Examination of Witnesses (Questions 220
- 239)
WEDNESDAY 26 JANUARY 2000
MR RICHARD
SMITH, MR
JON WILLIS,
DR DAVID
QUARMBY AND
MR IAN
BROWN
Mrs Gorman
220. The comparison is between people getting
into cars in traffic jams all the way up to London and especially
through London and taking your route instead, and that route for
a commuter in the rush hour is pretty slow going anyway, so I
was thinking of it more in competition with people bringing cars
in because one of the things we are trying to do in London is
to reduce that. That is my comparison. Your colleague is dying
to say something.
(Dr Quarmby) I was going to add to what Richard Smith
had been saying there. It seems to me there are two things that
determine whether you have a fully fledged rail system like the
national rail network, or indeed something like the Underground,
or a light rail: it is a combination of the distances you are
travelling, and the intensity of demand on the corridor. Light
rail is best suited, as Richard was saying, for distances up to
about 15 or 20 kilometres and where stations are quite closely
spaced to give people final access to where they want to go and
where the volume of traffic is not more than 6,000 to 10,000 people
per hour. The kind of situation that is being referred to by Mrs
Gorman is generally more suited to the national rail network where
you have got longer distances coming in from the M25 where you
have got very heavy flows of people and where ideally you should
have a high performing rail system which we do have on many corridors
into London.
Mr Bennett: If I could pursue this question
that Mr Stevenson started with, this comparison between bus and
light rail. Is it not totally unfair that almost all the comparisons
are being made between new light rail and old buses which are
erratic, slow, have ancient ticketing systems, cold, dirty?
Chairman: Otherwise ideal!
Mr Bennett: Take Blackpool trams. Compared to
a bus service apart from the view there is not much to recommend
the trams in Blackpool.
Chairman
221. There used to be but there ain't any more.
(Mr Smith) We absolutely agree that the comparison
must be in the continuum and that you look at high quality bus
services giving a high level of priorities. Light rapid transit
tends to be interpreted as light rail but Millennium Transit is
deliberately designed to be in that gap, a guided busway with
very high levels of priority and we are very keen to see a real
trial of a network of that kind because we believe there will
be a rather stronger case than many, many, many accept and that
that can actually perform in the same league as tram systems.
And you are absolutely right that we need to understand whether
that kind of system really can deliver and we have not got one
in the United Kingdom at the moment.
Mr Bennett
222. So the Millennium system coming late is
a bit of a disaster. Why is it that it is the Railway Inspectorate
that is checking it out rather than anybody else?
(Mr Smith) The Railway Inspectorate has to check it
out because that is its statutory role. We have not handed it
over to the Railway Inspectorate to check out because we know
that it is not yet ready. We will hand it over to them to check
once we are confident they will say yes to it.
223. Can these new light rapid transit systems
work unless we have some traffic restraining measures? Effectively
in Docklands the River is a very effective traffic restraining
measure, is it not.
(Dr Quarmby) Certainly any traffic restraint, whether
it is a natural one like a river, or control on parking in a city
centre, will generate more travel on a light rail system like
the DLR or any other. But there are certain intrinsic features
of a light rail system, whether it is one that is totally segregated
or one that is partly street running like a tram, which I believe
will tend to attract more people to that than to the equivalent
bus system, even if it is a segregated busway. These are things
which I know the Committee is quite familiar with from the visits
that you have made, such as the reliability of travel, the quality
of the product, the quality of the ride, and indeed the sense
of permanence in the infrastructure and the system which give
a different image to it. These factors also tend to attract more
people to using rail.
224. This controversy about the 3.9 million
new homes in the South East. A fair number of them are going to
go into the Thames Gateway side of London?
(Dr Quarmby) Yes.
225. Also they ought to be of a much higher
density than has been done in suburbia?
(Dr Quarmby) Indeed.
226. Therefore it ought to make sense for a
light rail system to go out there. How far are you looking to
go out?
(Dr Quarmby) There is plenty of scope for further
housing in many parts of the eastern area of Docklands and we
hope very much that those will help to meet the new targets of
housing because the light rail system is there and being extended
and there is the land and there is the opportunity.
Chairman
227. Some of those middle class ghettos behind
their electronically-controlled doors are not going to fight their
way onto your Docklands Light Railway.
(Dr Quarmby) Chairman, we have all sorts of conditions
of people using the DLR.
228. You are not listening me. We are asking
you if there are extended housing areas, are you looking at whether
you can provide them with a service?
(Mr Brown) The one we are looking at specifically
is London City airport and making that route go through those
areas with benefits to local people who are going to live there.
229. Would that not make your system rather
longer than the optimum size that we were told about.
(Mr Brown) It is on the edge of that optimum size
but it is 22 minutes to the centre of London, which is about the
most competitive.
230. I think the areas Mr Bennett was talking
about are not just where there is an obvious economic driver at
the end of the line, and City airport is not only that but it
should have been connected a long time ago, what about the other
areas where no such link exists?
(Mr Brown) The choices made by the developers are
to go for high density or low density, high density based on public
transport or low density based on one or more cars. In this corridor
although it is limited by the destination which is London City
airport, we are looking with the developers, and it is all about
planning with the developers, for a low amount of cars and a high
density of housing which makes the railway viable and makes to
go beyond the airport viable.
(Mr Smith) We are very keen to work with local authorities
and developers and our emphasis is very much when you are planning
a development plan the public transport, whether it is bus or
light rail or anything else. If you take Millennium Transit if
we extend into Waterfront Transit we will see that as a key link
for Woolwich for those people who want to travel into central
London as an interchange. They will not necessarily travel all
the way on our system but we are very keen to encourage and that
new housing is high density near to good public transport access
and that good public transport access is planned from day one
rather than an after thought. It has got to be part of the plan.
231. And you are getting a good response?
(Mr Willis) We are working very closely with Thames
Gateway Partnership in terms of trying to understand the land
use.
232. That is careful use of English. I said
are you getting a good response?
(Dr Quarmby) We are, Chairman!
(Mr Willis) We are looking at a wide range of options
including Intermediate Modes and looking at the DLR possibly going
under the River at Woolwich.
233. Funding?
(Mr Willis) The three intermediate modes in Thamesmead,
Barking and Romford are all designed to serve development areas.
What we put on the ground comes down to essentially the layout
of the developments but particularly the density of developments.
At the moment, particularly in the Barking Reach areas and parts
of Thamesmead, we do not think that the densities are high enough
to justify the high investment of light rail.
234. Is that a part of your formula because
presumably what you are doing is an economic model that says the
formula must be X.
(Mr Willis) In terms of houses per acre I do not think
I have got a number off the top of my head.
(Dr Quarmby) We can do you a note.
235. That would be helpful. Dr Quarmby, do you
have a different view on this?
(Dr Quarmby) I would not say different views but we
do have practical evidence as the DLR of working closely with
developers in the areas surrounding our stations to support them
in their planning applications with the local boroughs and in
enabling easy access to the stations from the development.
Chairman: I do not think we are arguing against
that. Mr Stevenson?
Mr Stevenson
236. I have two or three questions on the housing
densities you talked about in terms of the viability of the transport
facility you referred to. Those higher density public transport
potential options versus the lower density car options, is that
a density based on the provision of light rail transport?
(Mr Smith) Not necessarily. If you were putting the
density in to get people into central London then you clearly
have to find a way of getting them all the way into central London.
That may be a good bus service to the nearest underground station.
237. That clearly is the kernel of my question
because the impression is that all you have got in mind is light
rail which, by definition, can be more expensive than alternatives.
So therefore my next question is what bus, either bus lane facility
or guided bus facility, are you looking at in terms of the developments
you can see in the foreseeable future?
(Mr Kinnock) If we take the Barking and Romford scheme,
which is one of our intermediate schemes that we are looking at
at the moment, it is not at all clear that we will conclude that
it should be a light rail scheme. It might well be a guided bus
scheme.
238. How many schemes are you looking at?
(Mr Smith) We are currently looking at those four
areas as specific major schemes.
239. And one you are not sure about?
(Mr Smith) We are still looking at all of them for
what mode we use.
| 
