Contact: Jon Foley, ext 7559 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report proposes policy guidance for bus priority in the county. The Committee is invited to consider the content of the draft policy statement prior to wider consultation with key stakeholders.

2. Background

2.1 In recognition of the need to address the complex issues surrounding the implementation of bus priority initiatives in the county, the Environment Policy Review Committee on 7 May 2003 recommended that a sub-group of Members and officers meet to investigate these issues with a view to preparing draft policy guidance for consideration by the Committee.

3. Summary of Sub-group Discussions

3.1 There was general agreement by the sub-group on the majority of the issues covered by the proposed policy guidance.

3.2 That element which prompted the most significant debate was the extent to which taxis (both hackney carriage and private hire vehicles) should be permitted to use bus priority facilities. The main concern was that private hire vehicles were difficult to identify as taxis (often being a standard saloon car) and, as such, could lead to abuse of a bus priority facility by other cars, thereby undermining the performance of the facility.

3.3 It was generally felt however that, on the understanding potential abuse and enforcement problems could be overcome, both hackney carriage and private hire vehicles should be permitted to use these facilities.

3.4 This discussion also raised the more general issue that the Committee may wish to consider the potential role for a `taxi strategy' for the county. Furthermore that the County Council should liaise more closely with local taxi licensing authorities.

4. Draft Bus Priority Policy Guidance

4.1 The sub-group has, through a process of discussion and research from elsewhere in the United Kingdom (a summary of approaches is detailed in Appendix 1), agreed on the attached draft bus priority policy guidance. There are two elements to the proposed guidance document as detailed in paragraph 4.2.

4.2 The summary policy statement (Appendix 2) is an overview of the proposed guidance and could ultimately be produced in a format suitable for wider publication. The technical issues paper (Appendix 3) is intended for those with a more detailed interest in the topic and would be used, in the main, as a source of reference.

5. Consultation

5.1 In developing the draft policy guidance the sub-group has considered good practice from around the UK, and County Council officers have also discussed the issue with those from Southampton and Portsmouth City Councils.

5.2 At this stage the views of other stakeholders in Hampshire have not been sought. It is proposed that once considered by this Committee the draft policy guidance (both the summary policy statement and technical issues paper) be subject to consultation with those organisations identified in Appendix 4.

5.3 The consultation would run for six weeks at which point a final version of the draft policy guidance, amended as necessary to reflect the outcomes of that consultation, would be reported to the Executive Member for approval. If significant policy issues were raised through this consultation process, they would first be reported to this Committee for further consideration.

Recommendations

1. That the Committee considers and comments on the draft policy guidance and that it be forwarded to the Executive Member for Environment to be approved for consultation with those organisations listed in Appendix 4.

2. That:

(i) the Executive Member for Environment be advised of the Committee's view that local taxi licensing authorities be encouraged to engage with operators to provide hire vehicles to develop a system where these vehicles are easily identifiable (to help alleviate potential bus priority enforcement problems);

(ii) officers in the Environment Department be assigned to undertake this work; and

(iii) a progress report be submitted to a future meeting of the Committee.

3. That a sub-group of Members of the Environment Policy Review Committee, with the support of relevant officers, considers the potential role for a taxi strategy for the county and reports back to this Committee early in 2004.

8209/JF

APPENDIX 2

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT

DRAFT BUS PRIORITY POLICY GUIDANCE

SUMMARY POLICY STATEMENT

SEPTEMBER 2003

BACKGROUND

In pursuance of its Local Transport Plan objectives the County Council is keen to encourage greater use of public transport. In this context, for the bus to become the option of first choice it needs to be considered a realistic alternative to the car. This applies in particular to its ability to compete with the car in terms of the reliability and consistency of journey times.

One means of influencing bus journey times is through the introduction of measures to separate the bus from general traffic. This can be achieved by giving the bus priority at junctions and/or on main roads. These priority measures can dramatically reduce delays to buses.

To assist in the promotion of bus priority and ensure consistent implementation the County Council has developed this "Bus Priority Policy: Summary Policy Statement" together with a more detailed Technical Issues paper.

POLICY GUIDANCE

This note provides guidance on the key elements required to help influence the effectiveness of a bus priority scheme. These include:

· The Role of Bus Priority

· Time of Operation

· Vehicles Permitted to Use Bus Priority Facilities

· Enforcement

· Bus Stops.

The proposed policy guidance for each of these elements is set out below.

The Role of Bus Priority

Much has been said about the circumstances under which bus priority measures may or may not be appropriate. Decisions on whether or not to proceed with the introduction of bus priority should be made in the context of the longer term and wider policy framework, and include a full assessment of the costs and benefits associated with the proposal.

Proposed Policy Guidance: The role of bus priority facilities

Due consideration should be given to the role of bus priority facilities as part of a package of measures to encourage greater use of public transport within the context of an overall transport strategy.

Time of Operation

Bus priority facilities may be either full-time or part-time (eg morning peak time only). It is advantageous if all bus priority facilities should be full-time to provide priority at whatever time it may be needed and to avoid confusion and abuse.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Time of Operation

New bus priority facilities would normally be for full-time (24 hours seven days a week) operation but that this might be varied because of local circumstances, particularly where there is a lack of alternative servicing arrangements for frontages.

Vehicles Permitted to Use Bus Priority Facilities

There is much debate regarding which `types' of vehicle should be allowed to use bus priority facilities. While the justification for the use of these facilities by buses and bicycles is clear, the decision on whether or not to permit taxis (either hackney carriage or private hire vehicles) to use bus priority facilities is much more complex.

If, however, the public transport and social inclusion role of taxis (including private hire) is accepted then the conclusion must be that all forms of taxis should be allowed to use these facilities as long as this does not adversely affect bus operation and, if necessary, where specific approaches to monitoring and enforcement are considered.

There are other potential exemptions for motorcycles, goods vehicles or cars (or similar vehicles) carrying more than one (or two) people. It is proposed that such exemptions are progressed through experimental orders and their impacts assessed.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Vehicles permitted to use bus priority measures

The following vehicles should be permitted to use a bus priority measure:

Buses - as defined in the technical issues paper;

Taxis (whether hackney carriage or private hire) - except where any abuse/enforcement problems cannot be overcome;

Bicycles - except where there is a particular safety issue.

Enforcement

Traditionally local police have been unable to provide sufficient resources to enforce bus priority measures to a level that will ensure they operate properly and produce the intended results. In many cases this has led to the use of distinctive coloured surfacing to make them better self-enforcing. In addition, technology in the form of selective vehicle detection is increasingly being used to overcome potential enforcement problems.

With the exception of London, local authorities do not currently have the `powers' to take enforcement action on `moving' traffic offences (which in the case of this policy would be non-exempted vehicles driving in bus priority facilities), however legislation extending the London facility nationwide should be processed in the next 12 months or so. Legislation does however currently exist which would permit the County Council or its agents to take enforcement action on `static' violations (which in the case of this policy document would be vehicles parked in a bus lane).

If bus priority schemes are to be effective then it is clear there will need to be effective enforcement.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Enforcement

That, where appropriate, bus priority facilities should normally be surfaced in a distinctive red colour to assist in making them self-enforcing.

That the County Council, with District Councils and other partners, considers the introduction of local authority assistance with bus priority enforcement as soon as the legislation is in place.

Bus Stops

Bus stops are often obstructed by parked vehicles rendering them ineffective as a convenient and safe place for passengers to board and alight the bus, thereby undermining the role of the bus as a viable alternative to the private car.

This situation can be resolved through design and/or by ensuring that the appropriate regulation is in place at the bus stop to prevent obstructive parking. Localised widening of the footway around a bus stop (known as a bus boarder) can assist access between the bus and kerb.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Bus Stops

Bus stop clearways should be applied as part of all bus priority schemes. Where local conditions permit, bus boarders should be implemented as part of a bus priority scheme.

CONSULTATION, MONITORING AND REVIEW

As with the design of any transport scheme it is important that the needs of all road users and others in the local area are taken into account when considering the introduction of a bus priority scheme. In determining these needs it is important that consultation takes place with a wide range of stakeholders, particularly local taxi and bus operators as well as the Hampshire Constabulary.

These needs should be reflected in the objectives of the scheme and the performance of the scheme can be monitored against these through a regular review mechanism.

The performance of bus priority measures across Hampshire will also be reviewed as appropriate to determine whether any change to the final bus priority policy is required as a result of the implementation of the policy in practice.

APPENDIX 3

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

ENVIRONMENT DEPARTMENT

DRAFT BUS PRIORITY POLICY GUIDANCE

TECHNICAL ISSUES PAPER

SEPTEMBER 2003

CONTENTS

Preamble

1. Bus Lanes/Bus Only Roads/Movements

1.1 Justification

1.2 Times of operation

1.3 Vehicles permitted to use bus priority facilities

· Buses

· Bicycles

· Taxis (Hackney Carriage and Private Hire)

· Other Vehicles

1.4 Legal Aspects

1.5 Enforcement

2. Other Bus Priority Measures

2.1 Enforcement at Bus Stops

Annexe 1: Alternative Bus Priority Technologies

Preamble

This documents sets out some of the key technical issues which have influenced the development of the County Council's Bus Priority Policy. As such it is a supporting document to the County Council's Bus Priority Guidance: Summary Policy Statement.

1. BUS LANES/BUS ONLY ROADS/MOVEMENTS

1.1 Justification

The principal purpose of bus priority measures is to allow bus services to provide a consistent and reliable service in terms of journey time. This is best achieved by the introduction of ways of separating the bus from general traffic, and in particular its queues and delays, by giving the bus priority at junctions and/or on the carriageway usually in the form of bus lanes.

These priority measures can dramatically reduce the delays to buses while having relatively little effect on car journey times (although disruption during construction can be significant as with most maintenance and improvement schemes).

The benefits of bus priority measures are both direct in terms of time savings to current bus users but also, and perhaps more importantly, by helping provide a more reliable and competitive service they are part of the programme of measures to promote bus use. Bus priority measures are often a major part of the local authority contribution to a Bus Quality Partnership where the provision of quality facilities on the road is matched by improved services and vehicles by bus operators. This partnership approach can work in attracting more passengers, and promotion of modal change to public transport is a very important part of both national and local approaches to dealing with the growing transport congestion problem caused by increasing car use.

There is much debate over the appropriate criteria for the introduction of measures, eg whether there should be a minimum current bus service level before measures are introduced.

Such decisions need to be made in the context of the longer term and wider policy framework, and following a detailed cost benefit analysis. Bus transport is the only form of transport available for a significant proportion of the community and is also the principal alternative mode for car users. As congestion increases the provision of a quality alternative service able to avoid much of the congestion will become more important.

1.2 Times of Operation

Bus priority facilities may be either full-time or part-time (eg am peak time only). There is a technical argument saying all bus priority facilities should be full-time to provide priority at whatever time it may be needed and to avoid confusion and abuse.

The principal counter argument is that a bus lane is often only `needed' in the peak and that opening it up at other times allows the motorists to overtake. As most bus priority facilities are in urban areas the counter argument is that speeding associated with overtaking can be a major safety problem. There is also the point that as traffic levels increase it is more likely that the bus priority measures will be needed for longer periods.

The most obvious exemption is for servicing where there are no alternative arrangements or where there may be no parking available nearby for commercial premises reliant on car borne custom. The latter is more likely to apply on a suburban corridor rather than a town centre location, in terms of justification for exemption.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Time of Operation

New bus priority facilities would normally be for full-time (24 hours seven days a week) operation but that this might be varied because of local circumstances, particularly where there is a lack of alternative servicing arrangements for frontages.

1.3 Vehicles Permitted to Use Bus Priority Facilities

Buses

In determining which vehicles should be permitted to use a bus lane there have been many different definitions of a `bus' employed over the years but today there is a common definition. Regulation 23 of the Traffic Signs Regulation and General Directions 2002 defines a bus lane as a traffic lane reserved for:

· motor vehicles constructed or adapted to carry more than 8 passengers (exclusive of driver);

· local buses not so constructed or adapted.

A local bus service is defined by Section 2 of the Transport Act 1985 as one using public service vehicles for the carriage of passengers by road at separate fares and having picking up/setting down points less than 15 miles apart. A local service has to be registered by virtue of Section 6 of the same Act.

Bicycles

Bicycles are now almost universally accepted in bus priority facilities and this should be reflected in the design of subsequent schemes.

Taxis

The situation regarding taxis (hackney carriages and private hire vehicles) is much less straightforward. There are inconsistencies within the Hampshire area and particular issues with regard to enforcement which influence decisions. These are discussed in the Enforcement section below.

Portsmouth City Council allows hackney carriage vehicles in almost all of its bus priority facilities/roads but not private hire vehicles. The reason for the latter is that private hire vehicles often look like normal saloon cars and permitting them into bus priority facilities could lead to abuse by other vehicles. Portsmouth has a Taxi Quality Partnership and is moving towards a standard colour (silver) and standardised markings in terms of full width bars and bonnet crests for all hackney carriage vehicles except FX4s (London type cabs which will remain black).

This standard livery makes enforcement easier. Portsmouth City Council officers confirm that the vast majority of taxis in Portsmouth are local and are mostly used for local journeys, often for return shopping trips for people who do not have use of a car.

In Southampton bus priority facilities may be used both by hackney carriage and private hire vehicles.

In the most recently introduced County Council bus priority schemes, taxis are not allowed. These decisions have been based on police advice that enforcement action would be limited. This in turn has influenced the decision to use transponders on buses to activate a bus - only movement at a traffic signal controlled junction in Farnborough.

At present therefore there are different situations in each authority.

If the public transport and social inclusion roles of taxis (including private hire) is accepted then the conclusion could be that all forms of taxis should be allowed to use bus priority facilities as long as this does not adversely affect bus operation and, if necessary, where specific approaches to monitoring and enforcement are considered. This is only likely to occur where there is significant abuse of the facility by car drivers which in turn relates to enforcement.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Vehicles permitted to use bus priority facilities

The following vehicles should be permitted to use a bus priority measure:

Buses - as defined above;

Taxis (whether hackney carriage or private hire) - except where any abuse/enforcement problems cannot be overcome;

Bicycles - except where there is a particular safety issue.

Other Vehicles

There are other potential exemptions for motorcycles, goods vehicles or cars carrying more than one (or two) people.

It is proposed that such exemptions are progressed through experimental orders and their effects assessed. The principal criteria for assessment would be the effect on bus performance, behavioural change (actual and potential) and abuse/enforcement. The outcomes of these experiments can then be reflected in an amendment to the policy document as necessary.

1.4 Legal Aspects

Bus priority facilities require Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) to make them legally enforceable. The TROs must be specific to the particular facility and will define all aspects, including permitted vehicles, hours of operation, access arrangements across the facility and the extent of the restricted lengths of carriageway.

1.5 Enforcement

There is a particular problem with enforcement in that local police are unable to provide sufficient resources to guarantee bus priority measures will be enforced to a level which will ensure they operate properly and produce the intended results. In many cases this has led to the use of distinctive coloured surfacing, usually red, to delineate bus priority facilities and hence make them better self-enforcing.

This has also led to the adoption of technology based solutions, eg transponders on buses to call special phases at traffic signals that preclude taxis from using a facility (unless they are fitted with the same technology). Additional information on the alternative technological approaches to bus priority is located in Annexe 1.

With the exception of London, local authorities do not currently have the `powers' to take enforcement action on `moving' traffic offences (which in the case of this policy would be non-exempted vehicles driving in bus priority facilities), however legislation extending the London facility nationwide should be processed in the next 12 months or so. Legislation does though currently exist which would permit the Highway Authority to take enforcement action on `static' violations (which in the case of this policy document would be vehicles parked in a bus lane).

If effective bus priority schemes are to be operated then it is clear that there will need to be effective enforcement.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Enforcement

That, where appropriate, bus priority facilities should normally be surfaced in a distinctive red colour to assist in making them self-enforcing.

That the County Council, with District Councils and other partners, considers the introduction of local authority assistance with bus priority enforcement as soon as the legislation is in place.

2. OTHER BUS PRIORITY MEASURES

2.1 Enforcement at Bus Stops

Bus stops are often obstructed by parked vehicles rendering them ineffective as a convenient and safe place for passengers to board and alight the bus, thereby undermining the role of the bus as a viable alternative to the private car.

This situation can be resolved through design and/or by ensuring that the appropriate regulation is in place at the bus stop preventing obstructive parking.

After recent changes to legislation, bus stop clearways no longer need Traffic Regulation Orders to be enforceable. Furthermore District/Borough Councils can enforce clearways through decriminalised parking. In designing bus priority schemes it is therefore recommended that a clearway is in place for all bus stops within the scope of the project.

More and more, the use of bus boarders (with raised kerbs) is being used to improve access to the bus. A bus boarder, where there is localised widening of the footway into the carriageway at a bus stop, performs two roles. Firstly it ensures that the bus can reach the kerb unobstructed by parked vehicles, and secondly it enables the bus to return to the main flow of traffic without excessive delay caused waiting for a gap in traffic. Bus boarders are in themselves a form of bus priority measure.

Proposed Policy Guidance: Bus Stops

Bus stop clearways should be applied as part of all bus priority schemes. Where local conditions permit, bus boarders should be implemented as part of a bus priority scheme.

ANNEXE 1: ALTERNATIVE BUS PRIORITY TECHNOLOGIES

The decision to install transponders or tags on buses as a means of triggering a bus gate or signal can have a significant impact on the extent to which other vehicles can use the bus lane or gating signals.

Under normal circumstances (just normal bus lanes) then it is clearly just an enforcement/use issue. It does become more critical when there is a signalled facility or controlled access in some form. In this case there is then an issue over the type of selective vehicle detection that can be used - either through transponders/tags or through loop detectors as discussed below:

· Transponders/tags are very selective and the policy needs to reflect how this would be administered - there can be significant problems in issuing and maintaining the tags especially when there are a number of local authorities involved for cross-boundary issues - a decision has to be made as to who issues, replaces, etc. In the case of Farnborough this would have to be undertaken locally as it is unlikely it would be administered from Winchester. There is then the knock-on effect on-street if a large number of tagged vehicles are using the facility - this in turn can reduce the effectiveness/benefits of the facility and could have a significant effect on other traffic.

· With loop detectors this is slightly different - the loops can be selective (by vehicle size) and various delay features incorporated to reduce the worst effects of use by other vehicles. It is however only self-enforcing to a degree and open to abuse.

· Finally there is the use of the Geographical Positioning System (GPS) which will come in the future and could be utilised but would in practice probably be restricted to buses for Real-Time Information purposes. The County Council may not want to fit a large number of taxis, etc with expensive GPS equipment.

APPENDIX 4

Draft Bus Priority Policy: Stakeholder Consultation

Proposed list of consultees

Local bus operators

Neighbouring County, Unitary and District Councils

Taxi operator representatives (both Hackney Carriage and Private Hire Vehicles)

Emergency services (notably Hampshire Constabulary)

Local bus user groups

Local cycle interest groups