Effective road and traffic management

Written evidence from the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport in the UK (ETM 36)

1. The Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport in the UK ("the Institute") is a professional institution embracing all transport modes whose members are engaged in the provision of transport services for both passengers and freight, the management of logistics and the supply chain, transport planning, government and administration. We have no political affiliations and do not support any particular vested interests. Our principal concerns are that transport policies and procedures should be effective and efficient and based, as far as possible, on objective analysis of the issues and practical experience and that good practice should be widely disseminated and adopted.

2. The Institute has a specialist Transport Planning Forum, a nationwide structure of locally based groups and a Public Policies Committee which considers the broad canvass of transport policy. This submission draws on contributions from all these sources.

Alternatives to road pricing

3. The Committee seeks evidence on how road traffic can be better managed to reduce congestion in the light of the Government’s decision not to introduce road pricing on existing roads. In the short time available we have not been able to assemble detailed recent evidence about the relative effectiveness of different measures; but we can offer some broad comparisons and comments on appropriate policy choices, which we hope the Committee will find helpful.

4. In considering these it is relevant to consider how far they would achieve the results that road pricing might have delivered. These can be summarised as bringing about a more efficient balance of supply and demand by:

i. shifting some demand from the peak to the off-peak

ii. reducing the use of cars by a broad range of measures including encouraging car-sharing, mode shift to non-car modes (public transport, cycling and walking); and the use of trucks by encouraging mode shift from long-distance road freight to rail, among other possible measures including reducing food – and other avoidable - miles through changes in the structure of the industry;

iii. raising funds to improve both roads and public transport.

5. We take also the opportunity to comment on the impact the recently introduced Localism Bill might have on traffic management issues.

Traffic Growth

6. Before the recession car traffic had been growing much less fast than forecast, although some of this shortfall was made up by a rapid growth in light vans. We believe that a better understanding of the reasons for this change in trend is urgently needed. But even a return to traffic levels experienced before the recession plus growth in line with population growth implies road congestion on a level leading to a high social cost (see for instance the detailed estimates made in the UNITE project Deliverable 8 that in 1999 the social cost of congestion in Britain was £12.4b) (www.its.leeds.ac.uk/projects/unite).

7. We need therefore to plan for increased travel demand. The Eddington report forecast the increased cost of congestion if no action is taken and we see no reason to question those forecasts. Better managed use of roadspace can also reduce social and environmental costs.

Local roads and traffic

8. In most urban areas [1] , apart from London and some of the Integrated Transport Authority areas, serious congestion is restricted to the morning and evening peaks. In the absence of road pricing, peak hour commuting can be tackled by a combination of:

i. parking regulation including charging, particularly all-day parking in and around employment, business and retail centres;

ii. measures to encourage mode shift, such as bus priorities, cycle lanes and (in some places where the cost is justified) trams or bus rapid transit;

iii. park and ride schemes;

iv. smarter choices including travel plans at the workplace and school;

v. more efficient operation of traffic control systems

vi. better management of streetworks and road accidents.

Parking Regulation

9. Of these measures, parking controls are likely to be the most effective as they are perceived most directly by motorists. Unfortunately, past attempts to use parking controls to influence peak hour traffic have been undermined by high levels of private non-residential parking (PNR) in city centres and at employment and retail centres. Under current legislation, local authorities have the power to introduce Workplace Parking Charges to overcome some of these problems, but so far only Nottingham has seriously proposed doing so. Other authorities known to have considered the option have not proceeded, possibly dissuaded, in part, by limitations in the legislation and potential enforcement difficulties.

10. Local authorities also have powers to regulate PNR parking charges but have to compensate PNR operators for any loss of income; to our knowledge, these powers have never been used. Some changes in existing legislation could provide local authorities with improved powers that could increase their willingness to use them.

11. We consider that parking is an area requiring further policy development, but we are concerned by what appears to be the emerging approach of the Department for Transport that such measures are solely the responsibility of local government. That is correct so far as adoption and implementation is concerned, but the Department is responsible for providing the legislative powers they need.

Encouraging Mode Shift

12. Measures to encourage the use of public transport will be most effective if combined with measures to discourage the use of cars (the Central London Congestion Charge illustrates clearly the positive effect of combining better bus services with a charge for car use). In the absence of complementary measures to restrict car use, measures to increase public transport use may have only a limited effect on car use, with some of the extra passengers making new (generated) journeys or having transferred from cycling or walking. To the extent that the roads are relieved of traffic by a switch to public transport use that may itself tend to generate new car trips or transfer existing car trips from other congested roads.

13. Nevertheless successive Governments have recognised the benefits of a proactive approach to public transport and the Quality Partnership approach first advocated in the Chartered Institute of Transport’s report "Bus Routes to Success", now enshrined in legislation, has had significant success in cities and towns such as Brighton, Cambridge, Leeds, Oxford and York. Unfortunately the impacts of the traffic management policies adopted in such Partnerships are not terribly well documented, only the headline figures of increases (or arrested downward trends) having been studied. However there are some valuable before and after studies where significant new infrastructure has been provided, for example in association with the guided busways and High Occupancy Vehicle Lane in Leeds, West Yorkshire (see paragraph 15).

14. Bus priorities can be very effective and cost-efficient. If applied at junctions that are saturated at peak times, they will reduce capacity for other traffic (although good design of the schemes can minimise this), but increase capacity overall in terms of the number of people per hour that can pass through the junction [1] . This will only be true, however, if the buses are well-patronised. The extra congestion suffered by the non-bus traffic may encourage some drivers to switch to bus, but higher peak time (and all-day) parking charges are desirable to maximise bus patronage and free delivery vehicles from congested conditions. Similar considerations apply to traffic signal control plans and exemption of buses from turns banned to other vehicles.

15. The West Yorkshire studies confirm that one of the most significant impacts is what happens to road capacity released by car journeys transferred to bus. In one case, the A61 corridor it was shown that the capacity released was quickly taken up by car journeys transferring from adjacent corridors, primarily the heavily congested A660. In another case, the pioneering A647 High Occupancy Vehicle Lane, the capacity released was not taken up but the reduction did not correspond to the increase in bus use. Because of the concentration of surveys in a relatively narrow sector, the investigators were forced to conclude that either there was a large number of unnecessary journeys which was unlikely, or that some journeys were being made more efficiently (for example car sharing on the school or journey to work run perhaps as vehicles occupied by 2 or more people were allowed to use the HOV lane) or that displaced traffic was dispersed over a wider area than the study could encompass which was feasible given the location of the HOV lane in relation to the Leeds Outer Ring Road and its many connections.

16. The potential to relieve traffic congestion through improved bus services and performance is likely to be adversely affected by the current austerity measures, with cuts in both bus subsidies and forthcoming changes in the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) and the CILT has been examined on these impacts in response to the Committee’s Inquiry into Bus Services after the Spending Review.

17. The use of higher (and more widespread) parking charges – particularly in the peak – in central areas should be explored as a means of both increasing patronage of public transport services and helping to fund their provision.

Park and Ride

18. Park and Ride (P&R) can be very effective, but only if combined with parking controls in city centres and bus priority measures to give uncongested access to the central area for the buses serving the scheme. However, many P&R schemes require public subsidies both for the capital and operating costs. Such subsidies are generally justified on the basis of congestion relief, reduction in central area space required for car parking and environmental benefits, for which no monetary transfer to public transport budgets is made. Not only is the expansion of the coverage of such schemes under threat but the Institute understands that some existing schemes could be closed.

Smarter Choices and Travel Plans

19. Recent research suggests that a major effort to promote smarter choices, which encompass a range of interventions at organisational and personal level to increase awareness of travel choices and promote use of healthier and more environmentally friendly options can have a significant impact. Smarter Choices includes programmes such as School, Workplace and Personal Travel Planning.

20. Travel Plans at major traffic generating locations (workplace, hospitals, schools, etc) can be highly effective by encouraging car-sharing and the use of non-car modes. They need to be well thought out and provide alternative means of transport if the car-share arrangement breaks down on a particular occasion (some schemes offer free tax rides home in these circumstances). They require a major staff effort by the local authority in collaboration with major employers and Chambers of Commerce. Increasing the use of cycling also requires the provision of secure cycle storage and shower/changing facilities at places of work.

21. If applied on a large scale, smarter choices initiatives are labour intensive and local authorities may not be able to afford the cost in the current financial circumstances. Indeed, it is our understanding that this is an area in which local authorities are planning to cut back substantially as part of the required cuts in their spending which appears perverse in both economic and environmental terms as the Benefit:Cost ratios for, for example, the DfT’s Sustainable Travel Towns programme have been estimated at a minimum of 4.5 to 1 and probably significantly more, comparing very well with many highway improvement schemes which are being allowed to proceed.

22. Given  rising travel costs (bus fares, train fares and fuel costs) and the increasing pace and dexterity of IT applications smarter choices might also explore the opportunity for people to travel less e.g: by staggering their journeys more or working from home or from a base closer to their home location

Traffic Control Systems

23. Most large cities already use efficient systems to manage their traffic lights (mainly the SCOOT dynamic control and TRANSYT fixed programme systems). But all systems need regular review and updating to ensure that they are operating in an optimal fashion. This requires both funding and a high level of technical skill, both of which are under threat with the current austerity measures.

Management of Streetworks and Accidents

24. Recent studies by Transport for London (TfL) have brought out the disruption caused by streetworks (particularly by the multitude of utility companies with rights of access), as well as by accidents and other incidents. All need to be managed more efficiently. We need to gain experience from large-scale introduction of lane rental for streetworks and the rapid management of accidents, learning from the Highways Agency’s Traffic Officers (as well as the management of incidents on the M6 Toll).

Inter-urban roads

25. Congestion occurs on motorways and trunk roads mainly at peak times in the vicinity of major cities. It is caused predominantly by peaks in car traffic, particularly commuting to work. In the short to medium term, hard shoulder running coupled with greater lane discipline and regulated speeds (managed motorways) can increase capacity at relatively low cost. Speeds are reduced to 50mph or less, but journey times are improved and more reliable.

26. These measures will buy some time, but because of long lead times for the construction of new capacity, policies need to be formulated now to deal with further traffic growth. Moreover, the closer system is running to capacity, the lower its resilience to incidents and poor weather, leading to increasing and more frequent delays, and thus unreliability.

27. Apart from increasing capacity (including hard-shoulder running and other "managed motorway" techniques) or introducing peak time charges on the motorway itself, reducing congestion on motorways is unlikely to be achievable without measures to manage levels of peak hour urban commuting.

28. CILT’s view is that the Government cannot therefore discharge its responsibilities for the proper management of motorway traffic and the efficient movement of freight without taking an interest in the management of urban car commuting. Conversely, it would be wrong to try to control motorway traffic (for example by ramp metering) without considering the impact on local roads, taking account of the local demands upon them as well as the requirement to distribute traffic from the national network. Motorways and trunk roads form a key part of many metropolitan area networks and should be managed as part of an overall strategy agreed by both local and central government, the latter acting through the Highway Agency.

Fuel Tax and Road User Charges

29. Some people suggest increases in fuel duty as a way of reducing overall traffic growth. In our view this would be unfair and inefficient. People travelling at off-peak times and in rural areas already pay more than the external costs of their journeys and road users generally pay more in fuel duty than would be justified as a carbon tax. Moreover, as the use of electric cars becomes more widespread, an unfair distinction will arise between electric car users, who make no contribution to the cost of providing and managing the road system through fuel duty, and petrol or diesel users who do. This distinction might be thought reasonable in the early days of electric cars, as a means of encouraging their use, but in the medium to longer term it will be grossly inequitable.

30. Apart from unfairness, higher levels of fuel duty would affect all journeys, including those in places and at times where and when there is no reasonable alternative to the car, and would not have a sufficient effect on peak hour congestion, where very large increases would be needed to reduce external costs to an efficient level. Electronic charges for road use related to distance and time would be much fairer as well as economically more efficient.

31. CILT has long advocated fair pricing for all road users. Although the Government has decided not to introduce a national road user charging scheme, it has not said that individual local authorities cannot do so. The powers for local authorities to introduce local road user charging are still on the Statute Book [1] ; and if a charging scheme appears to be more effective and fairer than other measures (workplace parking levies, for example) local authorities could still promote it. They ought certainly to examine the option in broad terms so that proper comparisons can be made. Charging has the potential to provide a local funding stream to support capital investment in local transport schemes. In an era of increasing localism and lower central government grants, the alternative to road user charging may be one or a combination of measures and effects including higher local council taxes, higher local parking charges, poorer public transport, increasing congestion and travel time unreliability, and deteriorating roads.

Enforcement

32. Many of the measures identified in this evidence depend on effective enforcement. Effective in at least three respects:

i. the necessary legislation is in place and is beyond reasonable challenge when applied properly.

ii. levels of non-compliance are low – sufficiently low to discourage some from deciding that non-compliance is worthwhile, because the combination of the chances of being caught and the impacts of the penalties when caught are less than the disbenefits of compliance.

iii. the costs of enforcement are low, and are at least offset by the revenues obtained.

33. These requirements serve to emphasise the key roles the Department must continue to play, both legislative and technical, and to do so at a high level of professional competence.

34. They also discriminate between the suitability of some of the measures we have outlined in this Evidence. For example, the ROCOL Working Group that advised the first London Mayoral candidates on how they might use the charging powers provided under the Greater London Act (1998) concluded that the provisions of the Act would make enforcement of Workplace Parking Levies with London very difficult, and costly. It is also important that enforcement does not need to involve the police, that measures can be enforced using civil proceedings, as is the case where parking and bus lane use offences have been decriminalised.

Localism and the Role of Central Government

35. CILT welcomes and supports the devolution of powers relating to transport and land use planning from Central to Local Government. It considers that too many powers and functions have moved from Local to Central Government over recent decades. However, to be effective, it is essential that local authorities have greater financial independence, in both the raising of funds (both capital and revenue) and in their expenditure, as well as in their ability to adopt policies best suited to their locality. The Institute is of the view that much more needs to be done in both areas.

36. But, it is essential that Central Government provides the support Local Government requires to fulfil its responsibilities. The Institute is very concerned that the Department for Transport might use "localism" as a rationale for cutting many support services, including research and the development of frameworks that Local Government needs. In particular, the Institute is concerned that the Department ensures that the legislation, both primary and secondary, required by Local Government, is prepared and managed through the Parliamentary processes in a timely and efficient manner. The Department can stand back from the development and implementation of local policies but it cannot, it must not, stand back from its critical enabling role. Similar requirements apply to the Department of Communities and Local Government.

Summary

37. In conclusion, we believe that there are alternatives to road user charges to tackle congestion. But whereas road user charges can produce substantial net revenue, the alternatives generally tend to cost money. Resources for such measures are in very short supply. Thus we regard including road user charges in the set of measures considered in tackling congestion as being even more crucial in the current circumstances than when money was more plentiful.

February 2011