Effective road and traffic management

Supplementary written evidence from the Passenger Transport Executive Group (pteg) (ETM 16a)

Report on the impact of the LTP2 congestion reward fund in South Yorkshire

1) INTRODUCTION

In 2007 the DfT asked 10 Metropolitan areas to produce a Congestion Delivery Plan (CDP) which would outline their ambitions for delivery of schemes that tackle congestion over the lifetime of the LTP2.

Against these plans the DfT made £60M available over 4 years, through the Congestion Reward Fund (CRF), which was based on the performance of each of the ten areas. This approach represented probably one of the most ‘focussed’ examples of recent output delivery performance and led to a much improved understanding of how congestion might be measured and tackled. The ‘carrot’ effect of achieving significant levels of reward funding led to the South Yorkshire partners prioritising congestion as a key transport issue. As a consequence all four South Yorkshire Local Authorities adopted the congestion performance indicator as a designated measure within their Local Area Agreement, in support of the then national PSA target.

At an operational level, the launch of the CRF encouraged South Yorkshire to integrate mainstream LTP activity with Network Management and the alignment of LTP investment with the network management duty. It focused prioritisation of schemes which were believed to have a direct impact on congestion at both ‘hot spots’ and along target route and corridors. Resources were also made available to achieve a broader understanding of the impact of congestion by investing in transport modelling in order to test strategies and schemes. Investments were also made in monitoring traffic flows on targeted routes in order to gain a deeper understanding of the causes and effects of congestion.

Typically, partners used improved monitoring processes on a regular basis for individual schemes and kept track of milestones. Estimated congestion benefits were calculated for each scheme prior to financial resources being allocated; and new Prioritisation Frameworks were adopted to ensure that schemes offering best value were prioritised. The CRF also offered a valuable way of progressing those ‘enabling’ initiatives not so easily funded from mainstream LTP and allowed an element of valuable revenue support activity to be introduced.

Where slippages occurred, visible explanations were available and mitigation measures put in place to deal with the slippages. In South Yorkshire and other locations, the Congestion Delivery process led to new, shared, LTP project management frameworks with all schemes assessed to ensure value for money. Quarterly updates were submitted on both financial and delivery progress and the concept of "whole route performance" developed to better understand how "internal transport interventions" had affected highway conditions. The variations in routes’ performance were identified and as a result South Yorkshire has an improved understanding of why some routes are more susceptible to change than others. This was achieved by identifying the key strategic network within South Yorkshire, targeting specific routes and assigning "RAG-ratings" to the implementation and delivery of congestion tackling interventions.

Robust systems were introduced to review risks to delivery both in terms of scheme progress and resource requirement. These were discussed at Chief Executive and with senior officers on a regular basis. A further impact therefore of the requirement to achieve much needed additional reward funding was that the risks to delivery for the congestion indicator became managed at a senior corporate level by each local authority which ensured that issues were prioritised and dealt with effectively.

2) OUTCOMES

Over the five years the Congestion indicator was measured, South Yorkshire not only achieved its LTP2 Congestion indicator target, but also reduced aggregated average person journey times by 5.2% (along the 18 defined routes); at the same time experiencing a 2.7% growth in "person miles". This led to South Yorkshire achieving its full £4m CRF funding allocation.

All but one of the 18 routes met respective journey time targets. A number of these were actually achieved against a higher background growth in "person miles" than predicted in our original CDP submission.

Through our development of "route proformas", the Congestion Delivery Plan process encouraged a better understanding of the relationship between interventions along route corridors and subsequent outcomes. This has been supplemented by the use of the "strat-e-gis Congestion" software system, which enables detailed analysis of journey times, average speeds and delays.

3) THE ALLOCATION OF CRF

In addition to modelling activity, CRF has been used in South Yorkshire to fund various revenue and capital projects, including Congestion Analysis work; a Key Routes Inspector; and on further development of the South Yorkshire Intelligent Transport System (syITS). Other funded projects include:-

¨ Smarter Choices initiatives (including iTRACE Travel Planning Management tool).

¨ Preparation work for a Utility Works Common Permit Scheme.

¨ Mobile ANPR parking enforcement in Barnsley.

¨ Bus hotspots schemes.

¨ Bus Key Route initiatives (including bus priority measures along Balby Road, Doncaster; and Rotherham town centre).

¨ Congestion Target Route packages of interventions on major arterial routes (including various traffic / demand management and Smarter Choices initiatives along the A61 Chesterfield Road and A625 Ecclesall Road, Sheffield).

The £4m CRF supplemented the mainstream Integrated Transport block settlements, and provided South Yorkshire with more flexible opportunities to fund revenue based activities in support of mainstream capital projects partners

4) NEXT STEPS

The Congestion Delivery Plan / CRF process provided South Yorkshire with an important catalyst to move forward and develop a "Strategic Network". This Strategic Network now forms a corner stone of the LTP 3 Transport Strategy; emphasising the contribution reliable networks make to our economic growth objectives. CRF has also provided partners with a better understanding of which interventions may provide the best outcomes in easing congestion and achievement of reliable journeys, through evaluation of our best / worst performing routes and assessing where / why earlier predictions have not been realised (or have been exceeded).

We will be assessing our best and worst performing routes against the original predictions for impact. As we move into LTP3, we are developing the previous Congestion indicator into a new journey reliability measure and the focus on the performance of network in South Yorkshire will continue to be given a high priority for LTP3 investment.

This is a good example of a Central Government funding allocation aimed at one specific outcome. It encouraged local development of analysis, and delivery of key interventions to deliver an enhanced output – reduced congestion.

May 2011