Contact: Jon Foley, ext 7559

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

(i) That the Secretary of State be thanked for providing the County Council with the opportunity to comment on the draft Regional Transport Strategy and the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) be congratulated on preparing a much improved transport strategy for the region.

(ii) That the Panel Secretary be informed of the County Council's detailed comments relating to the individual policies proposed in the draft, as set out in Appendix 2 of this report.

(iii) That the Panel Secretary be informed of the County Council's strong support for those policies and initiatives identified in paragraph 10.2 of this report.

(iv) That the Panel Secretary's attention be drawn to the County Council's concerns set out in paragraphs 10.3 to 10.13, the key elements of which are summarised in the following points.

(v) That the County Council remains unclear about the potential implications associated with the `transport designation' of certain areas within Hampshire, including Basingstoke and Southampton International Airport as hubs and Farnborough as a transport interchange. Furthermore, the County Council is concerned that the south coast part of the Regional Frame implies the corridor has strategic significance. This is contrary to the outcomes from the South Coast Multi-Modal Study which confirmed movements in the corridor are of a local nature. The latter needs emphasising in the text.

(vi) While welcoming the principle of investment within sub regional areas, that the County Council is concerned that the Strategy does not acknowledge that the South Coast Multi-Modal Study (SoCoMMs) did not cover the whole of southern Hampshire. The outcomes from SoCoMMs are therefore only part of the picture in this area.

(vii) While acknowledging that this is an emerging issue nationally, the County Council is disappointed the proposed Strategy has not taken the opportunity to clarify the relationship between itself, the Regional Spatial Strategy, the Local Transport Plan and the Local Development Frameworks within the region.

(viii) That the County Council is concerned that proposed policies on ports and airports are premature, given that the outcomes of the recent regional studies into these issues have not yet been subject to stakeholder discussion. This needs to be given greater acknowledgement in the text.

(ix) That the County Council is concerned over the emphasis given within the draft Strategy to congestion charging, particularly within southern Hampshire. Significant regional and local research must be the precursor to any decisions taken in this respect. The text should be amended to reflect the latter.

(x) That the County Council requests an amendment to the text supporting the car parking policy to emphasise that the provision of extra parking at stations should be seen in the context of the local transport situation and not simply as a means of promoting rail travel.

(xi) While acknowledging this was an outcome from SoCoMMs, the County Council asks for confirmation that the text should reflect that any proposal for a new station at Eastleigh MDA will be seen in the context of a range of local and strategic transport issues, including the aspirations to upgrade the rail services in this area as part of South Hampshire Rapid Transit. Furthermore, that the Panel Secretary be informed of potential uncertainties regarding the future of the MDA proposals.

(xii) That the Panel Secretary be informed of the County Council's interest in contributing to the Public Examination and any informal Panel discussions that may precede that.

(xiii) That this report be forwarded to the next meeting of the Environment Policy Review Committee for information.

2. Reason

2.1 SEERA published a draft Regional Transport Strategy (DRTS) for first stage consultation in early summer 2002. The item was reported to the Executive Member for Environment on 10 September 2002 and the response forwarded to SEERA on 18 September 2002.

2.2 SEERA revised the DRTS following this initial consultation and it was passed to the Secretary of State in January 2003. The Secretary of State is now conducting the second phase of consultation and SEERA has written to around 2000 key regional interests. Comments are required by the Panel Secretary by 17 April 2003.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 To offer an alternative response to the Panel Secretary.

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. Background

7.1 On 20 January 2003 the Secretary of State invited 2,000 stakeholders to contribute to the consultation on the revised Draft Regional Transport Strategy (DRTS) from the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA). This represents the second phase of consultation on the DRTS following the first round of consultation to which the County Council responded in September 2002. A Public Examination on the Strategy has been provisionally arranged for July 2003 and may be preceded by informal Panel discussions. The current round of consultation closes on 17 April 2003.

7.2 The revised DRTS proposes 19 policies (see Appendix 1) and a separate supporting statement. The main body of this report examines the key issues of particular interest to Hampshire. A series of detailed comments on individual policies are contained within Appendix 2. The majority of the comments made by the County Council in response to the first phase of consultation have been addressed; however, instances where this is not the case are referred to, as appropriate, within this report. It should be noted that although the presentation of the draft has changed, there are no fundamental differences between the policies in the previous and current versions.

7.3 An informal discussion has also taken place with SEERA to clarify a number of outstanding points.

7.4 This report will be forwarded to the next meeting of the Environment Policy Review Committee for information.

8. Proposed Vision and Objectives

8.1 The DRTS builds upon the vision for the South East, already identified in Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) 9 for the spatial framework, and sets out to deliver the following transport vision:

(i) "Our vision is a high quality transport system to act as a catalyst for continued economic growth and provide for an improved quality of life for all in a sustainable and socially inclusive manner; a regional transport system which by 2021 matches the standards of the best in North West Europe."

8.2 Within this context the DRTS recognises the following set of regionally and spatially specific objectives intended to guide the integration of spatial and transport planning in the region:

(i) to improve transport infrastructure within and to the Thames Gateway to maximise regeneration potential and encourage economic development;

(ii) to improve strategic road and rail links within and to the Western Policy Area to maintain economic success;

(iii) to improve road and rail links along the South Coast Corridor to improve spatial connectivity and realise economic opportunities to reduce disparities within the region;

(iv) to support economic development in East Kent through investment in improved accessibility;

(v) to take forward transport infrastructure proposals required to support development in the growth areas of Milton Keynes and Ashford;

(vi) to develop road and rail links that improve inter and intra-regional connectivity while avoiding the need to interchange in London;

(vii) to improve and develop more sustainable transport connections to the region's key ports, airports and international rail stations as a basis for the enhancement of its gateway function to Europe and the rest of the world;

(viii) to facilitate urban renaissance and foster social inclusion by bringing forward measures that encourage modal shift, with particular emphasis given to significantly improving the attractiveness of local public transport services;

(ix) to reduce the wider environmental, health and community impact associated with the transport system by bringing forward measures to positively manage the transport system in urban areas that reduce our dependence on the private car.

8.3 The DRTS recognises that the realisation of the vision and objectives will require action and doing nothing is not an option. The DRTS suggests the ultimate solution will require the integration of increased investment and more active management of the capacity and use of the transport system into a single strategy - referred to in the DRTS as `Invest and Manage'.

9. Key Elements of `Invest and Manage'

9.1 To deliver the above vision and objectives the Strategy identifies a series of policies, which are included in Appendix 1. These policies are intended as the mechanism by which the key elements of `Invest and Manage' will be delivered.

9.2 The main thrust of the DRTS 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 DRTS 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.

9.3 The concept of `Mobility Management' forms a substantial element of the overall Strategy. The approach is one that embraces the need to develop the transport system in a way that considers, more positively, the inter-relationship between all elements of the transport system, the focus being one of maintaining and, where appropriate, improving the overall level of accessibility to goods and services in a way that reduces dependence on the car and lorry. Greater emphasis is also given to the need for travel planning advice centres.

9.4 The Strategy also places great emphasis on investing in public transport, including local mass transit systems, Bus Quality Partnerships and interchange between public transport and other modes.

9.5 The DRTS also identifies the potential role of charging, together with that of the management of car parking. The DRTS confirms that the legislative framework now exists within which local transport authorities can introduce either road user charging or workplace parking levies. Furthermore, the Strategy identifies an overall approach for managing the car park stock and advocates a partnership approach between county and district councils.

9.6 Finally, the Strategy recognises the need for an efficient and effective freight distribution system as key to the realisation of sustainable economic growth.

9.7 Phased investment packages reflecting these themes will be given a sub-regional focus. 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 key transport projects have been identified within the DRTS investment frameworks for the sub-regions within Hampshire (their current status is shown in brackets):

(i) Western Policy Area Investment Framework

Rail: Southampton-West Midlands Upgrade (committed)

Blackwater Valley Mass Transit (proposed for investigation)

Outputs from A34 Multi Modal Study (awaiting Study)

(ii) South Hampshire and Isle of Wight Investment Framework

Rail: Southampton-West Midlands Upgrade (committed)

Rail: Eastleigh Chord (committed)

Rail: Southampton Tunnel Gauge Enhancements (under investigation)

Rail: New Station at Eastleigh MDA (under investigation)

Rail: Southampton Airport Parkway Upgrade (under investigation)

M27 Junction 5 (under investigation)

M27 Improvements (under investigation)

Workplace Parking Charging in main urban areas (under investigation)

Urban Congestion Charging: Portsmouth/Southampton (under investigation)

SHRT: Fareham-Gosport-Portsmouth (committed)

SHRT: Portsmouth-Horndean (committed)

SHRT: Further development of integrated systems (under investigation)

SHRT: Dual tracking between Fareham-Botley (under investigation)

SHRT: LRT/Heavy Rail Fareham-Southampton (under investigation)

9.8 In preparing the DRTS account has been taken of the financial resources that are likely to be available. In addition to the indicative programme set out in the Government's Ten Year Plan, SEERA has sought advice from the Highways Agency and Strategic Rail Authority. Furthermore, the DRTS has been prepared in the knowledge of the current Local Transport Plan allocations up to 2005. The other issue acknowledged as key to the achievement of the DRTS objectives is a potential shortfall in the skills required in the transport planning and development sector. The `Regional Transport Skills Partnership' is proposed within the DRTS as a means of tackling this matter.

9.9 SEERA acknowledges that the final 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 the Government, other agencies, local authorities and businesses to help realise the vision.

10. Comments of the Director of Environment

10.1 There are no significant differences between the current and previous versions of the DRTS. 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.

10.2 The DRTS proposes 19 policies and detailed comments on these are set out in Appendix 2. The County Council strongly supports a number of the initiatives within the Strategy as identified below:

(i) the move within the revised DRTS to place much greater emphasis on the Local Transport Plan as a delivery mechanism;

(ii) the concept of the regional frame, hubs, spokes, transport interchanges and `living centres' (with the exception of comments in paragraph 10.4), though the latter will require additional weight in any revisions to the Regional Spatial Strategy to clarify their status in land use terms;

(iii) mobility management represents an innovative approach to integrating transport planning in the region;

(iv) greater emphasis being placed on travel planning and travel planning advice centres;

(v) the investment frameworks identified for the sub-regions of the Western Policy Area and South Hampshire;

(vi) the emphasis given within the DRTS to the concept of integrated management partnerships is seen as an endorsement of the Solent Transport initiative.

10.3 There are, however, a number of elements of the DRTS which give the County Council cause for concern and these are set out below.

10.4 In its response to the previous round of consultation on the DRTS the County Council requested that the final RTS provided better explanation of certain aspects contained therein. While acknowledging there is some explanation in Annex 2 of the supporting statement, the implication of the designations for the regional frame, hubs, spokes, gateways and transport interchanges remains unclear. Interpretation could vary across the region, which could subsequently lead to problems particularly close to administrative boundaries.

10.5 The role of the south coast part of the regional frame requires additional explanation in the supporting statement to confirm it does not have any strategic significance. Furthermore, the Panel Secretary is asked to clarify why, within item (iii) of the DRTS objectives, improvements to road and rail links along the south coast corridor are specifically mentioned.

10.6 With the proposed changes to the planning system (and retention of the Local Transport Plan) the function of land use and transport planning at sub-regional level remains unclear. In this context, it is disappointing that the revised DRTS has not been taken as the opportunity to clarify the relationship between itself, the Regional Spatial Strategy, the Local Transport Plan and the Local Development Frameworks within the region. In its response to the previous round of consultation on the DRTS, the County Council asked for a position statement in this respect to be included in any revision. The County Council does however acknowledge that as an emerging issue this relationship may be difficult to clarify at this stage.

10.7 While welcoming the greater emphasis put on the Local Transport Plan by the DRTS, it is important to note that the achievement of transport strategy objectives is also reliant on revenue funding and the actions of the private sector (notably bus and rail operators). In this context, the County Council is concerned that the policy in the previous version of the DRTS (T22) relating to the need for capital and revenue funding has been deleted from the main policy documented. This is a particular concern with recent announcements on the availability of revenue funding and also the reduction in rail investment.

10.8 The policies relating to airports and ports are premature, given that the outcomes of the recent regional studies into these issues have not yet been subject to stakeholder discussion. It is therefore suggested that Policy T7 (airports) and Policy T8 (ports) be amended to possibly avoid reference to specific locations, and the matter should be resolved and incorporated within the final RTS, through stakeholder dialogue as part of the roll forward of the Regional Planning Guidance which commences in autumn 2003.

10.9 The revised DRTS has strengthened its position on the role of congestion charging within the region as a whole. The supporting text also indicates that Hampshire's next Local Transport Plan should consider the South Coast Multi-Modal Study recommendations that the role of congestion charging should be pursued in southern Hampshire - or it should promote an alternative approach that delivers the same level of restraint. While acknowledging there may be a role for congestion charging within Hampshire as part of an integrated transport strategy, the County Council is keen that regional and local research is undertaken prior to deciding on its application. It is therefore suggested that the reference to proposals within Hampshire should be broadened to "Demand management measures" so as to keep all options open pending the outcome of further work. Furthermore, for congestion charging schemes to be publicly acceptable the availability of high quality travel choices must be a prerequisite. The supporting text to this policy should therefore recognise the need for local authorities, with support from SEERA as appropriate, to secure the capital and revenue funding required in advance of the introduction of any charging schemes.

10.10 The text supporting the parking policy advocates the provision of additional car parking at railway stations. In its response to the previous phase of consultation on the DRTS a request was made by the County Council to reword the supporting text based on the view that the provision of extra parking at stations should be seen in the context of the local transport situation and not just as simply a means of promoting rail travel. Town centre and city centre station locations are often sites where additional long stay car parking is counterproductive to local objectives of reducing the growth of car usage and encouraging alternative travel modes. Similarly, long distance car journeys to car parks such as Southampton Airport Parkway for onward rail journeys to London produces extra motorway journeys and at the same time a London commuter based parking regime that seriously inhibits use of the station as a local interchange. The County Council will shortly be producing its own strategy on this issue in partnership with all interested parties. This will include consideration of strategic and local demands and issues, looking at stations as transport generators and embracing the potential role of travel plans for stations and groups of stations in an area. The County Council looks forward to discussing the principles of the latter further with SEERA in due course.

10.11 The revised DRTS proposes a new station at Eastleigh Major Development Area (MDA) which was an outcome from the South Coast Multi-Modal Study. The Panel Secretary should be advised that the future of the MDA is in doubt, particularly as it is not being promoted by Eastleigh Borough Council within the current review of their local plan. However, should the MDA proceed, it is important that any proposals for a new station are seen in the context of local and strategic transport issues, including aspirations to upgrade the rail services in this area as part of South Hampshire Rapid Transit.

10.12 While welcoming the principle of the approach to investing in sub-regional areas, the County Council is concerned that the investment framework related to South Hampshire (Table 3 of the Strategy) is based largely on the outcomes from the South Coast Multi-Modal Study, which did not cover the whole of southern Hampshire, and the County Council is anxious that other issues in the area, such as those related to the A34 north from Southampton, are not overlooked. The Panel Secretary should be advised of the County Council's desire that this be reflected in the text.

10.13 While acknowledging the mention of the proposed national park designations (South Downs and New Forest) within paragraph 3.33 and Maps 3.5 of the supporting statement, the County Council is disappointed that the special transport issues likely to be faced within these areas are not recognised. A transport policy framework for these areas (particularly where they cross administrative boundaries) should be included in the final RTS within which specific policies and measures can be developed.

10.14 Inevitably a document of this nature includes controversial elements that could benefit from strong endorsement or greater clarification. It is with this in mind that the Panel Secretary should be notified of the County Council's interest in being represented at the Public Examination, or any informal Panel discussions that may be held in advance of that.

7870/JF

APPENDIX 1

PROPOSED POLICIES

POLICY T1

Priority will be given to investment in the transport system that supports delivery of the spatial strategy by:

i. developing the network of regional hubs and spokes (Map 1);

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

iii. supporting the region's gateway function.

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should ensure that their policies and proposals:

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

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

iii. are consistent with, and supported by, appropriate mobility management measures.

POLICY T2

The Regional Frame (Map 2) will act as a focus for the development of selected strategic transport corridors within the region in order to assist in regional and inter-regional movement, reduce the present concentration of movement on the London area, and assist in the regeneration of sub-regional priority areas. Priority for investment to improve movement along these corridors will be given to public transport.

POLICY T3

Local transport plans should develop innovative approaches to public transport in rural areas that reflect the particular and longer-term social and economic characteristics of the region.

POLICY T4

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals that facilitate sustained economic growth, environmental enhancement and promote social inclusion by giving priority to:

i. maintenance of the existing transport system;

ii. improvements to the overall level of safety;

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

iv. reducing the environmental impact of movement on the natural and built environment.

POLICY T5

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals that support and develop the role of transport hubs by:

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

ii. encouraging the development of concentrations of higher density land

iii. uses and/or mixed land uses that require a high level of accessibility so as to create `living centres';

iv. giving priority to the development of high quality interchange facilities between all modes of transport.

POLICY T6

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals that support and develop the role of regional spokes by:

i. giving priority to providing a level of service that supports delivery of the spatial strategy;

ii. supporting the role of transport hubs as a focus of economic activity;

iii. delivering an improvement in journey reliability that supports the rebalancing of the transport system in favour of non-car modes;

iv. supporting the gateway function.

POLICY T7

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals that:

i. support 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.

The potential of Manston Airport to be developed as an airport of regional significance will be assessed.

Airport Surface Access Strategies produced to support these airports should be consistent with the overall priorities of the Regional Transport Strategy.

POLICY T8

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals for infrastructure that maintains and enhances the role of the following gateway ports:

i. ro-ro - Dover, Channel Tunnel, Portsmouth, Newhaven and Ramsgate;

ii. `niche' markets - Southampton, Portsmouth, Shoreham, Newhaven, Dover and the Medway ports;

iii. deep-sea containers - Southampton, the Medway ports.

POLICY T9

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals that encourage the development of short sea shipping connections linking the region into the wider European network, and between, the following ports:

POLICY T10

Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals that foster an improved and integrated network of public transport services that give priority to:

i. delivering better local bus services in partnership with operators through Bus Quality Partnerships;

ii. mass transit systems within larger urban areas;

iii. developing intra-regional scheduled coach and rail services along regional spokes;

iv. developing rail services to provide better inter-regional connections;

v. increasing the opportunities for interchange between the network and all other modes of transport.

POLICY T11

The policies and proposals set out in Local Transport Plans should use mobility management as the mechanism for achieving a rebalancing of the transport system by considering the interaction between:

i. the availability of an integrated and comprehensive travel planning advice service;

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

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

iv. the availability and management of public transport services;

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

vi. the role of charging initiatives;

vii. the role of intelligent transport systems;

viii. the provision of local services and e-services to reduce the need to travel;

ix. the effect that changes in ways of working may have on the extent and balance of future demand for movement.

POLICY T12

Local transport authorities should make appropriate use of the powers available under the Transport Act 2000 to introduce new charging initiatives where they consider these are required in order to support delivery of the regional spatial and transport policy frameworks.

POLICY T13

Development plans and/or Local Transport

Plans should:

i. adopt maximum parking 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;

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

iii. apply guidance set out in PPG3 on residential parking standards flexibly, reflecting local circumstances.

POLICY T14

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;

iii. include proposals to trial transport planning advice centres for the transport hubs where they offer the potential to add value.

POLICY T15

The railway system should be developed to carry an increasing share of freight movements. Priority should be given in other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans to providing enhanced capacity for the movement of freight by rail on the following corridors (in priority order):

i. Southampton to West Midlands;

ii. Dover/Channel Tunnel to and through/around London;

iii. Great Western main line;

iv. Portsmouth to Southampton.

POLICY T16

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should include policies and proposals that:

i. promote the most appropriate mechanism for securing the efficient distribution of goods (for example Freight Quality Partnerships);

ii. safeguard wharves, depots and other sites that are, or could be, critical in developing the capability of the transport system to move freight, particularly by rail or water;

iii. safeguard sites adjacent to railways, ports and rivers for developments, particularly new inter-modal facilities, that are likely to maximise freight movement by rail or water;

iv. encourage development with a high generation of freight and/or commercial movements to be located close to inter-modal facilities, rail freight facilities or ports and wharves.

Policy T17

Provision should be made through other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans to safeguard sites within the region for up to 3 inter-modal interchange facilities. These facilities should be well related to:

i. rail and road corridors capable of accommodating the anticipated level of freight movements;

ii. the proposed markets;

iii. London.

POLICY T18

Other relevant regional strategies, development plans and Local Transport Plans should give priority to investment in the sub-regional areas identified in regional planning guidance and the list of projects for each sub-region set out in Tables 1 to 6.

Development plans should include policies that safeguard delivery of:

i. the specific investment proposals set out in Tables 1 to 6;

ii. other major projects where they are required to support delivery of the regional spatial and transport policy frameworks.

The South East England 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 investment proposals of regional or sub-regional significance.

POLICY T19

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.

APPENDIX 2

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL COMMENTS ON PROPOSED POLICIES