengauge 21 in 2009 on

regional issues (Complementary measures to facilitateregional economic benefits from high-speed rail) Iexpressed concern that the dynamic economic processesinvolved depended on consistent action across a widerange of other policy areas; that there was no coherentsystem of governance capable of delivering this in thelong-run; and the potential of such actions were notaddressed by the official appraisal process. In otherwords, HS2 requires a broad approach for which welack the machinery – and even if we had the machinerywe wouldn’t be able to tell if it was worthwhile. If any-thing, the position now is worse now than it was then.Tackling the North-South divide is a cause capable of

enlisting the long-term public support that a project suchas high-speed rail requires if it is to happen. But publicconfidence that regional regeneration would resultrequires a radical re-think of both the project and itsappraisal. Connections between elements of ‘the North’should be the priority, to catalyse an economic agglom-eration capable of balancing and complementingLondon and the South East and (incidentally providingthe Birmingham-London HS2 link with the real purposeit currently lacks). Time savings were the reason for the400km per hour design speed of HS2: but for regionalregeneration 300kmph (as in most of the rest of Europe)would be adequate. This would cut costs and reduceenvironmental impact (especially if the link to Londonfollowed existing motorway and/or mainline railwaycorridors), and in line with regional regeneration logicserved Manchester Airport rather than Heathrow. Aradical redesign is thus needed, both to reflect the newrationale and to get better value for money. The Germans have tackled their East-West divide

over the last 20 years with a coherent national sense ofdirection: so what is stopping the UK tackling its ownNorth-South divide with equal energy, purpose andcommitment? A great deal of political capital has been

invested in HS2 by all three major parties, so finessingany change will be extremely difficult. The conventionalappraisal system is now an obstacle: it is clearly unableto deal convincingly with broader and longer-termissues of regional balance, yet it is used in the latest HS2study, and the DfT has just re-issued a restructured (butbasically unaltered) version of its web-based transportappraisal guidance, WebTAG. This appraisal systemdepends on a narrow econometrician’s view of howbusinesses work, and has become a vast rambling struc-ture in which few outside its priesthood now have anyfaith. We need a more convincing story than WebTAGcan offer, and (whisper who dares) this may perhapstake the form of an essay rather than a spreadsheet.PS. Since writing this letter, HS2 Ltd’s Strategic case

for HS2 has appeared, and it is “an essay not a spread-sheet”. But, unfortunately, not a very good one: insteadof a coherent argument, based on strategic economicpurposes and buttressed by relevant evidence, it is anenormous heap of everything that sounds a bit positive.

Alan Wenban-SmithUrban & Regional PolicyBirmingham B13

We’ve enjoyed the comedy butit’s time to end this HS2 farce A high spot on TV in my youth was the WhitehallFarce series starring Brian Rix and Elspeth Grey.Events gradually descended into farcical chaos, storieschanging, misinformation abounding, vital facts with-held, identities altered and confusion everywhere.Today we have our own version, it’s called HS2.It’s been a green alternative to expanding Heathrow,

long since forgotten. Not that it was going thereanyway. Its green credentials are long gone, tinynumbers of passengers are expected to come from carsor planes. It was going to save business folk wastingtime on trains, a concept also long gone with moderncommunications. So now it isn’t about speed anymore,it’s “a new north south railway” – so why perseverewith a high-speed alignment that misses so many placesand causes discontent?It is claimed it will bridge the north-south divide

despite the DfT clearly stating on your front cover inJanuary 2012 that it wasn’t designed to do so (‘HS2isn’t about reducing CO2 or the North-South divide,says DfT’ LTT 19 Jan 12). They also said it wouldn’tcut carbon dioxide emissions. There’s a lot more to the north than Leeds and Man-

chester. If HS2 were built, folk from places such asHalifax now enjoying cross-platform connections atLeeds for London would have to trek to another station.The HS2 business case lists many places that wouldhave fewer and slower services to London, the LakeDistrict being but one. And as so-called high-speedtrains won’t tilt, they’ll be slower than today’s Pen-dolino trains on existing tracks. Experience ofhigh-speed rail in other countries shows central citiesbenefit as companies no longer have a need for regionaloffices. Talk about leaving a legacy. Network Rail’s figure for the amount of disruption

necessary to upgrade existing lines as an alternative toHS2 looks as if it was plucked from the air. Andanyway, just last week my first Sunday train on the

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

When ministers authorised the creation of LocalEnterprise Partnerships across England three yearsago, many in local government were sceptical thatthese alliances of businesses and councils wouldever become serious players in local economicpolicy. After all, the partnerships had no funding tospeak of, their role was ill-defined, and they wouldrequire busy private sector business people todevote their time to the sometimes stultifyingprocess of public sector decision-making. The hurried formation of LEPs hardly boosted

confidence, with many partnerships established withoverlapping boundaries, which were, and remain, arecipe for confusion. But three years on and, withthe help of a small cash injection to build theircapacity, the LEPs are on the verge of taking overfrom local government decisions on how billions ofpounds of public funds a year are spent, mostnotably the £2bn a year Single Local Growth Fund tobe introduced from April 2015. The DfT is thebiggest single departmental contributor to the fund,putting in just over £1bn.Last week’s LTT-sponsored conference on LEPs

provided an opportunity to learn how preparationsfor the transfer of power are proceeding. Despite noring-fencing within the fund, LEP and DfT represen-tatives seemed confident that transport projects willdo well, potentially receiving more money than theDfT puts in. But the day threw up a huge number ofconcerns about how the reforms could shape localtransport policy. Where, for instance, do social, envi-ronmental and road safety objectives now sit, giventhe seemingly single-minded focus on theeconomy? Are business leaders likely to engage inthe sometimes subtle debates about the economicbenefits of public transport, walking and cyclingschemes, or will they simply see the junctionimprovement or the road widening as their priority?And will they have the patience to wait for schemesto pass through sometimes lengthy DfT’s appraisalprocedures? Sitting above all these issues were questions

about the democratic legitimacy of the new set-up.Councils are members of the LEPs (and, in somecases, actually in the driving seat) but LEPs are notelected bodies and nor do they seem to have thecapacity, time, inclination, or requirement to consulton their investment priorities. The strong suspicion is that the electorate remains

oblivious to these reforms and will only becomeaware of what has happened when they quiz theircouncil about why a particular policy is beingpursued or why the council has no cash to imple-ment a local safety scheme or cycleway. They maybe very puzzled by the answer and tempted to ask afollow-up question, what are councils now for?

LEPs – do thepublic know?

TransportXtra.com/ltt Comment 13

> MORE ON p14

In January 2012 the DfT said there was no robust method of understanding how the economic benefits ofhigh-speed rail would be split between different parts of the country. See letters from Alan Wenban-Smithand Roger Davies


West Coast Main Line was cancelled due to plannedengineering works and I had to take a later one. A fewmonths back the line was closed for around two weeksfor necessary upgrading works. So as far as disruptioncaused by HS2 alternatives is concerned, it’s a case ofno change there then.Then there is the question of cost. Nobody in their

right minds can assert today that the already horrendouscost will not rise.As I predicted (Letters LTT 21 Dec 12) it comes

down to the capacity argument. I’m not sure we have aproblem with that here, and with evening peak WestCoast trains leaving London half-empty it doesn’t seemto be the right area to be looking at. But it is right wehave many desperately overcrowded trains; the problemis HS2 will not help the vast majority of them. It is allwell and good politicians supporting the scheme in theinterest of helping standing commuters but what theyare actually saying is “and you are going to have to doit for another 20 to 30 years”.We have pressing needs on the railways that need a

solution and need it now. HS2 is not that solution, itnever will be, and should be scrapped immediately. At least the Whitehall farces usually turned out right

in the end.

Roger Davies Kendal LA9

Diesel vehicles: worsening airquality and no CO2 benefitsDuncan Laxen and Stephen Moorcroft refer to ourfailure to achieve reductions in nitrogen dioxide concen-trations and relate this to the growth in the number ofdiesel cars combined with the lack of any improvementin diesel car emissions (Viewpoint LTT 18 Oct).The situation is quite different in Tokyo where both

overall nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide levels arefalling steadily, despite a rise in the nitrogendioxide/nitrogen oxide ratio. The reason for this differ-

ence is the absence of diesel cars in Japan. Indeed, only18% of vehicle kilometres driven by light goods vehi-cles in Tokyo are by diesel vehicles.Laxen and Moorcroft say that the growth in diesel

cars is a real plus for reducing carbon dioxide emissions.This is now being questioned. The late Lee Schipper,from Stanford University and the University of Califor-nia, Berkeley, and Lew Fulton in a paper in the March2013 issue of Energy Policy entitled ‘Dazzled bydiesel?’ conclude that the European switch to diesel “hascontributed little itself to the observed reduction iscarbon dioxide emissions from new vehicles.” Indeed,Michel Cames and Eckard Helmers, writing in the openaccess journal Environmental Sciences Europe, 201325:15, go further and “conclude that global warming hasbeen negatively affected” when a significant increase insupply chain carbon dioxide emissions together withblack carbon emissions are taken into account.

David HutchinsonLewes, East Sussex BN7

Cycleways would be betterbeside motorways than HS2I was interested by the article on a proposed cyclewayparallel to HS2 (‘Consultants invited to design a cycle-way to parallel HS2 route’ LTT 01 Nov). So theGovernment thinks a cycleway parallel to HS2 is a goodidea and I think they are right. The publicity from such ascheme will excite a bit more interest in cycling andimprove the green credentials of the Coalition.However, there are several “buts” to be considered. First, the National Cycle Network, and other cycle

networks that it links, is a mature infrastructure and, likethe original railway network, probably, needs an update.Secondly, HS2 is likely to take a generation to completeand, by that time, we need to have between 10% and20% of journeys made by bicycle. Thirdly, HS2 is a railway and cycling is a road-based

fully accessible mode. So a cycleway won’t want to go

where HS2 goes. If they want a normal cycleway thatlinks the north and south it should be routed parallel toexisting motorways and should be started now. I believe that the disruption caused by HS2 should be

ameliorated by the inclusion of a north/south waterpipeline. I know there are objections to this but in 25years’ time the water distribution system may havechanged radically and it will be too late for a retro-fit.

Brian DaltonPurleySurrey CR8

TfL’s flawed claim of camerabenefits overlook costs too Transport for London’s claims for speed camera effec-tiveness are just the most recent example of long-termflawed and selective analysis (“TfL’s claim of speedcamera casualty benefits ‘nonsensical’” LTT 1 Nov).TfL not only ignores Regression to the Mean (RTM),

as Malcolm Heymer points out, but fails even tomention, let alone adust for, camera costs of £30,000 to£50,000 per annum compared to £1,000 per annum forvehicle activated signs. Nor indeed is there mention thatcameras, being so much more expensive, tend to beused where accident numbers and subsequent RTM fallswill be higher. Furthermore, given the police STATS19accident causation data, it is not remotely possible thatthe speed reductions achieved from speed cameras couldresult in the accident reductions observed.

Idris FrancisPetersfield, Hampshire GU32

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR (continued)14 Comment LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

SEND letters to be considered for publication to:Local Transport Today, Apollo House, 359 Kennington Lane, London SE11 5QYFax: 0845 270 7961 Email: [email protected](Letters may be edited)


What knowledge liesbehind cycle forecast?

PHIL GOODWINComment

THE ASTUTE Times reporter Philip Pank wrote last week‘Funding cuts fear as cycling is forecast to drop’. Thefunding cuts were not in any official statement, but theforecasts were as official as you can get – results fromthe Department for Transport’s National Travel Model(NTM), announced in Parliament by the transport minister,Robert Goodwill. The suggestion was that although cycletrips would rise a little between now and 2015, both tripsand mileage travelled by bicycle would then decline forthe following 15 years, So the ‘fear’ is that a broad brushstrategic view that cycling will decline will set a tone for thediscussion in which cycling is seen as a loser from thestart. Now the actual figures for both trips and miles seem to

be different (and less) from those found in the NationalTravel Survey and other sources, but the question is why issuch a decline forecast when large, unprecedentedincreases in cycling have been such an important aspectof the transport landscape in recent years.One reason is that – as I am sure the DfT modellers

would be second to agree – the NTM is unsuitable in manyways for forecasting cycling (not ‘fit for purpose’ in thestrict sense of that phrase) because cycling is a small pro-portion of the total, the data are unreliable, the error bandsare consequently wide, and the NTM mainly emphasisesthose aspects of influence over transport that have anational dimension, such as ‘the economy’, not the crucialinfluences over cycling which are manifestly local, asshown by the huge variation in experience between areaswhere cycling is increasing massively, and others where itis declining. The model is more comfortable with forecastswhere roughly similar things are happening in differentplaces. Another reason is that the model has never sought to

capture the effects of motivations such as health, fitness,enjoyment or lifestyle. While there are hints of suchimpacts buried in some of the parameters, they remainjust hints, and are almost invariably discounted. The maininfluences – say the model, and its custodians – are pop-ulation, the economy, and costs.But even if that were true, the question then arises – so

why does not the model forecast that cycling will increaseat least in line with population, and the expectations ofeconomic growth? Is cycling assumed to be such an infe-rior mode that growing numbers of people will shun it, andthe richer they are the more they will shun it, in favour ofcar use? The other dimension is the convention that forecasts

don’t include the effects of policies other than those firmlycommitted. This might be – I speculate – the reason whythere are modest increases forecast up to 2015, becausethe current allocation of funds to support cycling are com-mitted until then, but thereafter no commitment has beenmade, so the assumption is that they will cease, and thedecline would be seen as the predicted effect of stoppingthe policies. That’s quite a subtle and double-edged argu-ment, in principle, though in practice may not be importantsince I strongly suspect that the model will say (wrongly)that neither the funds already allocated, nor their cessa-

tion, would have very large effects. In any case, the Times story reports “The DfT said that

its forecasts were based on rising incomes, fallingmotoring costs, higher congestion, an ageing and growingpopulation and additional road infrastructure.”Can this really be true, this quote? Did a DfT spokesman

really say that cycling would fall because increased roadcapacity will be provided – another policy which is aproposition for future governments, and cannot be morecertain than the cessation of expenditure on cycling.I think we have to look at the bigger picture. The DfT’s

record, since 1989, on traffic forecasting at the nationallevel, is appallingly bad. The long-term road traffic fore-casts have consistently been overestimated, both in timesof economic growth and economic difficulty. Rail has beenmostly substantially underestimated. Now the reason whyit is appalling may not be all, or even mostly, the DfT’sown fault, as they stoutly repeat: they were given wrongassumptions about economic growth by the Treasury andwrong population forecasts by OPCS. That argument hassome merit at the national, aggregate level. But it begs a bigger question. If the disaggregate fore-

casts for specific areas, area types, population segments,

policy contexts, age groups, occupations or other minori-ties are systematically wrong – and especially wrong forthe crucial cases where trends are changing – there mustbe something structurally wrong with the relationships andlinkages in the model, and the national totals must them-selves be less reliable.That proposition, it seems to me, provides a really inter-

esting starting point for a set of performance tests on themodel which would genuinely increase understanding ofhow it operates – above all when the model itself stillremains a closed, internal, DfT-only tool not available forany external analysts. Those tests – careful, transparent, fully engaged with

stakeholders and without the need either to ‘prove’ or ‘dis-prove’ the model – would really help to move forward theunresolved paradox about forecasts, which rests at theheart of road infrastructure policy. The official view is that traffic, especially car use, will

continue to grow indefinitely into the future, more or less inproportion to population, encouraged by economic growthand by reduction of motoring costs as engines get moreefficient. The alternative view suggests that car use is at orclose to some sort of saturation level and will remainstable, or even decline, in future. This view observes pop-ulation and economic growth happening without trafficgrowth, influenced by changing land use patterns andchanging attitudes and behaviour, starting with the young.I am inclined to this view. I could be wrong of course, butthe point is that the debate is unresolved. Car use mightincrease, and cycling decrease, as the DfT predicts, or itmight not. In terms of the balance of evidence – a growinginternational literature by excellent scholars – the DfT’sforecasts are, at least, seriously contested. Now the paradox is this. If the DfT forecasts are right,

their programme of road infrastructure projects will appearto give good value for money, the way the calculus ofappraisal is done, but the programme will fail to makethings better. It may slow down the pace at which congestion

increases, but congestion will increase, and therefore anyimpact of congestion on the economy will be a negativeone, not a positive one. Transport will depress theeconomy. So if the forecasts are right, the road strategy iswrong. If however the forecasts are wrong, ie if there willnot be much traffic growth, the projects will reduce con-gestion, but at a cost which is disproportionately hugecompared with the modest benefits. That is a real strategicdilemma, and I think the NTM has much to contribute to it,potentially. But not without a much more carefullydesigned scrutiny.

The DfT’s prediction that cycle volumes will decline raisesimportant questions about its modelling

Phil Goodwin is professor of transport policy at theCentre for Transport and Society, University of West ofEngland, Bristol, and emeritus professor at UniversityCollege London. Email: [email protected]

The DfT’s record, since1989, on traffic forecasting at thenational level, is appallingly bad.Long-term road traffic forecastshave consistently beenoverestimated... and rail has beenmostly substantially overestimated.

The DfT predicts cycling tripswill decline from 2015 onwards

An archive of Phil Goodwin’s columns is availableon TransportXtra.com/reports

TransportXtra.com/ltt Comment 15

LTT635_p15_Phil Goodwin_LTT635_p15 14/11/2013 20:33 Page 15

NatioNaL ExprEss Grouphas reported revenue growth of5% in the third quarter, and 3%for the year to date.

the group has five main busi-ness areas: uK rail, uK Bus,uK Coach, spain and Northamerica.

UK Coach turned in an“exceptional performance” forthe seasonally important thirdquarter, with the august Bankholiday week described as being“the best on record for passengervolume and revenue”. revenuerose 9% in the quarter, and wasup 5% for the year to date,largely passenger volume driven.

NEG partly attributes this tolower fares, as well as formingpartnerships with airlines servinguK airports, and retailing ticketsthrough 11,000 post officebranches.

UK Bus like-for-like commer-cial revenue (i.e. adjusted formileage changes) was 3% higherin the third quarter, with passen-ger numbers 2% up, comparedwith the corresponding period of2012.

UK Rail figures are not givenfor the third quarter. c2c is theonly remaining NEG rail fran-chise (now extended toseptember 2014). however, the

group has been shortlisted for theprestigious Berlin ringbahn con-tract, which it says is part of apipeline of German rail opportu-nities worth over €500m of“targeted annual revenue”.

Bath aND North East som-erset Council has awardedGerman bike hire firmNextbike a contract to operatea public bike hire scheme inBath.

the contract will seeNextbike supply 100 bikes,based at ten docking stations.the scheme will be launched inthe spring. Nextbike’s contractis for two years with a one-yearperformance-based extension.

the Nextbike system willreplace italian firm’s Bicincittáscheme, launched under theCivitas programme two yearsago.

Nextbike was founded inLeipzig in 2004 and operates in80 cities in ten countries. itdoesn’t operate any schemes inthe uK but Glasgow CityCouncil has selected it tooperate a scheme in the city,with 150 bikes at 30 dockingstations due to be launchednext May (LTT 18 oct).

Coach traffic boosts National Express Nextbikewins Bathbike hirecontract

hEathroW airport’sowners have stepped up theircampaign against Gatwickairport’s expansion plans, bypublishing a report suggestingthat cities can only support onehub airport.

Gatwick’s owners have putforward plans for a secondrunway to the Government’sairports Commission and saidthat London doesn’t need asingle mega-hub airport such as

heathrow or at one of the loca-tions identified by Londonmayor Boris Johnson.

But heathrow has now pub-lished the findings of a reportcommissioned from aviationconsultant JLs Consulting intowhether a split-hub model couldwork. JLs reviewed airportoperations in New York, tokyo,paris and Moscow and con-cludes that none operate atwo-hub model.

Baa chief executive ColinMatthews said: “this researchshows that no world cities havesuccessfully split demandacross multiple hub airports.the uK can only benefit fromimproved long haul connectionsby building a bigger hubairport.”� Analysis of global hub air-ports – why no city supportsmore than one hub is availableat http://tinyurl.com/m68u4m8

Heathrow attacks Gatwick airport’s plans


By John W E Helm

FirstGroup has reportedmixed results for the half-yearresults to end of september witha deterioration of results in its uKBus division but improved per-formance in rail.

revenues as a whole were£3.30bn, up by 1.6% on the£3.25bn in the first half (h1) of2012. Net debt was slashed30.5% to £1,446.8m (h1 2012,£2081.8m).

underlying (or unadjusted)EBitDa (earnings before inter-est tax depreciation andamortisation) was up 2.6% to£269m (h1 2012 £262m), andoperating profit increased 10.1%to £109.9m (h1 2012 £99.8m).

however, the adjusted resultsafter depreciation, amortisationand interest, but before taxresulted in a group loss of £8.0m.a tax credit of £11.8m trans-formed this into a £3.8m profit.this is an improvement on h12012, where a £9.9m tax creditreduced a £20.6m loss to one of£10.7m.

return on capital employed(roCE) after tax is currently 8%,though First wants to ratchet this

up to 10-12% in all but the railsectors within the next four years.

operating margins in the uKBus (3.5%) and uK rail (2.4%)divisions compare unfavourablywith First’s North america Grey-hound (9.5%) and First transit(7.7%) operations, but consider-ably better than the 1.7% marginfrom its First student operationsin North america.

UK Bus accounts for around15% of group turnover and ranksthird in size behind uK rail (withover 40%), and First student(about 20%).

uK Bus revenue fell 14.3% to£490.7m (h1 2012, £572.9m),and operating profit slumped17.6% to £17.3m (h1 2012,£21.0m), bringing down marginsfrom 3.7% to 3.5%.

First attributes this fall to anumber of factors: withdrawalfrom the London bus market; theolympic Games boost; higherfuel costs; and reduced centralgovernment grants to the busindustry. When these are factoredout FirstGroup claims passengerrevenues on a like-for-like basisactually increased by 1.7%.

the sale of eight London bus

depots for £79.1m resulted in a£16.5m profit.

First has initiated a three-pronged programme to stimulatebus revenues and return marginsto double-digit levels through:cost-cutting; selective fare cuts;and introducing new vehicles.

average passenger volumesgrew 0.7% in the six monthperiod, the first increase forseveral years, with a 7.8% risereported in the North region.

UK Rail is a very mixed port-folio: First Capital Connect(FCC) and First Great Western(FGW) are premium payers, butFirst scotland (Fsr) and Firsttranspennine (FtpE) receivesubsidises, while First hull trains(Fht) is an open-access operator.

total rail revenue increased7.6% to £1.40bn (h1 2012,£1.30bn), and operating profitsshot up 37.8% to £32.8m (h12012, £23.8m), improvingmargins from 1.8% to 2.4%. pas-senger revenues remains strong inall five operators, averaging 5.7%growth over the first six-monthsof the financial year, with hulltrains turning in the best per-formance of 8.0%. Franchise

passenger volumes grew 3.6%.premium payments made by

FGW to the Governmentincreased to £234.2m (h1 2012,£200.5m) and on FCC rose to£118.0m (h1 2012, £105.5m).

But both franchises receivedrevenue support from Govern-ment: FGW £153.4m (h1 2012,£132.3m) and FCC £39.3m (h12012, £26.0m). revenue supportcan be claimed from the Dft ifthe actual annual revenue fallsbelow the agreed target revenuelevel of the original bid. if theshortfall is between 94% and98%, the Dft makes up 50%; ifless than 94%, the Dft contribu-tion rises to 80%. Both FCC andFGW are in the latter category.

subsidies to Fsr increased to£231.2m (h1 2012, £206.4m)and FtpE increased to £30.8m(h1 2012, £26.0m).

the FCC franchise expires in2014, and the other three followin 2015. First has been shortlistedfor: Essex thameside; thames-link, southern & Great Northern;scotrail; Caledonian sleeper;and the Luas light rail networkin Dublin. it will tender for theEast Coast Mainline next year.

First’s £80m fall in bus revenueoutweighed by rail growth

BUSINESS BRIEFING

Go Travel Solutionswins Milton KeynesConsultant Go Travel Solutionshas won a three-year contractfrom Milton Keynes Council todevelop a business travel networkin the city. The ‘Smartgo MiltonKeynes’ project will provide localemployers and staff with servicessuch as travel discounts andadvice on public transport andactive travel options. Go TravelSolutions already operates similarschemes in Leicester and Steve-nage.

Carillion wins M6smart motorway jobCarillion has won a £70.5m con-tract to install smart motorway(previously called managedmotorway) infrastructure on theM6 between junctions 10a and 13in the Staffordshire. The scheme,which has an estimated total costof £87.5m, will include mandatoryvariable speed limits and con-verting hard shoulders to addi-tional traffic lanes. Constructionshould start early next year and becompleted in spring 2015.

Five shortlisted forScotRail franchiseFive companies – Abellio, Arriva,FirstGroup, MTR and NationalExpress – have pre-qualified to bidfor the new ten-year ScotRail fran-chise, which will begin on 1 April2015. The draft invitation to tenderwill be published on 19 November,with a spring 2014 closing date forsubmissions. The winning bidderwill be announced next autumn.ScotRail is currently operated byFirstGroup. The new franchise –which includes a five-year breakpoint – will not include the Cale-donian sleeper service, which isbeing awarded as a separate 15-year franchise. The invitation totender for this was published lastmonth, and the three bidders –Arriva, FirstGroup and Serco –have to respond by 12 December.The successful bidder will be noti-fied next summer.

Amey and Mouchelwin work in OzUK infrastructure service firmsAmey and Mouchel have securedhighways maintenance work inAustralia as part of joint ventures.A joint venture of Amey and Aus-tralian infrastructure companiesLeighton Contractors and BoralConstruction Materials has won aseven-year road asset manage-ment and maintenance contractfrom the New South Wales state’sRoads and Maritime Servicesagency and a similar five-yearcontract from the Department ofTransport and Main Roads inQueensland. Amey has a 22%stake in the JV. DownerMouchel, a50:50 joint venture, has won aseven-year maintenance contractfor roads in Western Sydney.

Coach: profits boost

LTT635 business page_LTT635_p16 14/11/2013 18:53 Page 16

TransportXtra.com/ltt Conferences & Courses 17

LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:15 Page 17

18 LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

Action Streets consultancy supports clients toimprove sustainable access to employment andeducation by bike, walking and public transportincluding LSTF projects. We enable clients toregenerate streets and urban centres throughpractical studies, street audits, workshops andtraining. Please contact Richard SmithTel: 07850099517Email: [email protected]

Air Quality Consultants Ltd provides independentexpert advice on ambient air quality. Established in1993, the Company has completed manyassessments of road, rail, shipping and airportschemes. Its staff have presented expert evidenceat numerous Public Inquiries. The Comapny plays acentral role in the development of air qualitymanagement and assessment in the UK andabroad, and has developed guidance and many ofthe tools used for assessment.Bristol contact: Prof. Duncan Laxen on 0117 974 1086London contact: Stephen Moorcroft on 020 8673 4313Email: [email protected]

We are one of the UK’s leading civil engineeringconsultancies, with an enviable reputation forquality, reliability and value, providing TransportPlanning & Traffic Engineering, TransportAssessments, Road Safety & Mobility Audits, TravelPlans, Highway & Civil Engineering Design, TrafficManagement & Parking, Flood Risk Assessment &Drainage Strategy, Development, Masterplanning,Code for Sustainable Homes Assessment, andExpert Witness services.Please contact:Swindon: Rob Bowley T: 01793 619965 Email: [email protected]: Doug Hickman T: 01454 800474Email: [email protected]: Brett Farmery T: 01925 661707 Email: [email protected] out more about us atwww.coleeasdon.com

Curtins is a leading team of transport planners,engineers and consultants. We have developeddesign consultancy services nationally with a stronglocal presence across the UK. We provideinnovative transport and highway solutions to bothprivate and public sectors developers. Our pro-active and commercial approach is focused uponresponding to clients’ needs by providing apersonable service with highly experiencedspecialists.Offices at: Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff,Douglas, Edinburgh, Kendal, Leeds,Liverpool, London, Manchester, andNottingham. Please contact: Tony Dolan on 0161 236 2394 Email: [email protected]

Specialist consultancy providing highway, traffic andtransportation advice to both the public and privatesectors. Transportation Strategies, TransportAssessments, Sustainability Appraisals, TravelPlans, Policy Advice, Expert Witness Support.Forester House, Doctor’s Lane, Henley-in-Arden, Warwickshire, B95 5AW Tel: 01564 793 598 Fax: 01564 793 [email protected]

ITP is a dynamic consultancy specialising insustainable transport planning and research. Weoffer expert advice and solutions in: SmarterChoices; Demand Management; SustainableTransport Strategies; Public Transport; Transportand Climate Change; Market & Social Research;Consultation; Rural Transport; AccessibilityPlanning; Mobility for Disabled People; andConcessionary Travel.Offices in Birmingham – Milton Keynes –NottinghamPlease contact Nick Ayland Tel: 0115 988 6905 Email: [email protected] www.itpworld.net

Specialists in all aspects of traffic signal design,analysis and training. As the producers of industrystandard software such as LinSig, JCT is unrivalledin its ability to offer clients correct and appropriatesolutions to their traffic problems. In particular, JCTis highly regarded for its expertise in signalroundabout and complex junction design havingbeen involved in numerous projects and providingadvice to Government at both National and Locallevel.JCT Consultancy Ltd, LinSig House,Deepdale Enterprise Park, Nettleham,Lincoln LN2 2LLTel: 01522 751010 Fax: 01522 751188 Email:[email protected] www.jctconsultancy.co.uk

Introducing our SmarterTravel Service.Our Smarter Travel Team provides the full range ofsustainable transport services: school, work andindividualised travel plans, travel surveys, businesstravel networks, promotion & marketing and muchmore. All schemes are managed by our in housespecialists, with additional resource taken from ourpool of over 450 registered sustainable transportprofessionals. This flexible consultancy modelprovides excellent value for our clients at a cost ofup to 50% less than other traditional consultancies.Please contact: Peter Mattinson Tel: 020 7960 2551 Email: [email protected] www.mattinsonpartnership.com

The leading independent TransportationConsultancy. Travel Plans, Accessibility Studies,Highway and Infrastructure Design, TransportAssessments, Noise and Vibration, Air Quality,Public Transport Planning, Streetscape Solutions,Road Safety, Pedestrian and Cycle Networks, GISModelling and Evaluation, Regeneration Studies,SuDS and Integrated Transport Plans.Woking Office: Tony Brown, Paul StockerTel: 01483 750 508Highway & Infrastucture Design: Tim MooreTel: 01483 750 508Strategic Group: Ian MitchellTel: 0207 874 1580London Office: Paul ZannaTel: 0207 874 1574Leeds Office: Geoff BlackburnTel: 0113 248 1414Newcastle Office: Nigel DysonTel: 0191 230 8005North West Office: Mark ButtTel: 01524 382 522Bristol Office: Adam PadmoreTel: 0117 925 1027Birmingham Office: Paul ZannaTel: 0121 224 7630West Midlands Office: Stephen CheckettsTel: 07787 523397Isle of Wight Office: Ken FryTel: 01983 866 234Cardiff Office: Leigh FotiadisTel: 02920 263653

A central London transport planning consultancyspecialising in global sports stadia and majorevents, central London development planning andinternational stations and transport interchange. Weenjoy what we do, and deliver outstanding valueand technically excellent advice by employing thebest consultants and empowering them to solve ourclients’ most complex challenges.Tel: 020 7242 0228Email: [email protected]: @Momentum_TP_Ltdwww.momentum-transport.com

Mott MacDonald is a leading consultancy shapingtransport solutions around the world. We provide acomprehensive range of services combined with areal understanding of local conditions to find theright solution in all stages of the planning andimplementation process for all modes of urban and inter-urban transport.Mott MacDonald Limited, 35 Newhall Street,Birmingham, B3 3PU. United KingdomTel: +44 (0)121 234 1509Email: [email protected]

Specialists in the provision of transportationplanning, highways, traffic and infrastructureengineering, and working for the public and privatesectors. The services provided range from initialappraisals and feasibility studies, transportassessments and analysis, traffic modelling andtravel plans through to detailed highway andinfrastructure design and supervision of constructionprojects.PFA Consulting Ltd, Stratton Park House,Wanborough Road, Swindon, Wilts SN3 4HGTel: 01793 828000Fax: 01793 835500Email: [email protected] www.pfaplc.com

Delivering modern sustainable mobility: travel plans,transport and the NHS, active travel, carbonreduction planning, parking management schemes,car clubs, accessible and community transport.Transport and travel service design and start-up:consultation services, transport events, workshopsand conferences, business planning, socialenterprise development, website and graphicdesign. More about us: www.ratransport.co.ukOffice: +44 (0) 161 368 6603Contact: Richard Armitage Mob: +44 (0) 7973 538 556Email: [email protected]

Stratageeb Ltd assists businesses develop strategicvisions and positioning, thus, allowing for stronger,more focussed growth. Based on the experience ofits MD Giles Bailey, who brings 20+ years ofknowledge in strategy, innovation and marketing atorganisations including TfL, its activities includework with digital starts-ups, business mentoring,university lecturing, public speaking and proposalrefinement.Tel: 0203 589 8618E:[email protected]: stratageeb1www.stratageeb.co.uk

Specialists in innovative ways of developing andpromoting sustainable transport, covering everystep from strategies to implementation. We canoffer advice and solutions on a range of sustainabletransport options: cycling & walking projects, cyclisttraining, professional training for cycling & walkingpractitioners, public consultation, travel plans,promotion & marketing, active leisure and muchmore.Office 4, 145 Islingword Road,Brighton BN2 9SH Tel: 0845 345 7623Email: [email protected]

The Transportation Consultancy (ttc) is a dynamicand innovative transportation consultancy thatspecialises in transport planning, traffic engineering,sustainable transport and transport economics. Ourpeople have over 100 years of combined technicalknowledge and can offer you expert advice coveringthe whole transportation sector, helping you to makesound decisions in today’s complex environment.Our advice is underpinned by innovation, technicalexcellence and expert opinion, enabling our clientsto make sound decisions in what is often a complexand challenging environment. “ttc” has a set ofvalues that guides us in our everyday business andcontinues to drive our ambition to provide unrivalledadvice that helps deliver the best transportationsolutions to our clients.Please contact Alan BailesTel: 07803894686 Email: [email protected]

TTR are sustainable transport experts who providehigh quality transport consultancy and researchservices. TTR also helps local authorities andpartner organisations to gain access to Europeanand national funding. What we do: • FreightTransport Policy • Health, Environment & ClimateChange • European Projects and Bids • SmarterChoices • Travel Information Services • TransportDemand Management • Market & Social Research •Transport Accessibility & Equality.Please contact Chris DouglasTel: 01543 416416 Email: [email protected]

URS provides transport consultancy and planningsolutions across the investment and project lifecyclefor local and central government, infrastructureoperators and private sector clients. Core servicesinclude business case, demand and revenueforecasting, transport assessments, sustainability,technology, road safety engineering and travel planning.For further information please contact:Caroline Brock Tel: +44 (0)121 212 3035Email: [email protected]

Waterman is a leading engineering andenvironmental consultancy with specialist skills intransport planning, traffic engineering andinfrastructure design consultancy. We work inpartnership with both public and private sectorclients to deliver sustainable and affordablesolutions on projects throughout the UK.Offices in Belfast, Birmingham, Brentwood,Bristol, Cardiff, Derby, Edinburgh, Glasgow,Inverness, Leeds, Lingfield, London,Manchester and Nottingham.Jonathan Hoare: Tel: 0121 212 7700 Email: [email protected] Jackson: Tel: 01277 238100 Email: [email protected]

20’s Plenty For Us is the national charity thatsupports local 20’s Plenty campaigns across thecountry. Implementing lower speeds that workrequires far more than highway engineering. 20’sPlenty For Us can offer practical advice on how towork with communities to maximise drivercompliance and community ownership of lowerspeeds.Tel: 07973 639781Email: [email protected]

Carplus is the national accreditation body for carclubs in the UK and co-ordinates annual datacollection and research for this sector. We provideinformation, advice and consultancy to regionalgovernment, local authorities, transportprofessionals and community groups on car clubsand ride-sharing. Carplus is a membershiporganization and registered charity with offices inLeeds and Edinburgh.Tel: 0113 234 9299Email: [email protected]: @CarplusTrustwww.carplus.org.uk

The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport(UK) is the leading professional body for individualsand organisations involved directly and indirectly intransport, logistics and supply chain management.As a member of CILT you will receive a wide rangeof products and services to support you throughoutyour career. These benefits represent anoutstanding return on your initial investment and willhelp you to make a noticeable impact at all levelswithin your organisation.Tel: 01536 740 100Fax: 01536 740 101 Email: [email protected] www.ciltuk.org.uk

PTRC Education & Research Services Co Ltd is acompany within CILT (UK). PTRC is the leadinginternational organisation specialising in the trainingof transport, highways and planning professionals.Tel: 020 7481 970Emai: [email protected] www.ptrc-training.co.uk

The CIVINET UK & Ireland Network is thesustainable transport network for local authorities.Members can access European and nationalfunding information, comprehensive sustainabletransport expertise and networking events. Privateorganisations are welcome as associate members.Tel: 0117 907 6520 Email: [email protected]/civinet-uk-ireland

ITS United Kingdom is the society for all who workin the Intelligent Transport Systems sector in theUK. ITS technology delivers transport benefits interms of reducing congestion, lessening theenvironmental impact of transport, and real time andaccurate information to travellers and managers.ITS (UK) has 170 corporate members, ranging fromUK Government departments to systems suppliers,consultants, and academic institutions. ITS (UK) isthe voice of the ITS communityTel: 020 7709 3003 Email: [email protected]

The Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership is an actionand advisory group established in 2003 to take alead in accelerating the shift to low carbon vehiclesand fuels in the UK and to help ensure that UKbusiness can benefit from that shift. The LowCVPnow has over 300 member organisations fromsectors including: energy; automotive; government;academia; environment campaigns and road usergroups.Tel: 020 3178 7859Email: [email protected]

The Transport Planning Society facilitates, developsand promotes best practice in transport planningand provides a focus for dialogue and debatebetween all those engaged in it, whatever theirbackground or other professional affiliation. TPSworks closely with its four partners ICE, CILT (UK),IHT and RTPI to further the profession and in thedevelopment of transport planning qualifications.Werun a programme of events across the country.Tel: +44 (0)20 7665 2238 Email: [email protected]

The Transport Statistics Users Group bringstogether users and producers of transport statisticsto develop understanding, identify problems inprovision and suggest solutions.The TSUG organises a series of regular seminarsand publication of newsletters and a Yearbook, all ofwhich are free to members.For more information, visit:www.tsug.org.uk, email [email protected] phone 0203 054 0874

FINE AnnFine Reports Professional policy and strategy developmentincluding clear and concise report writing.Experience in local transport plans, Highway assetmanagement plans, Parking and Enforcementplans, Road safety plans, Network Managementreports and plans, Freight Transport Strategies,School Travel Plans, data management, reportwriting and bidding. Tel: 07815 526068Email: [email protected]

HURDLE David. DipTP, MA, MRTPI, FCILTTransport Planning Consultant Travel Plans, Transport Policies/Strategies andActive Travel Audits. Broomfield, 20 Holt Road, SheringhamNR26 8NB Tel/Fax: 01263 822300Mobile: 07808 533165 Email: [email protected]

STAVELEY Peter. MSc CMILTPublic Transport ConsultancyRailway and bus operational planning, publictransport strategy, railway timetabling, capacitystudies, software development, data manipulation.247 Davidson Road, Croydon, CR0 6DQTel: 07973 168742 Email: [email protected]

Consultants &ResearchersTransportXtra.com/consultants

TransportOrganisations

SpecialistsView their full CVs atTransportXtra.com/consultants

To get your profile in printand online call us on 0845270 7861 or [email protected]

Your company here?Please contact

Daniel on: 0845 270 7861

or email: [email protected]

LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:15 Page 18

TransportXtra.com/ltt The LTT Directory 19

To place an advertisement call the sales team on 0845 270 7861 or email [email protected]

The next issue of LTT will be published:Friday 29 November

Advertising booking deadline:Tuesday 26 November

To advertise please contact Daniel on:0845 270 7861


LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:15 Page 19

20 The LTT Directory LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013

LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:15 Page 20

TransportXtra.com/ltt The LTT Directory 21

LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:15 Page 21

LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:15 Page 22

www.Jobs-in-Transport.com Recruitment 23

The best jobs for transport specialists starts here

Transport Planner£17,980 - £29,528Working in the sustainable travel team, you will be responsible fordelivering key, innovative LSTF projects including Business Travel Planningin Dorchester and Visitor Travel Planning and pedestrian way finding inWeymouth.

Closes: 20th November APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/lknvma5

Principal Transport Policy Officer£37,517 - £44,136North Hertfordshire District Council is pleased to be able to offer anopportunity for a Transport Policy Officer to work with the StrategicPlanning & Projects Team in progressing the Council’s strategic priorities ofdelivering cost-effective services, working with local communities andprotecting our environment for our communities.

Closes: 18th November APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/m2p89mc

Strategic Transport Planner£34,842 – £43,266You will have the responsibility for client-managing someof our ambitious projects, representing the City Councilon transport projects across the Transport for SouthHampshire area as well as the Local Economic Partnership, and also lead onthe transport aspects of the City Centre Masterplan.

Closes: 22nd November APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/pjcy5y5

Graduate to Senior TransportPlanners – London Competitive salary Motion is a specialist Transport Planning and Infrastructure DesignConsultancy with offices in London and Guildford. Due to continuing growth,Motion is looking to recruit Transport Planners with a good developmentplanning background for our London office.

Closes: 29th November APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/pg3kx4w

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

Closes: 28th November APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/np5yoly

Head of Transportation& Highways£92,000We need you to evolve our recent success stories, develop new ones, buildpractices and prioritise infrastructure that will continue Thurrock’sprogramme of regeneration. With an impressive track record in a similarrole, you’re ready for a diverse remit: everything from overseeing strategictransport to public rights of way.

Closes: 18th November APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/p7axe75

Programme Manager£38,393 - £41,954To provide overall programme co-ordination andmanagement, financial control, liaison with politiciansand interest groups, management of risk and liaison withthe Department for Transport. The Programme Manager would report tothe Director of Passenger Services (as Programme SRO) and wouldcontribute to developing options for development of new deliveryarrangement for ‘behaviour change’ activities.

Closes: 5th December APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/ltxqmgz

Programme Co-ordinator£25,660 – £32,153 To monitor and report programme finances, provide forecasts ofexpenditure, liaison with component projects and within Metro, includingFinance and LTP team in respect of quarterly payments to partners. Theprogramme co-ordinator would also act as Project Manager for themonitoring and evaluation activities.

Closes: 5th December APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/m3va45p

To advertise please contact Daniel on:0845 270 7861


LTT635_p08,17-23_LTT635_p08_p17-23 14/11/2013 16:16 Page 23

Poulton launches transport consultancyMarshall Poulton (pictured) hasleft the City of Edinburgh Council,where he was head of transport,and set up his own consultancy,LBK Transport Consultants. One ofhis current contracts is helping todevelop a transport strategy for theSwindon and Wiltshire Local Enter-prise Partnership. Poulton joinedEdinburgh in 2008 from Transportfor London where he was head oftechnology and systems.

Veitch leads ACT TravelwiseAlex Veitch has been elected chair of travel behaviour changeorganisation ACT Travelwise, after a period serving as interim chairfollowing Colin Black’s decision to stand down (LTT 28 Jun). Veitchis European affairs and sustainability manager at the rail industry’sRail Delivery Group and EU representative and sustainabilitymanager at the Association of Train Operating Companies.

Temple appoints technical directorsEnvironmental and planning consultancy Temple has appointedMark Skelton and Martin Gibson as technical directors. Skeltonjoins from Capital Symonds where he led a 120-person multi-discipli-nary planning, environment, design and transport planning team.Gibson is a former member of the now defunct English RegionalCycling Development Team.

New MDs at FirstGroup’s bus businesses Fiona Kerr has been appointed managing director of FirstGlasgow, replacing Ronnie Park who went on indefinite leave inthe summer (LTT 9 Aug). Kerr, 35, was previously regional financedirector of FirstGroup’s Scottish bus operations, and is a char-tered accountant. FirstGroup has also made managing directorappointments for its three restructured South East and Midlandsbusinesses. Adrian Jones will lead the Essex business, DavidSquire is interim managing director of the Eastern Counties busi-ness based in Norwich; and Nigel Eggleton will lead the Mid-lands business, based in Leicester.

Jamie Burles has been appointed managing director of Abellio’sGreater Anglia franchise, succeeding Ruud Haket who has joinedKeolis as chief operating officer (LTT 01 Nov). Burles was a biddirector for Abellio UK, leading the company’s bid for the Thames-link franchise.

If you would like to be included in this column please call 0845 2707875 or email [email protected]

Editorial Tel: 0845 270 7875 | Fax: 0845 270 7960 | Email: [email protected]

Advertising Tel: 0845 270 7861 | Fax: 0845 270 7960 | Email: [email protected]

Next issue Published 29 November

THE GOVERNMENT is consult-ing on West Yorkshire’s plan to setup a combined authority (CA) tooversee transport and economicdevelopment from next April.The CA would cover the five

Metropolitan districts of Leeds,Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees andWakefield. The City of YorkCouncil would be a non-con-stituent council member.

The authority will have tenmembers – eight from the five dis-tricts (the leaders plus threereflecting the political balance ofthe authorities); one from YorkCouncil; and one from the LeedsCity Region Local Enterprise Part-nership. The West Yorkshire Integrated

Transport Authority and the Pas-senger Transport Executive willboth be dissolved. A joint committee overseeing

transport would operate below theCA. It could carry out functionsthat councils may choose to dele-gate to the combined authority,such as urban traffic control orroad network management.Consultation ends on 2 January.

LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013 TransportXtra.com/ltt

Consultation on West Yorkshire CA plan

News

THE GOVERNMENT has askedlocal authorities in the North Eastof England to provide “clear andcompelling evidence” that theirplan to set up a combined authority(CA) overseeing transport and eco-nomic policies has public support. The Department for Communi-

ties and Local Governmentconsultation on the authorities’proposal notes that in 2004 theNorth East voted against plans foran elected North East regionalassembly in a referendum. “The Government believes it is

right that there is clear and com-pelling evidence that the pastopposition of electors within thelocal area to governance changesin that area does not continue toany new proposal for a combinedauthority,” says the DCLG.The North East Combined

Authority would cover the fiveTyne and Wear districts – Newcas-tle, Gateshead, North Tyneside,South Tyneside and Sunderland –plus neighbouring Durham andNorthumberland. It would take onthe functions of Tyne and Wear

Integrated Transport Authority(TWITA) and transport functionsof Durham and Northumberland.The councils want the CA up

and running next April but theplans first have to be approved byministers and Parliament then hasto approve a Parliamentary Order. The CA would have eight

members – one from each of thecouncils and one from the NorthEast Local Enterprise Partnership.A joint transport committee

would operate below the CA, dis-charging transport functions. The future of Nexus, the Pas-

senger Transport Executive, isunclear. It would continue for atransitional phase as an executivebody of the CA but only coveringthe five metropolitan districts.During this time Durham andNorthumberland would continueto undertake their functions forpublic transport information, trans-port infrastructure delivery,tendered bus services and conces-sionary fares. “Following the transitional

phase, the combined authoritywould establish consistent deliveryarrangements to operate across the

geography of the combinedauthority as a whole,” the DCLGexplains.The CA will have the power to

raise a levy on member councils tocover the cost of transport func-tions. The levy will be subject tocouncil tax referendums if Parlia-ment enacts the Local Audit andAccountability Bill. CA members will decide how to

apportion the levy betweenmember authorities. The DCLGnotes that apportioning the levy onthe basis of population would beinappropriate because Northum-berland and Durham have differenttransport needs from the Tyne andWear conurbation and TWITA hashistoric debt that would be inap-propriate for the county councils toshoulder. The first full year of alevy covering all seven councilswill be 2015/16.Consultation ends on 2 January.

Public must support CombinedAuthority plan, North East told

People

Proposal to establish acombined authority for the areais available athttp://tinyurl.com/m7mvrqt

Proposal to establish acombined authority for the areaof Durham, Northumberlandand Tyne and Wear is availableat http://tinyurl.com/kb43wzc

GOVERNANCE

GOVERNANCE

LTT635 back page_LTT635_p32 14/11/2013 20:38 Page 40

4 DECEMBER 2013 - DAY 2: HOW SMARTER TRAVEL DELIVERS - LESSONS LEARNED


08.45 Registration: Refreshments served in the exhibition area

09.00 Optional pre-conference 30 minute ‘International Breakfast Briefing’ in the Great Hallto New York's sustainable transport policy and practice

09.30 Jon Orcutt, Director of Policy, New York Department of Transport & Kate Fillin-Yeh - Director of the NYC Bike Share schemeSmarter Choices in SingaporeDr Evan Gwee, Director, Research and Publications Division, Land Transport Authority Academy, Singapore

09.50 Sustainable transport in ManchesterCouncillor Andrew Fender, Chair of the Transport for Greater Manchester Committee (TfGMC)

10.00 The views of LEPs on Sustainable TransportMike Blackburn, Chair of the Greater Manchester Local Enterprise Partnership & BT's regional director for the North West

10.10 Mainstreaming the Local Sustainable Transport FundLocal Transport Minister Baroness Kramer

10.20 Interview with the Minister, Chair of GM LEP and Chair of TfGMCInterviewer: Lynn Sloman Director of Transport for Quality of Life


11.30 Streamed sessions: Delegates choose 1 of 4

Marketing and CommunicationsSponsored by Diva

The Key Ingredients of a SuccessfulBehaviour Change CampaignAmy Boyle, DIVA Creative

The Greener Journeys Behaviour ChangeLab: getting motorists to try the busLynn Sloman and David Hall, BehaviourChange Lab

A campaign to increase awareness ofshared transport and create legacyAli Clabburn, Liftshare & Thomas Evans,Gloucestershire CC

Engagement - Partnership workingSponsored by TfGM

Delivering Success Through PartnershipWorkingHelen Ramsden, TfGM

Lessons from the Award WinningLowestoft Local LinksSteff Jones, Suffolk Council and Jon Parker, ITP

Employers group - business enagementAnn O'Driscoll, North Bristol Suscom

Mainstreaming - embedding smarter travel into general practiceSponsored by Transport for GreaterManchester (TfGM)

How big can we go?Gordon Baker, JMP

The devil is in the deliveryJon Foley, Steer Davies Gleave

Maximising value- tapping into existingfunding to maximise LSTF project fundsTim Anderson, Energy Savings Trust

Integration - New technology,smartcards, buses, trains & interchangeSponsored by ATKINS

Effective partnerships for passenger transportAndy Summers, Hertfordshire CC

How technology & gamification can be usedto encourage travel behavioural change. A case study from Leeds METROJames Datson, ATKINS; Ginny Leonard,METRO, Ronan Carter, Stravel &PleaseCycle; Jon MJ, Cambridge University

Demolishing Information Silos for theBenefit of CustomersPete Johnson, TfGM

The Great Hall Lord Mayor's Parlour Conference Hall Committee Room

Mainstreaming - Embedding smarter travel intogeneral practiceSponsored by ATKINS

Local Growth Deals & Smarter TravelJonathan Foster-Clark, Atkins

LSTF and Young Adults: The real potential forsustained, life - long travel behaviour changeDamian Price, Mott MacDonald &Rachel Evans, Centro

How do we ensure a local LSTF legacy?Adrian Webb & Lee Parker, SouthamptonCC & Parose Projects

Monitoring and Evaluation

Best Practice in MonitoringAndy Cope, Sustrans

Cost effective monitoring of behaviourchange interventionsTony Duckenfield, Steer Davies Gleave

Active Travel - Walking and Cyclinginitiatives WorkshopSponsored by Sustrans

Mainstreaming Cycling for AllNick Vaughan, TfGM & Eleanor Roaf,Sustrans Regional Director, North West

Developing a new behaviour changeframework to encourage cyclingSam Robinson, General Manager, Challenge for Change

Integration - New technology, smartcards,buses, trains and interchangeSponsored by ATKINS

Real Time Travel Information - Delivering the benefitsDaniel Hobbs, AECOM

Connecting the Dales LSTFRandall Ghent, DITA

Sustaining access and connectivity inremote areas: some issues for smartcommunicationsCoen Salemink, University Groningen

Marketing and CommunicationsSponsored by ACT Travelwise

Market SegmentationJohn Screeton, DfT

A Blueprint for an Effective SustainableTravel WebsiteSteve Dupree, Diva Creative

Engaged Employers and intergrated fundingRachel Evans and Thomas Evans,Gloucetershire County County Council

Active Travel - Walking and Cyclinginitiatives WorkshopSponsored by Sustrans

Integrating hard and soft measures inaccess to education & workTony Russell, Transport EngineeringManager, Sustrans & Zsolt Schuller,Strategic Sustainable Travel Officer, Devon County Council

Engagement -partnership workingSponsored by TfGM

Cross Boundary Partnership Working -The Trials and Tribulations, a practicalguideDaniel Caffrey, St.Helens Council

Delivering Smarter Travel Choicesthrough Social LandlordsLucy Low, Cheshire West

Monitoring and EvaluationSponsored by the Department for Transport

Workshop on Monitoring and EvaluationBetty Leow & Angela Trevithick, DfT





12.45 Lunch: Served in the exhibition area


16.15 Event Close Published programme subject to change. See www.mainstreamsmart.co.uk for latest updates.

LTT635_Mainstreaming_Wraparound_LTT635 12/11/2013 15:46 Page 3

The 2-Day Mainstreaming Smarter Travel event includes 'round-table’ discussion forums, workshops, panel discussions, casestudy and key-note presentations taking place over the two days.

Delegates will have the opportunity to learn lessons from the earlyprojects already underway, for those planned for implementation in2014/15.

WHO SHOULD ATTEND?

With an expected 450 delegates, Mainstreaming Smarter Travel is themeeting place for sustainable transport experts from around the UK.

If you are involved in sustainable transport provision then this is theevent to attend to input into the future of smarter travel and findcooperation opportunities.

Delegates and speakers include:

� transport planners� travel planners� sustainable transport officers� facilities and transport managers from large employers

� LEP representatives� public health officials� academia� transport operators� consultants ...from both the non-profitand private sector.

DELEGATE RATES

First private sector delegate £245 + VAT

Each additional private sector delegate £195 + VAT

Public Sector delegates £95 + VAT

Add-on Mapping & Information for Smarter TravelMorning Session on Day 1 +£65 + VAT

HOW TO BOOKSecure your place online at: www.mainstreamsmart.co.ukIf requesting an invoice online, you will be prompted for a purchase order number.

All bookings are subject to payment terms which can be found at:www.landor.co.uk/smartertravel/terms.php

Conference enquiries: Gemma [email protected]+44(0)207 091 7865

Organised by:Landor LINKSApollo House359 Kennington LaneLondon, SE11 5QY

Mainstreaming Smarter Travel is organised by Landor LINKS.

Landor LINKS connects with every Local Authority in the UK,Central Government, Universities and research bodies, suppliers,consultants, contractors and service providers.

Professionals depend on us for authoritative information, newsand analysis. We deliver this through targeted events, traditionalprint, such as the respected transport planning and policy journalLocal Transport Today, online and through social media.

Mainstreaming Smarter Travel is endorsed by:

Supported by the Department for Transport and hosted by Transportfor Greater Manchester, this conference is the second nationalmeeting of all the LSTF projects.

The programme features a mix of networking discussion, paneldebate, keynote presentation and streamed sessions providing aknowledge sharing platform for delegates.

It is an opportunity for delegates from a number of different sectorsto network with each other, share good practice, find opportunitiesfor cooperation, and to discuss the future of smarter travel.

� Listen to presentations from experts on the future of smarter travel

� Network with practitioners tasked with delivering LSTF projects throughout the UK

� Learn from good practice being delivered as part of the LSTF� Join networking groups to discuss cooperation opportunities

3 & 4 December 2013 |Manchester Town HallLocal Sustainable Transport Fund National Conference

SUSTAINABLETRANSPORTFUND

LOCAL

Supported by:Hosted by:

Editorial Tel: 020 7091 7875 | Fax: 020 7091 7960 | Email: [email protected]

Advertising Tel: 020 7091 7861 | Fax: 020 7091 7960 | Email: [email protected]

Next issue Published 29 November

LTT635 15 November - 28 November 2013 TransportXtra.com/ltt


LTT635_Mainstreaming_Wraparound_LTT635 12/11/2013 15:45 Page 4

ltt 635

Documents

sustainable travel

sustainable transport

information provision

active travel walking

rebooting smarter travel

town hall11

transport mappingpeter

better travel information10