M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures Alternatives Considered

Transcription

1 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures Alternatives Considered Measures discarded falling outside from of the the M4 M4 CEM CEM Programme

2 Contents Page Workbook User Guide 2 Key information and Glossary 3 Key information sheet 4 Alternatives considered and could be delivered outside of the M4 CEM Programme Page Measure 1: B4245 and M48 link 6 Measure 2: Cardiff Peripheral Distributor Road 7 Measure 3: Sustainability checklists for developments 8 Measure 4: School Travel Planning 9 Measure 5: Workplace Travel Planning 10 Measure 6: Car sharing scheme 11 Measure 7: Town centre development planning 12 Measure 8: Flexible working arrangements 13 Measure 9: Travel education programme 14 Measure 10: ICT investment 15 Measure 11: Maintain or increase Severn Crossing Tolls 16 Measure 12: Reduce or remove Severn Crossing Tolls 17 Measure 13: Collaborative working 18 Measure 14: Grade separated improvements to A48 SDR 19 Measure 15: Closure of J27 to motorway 20 Alternatives considered and discarded Page Measure 1: New M4 lagoon barrage 22 Measure 2: Corporation Road Link 23 Measure 3: Celtic Springs and Rogerstone link 24 Measure 4: M48 and Second Severn Crossing link 25 Measure 5: Hard shoulder running lanes on M4 26 Measure 6: Upgrade Steelworks Access Road to 3 lanes 27 Measure 7: On-line widening of M4 to dual 3 lanes 28 Measure 8: Motorway access westbound at J25 29 Measure 9: Introduce climbing lanes at High Cross 30 Measure 10: Introduce climbing lanes at St Julian s Hill 31 Measure 11: Bus priority on M4 32 Measure 12: Intercity bus services 33 Measure 13: Reduce public transport fares 34 Measure 14: Reregulate commercial bus services 35 Measure 15: Increase fuel duty 36 Measure 16: Increase parking enforcement 37 Measure 17: Increase parking charges 38 Measure 18: Introduce flexible cross border bus passes 39 Measure 19: Fuel efficient cars programme 40 Measure 20: Incremental widening along M4 41 Measure 21: Active Traffic Management System on M4 42

3 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures Alternatives Considered Workbook User Guide What is this workbook all about? On 27 July 2011 the M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures Programme initiated detailed work with a specially selected Forum of Stakeholders, representing a breadth of interests from the public, private and third sectors in South Wales. Thirty four members of the Stakeholder Forum convened with representatives of Welsh Government and Arup staff to explore over 100 possible solutions, old and new, to safety, capacity and resilience related problems associated with travel in the M4 corridor between Magor and Castleton. Building on the robust exploration of possible solutions facilitated by the Forum, the WG and Arup team have developed four Packages of measures that work together optimally to address the problems of the M4 Corridor, Magor to Castleton. Package development has involved further research into the feasibility and deliverability into selected measures both on a stand-alone basis, and again in the context of the complete package of complementary measures. The resulting four option Packages, plus a Dominimum scenario, are each presented within a dedicated workbook. Each Package offers a core scheme, comprising one or more measures, supported by a number of supplementary traffic management, public transport and sustainable travel measures. This workbook presents the alternatives considered which include possible solutions that will not be progressed through the M4 CEM programme, following the packaging process. The measures fall into two categories: 1. Those that will help towards meeting the objectives but could be delivered by others outside of the M4 CEM Programme; and What will I find in this workbook? Within this workbook you will find a number of different measures that have not progressed to form part of the Packages. This workbook presents the omitted measures - offering a high level overview of what the measure would involve, its likely impacts and implementation issues. An explanation is provided for its discarding from the M4 CEM programme, in addition to an action for relevant parties to pursue where appropriate. How are the packaged measures appraised? Arup have appraised each measure to identify: what it would entail; what impacts it could have on the economy, society and environment, in the context of M4 CEM Programme Aims, and WelTAG criteria; its compatibility with other measures as part of the package; how well it addresses the goals of the programme; and its acceptability, feasibility, deliverability and risks. At this stage, the appraisal of measures is often still high level. In practise this means traffic modelling work and assessment of traffic flow and accident data is undertaken, for comparative purposes. Further technical appraisal is required during project delivery following formal public consultation early next year, when a decision is made with respect to strategy implementation. How should I use this workbook? In order to help make the appraisal information easier to understand, each measure is assessed through appraisal tables using a 7-scale colour coding system: Large Positive Impact (+++) Moderate Positive Impact (++) Slight Positive Impact (+) No (or Minimal) Impact (N) Slight Negative Impact (-) Moderate Negative Impact (--) Large Negative Impact (---) The impacts are appraised in terms of the likely effect each measure would have on the M4 Corridor transport conditions, as defined in Programme Goals and WelTAG criteria. This package identifies the measures that will not be progressed through the M4 CEM Programme, following the packaging process. Should you feel that some of these measures should be part of the Programme, please let us know. 2. Those which have been discarded due to poor performance against the M4 CEM Programme objectives. 2

4 Key information and Glossary Key information sheets A key information sheet is provided at the beginning of this workbook to offer a summary description of its content. It identifies a number of measures that have been considered but discarded as part of the M4 CEM Programme. summary worksheets An appraisal summary worksheet sets out details of Measures, providing an appraisal at a high level to identify the likely impacts on the economy, society and environment. The potential acceptability, deliverability, feasibility and risk of the measure are also considered. Economic impact this is a description of the impact of a measure on the economy, at a local, regional and/or national level. Economic outcomes against which a measure is appraised include: Access to employment opportunities; Connectivity within Wales and internationally; Efficient, reliable and sustainable movement of people; Efficient, reliable and sustainable movement of freight; Access to visitor attractions. Social impact the impact of a measure on people and communities. Social outcomes against which a measure is appraised include: Access to healthcare; Access to education, training and lifelong learning; Access to shopping and leisure facilities; Is healthy lifestyle encouraged; Safety of travel. Environmental impact the impact of a measure on the environment. Environmental outcomes against which a measure is appraised include: Use of sustainable materials; Contribution to greenhouse gas emissions; Impact on climate change; Contribution to air pollution; Impact on the local environment; Impact on heritage; Impact on biodiversity. 3

5 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Key Information Sheet Alternatives Considered What are alternatives considered? The alternatives considered are measures that have been identified by either policy makers, stakeholders or the public some of which may have merit in addressing some of the M4 CEM objectives. However, following detailed analysis and consideration as part of the packaging of the possible measures; these alternatives considered fall outside of the M4 CEM Programme, for a number of possible reasons. The measures fall into two categories: Lagoon Barrage 1. Those that will help towards meeting the objectives but could be delivered by others outside of the M4 CEM Programme; and 2. Those which have been discarded due to poor performance against the M4 CEM Programme objectives. Junction closures Highway upgrades What will happen to the measures falling outside of M4 CEM that are still good ideas? Each measure s Summary Worksheet sets out an action for the Welsh Government. Whilst poor performing measures may not be pursued; those that have merit will be passed onto the relevant potential delivery bodies for consideration. It is important to Welsh Government that these measures that have some merit in helping address the wider transport problems in South Wales will not be lost. Therefore this Workbook will be used to raise these ideas and help join up thinking between different Welsh Government departments and other potential delivery bodies. Why have some measures been discarded and what will happen to them? Following appraisal, some measures considered have been identified to have large adverse impacts and deliverability issues. There may be a number of reasons why a measure presented as an alternative considered has been discarded from the M4 CEM programme. Each measure is presented through an Summary Worksheet in this booklet identifying its description, likely impacts and justification for discarding. Because these measures are not considered to add benefits to the Programme or may in some cases be very difficult to deliver as part of wider South Wales transport schemes, they have been discarded from the process altogether. Those with some merit in helping address wider transport problems have been included in the alternatives considered and could be delivered outside of the M4 CEM Programme section, which presents measures that will help towards meeting the objectives but could be delivered by others outside of the Programme. Policy measures Education programmes Travel planning Alternatives Considered Public transport subsidies Climbing lanes Bus prioirty on M4 Land use planning Car taxing and parking charges 4

6 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures Alternatives Considered and could be delivered outside of the M4 CEM Programme Measures that will help meet the objectives but could be delivered by others outside of the M4 CEM Programme 5

7 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 1: Link (and new M48 Junction) between B4245 and M48 east of Magor The provision of a direct connection between the M48 motorway and the B4245 in the vicinity of Rogiet / Caldicot would permit access to the M48 / M4 motorway for residents of Caldicot and Rogiet and potentially some Undy / Magor residents. This would avoid travellers needing to pass through Magor and Undy to join the motorway via the [Llanwern] Steelworks Access Road at J23A. The measure would be expected to reduce congestion delays (and associated economic costs) on the B4245 at its junction with the Steelworks Access Road. The measure could facilitate access to Severn Tunnel Junction railway station and any associated Park & Ride facility. The measure is likely to be acceptable to Monmouthshire County Council and a majority of local residents. However, it is likely to receive opposition from some members of community, as a new motorway junction on the M48 could not be constructed to full design standards without significant impact on a number of residential properties. Alternatively, an at-grade roundabout junction could be constructed with only limited impact on residential properties but only if the M48 motorway classification was removed and the route status downgraded. The measure presents technical challenges if social impacts are to be minimised. The M48 / B4245 connection has been considered previously by Monmouthshire County Council and funding has been one obstacle to implementation in the past. Journey times and travel delays would be likely to be reduced for residents of Caldicot, Rogiet, Magor and Undy, especially for those accessing the M4 motorway. A number of residential properties could be directly affected subject to the detailed design of this measure potentially creating local opposition from community groups. Unlikely to address the aims and goals of the M4 CEM Programme; Poor social impact; Presents technical risks. The measure would be expected to reduce congestion delays (and associated economic costs) on the B4245 at its junction with the Steelworks Access Road. The measure could facilitate access to Severn Tunnel Junction railway station and any associated Park & Ride facility. Pass on to Monmouthshire County Council for consideration. 6

8 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 2: Cardiff Peripheral Distributor Road Eastern Bay Link The Eastern Bay Link would connect the existing Queens Gate roundabout in Cardiff Bay to the existing Eastmoors / Southern Way viaduct at Pengam Green with a new dual 2-lane All Purpose highway. This in turn connects to the A48 Eastern Avenue at the Llanederyn Interchange and the eastern gateway to Cardiff and would complete the missing link in Cardiff s [Southern] Peripheral Distributor Road. The absence of the Eastern Bay Link forces traffic onto local routes to enter and exit the south eastern region of Cardiff. The Llanederyn interchange is congested with current traffic volumes and it may be necessary to consider capacity improvements at this location, in addition to the Eastern Bay Link itself. The measure would facilitate access to / from the south eastern industrial, commercial and residential districts of Cardiff subject to appropriate capacity improvements at the A48 Eastern Avenue Llanederyn interchange. The measure does not appear to offer any direct benefit to traffic on the M4 motorway corridor - therefore there appear to be no economic benefits in the context of the Corridor Enhancement Measures Programme. The measure would reduce local traffic congestion, and improve highway safety for both drivers and pedestrians in a significant part of south east Cardiff. Community severance may be reduced with reduced traffic volumes on local roads. The measure has been considered in the past within transport planning documents and would be considered acceptable to Cardiff Council. It would be feasible and deliverable within a previously defined corridor. However, there would be significant ecological and environmental risks to be addressed. Unlikely to address the aims and goals of the M4 CEM Programme; Poor environmental impact. The measure would have potentially significant ecological and environmental impacts, with the primary issue being that much of the route is within the Severn Estuary Special Area of Conservation, Special Protection Area and Ramsar Site. Generally, the removal of traffic from local routes in the south east Cardiff region and the reduction in atmospheric pollution associated with slow moving congested traffic, would have a beneficial environmental impact on communities in south east Cardiff. Pass onto Cardiff Council for consideration. 7

9 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 3: Introduce a travel sustainability checklist to be applied to new developments A Sustainability Checklist for developments can be used by both developers and architects to review good practice and demonstrate the sustainability performance of proposed developments. Planners can also use it to assess a planning application and, through forward planning, compare the sustainability of different development site options. Checklists can be tailored to reflect key local issues and local authorities can choose at what size of development the Checklist should apply. The transport element of a checklist comprises questions that aim to ensure people can reach the facilities they need by designing out the need to travel, encouraging walking and cycling, encouraging public transport use and accommodating private cars in a way that minimises their impact and promotes a reduction in their use. An example may be asking what measures will be taken to ensure that the development enables sustainable and healthy modes of transport such as walking, cycling and public transport? Incentivising or regulating the need to satisfy a travel sustainability checklist for new developments will facilitate and encourage better transport planning ultimately helping to improve connectivity to local and regional employment opportunities, facilities and services by a range of modes. Ensuring that new development adheres to sustainability criteria will help reduce transport costs by facilitating the sustainable movement of people. It will also improve local economies by enabling access to local jobs and services. Encouraging new developments to both facilitate and promote sustainable travel will encourage modal shift and improve local accessibility. Encouraging more walking, cycling and public transport use has benefits for individuals in terms of their health and wellbeing, whilst improving access to local services for all will improve social equality. Introducing a requirement to fulfil sustainability checklists will require mandatory legislation or commitment by the developer to ensure its successful implementation. It is understood that the Welsh Government is planning to introduce One Planet Development guidance, which would include an element on transport. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. By designing out the need to travel and encouraging people to travel by sustainably modes of transport will help reduce the dependence on the private vehicle and encourage a reduction in congestion, pollution and emissions. The overall impact will depend on the scale and compliance of developments to the checklist. Pass onto Welsh Local Planning Authorities for their consideration. 8

10 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 4: Develop School Travel Plans and safe routes to school schemes The development of school travel plans and safe routes to school schemes encourage children to walk and cycle to school through a range of practical and educational measures. Organisations such as Sustrans in particular do much to help deliver programmes that aim to make the school journey safer, healthier and more enjoyable for children. School Travel projects might include cyclist and pedestrian road safety training, walking buses, incentives and promotional activities, curriculum work, highway improvements and the provision of facilities such as cycle parking and waiting shelters. Schools might create a School Travel Plan to set out how they intend to make travel to and from educational sites safer and more sustainable for pupils, parents and teachers. It is therefore an important tool in helping to reduce the number of pupils who travel to school by car (a figure which currently stands at 32% according to the National Travel Survey 2009). Promoting the sustainable transport of children to school will help reduce transport costs for parents and educational programmes will create jobs for trainers. Typically, this kind of intervention can achieve a benefit-cost ratio of 4.6:1. Whilst walking and cycling to school will improve children's health, the associated education programmes will also help improve road safety and reduce child casualties. In addition to safer travel, School Travel Plans help combat social exclusion by encompassing all pupils in its sustainable travel programme. It can also contribute to community cohesion, helping to create safer, more pleasant streets for people to meet and socialise and for children to play. Whilst largely supported, implementing travel education programmes and travel plans will require commitment from parents, teachers, school governors and local councils alike. There is a risk that if this kind of intervention is not accompanied by initiatives that will also encourage parents to use sustainable transport that efforts could be undermined. These interventions are only likely to replace short journeys and would therefore only replace a small number of trips currently made along the M4 corridor. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. Encouraging the sustainable travel of pupils, parent and teachers will help reduce traffic congestion and pollution, ultimately contributing towards making the local community greener and improving the quality of life for everyone. Pass onto Welsh Local Authorities and Local Education Authorities for their consideration. 9

11 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 5: Develop Workplace Travel Plans A workplace travel plan aims to identify and promote possible alternatives to single occupancy car use in order to address the overdependency on car travel to work. A reduction in car miles can not only benefit the environment but can produce financial benefits and productivity improvements, saving both the business and its staff money and time. Mostly they concentrate on improving existing travel choices whilst giving incentives to use more sustainable travel and disincentives to solo car use. Interventions can include: Cycle parking, showers and lockers; Preferential parking for car sharers with 3 or more in the team; A carshare database to promote carpool formation; Discount on bus and rail season tickets; Promotion of and information about alternative modes; The phasing out of company cars and their replacement with clean-fuelled pool vehicles; Company bus services; Telecommuting and teleworking. Business travel incurs costs related to mileage claims; staff time spent travelling; and parking. Delays and unreliability caused by congestion also creates a business cost. Travel plans have the potential to make a strategically important contribution to achieving better use of the transport system and employees can gain a wide range of benefits and savings from an employer s travel plan. A well-designed travel plan can typically cut 15% of commuter car use, which has huge cost saving benefits. Sustrans estimate that investment in workplace cycling facilities has at least a 6:1 benefit-cost ratio. By encouraging staff to travel by sustainable means, staff stress can be reduced and punctuality improved. Staff recruitment and retention can be enhanced, walking or cycling to work can bring health benefits. Employees who are physically active for 20 minutes a day take less than half the annual sick leave of staff who are only active for 10 minutes a day, providing additional economic benefits to the business. Implementing travel plans will require commitment from employers and employees alike. In order to encourage enough businesses to adopt travel plans to make a real difference to mode share, a co-ordinated approach is likely to be required, offering support to businesses that have less internal resources and show encouragement to others. Government and local authorities are under increasing pressure to lead by example to encourage other organisations to develop Business Travel Plans. For some companies the core business revolves around expanding the environmental market and therefore it is in their commercial interest to lead by example to develop environmental products, or approaches. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. Transport is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions, and commuter and business travel constitute nearly 40% of miles driven by car. Measures taken to reduce excessive vehicle use are therefore vital for any business that seeks to make its operations more environmentally sustainable. Increasingly, organisations are exerting pressure on their suppliers to demonstrate green credentials, through ISO14001 or EMAS accreditation. Preparing and delivering measures through a GCP can satisfy corporate environmental objectives as well as bringing real environmental benefits. Pass onto Welsh Local Authorities and Business Groups for their consideration. 10

12 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 6: Promote local and regional car share schemes Car sharing is when two or more people share a car and travel together on a journey. Car sharing is becoming increasingly popular as the benefits are acknowledged: Saves money on transport costs; Fewer cars on the road means less congestion, less pollution and easier parking; Provides a real solution to the transport problems of rural areas; Gives employees and employers more transport options; Reduces the need for a private car. Car sharing can be incentivised through priority 2+ highway lanes and special priority car parking. Initiatives are often promoted and marketed through car share organisations and local authority websites. If everyone who drives on their own to work every day were to catch a lift with someone just once a week, the commuting car journeys would reduce by 20%. Car sharing reduces the need for a private car and reduces the number of trips made by each driver ultimately resulting in savings on transport costs. It can also help to reduce parking costs for businesses. Car sharing helps reduce costs of transport and gives employees more transport options thus providing improved accessibility to those residing in rural areas in particular. Concerns over passenger safety for women sharing with strangers in particular, are often addressed effectively by policies offered by national car sharing companies. It can also improve staff morale by providing a sociable commute. Advertising campaigns are important to the viability of car sharing schemes and local authorities often partner with national car sharing companies to deliver local and regional schemes. Successful car sharing schemes are often coordinated by private organisations. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. Reducing the number of cars on the road will result in less congestion and less pollution, including air, noise and greenhouse gas emissions. Pass onto Welsh Local Authorities and local car sharing scheme companies for their consideration. 11

13 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 7: Locate key services in town centres (not out of town) in order to satisfy government sustainable development policy Town centres are the traditional focus for shops, leisure facilities, financial and professional services, and various community services. As such they attract significant demand and are generally accessible by both public and private means of transport. However, the traditional retailing role of the town centre has come under threat from outof-town developments, which are often less well served by public transport services. Recent government planning guidance has recognised the importance of town centres as sustainable locations for development of community and economic functions - and now emphasises the need to protect town centre vitality and viability. As such, government policy should promote sustainable development principles to encourage sustainable transport movements, thus reducing the need to travel and reducing the reliance on the private vehicle. Locating key services in town centres attracts a large number of trips and as such focusing development in such sustainable locations will attract investment and encourage funding for town centre regeneration purposes, to the benefit of transport infrastructure. Such a policy will not only protect town centre vitality and viability but encourage sustainable transport movements to and from important community and employment destinations. Vibrant town centres can also encourage greater investment in the local economy. Social equality is upheld by focusing development in locations where all consumers are able to access key services and maximise the opportunity to use means of transport other than the car. It is also likely to improve community cohesion, as a vibrant town centre provides space for people to meet and socialise locally. The implementation of this approach will be determined by the level of local and national government commitment shown to sustainable development planning guidance. However, it is unlikely to be possible in the near future to remove competition from existing out of town shopping areas altogether. Further regeneration of town centres will require investment from the private sector, and possibly specific delivery bodies to be set up. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. Focusing key services in sustainable locations accessible to a means of transport, including town centres, will reduce the need to travel and reduce the reliance on the private vehicle. Ultimately this approach will help reduce congestion, pollution and emissions. If there is significant regeneration of town centre areas, this also provides the opportunity to build in improvements to e.g. urban biodiversity and water quality. Pass onto Welsh Local Planning Authorities for their consideration. 12

14 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 8: Encourage local employers and schools to offer more flexible working arrangements Reducing the need to travel is a key element of sustainable travel planning and such an approach can benefit from moves to flexible working and smarter working. New forms of flexible working are emerging as technologies in communication improve and become more affordable. Advances in communications have seen progress in teleworking, hot-desking and virtual offices meaning that where once there were only flexible contracts and flexible working hours, there is now flexibility in location as well. If it is properly implemented, flexible, location independent and mobile working can substantially reduce costs, boost productivity and deliver a host of other benefits to employers, customers and staff. Transport for London has published a Smarter Working Guide in association with Work Wise UK, the national campaign to promote flexible working. The research involved suggests that flexible and location independent working can substantially reduce travelling, both for individuals and for organisations. Being socially and environmentally responsible, apart from its intrinsic value, can also have a powerful marketing impact. It can help raise the profile of organisations and it can help to sell products and services. It can also make the organisation more attractive to potential recruits. Should a culture change progress, future flexibility in location could mean that organisations could locate work in areas of employment need, which may have financial advantages due to lower property and labour costs, and availability of grants and other incentives from government for relocation. Furthermore, some flexible working arrangements, such as hubs, can improve collaboration between companies and encourage innovation. Flexible working arrangements offer employees more choice in the way they organise their time, including spending time with a family, or contributing to the local community, improving wellbeing and cohesion. As well as supporting equal opportunities, new ways of working have the potential to help sustain local economies by locating work in areas of employment need, for example rural communities and post-industrial towns. Surveys demonstrate that the main obstacle to introducing innovative working practices is organisational culture. In addition, the underlying infrastructure of technology and processes must be sound if more flexible working methods are to succeed. The deliverability of this measure would rely heavily on commitment from local authorities, schools and businesses to implement. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. Many studies have been carried out on the travel behaviour of homelocated employees. A recent study by BT into their own staff found home-based workers reduced their commute travel by an average of 3,149 miles. Most studies find mileage reduction between 2,000 and 3,000 miles per year. However, it should be noted that home working is likely to lead to an increase in energy use at home and possibly more short journeys during the day. New ways of working can contribute directly to an employer's environmental policies through business-related transport reduction (commuting and in-work) through local working, home-based working, flexible working hours, electronic access to files, etc. This ultimately helps businesses contribute to reducing congestion, pollution and emissions. Pass onto Welsh Government Business and Economy team, Welsh Local Authorities, Local Education Authorities and Business Groups for their consideration. 13

15 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 9: Provide travel and behaviour information through education programmes Educating people of measures which can change people s decisions about when they travel, where they go and the mode of travel they use will be increasingly important in off-setting the need for new transport capacity. Promotion of the evidence of travel change behaviour can better educate people about the following benefits of sustainable travel: Travel behaviour change measures can provide very high benefits compared to costs, when measured by WelTAG, the method for evaluating transport investment; Changing how we travel can reduce the need for expensive infrastructure; Behaviour change measures can be implemented much more quickly than infrastructure projects; Travel behaviour change measures can achieve genuine carbon reductions; Approaches to encourage walking and cycling can promote the health and wellbeing benefits; Better driving techniques can have economic and environmental benefits through reduced fuel use. Many smarter choice ideas have been developed over the last decade or so to encourage changes in travel behaviour. Typically the goal is a shift from relatively expensive and high energy car use towards lower carbon and more active travel which makes transport more cost effective for individuals and businesses. There is potential to make significant savings to the economy through more active travel in particular: other countries like the Netherlands have achieved huge cost reductions in healthcare by supporting walking and cycling policies and promoting the benefits to communities. This is a low cost option, with no new infrastructure required. Encouraging more people to travel more sustainably can help facilitate modal shift and bring health and wellbeing benefits if people start walking and cycling short distances opposed to using the car. In addition, active modes can improve equality, as they are a cheap mode of transport, equally accessible to most groups. It can also contribute to community cohesion, helping to create safer, more pleasant streets for people to meet and socialise and for children to play. Implementing and delivering travel education programmes will require commitment from businesses, schools and government funding alike. In order to promote this measure, walking and cycling should be at the heart of local transport and public health strategies and plans which will require political commitment. Cycling and walking are normally judged to be appropriate to replace journeys of up to 5 miles and would therefore only replace a small number of trips currently made along the M4 corridor. If this is not accompanied by investment in walking and cycling infrastructure, it may not provide the expected modal shift. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. Educating people to make better decisions that can help reduce the need to travel and encourage people to travel more sustainable will create positive environmental benefits in terms of reducing car use, pollution and emissions. Specifically, there are benefits for the environment in promoting walking and cycling as alternatives to the car - with potential modal shift helping to create safer and more pleasant streets, better air and noise quality and lower carbon emissions, as a result of reduced congestion. Pass onto Welsh Local Authorities, Local Education Authorities and Business Groups for their consideration. 14

16 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 10: Invest in IT and broadband connections to reduce need to travel Reducing the need to travel is a key element of sustainable travel planning and advances in IT communications are central to moves to flexible working and smarter working. New forms of flexible working are emerging as technologies in communication improve and become more affordable. Advances in communications have seen progress in teleworking, remote desktop access, mobile access, hot-desking and virtual offices. Such investments in IT facilitate the potential to implement flexible contracts and flexible working hours, whilst there is now flexibility in location as well. If it is properly implemented, flexible, location independent and mobile working can substantially reduce costs, boost productivity and deliver a host of other benefits to employers, customers and staff. Flexible working and a reduced need to travel offer businesses the potential to make a strategically important contribution to achieving better use of the transport system, whilst both employers and employees can gain a wide range of benefits and savings from reduced travel costs. Furthermore, flexibility in location allows organisations to locate in areas of employment need, which may have financial advantages due to lower property and labour costs, and availability of grants and other incentives from government for relocation. Deployment of next generation broadband will be commercially viable in densely populated areas of Wales, but public sector intervention will be required in rural areas. Investment in ICT offers employees more choice in the way they organise their time, benefiting from a reduced need to travel. As well as supporting equal opportunities, new ways of working have the potential to help sustain local economies by locating work in areas of employment need, for example rural communities and postindustrial towns. Delivery of high speed broadband is less commercially attractive in rural areas; this barrier will need to be overcome through subsidies or alternative delivery models in order to ensure that rural areas have equal access to services. Suitable training will need to be provided to ensure that all groups can benefit equally from next generation broadband. The level to which benefits are reaped will coincide with the level of investment the government, an organisation or individual is willing to commit to. There are often significant financial costs involved in rolling out new technologies and although they may lead to longer term savings in transport costs etc the initial expense can often deter delivery. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. New ways of working, supported by technological advances in communications, can contribute directly to an employer's environmental policies through business-related transport reduction (commuting and in-work) through local working, homebased working, flexible working hours, electronic access to files, teleconferencing etc. This ultimately helps businesses contribute to reducing congestion, pollution and emissions. However, ICT is a significant user of electricity. If combined with investment in low carbon electricity supply then this will help to create a low carbon future. Pass onto Welsh Government Business and Economy team for their consideration. 15

17 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 11: Maintain/Increase River Severn Crossing tolls Determining the costs and benefits of alternative futures for the tolls is far from straightforward. Once the concession agreement has ended (approx 2017) the UK Government has the flexibility over the decision to remove tolls, retain tolls at a level to cover maintenance costs, or increase tolls in order to fund transport infrastructure improvements elsewhere. Increasing the tolls will aim to generate increased revenue that can be reinvested in the maintenance or improvement of Welsh transport infrastructure. However, depending on the effect on demand, a toll increase could also see reduced demand for the route ultimately leading to a reduction in use, congestion and a shift to alternative means of transport to the car. The response of traffic demand to tolls has proved difficult to predict with accuracy. The choices facing transport users are complex and the response to tolls is shaped by a range of local factors and circumstances. A decision would see a trade off between increased revenue and modal shift, with wider economic costs and impacts. Retention of the tolls may benefit from technologies in toll collecting that reduce the economic impact of queuing times. Previous research has demonstrated the importance to businesses of access to suppliers, consumers and labour force. The Severn Crossings effectively reduce this accessibility both in terms of time and cost. There are three elements to cost. These consist of a short time delay for westbound traffic at the toll booths and the cost of the toll itself. In addition, there may be a further perception of cost, inconvenience and delay, especially in the case of businesses considering inward investment into South Wales. An increase in toll prices would exacerbate the current perceived and actual economic costs, although should demand fall congestion and time delays could in fact be reduced along this stretch of the M4. There would be a likely adverse impact on the visitor economy in particular. It is reasonable to expect, for labour markets in close proximity to the bridge, that a toll increase will impact adversely upon the daily commuting and residential patterns of workers on either side of the Severn in terms of increased financial burden. In particular, an increase would place additional financial burden on those less able to pay for the increased toll price. However, should demand reduce, journey time reliability may be improved as a result of reduced congestion. Public transport and cycle alternatives would need to be improved and in particular made accessible to those unable to afford the toll increases. Given current budgetary constraints, an additional source of revenue for re-investment is a potentially attractive option although any review of the toll price structure is unlikely until after the concession agreement ends around However, the decision rests with the Department for Transport despite the importance of the Severn Crossings for Wales and the fact that transport is a devolved policy area. Decisions on the future of the tolls are, therefore, political as much as they are economic. Poor social impact; Significant deliverability issues; This measure would fall outside of the scope of delivery for the M4 CEM Programme. Depending on a user s willingness to pay an increased toll, an increase in toll price could lead to reduced use along this stretch leading to a reduction in congestion, pollution and emissions. In some cases, the effect could be modal shift, which will bring environmental benefits. However, where car users may seek alternative routes congestion hot spots may appear on local roads and redistribute air, noise and emissions pollution elsewhere on the untolled network. Pass onto Welsh Government Economic Advice Unit for their consideration. 16

18 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Considered Measure 12: Reduce/Remove River Severn Crossing tolls Determining the costs and benefits of alternative futures for the tolls is far from straightforward. Once the concession agreement has ended (approx 2017) the UK Government has the flexibility over the decision to remove tolls, retain tolls at a level to cover maintenance costs, or increase tolls in order to fund transport infrastructure improvements elsewhere. Decreasing the tolls will aim to boost the visitor economy and cross border trade. However, this would be at the expense of direct generated from the tolls. Depending on the effect on demand, a toll decrease could ultimately lead to an increase in use, congestion and a reduced incentive for modal shift. The response of traffic demand to tolls has proved difficult to predict with accuracy. The choices facing transport users are complex and the response to tolls is shaped by a range of local factors and circumstances. A decision would see a trade off between decreased revenue and modal shift, with other wider positive economic impacts. Previous research has demonstrated the importance to businesses of access to suppliers, consumers and labour force. A reduction or removal of the Severn Crossings tolls would effectively increase this accessibility both in terms of time and cost. There are three elements to cost. These consist of a short time delay for westbound traffic at the toll booths and the cost of the toll itself. In addition, there may be a further perception of cost, inconvenience and delay, especially in the case of businesses considering inward investment into South Wales. A decrease in toll prices would reduce the current perceived and actual economic costs, although should demand increase congestion and time delays could in fact be exacerbated along this stretch of the M4. A toll increase would improve access to labour markets in close proximity to the bridge, by reducing the financial burden on both commuters and businesses. This will be to the benefit of social equality. Given current budgetary constraints, reducing a source of revenue generated from the tolls is a potentially unattractive option although any review of the toll price structure is unlikely until after the concession agreement ends around 2017 in any case. The decision ultimately rests with the Department for Transport despite the importance of the Severn Crossings for Wales and the fact that transport is a devolved policy area. Decisions on the future of the tolls are, therefore, political as much as they are economic. Significant deliverability issues; This measure would fall outside of the scope of delivery for the M4 CEM Programme. A decrease in toll price could lead to increased use along this stretch leading to an increase in congestion, pollution and emissions. However, a removal of the tolls altogether would remove queuing, thus improving fuel efficiency. Pass onto Welsh Government Economic Advice Unit for their consideration. 17

19 M4 Corridor Enhancement Measures: Discarded Measure Summary Worksheet Discarded Measure 13: Improve collaborative working from in order to reduce the negative impacts of current travel patterns Greater co-ordination and collaboration between adjacent local authorities and/or regions can bring several benefits with regards to transport management and planning. Benefits from co-ordination and collaboration include: improving cross-border/cross-department communications and data sharing; the sharing of technical and project management skills, experience and personnel; the development of common objectives and delivery plans; more sustainable procurement of products services from the supplier market; the sharing of operational and maintenance costs; standardisation of services and technologies within organisations and between partners offering efficiency savings. Collaborative working comes at no direct additional financial cost but is centred on delivering best value outputs. It can aid data sharing and even see the use of shared ICT systems ultimately eliminating the time and costs of unnecessary travel. Better sharing of information with team members both internally and externally, such as partners or delivery bodies, can see the exchanging of information benefit knowledge transfer helping organisations and staff personnel become more skilled, efficient and profitable. Overall this approach helps add value to projects and helps deliver higher quality projects on time and to budget more easily. There is also potential for procurement savings with increased scope for resource pooling. Collaborative working benefits the quality of communication between departments and organisations, helping to improve workplace efficiency, responsiveness, and professionalism. It can reduce competition and antagonism between organisations, departments and individuals, creating a more pleasant working environment and improving wellbeing. Working collaboratively requires an alignment of organisational and individual cultures for the common good of partnership working and aiming to deliver best value outputs. Obstacles to collaborative working include lack of commitment by leadership, cultural differences, capability and skills deficits, and wasteful practices focused on delivering projects on lowest price and not best value. Although the impacts are favourable towards helping meet the aims and goals, the deliverability of this falls outside of the realms of the M4 CEM Programme. Encouraging partnership working reduces the need to travel through more efficient data sharing, when resources can be pooled, and multiple offices can be used by partnering staff. Skills sharing and knowledge transfer can also support innovative practices that may help reduce the environmental impact of projects for no additional cost. It can also lead to a more joined up approach to delivery of an integrated transport system; encouraging modal shift, which results in reduced pollution and emissions. Pass onto Welsh Government Business and Economy team and Local Authorities and for their consideration. 18