Effective road and traffic management

Written evidence from the Chartered Institution of Highways and Transport (CIHT) (ETM 22)

The Chartered Institution of Highways and Transport’s (CIHT) response to the House of Commons Transport Select Committee call for evidence entitled:

Effective Road and Traffic Management

The CIHT is pleased to have the opportunity to submit evidence to the House of Commons Transport Select Committee. CIHT would like to commend the evidence submitted by the Association of Directors of Environment, Economy, Planning and Transport and ITS-UK to the Committee and where appropriate we have re-iterated parts of their response in ours.

1. The prevalence and impact of traffic congestion and likely future trends.

The existing highway network has a finite capacity and so the projected growth of population and vehicle ownership in future years must inevitably lead to concerns about traffic congestion given the limited opportunity to build new roads. With this background any move to reduce congestion would have to be grounded in a strategy that linked better use of the existing road space, the use of technology to manage traffic and inform travellers, improved driver behaviour and continued encouragement of modal shift and changes in working practices.

With the finite road capacity that the UK has therefore, we have to consider solutions which can make the best use of our transport systems. ‘Delivering a Sustainable Transport System’, ‘Guidance on Local Transport Plans’ and the equivalent strategy documents for each of the devolved governments, all stress the importance of thinking smarter travel first in terms of our travel solutions.

For example, the 5 goals for transport in ‘Delivering a Sustainable Transport System’ make it absolutely clear that smarter travel solutions must be an integral part of the solution to our 21st Century transport challenges. CIHT along with ACT Travelwise and the Royal Town Planning Institute in 2009 produced ‘Making Smarter Choices’, a guide for practitioners on implementing smarter choices to assist them in implementing travel demand management.

The CIHT Transport Manifesto ‘2010 and Beyond’ sets out the following priorities that we believe should be the main order in which transport spending is prioritised:

1. Maintaining and safely operating the network;

2. Making better use of that network; and

3. Making targeted infrastructure improvements.

With a deteriorating highway network and the need to ensure the highest safety standards in road, rail and air, it is essential that the first priority has to be in the maintenance of the existing infrastructure. The real cost of delays due to poor quality infrastructure and the cost of accidents are high. A further deterioration of the network can only exacerbate the situation as well as putting more pressure on the police and rescue services at a time when they will be subject to close financial scrutiny.

Increased capacity through making better use of the existing network through upgrades such as the managed motorway programme, improvements to the rail network and signalling, and small improvements to our airports can all deliver greater capacity at relatively low cost. Smooth flow rates rather than direct capacity increases will bring benefits in terms of journey reliability and accident reduction.

Improved information systems and through-ticketing can also deliver a more efficient use of the existing infrastructure, allowing users to make better-informed choices and, while not necessarily affecting large numbers in terms of percentage use, will bring about a degree of modal shift.

The priority for capital investment should be where demand is clearly exceeding capacity and where there is no reasonable alternative option. Greater consideration should also be given to investment planning which allows the private sector access to better value labour markets and land prices to make the UK more competitive on a national basis.

2. The extent to which the Government and Local Authorities should intervene to alleviate congestion and the best means of doing so.

The recognised ways of addressing congestion are reducing demand, increasing infrastructure capacity or a combination of both. Techniques In the first category include reducing the flow of vehicles on to a congested link using traffic signals ( "ramp metering" ) and imposing charges for using the link at peak periods ( road user charging ). In the second category we have simple road widening, signal-controlled use of the hard shoulders to create temporary widening, and ‘traffic calming’ – setting a reduced and identical maximum speed for all the lanes in a carriageway when traffic density passes a set threshold. More detail of these approaches is given below.

Road User Charging is an extremely emotive issue. The apparent inability of scheme proposers to focus clearly upon the reasons why change is needed and the benefits of making changes to drivers and taxpayers has been matched by the dogged refusal of individual drivers to accept payment of a 'penny now for a poundsworth' of benefit later on, causing previous proposals to fail. The most notable success has been the London Congestion Zone whilst the most notable failure has been the Manchester TIF bid. It could be said that both cities have a similar traffic problem; however it was only through the personal and highly visible leadership of the then Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, that the scheme was introduced.

For complex schemes to succeed local leadership and tight governance are needed. One major problem that local authorities encounter is the conflict between the long incubation and planning timescales for transport schemes and the much shorter political procedures that oversee them. As transport schemes take many years to design, receive formal approval prior to building and then operate, the eventual outcome of the scheme can be influenced, amended and/or undermined through local political requirements. The government needs to consider the case for an intervention scheme whereby it can empower itself and Local Authorities to guarantee traffic to flow naturally and without hindrance under normal circumstances but retain a capability of intervening as and when circumstances dictate.

4. Intelligent traffic management schemes, such as the scheme which has operated on the M42, and their impact on congestion and journey times.

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) have proven to be extremely effective in a variety of situations across the whole UK road network. However the best examples can be found in the ‘Managed Motorway’ schemes such as the M42 scheme that has facilitated traffic flow across the region by both smoothing traffic flow and enhancing capacity as and when required. This can be as a response to incidents, collisions or sheer excess traffic flow when intervention is critical to enable the maximum number of journeys to be completed in the best possible time.

An earlier example of active traffic management was the variable speed project on the South Western section of the M25 which during heavy traffic loaded times of the day varied the speed limit. Whilst not a perfect solution because there was insufficient camera enforcement, it did demonstrate that traffic flow could be smoothed and the stop start congestion that occurs through minor incidents could be manage controlled. The results of this trial are available in the TRL report PPR033 which is available from http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/reports_publications/trl_reports/cat_traffic_and_the_environment/report_speed-control_and_incident-detection_on_the_m25_controlled_motorway_summary_of_results_1995-2002.htm

Across the UK there are many other examples where ITS have been deployed to help manage traffic flow during peak periods and situations where congestion occurs. Each system has been introduced to counter a specific problem and as a bespoke system operates to local requirements.

‘Ramp metering’ is another effective technology that is employed at critical times through the installation of traffic lights on the access slip roads to motorways and trunk roads to regulate infiltration of vehicles joining the main road without causing either flow. By avoiding vehicles coming to a halt this prevents one of the main causes of congestion – ‘stop-start’ driving. As this system operates only during peak periods when sensors detect that there is a growing traffic merger problem at that location there is no cause to intervene at other times. However ‘ramp metering’ can sometimes operate in conflict with surrounding roads that are also congested. Currently this technology is confined to the Highways Agency network and as yet has to be fully integrated with Local Highway Authority systems although a greater extension of UTMC principles to urban, inter-urban and the strategic network could be expected to enable high benefits if a "one network" approach is adopted.

Variable Message Signs (VMS) are being increasingly deployed across the road network and enable travellers to make ‘informed decisions’ on their journey options as and when incidents occur. This enables the congestion to be kept to a minimum as motorists select alternative routes thereby allowing the speediest resumption of normal traffic patterns.

Increasing use of the Internet through website messages is proving to be an additional boon as ‘real-time’ information is readily available to travellers to assist journey planning prior to or during journeys. Information-gathering systems linked to intelligent roadside infrastructure can be interpreted by the Highways Agency’s National and Regional Traffic Control Centres to communicate specific messages to the travelling public. The recent extreme winter weather conditions have proven to be an excellent example with a significant increase in the number of travellers accessing the Highways Agency website seeking information and advice on the necessity and applicability of their journeys.

ITS systems can be described as having a ‘Cinderella’ role in that they are an extremely effective behind the scenes and so often fail to receive their due recognition. In these straitened financial times relatively inexpensive ITS systems can return their investment many times over as they operate efficiently 24/7 in the background and enable direct intervention at the most crucial times. If there is to be a genuine effort to resolve and effectively manage congestion then the network must be treated in a coordinated manner by both the Highways Agency and Local Highway Authorities. There is still a tendency for many road authorities to look at traffic management problems from a zero base whereas the considerable past investment in UTMC and similar technology means that adding new capacity to what already exists to address, say, 85% of a problem is going to be far more cost-effective, and faster to commission, than a bespoke new system.

However Intelligent Traffic Management Schemes are only a sticky plaster and is not a long term solution to the problem. Road User Charging is seen by many academics and the profession as a long term solution to rationalisation of journeys, improved journey planning and modal shift.

5. The effectiveness of legislative provisions for road management under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 and the Traffic Management Act 2004.

It has been recognised that all works on the highway will cause disruption and delay to the day to day activities of all users. Some years ago this was estimated at 10% of the overall congestion that traffic, as defined in the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA), suffers. CIHT believe this figure was originally produced by the then TRRL under commission to the DfT.

The New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 (NRSWA) introduced a new requirement for Utility Companies to comply with legislation designed to ‘control’ activities by notification and this has subsequently been expanded through the TMA.

Most Utility Companies do comply with the initial requirement for prior notification but consequent management of works and the supply of information regarding progress has been a cause for concern.

The TMA introduced a recommendation that all highway works should adopt the same techniques and practice this method of notification without the legislative powers to enforce. There are many highway authorities that have done this but some only to a limited degree.

The TMA also introduced a new Permit Scheme which positively allows for management of all works. Any work promoter must apply for a Permit to Work whereas under Notification rules, it is only necessary to inform rather than request permission.

Over the years the art of managing these types of works has improved and there has been a significant reduction in the overall congestion.

It has been stated that by applying the Permit Schemes a greater degree of congestion reduction has been achieved (Kent County Council verbal statement) and despite an increase in costs to the community, all the Permit Fees costs may be ‘passed on’, there should be a corresponding reduction in congestion costs.

CIHT believe there is scope for a research project to determine the overall costs/benefits from the introduction of Permit Schemes against a limited reduction by the strict application of Notification and all factors recommended to comply with the TMA.

January 2011