LTT 633 by Justin Andrew

LTT633 front page_LTT633_p01 18/10/2013 07:39 Page 1

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

New insight about traffic growth POLICY | PLANNING | FINANCE | DEVELOPMENT

ROAD TRAFFIC

CHANGES IN personal disposable income could offer a better explanation for trends in car traffic volumes than changes in GDP, according to a consultant. “In the past, we have relied heavily on GDP as an indicator of performance,” says Charles

Russell, a director of consultant Steer Davies Gleave. “It is clear that we now have to look elsewhere to understand how traffic rises and falls. For cars, it seems as if measures of personal disposable income (PDI) provide a more powerful explanation.” Russell says the consultant’s toll road owner, investor and

lender clients across Europe are anxious to know about future traffic trends. SDG has compared traffic on some of France’s autoroutes with GDP and PDI indicators. “For many years, until perhaps 2005, PDI appeared to more or less track GDP,” says Russell. “But through the credit boom and

contraction, and on into the years of recession, PDI is clearly following a different path. Perhaps this provides a better indicator?” Russell told LTT he hadn’t looked at the UK relationship between PDI and traffic. His analysis appears in the latest edition of SDG’s publication, The Review.

Glasgow’s bicycle hire contract brings new entrant to UK market

CYCLING

Nextbike: Glasgow-bound

scoring the best marks on cost and quality. Its public sector funding requirement is far below the levels Glasgow had been expecting. Consultants had advised the council that it would cost about £1.35m of public money to deliver and run the proposed scheme for three years. But

TfL and manufacturers get to work on safer lorry design ROAD SAFETY

TRANSPORT FOR London has started working with six truck manufacturers and a group of freight operators on the design of construction lorries that would minimise the likelihood of collisions with cyclists. One of the key priorities is to develop high visibility cabs that design out blind spots. The initiative is part of the two-year Construction Logistics

and Cycle Safety project, the work of which will be profiled at an event in City Hall on 9 December. The vehicle manufacturers have been engaged through the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders. The London Cycling Campaign published concept designs for construction lorries last year. >> READ MORE? Letters

p17

Brian Devlin, Glasgow’s executive director for land & environmental services, said the actual cost was likely to be just £586,000. Nextbike has asked for £401,000 over the three years of the contract. The council will spend a further £65,000 to cover the cost of installing the 30 bike hire stations and £120,000 will cover the costs of a council officer to liaise with Nextbike and monitor the scheme over three years. Nextbike was founded in Leipzig in 2004 and now operates in 80 cities in ten countries, mainly in Europe but also in places such as Dubai and Christchurch, New Zealand. The Glasgow scheme will be open to members and casual users. Annual membership will cost £60, giving members free use for the first 30 minutes, £1 for an hour, £2 for two hours and so on up to a maximum of

£5 for 24 hours. Casual users will pay £1 for the first 30 minutes, and then £2 for an hour, £4 for two hours, £6 for three hours, £8 for four hours, and £10 for five-24 hours. The contract could be extended for a further two oneyear periods. Transport for London is to host an industry engagement day later this month to discuss the future of the capital’s bike hire scheme. Serco’s contract to run the operation ends in July 2015 but includes an option of a further two-year extension. TfL is keen to develop plans now for the future contract and hopes bike hire operators, IT, logistics, manufacturing and other suppliers will attend the industry day on 25 October. TfL says the meeting will enable suppliers to hear about its plans for the “next generation cycle hire scheme” and inform TfL’s thinking.

The Mayor of London’s aviation advisor Daniel Moylan this week expresses concern that the DfT’s Airports Commission has no clear criteria for selecting the shortlist of locations where capacity expansion could take place. ● Interview – page 12

PROVIDING INDEPENDENT NEWS & ANALYSIS SINCE 1989

11 Ten more years of Pacer trains in the Welsh Valleys? 3 ACPO launches speed awareness courses for 20mph

3 Glasgow seeks Earnback deal with UK Government

5 Kent caps bus fare increases at RPI

TOP10 1. Drop bus lane suspension plan, Baker urges Liverpool’s mayor 2. West Yorks reviews delivery of £1bn transport fund

3. DfT rethinks cycling data 4. Hourbike tipped for Reading bike hire

5. Ex-CPT man on Nexus bus QC panel 6. All aboard the Luton BRT

7. Area-wide 20mph limits are not for us – Norfolk

8. Welsh Government toughens up pioneering Active Travel Bill 9. Ban on CCTV enforcement tops Pickles’ list of parking reforms

10. FirstGroup cuts fares in York

most read stories on

4 October - 17 October 2013

ONE OF Europe’s major public bike hire firms is poised to gain a foothold in the UK market. German firm Nextbike is awaiting official confirmation that it has been selected to run Glasgow’s new scheme. Glasgow City Council plans to launch bike hire next May in time for the Commonwealth Games, with 150 bikes at 30 docking stations. Half the stations will be in the city centre, with others located at transport hubs and venues for next summer ’s Commonwealth Games venues. The scheme will be expanded to 400 bikes in September next year. The prospect of a global audience in Glasgow next year appears to have ensured keen interest in the city’s bike hire contract. The council received seven bids with Nextbike

PHOTO: ELLIOT BROWN

by Andrew Forster

TransportXtra.com/ltt

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 2

LTT633 page 3_LTT633_p03 18/10/2013 06:19 Page 3

TransportXtra.com/ltt

ACPO to extend speed awareness courses to drivers in 20mph areas

SPEED LIMITS by Andrew Forster

MOTORISTS CAUGHT exceeding 20mph speed limits could be sent on speed awareness courses under new speed enforcement guidelines published by the Association of Chief Police Officers. Until now the police have had the ability to offer courses for drivers exceeding all limits except 20mph. The change follows pressure from local transport minister Norman Baker (who moved to the Home Office last week) and 20mph limit campaigners. “We are now introducing speed awareness courses as a key part of enforcement in these areas for those drivers who breach the limit between 24 and 31mph,” said chief constable Suzette Davenport, the national policing lead on roads policing. The guidelines state: “As more and more [20mph] limits are introduced and officers find there are offenders who are, for whatever reason, either mistaken or simply unaware of the limit and would benefit from education there is a need to provide an edu-

Davenport: speed awareness courses for 20mph

cation diversion.” Staff at the National Driver Offender Retraining Scheme are developing a speed awareness course specifically for 20mph limits, which will run from November this year until 2016. During this time the reason for the offending and most appropriate diversion will be researched and evaluated with a more permanent diversion put in place in 2016 or the diversion removed if it is found to be unnecessary and current speed awareness courses

are deemed suitable. Welcoming the change, Anna Semlyen, campaign manager for 20’s Plenty for Us, said: “20mph limits are law. Bad drivers can and should be made accountable for their actions. Speeding is antisocial, incredibly dangerous and warrants dealing with strictly.” The guidelines emphasise that councils cannot expect the police to be the primary mechanism for ensuring motorists stick to 20mph speed limits. “As with all limits, if the site doesn’t look like or feel like the limit imposed then there will be larger scale offending and routine prosecution [will be] seen as inappropriate and simply over the top,” says ACPO. “It is for local authorities to appropriately sign and if necessary engineer a limit, leaving the police to target the persistent and deliberate offender. “Where speed limits are not clear (that is they don’t feel like/look like the limit or are on inappropriate roads) they will not be routinely enforced (routinely means regularly planned attendance where there isn’t intelligence of deliberate offending) only targeted where there is

intelligence of obvious deliberate disregard.” ACPO’s guidance suggests 20mph limits should only be imposed on streets where the average speed of traffic is 24mph or below. The guidelines retain the recommendation that enforcement of speed limits generally should be conducted at a 10%+2mph threshold above the limit. But ACPO emphasises that this guidance cannot replace police officer’s discretion. The Alliance of British Drivers welcomed the guidelines. “In general the attitude of ACPO is commendable,” said spokesman Nigel Humphries. “The gist of these guidelines is that limits should suit the road and that police should use their discretion to enforce only where the limit is obvious to drivers and what they would expect from what they see through the windscreen.” ACPO speed enforcement policy guidelines 2011-2015: joining forces for safer roads is available at http://tinyurl.com/krrgv74

Glasgow seeks City Council to add tactile paving to shared space Deal with Whitehall URBAN DESIGN

TACTILE PAVING is likely to be installed along the edge of the vehicle path in a shared space scheme in Southend. Consultant Urban Movement has recommended the paving in a post-implementation design review of Southend-on-Sea Council’s Victoria Gateway scheme outside the town’s Victoria rail station. Urban Movement says the scheme, which was completed in March 2011, appears to have been “largely successful” in meeting its objective of enhancing the sense of arrival to the town. But, although the collision record is positive, it says concerns

remain that some user groups feel excluded from the space because of perceived safety risks. Urban Movement recommends that the council introduces corduroy tactile paving to delineate the pedestrian-only areas from the area in which vehicles circulate. Officers will endorse the recommendation in a report to cabinet on 5 November. Urban Movement also suggests that the installation of the tactile paving could allow the removal of the ‘canon ball’ bollards, which currently demarcate the boundary between pedestrian-only areas and shared areas. But Southend’s officers will recommend that these be retained, saying they prevent vehicles overrunning.

‘Restrict longer lorries’ URBAN DESIGN

THE DFT is being urged to restrict the longer heavy goods vehicles currently being trialled to a network of designated routes. The Campaign for Better

Transport and the Local Government Technical Advisers Group say allowing local authorities to draw up a network of designated routes for vehicles using the longer 15.65 metre trailers could improve road safety and cut damage to roadside furniture.

FUNDING

GLASGOW CITY Council is trying to strike a City Deal with the UK Government, which, if successful, could secure additional funding for transport investment. Glasgow and neighbouring authorities in the Clyde Valley hope to persuade the Treasury to agree a Greater Manchester-style ‘earnback’ funding model under which the local authorities would be rewarded with additional funding for transport and other capital works if their economies outperform a benchmark. KPMG has been assisting the Scottish councils develop their plans. If ministers accept the request it could raise eyebrows in parts of England, particularly in the Leeds city region, which has so far been unsuccessful in persuading the Treasury to grant it an earnbackstyle fund. Labour-controlled Glasgow is hopeful that the UK Government will see attractions in agreeing a City Deal because it would highlight the benefits of collaboration between Scotland and Westmin-

ster ahead of the Scottish Government’s independence referendum next year. The Scottish Government said it would want to consider the detail of any proposed deal. It claimed that the Treasury, rather than local authorities, stood to gain the most from the Greater Manchester City Deal. “If any proposals were developed, we would want to consider these in detail and with proper rigour,” a Scottish Government spokesman told LTT. “Under arrangements such as the deal struck with Greater Manchester, HM Treasury stands to benefit the most. We would need to be very clear that Scotland would not be disadvantaged by any proposals.” Glasgow criticises the SNP administration’s handling of the Scottish cities agenda, saying the UK Government’s cities agenda is better. “The approach in the rest of the UK has been to encourage cities to take more responsibility and compete. In Scotland it has been about collaboration.” Glasgow says other Scottish cities may seek their own deals with the UK Government.

News 3

Local Transport Today provides fortnightly coverage of the total urban and regional UK transport scene from the viewpoint of planners, policy makers, traffic engineers, analysts, investors and managers of resources involved. Editorial Office Apollo House 359 Kennington Lane London SE11 5QY. Tel: 0845 270 7875 Fax: 0845 270 7961 Email: ed.ltt@landor.co.uk Publisher/Editorial Director Peter Stonham Editor Andrew Forster Contributing Writers John Helm Design & Production production@landor.co.uk Managing Director Rod Fletcher Client Partnership Manager Daniel Simpson Tel: 0845 270 7861 Advertising Office Tel: 0845 270 7861 Fax: 0845 270 7960 E-mail: ads.ltt@landor.co.uk Subscriptions Tel: 0845 270 7900 Fax: 0845 270 7920 E-mail: subs@landor.co.uk Subscribe on line TransportXtra.com/ltt Address for subscriptions HPC Publishing Drury Lane, St Leonards-on-Sea East Sussex TN38 9BJ Accounts Irina Cocks Tel: 0845 270 7854 Fax: 0845 270 7960 359 Kennington Lane London SE11 5QY LTT is available on subscription only. The annual UK subscription rate is £140 including dispatch by first class post and supply of special supplements. The overseas rate is £180 for Europe and £220 for the rest of the world.

Printed by Hastings Printing Company Ltd Drury Lane St Leonards-on-Sea East Sussex TN38 9BJ. ISSN 0962 6220. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in whole or in part without the written permission of the publisher. LTT is published by Landor LINKS Ltd. © Landor L|I|N|K|S Ltd 2013

LTT633 page 4_LTT633_p04 18/10/2013 05:20 Page 4

4 News

Ex-TfL rail chief backs ‘rail M25’

RAIL

TRANSPORT FOR London’s former rail chief has added his voice to calls for a new orbital rail route round London. Ian Brown, TfL’s former managing director for rail, said: “If you draw a circle around London, you can see a ring of enhanced-capacity stations under construction or recently completed. The ring, going clockwise, starts with Gatwick Airport then Reading, Rugby and Milton Keynes, Peterborough and Cambridge. “Throw in flyovers at Reading, Nuneaton and Hitchin and this is starting to look like a serious co-ordinated capacity

Brown: Gatwick to Milton Keynes and Cambridge

enhancement strategy. Join these up with the plans for an electrified western spine for freight and passengers from Southampton to Oxford, Bletchley and Bedford, and this is starting to look like a national strategy.” Brown makes the comments in the October edition of campaign group Railfuture’s Railwatch magazine. Surrey County Council recently outlined its ideas for an outer orbital railway linking Gatwick, Reading, Oxford, Milton Keynes and Bedford (LTT 20 Sep). Transport for London is working up separate proposals. Brown also suggests there is a need for an electrified eastern spine railway to link the Channel Tunnel, Medway ports, across the Thames Estuary, to the London Gateway container port and then through March, Spalding (requiring March-Spalding to be re-opened) to Doncaster. “Just think what such a spine could do for regional passenger links,” he says. “You could travel by train from Kent to East Anglia and from East Anglia to Lincolnshire.”

LTT632 04 October - 17 October 2013

Legal route used to secure road powers immaterial, says judge ROADS

by Andrew Forster

CAMPAIGNERS OPPOSING the Lancashire County Council’s £124m Heysham M6 Link road are to continue their legal fight despite a judge rejecting their case on all five grounds. Mr Justice Turner this month rejected the judicial review brought by Transport Solutions for Lancaster and Morecambe (TSLM) against the Secretary of State for Transport’s decision to grant a development consent order (DCO) for Lancashire’s £124m three-mile dual carriageway road, which will connect into junction 34 of the M6 at Lancaster. But TSLM’s David Gate said the fight would go on. “We have taken legal advice and that is that there are errors in the judge’s decision, and there are good grounds for a successful appeal against it. So we shall ask the courts for permission to appeal.” One of the grounds for the original legal challenge was that

Lancashire had used the incorrect legal route to secure powers for the road. The council took the scheme through the DCO route introduced by the Planning Act 2008. Turner said he was satisfied that the DCO route was appropriate and said that, even if he had judged that the scheme fell outside the Planning Act 2008 definition of an nationally significant infrastructure project, he wouldn’t have approved TSLM’s case. “The development consent [DCO] process is thorough and comprehensive and it is overwhelmingly likely that consent would have been given regardless of the route by which it had been achieved. The time, cost and inconvenience of re-starting the process would render judicial intervention at this stage to be wholly disproportionate.” This is one of three issues that TSLM’s lawyers, Leigh Day, are taking to appeal. The question of whether a local authority road could be a NSIP rests on how the Planning Act’s definition of

a road connected to a road managed by the Highways Agency is interpreted. Gate told LTT he accepted that the road would be physically connected to a Highways Agency road (the M6) but said the purpose of the road was not connected to the motorway. Gate said Turner was also wrong to suggest that the route through which powers to build the road were secured was irrelevant. “To say it doesn’t matter if it’s gone through the right procedure is dubious – the procedures have to be legal.” Turner also rejected TSLM’s argument that the pre-DCO consultation conducted by Lancashire on the scheme had been unduly restrictive, with the public not allowed to comment on the route and road type. Turner noted that a broader consultation had been conducted prior to the road gaining planning consent in 2007. Lancashire subsequently reapplied for planning consent via the DCO process following design changes to the scheme.

“It would have been more appropriate for the consultation exercise to have been presented in terms that were not so unequivocally expressed,” said Turner. “However, I decline to conclude that the matters complained of by the claimant are of sufficient practical substance to render the decision unlawful.” Gate told LTT this week that this was a second ground for the appeal. “He [Turner] admits that the consultation was inadequate – the promoter went into the consultation with a closed mind.” The third ground of the appeal concerns the impact of the development on the welfare of otters. Gate said that if the Court of Appeal rejects the appeals then that would be the end of TSLM’s legal challenges against the road. The DfT has pledged £111m towards the scheme’s £124m construction cost, a figure that has been agreed with contractor Costain. Lancashire is providing the remaining funding.

favour the interests of MAG and that is precisely what we fear he may have done. That is why it is not enough simply to remove Mr Muirhead from the Commission at this advanced stage and that is why we will be asking the High Court to order the Commission to re-visit certain key decisions made by the Commission during the time that Mr Muirhead was involved.” Airports Commission chairman Sir Howard Davies said last week that the Commission’s provisional conclusion is that some net additional runway capacity will be needed in the South East of England in the coming decades. It was difficult to see how regional airports could absorb excess demand in the South East, he said. Pressure on the UK’s busiest airports was likely to grow “even if we take a more conservative view of future aviation demand than the DfT has in the past”. “We hope to improve on the current forecasting approaches in our interim report, for example by considering a greater range of scenarios than the DfT does currently.”

HIGH-SPEED RAIL

spending settlement, committee chair Andrew Tyrie said: “The economic case must be looked at again. The Bill should not proceed until this work has been done.” Campaign group Stop HS2 is concerned that the decision by former rail minister Simon Burns to quit and stand to become Deputy Speaker is part of a plan to steamroll the Hybrid Bill through parliament. “The Deputy Speaker also holds the post of chairman of the Ways and Means committee, which presides over Hybrid Bills in the Court of Referees during the petitioning process and will be allowed to determine who is heard as regards the petitions against the HS2 Hybrid Bill, and even determines the scope of areas the petitions can challenge,” said the group. “Given the way the proposed Lobbying Bill would silence campaigners, and the way the Local Audit Bill would silence councils in opposition to HS2, trying to reduce the rights of those affected by HS2 in Parliament would come as no surprise,” said Stop HS2’s Joe Rukin.

Airports Commission HS2 environment work shortlisting challenged challenged in court

AIRPORTS

OPPONENTS OF Stansted Airport expansion are seeking a judicial review of the Government’s refusal to re-examine the ‘sift criteria’ that the Airports Commission will use to draw up a shortlist of airport expansion options in December. Stop Stansted Expansion’s challenge is on the grounds of “apparent bias” associated with Geoff Muirhead’s membership of the Commission. Muirhead stepped down from the Commission last month in response to protests by SSE. He is a former chief executive of Manchester Airports Group, the current owner of Stansted. Although he stood down from this role in October 2010, SSE says he then served as an ambassador for MAG until earlier this year. He was appointed onto the Airports Commission last year. SSE economics adviser Brian Ross said: “For almost a year Mr Muirhead was allowed to play a pivotal role on the Commission. He was in a powerful position to shape the decisions and judgements of the Commission to

TEN LOCAL authorities this week took their case against the Government’s high-speed rail plans to the Supreme Court. The court was considering an appeal brought by the councils after their original case was rejected in the Appeal Court earlier this year (LTT 26 Jul). The appeal has two grounds: that the Government should have conducted a Strategic Environmental Assessment of HS2 and alternatives; and that the Government’s plan to use the Hybrid Bill procedure to secure powers of the London-West Midlands line is incompatible with the European Environmental Impact Assessment Directive. The ten authorities are: the London Boroughs of Camden and Hillingdon, Warwickshire County Council and the districts of Chiltern, Warwick, South Northamptonshire, Cherwell, North Warwickshire, Lichfield, and Three Rivers. The House of Commons treasury select committee has become the latest critic of HS2. Launching its report on this summer’s

LTT633 page 5_LTT633_p05 18/10/2013 04:33 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Kent caps bus fare rises at RPI in town’s statutory partnership

BUSES

by Andrew Forster

KENT COUNTY Council is to cap bus fare rises on a busy corridor in Maidstone through a Statutory Quality Partnership Scheme. Operators running services on the A20 corridor into the west of Maidstone will only be permitted to increase fares in April each year and will be restricted to increases of the RPI rate in the 12 months leading up to 31 October the previous year. The QPS, covering a threemile section of the A20, is due to be launched early next year and will run for ten years. Arriva provides the vast majority of services on the road but independent operators provide a small number, including some tendered services. The QPS includes provisions covering fares, frequencies and

Frequencies covered too

vehicle emission standards. David Joyner, Kent’s transport and safety policy manager, told LTT that fares had been “the main sticking point in the discussions”. As well as restricting how much operators can raise fares by, the QPS specifies

Councils gear up for smartcard launch

TICKETING

KENT AND Medway councils are working with public transport operators to develop a public transport smartcard for the area. Bus operator Arriva will pilot the Kent Travel Smartcard in Maidstone early next year, offering pay-as-you-go and period pass ticketing. Kent hopes to extend the scheme to other operators in Maidstone by the spring and then to all bus operators across Kent and Medway next autumn. “Stagecoach is interested in principle in the scheme and the opportunity to develop multioperator tickets,” Kent’s smartcard project manager, Charlotte Owen, told council-

lors. “All smaller bus operators are extremely keen to join the scheme.” She said it would take some time to extend the ticketing to rail. “[Train operator] Southeastern is committed to rolling out some smart tickets in rail first before launching integrated bus-rail products,” she said. Kent and Medway councils are to fund the initial estimated £60,000 project costs. Owen said the intention was that Kent would collect the revenue from ticket sales and reapportion it to operators on the basis of the number of journeys made on each firms’ services. “The cost of the on-going running of the scheme will be taken out of this revenue pot,” she added.

the maximum fares that operators can charge. Joyner said these were consistent with the fares currently charged. The QPS does include provision for fares to be increased above RPI but Joyner said this would only be permitted in exceptional circumstances. The QPS also sets out a minimum number of services to be provided by a combination of participating operators. Joyner said the specification reflected current service levels. Vehicles will have to comply with Euro IV emission standards by April next year. Arriva recently made a successful bid in partnership with Kent to the Government’s Green Bus Fund for grant to support the purchase of 11 new hybrid diesel/electric buses for a service on the corridor. Joyner said the operator would be

investing in further vehicles to ensure that they all meet the QPS requirement. Vehicles used on tendered services will not have to meet the emissions standard. “We’re anxious to maximise the number of bus services we can keep going with our supported services budget so we’re not in a position to raise the vehicle standard,” said Joyner. Kent County Council and Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council will commit to continue to provide facilities including real-time information at bus stops, bus stop clearways, timetables, and traffic signal priority for buses. Kent already has seven voluntary bus partnerships but this is the first statutory scheme. “This is a bit of a pilot for us. It may be the way forward, it may not,” said Joyner.

Transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin has granted Transport for Greater Manchester the power to build a second Metrolink route across Manchester city centre. The route is vital for delivering additional capacity on the system as the network expands. It runs from St Peter’s Square, along Princess Street, Cross Street and Corporation Street, rejoining the existing Metrolink line just outside Victoria station. Transport for Greater Manchester is currently procuring a contractor to undertake the works. Construction should begin next year and be completed in the winter of 2016/17. The scheme will cost in excess of £100m and is part of the Greater Manchester Transport Fund.

Four areas secure Better Bus Area devolved BSOG BUSES

THE DFT has designated four Better Bus Areas in which Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) paid to operators for commercial services will gradually be transferred to local authorities. In addition to seeing BSOG payments cut to zero over a fourand-a-half year period, with the equivalent amount instead paid to the local transport authorities, the

councils in each area will receive a top-up grant worth 20% of the BSOG claimed. The four BBAs and their BSOG plus top-up grant allocations are: Nottingham City Council (£11.3m), Merseytravel (£2.7m), the City of York Council (£1.3m) and the West of England Partnership (£1.3m). They follow the £18.5m Sheffield Better Bus Area which has pioneered the BAA model and was launched

earlier this year. Local authorities will spend the transferred grant plus top-up on measures to improve local bus services. Nottingham will receive £8.1m of devolved BSOG and £3.2m top-up funding. It will use some of the cash to deliver the Southern Gateway bus priority scheme, implementation of which is planned for 2016. Other investments will include real-time

information and CCTV at bus stops. In addition, £4m of the funds will be used to directly compensate operators for the loss of BSOG – increased concessionary fares reimbursement, the abolition of bus station departure charges, and de minimis payments (LTT 26 Jul). The DfT only received a handful of BBA bids. Many areas struggled to develop a scheme that fitted the rules (LTT 12 Jul).

News 5

In Brief

Councils notified of devolved BSOG The DfT has notified local transport authorities in England of how much funding they can expect to receive as a result of the Government’s decision to devolve Bus Service Operators Grant paid to operators for tendered services. The new arrangements take effect on 1 January when councils will receive their first payment. Further payments will be made in April each year.

‘Too many councils in Scotland’ Business leaders in Scotland are calling on the Scottish Government to reduce the number of local authorities in the country. CBI Scotland said that the number of local authorities should be reduced from the current 32 “towards a model based on larger authorities including metropolitan areas covering the principal cities”.

Lancs extends free bus travel for young Lancashire County Council is expanding and extending its free bus travel scheme for young people. The council introduced a scheme last December offering free travel to 16-18 year olds who are classified as NEET (not in education, employment or training) and in March extended this to 16-18 year old parents or carers. Councillors have now agreed to fund the scheme to 31 March 2017 and also to offer participants three month’s free travel on entering full-time employment, training or education. Lancashire estimates that the total cost of the scheme between 1 April 2013 and 31 March 2017 will be £2.5m. The council has failed in an attempt to persuade bus operators to offer child rate fares for all 16-18 years olds, although Transdev last month began offering the discount on services in East Lancashire.

Borough studies road tunnel options The London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham is looking at a range of options for placing part of the A4 in tunnel to reduce the road’s environmental intrusion. The focus was initially on placing the Hammersmith flyover in tunnel but council leader Nicholas Botterill told a public meeting last week: We have a range of options from simply replacing the flyover to something far more ambitious, like a tunnel that potentially stretches from Chiswick to Earl’s Court, involving various north/south connector tunnels.” Consultant CH2M Hill is assisting the investigations.

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 6

LTT633 page 7_LTT632_p0 18/10/2013 03:41 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Derbyshire and S Yorks at odds over split of transport funding

GOVERNANCE

by Andrew Forster

DERBYSHIRE COUNTY Council has expressed concern with the arrangements the DfT has put in place for funding transport improvements in those parts of the county adjoining South Yorkshire. Earlier this year the DfT announced it would split the devolved local major scheme funding from April 2015 for three Derbyshire districts (Bolsover, North East Derbyshire and Chesterfield) and one Nottinghamshire district, Bassetlaw, 50/50 between the local transport body (LTB) covering Derbyshire, Derby, Nottingham and Nottinghamshire (D2N2) and the LTB covering the Sheffield City Region. This was in recognition of the fact that the four district councils are members of both local enterprise partnerships. They are also non-constituent members of the proposed South Yorkshire Combined Authority. In making its decision, the DfT advised: “We are conscious that the Sheffield City Region’s governance review and plans for a Combined Authority will have a bearing on the LTB geography. We will therefore expect partners to propose definitive LTB boundaries once the governance review is complete, following which

revised allocations will be set accordingly.” Derbyshire expresses its unhappiness with the current arrangements in response to the Government’s consultation on plans to set up the South Yorkshire Combined Authority. The county’s acting strategic director for environmental services, Mike Ashworth, said the split of funding was complicating priority setting. He cited an improvement to the A61 Whittington Moor roundabout, a key junction between Chesterfield and Sheffield, which has been prioritised by the D2N2 local transport body, but not by the Sheffield City Region LTB. Ashworth said he could foresee difficulties delivering another new road, the Seymour Link at Markham Vale. “Whilst it has performed well under the selection criteria of both areas, it still represents a significant challenge [to deliver] because there is no guarantee that funding can be drawn down from each source at the appropriate time,” he said. But Ben Still, chief executive of the Sheffield City Region Local Enterprise Partnership, said that, if anything, the funding split would strengthen the delivery of transport improvements in the areas concerned. “The opportunities for Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire and the Sheffield City Region to make

Leeds studies delivery options for £100m road ROADS

LEEDS CITY Council is exploring how to fund a £100m new dual carriageway on the eastern edge of the city, which it says is vital to supporting housing growth. The 4.3-mile East Leeds Orbital Road will support the East Leeds Extension, a greenfield development of 7,000 new homes, connecting the city’s existing A6120 Outer Ring Road at Red Hall to the M1 (LTT 25 Jan). The road’s construction could allow the existing A6120 between Red Hall and the M1 to be downgraded, with new features such as lower speed limits, cycle lanes, bus lanes and lane narrowing. Consultant Mouchel has just completed a review of the council’s plans. It supports the view that the new road should be built as a dual carriageway, with

a 50mph speed limit, and with junctions limited to the existing main roads through the area. The estimated cost of the road in 2013 prices is £74.5m, including £23m for optimism bias. Assuming a start to construction of 2018 and an opening date of 2020 the outturn cost is £91.5m. These estimates, however, assume the road is constructed as a single project. Director of city development, Martin Farrington, said that, although this remained the council’s aspiration, “it is more likely that there will be a need to identify a realistic phased approach to its construction”. This could enable developers to contribute to the road “without impacting on the viability of [their housing] development”. Farrington said £50m of an assumed £100m scheme cost could be secured from the West Yorkshire Plus Transport Fund.

sure they’ve got the right priorities is much greater now because we’re putting these arrangements in place,” he told LTT. He said the prioritisation of the Seymour Link by both LTBs would “add to the case for delivering the scheme, rather than detract from it”. The Sheffield City Region LEP has told the DfT that the funding split should continue for as long as the Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire district councils want it to continue. The LEP is hoping that the DfT will agree to split funding for a fifth district, Derbyshire Dales, which only became a member of the Sheffield City Region LEP board in January. Whether the Government will agree to the continuation of the funding split will become clear when the Local Growth Fund allocations for the areas are

announced next summer. Ashworth said Derbyshire’s response to the South Yorkshire CA consultation should also emphasise the county’s “absolute opposition to any potential changes in governance that would undermine the ability of the county council to coordinate across the whole county its statutory functions for economic development, highways and transport”. Ben Still said there was no intention for the Combined Authority to have any transport powers over parts of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. But he said it made sense for the purposes of strategic transport and economic planning of the city region to look across nine authorities (the four South Yorkshire metropolitan districts, the four Derbyshire districts, and the Nottinghamshire district of Bassetlaw).

The future of local transport policy will be discussed at LTT’s event – LEPs and the new transport agenda – in London on 5 November. Speakers include Graham Pendlebury, the DfT’s director of local transport; Tony Ciaburro, chairman of the transport board of ADEPT; and David Frost, chair of the Local Enterprise Partnership network. To book a place see the advert on page 23 or visit: http://tinyurl.com/ny42b7k

Legal threat to £1.5bn A14 upgrade in Cambs

ROADS

ENVIRONMENTAL CAMPAIGNERS have threatened legal action against the Government’s proposed A14 improvements in Cambridgeshire because of their air quality implications. The Campaign for Better Transport makes the threat in its response to the DfT’s consultation on a £1.5bn programme to improve 22 miles of the A14, which includes a new tolled Huntingdon Southern Bypass. CBT says two Air Quality Management Areas already exist close to the road, at Brampton and Bar Hill to Girton. It believes the road improvements could push these areas and other locations nearby “above, or further above, the legal limits”. “EU legislation and the recent Supreme Court ruling that the UK is failing in its legal duty to protect people from the effects of

air pollution, is clear that areas currently within legal limits cannot be pushed over them,” says the CBT. ClientEarth, the environmental legal organisation, is taking an interest in the scheme. The CBT also questions the case for the improvements, saying traffic levels between Cambridge and Huntingdon were 4.2% lower in 2012 than 2002. “Against this background, we strongly oppose any new road building in this area, and argue that the recent history of flat or reducing traffic allows considerable ‘breathing space’ to look at other options that will build on these trends and reduce traffic further rather than encourage more traffic and car dependency.” Cambridgeshire councillors this week voted 36:22 against a UKIP motion criticising plans to toll the new Huntingdon Southern Bypass.

News 7

In Brief

Kent studies riskbased road safety Kent County Council is considering adopting risk-based criteria for identifying where to invest in road safety measures. The council currently bases decisions on figures for personal injury crashes but Andy Corcoran, Kent’s traffic schemes and member highway fund manager, told councillors: “A new model is being investigated that would take into account risk factors, as opposed to simple crash statistics. This potentially will lead to road safety schemes being promoted where minimal or even no crashes have occurred.” Kent is also revising its policy on area-wide 20mph speed limits to allow their implementation where they would encourage more walking and cycling. The council has traditionally only approved 20mph limits on casualty reduction grounds. Corcoran said that, with the council now having public health duties, “a greater use of 20mph schemes for this purpose alone should be promoted”. Local members can also order the implementation of 20mph schemes where there are neither casualty reduction or public health benefits using the council’s member highway fund.

DfT sets out evaluation methods The DfT has published details of its monitoring and evaluation programme for transport projects and regulations. Monitoring and evaluation programme is available at http://tinyurl.com/kryywep

Active travel for NI schools The Northern Ireland Executive has launched a £1.2m fund to encourage children to walk and cycle to school. The Active Travel School Initiative is funded by the Department for Regional Development and the Public Health Agency and will deliver programmes at 180 schools over three years.

TfL seeks to cut peak hour deliveries Transport for London is setting up a working group to promote freight deliveries in the capital outside the busiest times of day. The out-of-hours consortium brings together TfL, boroughs, retailers, London Councils, the Freight Transport Association and the Road Haulage Association. It will work on a series of out-ofhours delivery trials, look at how schemes can be delivered more widely without causing disruption to residents, and consider whether legislative changes and modifications to vehicles such as to reduce noise, are required. TfL promoted out-of-hours delivery trials during the Olympics.

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 8

LTT633 page 9_LTT633_p09 18/10/2013 03:39 Page 5

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Review finds ASA speed camera ruling was ‘substantially flawed’

ROAD SAFETY

by Andrew Forster

THE ADVERTISING Standards Authority’s decision to reject a complaint about speed camera publicity material was “substantially flawed”, the body’s independent reviewer has concluded. But the ASA will not reverse its judgment because it has now decided the publicity material lies outside its remit. The case centres on the Scottish Safety Camera Programme Office’s website, which reported that the number of people killed or seriously injured at safety camera sites in Scotland had fallen 68% following camera enforcement (LTT 9 Aug). Ian Belchamber, who runs the Dorset Speed website, complained to the ASA, arguing that the statement implied that cameras were the cause of the entire reduction, ignoring the contribution of factors such as regression to the mean, the downward trend in road accident casualties, and the recession.

Camera statements lie outside the ASA’s remit

The ASA Council rejected Belchamber’s complaint, ruling that the website’s statement “was likely to be understood by consumers as one which factually reported the number of KSIs at camera sites”. Belchamber complained about the ruling and it has subsequently been examined by the ASA’s independent reviewer, Sir Hayden Phillips, who was permanent secretary of the Lord Chancellor’s department from 1998 to 2004.

Phillips concluded that the ASA’s initial ruling was wrong, telling Belchamber: “I am minded to recommend that the [ASA’s] adjudication is substantially flawed on the grounds that the advertisement implies, to an average reader, that the cameras are solely responsible for the 68% reduction claimed. It seems to me clear that, as you have put it to me, there are a number of other factors at work and the advert should have been qualified.” But Phillips added: “You should be aware that there is a good case for saying that the advertising in question was not in fact within the remit of the ASA to consider as it was primarily promoting a cause or idea, namely that speed cameras save lives, and is not directly connected with the supply of goods or services.” He nonetheless added: “I can tell you that I am minded to recommend that the advert is within remit.” But the ASA Council this week ruled that the statement on the Safety Camera Programme

Office’s website was outside its remit because it was “not an advertisement, on a website, that was directly connected with the supply or transfer of goods or services”. Belchamber told LTT: “Clearly the ASA had to do something, and fortunately for them, there was an easy escape: where they had previously decided the advert was within remit, and the reviewer had agreed, all they had to do was change their minds about this – they simply said that the advert now, when it had been before, was no longer within remit.” The decision means that the ASA’s original ruling that the website’s reporting was acceptable will now be withdrawn. Phillips is considering Belchamber’s request for a review of the ASA’s similar ruling on the Welsh Road Casualty Reduction Partnership. But he has told Belchamber: “As you will appreciate I will need to take account of this precedent decision by the Council.”

Motorists angered by Liverpool rejects Baker’s Brighton’s green policies call for bus lane rethink

POLICY

BRIGHTON AND Hove Council’s green administration is facing a backlash from motorists who claim the council has declared “war” on the car. Local taxi firms together with businesses including cafes, restaurants and hotels have launched the ‘Unchain the Motorist’ campaign, criticising the roll-out of 20mph speed limits, “draconian parking charges”, and changes to the Lewes Road, which have seen the introduction of bus and cycle lanes and cut space for general traffic to one lane in each direction. The council introduced a 20mph limit in the city centre in April and has just completed a consultation on phase two of the programme, which will see the lower limit extended to nine residential parts of the city. Main roads in the areas will retain their existing limits. The Unchain the Motorist campaign says there is no evidence that 20mph limits reduce accidents, carbon dioxide emissions, pollution or congestion, or that they encourage more use of public transport.

The Unite and GMB trade unions have joined the campaign, with Unite saying the imposition of 20mph speed limits will “burden our members in the transport sectors with extra costs in both fuel and time”. The Advertising Standards Authority has now been asked to investigate one of the adverts placed by the pro-motorist group. Ian Davey, the council’s lead member for transport, told LTT: “We and apparently 12 other people or organisations, including the national 20s Plenty campaign reported the anonymous advert – later attributed to Unchain the Motorist – to the ASA because we believe it breaches the rules on honesty and truthfulness. “Their claim that there is no evidence 20mph limits make roads safer is flagrantly wrong. There’s masses of evidence.” Davey said the Lewes Road changes would take time to bed in. “We said when everything settles down car journey times on the route will be three to five minutes longer. Bus journeys – more common than car journeys on this road – will almost certainly be quicker and more reliable.”

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

LIVERPOOL CITY Council has rejected transport minister Norman Baker’s call to drop a trial suspension of every bus lane in the city. In one of his final ministerial duties before moving to the Home Office, Baker wrote to the Liverpool’s elected mayor Joe Anderson this month saying the council’s plan was not “just a matter of local interest” and would “send out a worrying signal nationally about the importance of excellent public transport, especially in large city areas” (LTT 04 Oct).

A council spokesman this week told LTT the council was intent on going ahead with the trial, which is scheduled to begin on 21 October. “This nine-month trial is about investigating the impact that bus lanes are having on traffic flow across the city,” he said. “We are consulting with stakeholders during the first six months, giving individuals and organisations the opportunity to make objections and comments. “We will then make an informed, evidence-based decision about the future of each bus lane when the trial is completed.”

South Gloucs trials cloud traffic management

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

SOUTH GLOUCESTERSHIRE Council has become the first in the country to use a new cloudbased traffic management system. The council is trialling Siemens’ Stratos journey time application that uses data from ANPR cameras to monitor journey times and provide a base-

line for assessing network strategies. “We chose Stratos as it represents a logical progression from our existing server-based systems,” said Tony Sharp of the council. Stratos offers a range of modules, including car parking, variable message signs, traffic management and, in the future, Siemens plans to extend the offering to adaptive traffic control.

News 9

In Brief

Average speed cameras for A12 The Highways Agency plans to install average speed cameras on a two-and-a-half mile stretch of the A12 in Suffolk. The cameras will enforce a 70mph limit on the road between the Colchester and Ipswich. The HA says the cameras will “target accidents related to traffic speed in an area of difficult road alignment and geometry”. Installation of the £843,000 scheme is expected to start in September 2014.

Removing bus lane ‘will speed up buses’ Removing a bus lane on a main road in Sheffield will reduce delays to buses as well as other traffic, according to modelling undertaken by Sheffield City Council. Councillors heard last week that removing the outbound bus lane on the approach to a roundabout on the A621 Ecclesall Road could help cut average bus journey times in the evening peak by more than a minute and average car journey times by more than two minutes. The council has deferred the lane’s removal until a suitable alternative route for cyclists has been provided.

App speeds up temporary TROs A new application for publishing temporary traffic regulation orders has been produced by ELGIN. The tool creates closures and diversions by clicking on a map before raising the legal order, publishing the information on roadworks.org and other websites. ELGIN says the new Traffic Management application can cut the preparation time down from hours to minutes.

Cut use of yellow lines, suggests DfT The DfT has asked local authorities in England to consider reducing their use of “intrusive” yellow lines to mark parking restrictions in favour of implementing restricted parking zones. These require a limited number of signs to inform motorists if they can or cannot park and during which times.

West of Edinburgh bus study Transport Scotland and the City of Edinburgh and West Lothian councils are teaming up to commission a £100,000 study into public transport improvements on the A89/Newbridge interchange/ A8 corridor between Broxburn and the Edinburgh city bypass. The installation of bus lanes will be one of the items examined; West Lothian also has ambitions for a bus-based park-and-ride facility at Kilpunt beside the A89/A899 junction.

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 10

LTT633 page 11_LTT633_p11 18/10/2013 01:58 Page 4

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Ten more years of Pacer trains, Valley Line passengers warned PHOTO: JOHN LORD

RAIL

by Andrew Forster

RAIL PASSENGERS on the Cardiff Valleys network of lines may have to endure the unpopular Pacer trains for another decade, Welsh Assembly members have been told. The Class 142/143 Pacer railbuses are the mainstay of local rail services on the Cardiff Valley routes. Built in the mid-1980s at a time when British Rail was cash-strapped they have been criticised for their ride quality, with politicians and rail campaigners urging their withdrawal. But Keith Howard, commercial director of Porterbrook Leasing Company, which owns many of the Pacers used by the Wales & Borders franchise, told the National Assembly for Wales that the diesel multiple units “should not be dismissed out of hand”. He said his company’s fleet deployed on the franchise were the most reliable Pacers in the UK “and are more reliable than many Sprinter and Super Sprinter fleets”. They were cheap too: a Pacer

Pacers: plenty of life in them

could be leased for only 30% of the cost of a Sprinter and 18% of the cost of a more modern Class 170 diesel multiple unit. Howard said the future of the Pacers was tied to the electrification of the Valley lines, which is planned for Network Rail’s sixth control period, 2019-2024. But their future is also connected to the requirement that from 1 January 2020 all trains must be compliant with a technical standard for passengers on reduced mobility (PRM). Trains must be fitted with audible and visual information systems, wheelchair accessible toilets, and priority seating for the disabled.

Neither the Pacer nor Sprinter fleets deployed in Wales are PRM compliant. “Wales & Borders are therefore in the position that, as currently configured, 73% of the train fleet cannot operate in passenger service on 1 January 2020 and beyond,” Howard told the Assembly’s enterprise and business committee inquiry into the future of the Wales & Borders franchise. “As the current [15-year] Wales & Borders franchise does not end until October 2018, there is no obligation on the current franchisee [Arriva] to undertake this work,” Howard added. He predicted this would be a “major

busiest services. “The overall increase in passenger numbers from a shoulder peak discount is likely to be very small, and not sufficient to generate the new income needed to offset the cost of the discount,” the DfT explains. The Department is also unable to introduce its plans to make long-distance single fares half the price of returns: “Allowing more long-distance passengers to get a better and fairer deal in this way would not be without cost to Government and mandating such a change network-wide remains unaffordable in the current climate.” A trial of the half-fare single ticket is being proposed. One significant change that will go ahead is the reduction in train operators’ flexibility to increase regulated fares in most of England above the rate of inflation. LTT revealed plans to make this change last month (LTT 20 Sep). Under the current policy of ‘flex’, operators can increase a regulated fare each January by 5% above the permitted average of RPI+1%, so long as other fares increase less, are frozen or are reduced, so that each opera-

tor’s regulated fares increase by on average of no more than RPI+1%. Explaining how the current policy worked, transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin said last week: “In practice it can mean fares get cut on less popular commuter routes and they go up on more popular ones.” From January next year the upper limit of the flex will be capped at 2%, rather than 5%. With July’s RPI inflation rate of 3.1%, the old policy would have allowed individual fares to rise by 9.1% in January (RPI+1% + 5%). The new policy will restrict rises to 6.1%. The Association of Train Operating Companies said its members had suggested reducing the flex. “Although the level of flex has always been a matter of government policy, the reduction being proposed is in line with that suggested by train companies and should help to encourage greater rail use,” said ATOC’s commercial director David Mapp.

problem” unless the current franchisee and the Welsh Government took decisions soon. Howard said there was no prospect of replacing the Pacers with an alternative existing fleet of trains as no spare rolling stock was likely to become available. “If, as would now seem likely, the Pacers will be modified for PRM compliance it would make economic sense to keep them in operation for as long as reasonably possible to get the benefit of the money that has been spent,” said Howard. “We estimate that it will cost in the region of £85,000 per Pacer carriage to carry out the PRM modifications. On 60 carriages that amounts to £5.1m. “If the electrification of the Valley Lines is completed in 2020 or 2021 and electric trains are introduced, unless an alternative use can be found for the Pacers, the full value of the investment will not be realised,” he said. “If the investment is to be made on the Pacers, it may be sensible to plan for the introduction of electric trains a year or two later to maximise the benefit of the investment.”

No money for flexible ticketing – DfT Future of

RAIL

THE DFT has kicked the introduction of flexible rail season tickets into the long grass, saying they are unaffordable for taxpayers. Flexible season tickets would cost less than a standard season ticket and be designed to suit people who mix working in an office with working at home, or travelling in the off-peak. In a new report on rail fares and ticketing, the DfT re-iterates plans recently announced to trial this type of ticket but says the Government cannot afford their widespread introduction. “Our analysis and discussions with industry suggest that the only cost-free way to widely offer part-time discounts [on season tickets] would be to increase the costs of the full-time or unlimited season ticket. In the current climate we are not prepared to impose additional fare rises on the many ‘full-time’ commuters.” Similarly, the Department says it is unable to pursue the idea of discounts for passengers travelling in the shoulder peak, an idea that has been championed as a way to ease overcrowding on the

Rail fares and ticketing: next steps is available at http://tinyurl.com/mfpgel7

Transport Direct probed JOURNEY PLANNING

THE DFT is reviewing the future of its Transport Direct multi-modal journey planning website. Consultant AECOM was awarded a £50,000 contract in May to provide technical support to the Transport Direct Future project. The DfT said at the time of the appointment: “At the outset of this project we do not have a clearly defined view of what successor arrangements should look like, what functionality should be provided, who would provide the service (public or private sector), or whether there is a requirement to offer a user interface or just provide the information as an Application Programming Interface (API).” Issues being examined include new functionalities such as fares; how journey planning can best be optimised for smart phones and tablets; and the incorporation of mapping. The project is due to be completed by the end of the year.

News 11

Councils gather cash for East West Rail revival

RAIL

COUNCILS on the route of the proposed East West rail line between Bedford and Oxford are finalising how to raise their £50m contribution to the project. Work is now underway on the first phase of the project to increase track capacity and reinstate bits of disused trackbed between Oxford and Bedford via Milton Keynes. Services between London Marylebone and a new station at Water Eaton (Oxford Parkway) should begin in summer 2015, extending to Oxford in spring 2016. The completion of phase two to Milton Keynes and Bedford is scheduled for December 2017. The Government has given the councils 15 years – until 2028 – to make their contribution but the payment is subject to annual indexation using the Consumer Prices Index. Eight councils are contributing funds: Oxfordshire County Council £11.1m; Buckinghamshire £10.1m; Milton Keynes £7.6m; Aylesbury Vale District Council £5.4m; Oxford City Council £4.7m; Cherwell District Council £4.4m; Central Bedfordshire Council £4.2m; and Bedford Borough Council £2.6m. Milton Keynes Council is to provide its contribution upfront using prudential borrowing. The council says this will save £700,000 over 15 years because the cost of borrowing is lower than the indexation costs. Oxfordshire, in contrast, plans to make payments of £700,000 a year for 15 years. Oxfordshire wants East West Rail to facilitate a four trains an hour service between Didcot, Culham, Oxford, Water Eaton, and Bicester. This is part of the Oxford Science Transit concept included in the area’s City Deal. The plan is likely to require fourtracking the line between Didcot and Oxford.

In Brief

Cyber attack threat to transport probed The European Commission is commissioning research into the threat posed by cyber attacks to road and rail systems. The work will lead to guidelines being prepared for member states and transport operators. The deadline for expressions of interest is 20 November.

LTT633 page 11_LTT633_p11 18/10/2013 01:58 Page 4

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Ten more years of Pacer trains, Valley Line passengers warned PHOTO: JOHN LORD

RAIL

by Andrew Forster

Pacers: plenty of life in them

No money for flexible ticketing – DfT Future of

RAIL

Rail fares and ticketing: next steps is available at http://tinyurl.com/mfpgel7

Transport Direct probed JOURNEY PLANNING

News 11

Councils gather cash for East West Rail revival

RAIL

In Brief

LTT633_p12-15_feature2_LTT633_p12-15 17/10/2013 22:27 Page 12

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

Decision time: Davies weighs up mayor’s plan for a new hub airport

12 Feature

Sir Howard Davies, chair of the Government’s Aviation Commission, says new airport capacity is needed in the South East. But he still has to decide where it should be built. Daniel Moylan, the Mayor of London’s aviation advisor, tells Andrew Forster why building an entirely new hub airport to the east of the capital makes sense not just for aviation, but for the spatial development of the metropolis too

ir Howard Davies must have one of the toughest jobs in Government. Twelve months ago the former chief of the Audit Commission and the CBI was appointed chair of the Airports Commission and tasked with ending years of political rancour about whether – and where – new airport capacity should be built in South East England. Davies answered the first question last week, telling an invited audience that there was a clear justification for new capacity. That, however, was arguably the easy bit. To deliver a politically feasible answer to the question of where that new capacity should be built, Davies will have to employ all his skills of analysis and persuasion. The Commission must draw up a shortlist before Christmas from the 52 submissions received this summer (many suggest the same location) and then publish a final recommendation in summer 2015, after the General Election. No one seems quite sure how many locations the Commission will shortlist but anything more than five or six would be a surprise. As an announcement looms, the frontrunners to make it past the first hurdle include Heathrow Airport’s plan for a third runway and a bid by the owners of Gatwick for a second runway (see panel, page 14). But what about London mayor Boris Johnson’s suggestions for a new four-runway hub airport at the Isle of Grain in Kent, at Stansted, or in the Thames estuary? Johnson may have hoped that his hub plan would by now be seen as the hot favourite but it hasn’t worked out that way. The flipside of his plan is that Heathrow would be closed and recent weeks have seen howls of protests about this prospect, not only from the airport and airlines but also from the trade unions whose members work at Heathrow and from businesses in West London and the surrounding area. They all endorse the airport’s view that closure would result in the “biggest mass redundancy in British history”. Sensing that the mayor’s plans are in trouble, Gatwick Airport’s chief executive Stewart Wingate this week felt confident enough to tell the London Evening Standard that the idea of an airport in the Thames Estuary was “sinking without trace” and that a four runway airport at Stansted was “undeliverable”. “On Davies’ mind is that the estuary option is dropping down the pecking order and perhaps dropping off altogether,” claimed Wingate. “It’s looking increasingly like Heathrow versus Gatwick.” With views like these circulating, the mayor is keen to get his message across and so Transport for London has invited LTT in to meet Daniel Moylan, the mayor’s aviation advisor, in his office high up in 55 Broadway, the classic 1920s London Underground headquarters building above St James’s Park Tube station. The last time LTT interviewed Moylan he was deputy leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea and promoting the multi-million-pound transformation of Exhibition Road into a shared space. Moylan remains a councillor on RBKC but he has also become part of Boris Johnson’s team, and served as deputy chair of Transport for London from 2009 to 2012. “I must say airports was not a subject I knew a great deal about but this is the great thing about local government and being involved in governmental things – you have wonderful opportunities to learn how the world

Daniel Moylan

works,” says Moylan. “I’ve been into waste, I’ve been into shared space and designing streets, and many other things.” Moylan frames the aviation topic by making two succinct points: Britain’s economy relies on good connectivity with the rest of the world; and Britain needs to have a single hub airport, offering the widest possible range of connections to support a comprehensive network of long-haul routes. Heathrow is the UK’s hub airport but its two runways operate at 99% capacity. Moylan contrasts this unfavourably with Schiphol near Amsterdam, which has five main runways and operates at 75% capacity. “Schiphol flies to 27 UK destinations, Heathrow flies to eight,” he says, going on to explain how all these UK flights help make Schiphol a successful hub. “You take 100 passengers [from a UK flight], let’s say 50 are going to Amsterdam but 50 are transferring; even if only three or four of those are transferring to marginally viable flights, they’re the ones who are making those flights pay.” Moylan is frustrated that the very need for a single hub airport in Britain is still the subject of debate. “The big airlines believe in a hub, they want to operate that way, other countries do it, but we in Britain seem to say, ‘Oh well, we can’t do that, why would we want to do that?’” He raises his voice: “BECAUSE EVERYBODY ELSE IS DOING IT AND KNOWS BUSINESS AND

THAT’S HOW IT WORKS! BECAUSE IT’S OBVIOUS ISN’T IT! GET YOUR HEAD ROUND IT!”

Self-interest vs national interest

If the Airports Commission concludes that Britain does indeed need a single hub, then the choice comes down to expanding Heathrow or building an entirely new airport. Moylan says the choice is really between the commercial interests of Heathrow Airport’s owners and the national interest. “The mayor wants to build a large airport with plenty of spare capacity because that’s in the national interest, that’s what allows airlines to experiment with new routes,” he says. “The fact is Heathrow always intends to be full.” He points to evidence Heathrow’s boss Colin Matthews gave to the Airports Commission in July. Asked what percentage of capacity he would like to operate the airport at, Matthews dismissed a figure of 75% and said: “Ideally you would not be at 99% or 98%; I am not sure whether it is 95% or something.” Says Moylan: “Heathrow intends to expand incrementally – a third runway, followed by a fourth runway, because preserving its monopolistic characteristics is core to its business model. You benefit if you’re a monopoly provider from having no spare capacity, because if you

LTT633_p12-15_feature2_LTT633_p12-15 17/10/2013 22:27 Page 13

TransportXtra.com/ltt had lots of spare capacity your prices would fall. That’s great if you’re a shareholder in Heathrow but it is no good for the country. Quite apart from the resilience argument, where is the opportunity for new flights?” Moylan says noise pollution ought to be a showstopper for any further expansion at Heathrow. About 766,000 people currently live within the airport’s 55dB Lden noise contour, the measurement used by the World Health Organisation. “It’s not the measure the [UK] Government uses because it’s too embarrassing for them. They use 57dB Leq, which doesn’t take account of the additional disturbance caused by night noise. “Heathrow claims that if you build a third runway it will be quieter than it currently is, with an extra 50% flights. Well, you know, does anyone believe this?” Moylan also foresees years of disruption to the M25 if Heathrow expands because the airport’s preferred option of a runway to the west of the existing airport would require placing a section of the road in tunnel. He thinks the long-term impacts of a bigger Heathrow on surface transport networks are pretty unpalatable too. “If you had an increase of 50% in flights and passengers and a 100% increase for a fourth runway, you would have complete congestion on the M4, the M25 and potentially the M3 as well. You’d need massive improvements in road connectivity in a way that I just don’t think the area could take.” Heathrow’s rail connections don’t meet the requirements of an international airport either, he says. “You compare it to Amsterdam or Frankfurt where you drop down into a railway station that is not just a shuttle into town, it is a railway station on the main high-speed European rail network. Heathrow has nothing like that and never will. Nobody’s ever going to build that high-speed rail spur to the airport; that has the least compelling business case of any part of HS2.” He thinks the Government has ‘jumped the gun’ in pledging to build a new western rail access to Heathrow (LTT 31 May). “How can you do that when you’ve got an Airports Commission deciding the future of the airport?”

Three of a kind

So if Heathrow is the wrong location for a hub, where’s the right one? “Boris doesn’t mind where a new hub airport is built, as long as it strongly reduces the number of people affected by noise and allows for growth,” says Moylan. “You mustn’t think of Boris’s proposals as being on a par with Heathrow’s and Gatwick’s and all the others i.e. this is his airport and they’re proposing that airport. Boris is looking for the right – THUMP! – public – THUMP! – policy – THUMP! – outcome and Colin Matthews is looking to maximise the return to shareholders. “The mayor has a bias towards the eastern side of London because there you get the regeneration benefits, as East London and the eastern side of London are significantly poorer than the west, and there’s land available in a way that doesn’t cause that level of noise pollution [experienced at Heathrow]. “If people are really sensitive about noise, Boris says put it right out in the sea but it doesn’t have to be out in the sea – he’d go with Stansted, he’d go wherever is politically acceptable.” The mayor’s submission to the Airports Commission says about 37,800 residents would be exposed to noise levels above 55dB Lden at Stansted and 31,500 at the Isle of Grain. For a hub in the estuary the number would fall to fewer than 50. “Boris has shown the right solution is possible at three sites – if you find a fourth that’s better, fine! Get on with it.” Huge investment in road and rail links would be needed for each of the options. Despite their very different locations, the mayor proposes a high-speed rail link for each of them to London Waterloo, with intermediate stops at Barking Riverside (making use of the land vacated by Ford, which is now owned by the Greater London Authority), Canary Wharf and London Bridge. At Barking, “you could have fantastic global headquarters and housing, minutes from the airport,” says

Feature 13

Moylan bemoans the fact that much of the “establishment” is still backing a third runway at Heathrow

What really worries the mayor is that the Airports Commission goes for a third runway at Heathrow and it’ll never get built. It was killed before by protests, it will be killed again. Daniel Moylan

Moylan. Why would the trains run all the way to Waterloo? “That way you’re serving the south-west of the country,” he explains. “Because this airport has to work for the rest of the country. Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham would be able to get to the airport on high-speed rail lines – you’d need an extension to take it through from Ebbsfleet. We happen to think that the HS2-HS1 link that the Government is proposing is pretty c***** but actually that bit is the easiest to fix later.” A new hub airport would be a huge catalyst for development in the surrounding sub-region, says Moylan. “Stansted sits at the centre of what has been a growth corridor for the Government for the last 20 years or so – the London-Stansted-Cambridge growth corridor. If you had a major airport there it would transform things; I think it would be a positive transformation, I think it would bring in huge wealth.” Building a new hub airport would be technically straightforward, he says. “Take the Isle of Grain as an example. You put a fence round the land and it’s a very low risk option in engineering terms. Every engineer would die for a project like that where he has a fence and he’s just allowed to get on with it.” But a new airport is also bound to be hugely controversial with local people and it’s hard to imagine eco-activists staying at home even if the airport was built out at sea. “Stansted is ‘chocolate box’ countryside and very beautiful and you would destroy quite a lot of that and that’s a bad thing,” Moylan concedes. “But that’s what we’re talking about.” The Isle of Grain is “certainly not chocolate box beautiful”. “I think there will be some people who find a strange sort of haunting beauty in that bleak, desolate, sort of post-industrial landscape. [But] the estuary is an entirely man-made landscape, there is nothing natural out there. It does have important habitats in the way that Stansted doesn’t, principally bird habitats. I’m not saying birds aren’t important but let’s not kid ourselves that there’s something primeval and primordial or whatever about this. This is as natural as an abandoned ware-

house.” Kent County Council’s no-nonsense leader Paul Carter doesn’t like the mayor’s idea of a new airport on the Isle of Grain does he? “Paul Carter is vehemently opposed to it and believes there is a role for Manston Airport [in East Kent] in the future, but there isn’t.”

Heathrow: the new des res

Closing Heathrow Airport is a fundamental part of the mayor’s plan but it’s hugely controversial. Business leaders have warned that some firms who value being located close to Heathrow could leave the country if the airport closes. And 75,000 people directly dependent on Heathrow for employment could find themselves out of work. Aren’t these valid concerns about the hub airport plan? On the threat of businesses leaving the UK, Moylan thinks not and he refers me to TfL’s transport planning manager Chris Moores who says: “Firms in West London would be extremely unlikely to leave the UK. We would be building a much bigger and better airport serving all of the possible destinations that multinationals wish to fly to. They would most likely stay where they were, taking advantage of excellent new rail links to the airport and retaining their skilled workforce. Over time, we would expect some to relocate to new and bigger premises across London and the South East, taking a wide range of location factors into account as they do so.” On the prospects for people directly employed at Heathrow, Moylan states: “It needs to be remembered that we expect Heathrow to remain fully operational to 2029 and also, that there will be jobs for those still working then at the new airport if they wish – there will be excellent surface access to the new airport from west London.” Furthermore, he says that as soon as Heathrow closes construction of a new town will begin, generating a large number of construction jobs. The mayor says the land at Heathrow could provide homes for 184,000 people, playing a vital part in meeting the capital’s growing population. “If you think of it as an outer London borough, Heathrow within the perimeter is 1,225 hectares. Kensington and Chelsea – the whole of the borough on which I sit is 1,215 hectares. If you take the land round Heathrow that’s been sterilised for aviation purposes, you’re talking about potentially 1,600 hectares. That is a medium-sized London borough and, although the transport connectivity is poor for an international airport, for an outer London borough you’ve got four Tube stops, a 15-minute connection into Paddington, Crossrail into Paddington and beyond. You could build 80,000-100,000 homes on that site, you could have major business districts creating jobs.” Moylan envisages that once ministers decide to build a

Continued on page 15

LTT633_p12-15_feature2_LTT633_p12-15 17/10/2013 22:27 Page 14

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

14 Feature

Heathrow – owner’s submission Heathrow Airport has proposed three options for a third runway: north, north-west, and south-west of the existing airport. The two westerly options are its favourites, requiring fewer residential property demolitions: northwest (950); south-west (850); and the north (2,700). The westerly runways would also ensure that aircraft travel over London at a higher altitude, reducing the number of people exposed to noise. Heathrow insists that it can be bigger and quieter, with the population living within the airport’s 57dBA Leq noise contour falling 10-20% below today’s levels. A third runway would cost an estimated £14bn-£18bn (prices unclear) depending on the option selected. “Of this, it is estimated that £4bn-£6bn might be more appropriately funded by Government,” says Heathrow. A third runway could open in 2025-2029. In contrast, Heathrow believes it would take until at least 2034 for an entirely new hub airport to be built (the Mayor says 2029). Heathrow says rail access could be transformed through three committed projects – Crossrail, an upgrade to the Piccadilly Line, and a new Western rail access – plus the Government’s proposed High Speed 2 project (offering, initially, an interchange at Old Oak Common) and a southern rail access. The airport wants to boost public transport mode share for passengers to over 50%. Both the north-west and south-west runway options would require a section of the M25 to be placed in tunnel underneath the runways. A third runway would provide sufficient capacity until at least 2040 but Heathrow says a fourth runway could subsequently be added, if required. Gatwick – owner’s submission Gatwick Airport’s proposal for a second runway is based on the case that London doesn’t need a single mega-hub airport. A constellation of airports is more resilient than a single mega-hub model, says Gatwick. It says advocates of mega-hubs overstate the importance of transfer passengers, which account for only 13% (18 million) of the 135 million passengers using London’s airports in 2012. A mega hub would be damaging for competition and all the locations identified for one have high environmental costs, it adds. Gatwick suggests building a new runway south of the existing runway. Opening in 2025 this would increase Gatwick’s capacity to between 60 and 90 million passengers a year, depending on location. This would provide the additional airport capacity needed in the South East up to the 2040s, it says. Land required for the construction of a second runway is safeguarded and the residential property take is likely in the range 50-300. About 11,800 people would be living within the 57dB Leq noise contour. Estimated costs of a runway and associated infrastructure (including a share of the costs of road and rail links) are £5bn-£9bn (2013 prices). This could all be financed by the airport’s owners. Limited road and rail improvements would be needed. One thing Gatwick wants to explore is how to improve road access into London north of the M23/M25 junction.

Stansted – owner’s submission Stansted’s new owners, Manchester Airports Group, emphasise that the single runway airport has huge capacity to grow without adding a second runway. Currently only 17 million passengers use the airport, which has planning permission for 35 million. MAG says the capacity limit of a single runway is probably 45 million. That said, MAG says there is a “strong case” for the Commission to include a second runway on its shortlist. This could be built to the east or north-west of the existing runway, taking capacity up to 70-90mppa. The number of people living within the 57dB noise contour with two runways would be about 7,000. Estimated costs for airport infrastructure are £2.5bn-£4bn

CONTAINS ORDNANCE SURVEY DATA © CROWN COPYRIGHT AND DATABASE RIGHT 2013

Adding capacity: some of the candidates

(prices unclear). Road and rail links would also have to be improved, including four-tracking the West Anglia Main Line and, possibly, widening the M11 between the airport and the M25. To turn Stansted into a hub airport would require an extra three runways, says MAG, taking capacity up to 140-160mppa. About 240-400 residential properties would have to be demolished and about 14,000 people would find themselves living within the 57dB noise contour. On-airport infrastructure costs would be about £10bn.

Isle of Grain – mayor’s submission A four runway airport would be built at the eastern end of the Hoo peninsula, about 30 miles east of central London. It could be up and running by 2029. On day one the airport would have capacity for 90 million passengers a year; this could be increased to 180 million with additional infrastructure by 2050. Only 31,500 residents would live within the 55dB Lden noise contour and more night flights could be permitted than is possible at London’s existing airports. Trains would connect the airport to Waterloo, taking 28 minutes, with intermediate stops at Barking Riverside, Canary Wharf and London Bridge. A connection would be built into HS1 and onto HS2, and Crossrail would be extended from Abbey Wood to serve the airport too. The DfT’s proposed Lower Thames Crossing would help improve road access and capacity enhancements would be needed to the M25 and the A2 in Kent. Overall, the mayor suggests a 65% public transport mode split target for passengers. The mayor acknowledges the proximity of the airport to the wreck of the WWII US munitions ship, the SS Richard Montgomery, but says an airport is “not expected to alter the level of risk associated with the wreck”. The Government funding requirement is estimated to be £96bn to 2032, including £26bn for rail links, £7bn for road links, and the cost of acquiring Heathrow. But the net cost to Government would be £25bn after proceeds from privatising the new airport are considered. These are nominal values ie. including a provision for inflation. Outer Thames Estuary – mayor’s submission Located 50 miles east of central London, the airport would be built on a reclaimed island three miles north of Herne Bay. It could open in 2029 with a full complement of four 4,000-metre runways offering capacity for 90 million passengers per annum. Terminals and satellites could be expanded to offer capacity for 180mppa by

2050. A major attraction of the airport is that fewer than 50 people would live within the 55dB Lden noise contour. Consequently there would be no restrictions on night flights. There would be two sets of road and rail connections, one to the west (onto the Isle of Grain) and the other to the south (to Whitstable). Trains would connect the airport to Waterloo in 38 minutes with intermediate stops at Barking Riverside, Canary Wharf and London Bridge. The airport would also be connected to HS1 and HS2. Road access would be facilitated by the DfT’s proposed Lower Thames Crossing and capacity enhancements to the M25, M2 and A2. The target is a 65% mode split by public transport for passengers. This is the most expensive of the mayor’s three proposals, with a Government funding requirement of £122bn to 2032, including £34bn for rail, £18bn for road, and a provision for the cost of acquiring Heathrow. The net cost to Government is £46bn after proceeds from privatising the new airport are considered. The figures are in nominal values ie. including a provision for inflation.

Stansted – mayor’s submission The mayor envisages the construction of four new 4,000metre runways to complement the existing runway, offering a five-runway airport with an eventual capacity for 210 million passengers per annum. Opening in 2029, the airport would initially have capacity for 120mppa. The new airport infrastructure would be located north and east of the existing airport and require the demolition of about 1,000 residential properties. The mayor estimates that 37,800 residents would live within the 55dB Lden noise contour, contrasting this with the 766,100 who currently live within Heathrow’s noise contour. Trains would connect Stansted to Waterloo in 30 minutes with intermediate stops at Barking Riverside, Canary Wharf, and London Bridge. The airport could also be connected into the HS1-HS2 link and to Crossrail 2. Road capacity enhancements to the M25 and the M11 would be needed. A public transport mode share for passengers of 65% is proposed. The Government funding requirement is estimated to be £101bn to 2032 (including £24bn for rail links, £8bn for road links, and also including the cost of acquiring Heathrow). But the net cost to Government is £28bn after the proceeds from privatising the new airport are considered. The figures are nominal values, ie. including a provision for inflation.

LTT633_p12-15_feature2_LTT633_p12-15 17/10/2013 22:27 Page 15

TransportXtra.com/ltt new hub airport, the Government would purchase Heathrow and run it for, say, 15 years until the new airport opened. He reckons it would cost about £15bn to buy Heathrow. “Heathrow’s regulatory asset base is £14.5bn,” he says, before citing a Daily Mail article suggesting Heathrow’s owners would sell for about £18bn. “They’re open to negotiation, so I’m calling it £15bn.”

Convincing the sceptics

Whatever the merits of the mayor’s plans, plenty of key stakeholders remain to be convinced by them. “One of the things the mayor is despondent about is that the establishment inertia in favour of expanding Heathrow appears to be solid, it’s very difficult to shift a wellfunded monopolist and his establishment mates.” Moylan says the incumbent airlines at Heathrow have a vested interest in remaining there and the first priority of those airlines who are not at Heathrow is to get into it. In addition, large parts of the business community have been so much in the habit of calling for a third runway at Heathrow that “they don’t seem to be able to take on the vision of something as transformative as this”. He thinks many business leaders see a third runway as the easiest option – “just bang it in or we’ll never get anything”. “But it’s not the easiest option – it’s the least easy option in engineering terms, probably one of the most expensive, and politically it is absolutely impossible. “What really worries the mayor is that the Airports Commission goes for a third runway at Heathrow and it’ll never get built.” The opposition to a new third runway will make protests against HS2 look like a “tea party”, he predicts. “It was killed before by protests, it will be killed again.”

Counting the cost

But what about the costs of a new hub? Heathrow sees this as one of the big drawbacks of the mayor’s proposals. It argues that a third runway at Heathrow, plus associated infrastructure, including road and rail links, can be built for £14bn-£18bn, with Government funding of £4bn-£6bn. Heathrow contrasts this with £70bn-£80bn for a new hub airport, with taxpayer support of perhaps £25bn. Furthermore, Boris Johnson envisages his new airport opening in 2029, so it would be being built at the same time as the Government lays the tracks for its high-speed rail network between London, the West Midlands, Manchester and Leeds. Is it conceivable that the Government would authorise two multi-billion-pound transport projects simultaneously? Johnson is not a big fan of HS2 and Moylan sidesteps the question. But he insists the cost of a new hub airport is affordable. “Let’s say we’re talking £75bn including the cost of buying Heathrow, over a 15-year period. Even if it was £100bn over 15 years, that’s about £7bn a year. Total government expenditure in this country is of the order of £600bn a year so clearly £7bn is affordable.” But Moylan also thinks the views of Heathrow Airport’s shareholders needs close examination. “One of the interesting things about the Heathrow proposal is that is has no shareholder endorsement. There is no shareholder commitment in their documents to finance any of this. Heathrow is a company that currently has a set of foreign shareholders and they have about £4.5bn of equity in the company. They also have about £10bn of debt.”

A transparent choice?

On political grounds alone, it seems inconceivable that Sir Howard Davies will exclude all three of the mayor’s hub airport locations from the shortlist. How many options does Moylan expect Davies to take forward? “They [the Commission] will get down to three or

Heathrow Airport from the air

Feature 15

four options probably, maybe five, no one knows exactly, but it will be somewhere between three and six, I think everyone’s agreed that’s the likely range,” he says. But Moylan is concerned about the lack of transparency in how the list will be drawn up. “Before we award the prizes [the shortlist], the Commission has to answer the question what is this airport for? They’ve done a very good consultation with high quality consultation papers asking for views on things such as demand, the hub model, the non-hub model, noise and climate change. They’ve taken all the answers in; OK, now tell us – what’s the answer? What level of demand is this airport meant to cater for? That would be a good thing to know before you award a prize. Do you believe it needs to be a hub or not a hub? You asked the question, what’s the answer?” He believes the Commission will present some thoughts on demand. “But I’ve been told they’re not going to decide between a hub and no hub, they’re not going to come back and say on noise, 766,000 is too much, one million is way too much, and 50,000 is about ok. They’re not going to tell us, I believe, about climate change, except that there exists a law, and we know that already, and that they’re going to be compliant with the law.” (Correspondence released by the DfT this week shows that Lord Deben, chairman of the Committee on Climate Change, wrote to the Airports Commission in July asking it to set out whether each shortlisted option would be consistent with limiting passenger demand growth to 60% by 2050 compared to 2005 levels, which the CCC says would be consistent with its objective of reducing aviation emissions to 2005 levels by 2050). Moylan continues: “So they’ll say, ‘We’ve chosen these locations.’ Why? You could have chosen any locations on that basis, you haven’t got any criteria.” He explains what he’d like the Commission to do. “The Commission should decide on the hub/no hub model and it should say it’s got to be a large hub airport. That would rule out the Gatwick ideas of keeping a constellation of airports around London. And on environmental and other grounds it should rule out having that hub airport at Heathrow. Now obviously that is a bit of an ask and I wouldn’t expect them to do that at Christmas. “The third thing the mayor would like to see is one, two, or three of his locations in the mix.”

Political games

After shortlisting, the Commission will prepare a detailed business case and sustainability assessment of each proposal, in collaboration with scheme sponsors and other bodies. Moylan reckons it will cost about £5m

per proposal and says it’s unclear who will pay for the work. “Our view is the Government needs to fund it,” he says, pointing out that Sir Norman Foster and Partners, the architectural practice that has worked up the Isle of Grain proposal, doesn’t have a client for its plans, so it would hardly be fair to expect Fosters to fund the further work. A public consultation on the shortlisted options will follow in 2014 but the Commission hasn’t been asked to make its final recommendation to ministers until after the General Election in 2015. As things stand, the Conservatives will go into the election campaign with no clear position on airports, saying instead that they are committed to abide by the Commission’s recommendations. But other political parties may not feel under such an obligation. LTT understands the Commission is anxious for Labour to take a similar position but the temptation for Ed Miliband to come out clearly against airport expansion at particular locations ahead of the election are obvious; there are a good few marginal constituencies in West London and North Kent. Indeed, Miliband’s opposition to Heathrow expansion is well-known, though not shared by his chancellor Ed Balls. Moylan believes trade union opposition to closing Heathrow will prevent Labour supporting the construction of a new hub airport elsewhere. With Heathrow and a new hub seemingly impossible for Labour to support, the smart money suggests the party is most likely to support a second runway at Gatwick. What about the Liberal Democrats, who could once again find themselves coalition partners post-2015? “The Liberal Democrats are on the whole in the box that says you don’t need to expand aviation capacity,” says Moylan. Some of them say that because they want “to save the planet”, he says, but the “sensible ones” say something slightly different. “Take as an example an intelligent and capable woman like [new transport minister] Susan Kramer. She doesn’t say aviation’s not important and we all have to sit around eating baked beans and wearing sandals. “When you say to Susan why don’t we need to do anything, she just says, ‘Oh, because it’s all going to change, aviation will change, things will be different.’ But how do you know it’s going to change, and what if it doesn’t change? ‘Oh, it’s all going to change, it’s all change, could change, nobody knows, nobody knows.’ And what about his colleagues in the Conservative party? “The Conservatives are a very fine body of farsighted men and women with a huge commitment to the country’s economic welfare,” Moylan quips. “We’re confident that they will do the right thing and give us a new airport the country needs, not at Heathrow. Eventually.”

LTT633_p16-17_viewpoint and letters2_LTT633_p16-17 18/10/2013 00:42 Page 16

16 Comment

Duncan Laxen & Stephen Moorcroft Air Quality Consultants Ltd

The recognition of transport as a major source of air pollution grew steadily during the 1970s and 80s but the real changes started around 20 years ago. In 1992, guidance on the assessment of the air quality impacts of road schemes was introduced as part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB). The Highways Agency was formed in 1994 and took forward DMRB assessments of new road schemes. New Euro emission standards were introduced for new vehicles from 1993, with catalytic converters required to limit emissions from new petrol cars; there were few diesel cars in those days. Understanding the health effects of air pollutants also developed during the early 1990s. A seminal study by Dockery and Pope and co-workers in the US in 1993, known as the Six City Study, provided convincing evidence that long-term exposure to fine airborne particles could lead to a large number of premature deaths. Around 29,000 deaths each year in the UK are now attributed to air pollution. A rapid legislative response to these developments followed. The Environment Act introduced in 1995, lead to the first National Air Quality Strategy in 1997. The strategy included air quality objectives for a range of pollutants that became enshrined in air quality legislation. It also introduced Local Air Quality Management (LAQM), which required local authori-

The failure to deliver the expected reduction in NO2 over the last 15 years is due principally to the failure of legislation to ensure that emission standards for new vehicles deliver realworld reductions in emissions.

In Passing Airports Commission chairman Sir Howard Davies faces an enormous challenge in coming up with a set of proposals capable of ending decades of political battles over where to allow new runway construction in the South East. It’s a tall order but we’re confident that his formidable intellectual powers will see him through. Or at least we were, until we heard this in his speech on the Commission’s provisional thinking last week: “Of course forecasting is always difficult, especially about the future.” Thankfully Sir Howard still has a year-and-a-half to craft his final recommendations. Heathrow Airport executives hoping that the latest ministerial merry-go-round would see some MPs sympathetic to a third runway touching down in Marsham Street will be sorely disappointed by the result. In Baroness Kramer and Robert Goodwill they’ve ended up with a

VIEWPOINT

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

Air quality action plans aren’t delivering their promises – but don’t blame councils

ties to assess air quality in their area. If exceedences of the objectives were identified they had to declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and develop an action plan. The LAQM regime soon identified traffic in urban areas as a key source of poor air quality; air quality assessments up until this time had generally been for major highways, often in rural areas. When the LAQM regime was instituted in the late 1990s it was expected that ever more stringent emissions standards for new vehicles would ensure that air quality problems would be limited to a few hotspots, and that these hotspots would be most efficiently dealt with by local measures. This has not, however, been the case; 232 local authorities (57%) have declared AQMAs for nitrogen dioxide, a number that has increased over the last decade, with no sign of an imminent decrease. Furthermore, the UK Government is being challenged in the courts for failing to meet the EU Directive limit values for nitrogen dioxide. How has this come about? The failure to deliver the expected reduction in concentrations of nitrogen dioxide over the last 15 years is due principally to the failure of legislation to ensure that emission standards for new vehicles (the ‘Euro’ standards) deliver real-world reductions in emissions. This caught everyone by surprise, as the legislation that introduced catalytic convertors for petrol cars in the early 1990s did deliver substantial reductions. Onroad emissions from diesel cars, on the other hand, have not declined; clearly the motor vehicle manufacturers have found ways around the intention of the testing regime, as the vehicles have passed the tests but not delivered real reductions on the road. This has been coupled with a rapid growth in diesel cars over the last 20 years, such that they represented just over 50% of new car sales in 2012. Buses and lorries have also not delivered the expected reductions. The Euro VI standards for lorries and buses and Euro 6 for cars and light vans apply to new vehicles from 2013-15. It is to be hoped that a new testing regime being developed will ensure that these new standards deliver real reductions. The DfT should be applying pressure on the European Commission to ensure appropriate tests are instituted.

One consequence of the failure to deliver real improvements in emissions is that the ‘official’ emission factors used to predict air quality impacts of road traffic have not been reliable. Air quality assessments have had to take account of this uncertainty by presenting two views of the future, one optimistic (using ‘official’ factors) and one pessimistic, assuming no reduction in vehicle emissions. It is to be hoped that more realistic factors will soon become available to render assessments more straightforward. Another consequence of the failure to deliver real improvements in emissions is that many of the air quality action plans developed by local authorities have been discredited because they have not delivered. For example, some action plans involved negotiating the replacement of older Euro I, II and III buses with Euro IV buses. This should have improved air quality, but this did not happen in practice because Euro standards have not delivered. Local authorities are not to blame; they have shown they can negotiate real changes and should be encouraged to continue, but only when the new Euro standards are shown to work. Another challenge is to ensure that climate change and air pollution are not in conflict. Mention has already been made of the growth in diesel car sales, which is a real plus for reducing carbon dioxide emissions, but has been negative for air pollution. The Government’s drive to meet the carbon reduction targets through the widespread adoption of ultra-low emission vehicles should help both climate change and air quality, but can the change happen fast enough? The growth in vehicle-kilometres travelled will also negate the reductions in emissions per vehicle: the National Transport Model is now predicting a 43% growth in traffic in England between 2010 and 2040 – a growth that will make it harder to deliver air quality and climate change targets. Road transport has been a dominant source of air pollution over the last 20 years and looks set to be so for some time to come.

couple of staunch adversaries. As a former south-west London MP Kramer has vociferously opposed Heathrow’s expansion on noise grounds. Goodwill, meanwhile, held a bizarre twinning ceremony between his North Yorkshire farm and Sipson, the village that was originally going to be flattened to make way for the extra runway, even inviting a group of Greenpeace activists to the event!

while on a visit to Japan. “Osborne hadn’t taken a press entourage to Japan, and had instead just given an overnight exclusive to The Financial Times that he wanted to build a UK version of Japan’s ultra-high-speed magnetic levitating train,” McBride recalls. “He and his team may have gone to bed eight hours ahead in Tokyo thinking the FT story was a job well done but I was just waking up with a whole day in front of me to kill it. And I did: I spent the morning online researching and distributing to journalists the history of accidents and fires on maglev trains, and established the fact that it wouldn’t even have time to get up to top speed on the route Osborne was proposing. One journalist told me that Osborne texted him and said: ‘What’s going on with this story? Why has everyone got so down on it?’ The journalist replied: ‘You’ve just met the Dog.’”

In our last issue we reported a couple of jolly transport anecdotes from Power Trip, the autobiography of Gordon Brown’s controversial spin doctor, Damian McBride (known to friends and foes alike as ‘the Dog’). Well, we’ve finished the book now and what a cracking read it was! One further transport story concerns the episode when then shadow chancellor, George Osborne, announced plans for a maglev ultra-high-speed train

Professor Duncan Laxen and Stephen Moorcroft are directors of Air Quality Consultants Ltd (www.aqconsultants.co.uk), which is celebrating its 20th anniversary.

LTT633_p16-17_viewpoint and letters2_LTT633_p16-17 18/10/2013 00:42 Page 17

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Inaccurate claims undermine efforts to cut cycle casualties

Sustrans apparently mis-understands the DfT’s HGV/ cyclist accident statistics, on which you reported (‘Night-time deliveries urged to cut HGV-cycle accident risk’ LTT 4 Oct). The extent of HGV involvement is nothing like the “nearly half of all cyclists’ deaths” asserted by Sustrans in its press release responding to the DfT casualties statistics for 2012. These show that of 118 reported cycle deaths in Britain, 23 involved HGVs. That is less than one fifth. Furthermore, Sustrans’ incorrectly asserts that the HGVs are “responsible” for these deaths. The statistics are for HGVs that were involved, which is a very different matter. HGV involvement in cyclist deaths is nearly 50% in London in recent years but that should not be confused with the national figure – and the jury is certainly out as to what impact delivering more goods at night will have on the number of deaths from accidents involving HGVs and cyclists. Meanwhile, the understandable focus on deaths has meant that the growing number of serious injuries to cyclists is largely overlooked in public debate. There were 3,222 serious injuries reported in Britain in 2012 and the DfT says many go unreported. HGVs were involved in around 4% nationally – and less in London. There is an increasing risk of scapegoating the haulage industry because it is an easy target. That will not do much for road safety outcomes. What is needed in managing the risk to cyclists is a holistic policy response aimed at improving our infrastructure and improving the risk awareness and driving/cycling culture of all road users. Jack Semple Director of policy Road Haulage Association Weybridge, Surrey KT13

We need high-speed rail but HS2 must be re-configured

The last three editions of LTT have reported some pertinent comments about HS2. This project is in trouble and there is a grave danger of it being cancelled while still leaving the need for something similar. A new line between London and the Midlands is needed for capacity – Shropshire and Wrexham have been refused even a nominal through service to London because of insufficient capacity for reliable operation south of Rugby. The economic case is unimportant. High-speed trains should use city centre stations, either existing or adjacent to the existing one. The East Midlands station is to be midway between Derby and Nottingham and 20 miles north of Leicester! That’s ludicrous, and useless for Leicester people going to London. The planners of this project have no idea of the time penalties for interchange. Avoiding towns was a mistake made by early builders of railways in the 19th century and led to more lines being built to rectify the omissions. A simple scheme is cheaper than a complex one and there is less to go wrong. We don’t need a higher speed line than the French use. Train lengths should match platform lengths in existing stations or the potential for economic lengthening. Three hundred metres rather than the proposed 400 is generally feasible and is longer than Virgin’s Pendolinos even after lengthening. The excessive construction, equipping and testing time could be cut to five years. Opposition to the scheme in greenbelts could be minimised by following the routes of motorways or existing railways. The latter are preferable because they have larger radius curves and would provide better connections with the existing system. David HT Smith The Thursfield Smith Consultancy Shrewsbury SY3

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR If cities had a free choice, would they invest in HS2?

In the HS2 debate, a pertinent question is whether the cities and regions served by the scheme would choose HS2 – if they had a free choice on spending £millions on transport capital investment. Consider the East Midlands. HS2 includes a new line – a very high-speed line with no intermediate stations – between Birmingham and Toton in the Nottingham suburbs. It happens that Birmingham-Nottingham is one of the city pairs where the current railway is rather indirect. A new general-purpose railway between Birmingham and Nottingham might well be a useful new link. It could serve East Midlands Airport and East Midlands Parkway Station along the way. But such a link is not on the agenda. Consider too the north of England, where the population is similar in size and distribution to the Netherlands. There, main lines have been four-tracked and junctions grade-separated. Fast and all-stations services interconnect at key nodes. If a ‘Dutch network’ were created across the north of England – building on the Northern Hub project – accessibility would be transformed. Just think of the agglomeration benefits. In the West Midlands, the people and local authorities might well prefer to develop their rather sketchy local railway network than have another London service. Especially as several trains an hour already link Birmingham to the capital. This brings me to the Chiltern Line. There has been a strange silence about this route – perhaps because HS2 would parallel it. The Chiltern Line links London Marylebone and Birmingham Moor St and is to the West Coast Main Line what the M40 is to the M1. Investment has transformed the Chiltern Line from near-closure in the Beeching period – it is now a good alternative to the WCML for many trips. The route is twin-track and not electrified, but parts of the route have a four-track alignment. The Chiltern Line could clearly be upgraded further, with longer and more frequent trains. Electrification and selective four-tracking could make possible an attractive offer of fast, semi-fast and suburban services – in both London and the West Midlands. The London end could stay at Marylebone or it could feed Crossrail or Paddington. Most importantly, the route could be upgraded in stages in line with traffic growth. By contrast, HS2 is an all-or-nothing take-it-orleave-it scheme. So we could upgrade the Chiltern Line and make it the ‘main drag’ of an additional intercity route between London and Birmingham. We would avoid building a new railway through much-loved countryside. And we could reallocate the considerable financial and staffing resources that have been marshalled for HS2 to integrating the London and Birmingham ends of the line into the respective city-region networks. A striking feature of HS2 project is that the Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds stations would be dead-ends – in contrast to Antwerp, Barcelona, Berlin, Bologna and Brussels. If we are in the business of building tens of miles of new railway, much of it in tunnel, we could build a new line through Birmingham and link the Chiltern Line with existing lines near Stafford. As well as Birmingham city centre, we could have stations at Solihull or the airport and at Wolverhampton or Walsall. We would then have a second London-Midlands route which would add intercity capacity and provide enviable connections across city regions. Better than HS2. Keith Rogers Stockport SK7

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

Comment 17

Commission impossible? When Governments are faced with a seemingly intractable problem, they are often attracted to the idea of setting up an independent commission to look at the matter with a fresh set of eyes. Sometimes these pieces of work can successfully identify a way forward but we would hazard a guess that this happens most often on questions that are highly technical. The ability of experts to resolve matters that years of political wrangling have failed to crack is a whole lot more difficult. Airports policy is a topic that has escaped political resolution for decades. The Government tried using the independent commission route to select the site of a third London airport in the 1960s but the three-year Roskill Commission proved a miserable failure. Not to be put off by history, a year ago the prime minister asked Sir Howard Davies to lead a new commission looking into the questions of whether and where new airport capacity is needed in the South East. The Airports Commission offered its provisional conclusion on the first question last week when Sir Howard put forward the case for new runway capacity. His team is now preparing a shortlist of locations to be announced this side of Christmas, with a final recommendation following in summer 2015, after the General Election. This will be the tricky bit because, while there is a widespread, though far from universal, acceptance that new capacity will be needed somewhere, there is much more division about where. Should we make the best of a bad job and add a runway to the UK’s only hub airport, Heathrow? Or start from a clean slate and build a new hub? Or promote a constellation of airports, rather than a single hub, by adding an extra runway at Gatwick? These questions cannot be answered by reference to some mathematical model. The decisions rest on considering, weighing-up and trading-off a multiplicity of economic, financial, environmental, and social factors. As an independent body one would expect the Commission to conduct its work without political steer. But if it ignores political realities, then the Commission risks seeing its recommendations being stillborn. Sir Howard and his colleagues will have to tread a fine line.

LTT633_p18_Phil Goodwin_LTT633_p18 18/10/2013 00:40 Page 18

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

18 Comment

PHIL GOODWIN Comment

Smarter choices: rebooted, but not yet mainstream

When it comes to promoting ‘smarter choices’ everyone talks a good game ... until the question of budgets arises Last year the theme of the increasingly important annual conference on Smarter Choices was ‘Rebooting’, and this year it will be ‘Mainstreaming’. It will be on the 3rd and 4th of December in Manchester: Norman Baker had agreed to do the keynote speech before his translation (as he did last year, though in the event he and his ministerial team were stranded on a station platform at Paddington) and an attendence of some hundreds of specialists – practitioners and researchers – will be gathering to work out how to cope with the way ahead. In introducing the conference last year I wrote “By every reckoning the current conditions ought to be favourable for a set of policy measures which offer a (relatively) easy, cheap and politically attractive way of improving travel opportunities”. And surely the same words apply today. It is normal to give conferences some such title, with words like ‘launching’, ‘studying’, ‘implementing’, ‘understanding’, ‘changing’ and so on. They don’t always have a specific meaning, and maybe they don’t have to – it’s a way of designing a leaflet and drawing attention. But on the face of it the move from ‘Rebooting’ to ‘Mainstreaming’ seems to suggest a symbolic statement of a transition from preparatory work to a great flood of activity. The last year has certainly seen the continuation of various funding streams intended to support smarter choices, and almost alone among transport policies there is simply no serious body of opposition. They are cheap, quite popular, remarkably effective, and contribute usefully both to specific local improvement of opportunities and quality of life, the attractiveness of local areas, non-transport objectives especially health, and the highest level of policies on sustainability. Those who are familiar with experience and the research (which doesn’t include everybody who ought to be) are by now rather clear that there is a centrality, a comprehensiveness, about smarter choices that justify their inclusion at every level of strategy. Yet the conference organisers and participants plan to spend some time discussing what this attractive phrase actually means.The first session of the conference is designed as a proper discussion among the participants rather than speeches from the platform (odd, and a real shame, how rare such opportunities are in transport conferences) and the session title offers, perhaps as a working definition, ‘embedding smarter choices into general practice’. But surely that won’t do as the main stream? Rory Mcmullan, the conference organiser, wrote to me: “Mainstreaming is one of those words which is often used about smarter choices, but not clearly defined, and I think your article might go some way to clarifying what we mean. How do we go about mainstreaming? How will we know if we have been successful? How does this fit in the overall context of transport policy and practice?” Good questions, and not easy to answer. Let’s think about the word itself. It comes, of course, from basic physical geography, as small streams join larger ones, the flow of water becoming bigger and bigger, until they eventually become a river and flow to the sea. In simple terms, the main stream is the biggest one. Well that in a sense is a helpful starting point, and there is a salience

in the metaphor because smarter choices are indeed not a single policy, but a wide and changing variety of different streams – information, advice, improvement in operations, opportunities, infrastructure, favouring walking, cycling, public transport, various forms of alternatives to travel including e-commerce – all contributing to a less car dependent culture. Multiple small streams contributing to a greater flow – that’s good. But as a reality check, we know perfectly well that smarter choices do not represent the biggest element of transport expenditure or effort. Saying smarter choices should be the mainstream of transport policy is, I think, a defensible proposition. It needs argument, but it is not silly. Saying that smarter choices are already in that position is manifestly unrealistic. But words evolve, and the main use of mainstream, as a single word, is not about streams and water at all: it refers to cultures. I like the Wikipedia definition, which starts: “The mainstream includes all popular culture and media culture, typically disseminated by mass media. The opposite of the mainstream are subcultures, countercultures and cult followings”. The point of the mainstream is its dominance, it is the prevailing wisdom, it is the zeitgeist. From that point of view, the culture of smarter choices exists, but there are great swathes of Government who see it as an amusing diversion, a sop to sustainability, a good candidate for rather cheap ‘initiatives’, but simply not in the same class as the ‘real’ priorities of massive expansion of infrastructure for travel, and essentially disposable. In this context there is a peculiar sort of concept-blindness. Financial pressures on national and local govern-

There are great swathes of Government who see smarter choices as an amusing diversion, a sop to sustainability, a good candidate for rather cheap ‘initiatives’... ment, as indeed on most of the public, mean that there is a need for reassurance that any substantial expenditure gives good value for money, and is in accord with the political and economic priorities of the time. There is substantial evidence that smarter choices give very good value for money indeed – better than most infrastructure projects – in line with a decade of discovery that small, local, cheap improvements to the quality and ease of transport (such as local safety schemes, area traffic management, reallocation of road capacity to walkers, cyclists and public transport, and improvements to the public realm in town centres and areas of concentrated shopping and leisure activity) typically give benefit cost ratios (BCRs) in double figures, with benefits that may be ten or 20 times as large as costs, or more, compared with ratios in the range one-six of even the

best infrastructure projects. All this, you would think, fits well into the mainstream of transport appraisal and evaluation, but the reality still is the illusion that ‘revenue spending is bad, capital spending is good’, with burdens of proof on small effective policies which are more stringent than is ever demanded on even the most implausible claims of infrastructure ‘contributing to economic growth’. So what we have is the paradox that smarter choices are indeed in the mainstream of transport thinking culturally, but are still at the level of minority interest in the allocation of funds. They are in the vanguard, I would say, but do not yet constitute the mainstream. Lynn Sloman, whose diagnosis of the current situation might be summarised as ‘chilly but with some grounds for optimism’, has started to put a figure to this (as she did for cycling, an important piece of evidence which underpinned the £10 per head per year which the Parliamentary Cycling Group formally recommended). Her interpretation of mainstreaming is particularly important: “In 2015, there will be £179m for smarter travel. That should become a dedicated, ongoing funding commitment, 40% revenue and 60% capital… It needs to increase by 25% per year for the next decade, with each pound from DfT matched by local authorities or their partners. That would give roughly £40 per citizen per year for sustainable travel. Only then will smarter travel really be mainstream.” That’s very cleverly pitched at the crux of political achievability and real impact, characteristic of Lynn’s targets. I’d vote for it. But we do need to think about the expenditures of billions, if the mainstream has millions. Phil Goodwin is professor of transport policy at the Centre for Transport and Society, University of West of England, Bristol, and emeritus professor at University College London. Email: philinelh@yahoo.com An archive of Phil Goodwin’s columns is available on TransportXtra.com/reports

LTT633_p19_Business Briefing_LTT633_p16 18/10/2013 00:51 Page 19

TransportXtra.com/ltt

BUSINESS BRIEFING

News 19

Investors may take their cash elsewhere, warns Heathrow By John Helm & Andrew Forster

HEATHROW AIRPORT has warned that its shareholders will not invest in a possible third runway unless the Civil Aviation Authority creates a favourable regulatory environment that allows an attractive rate of return. The comments came after the CAA issued its final proposals for the economic regulation of Heathrow in the five-year period, 2014/15-2018/19, imposing a real-terms price freeze (RPI+0%). Heathrow said the CAA’s proposal of a 5.6% return in Period 6 (2014-19) compared unfavourably with 7.75% in period 4 (2003-2008) and 6.2% in period 5 (2008-2014). “Since 2008 Heathrow has made a pre-tax loss every year and shareholders have not received the return on their investment allowed for by the regulator, which is unsustainable,” it said. Heathrow’s chief executive, Colin Matthews, added: “The CAA’s proposed cost of capital of

Matthews: shareholders are footloose

5.6% is below the level at which Heathrow’s shareholders have said they are willing to invest. We will now carefully consider our investment plans before responding fully to the CAA.” The company said its shareholders would be unlikely to invest in infrastructure such as a third runway if the regulatory environment did not improve. “Heathrow has to compete for investment on the global stage,

and its international shareholders from Canada, China, Qatar, Singapore, Spain and the United States are all looking for a fair return corresponding to their investment risk. If the UK does not offer a competitive rate of return, international investors will be discouraged from investing in regulated British companies.” Noting that the Government’s Airports Commission is currently reviewing where to build additional runway capacity in the South East, Heathrow said that a new runway there or a new hub airport elsewhere would require an “unprecedented” level of funding. “International investors will not fund billions of upfront investment in UK infrastructure if the lesson from history is that their return will be cut as soon as they have built it.” The RPI+0% rise in airport charges is better than the CAA’s original suggestion of a RPI-1.3% cap. Heathrow, however, had wanted an RPI+4.6% annual

increase. The airport’s airlines have responded more favourably to the CAA’s recommendations; they had lobbied for a 9.8% per year real terms cut in charges. “Heathrow is the only hub airport in the UK, and has a monopoly,” said Willie Walsh, head of British Airways’ parent group IAG. “The CAA proposal would allow Heathrow to continue levying charges well above those of other major airport hubs.” BA also criticised a previous statement by Heathrow’s owners threatening to cut spending by £1bn if they failed to reach a settlement of RPI+2%. The CAA has also issued recommendations for Gatwick of a RPI+0.5% per year rise in charges for seven years. Consultation on the CAA’s plans run until 4 November. The proposals will take effect from April next year if the CAA concludes in January that the two airports have “substantial market power”.

Chester & Bournemouth Infratil sheds Manston select car club operators and Prestwick airports CITY CAR Club has won a tender from Cheshire West and Chester Council to provide a car club in Chester. The firm is providing eight vehicles in the city. City Car Club also recently won Liverpool City Council’s contract to provide a scheme in Liverpool (LTT 06 Sep). It now operates in 16 cities. LTT understands that national not-for-profit operator CoWheels has been selected as the

operator for a scheme in Bournemouth being tendered by the borough council. Carplus, the national organisation that supports the car club sector, said this week that the number of car club vehicles in the UK had reached 3,000. ● Car clubs will be discussed at the ‘Urban mobility & alternatives to car ownership conference’ organised by Landor Links on 13 November at the Kia Oval – see page 20

Infratil Ltd has sold Manston Airport in Kent to Lothian Shelf Ltd – a company wholly-owned by Stagecoach co-founder Ann Gloag – for £1. News of the sale came days after the Scottish Government announced plans to buy one of Infratil’s other assets, Prestwick Airport in South Ayrshire. Infratil

has been unable to find a private sector purchaser since putting Prestwick up for sale in March 2012. The Scottish Government already owns 11 airports and pointed out that in England and Wales a number of major airports are wholly or substantially owned by the public sector: Manchester, Stansted, Newcastle and Cardiff.

SKM maintains silence on purchase by Jacobs East Coast record premium STATE-RUN TRAIN operator East Coast paid a record £202.8m premium last year (2012: £188.6 m). Figures released by Directly Operated Railways Ltd (its stateowned holding company) for the financial year to 31 March 2013, show that turnover increased 4.2% to £693.8m (2012: £665.8m). This figure also includes the proceeds from parking, catering and commissions from other operators’ ticket sales, though passenger revenues remain the main source. However, operating profit after payment of the DfT premium, but

before tax, was down 16.7% to £5.9m (2012: £7.1m). East Coast has recorded an annual 4.3% passenger revenue growth rate, but this is less than the national 4.9% long-distance average. The company attributes the shortfall to regional factors, as well as the impact of the route’s two open access operators. DOR took control of the East Coast franchise after National Express pulled out in November 2009. It is now one of the most profitable in the country. The DfT is to return it to the private sector when the franchise expires in February 2015.

CONSULTANT SKM (Sinclair Knight Merz) this week said it was still too early to comment on the implications of the firm’s takeover by California-based Jacobs Engineering. SKM, an employee-owned Australian-based engineering projects firm, is the subject of a US$1.2bn purchase offer from Jacobs Engineering, one of the world’s largest construction consultancy companies (and which is about ten times SKM’s size). The deal requires the approval of SKM shareholders, as well as the Australian Federal Court and the Australian Federal Investment Review Board, and should be

completed by the end of December. While the bulk of SKM’s US$1.2 billion turnover is generated in Australia, it also has growing international operations, and has a presence in the UK. SKM purchased the UK consultant Colin Buchanan and Partners in 2011. SKM’s revenues have declined 16% since 2011/12, and staff cuts have already been made; it currently employs 6,500. SKM would not be drawn into disclosing possible merger consequences, i.e. job losses or the continued existence of the company name or structure.

Mouchel wins Norfolk contract Norfolk County Council this week named Mouchel the winner of its highways design and professional services contract. Mouchel will take over from Mott MacDonald on 1 April. The contract will run for an initial seven years but could be extended to 12. The county said the value of the work over 12 years would be between £30m and £60m and the contract would save Norfolk taxpayers £1m a year. Three bidders were shortlisted for the work, which was awarded via the Competitive Dialogue process. Norfolk awarded its new highway works contract to Lafarge Tarmac in July.

Amey wins HA asset contract The Highways Agency has awarded Amey a five-year asset support contract to carry out maintenance, renewal and lowcost improvements to more than 500 miles of roads in Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire, Milton Keynes and Cambridgeshire. The contract for Area 8, worth up to £200m over the five years, begins on 1 April next year. Area 8 covers sections of the M1, M11, A1, A1 (M), A5, A11, A414, A421 and A428. Amey recently won the Area 6 asset support contract covering East Anglia.

National Express bids for Berlin rail National Express has been shortlisted to bid for the Berlin Ringbahn contract. The orbital route encircling the German capital is currently run by Deutsche Bahn, the state-owned national railway. The British coach-turned-train operator won two 15-year contracts in February to run regional commuter rail networks in Bonn, Koln, and the North Rhein-Westphalia region.

Network Rail grows Down Under Network Rail’s international consultancy division, Network Rail Consulting, has won a contract from Transport for New South Wales in Australia to provide safety assessment for the design and delivery of a new rail link in Sydney. Network Rail Consulting’s managing director, Nigel Ash, said: “This commission heralds the start of a long-term working relationship with Transport for New South Wales and coincides with the recent opening of our Sydney office.”

Information for this page can be sent to:

business.ltt@landor.co.uk

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 20

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 21

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 22

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 23

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:46 Page 24

24 Conferences & Courses

Conferences & Courses

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

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

October 2013 October 23 ACT TravelWise AGM To be held in London E-mail: sabrina@acttravelwise.org Website: http://www.acttravelwise.org

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

Going for Growth â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Building bus patronage in tough economic time CILT Members event to be held at Essex County Council Contact CILT. Tel: 01536 740104 Email: membership@ciltuk.org.uk November 19-20 Highway drainage systems, design installation and maintanance Training course organised by PTRC in London Contact PTRC. Tel: 020 7348 1970 Email: info@ptrc-training.co.uk Website: http://www.ptrc-training.co.uk/ November 20-21 Public enquiries and appeals Training course organised by PTRC in London Contact PTRC. Tel: 020 7348 1970 Email: info@ptrc-training.co.uk Website: http://www.ptrc-training.co.uk/

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

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

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:47 Page 25

TransportXtra.com/ltt

Consultants & Researchers

TransportXtra.com/consultants

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Offices at: Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Douglas, Edinburgh, Kendal, Leeds, Liverpool, London, Manchester, and Nottingham. Please contact: Tony Dolan on 0161 236 2394 Email: tony.dolan@curtins.com www.curtins.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Delivering modern sustainable mobility: travel plans, transport and the NHS, active travel, carbon reduction planning, parking management schemes, car clubs, accessible and community transport. Transport and travel service design and start-up: consultation services, transport events, workshops and conferences, business planning, social enterprise development, website and graphic design.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Transportation Consultancy (ttc) is a dynamic and innovative transportation consultancy that specialises in transport planning, traffic engineering, sustainable transport and transport economics. Our people have over 100 years of combined technical knowledge and can offer you expert advice covering the whole transportation sector, helping you to make sound decisions in today’s complex environment. Our advice is underpinned by innovation, technical excellence and expert opinion, enabling our clients to make sound decisions in what is often a complex and challenging environment. “ttc” has a set of values that guides us in our everyday business and continues to drive our ambition to provide unrivalled advice that helps deliver the best transportation solutions to our clients.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Offices in Belfast, Birmingham, Brentwood, Bristol, Cardiff, Derby, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness, Leeds, Lingfield, London, Manchester and Nottingham. Jonathan Hoare: Tel: 0121 212 7700 Email: jonathan.hoare@watermangroup.com Mark Jackson: Tel: 01277 238100 Email: mark.jackson@watermangroup.com www.watermangroup.com

Transport Organisations

The CIVINET UK & Ireland Network is the sustainable transport network for local authorities. Members can access European and national funding information, comprehensive sustainable transport expertise and networking events. Private organisations are welcome as associate members.

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

ITS United Kingdom is the society for all who work in the Intelligent Transport Systems sector in the UK. ITS technology delivers transport benefits in terms of reducing congestion, lessening the environmental impact of transport, and real time and accurate information to travellers and managers. ITS (UK) has 170 corporate members, ranging from UK Government departments to systems suppliers, consultants, and academic institutions. ITS (UK) is the voice of the ITS community

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport (UK) is the leading professional body for individuals and organisations involved directly and indirectly in transport, logistics and supply chain management. As a member of CILT you will receive a wide range of products and services to support you throughout your career. These benefits represent an outstanding return on your initial investment and will help you to make a noticeable impact at all levels within your organisation.

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

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

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

Your company here?

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

The Transport Planning Society facilitates, develops and promotes best practice in transport planning and provides a focus for dialogue and debate between all those engaged in it, whatever their background or other professional affiliation. TPS works closely with its four partners ICE, CILT (UK), IHT and RTPI to further the profession and in the development of transport planning qualifications.We run a programme of events across the country. Tel: +44 (0)20 7665 2238 Email: info@tps.org.uk www.tps.org.uk

The Transport Statistics Users Group brings together users and producers of transport statistics to develop understanding, identify problems in provision and suggest solutions. The TSUG organises a series of regular seminars and publication of newsletters and a Yearbook, all of which are free to members.

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

Specialists

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

Fine Reports Professional policy and strategy development including clear and concise report writing. Experience in local transport plans, Highway asset management plans, Parking and Enforcement plans, Road safety plans, Network Management reports and plans, Freight Transport Strategies, School Travel Plans, data management, report writing and bidding.

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

HURDLE David. DipTP, MA, MRTPI, FCILT

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

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

STAVELEY Peter. MSc CMILT

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

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

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:47 Page 26

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

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

The next issue of LTT will be published: Friday 1 November Advertising booking deadline: Tuesday 29 October

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

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:47 Page 27

TransportXtra.com/ltt

The LTT Directory 27

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:47 Page 28

28 The LTT Directory

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:47 Page 29

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:47 Page 30

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

30 Recruitment

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

Cycling Project Officer (LSTF) £26,260 - £29,627 We are looking for a Cycling Project Officer who will work with SDNPA colleagues and project partners, this post will contribute to the delivery of the Two National Parks Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) programme and Transforming cycling in the South Downs National Park (Cycling in National Parks Fund) by providing specialist cycling expertise and project management. Closes: 21st October

Competitive This post provides an exciting opportunity to lead Atkins Development and Regeneration-led Transport Planning workstream in the Midlands, Reporting to the Transportation Planning Group Leader, as part of the national Development & Public Realm Services. Closes: 8th November

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

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/p745hrf

Highways Projects Manager (Major Projects) £41,939 - £49,120 This is a wonderful opportunity for you as an experienced Highways Project Manager to demonstrate you skills in the delivery of major highway improvements for Kent County Council. Closes: 24th October

Associate Director – Development Planning

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/oyd7gng

Senior Transport Planner – Pedestrian, Cycling & Space Planning £35,000 - £42,000 As part of our strong existing workload and planned growth for the sector, we have a senior vacancy for a Managing Consultant/Senior Transport Planner to provide technical leadership to the team for our work in the UK and overseas, as well as working with other senior members to shape the future of the wider public realm and development planning business. Closes: 8th November

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/qgjy8ak

Senior Managing Consultant Competitive

Planner Circa £32k Contribute to the work of the Spatial Planning team to ensure that TfL’s objectives and London Plan policies are met by development proposals including applications referred to the Mayor by local planning authorities and schemes on which TfL is consulted. Closes: 25th October

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/oru7vhs

We have an opening for a Associate Director/Senior Managing Consultant with experience in winning and delivering consultancy work in Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) for the Highways Agency and other traffic authorities. This will be a key role to enhance and grow the strategic advice and consultancy services we already offer to our key clients to improve their traffic network management, control and information systems. Closes: 8th November

APPLY NOW: http://tinyurl.com/pe7blz4

LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31_LTT633_p02,06,08,10,20-31 17/10/2013 17:47 Page 31

www.Jobs-in-Transport.com

The best jobs for transport specialists starts here

Recruitment 31

LTT633 back page_LTT633_p32 18/10/2013 01:35 Page 40

Editorial

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

Advertising

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

Next issue

Published 01 November

TransportXtra.com/ltt

LTT633 18 October - 31 October 2013

Kramer takes No.2 post at DfT as Baker and Eagle move on

People

News

GOVERNMENT

THE LIBERAL Democrats have strengthened their influence on transport policy with the appointment of Baroness Kramer as minister of state for transport, the second most senior member of the transport team. But the party’s long-serving transport minister Norman Baker has moved to the Home Office. Kramer replaces Tory transport minister Simon Burns who resigned from the Department to standing for Deputy Speaker. Baker’s move to the Home Office came as part of the Government’s reshuffle of junior and middle-ranking ministers. He has been replaced by the Conservative MP for Scarborough and Whitby Robert Goodwill. Ed Miliband has also reshuffled his shadow cabinet, with shadow transport secretary Maria Eagle and shadow environment secretary Mary Creagh swapping jobs. Baker served as transport minister since the Coalition was formed in 2010 and supporters of the public transport and the active travel agendas last week paid tribute to his achievements. Stephen Joseph, chief executive of environmental transport charity the Campaign for Better Transport, said: “Many in the transport sector will be very sorry to see Norman Baker go. It’s rare that you get a minister who has such a strong understanding of his brief. It’s also unusual for them to be given enough time to act to make a real difference in the way Norman has through things such as the Local Sustainable Transport Fund. He’ll be a very tough act to follow.” Kramer’s ministerial responsi-

Brunt to retire from Pteg Matt Brunt, assistant director of the Passenger Transport Executive Group, is retire on ill-health grounds. Brunt joined Pteg in 2009 from Leeds City Council.

Taylor leaves Labour transport post Phil Taylor has left his post as senior political adviser to the shadow secretary of state for transport following Maria Eagle’s move to shadow the department of environment, food and rural affairs.

MacNicol joins Parsons Graham MacNicol has joined consultant Parsons Brinckerhoff as regional director for highways in the Midlands, based in Birmingham. MacNicol joins from consultant Atkins. Left to right: Susan Kramer, Robert Goodwill, Mary Creagh

bilities are: phase two of High Speed 2; the Local Sustainable Transport Fund; rail funding and futures; cities and urban renewal (including growth deals), localism and devolution; local connectivity (including smart ticketing, buses, taxis, light rail and trams); accessibility and equalities; “future transport” (including the Office of Low Emission Vehicles); environment, small and medium enterprises; and international. Robert Goodwill, the new parliamentary under-secretary of state for transport, has responsibility for: aviation; strategic roads and the Highways Agency; motoring agencies, road safety and standards; freight and logistics; local roads; cycling; phase one of High Speed 2; and Europe. Fellow parliamentary under-secretary of state Stephen Hammond is responsible for rail operations, major projects, fares and ticketing, franchising, and Rail Delivery Group reform; London (including Crossrail); maritime; regulation; and corporate matters. Kramer, 63, was MP for Richmond Park in South West London from 2005 to 2010 and was briefly the Liberal Democrat’s transport spokeswoman in 2007. A fierce opponent of plans for a third runway at Heathrow, she was the

party’s candidate in the first London mayoral election in 2000 and served as a board member of Transport for London from 2000 to 2005. Her career has been spent in infrastructure finance. She remains a director of Infrastructure Capital Partners Ltd, which advises on infrastructure projects, primarily in Central and Eastern Europe. Goodwill, 56, is a farmer and was elected an MP in 2005. He was a member of the House of Commons transport committee for 18 months in the mid-2000s and served as shadow roads minister in 2007. Dualling the A64 to Scarborough is one of his constituency priorities and he’s spoken enthusiastically about private sector investment in roads. “If you can attract some private investment to improve the roads then why not look at it?” he said last year. Some observers believe Eagle’s loss of Labour’s transport brief reflects the rethinking going on within the party about high-speed rail. Eagle was an enthusiast for the HS2 project but shadow chancellor Ed Balls questioned its merits last month. Mary Creagh is MP for Wakefield, a council that opposes HS2, though she herself has spoken in support of the project.

Tungatt leaves SKM for Motion Damian Tungatt has left consultant SKM Colin Buchanan, where he was an associate within the development planning team, to join the London office of Motion, a consultancy offering transport planning, highways and infrastructure design advice to the development industry. Motion has about 30 staff split between London and Guildford and Tungatt is being tasked with helping to expand the business in the capital and the wider South East.

i-Transport announces appointments Carl Peers has joined consultant i-Transport as an associate in the Manchester office from Atkins. Simon Richardson has joined as a senior consultant in the London office from Robert Walters in Australia and prior to that Buro Happold in London and Matthew Craddy has joined as a senior consultant in the Basingstoke office from Capita Symonds. Scott Harvey has joined as a technician from Scott Wilson/URS and Melanie Dobson and Alexander Rowe have started as graduates. Meanwhile, Greg Jones has been promoted to become an associate partner.

McCabe takes interim post at Norfolk Tom McCabe has been appointed interim director of environment, transport and development at Norfolk County Council, replacing Mike Jackson who leaves later this month to become chief executive of North Somerset Council. McCabe is Shropshire’s former corporate director of development services. Since the start of the year he has been director of his own consultancy, A56 UK Ltd. He joined Norfolk last month in a part-time role as interim head of the council’s highways division. McCabe will lead Norfolk’s directorate for six months, allowing the council to make a permanent appointment following consideration next month of a new senior management structure.

Julian Conrad has joined WSP from Halcrow where he was principal architect for a number of rail projects. He joins as design manager for the Tottenham Court Road Crossrail project. Network Rail Consulting has appointed Peter Koning as general manager of its business in Australia and New Zealand, based in Sydney. Koning joins from consultant AECOM Australia. He has previously worked for Network Rail and British Rail.