WRITTEN EVIDENCE FROM SCOTTISH ASSOCIATION FOR PASSENGER TRANSPORT

Transcription

1 WRITTEN EVIDENCE FROM SCOTTISH ASSOCIATION FOR PASSENGER TRANSPORT Forth Crossing Public Transport Corridor: Introductory Notes The Scottish Association for Public Transport (SAPT) is concerned that the proposed configuration of the Forth Road Bridges, including the bus corridor proposals, creates an unbalanced road capacity situation and is an extremely ill-thought out project considering the high capital cost involved. Bus traffic on the existing Forth Road Bridge amounts to less than 1% of the overall vehicle movements. Even a doubling of bus traffic from development of P+R will still amount to less than 2% of overall vehicle movements. The existing Forth Road Bridge will, therefore, be effectively empty, while the new bridge is expected to absorb all the car and HGV traffic. A significant cost is involved in modifying the approach roads to provide access to the new bridge for all traffic other than buses. But it is obvious that once the new bridge opens, there will be irresistible pressure on politicians from road users to re-open the existing bridge to car traffic to relieve traffic congestion at peak periods on the new bridge. Given that this is the most expensive Scottish transport infrastructure investment of the 20 th and 21 st century, it is of the utmost concern that the proposed configuration of the two Forth Road bridges is illogical, and that further significant and expensive re-design of the approach roads is almost certain to be undertaken, under public pressure, to revert to making greater use of the existing bridge for car traffic, leading to a major increase in road capacity from Fife into the Lothians. SAPT recommends that the design of the approach roads, including the bus access roads, should be suspended to allow a more logical solution to be investigated. The rushed timetable for design of the new bridge and the approach road philosophy, in response to over-reaction to the corrosion problems, should be halted while results from the current anti-corrosion exercise are completed. Analysis of road traffic statistics, which will be presented to the TICC Committee orally by SAPT on 23 rd February, show that there is no pressure from road traffic growth to urgently provide additional road capacity on the Forth crossing. Furthermore, train capacity across the Forth can be expanded by further train and platform lengthening, and additional signalling. More Park+Ride parking spaces at railway stations throughout Fife, where feasible, together with train/ tram connections to west Edinburgh once the Gogar Interchange opens, should help reduce road traffic on the Forth road bridge, giving time for a measured review of the situation. Regards, John McCormick Chairman Scottish Association for Public Transport

2 This statement complements parallel submissions being made to Forth Bridge Bill and Finance Committees of Scottish Parliament. These conclude that in the present budget context and with a prime priority for an improving and sustainable Scottish economy:- a) the principles of the Forth Crossing Bill are unsupported by robust evidence and would lead to a damaging contraction of spending on the programmes needed to accelerate shifts in energy sources and cuts in greenhouse gas emissions over the years to 2020 and on to 2050 b) inadequate attention is given in the Bill to actions to encourage modal shift from cars (a key policy aim of the Scottish Government) and increased car-sharing, especially at peaks. The rest of this submission deals with the scope for a major change of approach to the Forth Public Transport Corridor in the years to 2017 (the first full year an extra bridge could be available) and from 2017 to It supports the view of the adjacent City of Edinburgh, West Lothian and Fife Councils that there is a pressing need, ignored in the Policy Memorandum, to encourage greater shifts to public transport in the years to 2017 and to continue such a momentum in a cost-effective way. The proposals in the Policy Memorandum are not cost effective and largely an afterthought to the emphasis on an additional crossing rather than central to the Scottish Government policy aims of greater shifts to public transport and greater cuts in carbon emissions. The Period The Bill s Policy Memorandum and the extensive additional information available on the Transport Scotland Forth Crossing website has the fundamental flaw of concentrating on road vehicle flows rather than on passenger volumes and occupancy levels crossing the Forth. There are only incidental references to the Forth Rail Bridge, no information on passenger mode share and no evaluation of steps to improve car occupancy at peaks or of the impact on travel patterns of multimodal smart ticketing and a multi-modal Gogar (Edinburgh West) interchange. Table 1 shows the Transport Scotland data on actual and expected road vehicle crossings in 2005 and 2017 Forth Crossing: Road Vehicle Volumes per Day (thousands) % change 2017 % change ( no extra bridge) (on new bridge) (on present bridge) % % Since traffic levels on motorway and A road traffic levels in Scotland have stabilised (APPENDIX 1) and since toll removal on the Forth Bridge in early 2008 has had only a marginal impact on traffic levels (apart from some rise in off-peak volumes), Forth Road Crossing volumes are unlikely to be more than 68,000 in 2010, possibly rising to 70,000 on the existing bridge by 2017 but with some absolute reduction in peak volumes. The Transport Scotland estimates of 26% to 44% growth between 2005 and 2017 are unsubstantiated and conflict with existing information on changes in passenger flow totals and mode share since Table 2 shows SAPT mid-range estimates of passenger volumes across the lower Forth in 2005, 2010 & They assume that around 10% of traffic volumes relate to HGV and LGV goods movement. Forth Crossing : Average Passenger Volumes per Day (thousands) Passengers Road Vehicles Car 1 occupant * Car multi-occupant Bus/coach/DRT ** Rail Ferry 2 TOTALS *including taxis with 1 passenger ** including private hire buses, minibuses, taxis with 2+ passengers

3 Transport Scotland has been invited to confirm actual data for 2005 and their up-dated estimates and underlying assumptions for 2010 and The SAPT data is based on the assumptions in Appendix 2. The Period : Suggested Actions Defer decisions on an additional Forth crossing until the results of present technical studies and of a stronger public transport and car-sharing strategy to 2017 have been observed. This may permit further extension of the life of the present road bridge but, if road vehicle volumes are higher than expected, it will be important to maintain the momentum of a strategy supporting an increased modal share for public transport and taking forward the proposals already being advanced by official bodies yet, for reasons which are unclear, omitted from the Bridge Bill Policy Memorandum and the Transport Scotland Forth Crossing website. SAPT would draw the Committee s attention to Transport Scotland s own conclusion that road vehicle traffic growth at Queensferry is expected to be much lower after 2016, amounting to total growth of only 6% between 2017 and There is a need to clarify whether there is an implicit assumption here that, if growth is higher, it could be handled by hard-shoulder running on the new bridge and/or the reopening of a least one lane each way on the present bridge to general traffic rather than bus only operation. The further public transport actions to which the attention of the Committee is drawn are:- the Scottish Government plans for the extension of rail electrification into Fife and to Dundee/Aberdeen by 2027 with the route to Perth and Inverness following the construction of a new and direct rail link from the Ferrytoll area to Halbeath and beyond (Project 28 in the Strategic Transport Projects Review, December 2008, costed at 100 to 250m) plans to reopen to passengers the rail branch from Thornton to Windygates and Leven (also for freight) possible restoration of passenger rail services between Dunfermline and Alloa (on a freight line) plans to develop a Glasgow-Lanarkshire-Livingston-west Edinburgh-Fife- Dundee/Aberdeen rail corridor in association with a high-speed route from London to Scotland via the West Midlands, Lancashire and Carlisle to Scotland, dividing for Glasgow and Edinburgh north of Carstairs. modification of the existing Forth Road Bridge as part of plans for tram extensions from West Edinburgh into West Lothian and also South Fife Conclusions and Recommendations The Forth Bridge Bill and the related Policy Memorandum and Transport Scotland documentation gives inadequate consideration to the potential for increased modal share for public transport on existing Forth Crossings - especially in a situation where the evidence points strongly to reduced rates of growth in total in passenger movement across the Forth even after allowance is made for expected change in population and employment levels and locations. The optimum solution is to make better use of the existing road and rail bridges in the coming decade rather than proceed to a very expensive additional crossing and underutilisation of the existing rail and road bridges. The Committee is urged to make two recommendations as top priorities:- 1) an early multi-modal reappraisal of total passenger movement and mode share on the Forth Crossing Corridors with a view to an action programme agreed within 12 months to encourage mode shift to public transport and car-sharing over the years to ) cancellation of further work on the Forth Crossing Bill on the grounds that this is not an essential and cost-effective project within the stated overall aims of the Scottish Government in a period of tightened public finance.

4 APPENDIX 1 Road and Car Traffic Statistics (million vehicle Kms) - Rail Comparisons Scottish M-way & A Roads All traffic 28,209 28,055 28,898 28,986 28,810 Cars 22,308 22,060 22,610 22,392 22,221 STS No 28 p 124 M90 at Kelty (average daily flows for all traffic- thousands) 29,565 30,703 26,511 30,787 STS No 28 p 130 Rail Passenger kms in Scotland outwith SPT area (millions) , % STS No p 152 Total pass kms in Scotland continued upwards from 2,224m in to 2,601m in i.e. +18% with rate of growth being higher in the east of Scotland STS No 28 p 158 Examples of yearly passenger usage of Forth area rail stations (thousands) Dundee 1,438 1,515 1,490 1,600 Kirkcaldy ,072 1,126 1,152 Inverkeithing ,032 Dunfermline Town South Gyle Leuchars Dalmeny Dunfermline Queen Margaret Dalgety Bay Annual data in STS on 100 top stations and usage of new stations more detail available from ORR Ferrytoll Park And Ride and other P+R Data requested but not yet available Estimated usage of Gogar Rail/Tram/Bus Interchange in first full year is 750 thousand APPENDIX 2 Assumptions made in relation to Passenger Volumes in ) 50% rise in real cost of petrol/derv but rail and bus fare rises capped at rate of inflation 2) introduction on the existing bridge of a peak period priority lane for buses, other high occupancy vehicles, vans and approved HGVs within the next 12 months (peak period being defined as the Monday to Friday commuting peaks plus well-publicised extensions to cover periods when major events would otherwise lead to bridge delays; approved HGVs defined as those with no easy alternative to using the present bridge and paying an appropriate 3- monthly or yearly fee; bridge ban on non-approved HGVs) 3) ramp metering at Ferrytoll, Inverkeithing & Halbeath junctions and/or peak-time lone occupant car charges 4) opening of Gogar(Edinburgh West) as a fully intermodal interchange by 2012, including interchange from rail to a quality bus network for west Edinburgh and to quality bus links to West Lothian and along the Edinburgh Bypass (this could be financed in part by a delay in the planned provision of a direct rail link from Gogar to the Falkirk line by 2017 and earlier extension of Edinburgh tram Route 1 from the Airport to a new interchange station at Ratho Station/Newbridge also serving the Ingliston Exhibition and Showground zone) 5) early introduction of multi-modal smart ticketing in association with a rise in long- stay parking charges in west Edinburgh and at Edinburgh Airport (with proceeds used for public transport and active travel) 6) provision of high-capacity Forth Metro rail services from east of Edinburgh to Cowdenbeath via Gogar, Ferrytoll, Inverkeithing, Rosyth, Dunfermline & Halbeath on a 15 minute or higher frequency

5 7) further improvements in rail passenger capacity and trip times to Dundee, Aberdeen, Perth and Inverness 8) enhanced use of rail, bus & cycle park and ride and local bus feeders 9) development of Ferrytoll as an interchange including rail facilities, bus feeders and direct bus links to Newbridge/Livingston and to Granton/Leith development zones 10) provision of at least one fast passenger ferry route from south Fife to Edinburgh Waterfront