Archived decisions

Contact: Karen Walton, ext 6594

1. Summary

1.1 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 closed on 18 September 2002. The draft RTS proposes 25 new policies and this report highlights the key issues of particular interest to South East Hampshire and provides comments in response to the public consultation agreed by the Executive Member for Environment on 10 September 2002.

2. Background

2.1 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.

2.2 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.

2.3 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.

3. Proposed Vision and Objectives

3.1 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".

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

3.3 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.

3.4 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.

3.5 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.

4. Key Proposals

4.1 To deliver the above vision and objectives the Strategy sets out a policy framework supported by a suite of key proposals. The main thrust of these 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 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.

4.2 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.

4.3 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.

4.4 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.

5. National Priorities

5.1 National priorities are:

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

(ii) Rail: Airtrack; and

(iii) A3 Hindhead Improvement.

6. Sub-Regional Priorities

6.1 Sub-regional priorities are:

(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 - it should be noted that this project is the subject of a Major Scheme submission);

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

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

(vii) Outputs from the Thames Valley Multi-Modal Study (under investigation).

6.2 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 to help realise the vision.

7. Comments of the former County Surveyor and County Planning Officer

7.1 The comments below were agreed by the Executive Member for Environment on 10 September 2002 and have been forwarded to SEERA for consideration.

7.2 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 adopted.

7.3 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.

7.4 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.

7.5 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.

7.6 The Strategy introduces a new approach to `Mobility Management' in recognition that major increases in capacity of the transport system will provide relief of little more than a few years' growth. More innovative solutions are therefore needed. With this in mind the Strategy, as proposed, in effect invites 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 considered by SEERA or the Department for Transport, 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.

7.7 Maps in 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 may convey. In any event the County Council has asked for reassurances that these maps will not be used as the basis for decisions concerning the future of the transport network in Hampshire.

7.8 The Draft Spatial Development Strategy for London is also currently being consulted upon. 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.

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

7.10 The draft Regional Transport Strategy proposes 25 new policies, and detailed comments on the ones specific to South East Hampshire are set out in the attached appendix.

Recommendation

That this report be noted.

7455/KAW

APPENDIX

DETAILED COMMENTS ON SPECIFIC

POLICIES - SOUTH EAST HAMPSHIRE

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.

Comment on Policies T6 and T7

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

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.

Comment on Policy T8

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

Comment on Policy T13

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.

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.

Comment on Policy 24

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.