Contact: Jon Foley, ext 7559

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

(i) That the South East England Regional Assembly be thanked for the opportunity to comment on the draft Regional Transport Strategy.

(ii) That the draft Regional Transport Strategy be welcomed in principle and the South East England Regional Assembly be congratulated on providing a much improved strategy document for Regional Planning Guidance.

(iii) That the South East England Regional Assembly be informed of the comments and views expressed in section 11 of the report.

(iv) That attention be drawn to Hampshire County Council's particular concerns regarding the possible introduction of charging for the use of roads in the South East Region, as highlighted in the report.

(v) That the South East England Regional Assembly be informed of the County Council's disappointment that the potential for a mass transit system for the Blackwater Valley area is not recognised in the priority list of schemes for the Western Policy Area.

(vi) That further clarification be sought from the South East England Regional Assembly on its proposal to develop an Interchange concept.

(vii) That the County Council would welcome further dialogue with the South East England Regional Assembly to discuss in detail the range of issues raised in the report in order to agree a way forward.

(viii) That the County Council would welcome further dialogue with the South East England Regional Assembly to discuss the outcomes of the Regional Ports Study, the South East and East of England Regional Air Services Study and the local Multi-Modal studies.

2. Reason

2.1 On 26 June 2002 the South East England Regional Assembly launched its draft Regional Transport Strategy for public consultation prior to submission to the Secretary of State, who will then invite formal representations on the Strategy which may be debated at a Public Examination to be held in 2003. The initial consultation closes on 18 September 2002.

2.2 The attached comments were considered by the Environment Policy Review Committee on 5 June 2002 which supported the recommendations but emphasised the importance of reducing the need to travel. As a result, an amendment to comments on Policy T4 has been made.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 Not to offer a response to the South East England Regional Assembly.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or a Member or Officer consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - Not applicable.

Approved by: Date:

Councillor K B Estlin

7. Summary

7.1 On 26 June 2002 the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) launched its draft Regional Transport Strategy (RTS) for public consultation prior to submission to the Secretary of State, who will then invite formal representations on the Strategy which may be debated at a Public Examination to be held in 2003. The initial consultation closes on 18 September 2002. The draft RTS proposes 25 new policies (see Appendix 1) and this report examines the key issues of particular interest to Hampshire and provides comments in response to the public consultation. Section 11 of this report contains comments of principle while Appendix 2 includes detailed comments on individual policies.

8. Background

8.1 The Secretary of State approved new Regional Planning Guidance (RPG9) for the South East England Region in March 2001. The guidance included an initial RTS but SEERA was asked to undertake an early review of the transport elements of the guidance. The consultation draft RTS covers the period up to 2016.

8.2 There are two phases to the consultation. This first stage presents an early opportunity to help shape the guidance prior to its adoption by the Regional Assembly and subsequent submission to the Secretary of State. The second stage will involve formal representations on the adopted Strategy to the Secretary of State that may be debated in a Public Examination in 2003. It is also the intention that the RTS will be incorporated in a further roll forward of RPG9 to 2026 which is expected to begin in 2003/04.

8.3 The Regional Assembly recognises that the draft Strategy has been produced at a time when several important studies are not yet completed but considers any significant delay in the RTS would be unacceptable. These studies include the Regional Ports Study (SEAPLAG), the South East and East of England Regional Air Services Study (SERAS) and a series of Multi-Modal Studies, including those covering the South Coast, the Thames Valley and London, the corridor to the South West and Wales, the M25 corridor and South Hampshire to the West Midlands. It will be necessary to review the RTS in light of the final reports of all of these studies when they eventually become available and the County Council will engage with SEERA in this respect.

9. Proposed Vision and Objectives

9.1 The RTS builds upon the vision for the South East already identified in RPG9 for the spatial framework, and sets out to deliver the following transport vision:

"We need a Strategy that delivers a better balanced transport system to support economic growth and an improved quality of life for all in a sustainable and socially inclusive manner; and a regional transport system which by 2021 has matched the standards of the best in North West Europe."

9.2 Within this context the proposed objectives are split in two parts to cover `development' and `management' perspectives.

9.3 Development Objectives:

(i) To support the use of previously developed land and existing buildings and encourage urban renaissance.

(ii) To encourage a pattern of less dispersed more vibrant healthy, inclusive and sustainable communities.

(iii) To foster social inclusion.

(iv) To encourage more sustainable use of the region's natural resources.

(v) To develop the region's connections as a basis for the enhancement of its gateway function to Europe and the world.

(vi) To realise economic opportunities, reduce disparities within the region and manage the localised impacts of development in economically buoyant areas.

(vii) To target investment towards supporting higher capacity and less polluting modes of transport.

(viii) To assist in the conversion and enhancement of the region's bio-diversity, and its landscape and built heritage.

9.4 Management Objectives (complementary transport objectives to support delivery of the development objectives):

(i) To increase the reliability and efficiency of the existing transport system.

(ii) To manage the transport system such that it facilitates access and fosters social inclusion.

(iii) To address safety issues, both real and perceived, across the transport system.

(iv) To develop the capability of the transport system to accommodate significant improvements within and through the region.

(v) To reduce congestion and wider environmental and community impacts associated with the use of the transport system.

(vi) To raise awareness of and increase opportunities to positively manage the demand for movement.

9.5 The Strategy recognises that it is not possible to `build' a way out of the transport problems facing the South East but more investment in infrastructure is still needed. The RTS makes the case for substantial increases to improve the region's transport system and, in particular, increasing levels of investment through Local Transport Plans (LTPs) is advocated as good value. However, in addition to this investment the need to persuade businesses and individuals to adjust their travel behaviour, using appropriate forms of pricing and regulation, is also highlighted.

10. Key Proposals

10.1 To deliver the above vision and objectives the Strategy sets out a policy framework (see appendix) supported by a suite of key proposals. The main thrust of these proposals is to target investment into improvements in four strategic corridors on the south, west, north and east edges of the region to provide better inter-regional links to help reduce the reliance on radial routes to London and around London. In addition, the focus will be on developing key transport hubs in the region which are essential for economic activity and reflect the region's national `gateway' role as well as meeting local and regional needs. The key ports and airports in the region identified in the RTS as the main contributors to this `gateway' function are Gatwick Airport, Southampton Airport, the Port of Southampton, the Port of Portsmouth, the Port of Dover, the Channel Tunnel and the Medway Ports. Strategic transport corridors (spokes) linking these hubs and connecting them to other regions will be promoted and supported by prioritising investment.

10.2 Mobility management measures designed to give positive advice on travel planning, tough parking standards, the role of accessibility criteria and the possible introduction of charging in selected areas provide a substantial element of the overall Strategy.

10.3 The Strategy also gives great emphasis to investing in public transport, including local mass transit systems such as trams or dedicated bus networks. Enhancement of the freight capacity of the railway system is promoted, as too is selective investment in the road network where it is necessary to complement mobility management measures by removing key bottlenecks and/or providing relief to heavily polluted urban areas.

10.4 Phased investment packages reflecting these themes will be focused on the region's priority sub-areas, together with improved guidance at a sub-regional level. In particular, South Hampshire and the Isle of Wight have been identified by RPG9 as a Priority Area for Economic Regeneration. As a result the following provisional list of key transport projects has been identified in the RTS for this sub-region.

10.5 National Priorities

(i) Rail: Southampton to West Midlands Upgrade (committed by Strategic Rail Authority - SRA).

(ii) Rail: Airtrack.

(iii) A3 Hindhead Improvement.

10.6 Sub-Regional Priorities

(i) Eastleigh Chord (committed by SRA).

(ii) Southampton Tunnel Gauge Enhancement (under investigation by SRA).

(iii) South Hampshire Rapid Transit (SHRT): Fareham-Gosport (committed by Hampshire County Council).

(iv) SHRT: Portsmouth-Horndean (committed by Hampshire County Council).

(v) SHRT: Future Development of Integrated Systems (under investigation).

(vi) Outputs from the South Coast Corridor Multi-Modal Study (under investigation).

10.7 SEERA acknowledges that the RTS will not, by itself, deliver the solution to the problems of the transport system in South East England. It can make a valuable contribution, but action is also needed by Government, other agencies, local authorities and businesses in order to help realise the vision.

11. Comments of the County Surveyor and County Planning Officer

11.1 The draft RTS is to be welcomed in principle. Whilst there are a number of issues that give cause for concern, the Strategy marks a significant improvement compared to the previous transport strategy, both in terms of its overall approach and the way in which it has been developed. The County Council has been engaged in the process at Member and officer level through the various SEERA groups, working parties and expert Panels, and it is pleasing to see that many views have been taken on board.

11.2 The Strategy is being produced prior to the outcome of the multi-modal studies and before the airport study (SERAS) and the ports study (SEAPLAG) have been finalised. It is important that the outcomes of these studies are eventually reflected in the final Strategy in order to achieve a `joined-up' approach. Therefore, the initial views on the draft RTS have been made against this background and may be subject to change in due course in light of the outcome of these studies.

11.3 In general, the broad thrust of the Strategy and its policies are in keeping with the County Council's own approach to sustainable development, integrated transport and the role of land use and transport in supporting wider social, economic and environmental goals. The higher level vision, aims and objectives of the Strategy should be supported. SEERA has acknowledged that the Strategy, on its own, is not a panacea for the transport problems being faced by the South East and that others will need to play an important part in its delivery. In particular, great store is set on the role of local authorities, and LTPs in particular, in helping to deliver the Strategy. Whilst this responsibility is to be welcomed, it must be commensurate with an adequate funding stream of both capital and revenue money, together with the greater fiscal and legal flexibility needed to deliver the new transport agenda, especially through innovative new partnership arrangements between the public and private sectors.

11.4 The inclusion of the wider SHRT project in the priority list of schemes for the South East is to be welcomed. This is a major step forward in helping to deliver a new concept in public transport provision that will provide a fast, efficient and reliable alternative to car travel in South Hampshire. It is disappointing, however, that although the potential for a similar mass transit system in the Blackwater Valley area receives a positive reference in the body of the text, it is not included in the priority list of schemes for the Western Policy Area. This needs to be rectified.

11.5 The Strategy introduces a new approach to `Mobility Management' in recognition that major increases in capacity of the transport system will provide relief of a little more than a few years growth. More innovative solutions are therefore needed. With this in mind the Strategy as proposed in effect opens the door for the potential to introduce charging mechanisms to control the use of road space in the South East Region (eg congestion charging and road pricing). It is anticipated that at some stage during the Strategy period some locations in the region will need to be subject to some form of charging arrangement. In Hampshire potential locations could include South Hampshire, the Blackwater Valley area and the M3 and M27 motorways. It is important that, in the event that such measures are to be considered by SEERA or the Department for Transport (DfT), a thorough and comprehensive investigation of the implications is undertaken first. This should, among other things, look particularly at the impact on the local and regional economy, the social implications and the effect on the local network caused by traffic diversion. Charging of any type should in any event be preceded by the introduction of suitable high quality alternative modes of public transport. Any such proposal should also be subject to a full and proper consultation. Far more research is also needed on the merits of charging in terms of local impacts, together with possible alternative strategies.

11.6 Maps 3.1 and 3.2 of the draft report illustrate congestion levels on the trunk road network in the Region and the County Council is concerned that they convey an overly optimistic image of the situation within Hampshire. SEERA is asked either to reconsider inclusion or to exercise caution in the use of these maps, given the misleading messages they possibly convey. In any event the County Council asks for reassurances that these maps will not be used as the basis for decisions concerning the future of the transport network in Hampshire.

11.7 The Draft Spatial Development Strategy for London is also currently being consulted upon and is the subject of a separate report on the agenda. In this respect, SEERA is asked to consider strengthening reference within the RTS, to the need for joint working between neighbouring authorities and, where appropriate, regions, which in this context will include London, in the development and implementation of appropriate land use and transport strategies.

11.8 The Regional Assembly is asked to consider including a position statement within the RTS concerning the proposed alterations to the planning system, and in particular the implications for integrated transport and land use planning in the Region.

11.9 The draft Regional Transport Strategy proposes 25 new policies (Appendix 1) and detailed comments on these are set out in Appendix 2.

7323/JF

APPENDIX 1

PROPOSED POLICIES

Policy T1

The transport system in South East England will be developed to support:

i. delivery of the spatial Strategy set out in Regional Planning Guidance by focusing on key regional "hubs" and "spokes", including a regional frame of strategic transport corridors;

ii. a focus on urban renewal and urban renaissance as a means of achieving a more sustainable pattern of development; and

iii. the region's "Gateway" function.

Development plans, Local Transport Plans and other relevant regional strategies which should ensure that their policies and proposals:

i. encourage development that is located and designed to reduce average journey lengths;

ii. promote increased investment so as to achieve a rebalancing of the transport system in favour of non-car modes as a means of access to services and facilities; and

iii. are consistent with, and supported by, a Mobility Management Plan.

Policy T2

The Regional Assembly will encourage investment in Local Transport Plans that improves rural public transport services and other alternative modes of travel, provided that this is part of a wider package of measures to improve rural access to key services.

Policy T3

Development plans, Local Transport Plans and other relevant regional strategies should encourage better use to be made of the existing transport system by maintaining it to an appropriate standard to meet the needs of users. An adequate level of maintenance and revenue support for public transport will be essential to provide the transport quality necessary to fulfil the Strategy.

Policy T4

The priorities for managing the transport system in the region should be to:

i. improve the level of safety across all modes;

ii. improve the overall level of access by addressing issues in a way that takes into consideration gender, ethnicity disabilities and age;

iii. reduce the environmental impact of movement on the urban and rural environments;

iv. support sustained growth of the economy;

v. exploit information technology and intelligent transport systems to rebalance the allocation of capacity within the transport system in favour of non-car modes; and

vi. promote opportunities to reduce the need to travel by improving the local availability of services and e-services.

Policy T5

Regional and sub-regional transport hubs should act as a focus for the integration of national and local rail, bus, cycle and pedestrian networks. Development plans, Local Transport Plans and other relevant regional strategies should:

i. give priority to measures that will increase the level of public transport accessibility;

ii. encourage the development of concentrations of higher density land uses and/or mixed land uses that require a high level of accessibility close to interchange points within Hubs so as to create "Living Centres"; and

iii. give priority within their policies and proposals to the development of high quality interchange facilities as part of the transport hub.

Policy T6

Regional and sub-regional corridors that provide links to, and between transport hubs will be a focus for investment. Proposals to increase the capacity of these transport spokes that link, or provide access to, transport hubs will not be endorsed unless they:

i. support delivery of the spatial Strategy set out in Regional Planning Guidance;

ii. include a Mobility Management Plan as an integral element of the proposal;

iii. support the function of transport Hubs as a focus for economic activity; and

iv. deliver an improvement in journey reliability that supports the rebalancing of the use of the transport system in favour of non-car modes.

Policy T7

A regional frame of strategic transport corridors will be developed in order to assist regional and inter-regional movement, reduce the present concentration of movement on the London area, and assist the regeneration of sub-regional priority areas. Priority for investment to improve movement within these corridors will be given to public transport.

Policy T8

The Regional Assembly:

i. supports the development of Gatwick and Heathrow Airports within the currently agreed levels of growth;

ii. encourages Southampton Airport to sustain and enhance its role as an airport of regional significance; and

iii. will assess the potential of Manston Airport to be developed as an airport of regional significance.

Policy T9

The Regional Assembly will encourage the development of short sea shipping connections linking the region into the wider European network.

Policy T10

The Regional Assembly will support proposals to increase the capacity of the highway network that are of regional or sub-regional significance where they are justified after a thorough examination of options on a multi-modal basis.

Policy T11

Development plans, Local Transport Plans and other relevant regional strategies should include policies and proposals that seek to achieve:

i. a minimum target of a 40% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured in road accidents by 2010 compared to the average for 1994 to 1998;

ii. a minimum target of a 50% reduction in the number of children killed or seriously injured; and

iii. an improvement on the national target of a 10% reduction in the slight casualty rate.

Policy T12

Public transport services should be enhanced. Development plans, Local Transport Plans and other strategies should foster a comprehensive and integrated network of public transport services that:

i. improves the level of public transport accessibility at transport Hubs;

ii. identifies the complementary roles of each form of public transport in providing the network; and

iii. identifies the links between the network and other modes of transport, specifically walking and cycling.

Policy T13

Development and improvement of the public transport network should give priority to:

i. local bus services, delivered in partnership with operators through Quality Bus Partnerships;

ii. intra-regional scheduled coach services and rail services as links with the transport Hubs;

iii. rail services to provide better inter-regional connections; and

iv. mass transit systems, where justified by density of population.

Policy T14

Development plans, Local Transport Plans and other relevant regional strategies should:

i. focus development in existing urban areas, and positively encourage the development of local services so as to increase the modal share of trips made by walking and cycling;

ii. give priority to the development of a network of safe, direct and continuous pedestrian routes that provide access to local services and public transport;

iii. include policies and proposals for existing urban areas that give priority to the needs of pedestrians;

iv. give priority to the development of a network of safe, direct and continuous cycling routes that connect residential areas with the principal services and facilities within an urban area; and

v. ensure that local cycle networks integrate with the National Cycle Network.

Policy T15

The development of Mobility Management measures is a key component of the Strategy. Development plans and/or Local Transport Plans should therefore include a Mobility Management Plan that sets out the balance to be sought between the following elements of the transport system:

i. the allocation and management of highway space used by individual modes of travel;

ii. the provision and management (including pricing) of car parking, both off and on-street;

iii. the availability and management of public transport services;

iv. the availability and quality of pedestrian and cycling routes;

v. the contribution of charging initiatives.

The plans for Mobility Management should:

vi. support delivery of the spatial Strategy;

vii. be supported by the use of accessibility criteria where appropriate;

viii. be supported by the availability of an integrated and comprehensive travel planning advice service.

Policy T16

Public funds to increase the capacity of the transport system at a regional or sub-regional level should be focused on projects that are supported by a Mobility Management Plan.

Policy T17

Development plans and/or Local Transport Plans should identify ceilings for the maximum level of car parking associated with new development, provided these are linked to an integrated programme of public transport improvements.

Policy T18

Development plans and/or Local Transport Plans should:

i. adopt maximum levels of parking provision for non-residential developments, linked to an integrated programme of public transport improvements, that are between 30% and 100% of the maximum level of provision set out in PPG13; and

ii. include policies and proposals for the management of the total parking stock within transport Hubs that are consistent with these limits.

Policy T19

Local Transport Authorities should ensure that their Local Transport Plans submitted to Government in 2005:

i. identify those major travel generating developments, both existing and proposed, for which Travel Plans should be developed;

ii. require all major travel generating developments to have a Travel Plan agreed and implemented by 2010; and

iii. include proposals to establish Transport Planning Advice Centres as part of the Mobility Management Plan associated with the transport Hubs.

Policy T20

The railway system should be developed to carry an increasing share of freight movements. In particular, the Regional Assembly considers that priority should be given to providing enhanced rail freight capacity on the following corridors (in priority order):

i. Southampton to West Midlands;

ii. Dover/Channel Tunnel to London; and

iii. Great Western Main Line.

Policy T21

Development plans, Local Transport Plans and other relevant regional strategies should:

i. use Freight Quality Partnerships as the most appropriate mechanism for promoting the vitality of urban and rural areas by securing more efficient distribution of goods, whilst protecting the local environment and amenity;

ii. safeguard wharves, depots and other sites which are, or could be, critical in developing infrastructure for the movement of freight, particularly by rail or water;

iii. safeguard sites adjacent to railways, ports and rivers for development, particularly new inter-modal facilities, that are likely to maximise the usage of movement of goods by rail and sea;

iv. include policies and proposals that encourage development with a high generation of freight and commercial movement to be located close to inter-modal freight facilities, rail freight facilities, or port and wharves.

Policy T22

The Regional Assembly advocates that the levels of capital investment outlined in the Government's 10 Year Transport Plan are sustained beyond the ten year period, and increased. They should be accompanied by significant increases in revenue funding, in order to deliver the vision and objectives of this Strategy.

Policy T23

The Regional Assembly will encourage and support the development of innovative integrated management partnerships to improve the delivery of transport services at a sub-regional level.

Policy T24

The Strategy will give priority to investment in the sub-regional areas identified in Regional Planning Guidance. A provisional list of projects for each sub-region is set out in Tables 11.1 to 11.6 (see Annex 2). Development plans should include policies that safeguard delivery of:

i. the specific investment proposals identified in this Strategy;

ii. other major projects where they are consistent with the spatial Strategy.

The Regional Assembly will work with local authorities, the Strategic Rail Authority, the Highways Agency, statutory environmental bodies, public transport operators, the business community and other key stakeholders to deliver the identified proposals of regional or sub-regional significance.

Policy T25

The Regional Assembly will use this Strategy to advocate South East England's case for priority investment as part of the Trans European Network (TENS) programme, reflecting the region's critical role in North West Europe.

APPENDIX 2

DETAILED COMMENTS ON PROPOSED POLICIES

Policy T1

1. This Policy puts in place guidance on spatial distribution and introduces the concept of regional hubs, spokes and a framework of strategic corridors to support the gateway function of the region. It also recognises the important role of development plans and LTPs as part of the delivery process. Due to Hampshire's strategic geographic location on the south coast, Policy T1 will have a significant effect on the County Council's spatial and transport strategy. The ports of Portsmouth and Southampton and Southampton International Airport have rightly been identified as key components of the region's infrastructure and major contributors to the gateway function. However, it is important that for this policy to succeed significant investment will be needed to maintain and improve the transport infrastructure and services to these facilities, including the Trans-European Network in Hampshire. In addition, it is also important to appreciate that the efficiency of the strategic network can be greatly improved by investment in local schemes and initiatives off these corridors, and therefore the role of the LTP in delivering this policy will be crucial.

2. Although not mentioned in the text, Basingstoke has been identified as a regional hub on the accompanying plans to the RTS. The reason for this is unclear, given that both in road and rail terms the additional hub function of Basingstoke is limited in comparison to other locations. It is also noted that there is no `spoke' linking Basingstoke with Reading. Further discussion with SEERA, the Government Office for the South East (GOSE) and the DfT is needed on this, and also to identify how best funding can be targeted and prioritised to deliver this policy in Hampshire.

3. In spatial strategy terms, development pressures in the region are accentuated where one highway or planning authority supports development but where there is a significant impact on a neighbouring authority, particularly in terms of traffic on the local road network. For example, development in West Berkshire such as that at New Greenham Park will have an effect on Hampshire's road network, particularly the A339 and local communities near the boundary. With the authorities having separate LTPs and development plans, the impact of such large scale developments cannot be evaluated by individual authorities satisfactorily. The identification of hubs as a focus for transport activity (such as Basingstoke) may exacerbate this problem. A wider approach would take into account the transport issues arising from large developments, irrespective of administrative area. The County Council would welcome the opportunity to discuss how this might be reflected in the RTS.

Policy T2

4. This policy encourages investment in rural transport through the LTP and is to be supported, provided that the funding stream from Government for local authorities is forthcoming and maintained at an appropriate level.

Policy T3

5. Policy T3 puts the onus on LTPs and development plans to make best use of the existing transport system. This is in line with the County Council's own approach. It also promotes increased investment in highway maintenance and revenue support for public transport. However, the current level of Government funding, although substantially increased, is still inadequate to meet the backlog in maintenance or the increasing revenue demand for socially necessary public transport. The advent of the Single Capital Pot arrangement for local government means that investment in such things will also need to compete and be balanced with other demands, including those relating to education and social services, unless there is a significant increase in the overall pot.

Policy T4

6. This policy is in line with the County Council's own approach and should be supported, especially in relation to harnessing opportunities to exploit new technologies and Intelligent Transport Systems.

7. While the County Council welcomes the recognition this policy gives to reducing the need to travel through promotion of e-services the RTS is unable to "improve the local availability of services" as suggested in the draft document. The latter should be addressed through stronger linkages with the spatial strategy and the objectives of SEEDA. Furthermore SEERA is asked to consider including "reducing the need to travel" in the development and management objectives referred to in sections 9.3 and 9.4 of this report.

Policy T5

8. Policy T5 provides the specific policy for regional and sub-regional hubs. It again requires that LTPs and development plans are used to increase development densities, increase accessibility and develop new high quality interchange facilities. This policy encapsulates the principles of Transport Development Areas and should be supported but it is important to recognise that such hubs will attract development, and consequently traffic, so it is important to have robust transport plans and the necessary funding to deliver them in place. Attention is also drawn to comments made at paragraphs 11.9 and 11.10 in this respect.

Policies T6 and T7

9. The `spokes' serving the proposed hubs and the regional and sub-regional transport corridors are covered by these policies. It is sensible that these transport corridors operate efficiently and effectively for the hub concept to work properly, and therefore these policies should be supported. They not only promote economic activity in and around the hubs, and the economic regeneration area of South Hampshire, but should also help improve journey times generally for other movements in and around Hampshire. Targeted investment of this kind will help improve the economic attractiveness of the locality. Moreover, the support for greater investment into public transport is also to be welcomed. In addition, ways of improving access links to the Isle of Wight should be considered.

Policy T8

10. This policy highlights the important role of airports as part of the transport system and in particular the regional significance of Southampton International Airport. This is to be welcomed, however the need for local authorities and the airport management to develop a comprehensive strategy to deal with the anticipated increase in the number of users and identify the most appropriate new infrastructure required to serve the airport, particularly by rail, should also be recognised.

11. The implications for Hampshire of the South East and East of England Regional Air Services Study (SERAS) have yet to be determined and SEERA is therefore asked to review the detail of this policy only after the implications of the SERAS findings have been fully assessed.

12. In any event SEERA is asked to ensure that the RTS refers to the need for due consideration to be given to the access and more general environmental implications of any proposals arising from SERAS. The role of those airports in close proximity to the region should also be referred to within this policy, particularly where they have an impact within the area. In the case of Hampshire this would include Bournemouth International Airport which falls just outside both the county and regional boundary.

13. It is also hoped that the Regional Assembly will press the case for the Airtrack rail proposal to be linked to Hampshire by means of through trains, to provide a real alternative to the M25 for the many residents of the county, and those travelling through Hampshire, who use London Heathrow.

Policy T9

14. Short sea shipping is to be encouraged; although its likely take-up to any significant degree may well require the use of incentives that make such movement more attractive and economically viable. The County Council will engage further with SEERA on this issue as part of the consultation on the findings of the Regional Ports Study being managed by SEAPLAG which will inform the content of this policy within the final RTS.

Policies T10 and T11

15. The policy on highway capacity is in keeping with the County Council's own approach and the targets relating to road safety reflect the nationally set targets that are already adopted for Hampshire's LTP.

Policies T12 and T13

16. The support for public transport is to be welcomed. The LTP is seen as the focus for many public transport proposals in the RTS, especially those bus-related. The current constraints of the Competition Act limit what could be potentially achieved through innovative partnership arrangements with public transport operators. It would be helpful if this issue was recognised in the Strategy and pursued by the Regional Assembly.

17. The policy on mass transit is particularly important if public transport is to help achieve the quantum change in modal shift needed for the transport system to operate effectively. This provides particularly important support in terms of a policy context for the Hampshire mass transit projects including SHRT and any proposals that may be forthcoming for the Blackwater Valley.

18. The County Council is keen to explore the interchange concept and looks forward to the opportunity of discussing this further with the Regional Assembly.

Policy T14

19. This policy on cycling and walking is in keeping with the County Council's own approach and is to be supported.

Policies T15 and T16

20. These policies propose a new approach to managing demand called `Mobility Management' as one of the key components of the overall Strategy. Mobility Management measures address, among other things, the sensitive issues of the allocation of road space and the use of charging initiatives. In addition, the use of accessibility criteria and the establishment of a comprehensive travel planning advice service is also advocated. The onus to develop and introduce these initiatives is placed on local authorities through their development plans and LTPs. Although the County Council, as a Centre of Excellence, is well placed to deal with these initiatives, they will not be without serious resource implications. There is also concern that the interpretation of Mobility Management will vary considerably across the region, and therefore there is a need for clear guidance on this issue to ensure consistency in its application.

Policies T17 and T18

21. These policies relate to parking. The requirement that development plans and LTPs should identify maximum parking levels for new development is in keeping with PPG13. The car parking standards recently adopted by the County Council for use in Hampshire have already taken this on board.

22. The desire by SEERA to set parking standards that are significantly below the maxima quoted in PPG13 will require a step change in the provision of capacity of non-car modes of transport if overall accessibility is to be maintained. The need to rebalance the transport system is supported and the Hampshire approach is to promote reductions from PPG13 standards only at locations where accessibility is, or can be made to be, of a higher order in a sustainable way. Nevertheless, it remains a matter of concern that the privately-owned bus and train network may be incapable of the quick and widespread expansion needed to meet the challenge posed by reduced parking provision at new developments.

23. The sequential approach and management of total parking stock are both supported as a means of optimising this resource, but the imposition of blanket 50% and 70% quotas on PPG13 maxima for parking provision in the South East appears to be unduly inflexible. The alternative would be a sliding scale based on accessibility levels determined by local authorities themselves to reflect local circumstances and conditions. The County Council would be pleased to share and discuss its parking strategy with SEERA as a means of developing this approach further.

24. It is understood that SEERA may be revising its approach to the final version.

Policy 19

25. Policy 19 is to be supported but the Assembly must recognise that the implementation of comprehensive Travel Planning Advice Centres, real-time travel information and individualised journey planning is resource- intensive and costly. Provision must be made for this in future LTP settlements otherwise it could be introduced at the expense of infrastructure and other services. Hampshire County Council is well placed to disseminate advice to other authorities on this issue, given its history and expertise on Intelligent Transport Systems and in developing workplace travel plans in partnership with the business community.

Policies T20 and T21

26. These specific policies on freight are to be welcomed, particularly the provision for priority to be given to enhancing rail freight capacity on the Southampton to West Midlands line. However, improvements in freight facilities may also be needed elsewhere in the county and the region, and in this respect the outcome of the multi-modal studies will be key. The use of Quality Freight Partnerships is to be supported, as are the policies to safeguard land for the development of freight facilities, however the Regional Assembly may wish to consider referring to the potential for transhipment facilities, particularly for road to road interchange, within Policy T21.

Policy 22

27. Sustained or enhanced funding to support the Strategy policies and initiatives is essential. It is helpful that the RTS appreciates the need not only for more capital funding but also the importance of increased revenue support. More flexibility to link increased revenue to the LTP would be welcomed. It is also helpful that the current skills shortage in the South East is recognised and, unless addressed, could jeopardise the ability of local government, in particular, to deliver the outcomes desired by the RTS in the required time frame.

Policy 23

28. This policy sets down a new approach to transport delivery through Integrated Management. This is a concept of the County Council now taken up by SEERA in a positive way. It is also being actively promoted by the Executive Member for Environment and should be strongly supported. It highlights new and innovative partnership arrangements designed to gain added value from investment programmes, together with shared aims, objectives and priorities among a diverse range of potential stakeholders.

Policy 24

29. Priority for investment is to be given to the sub-regional areas identified in RPG9, including South Hampshire, and this is to be welcomed. It is important, however, that other areas are not neglected, especially the Blackwater Valley sub-region and the rural towns and villages of Hampshire. The County Council would be pleased to work with SEERA and other key stakeholders to help develop and deliver the infrastructure and services identified in the RTS.

Policy 25

30. Hampshire is a good node for the Trans European Networks on the south coast and therefore plays an important role in access to mainland Europe and beyond. It is important that every effort should be made to secure funding to ensure that the communication networks are maintained to the highest standard.