Midlands Connect Objectives for Improved Transport Connectivity

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Midlands Connect Objectives for Improved Transport Connectivity"

Transcription

1 Objectives for Improved Transport Connectivity Midlands Connect Partnership December 2015

2 Notice This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for the Midlands Connect Partnership s information and use in relation to the Midlands Connect project. Atkins assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents. This document has 68 pages including the cover. Document history Job number: Document ref: / Docs / Main Report Revision Purpose description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date Rev 1.0 Initial Draft NM / AC NM JFC JFC 14/08/15 Rev 2.0 Second Draft NM / AC JFC GH JFC 30/08/15 Rev 3.0 Final Draft AC JFC GH JFC 04/09/15 Rev 4.0 Final NM AC / JFC GH JFC 17/12/15 Client signoff Client Project Midlands Connect Partnership Midlands Connect Document title Job no Copy no. Document reference / Docs Out / 01 Main Report Atkins Version 4.0 December

3 Table of contents Chapter Pages 1. Introduction Midlands Connect Progress to date Purpose of this study Structure of this report 7 2. Connectivity challenges Introduction Business needs Connectivity constraints Summary Guiding principles and objectives Introduction Guiding principles Overarching objectives Potential corridors and hub priorities Summary Initial definition of network performance targets Introduction Development of indicators Required scale of improvement Review of targets Summary Conclusions and recommendations Introduction Business needs Connectivity challenges Guiding principles and objectives Targets Recommendations 32 Appendices 33 Appendix A. Graphics showing connectivity challenges 34 Appendix B. Description of connectivity challenges 43 B.1. Introduction 43 B.2. Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country 45 B.3. Nottingham, Derby and North 46 B.4. Leicester and Coventry 47 B.5. Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire and North West 48 B.6. Northampton, South East Midlands, East and South East 49 B.7. Worcester, Hereford, South West and South Wales 50 B.8. Telford, Shrewsbury and Mid Wales 51 Appendix C. Objectives by geographic area 52 Appendix D. Methodology for developing targets 57 D.1. Introduction 57 D.2. Determining key origin-destination movements 59 D.3. Journey time data 60 Atkins Version 4.0 December

4 D.4. Target setting 61 D.5. Additional origin-destination movements 62 Appendix E. Preliminary journey speed improvement targets 64 E.1. Preliminary targets for road conditional outputs 64 E.2. Preliminary Targets for rail conditional outputs 65 Appendix F. Potential agglomeration benefits from preliminary targets 66 F.1. Agglomeration impacts of road targets 66 F.2. Agglomeration impacts of rail targets 67 Tables Table 2-1 Important connectivity attributes by sector Table 2-2 Performance indicators Table 2-3 Existing network performance by Conditional Output (origin/destination) Table 4-1 Objectives and Performance Indicators Table 4-2 Highest potential targets for improvements to free-flow speeds by road Table 4-3 Highest potential targets for improvements to congested speeds by road Table 4-4 Highest potential targets for improvements to overall speeds by road Table 4-5 Highest potential targets for improvements to speeds of express journeys Table 4-6 Highest potential improvements to speeds of stopper services Table 4-7 Highest potential targets for improvements to overall speeds by rail Table 4-8 Largest agglomeration impacts by road Table 4-9 Largest agglomeration impacts by road: excluding movements to Birmingham Table 4-10 Largest agglomeration impacts by rail Table 4-11 Largest agglomeration impacts by rail: excluding movements to Birmingham Table B-1 Conditional outputs, corridors and hubs Table B-2 Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country Table B-3 Nottingham, Derby and the North Table B-4 Leicester and Coventry Table B-5 Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire and the North West Table B-6 Northampton, South East Midlands, East and South East Table B-7 Worcester, Hereford, South West and South Wales Figures Figure 1-1 Intensive growth corridors and hubs... 6 Figure 1-2 Study approach and chapter guide... 8 Figure 2-1 Chapter 2: Connectivity Needs and Constraints... 9 Figure 3-1 Chapter 3: Guiding Principles and Objectives Figure 4-1 Chapter 4: Develop and Review Targets Figure 4-2 Connectivity targets vs economic importance of origin-destination pairs (road) Figure 4-3 Connectivity targets vs economic importance of origin destination pairs (rail) Figure 4-4 Relationships between economic benefits and connectivity targets Figure 5-1 Relationships between economic benefits and connectivity targets Atkins Version 4.0 December

5 1. Introduction 1.1. Midlands Connect Midlands Connect is an ambitious initiative to identify transport connectivity improvements to maximise long-term economic growth in the Midlands. It will provide a platform for engagement with Government, High Speed 2 Limited, Network Rail and Highways England to influence longterm investment in the strategic transport networks. Its purpose is to identify the best opportunities to drive economic and employment growth and to make a compelling case for investment on the strategic road and rail networks post 2020, with a commitment to: developing the technical and economic case for investment; and developing a single powerful voice for the Midlands. Midlands Connect brings together a partnership of Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs), Local Authorities and Combined Authorities (working with Network Rail, Highways England and the region s airports) to develop the strongest possible case for strategic transport investment in the Midlands. The focus is on connecting towns and cities and on connecting to international gateways and other UK cities, to realise the region s full economic growth potential. Midlands Connect will seek to make the best use of existing transport networks, while supporting larger enhancements where necessary in order to facilitate economic growth across the region Progress to date The first Midlands Connect report, published in July , identified significant opportunities for economic growth in the Midlands. The strategic transport networks can play an important role in achieving this growth, by enabling access to markets, improving labour market efficiency, unlocking employment and housing sites, reducing the cost of doing business, stimulating business investment and innovation, and attracting global economic activity. Conversely, constraints imposed by the transport network act as barriers to growth, and a number of challenges were identified on both the road and rail networks. Based on this evidence, the 2014 report identified the following strategic transport priorities: making the most of HS2; linking to international gateways; improving east-west connectivity; improving freight services; making the strategic transport network more resilient; opening-up land for commercial and residential development; and growing and connecting established regional centres. From these priorities, the report identified a series of conditional outputs for strategic connectivity improvements between particular locations. These included improvements to journey times, service frequencies, reliability and capacity on road and/or rail corridors connecting key centres across the Midlands 2. A second study reported in May which assessed the potential economic impacts of improving connectivity by road and rail. This assessment looked to the future: 2026 and 2036, i.e. beyond completion of HS2 Phases 1 and 2. It considered both the direct impacts of reducing 1 Midlands Connect Technical Report, Steer Davies Gleave for Midlands Connect Steering Group, July For more information on the Conditional Outputs, refer to Chapter 5 of the Midlands Connect Technical Report, Steer Davies Gleave for Midlands Connect Steering Group, July Midlands Connect: Economic Impact Study, Atkins for Midlands Connect Steering Group, May 2015 Atkins Version 4.0 December

6 journey times for users of the road and rail networks, and wider impacts of stimulating increased business productivity and unlocking new jobs. The second study comprised three stages: quantification of forecast growth based on a review of the ambitions in the Strategic Economic Plans (SEPs) for the Midlands; assessment of the connectivity challenges, using road and rail model data; and estimation of potential economic benefits from improving connectivity along corridors in the Midlands. The study identified a number of intensive growth corridors, which provide the links between growth areas, and which will support the development of clustering and benefits from business agglomeration. The corridors follow the strategic transport networks, providing important national connections, as well as linkages between the Midlands and the surrounding areas. In addition, the study identified four hubs, focused on major urban areas and at critical points of intersection of the national transport networks. These corridors and hubs are shown in Figure 1-1 below. Figure 1-1 Intensive growth corridors and hubs Atkins Version 4.0 December

7 The May 2015 study quantified the potential economic impacts of nominal 10% and 20% reductions in generalised journey times 4 for key movements in the Midlands, including the conditional outputs identified in the first Midlands Connect report. The impacts quantified included business journey times, labour market impacts and potential agglomeration impacts, in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA), together with potential effects in unlocking new employment across the region. The study identified the need for further work to develop the evidence base, including: identification of more specific connectivity challenges and development of targeted objectives for the Midlands corridors and hubs (the subject of this report); and primary research with the business community to better understand market and supply chain linkages and connectivity requirements (described in a separate report 5 ) Purpose of this study The purpose of this study has been to further examine the connectivity challenges previously identified, and to begin development of targets for improved connectivity across the Midlands. At this stage it focuses on improved journey times for the conditional outputs, along corridors and between hubs. Building upon the findings from the preceding work, this study has: assessed the types and scale of the connectivity challenges within the corridors and hubs; developed guiding principles for the future roles of the strategic road and rail networks in the Midlands; and derived connectivity objectives and targets relevant to the pre-identified hubs and corridors. This study has drawn on emerging findings from business research undertaken in parallel with this commission. The business research has explored market and supply chain links and has examined how improved connectivity could benefit different sectors and different areas. It has focused on three key sectors: business and professional services; manufacturing; and logistics Structure of this report The remainder of this report is structured as follows: Chapter 2 describes the connectivity challenges on the rail and road networks; Chapter 3 examines the guiding principles for the future roles of the strategic road and rail networks before outlining objectives for the future development of the corridors and hubs; Chapter 4 outlines the approach to developing targets for improved connectivity; and Chapter 5 sets out the conclusions and recommendations for the next steps for Midlands Connect. The key components of the approach are set out in Figure 1-2 overleaf. 4 Monetised representations of journey time and cost. 5 Midlands Connect: Business Research, Atkins for Midlands Connect Steering Group, November 2015 Atkins Version 4.0 December

8 Figure 1-2 Study approach and chapter guide Understand Business Needs Understand Connectivity Constraints Chapter 2 Set Guiding Principles Set Overarching Objectives Chapter 3 Map Objectives to Corridors and Hubs Develop Target Metrics Understand Required Scale of Improvement Chapter 4 Review Targets Atkins Version 4.0 December

9 2. Connectivity challenges 2.1. Introduction This chapter draws on the findings of business research, and other data sources, to provide an overview of the connectivity needs of businesses in different sectors of the economy. It then examines connectivity challenges and constraints across the Midlands. Figure 2-1 Chapter 2: Connectivity Needs and Constraints Understand Business Needs Understand Connectivity Constraints Set Guiding Principles Set Overarching Objectives Map Objectives to Corridors and Hubs Develop Target Metrics Understand Required Scale of Improvement Review Targets 2.2. Business needs The Strategic Economic Plans of LEPs in the Midlands suggest that three business sectors in particular will continue to play a critical role in the Midlands economy, with large numbers of new jobs forecast to be created. They are: Business and Professional Services. These tend to be located in city or town centres, with good access to deep labour markets. There is a particularly strong representation of business and professional services in Birmingham and Nottingham, which are the largest urban centres and act as regional hubs for business, legal, financial and technical services. Manufacturing. The Midlands has a very strong manufacturing base. Employment data shows the strong representation of manufacturing in a number of the Midlands towns and cities. Manufacturing activities tend to be on the edges of towns or cities, but there are also important clusters close to urban centres. Logistics. The central location of the Midlands means that the area is home to a large number of logistics companies, which tend to locate close to the strategic road network. There are also a number of intermodal terminals, where inbound containerised goods are transferred to road haulage for onwards distribution. East Midlands Airport is a strategic location for air freight and is home to the air express logistics cluster (including DHL, UPS, TNT and Royal Mail). We have drawn on the evidence from the business research to understand the relative importance of the strategic road and rail networks to these three sectors and have summarised our findings in Table 2-1. Atkins Version 4.0 December

10 Table 2-1 Important connectivity attributes by sector Attribute Business and professional services Manufacturing Logistics Access to global markets and suppliers: airports Access to global markets and suppliers: ports Access to markets and suppliers: reliable journeys by road and rail Access to markets and suppliers: fast journeys by road Access to markets and suppliers: fast journeys by rail Access to markets and suppliers: frequent journeys by rail Access to labour markets: effective local road networks Access to labour markets: effective local public transport networks ( High Importance; Moderate Importance; Lower Importance). Note: Based on evidence derived from Focus groups and one-to-one interviews in programme of business research. The attributes shown in the table are clearly related to the drivers of productivity and business competitiveness that were previously assessed in the Economic Impacts Report. The business research confirms that businesses require fast, frequent, reliable and cost-effective connections to supply chains and markets and effective access to their labour markets. It can also be seen that there are differences in perspective between different sectors of the economy in terms of the importance of these attributes; for example a greater focus on rail connectivity for services businesses; and greater focus on road for logistics and manufacturing. These factors have been considered in the assessment of the connectivity challenges discussed below Connectivity constraints Qualitative findings Connectivity constraints have been identified from a review of existing data; findings of the business research; and stakeholder workshops with local authorities, LEPs, Highways England and Network Rail. The stakeholder workshops were important in testing and challenging the evidence, and in ensuring that the subsequent analyses were focused on addressing the right challenges in each area. These findings show that there are a diverse connectivity issues on the road and rail networks in the Midlands. On the road network, the key issues are: The importance of effective road links. The business surveys confirmed that all sectors of the economy require effective road connectivity, particularly the manufacturing and logistics sectors, for connections with supply chains and markets. Poor operating conditions on the network have detrimental consequences for profit margins of freight users. Low journey speeds. Many of the movements with low average speeds are caused by capacity issues on the Midlands strategic road network, including heavily congested junctions and links on key north-south corridors such as the M1 and M6 Motorways. Average journey speeds are also reduced by the time spent on local road networks into Atkins Version 4.0 December

11 town and city centres. The standard of the network is also inconsistent, with single carriageway sections providing a lower level of service in some areas. Poor journey time reliability. Highways England s first round of Route Strategies have demonstrated that many motorways and A-roads suffer from poor reliability, measured on the basis of proportion of journeys completed on time. Highways England s analyses also confirm that many parallel routes can be prone to chronic congestion during times of disruption on the strategic road network. Needs of the freight sector. A large number of road logistics companies are located in the Midlands, including a high concentration in the Golden Triangle area. The business surveys confirmed that operating margins in this sector are often very low and hence in order to operate successfully, the industry relies on journeys by road being reliable. Access to international gateways. The two largest airports are Birmingham and East Midlands, with the latter playing a major role in national air freight. Both airports are located adjacent to the motorway network, but motorways are often heavily congested and suffer from poor levels of journey reliability. High levels of growth in jobs are expected at and/or near to both airports, which will place major growth pressures in the surrounding areas. Impacts of growth. The scale of growth forecast in the Midlands will result in large increases in travel demand, a large proportion of which will be on the road network. This will place further major pressures on the motorways and trunk roads in the region, further impacting on speeds and reliability, hampering the competitiveness of businesses. On the rail network, the key issues are: The importance of effective rail links. The business surveys confirmed the importance of good rail connectivity for high value-added services businesses, both in terms of access to labour markets (particularly in the Birmingham area) and in facilitating efficient business travel. The speeds of some journeys are very slow. Some services are slow because of stopping patterns and others are slow because at least one change of trains is required to complete a journey. Many parts of the network are constrained and at the limit of their usable capacity (e.g. Coventry Birmingham), which limits the ability for additional services to be operated. The frequencies of some train services are low. Many parts of the network have trains operating with at least two trains per hour, but there are a number of movements with only one train per hour, including Hereford and Worcester to Birmingham and Coventry to Leamington Spa. A number of important movements do not have any direct trains, for example Leicester to Coventry and East Midlands cities to Birmingham Airport. Reliability of journey times. There are significant reliability challenges for operators, including problems posed by operators importing delay from other regions. Much of the railway network in the Midlands is two-track, accommodating a range of services from slow services to regional and long-distance services. This means that in the event of disruption, the knock-on impacts on other routes are considerable. Freight movements. The Midlands is important both as an end point for rail freight and as part of the national network in supporting through transit flows, notably on the WCML. Extensive intermodal flows in the West Midlands and aggregates flows in the East Midlands come into conflict with aspirations for increased passenger service provision at some locations. Access to international gateways. Birmingham Airport and East Midlands Airport are accessible by rail, via Birmingham International and East Midlands Parkway respectively, but journeys to these stations are indirect from many locations in the Midlands, leading to unattractive generalised journey times. Impacts of growth. Ambitions for growth in towns and cities will significantly increase demand for rail travel in the Midlands, both for business travel and for commuting. Failure to plan for this growth will mean that the competitiveness of some places will be Atkins Version 4.0 December

12 constrained, either because of poor connections to other cities or because of a lack of capacity constraining the ability to efficiently connect commuters to jobs. Travel costs. The business surveys showed that ticket costs sometimes prevent greater use of the railway network for business travel. More detailed analyses of the connectivity constraints are presented in the maps in Appendix A and tables in Appendix B Quantitative assessment of existing network performance In this section the performance of the strategic networks is assessed to provide a comparison with the findings of the business surveys and other existing data. The journey speed by road and rail, and the rail service frequency, has been assessed for each of the conditional outputs (origin-destination pairs) previously identified. The relative performance, compared to the average, has then been summarised using the criteria shown in Table 2-2. The approach used to derive road and rail speeds is described in Appendix D. Table 2-2 Performance indicators Performance Indicator Speed by road Speed by train Definition Strong Moderate Weak Journey speed by road compared with modelled average for similar journeys in the Midlands Journey speed by train compared with modelled average for similar journeys in the Midlands Speeds at or above average Speeds at or above average Speeds up to 15% worse than average Speeds up to 15% worse than average Speeds more than 15% worse than average Speeds more than 15% worse than average Train frequency Numbers of direct off-peak train services per hour 3 or more direct trains per hour 1-2 direct trains per hour No direct trains The analysis is based on existing road and rail speeds and train frequencies as this information is readily available and, at present, there is not yet a multi-modal transport model covering the Midlands with the ability to forecast journey times and travel conditions by road and rail. No account has been taken of the impacts of growth in travel demand on future conditions on the road and rail networks. However, it is recognised that the Midlands has major ambitions for transforming its future economy, which will mean a large increase in the number of jobs and the productivity of jobs. This will result in increased travel demand, within and between the towns and cities of the Midlands and to other parts of the UK. Further, the analysis does not take into account future major transport projects, including High Speed 2, Network Rail s programmed investment in Control Period 6 and Highways England s first Road Investment Strategy. It is recognised that this investment will significantly impact on the operating conditions of both the road and rail networks. On the road network, increased demand will worsen congestion, with increased delays and deteriorating reliability of journeys. On the rail network, increased demand will cause increased crowding in a number of cases, but poor rail connectivity on many movements will limit the attractiveness of rail for many journeys, which will exacerbate increasing demand on the road network. Subsequent work will be required to assess in more detail the future operating conditions on the road and rail networks, which will take place when more data is available. In the meantime, a systematic and consistent approach to analysis of the current connectivity challenges in the Midlands is required to identify the most critical issues. The comparative performance of the networks by Conditional Output is shown in Table 2-3, and this evidence is then considered further in Chapter 4. Atkins Version 4.0 December

13 Table 2-3 Existing network performance by Conditional Output (origin/destination) Conditional Output Indicator Origin Destination Avg. speed by road Avg. speed by rail Avg. train Frequency Discussion of challenges Brierley Hill / Dudley Hub@UKC (Solihull) Brierley Hill / Dudley Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Walsall Hub@UKC (Solihull) Walsall Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) West Bromwich Hub@UKC (Solihull) West Bromwich Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Wolverhampton Walsall Wolverhampton Hub@UKC (Solihull) Wolverhampton Cannock Walsall Nottingham Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Cannock Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Table B-2 Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country Nottingham Hub@UKC (Solihull) Walsall Nottingham Wolverhampton Nottingham Hub@UKC (Solihull) Coventry Leamington / Warwick Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Leamington / Warwick Hub@UKC (Solihull) Leicester Hub@UKC (Solihull) Leicester Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) East Midlands Airport Derby Nottingham Derby Nottingham East Midlands Airport Derby Chesterfield Mansfield Derby Mansfield East Midlands Airport Nottingham Mansfield Leicester Lincoln Newark Derby Derby Leicester Hub@UKC (Solihull) Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Table B-3 Nottingham, Derby and the North East Midlands Airport Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Lincoln Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Lincoln East Midlands Airport Newark Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Newark Lincoln Newark East Midlands Airport Nottingham Newark Nottingham Lincoln Atkins Version 4.0 December

14 Conditional Output Indicator Origin Destination Avg. speed by road Avg. speed by rail Avg. train frequency Discussion of Challenges Leamington / Warwick Leicester Leicester Derby East Midlands Airport Leicester Leicester Nottingham Nottingham Nottingham Stafford Stoke on Trent Walsall Stoke on Trent Stoke on Trent Stoke on Trent Nottingham Nottingham Milton Keynes Milton Keynes Milton Keynes Milton Keynes Milton Keynes Northampton Northampton Northampton Northampton Northampton Coventry Coventry Leamington / Warwick Coventry Coventry Derby East Midlands Airport Coventry Leamington / Warwick Leicester Birmingham (& HS2) Birmingham (& HS2) Stoke on Trent Cannock Derby East Midlands Airport Milton Keynes Northampton Birmingham (& HS2) Leicester Coventry Hub@UKC (Solihull) Kettering/Corby Leicester Birmingham (& HS2) Milton Keynes Kettering/Corby Hub@UKC (Solihull) Table B-4 Leicester and Coventry Table B-5 Stoke, Staffordshire and the North West Table B-6 Northampton, South-East Midlands, the East and South East Telford / Shrewsbury Hereford Table B-7 Hereford Birmingham (& HS2) Worcester, Hereford, South Worcestershire Birmingham (& HS2) West and S Wales Telford / Shrewsbury Birmingham (& HS2) Table B-8 Telford, Telford / Shrewsbury Hub@UKC (Solihull) Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton Telford / Shrewsbury Mid Wales 2.4. Summary It will be important to focus on the specific challenges identified in this chapter to ensure that Midlands Connect fully unlocks the economic potential of the Midlands. The following chapter sets out the approach taken to converting these challenges into guiding principles and objectives for improved connectivity across the Midlands. Atkins Version 4.0 December

15 3. Guiding principles and objectives 3.1. Introduction This chapter describes guiding principles and objectives that have been developed to help identify and assess the most appropriate connectivity interventions. The guiding principles and objectives reflect the ambition to tackle the connectivity challenges described in the previous chapter by delivering transformational improvements in connectivity across the Midlands. Figure 3-1 Chapter 3: Guiding Principles and Objectives Understand Business Needs Understand Connectivity Constraints Set Guiding Principles Set Overarching Objectives Map Objectives to Corridors and Hubs Develop Target Metrics Understand Required Scale of Improvement Review Targets 3.2. Guiding principles The following section sets out connectivity requirements to unlock economic growth and guiding principles for development of the strategic transport network: The Midlands has strong ambitions for transforming productivity and unlocking growth. A high-performing, competitive and growing economy requires fast, frequent, reliable and cost-effective transport connections to supply chains and markets. These are key drivers for future productivity and growth. There are many movements where speeds, frequencies and reliability are poor. The business research also highlighted that the costs of travel by rail are sometimes prohibitively high. There is a need for fast, frequent, reliable and cost-effective connections using a balance of road and rail to meet the differing needs of key sectors in the Midlands. It is important to consider the whole journey when looking at strategic movements, to include the local access component of both road and rail journeys, including access via the local transport network to different parts of the urban area and effective connections from railway stations to city centres. Transport networks in corridors and hubs are interdependent and so must be considered holistically. This is true for both the road and rail networks. In the case of the railway, a bottleneck can be located a long distance from the hub or corridor but can still act as a major constraint to service improvement. This confirms the need for a wider Midlands view of connectivity constraints. Atkins Version 4.0 December

16 It will be important to plan a resilient transport network. For example, significant longterm maintenance issues have been identified on the elevated sections of the Birmingham Box. This is a critical component of the UK transport network and closures would have very severe consequences for the economy of both the Midlands and wider UK. Long-term planning of the future resilience of both road and rail networks must be integrated into the planning process. It is important to consider the balance of modes in each corridor and hub based on the connectivity needs of the different business sectors in the area. The earlier analysis confirmed that the travel needs of logistics firms differ considerably from those of businesses in the service sector in city centres. Effective connectivity for freight movements will be critical to the future competitiveness of the Midlands and wider UK economy, enabling businesses to be well connected to their customers and suppliers, with reliable surface access to ports for volume transport of goods and effective access to airports for high-value air freight, which is particularly important for the advanced manufacturing sector. The Midlands is a global-facing economy that needs to be globally connected. Manufacturing businesses work in global markets with global supply chains, and the region is seeking to attract international businesses in the financial and business services sector, which means that effective air connections and access to airports are critical. Significant growth is forecast and there is a requirement to plan long-term movement capacity to meet the future needs of the economy in the Midlands. This includes providing rail capacity to cater for significant growth in demand into cities (in part driven by the expanding services sector in many locations) and the need to manage road capacity to provide good quality connections within, to, from and through the Midlands. There are significant numbers of local trips using the strategic road network within the hubs, and numbers of trips by car will increase with growth in the urban areas if better travel choices are not provided. There is a need to better manage demand in the urban areas, particularly shorter-distance trips by car using the strategic road network, to enable more efficient use of road space. HS2 will have a transformational impact on the Midlands, with dramatic improvements in connectivity to London, Manchester and Leeds. In order to effectively capture the full benefits of HS2, wider connectivity improvements will be required to unlock the benefits of released capacity and integrate HS2 with the road, rail and local transport networks serving Midlands towns and cities Overarching objectives The following objectives have been developed to set out the specific requirements for improvements to the strategic transport network to unlock economic growth. These relate to both the road and rail networks, and take into account both connectivity (journey times, reliability and service frequencies) and capacity (ability to carry the right amount of travel demand). The overarching objectives are: A. Improve speeds and reliability of journeys by road between adjacent Midlands urban areas, which will become longer (and more unreliable) as congestion rises with increasing demand for travel; B. Improve speeds and frequencies of rail services between key urban areas, including addressing the impacts of indirect rail links, to enable rail to better cater for future travel needs; C. Improve journey speeds by road and rail to unlock the economic potential of towns and cities in more peripheral locations, including Hereford, Shrewsbury and Lincoln; D. Improve road access (with a focus on speeds and reliability) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester; E. Improve rail connectivity (with a focus on speeds and frequencies) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester; Atkins Version 4.0 December

17 F. Enhance road freight links (with a focus on speeds and reliability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool; G. Improve rail freight links (with a focus on speed and capacity / capability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool; H. Improve access to both UK Central (for Birmingham Airport) and East Midlands Airport with a significant increase in surface access capacity, including improved rail connectivity from a wider area and improved road reliability; I. Provide capacity to meet strong growth in demand for rail travel into Central Birmingham, to ensure that demand is not constrained and rail provides an attractive option for travel into and through the city; J. Provide capacity to meet growth in demand for rail travel into other Midlands cities, to ensure that demand is not constrained and rail provides an attractive option for travel into and between Midlands cities; and K. Maximise opportunities to improve rail connectivity following completion of HS2, both in terms of connections to HS2 stations and re-configuration of existing capacity Potential corridors and hub priorities It is necessary to convert these objectives into specific priorities for the corridors and hubs, which are detailed in Appendix C. These draw on the analysis of specific challenges in the previous chapter to identify areas for potential focus as the Midlands Connect strategy is taken forward. These have been grouped into four broad areas, as shown in the tables in the appendix: Birmingham, Solihull, Black Country and Links to the West and South West (Table C-1); Nottingham, Derby and Links to the North (Table C-2); Leicester, Coventry and Links to the East and South East (Table C-3); and Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire and Links to the North West (Table C-4). In practice, there is strong interdependence between different parts of the Midlands. This means that each area should not be considered in isolation and reference should be made to all of the tables in identifying potential areas for intervention Summary The strategic transport challenges have been used to inform guiding principles for the future development of the transport network in the Midlands. From this, a series of objectives have been developed to shape the future development of Midlands Connect. At present, this presents a long list of issues to be considered. Further work is required to distil this list into a set of more focused priorities. This requires further analysis to develop potential targets for the conditional outputs, corridors and hubs, and the following chapter sets out the process for developing initial targets. Atkins Version 4.0 December

18 4. Initial definition of network performance targets 4.1. Introduction The Economic Impacts Study 6 forecast the potential impacts of delivering 10% and 20% reductions in generalised journey times for each of the Conditional Outputs. However, these reductions were merely illustrative changes to allow understanding of the potential scale of impacts of change. In practice, the actual level of change desired will be informed by the scale of the problem to be tackled, the economic importance of the movement, the scale of potential benefit and what is practically feasible. This chapter sets out indicators to quantify changes in network performance and makes a first attempt at quantifying the degree of change against one of these indicators (in the form of targets for journey time reduction). The chapter concludes by considering priorities based on the potential scale of economic opportunity and reviews the potential scale of economic impact resulting from improved network performance. Figure 4-1 Chapter 4: Develop and Review Targets Understand Business Needs Understand Connectivity Constraints Set Guiding Principles Set Overarching Objectives Map Objectives to Corridors and Hubs Develop Target Metrics Understand Required Scale of Improvement Review Targets 4.2. Development of indicators Whilst the objectives described in the previous chapter establish the type of change required, they do not quantify the scale of change required. To measure the scale of change, we have developed an initial set of performance indicators (and targets). The performance indicators reflect both connectivity factors (including journey speeds, reliability and frequency measures) and capacity factors (based on volumes of people or freight transported). One or more performance indicator is proposed for each of the objectives, as shown in Table 4-1. The table also highlights where further analysis will be needed to develop realistic evidence-based targets. 6 Midlands Connect: Economic Impact Study, Atkins for Midlands Connect Steering Group, May 2015 Atkins Version 4.0 December

19 Table 4-1 Objectives and Performance Indicators Objective A. Improve speeds and reliability of journeys by road between adjacent urban areas, which will become longer (and more unreliable) as congestion rises with increasing demand for travel B. Improve speeds and frequencies of rail services between key urban areas, including addressing the impacts of indirect rail links, to enable rail to better cater for future travel needs C. Improve journey speeds by road and rail to unlock the economic potential of towns and cities in more peripheral locations, including Hereford, Shrewsbury and Lincoln D. Improve road access (with a focus on speeds and reliability) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester E. Improve rail connectivity (with a focus on speeds and frequencies) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester F. Enhance road freight links (with a focus on speeds and reliability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool G. Improve rail freight links (with a focus on speed and capacity / capability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool H. Improve access to UK Central (for Birmingham Airport) and East Midlands Airports with a significant increase in surface access capacity, including improved rail connectivity from a wider area and improved road reliability I. Provide capacity to meet strong growth in demand for rail travel into Central Birmingham, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides an attractive option for travel into and through the city J. Provide capacity to meet growth in demand for rail travel into other cities, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides a highly attractive option for travel into and between Midlands cities K. Maximise opportunities to improve rail connectivity post- HS2 connection to HS2 stations and re-configuration of existing capacity Performance Indicators Journey Speed Journey Reliability Service Levels (based on Frequency and Speed) Journey Speed Journey Speed Journey Reliability Journey Speed Service Levels Journey Speed Journey Time Reliability to Ports Capacity for rail freight paths Journey Speed Journey Reliability Address missing rail connections Train Capacity Service Levels (as a function of Frequency and Speed) Journey times to HS2 Stations Is there sufficient evidence to define provisional target? Speed Reliability: further work required Speed Frequency: further work required Speed Reliability: further work required Speed Service Levels: further work required Further work required Further work required Missing connections: further work required Further work required Speeds Frequency: further work required Further work required Atkins Version 4.0 December

20 4.3. Required scale of improvement Overview of target setting approach This section describes how a set of initial targets has been derived, for journey speed only. In developing these targets, the focus has been on journey speed as this has been the easiest indicator to measure. Further work will be required at a later date to incorporate measures of reliability and service frequency into connectivity assessments, and significant further work is required to assess capacity issues for both passengers and freight on the rail network. The initial set of journey time targets were derived using a three-step process as follows: 1. Benchmarking the fastest journeys for each movement. The free-flow speed by road and fastest journey by rail was established and benchmarked against the average. For those Conditional Outputs where the speed was below average, an initial target was set to raise the speed to the average. Where the speed was above average no target was set. 2. Assessing the effects of traffic congestion and slower rail journeys. The congested and free-flow speeds by road were compared; and for rail, the fastest and slowest journeys were compared. A second initial target was identified, for each Conditional Output, of halving these differences (in response to an ambition to reduce road congestion and improve the speeds of the slowest train services 7 ). 3. The combined impact of both effects. For each Conditional Output, the targets from the two preceding steps were used to derive an overall target which takes into account both improving the fastest possible journeys and addressing the impacts of slower journeys. As such, these initial targets reflect an assumed aspiration to raise journey speeds to the current average, and halve the variation between the best and worst performance of each Conditional Output. It is acknowledged that, at this stage, these targets are crude and will require further refinement, not least because they do not reflect what changes are achievable and only relate to journey speeds. The targets shown above have been derived based on data about existing traffic conditions. This is because traffic model data on future road conditions are not currently available. In the meantime, the approach has focused on benchmarking of existing journey conditions, and the targets presented are compared with existing conditions. The technical approach is detailed further in Appendix D Initial targets for journey speeds by road A full list of provisional journey speed improvement targets for each conditional output is listed in Appendix E. The following section provides an initial overview of the potential scale of improvement needed to free-flow, congested and combined journey speeds to achieve the target outcomes described above Improvements to free-flow speeds In most cases, the road network performs consistently under free-flow conditions with relatively limited variation against the trend. There are some notable exceptions: certain origin-destination pairs have significantly lower journey speeds under free-flow conditions than the benchmark. These movements would require significant improvements to journey speeds to move towards the benchmark value. Table 4-2 summarises those origin-destination pairs for which the largest potential level of improvement has been identified. 7 In the case of road, it is practically impossible to completely remove the effects of congestion. The starting point was to develop an ambitious target to reduce the effects of congestion by 50%. In the case of rail, the slowest services have reduced average speeds because of increased numbers of stops and alternative routings. The starting point was to develop a target to reduce the difference between fastest and slowest services by 50%. These will be reviewed following detailed assessment of operational constraints. Atkins Version 4.0 December

21 Table 4-2 Highest potential targets for improvements to free-flow speeds by road Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement to speed) Hereford Birmingham 28% Telford/Shrewsbury Hereford 22% Nottingham Mansfield 20% Walsall Nottingham 20% Nottingham Lincoln 12% Worcestershire Birmingham 11% Milton Keynes UK Central / Solihull 10% Northampton Leicester 8% Northampton Nottingham 7% Walsall UK Central / Solihull 7% The worst performing movements include Hereford to Birmingham (long sections of single carriageway before connecting to a motorway) and Nottingham to Mansfield (A60 single carriageway connecting the urban areas). Movements between Hereford and Shrewsbury are slow because of the single carriageway standard of the A49, with poor geometries and limited opportunities to overtake slow vehicles. The poor standard of this route is a factor contributing to the peripherality of parts of the Marches Improvements to congested speeds Under congested conditions, overall speeds are much more variable and all of the movements have traffic speeds lower than free-flow conditions. Table 4-3 shows the origin-destination pairs with the largest potential improvements in congested speeds. Table 4-3 Highest potential targets for improvements to congested speeds by road Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement to speed) Wolverhampton UK Central / Solihull 21% Wolverhampton Birmingham 19% Brierley Hill/Dudley Birmingham 18% Walsall UK Central / Solihull 18% Nottingham Derby 17% Newark Birmingham 17% Wolverhampton Nottingham 16% Cannock/Lichfield/Tamworth Birmingham 16% Nottingham UK Central/Solihull 16% Brierley Hill/Dudley UK Central/Solihull 16% This clearly shows that connections into and across the Birmingham area perform worst in terms of congestion. However, there are numerous other movements that also suffer significant levels of congestion due to pinch points on the strategic road network and significant parts of the journey spent on congested urban networks. These should also be considered for intervention Improvements to overall speeds The two components discussed above were then brought together to identify the combined effects. Table 4-4 indicates that the largest targets for improved journey speeds would cover a diverse range of movements, including urban, inter-urban and more rural movements across many parts of the Midlands. Atkins Version 4.0 December

22 Table 4-4 Highest potential targets for improvements to overall speeds by road Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement to speed) Hereford Birmingham 33% Walsall Nottingham 29% Nottingham Mansfield 28% Walsall UK Central / Solihull 26% Telford/Shrewsbury Hereford 25% Nottingham Lincoln 23% Wolverhampton Nottingham 22% Wolverhampton UK Central / Solihull Derby Coventry Worcestershire Birmingham Lincoln East Midlands Airport Cannock/Lichfield/Tamworth Birmingham Northampton Leicester Nottingham Northampton Wolverhampton Birmingham 21% 20% 19% These should be considered as initial potential ambitions. They do not yet take into account the economic importance of each movement (and hence the potential benefit of intervention) and they do not reflect the practical feasibility of intervention Initial targets for journey speeds by rail A full list of provisional journey speed improvement targets for each conditional output is listed in Appendix E. The following section provides an initial review of the potential scale of improvement to fastest and slowest connections by rail Improvements to speeds of fastest connections Table 4-5 shows origin-destination pairs for which the largest potential level of improvement in fastest journeys has been identified, based on the differential between actual speeds and the benchmark speed for comparable journeys across the whole Midlands. Table 4-5 Highest potential targets for improvements to speeds of express journeys Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement to speed) Northampton Kettering/Corby 191% Wolverhampton Walsall 123% Nottingham Leamington/Warwick 101% Leicester Leamington/Warwick 98% Milton Keynes Kettering/Corby 93% Nottingham Northampton 75% East Midlands Airport Coventry 67% Nottingham Coventry 66% Walsall Nottingham 65% Nottingham UK Central/Solihull 53% The worst case is Northampton to Kettering / Corby, for which there is no direct train service. Northampton is located on the WCML but Kettering is on the parallel MML. A rail journey between these two locations requires at least two changes, which means that rail is not currently Atkins Version 4.0 December

23 a viable choice in practice for this movement. The second worst example shown is Wolverhampton to Walsall, for which there are no direct trains, and all services are directed through central Birmingham. There are also a number of other slow movements affected by a lack of direct trains, these include: Northampton to Leicester and Nottingham; Nottingham to Milton Keynes; and Nottingham and Leicester to Coventry, Leamington and Warwick Improvements to speeds of slower services Table 4-6 shows those movements with the largest differentials between the speeds of express and stopping services, with targets focused on reducing these differentials in speeds. Table 4-6 Highest potential improvements to speeds of stopper services Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement to speed) Milton Keynes Coventry 19% Leamington/Warwick Coventry Milton Keynes Birmingham Milton Keynes UK Central / Solihull 17% Stoke on Trent Tamworth, Lichfield and Cannock Leicester Coventry Leamington/Warwick UK Central / Solihull 13% Leamington/Warwick Birmingham Northampton Leicester Stoke on Trent East Midlands Airport West Bromwich UK Central / Solihull Brierley Hill UK Central / Solihull Walsall Stoke on Trent Nottingham Derby Nottingham Northampton Mansfield Derby Newark Leicester Nottingham Leicester Leicester Derby 18% 14% 12% 11% 10% 9% 8% The largest targets are identified on those movements that benefit from relatively fast direct services (including Milton Keynes to Coventry, Birmingham International and New Street) but also have services stopping at most stations en-route or alternatively have services operating via other routes. In practice, there is likely to be limited potential to improve the speeds of stopping services to the scale shown in this analysis. However, there are also other movements, for which there is a lack of direct connections, including Leicester to Coventry and Northampton Improvements to overall speeds The two components discussed above were then brought together to identify the combined effects. Table 4-7 indicates that the largest improvements would be dominated by the effects of tackling indirect journeys, for example Leicester to Leamington and Nottingham to Coventry, Northampton and Milton Keynes. Atkins Version 4.0 December

24 Table 4-7 Highest potential targets for improvements to overall speeds by rail Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement to speed) Northampton Kettering/Corby 191% Wolverhampton Walsall 131% Nottingham Leamington/Warwick 102% Leicester Leamington/Warwick 99% Milton Keynes Kettering/Corby 96% Nottingham Northampton 90% East Midlands Airport Coventry 77% Nottingham Coventry 72% Walsall Nottingham 69% Stoke on Trent East Midlands Airport 68% These should be considered as initial potential ambitions and suggest a potential requirement for transformational improvements in rail connectivity for certain movements in the Midlands. They do not yet take into account the economic importance of each movement (and hence the potential benefit of intervention) and they do not reflect the practical feasibility of intervention Review of targets The process described above has not yet taken account of the scale of demand or relative economic significance of the movements and potential priorities for improving connectivity. It has also not yet considered the practical feasibility of whether these targets could be achieved. The following section considers the economic importance of movements The economic value of improved connectivity The Midlands has a dense web of transport connections facilitating complex economic interactions between its towns and cities and other parts of the UK. The analyses described above have not yet taken into account the economic importance of each Conditional Output. There is, however, a need to focus on those connections of greatest economic importance. At this stage an estimate has been made of the potential economic impacts of delivering the targeted improvements in network performance described above, using the following approach: 1. Review of agglomeration impacts identified in the Economic Impact Study. The Economic Impact Study identified the agglomeration impacts of 10% and 20% reductions in generalised journey times in 2026 and This evidence can be used in two ways: first, to identify the potential strength of economic relationships for different origin-destination pairs, and second, to provide a benchmark for estimating the impacts of the targets identified in this latest work. 2. Assessment of strength of economic relationships. The agglomeration data was used to assess the overall strength of economic relationships for different origin-destination pairs. This can then be used to help identify those movements that should form the main focus for intervention through Midlands Connect. 3. Estimation of overall agglomeration impacts. The estimated agglomeration impacts of 10% and 20% improvements in connectivity were then used and combined with the connectivity targets set out above to estimate the potential agglomeration benefits. These can then be compared with the benchmarks established in the previous Economic Impact Study to review the overall potential economic impacts. Atkins Version 4.0 December

25 Strength of economic relationships The Economic Impact Study describes the economic impacts of connectivity improvements for each conditional output, including agglomeration impacts from enabling greater business clustering. These agglomeration impacts reflect the economic importance of each movement, because they take into account the scale of economic activity in connected locations and the propensity for these locations to interact. The agglomeration impacts for the conditional outputs can be compared to better understand the relative economic importance of different connections in the Midlands. The agglomeration impacts of 20% reductions in generalised journey times were used to assess the potential strength of economic relationships for the conditional outputs. These impacts were benchmarked and compared to the average for all the origin / destination pairs to assess the overall strength of relationship. This was undertaken separately for road and rail, in recognition of the differing roles of road and rail in supporting economic connections across the Midlands. Figures 4-2 and 4-3 compare the relative strength of economic relationship and the initial connectivity target, for each conditional output, for road and rail, respectively. Figure 4-2 Connectivity targets vs economic importance of origin-destination pairs (road) Less Important Very Important Figure 4-3 Connectivity targets vs economic importance of origin destination pairs (rail) Less Important Very Important Atkins Version 4.0 December

26 There are slight differences in the relative economic importance of different origin / destination pairs, based on definition of road and rail connectivity, because of the differences in rail and road connectivity between Midlands towns and cities. In the case of road, the movements with the highest levels of economic importance are Black Country Birmingham, other Midlands cities Birmingham, Nottingham Leicester, Leicester Coventry and Nottingham Derby. In the case of rail, the highest levels of economic importance are attributed to connections from major centres into Birmingham, Nottingham Leicester, Nottingham Derby and Leicester Derby. Other important movements include Nottingham Coventry, Leicester Coventry and Stoke Derby. Both figures show that there is more variation in the connectivity targets for movements of lower economic importance. It is not surprising that large potential improvements have been identified for more peripheral locations (with lower economic critical mass) that are not currently well connected. However, there are also many movements of lower economic importance that are currently relatively well connected. Again, this is not surprising: these movements form part of the wider connectivity of the Midlands. The highest levels of economic benefit will be derived for movements with high levels of economic importance and with the highest levels of improvement in connectivity. Conversely, movements with lower economic importance will deliver much lower levels of economic benefits. There will also be costs in improving connectivity: larger connectivity improvements will require higher-cost interventions. This means that larger connectivity improvements on movements with lower economic importance are likely to offer lower value for money. This is shown in Figure 4-4. Figure 4-4 Relationships between economic benefits and connectivity targets High investment cost, lower economic benefit: low priority Higher economic benefit could strengthen case for larger-scale investment Lower investment cost, lower economic benefit: medium priority Lower investment cost, higher economic benefit: higher priority Less Important Very Important In some cases, the potential benefits might not justify the investment required to deliver the connectivity targets (shown in pink). In these cases, it would be appropriate to consider more modest connectivity targets to improve the case for investment. Elsewhere, the potential scale of benefits could strengthen the case for larger-scale investment to deliver more transformational connectivity improvements Potential agglomeration impacts road Tables 4-8 and 4-9 show the largest agglomeration impacts of improved road connectivity on the road network. Table 4-8 includes connections to/from Birmingham and Table 4-9 excludes connections to/from Birmingham. Atkins Version 4.0 December

27 Table 4-8 Largest agglomeration impacts by road Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement in journey time) Agglomeration impact of target improvement ( m) 2026 West Bromwich Birmingham 12% 20.1m Brierley Hill Birmingham 15% 17.3m Wolverhampton Birmingham 16% 16.6m Leicester Birmingham 12% 11.3m Cannock/Lichfield/Tamworth Birmingham 17% 10.4m Nottingham Birmingham 12% 9.4m Walsall Birmingham 8% 7.9m Derby Birmingham 11% 7.4m Leamington/Warwick Birmingham 10% 7.3m Hereford Birmingham 25% 7.2m Table 4-9 Largest agglomeration impacts by road: excluding movements to Birmingham Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement in journey time) Agglomeration impact of target improvement ( m) 2026 Nottingham Leicester 14% 7.1m Nottingham Derby 15% 6.8m Leicester Coventry 11% 5.4m Walsall UK Central / Solihull 20% 4.2m Nottingham Coventry 14% 3.8m Northampton Leicester 16% 3.7m Wolverhampton Walsall 13% 3.7m Leicester Derby 11% 3.5m Walsall Nottingham 22% 3.2m Nottingham Mansfield 22% 3.0m These tables confirm that the largest agglomeration benefits would be focused on movements into and between the largest towns and cities in the Midlands. These include major movements into Birmingham, movements between cities in the East Midlands, and movements between the East and West Midlands. The analyses also show that there would be limited agglomeration impacts from some of those movements for which the largest potential connectivity targets were identified, including (for example) Shrewsbury to Hereford. As discussed above, this confirms that the focus for improvements to future connectivity should be on those movements with the greatest agglomeration potential. Overall, the analyses indicate that the total agglomeration impacts, in 2026, for all of the conditional outputs would be approximately 265 million, and the total impacts within the intensive growth corridors would be approximately 590 million 8. 8 Refer to Economic Impact Study, May This provided data on agglomeration impacts for 20% reductions in journey times in 2026 for Conditional Outputs ( 427 million) and Intensive Growth Corridors ( 959 million, or 2.25 x the impacts for the Conditional Outputs). Application of this multiplier to the latest estimate for the Conditional Outputs gives approximately 590 million for the Intensive Growth Corridors. Atkins Version 4.0 December

28 Potential agglomeration impacts rail Tables 4-10 and 4-11 show the largest agglomeration impacts of improved rail connectivity on the road network. Table 4-10 includes connections to/from Birmingham and Table 4-11 excludes connections to/from Birmingham. Table 4-10 Largest agglomeration impacts by rail Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement in journey time) Agglomeration impact of target improvement ( m) 2026 Milton Keynes Birmingham 15% 4.8m Nottingham Birmingham 17% 3.6m Walsall Birmingham 11% 2.2m Wolverhampton Walsall 57% 2.2m Hereford Birmingham 28% 2.1m Lichfield/Tamworth Birmingham 16% 2.0m Nottingham Coventry 42% 1.9m Leamington/Warwick Birmingham 10% 1.5m Telford/Shrewsbury Birmingham 7% 1.4m Leicester Birmingham 7% 1.4m Nottingham Milton Keynes 30% 1.4m Table 4-11 Largest agglomeration impacts by rail: excluding movements to Birmingham Conditional Output Initial target (% improvement in journey time) Agglomeration impact of target improvement ( m) Wolverhampton Walsall 57% 2.2m Nottingham Coventry 42% 1.9m Nottingham Milton Keynes 30% 1.4m Walsall UK Central/Solihull 27% 1.3m West Bromwich UK Central/Solihull 24% 1.2m Wolverhampton Nottingham 33% 1.1m Milton Keynes Coventry 16% 1.1m Nottingham UK Central/Solihull 36% 1.1m Milton Keynes Leicester 28% 1.0m Leicester Coventry 25% 0.9m As for the earlier road based analysis, these tables confirm that the largest agglomeration benefits would be focused on movements into and between the largest towns and cities in the Midlands. These include major movements into Birmingham, movements between cities in the East Midlands, and movements between the East and West Midlands. The analyses also show that there would be limited agglomeration impacts from some of those movements for which the largest potential connectivity targets were identified, including (for example) Shrewsbury to Hereford. As discussed above, this confirms that the focus for improvements to future connectivity should be on those movements with the greatest agglomeration potential. Atkins Version 4.0 December

29 Overall, the analyses indicate that the total agglomeration impacts, in 2026, for all of the conditional outputs would be approximately 45 million, and the total impacts within the intensive growth corridors would be approximately 85 million Summary This chapter has set out how the strategic connectivity challenges in the Midlands have been translated into a series of targets for connectivity improvements. It has highlighted the importance of improvements to both transport connectivity and capacity across the Midlands. The work to date on developing targets has initially focused on connectivity, but it is recognised that significant further work will be required, moving forward, on assessing capacity requirements. The work on connectivity targets has indicated that significant improvements will be required across the wider network, but with a particularly strong case for intervention to improve certain key movements. 9 Refer to Economic Impact Study, May This provided data on agglomeration impacts for 20% reductions in journey times in 2026 for Conditional Outputs ( 75 million) and Intensive Growth Corridors ( 143 million, or 1.9 x the impacts for the Conditional Outputs). Application of this multiplier to the latest estimate for the Conditional Outputs gives approximately 85 million for the Intensive Growth Corridors. Atkins Version 4.0 December

30 5. Conclusions and recommendations 5.1. Introduction The previous phase of work for Midlands Connect highlighted that there would be significant economic benefits from reducing journey times between different locations in the Midlands. The analyses included impacts on business journey times, labour market impacts and potential agglomeration impacts, in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA), together with potential effects in unlocking new employment across the region. This study has built on the previous work, to examine in more detail the evidence on business needs and connectivity challenges, and to develop guiding principles, objectives and targets for the conditional outputs. This has demonstrated that effective connectivity is a critical requirement for business competitiveness, connectivity is currently poor for a number of strategic movements, and there is a strong case for intervention to improve the strategic transport network Business needs The proposed growth outlined in the SEPs suggests that three sectors will continue to play a key role in shaping the Midlands economy, with large numbers of new jobs to be created: business and professional services; manufacturing and logistics, with most corridors and hubs supporting a range of jobs in all of these sectors. Travel requirements differ considerably for these sectors. Business engagement has informed the assessment and has helped to confirm a number of concerns from different sectors. Feedback from the logistics industry confirms that margins are typically low and poor levels of journey reliability have major impacts on the ability of the industry to operate effectively. Feedback from the business and professional services sector confirms that rail travel is important for business travel, especially as these sectors often locate in town and city centres Connectivity challenges Analysis of existing evidence and stakeholder engagement has demonstrated the diversity of the connectivity challenges on the road and rail networks in the Midlands. On the road network, there are problems with speeds and levels of reliability, with statistics from Highways England demonstrating that a lower proportion of journeys are completed on time for many roads in the Midlands relative to the national average. The speed and reliability challenges give rise to concerns for the logistics industry, which is extensively represented in the Midlands as a result of its central location. On the rail network, important themes are average speed (often due to a lack of direct journeys) and reliability of services. Capacity concerns have also been raised at a number of locations, where a predominantly two-track railway constrains the ability for future service development. The business surveys have also raised concerns regarding the affordability of rail services for business journeys. Many locations are not linked directly by rail services, leading to high generalised journey times, for example between Coventry and Leicester. Journeys between Nottingham and Birmingham, whilst direct, are slow because of their routing via Derby Guiding principles and objectives Guiding principles were developed to help inform the definition of objectives and targets. Whilst the focus of the study has been on strategic movements, there is a clear need to consider the whole journey, including the components of journey on local transport networks, which can have a significant bearing on the user s mode choice. Guiding principles have also been developed for freight traffic (both road and rail) and access to international gateways. Objectives have been developed to take into account both connectivity (journey times, reliability and service frequencies) and capacity (ability to cater for travel demand). These have been Atkins Version 4.0 December

31 applied to the corridors and hubs, confirming that the objectives are relevant to the whole Midlands. In addition to measures of journey performance such as speed and reliability, there are explicit objectives relating to enabling growth and to enable the Midlands to fully benefit from HS2. HS2 will transform connectivity and significantly boost capacity across the Midlands, with the potential for major changes both as a result of the new faster services on the high speed railway, but also on the classic network as a result of released capacity Targets Performance indicators have been developed and the immediate priority has been to formulate targets focusing on improvements to journey speeds. This analysis indicates that, if the strategy is to raise connectivity standards to the current average and to halve the current difference between best and worst performance for each movement, there would be significant variations in the targets for different movements across the Midlands, reflecting the variable current performance of the road and rail networks. The initial targets have been compared with indicators of economic importance for each movement. There are certain movements of critical economic importance, and investment in improved connectivity on these movements is more likely to deliver large-scale benefits to the Midlands. On the other hand, large-scale investment in projects to improve connectivity in areas of more limited economic importance is unlikely to be justified. Figure 5-1 shows the relationship between the economic importance and the connectivity targets. The diagram for rail is used as an illustration, but the same principles can also be applied to investment in the road network. This highlights the importance of taking into account the scale of economic importance of different movements in making the case for connectivity improvements. Figure 5-1 Relationships between economic benefits and connectivity targets High investment cost, lower economic benefit: low priority Higher economic benefit could strengthen case for larger-scale investment Lower investment cost, lower economic benefit: medium priority Lower investment cost, higher economic benefit: higher priority Less Important Very Important In some cases, the potential benefits might not justify the investment required to deliver the connectivity targets (shown in pink). In these cases, it would be appropriate to consider more modest connectivity targets to improve the case for investment (based on an understanding of the economic benefits of smaller improvements in connectivity). Elsewhere, the potential scale of benefits could strengthen the case for larger-scale investment to deliver more transformational connectivity improvements. This will need to be considered further in the next phase of Midlands Connect. This work has initially focused on improving journey speeds for key movements in the Midlands. It is recognised that more work is required in future, which will need to include improved journey reliability, increased service frequencies and increasing rail capacity to cater for city centre growth, as well as consideration of connections with other parts of the UK. Atkins Version 4.0 December

32 5.6. Recommendations Based on the emerging findings from this study, there is now a requirement to: review growth forecasts (both housing and jobs) for different areas to build a more comprehensive assessment of overall growth in travel demand, future growth pressures and implications for future travel conditions on the Midlands transport network; this needs to reflect both current planned growth and further ambitions; in the light of the above, review potential economic benefits to help inform understanding about future investment priorities; continue to refine the targets to take into account issues of practical feasibility, as well as develop targets for improved reliability and service frequencies; undertake work to develop targets for increasing capacity on the Midlands rail network, with a focus on the four hubs, particularly in terms of capacity into Birmingham; and develop the components of the Midlands Transport Strategy. Atkins Version 4.0 December

33 Appendices

34 Appendix A. Graphics showing connectivity challenges The following graphics present the connectivity challenges in different parts of the Midlands, as follows: North East Quadrant Road; North East Quadrant Rail; South East Quadrant Road; South East Quadrant Rail; South West Quadrant Road; South West Quadrant Rail; North West Quadrant Road; North West Quadrant Rail. Supporting text, to describe the issues in different parts of the Midlands, is provided in the tables in Appendix B. Atkins Version 4.0 December

35 Atkins Version 4.0 December

36 Atkins Version 4.0 December

37 Atkins Version 4.0 December

38 Atkins Version 4.0 December

39 Atkins Version 4.0 December

40 Atkins Version 4.0 December

41 Atkins Version 4.0 December

42 Atkins Version 4.0 December

43 Appendix B. Description of connectivity challenges B.1. Introduction This appendix provides a commentary of the connectivity issues and constraints across the Midlands, focused on the conditional outputs, corridors and hubs. For ease of analysis and presentation, the conditional outputs, corridors and hubs have been grouped. Table B-1 sets out these proposed groupings and references to more detailed analyses in tables that follow later in this appendix. Table B-1 Conditional outputs, corridors and hubs Origin Destination Connection to Hub Brierley Hill / Dudley Hub@UKC (Solihull) - Brierley Hill / Dudley Birmingham (& HS2) - Walsall Hub@UKC (Solihull) - Walsall Birmingham (& HS2) - West Bromwich Hub@UKC (Solihull) - West Bromwich Birmingham (& HS2) - Wolverhampton Walsall - Wolverhampton Hub@UKC (Solihull) - Wolverhampton Birmingham (& HS2) - Cannock Birmingham (& HS2) Birmingham, 4 Solihull and Black Walsall Cannock Country 4 Nottingham Birmingham (& HS2) 4 Nottingham Hub@UKC (Solihull) 4 Walsall Nottingham 4 Wolverhampton Nottingham 4 Hub@UKC (Solihull) Coventry 1, 5 Leamington / Warwick Birmingham (& HS2) 5 Leamington / Warwick Hub@UKC (Solihull) 5 Leicester Hub@UKC (Solihull) 5 Leicester Birmingham (& HS2) 5 East Midlands Airport Derby 4 Nottingham Derby 4 Nottingham East Midlands Airport 4 Derby Chesterfield 3 Mansfield Derby 3 Mansfield East Midlands Airport 3 Nottingham Mansfield Nottingham and 3 Leicester Lincoln Derby 4, 5 Newark Leicester 4, 5 Derby Hub@UKC (Solihull) 4 Derby Birmingham (& HS2) 4 East Midlands Airport Birmingham (& HS2) 4 Lincoln Birmingham (& HS2) 4 Lincoln East Midlands Airport 4 Location in Corridor For more detail: Table B-2 Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country Table B-3 Nottingham, Derby and the North Atkins Version 4.0 December

44 Origin Destination Connection to Hub Newark Birmingham (& HS2) 4 Newark Lincoln 4 Newark East Midlands Airport 4 Nottingham Newark 4 Nottingham Lincoln 4 Leamington / Warwick Coventry 5 Leicester Coventry 5 Leicester Leamington / Warwick 5 Derby Coventry 5 East Midlands Airport Coventry Leicester and 5 Leicester Derby Coventry 5 Leicester East Midlands Airport 5 Nottingham Coventry 5 Nottingham Leamington / Warwick 5 Nottingham Leicester 5 Stafford Birmingham (& HS2) 2 Stoke on Trent Birmingham (& HS2) 2 Walsall Stoke on Trent Stoke and 2 Northern Stoke on Trent Cannock Staffordshire 2 Stoke on Trent Derby 4a Stoke on Trent East Midlands Airport 4a Nottingham Milton Keynes 1, 5 Nottingham Northampton 1, 5 Milton Keynes Birmingham (& HS2) 1 Milton Keynes Leicester 1 Milton Keynes Coventry 1 Milton Keynes Hub@UKC (Solihull) 1 - Milton Keynes Kettering/Corby 1 Northampton Leicester 1 Northampton Birmingham (& HS2) 1 Northampton Milton Keynes 1 Northampton Kettering/Corby 1 Northampton Hub@UKC (Solihull) 1 Location in Corridor For more detail: Table B-4 Leicester and Coventry Table B-5 Stoke, Staffordshire and the North West Table B-6 Northampton, South- East Midlands, the East and South East Telford / Shrewsbury Hereford (Birmingham, 2, 6 Table B-7 Hereford Birmingham (& HS2) Solihull and Black 6 Worcester, Hereford, Country) the South West and Worcestershire Birmingham (& HS2) 6 South Wales Telford / Shrewsbury Birmingham (& HS2) (Birmingham, 2 Table B-8 Telford, Telford / Shrewsbury Hub@UKC (Solihull) Solihull and Black 2 Shrewsbury and Mid Wolverhampton Telford / Shrewsbury Country) 2 Wales Atkins Version 4.0 December

45 B.2. Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country Key issues are presented in the table below, including connections within the hub and connections to major destinations elsewhere in the Midlands, including Nottingham and Leicester. Table B-2 Birmingham, Solihull and Black Country Measure Road Rail Which journeys are slow? Where are there poor rail frequencies? Which journeys are unreliable? Where are the constraints? See graphics in Appendix A Is there good access to international gateways? What are the challenges for the movement of freight? Slow journeys: Cannock Birmingham Brierley Hill / Dudley Birmingham Walsall UK Central West Bromwich Birmingham Wolverhampton Walsall Wolverhampton UK Central Wolverhampton Birmingham Walsall Nottingham Wolverhampton Nottingham The Birmingham Motorway Box is heavily congested. Highways England measures of journey reliability confirm that the percentages of journeys completed on time are significantly below the national average. The M6 on the north side of the box is notably congested. Stakeholders have raised significant concerns about the under-use of the M6 Toll and its apparent limited impact on M6 congestion in the Birmingham and Black Country conurbation. Strategic highway access from the Black Country is a significant concern for stakeholders. Access to Birmingham Airport is generally good from the centre of Birmingham and east of the conurbation, but is poor from locations further west such as the Black Country. Access by road is problematic, with unreliable journeys and congestion at Junction 6 of the M42. Journeys to East Midlands Airport are prone to congestion on the Birmingham Motorway Box and M1 corridor in the East Midlands. Reliance on heavily congested motorway network, leading to unreliable journeys. The business survey showed that margins for road freight can be very low and hence unreliability is a major cause for concern. Road links from the Black Country to the strategic road network are crucial for the large manufacturing base in that area. Considerable numbers of logistics companies are based in the Midlands, capitalising on the central location in the UK. Slow journeys: Walsall UK Central West Bromwich UK Central Wolverhampton Walsall Walsall Nottingham Wolverhampton Nottingham Nottingham UK Central Leamington/Warwick UK Central Leicester UK Central No direct services from Nottingham to UKC, Walsall, Wolverhampton, and Leamington and Leicester to UKC. Birmingham New Street is a bottleneck of national significance, with limited capacity on the approaches, which means that in the event of disruption, timetable recovery is difficult. This is a constraint on future service development in the West Midlands. The largest operators in central Birmingham are Virgin Trains, Cross Country and London Midland. All three have PPM figures below the national average, and the long-distance nature of the services means that delay can be imported from elsewhere on the network. The network in the area is largely two track, which means that delays on the network are exacerbated. The layout of the network at Water Orton, with a large number of conflicting movements, limits future service enhancements between the East and West Midlands. Business surveys have confirmed that ticket prices are a barrier to greater use of rail for business travel. Access to Birmingham Airport is good from the city centre but many journeys require a change of train in central Birmingham. Journeys to East Midlands Airport by rail are very difficult, with at least one change of train required, and a high generalised journey time. Express Skylink bus services from the three East Midlands cities provides faster journeys. There are numerous rail freight terminals in or close to the conurbation. There are conflicting needs for further train paths to serve these facilities versus aspirations for improved passenger services: for example, in the Water Orton area, with intermodal services wishing to access Hams Hall, Birch Coppice and Lawley Street. There is a need for additional rail freight capacity in the Birmingham area, including supporting longerdistance through-flows (for example, scrap metal). Atkins Version 4.0 December

46 B.3. Nottingham, Derby and North Key issues are presented below, including links to the North, Lincolnshire, Leicestershire and Staffordshire. Table B-3 Nottingham, Derby and the North Measure Road Rail Which journeys are slow? Where are there poor rail frequencies? Which journeys are unreliable? Where are the constraints? See graphics in Appendix A Is there good access to international gateways? What are the challenges for the movement of freight? Relatively slow journeys: Lincoln East Midlands Airport Nottingham Lincoln Several junctions on the M1 Motorway in the area suffer significant congestion. Levels of journey reliability are low on the M1 through the East Midlands. Journeys to the West Midlands rely heavily on the Birmingham Box, including the M42 and M6. Many sections of this route are in the top 10% of most congested links in England. High levels of congestion in both Derby and Nottingham, including A38 through Derby, A52 connecting the cities, congestion in Derby and congestion on the Nottingham Ring Road: lack of capacity is a major issue in planning for growth south of Nottingham. To the west of the hub, on Corridor 4A, there are congested junctions on the A50 corridor towards Stoke-on-Trent and the North-West. Significant congestion on A46 Newark Northern Bypass, which is a single carriageway bottleneck. This is a major constraint to growth in the Newark area. East Midlands Airport is located adjacent to the M1 motorway, close to Junction 24, but both the junctions and the motorway suffer from significant congestion. Other east-west routes such as the A50, A52 and A453 also provide access to East Midlands Airport. Access to Birmingham Airport is via the A42 / M42 corridor. This is prone to significant congestion, including at M42 J6, in part associated with a mix of strategic and more local trips on the network. Reliance on heavily congested motorway network such as the M1 corridor, leading to unreliable journeys. Considerable numbers of logistics companies in the East Midlands (including the Golden Triangle ). Business survey showed that margins for road freight can be very low and hence unreliability is a major cause for concern. Slow journeys: Mansfield Derby Mansfield East Midlands Airport Leicester Lincoln Newark Leicester East Midlands Airport Birmingham Previous work identified that slow speeds between Nottingham and Birmingham highlight the need for improvement on this corridor in advance of HS2 Phase 2. Journeys from East Midlands cities towards Coventry and Northampton require a change of train en-route. MML has a number of bottlenecks, including at Syston (Leicester) and further south on the route where there are 3-track sections. Conflicts at approaches to Derby station cause disruption and regular delays to services between Nottingham and Birmingham. The hub is also influenced by railway bottlenecks further afield such as Water Orton, which limit future service enhancements between the East and West Midlands. There is overcrowding on the North Staffs Line between Derby and Stoke-on-Trent. East Midlands Trains has a PPM figure of 92.7%, higher than the national average of 89.5%. However Cross- Country is the second largest operator of services in the hub, but has a PPM figure of 88.7%; below the national average. Given the long-distance nature of its services, it is prone to importing delay from other areas. The Nottingham to Lincoln line crosses the ECML at a flat crossing at Newark-on-Trent, which can be a source of delay in the hub. Business surveys have confirmed that ticket prices are a barrier to greater use of rail for business travel. Journeys to East Midlands Airport are via East Midlands Parkway Railway Station. Frequencies are broadly hourly from both Derby and Nottingham, leading to a relatively high generalised journey time. Skylink bus services link East Midlands Parkway Railway Station with East Midlands Airport. Journeys to Birmingham Airport cannot be made by direct train journey, with a change of train required at Birmingham New Street, increasing the generalised journey time. The need for paths to serve aspirations for new intermodal terminals in the East Midlands, including (for example) proposal for East Midlands Gateway at M1 Junction 24. Heavy flows of aggregate traffic on the MML route (in particular), with conflicts between aspirations for greater freight versus greater passenger services. Atkins Version 4.0 December

47 B.4. Leicester and Coventry Key issues relating to connectivity in the Leicester and Coventry area, including connections to Nottingham, Derby, Northamptonshire, Warwickshire and Birmingham, are shown below. Table B-4 Leicester and Coventry Measure Road Rail Which journeys are slow? Where are there poor rail frequencies? Which journeys are unreliable? Where are the constraints? See graphics in Appendix A Is there good access to international gateways? What are the challenges for the movement of freight? Relatively slow journeys include: Derby Coventry Nottingham Leamington / Warwick Congested sections of the M1 are to the south (from J19 to the M25), but also to the north, through the East Midlands and onwards through South Yorkshire. Congested sections of the M6 are through the West Midlands Conurbation but also to the north, for example through Staffordshire and towards the Manchester area. The lack of a hard shoulder on the A14 means that it can be susceptible to long incident clear-up times, and there are few alternative routes during times of disruption. The A46 corridor to the North-East has congested sections in the Leicester area; in the vicinity of the junction with the A1 at Newark; and in the Lincoln area. The A5 corridor has several congested junctions and is prone to chronic congestion when there are incidents on parallel sections of the M1 and M6 Motorways. Access to Birmingham Airport is dependent on location in the hub, but the M6 and M42 Motorways are likely to accommodate the majority of the trips from the east. East Midlands Airport is located adjacent to the M1, but both the junctions and the motorway itself are very prone to congestion in this area. The area is home to a large number of logistics companies, capitalising on northsouth and east-west motorway links (including M1, M6 and A14 corridors). The highway network is heavily congested and unreliable in many locations, including the M1 and M6 corridors. Business survey showed that margins for road freight can be very low and hence unreliability is a major cause for concern. Slow journeys: Leamington / Warwick Coventry Leicester Leamington / Warwick Leicester Coventry Derby Coventry East Midlands Airport Coventry Nottingham Coventry Nottingham Leamington/Warwick Journeys from Coventry towards East Midlands are very poor, requiring changes of train in Nuneaton or Birmingham. Services between Coventry and Leamington Spa are hourly. Journeys from East Midlands cities towards Coventry and the South-East Midlands require a change of train en-route. Coventry to Birmingham and Wolverhampton railway is largely two-track and accommodates suburban, regional and long-distance services. WCML is at the limit of its usable capacity in the West Midlands. At Coventry, the WCML provides a barrier which restricts crossover movements at Coventry on the North-South corridor, which is proposed to accommodate the Electric Spine. Single track section south of Coventry: constraint to running more local and longer distance services. No connection between Coventry and Leicester lines at Nuneaton, which limits ability to run a through service. Syston Junction is a flat junction just south of Leicester Station and conflicting movements can lead to delays for MML and Cross Country services. The MML to the south-east of the Midlands has 3-track sections which could constrain future operations. Services between Coventry and Leamington Spa only operate hourly (the 2 nd Cross-Country service each hour operates via the Chiltern Line and avoids Coventry). Business surveys have confirmed that ticket prices are a barrier to greater use of rail for business travel. There is good rail access from Coventry to Birmingham Airport. Journeys from the Leicester area however require a change of train in Birmingham. Services on the MML link Leicester with East Midlands Parkway Station (for East Midlands Airport), but there are poor links from Coventry to East Midlands Airport, with two changes of train required, leading to a typical journey time in excess of 100 minutes. Heavy flows of freight on both the MML and WCML routes, with conflicting aspirations for greater flows of rail freight vs aims for improved passenger services. The largely two-track section from the WCML at Rugby to Birmingham, via Coventry, is heavily constrained. DIRFT is an increasingly important location for domestic intermodal traffic, including many flows to and from Scotland via the WCML. Atkins Version 4.0 December

48 B.5. Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire and North West Key issues relating to connectivity in the Northern Staffordshire area, including connections to Derby, Birmingham and the North West, are shown below. Table B-5 Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire and the North West Measure Road Rail Which journeys are slow? Where are there poor rail frequencies? Which journeys are unreliable? Where are the constraints? See graphics in Appendix A Is there good access to international gateways? What are the challenges for the movement of freight? Slowest journeys for this hub: Stafford Birmingham Stoke-on-Trent Birmingham Several section of the M6 suffer significant congestion (see Appendix A). Notably congested sections include from the M54 south towards the Birmingham Box and the section from the hub north towards the Manchester area. Levels of journey reliability are low on the M6 Motorway relative to the national average. To the east of the hub there are a number of congested junctions on the A50 corridor towards the East Midlands. During the workshops, concern was raised regarding the under-use of the M6 Toll and the impact on congestion levels on the M6 through the West Midlands. Access to Birmingham Airport is via the M6 Corridor. As above, this is prone to significant congestion, including at M42 J6 serving the airport. East Midlands Airport is located adjacent to the M1 motorway, but both the junctions and the motorway are prone to congestion. The A50 and A38 are important corridors for access to East Midlands Airport from the west. The M6 corridor is central to the movement of road freight in this area, but has a number of congested junctions and poor journey reliability. There are also concerns regarding the reliability of west-east road movements, e.g. the A50 corridor to the East Midlands. Increasing mineral / aggregate freight from Peak District largely by road through Stokeon-Trent and urban north Staffordshire. The business survey showed that margins for road freight can be very low and hence unreliability is a major cause for concern. Slow journeys: Walsall Stoke-on-Trent Stoke-on-Trent Cannock Stoke-on-Trent East Midlands Airport Service frequency is only hourly on the North Staffs Line between Crewe / Stoke-on-Trent and Derby. Stakeholders have raised concerns about overcrowding on this route. The largest operators are Virgin Trains, Cross Country and London Midland (other services are also provided by Northern and East Midlands Trains). The three operators all have PPM figures below the national average, and the long-distance nature of these operators services means that delay can be imported from elsewhere on the network. The railway network, with the exception of the WCML to Crewe, is largely two track, which constrains service frequencies at local stations due to lack of capacity and mixed use of track, which also leads to poor timetable resilience and periods of knock-on disruption. Single-track section between Crewe and Stoke is a major constraint to train paths. Lack of east-west paths through Crewe limit connectivity between Stoke / Staffordshire and the North West. At-grade rail junction at Colwich and two-track sections of WCML north of Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent. Lack of capacity from Walsall towards Stafford and Stoke constrains the ability to run through services Business surveys have confirmed that ticket prices are a barrier to greater use of rail for business travel. Hourly through journeys to Birmingham Airport can be made from both Stoke-on-Trent and Stafford. Journeys to East Midlands Airport require a change at Derby station for Skylink buses (trains from Derby to East Midlands Parkway Station are only hourly, with a further bus connection from the station to the Airport). Operating times of train services from Stoke to Derby are limited to daytimes and evenings. There are no direct rail services between Stafford / Stoke-on-Trent and Manchester Airport, and no direct services between Stoke-on-Trent and Liverpool South Parkway for Liverpool Airport. WCML plays a key national role in the movement of rail freight, with large numbers of trains passing through Staffordshire on this route each day. Maintaining capacity for these services is crucial in ensuring that they do not switch instead to road. Rugeley Power Station is a major origin and destination for rail freight traffic. There are aspirations for additional intermodal facilities close to Stafford / Stoke-on-Trent, including Cannock. There are also aspirations further afield for greater intermodal traffic, such as the Port of Liverpool, which may lead to heavier demand for WCML freight paths. Atkins Version 4.0 December

49 B.6. Northampton, South East Midlands, East and South East Issues relating to connectivity in Northampton and the South East Midlands, including connections to London, the East of England and the Oxford Cambridge Arc, are shown below. Table B-6 Northampton, South East Midlands, East and South East Measure Road Rail Which journeys are slow? Where are there poor rail frequencies? Which journeys are unreliable? Where are the constraints? See graphics in Appendix A Is there good access to international gateways? What are the challenges for the movement of freight? Relatively slow journeys: Northampton Leicester Nottingham Northampton The M1 motorway is heavily congested in this area, and the parallel A5 corridor is prone to chronic congestion when there are incidents on the M1. Due to a lack of hard shoulder on sections of the A14, there are long incident clear-up times, coupled with few suitable parallel routes for traffic to divert to. Access to Birmingham Airport is via the M1 / M6 or M1 / M45 / A45 corridors. The M1 and M6 Motorways both have heavily congested sections and junctions. Access to East Midlands Airport is via the M1 corridor which has a number of heavily congested sections. There are large numbers of logistics companies in this area, making use of the north-south and west-east highway links that are available. Many of the key corridors are however heavily congested and have poor levels of journey reliability. The A14 corridor is a key route for intermodal traffic to and from the Port of Felixstowe. The business survey showed that margins for road freight can be very low and hence unreliability is a major cause for concern. Slow journeys (these all require changes in trains en route): Northampton Leicester Nottingham Northampton Milton Keynes Leicester Milton Keynes Kettering / Corby Northampton Kettering / Corby Northampton and Leicester are located on different northsouth main lines and there are few west-east linkages between the two routes. The future introduction of East-West Rail could partly mitigate this poor west-east connectivity. Journey times are long from this area towards Cambridge. In addition, journeys from the South-East Midlands towards the East Midlands require a change of train. The WCML and MML are both very busy railway lines supporting a range of suburban, regional and longdistance services, in addition to high flows of rail freight, particularly on the WCML. Trains from Northampton to Birmingham must use the heavily trafficked 2-track section between Coventry and Birmingham, and Birmingham New Street is a bottleneck of national significance. Capacity constraints at Syston, close to Leicester, associated with conflicting north-south and east-west movements in the Leicester area. The business surveys have confirmed that ticket prices are a barrier to greater use of rail for business travel. Rail access from Northampton to Birmingham Airport is relatively good (with 3 tph) but rail access from Kettering and Corby is unattractive, with changes of train required, leading to high generalised journey times. Rail access to East Midlands Airport is poor from Northampton, with at least two changes of train required. However, from locations on the MML such as Kettering, direct train services operate. DIRFT is an increasingly important location for domestic intermodal traffic, including many flows to and from Scotland via the WCML. The WCML and MML are both vital arteries for rail freight and hence maintaining capacity for rail freight on these routes is key. Atkins Version 4.0 December

50 B.7. Worcester, Hereford, South West and South Wales Issues relating to connectivity in Worcester and Hereford, including connections to Bristol, Cardiff, Shrewsbury and Birmingham, are shown below. Table B-7 Worcester, Hereford, South West and South Wales Measure Road Rail Which journeys are slow? Where are there poor rail frequencies? Which journeys are unreliable? Where are the constraints? See graphics in Appendix A Is there good access to international gateways? What are the challenges for the movement of freight? Relatively slow journeys: Worcester Birmingham Hereford Birmingham Shrewsbury Hereford M5 and M42 are both prone to heavy congestion around Birmingham. Highways England statistics show that the numbers of journeys completed on time are considerably lower than the national average. There is also congestion at Junction 6 of the M5, adjacent to the growth area at Worcester Technology Park. There is congestion on the south side of Worcester affecting trips towards the M5 Motorway. The A49 is heavily congested in the Hereford area due to a lack of river crossings in the area and heavy use of the A49 river crossing through the city centre. The A49 single carriageway results in long and variable journey times between Hereford and Shrewsbury. Access to Birmingham Airport from both locations is via the Birmingham Motorway Box, which suffers from poor levels of reliability. Special events at the National Exhibition Centre can have significant detrimental impacts on congestion on the wider network, impacting on access to the Airport. There is a major bias towards road freight in this area given the absence of large sources / destinations for rail freight. Unreliability of journeys on the M5 corridor are compounded by high seasonal flows from the Midlands towards the South-West. Further development at the Hereford Enterprise Zone is expected to lead to further demand for road freight in the area. The business survey showed that margins for road freight can be very low and hence unreliability is a major cause for concern. Slow journeys: Worcester Birmingham Hereford Birmingham Rail journeys are also slow and infrequent from Worcester and Hereford towards Gloucestershire and the South-West, with trains between Worcester and Cheltenham Spa operating only two-hourly. Businesses have expressed concern about poor frequencies and journey times to the West Midlands. Service frequencies are hourly (via Bromsgrove) between Hereford / Worcester and Birmingham. The West Midlands and Chilterns RUS identifies that the 2-track section between Birmingham New Street and Kings Norton is heavily constrained due to the dense mix of traffic, station calling patterns and junction layout at Kings Norton. Birmingham New Street is a bottleneck of national significance which limits service provision across the Midlands. There are single-track sections of the Cotswold Line between Worcester and Oxford and between the main line close to Bromsgrove and Droitwich Spa. There are also single-track sections between Worcester and Hereford. These have implications for timetable resilience. There are constraints on the Marches Line in the Leominster area. The business surveys have confirmed that ticket prices are a barrier to greater use of rail for business travel. Journeys to Birmingham Airport require a change of train in central Birmingham, leading to a relatively high generalised journey time. There are no major sources / destinations for rail freight in the area, but the Birmingham to Bristol main line supports relatively high flows of longer-distance rail freight. The West Midlands and Chilterns Route Utilisation Strategy notes that the steep gradient of the Lickey Incline, between Bromsgrove and Barnt Green, impacts on capacity utilisation, particularly for freight traffic. The RUS also notes that significant capital investment to support expansion of the Port of Bristol will drive growth in the container market. This may lead to increased flows on the main line between Birmingham and Cheltenham. Atkins Version 4.0 December

51 B.8. Telford, Shrewsbury and Mid Wales Issues relating to connectivity in Shrewsbury, Telford and the northern area of the Marches, including connections to Mid-Wales, Wolverhampton, Birmingham and Hereford, are shown below. Table B-8 Telford, Shrewsbury and Mid Wales Measure Road Rail Which journeys are slow? Where are there poor rail frequencies? Which journeys are unreliable? Where are the constraints? See graphics in Appendix A Is there good access to international gateways? What are the challenges for the movement of freight? Relatively slow journeys Shrewsbury / Telford Birmingham Shrewsbury / Telford UK Central Congestion at M54 Junction 2 and various junctions on the A5 in the Shrewsbury area (including the junction with the A49). A number of Pinch Point improvement schemes have been introduced on this route. Also congestion at the junction of the A5 and A483 near Oswestry. The M6 corridor to the east has poor levels of journey reliability. The M6 Toll is considered to be under-used and hence does not alleviate M6 congestion to the extent that it may otherwise do. A number of consultees for the business research identified that the high cost of using the route results in limited use by the logistics and manufacturing sector as part of their distribution routes. Business surveys identified stakeholder concerns about the lack of a direct link from southbound M54 to northbound M6 / M6 Toll. Access to Birmingham Airport from Telford, Shrewsbury and Mid Wales is via the Birmingham Motorway Box, which suffers from poor levels of journey reliability. Special events at the National Exhibition Centre can have significant detrimental impacts on congestion in the surrounding area, impacting on access to the airport. The M54 / A5 corridor is a key route for road freight to and from Ireland, via Holyhead. The M6 corridor to the east has poor levels of journey reliability. The business survey showed that margins for road freight can be very low and hence unreliability is a major cause for concern. Based on our analyses, no journeys are raised as being notably slow, but based on a more high-level analysis, journeys towards Hereford on the Marches Line and on the Birmingham route are considered to be relatively slow. Stakeholder aspirations for electrification of the railway between Wolverhampton and Shrewsbury have been identified. There are 2tph between Shrewsbury / Telford and Wolverhampton / Birmingham, but these are not evenly spaced across the hour. Birmingham New Street is a bottleneck of national significance which limits service provision across the Midlands. Services to Birmingham must use the heavily constrained 2-track railway between Wolverhampton and Birmingham, which can be a significant source of delay. A number of long-distance operators such as Virgin Trains and Cross-Country operate on that corridor and hence may import delay from elsewhere on the railway network. The business surveys have confirmed that ticket prices are a barrier to greater use of rail for business travel. Through journeys to Birmingham Airport are available from both Shrewsbury and Telford on Arriva Trains Wales services. Some rail freight services use the intermodal terminal in Telford. However, in accessing this terminal from the east, trains must use the busy rail network in the West Midlands and further service development is constrained. Atkins Version 4.0 December

52 Appendix C. Objectives by geographic area Table C-1 Objectives for Birmingham, Solihull, Black Country and Links to the West and South West Objective A. Improve speeds and reliability of journeys by road between adjacent urban areas, which will become longer (and more unreliable) as congestion rises with increasing demand for travel Potential Focus Black Country Birmingham and UK Central Cannock, Lichfield and Tamworth Birmingham Walsall and Wolverhampton Nottingham Movements within the Black Country (Wolv. Walsall) B. Improve speeds and frequencies of rail services between key urban areas, including addressing the impacts of indirect rail links, to enable rail to better cater for future travel needs C. Improve journey speeds by road and rail to unlock the economic potential of towns and cities in more peripheral locations, including Hereford and Shrewsbury D. Improve road access (with a focus on speeds and reliability) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester E. Improve rail connectivity (with a focus on speeds and frequencies) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester Wolverhampton Walsall Black Country UK Central Nottingham Birmingham and UK Central Hereford and Worcestershire Birmingham Walsall Birmingham Cannock, Lichfield and Tamworth Birmingham Leamington Spa and Warwick Birmingham Worcester / Hereford to Birmingham Shrewsbury / Telford to Birmingham Shrewsbury to Hereford Birmingham to London and South East Birmingham to Manchester Birmingham to Leeds and Sheffield Improve journey times to Manchester / Sheffield / Leeds Improve journey times to Cambridge corridor Address crowding on Cross Country including towards Manchester, Sheffield / Leeds and Oxford Address reliability of: F. Enhance road freight links (with a focus on speeds and reliability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool G. Improve rail freight links (with a focus on speed and capacity / capability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool H. Improve access to UK Central (for Birmingham Airport) and East Midlands Airport with a significant increase in surface access capacity, including improved rail connectivity from a wider area and improved road reliability M6 / A14 corridor to Haven Gateway M6 corridor to Port of Liverpool / North-West M5 corridor to Bristol Birmingham Motorway Box, affecting all movements Improve capacity and capability of rail freight connections to Felixstowe (via Nuneaton), Southampton (via Oxford), Liverpool and Immingham Improve access from Black Country to UK Central (no direct services from many locations) Improve access from wider Midlands where there are no through connections Improve access to UK Central from peripheral areas of the metropolitan area Provide more resilience / capacity to UK Central, including addressing poor journey reliability on motorway network, especially in light of expected level of job creation Address slow connections from Birmingham to East Midlands Airport I. Provide capacity to meet strong growth in demand for rail travel into Central Birmingham, to ensure that Address capacity constraints in the Birmingham area Atkins Version 4.0 December

53 Objective demand is not constrained, and rail provides an attractive option for travel into and through the city Potential Focus Address capacity on approaches to Birmingham such as Water Orton; Birmingham to Wolverhampton Corridor; Coventry area J. Provide capacity to meet growth in demand for rail travel into other cities, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides a highly attractive option for travel into and between Midlands cities K. Maximise opportunities to improve rail connectivity post- HS2 connection to HS2 stations and reconfiguration of existing capacity N/A Ensure good interchange between classic and HS2 services at both Curzon Street and UK Central Ensure fast journey times to HS2 interchanges, including Birmingham Curzon Street, Birmingham Interchange and Crewe (for Shropshire, Staffordshire, etc) Optimise use of released capacity from HS2: WCML, Cross Country and for other services Implement Midlands HS2 Growth Strategy Table C-2 Objectives for Nottingham, Derby and Links to the North Objective A. Improve speeds and reliability of journeys by road between adjacent urban areas, which will become longer (and more unreliable) as congestion rises with increasing demand for travel Potential Focus Nottingham Derby Nottingham Newark Lincoln Lincoln East Midlands Airport Nottingham/Derby Stoke-on-Trent Nottingham/Derby Sheffield and Leeds B. Improve speeds and frequencies of rail services between key urban areas, including addressing the impacts of indirect rail links, to enable rail to better cater for future travel needs East Midlands Airport Birmingham Mansfield Derby and East Midlands Airport Leicester Newark Lincoln Nottingham and Derby Stoke-on-Trent C. Improve journey speeds by road and rail to unlock the economic potential of towns and cities in more peripheral locations, including Lincoln D. Improve road access (with a focus on speeds and reliability) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester E. Improve rail connectivity (with a focus on speeds and frequencies) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester F. Enhance road freight links (with a focus on speeds and reliability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool Newark and Lincoln to Nottingham and Derby Nottingham and Derby to London and South East Nottingham and Derby to Leeds and Sheffield Nottingham and Derby to Manchester Nottingham and Derby Hub to Sheffield / Leeds Address reliability of: M1 corridor both north and south of the Nottingham and Derby Hub M6 / A14 corridor to the east of England Birmingham Motorway Box for journeys into the West Midlands and beyond (e.g. towards SW England) A50 corridor to the west of the Nottingham and Derby Hub G. Improve rail freight links (with a focus on speed and capacity / capability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool H. Improve access to UK Central (for Birmingham Airport) and East Midlands Airport with a significant increase in surface access capacity, including improved Rail freight connections to Felixstowe (via Nuneaton) Rail freight connections to Southampton (via Oxford) Rail freight connections to Immingham Improve connectivity from Nottingham and Derby to East Midlands Airport via East Midlands Parkway Improve reliability of the M1 corridor in the East Midlands, which is crucial for East Midlands Airport Atkins Version 4.0 December

54 Objective rail connectivity from a wider area and improved road reliability Potential Focus Improve rail connectivity from Nottingham and Derby to UK Central I. Provide capacity to meet strong growth in demand for rail travel into Central Birmingham, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides an attractive option for travel into and through the city J. Provide capacity to meet growth in demand for rail travel into other cities, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides a highly attractive option for travel into and between Midlands cities K. Maximise opportunities to improve rail connectivity post- HS2 connection to HS2 stations and reconfiguration of existing capacity Address capacity constraints in the Birmingham area, including at Water Orton, constraining further development of rail services between the East and West Midlands Address capacity on the MML (including 3-track sections) and constraints at Syston Improve capacity between Nottingham and Derby, including addressing capacity and conflict issues on the approaches to Derby station Provide interchange between conventional and HS2 services at East Midlands HS2 station Maximise the opportunity for classic compatible high speed services to serve East Midlands cities directly (rather than relying on interchange between classic and HS2 captive services at the hub) Optimise use of released capacity from HS2 including on the MML corridor towards London and on the Cross Country network towards Birmingham and Sheffield Requirement for East Midlands HS2 Growth Strategy Table C-3 Objectives for Leicester, Coventry and Links to the East and South East Potential Corridor/Hub Priority Potential Focus A. Improve speeds and reliability of journeys by road between adjacent urban areas, which will become longer (and more unreliable) as congestion rises with increasing demand for travel B. Improve speeds and frequencies of rail services between key urban areas, including addressing the impacts of indirect rail links, to enable rail to better cater for future travel needs Nottingham and Derby Coventry Nottingham and Derby Leamington/Warwick Leicester Coventry, Leamington Spa and Warwick Nottingham Coventry, Leamington Spa and Warwick Derby and East Midlands Airport Coventry, Leamington Spa and Warwick Leamington Spa and Warwick Coventry C. Improve journey speeds by road and rail to unlock the economic potential of towns and cities in more peripheral locations, including Lincoln D. Improve road access (with a focus on speeds and reliability) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester E. Improve rail connectivity (with a focus on speeds and frequencies) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester F. Enhance road freight links (with a focus on speeds and reliability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool Improve rail connections between Lincoln and Leicester Leicester and Coventry to London and South East Leicester and Coventry to Leeds and Sheffield Leicester and Coventry to Manchester Improve links to Cambridge and East of England Improve links to Oxford and Thames Valley Address reliability of: M1 and M6 Corridors A14 corridor to the east Birmingham Box for journeys into the West Midlands and beyond (e.g. to SW England) G. Improve rail freight links (with a focus on speed and capacity / capability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool Access to Southampton Access to Felixstowe Atkins Version 4.0 December

55 Address conflicts between freight and passenger services on the Coventry to Birmingham line H. Improve access to UK Central (for Birmingham Airport) and East Midlands Airport with a significant increase in surface access capacity, including improved rail connectivity from a wider area and improved road reliability I. Provide capacity to meet strong growth in demand for rail travel into Central Birmingham, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides an attractive option for travel into and through the city J. Provide capacity to meet growth in demand for rail travel into other cities, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides a highly attractive option for travel into and between Midlands cities K. Maximise opportunities to improve rail connectivity post- HS2 connection to HS2 stations and reconfiguration of existing capacity Improve links to East Midlands Airport from Coventry and wider West Midlands Improve links to UK Central from Leicester Address capacity constraints in the Birmingham area, including at Water Orton, constraining further development of rail services between the East and West Midlands Improve capacity at Coventry station (conflicting at-grade movements) plus the single-track section to the south of Coventry Improve capacity in the Leicester area, which is constraining growth of the rail market in the East Midlands Improve capacity at Coventry station (conflicting at-grade movements) plus the single-track section to the south of Coventry Optimise use of released capacity from HS2 including on the MML corridor towards London (from Leicester) and on the Cross-Country network towards Sheffield and Leeds Identify best use of released capacity on the Coventry to Birmingham corridor, including permitting more northsouth movements through Coventry Requirement for East Midlands HS2 Growth Strategy Table C-4 Objectives for Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire and Links to the North West Objective A. Improve speeds and reliability of journeys by road between adjacent urban areas, which will become longer (and more unreliable) as congestion rises with increasing demand for travel B. Improve speeds and frequencies of rail services between key urban areas, including addressing the impacts of indirect rail links, to enable rail to better cater for future travel needs C. Improve journey speeds by road and rail to unlock the economic potential of towns and cities in more peripheral locations, including Hereford and Shrewsbury D. Improve road access (with a focus on speeds and reliability) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester E. Improve rail connectivity (with a focus on speeds and frequencies) to other strategic UK economic drivers, including Oxford to Cambridge Arc, Bristol, Sheffield and Manchester Potential Focus Stoke-on-Trent and Stafford to Birmingham Stoke-on-Trent to Derby and Nottingham Stoke-on-Trent to Manchester and Liverpool Stoke-on-Trent to Cannock, Lichfield and Tamworth Stoke-on-Trent to East Midlands Airport Stoke-on-Trent to Telford and Shrewsbury (no direct rail services) Stoke and Staffordshire to London and South East Stoke and Staffordshire to Manchester Links to Manchester and Liverpool via WCML Links to Derby / Nottingham via North Staffordshire Line Address reliability of: F. Enhance road freight links (with a focus on speeds and reliability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool M6 Corridor through the area Reliability of A500 / A50 corridor through the area Reliability of the Birmingham Box for journeys into West Midlands and beyond (e.g. to SW England) Atkins Version 4.0 December

56 G. Improve rail freight links (with a focus on speed and capacity / capability) between the Midlands logistics and manufacturing hubs and ports, including Humber, Haven Gateway, Southampton, Bristol and Liverpool H. Improve access to UK Central (for Birmingham Airport) and East Midlands Airport with a significant increase in surface access capacity, including improved rail connectivity from a wider area and improved road reliability I. Provide capacity to meet strong growth in demand for rail travel into Central Birmingham, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides an attractive option for travel into and through the city Maintain capacity of WCML through the hub for freight (reducing stress on the parallel M6 Motorway) Improve rail freight links to Port of Liverpool Hourly frequency of through services from Stafford and Stoke-on-Trent to UK Central No direct rail connectivity from Stafford / Stoke-on-Trent to Manchester Airport Improve reliability of A50 for journeys towards East Midlands Airport Improve speed of journeys between Stoke-on-Trent and Derby (for connections to East Midlands Airport) Address capacity constraints in the Birmingham area, including the largely 2-track section between Wolverhampton and Birmingham New Street Improve capacity at Norton Bridge Junction (flyover currently being constructed to grade separate northbound Manchester services) J. Provide capacity to meet growth in demand for rail travel into other cities, to ensure that demand is not constrained, and rail provides a highly attractive option for travel into and between Midlands cities K. Maximise opportunities to improve rail connectivity post- HS2 connection to HS2 stations and reconfiguration of existing capacity Increase rolling stock capacity on North Staffordshire Line between Crewe and Derby Ensure fast and effective access to proposed hub station at Crewe (noting some stakeholder aspirations for this station to instead be located at Stoke-on-Trent) Optimise use of released capacity from HS2, particularly on the WCML route though the hub Requirement for HS2 Growth Strategy to meet needs of both Crewe and northern Staffordshire. Atkins Version 4.0 December

57 Appendix D. Methodology for developing targets D.1. Introduction This appendix describes the methodology used to develop targets for key linkages within the Midlands. In order to measure the success of any future connectivity interventions, it will be necessary to develop ambitious but realistic and achievable targets, with the objective of delivering transformational improvements where particular challenges have been identified. The Economic Impacts Study articulated the potential scale of the economic uplift from improved strategic connectivity in the Midlands. However, the theoretical 10% and 20% reductions in generalised journey times were not based on any assessment of the real scale of the connectivity challenge (and hence required improvement) in each corridor. In some cases, the potential scale of improvement will be less than 10%. In other cases, the scale of required improvement could be significantly more than 20%. Future targets need to address the scale of the challenge and the potential scope for improvement to road and rail networks. The approach focused on setting targets for the study area based on journey speeds rather than service frequencies or capacities. Generalised journey speeds (GJS) were used as a measure as they were directly linked to generalised journey times (GJT). The flow chart on the following page describes the approach used to set targets for the most significant origin destination (OD) movements within the Midlands Connect study area. The following steps describe the technical approach in detail, as summarised in the flowchart overleaf. Atkins Version 4.0 December

58 1. Determine Key OD Movements Using the agglomeration impacts from Conditional Outputs in the Economic Impacts Study the most significant OD movements were identified for road and rail separately. 2a. Obtain Raw Journey Time Data For each road OD movement the following information were obtained: Crow fly distances; Overnight free-flow journey times; and Congested journey times during the AM peak (7am-10am). For each rail OD movement the following information were obtained: Crow fly distances; Best journey times during the AM peak (7am-10am); and Typical journey times during the AM peak (7am-10am). 2b. Determine GJS and GJT For all the OD movements, GJTs were calculated by assuming 10 minutes at either end of each journey. GJS for all the movements were calculated to allow comparison between the OD movements. For each mode the following were calculated: Road Overnight free-flow GJT and GJS / Congested AM peak GJT and GJS Rail: Fastest GJT and GJS / Typical GJT and GJS 2c. OD Categorisation Each OD movement was categorised into either an urban movement or an inter-urban movement. 3. Target Setting For each OD movement, for both road and rail, targets for improvements were set as follows: STEP 1: A target for improvement to the free-flow and the fastest GJS were set for both road and rail respectively by comparing against the line of best fit for the free-flow and fastest GJS for both road and rail respectively. STEP 2: A target for improvement to the congested and typical GJS for road and rail, respectively, were set by comparing against the free-flow and fastest GJS for both road and rail respectively. STEP 3: A combined target for each OD movement was determined by multiplying the targets determined in steps 2 and 3. STEP 4. Each combined target for the OD movements, determined in step 4, was weighted by scale of economic importance using the agglomeration impacts from the Economic Impact Study. 4. Additional OD Movements Additional OD movements were identified through stakeholder workshops and feedback and targets were set against them by applying steps 2 and 3. The additional OD movements also included the remaining OD movements within the conditional outputs in the Economic Impact Study. Atkins Version 4.0 December

59 D.2. Determining key origin-destination movements In the previous Economic Impacts Study a number of Conditional Outputs (COs) were reported with the agglomeration potential for each CO in the forecast year 2026 for a theoretical 20% reduction in generalised journey time. These values for agglomeration impacts were used to identify the COs with greatest economic significance in the Midlands. These analyses demonstrated that a subset of the long list of Conditional Outputs were forecast to deliver a large proportion of the overall impacts. In the case of road, 40% of the Conditional Outputs were forecast to deliver 75% of the total estimated agglomeration benefits. In the case of rail, 40% of the Conditional Outputs were forecast to deliver 80% of the total estimated agglomeration benefits. This provided clear evidence that focusing on the top 40% of the COs would be likely to deliver a large proportion of potential economic benefits. This shorter list of COs was therefore used as the basis for more detailed technical analyses. For road movements, 30 movements were selected from the total 72 COs. For rail movements, 24 movements were selected from the total 57 COs. The majority of the movements selected for both road and rail appeared in both road and rail. However, a small number of movements only appeared in one of the lists. A combined list was therefore produced to enable direct comparison between road and rail. The following table shows the list of OD movements selected for the more detailed technical analysis, together with the benchmark estimated agglomeration impacts of a 20% reduction in generalised journey times in Table D-1 Conditional Outputs used for Detailed Technical Analysis Origin Destination Estimated Agglomeration Impacts of 20% Reduction in GJTs Road ( m) Rail ( m) Hereford Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Walsall Hub@UKC (Solihull) Worcestershire Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Cannock Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Northampton Leicester 4.6 x Wolverhampton Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Brierley Hill / Dudley Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Stafford Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) 7.6 x Nottingham Derby Nottingham Leicester Nottingham Coventry Stoke on Trent Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Wolverhampton Walsall Leicester Leamington / Warwick Nottingham Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Telford / Shrewsbury Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) West Bromwich Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Milton Keynes Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Leicester Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Derby Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Leicester Derby Milton Keynes Hub@UKC (Solihull) Leicester Coventry Atkins Version 4.0 December

60 Origin Destination Estimated Agglomeration Impacts of 20% Reduction in GJTs Road ( m) Rail ( m) Wolverhampton Telford / Shrewsbury Leamington / Warwick Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Northampton Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) 10.8 x Nottingham Milton Keynes East Midlands Airport Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) 8.9 x Leamington / Warwick Coventry Walsall Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) West Bromwich Hub@UKC (Solihull) Milton Keynes Coventry Northampton Milton Keynes 8.0 x Hub@UKC (Solihull) Coventry D.3. Journey time data The analysis focused on identifying preliminary targets for journey speed improvements for the combined top 40% of the conditional outputs for road and rail shown in the table above. The following data was obtained in order to calculate the GJT and GJS for each OD movement for both road and rail. Road 1. For each OD movement the crow fly distance in miles was calculated using online mapping Free Map Tools. 2. Google Journey Planner was used to calculate the overnight free-flow journey time and the AM congested journey time for each OD movement. This was for a typical weekday and the AM peak period was taken to be 7am to 10am. The overnight free-flow period was taken to be between 2am and 3am. 3. The journey times were converted to generalised journey times by assuming that a typical business journey also included another 10 minutes at either end of the journey. This is the approximate time required at either end of the car journey to and from the place of business, which was considered to be reasonable and acceptable. Therefore, the GJT is calculated as journey time + 20 minutes. 4. The GJT and crow fly distances were used to calculate generalised journey speeds (GJS) in mph. 5. Each OD movement was categorised into either an urban movement or an inter-urban movement. Rail 1. For each OD movement the crow fly distance in miles was calculated using online mapping Free Map Tools. 2. National Rail Journey Planner was used to obtain the fastest journey time and a typical journey time for each OD movement, during the AM peak. This was for a typical weekday and the AM peak period was taken to be 7am to 10am. 3. The journey times were converted to generalised journey times by assuming that a typical business journey included another 10 minutes at either end of the journey to and from train departure and arrival. This is the approximate time required at either end of a train journey to and from the place of business, which was considered to be reasonable and acceptable. Therefore, the GJT is calculated as journey time + 20 minutes. 4. The GJT and crow fly distances were used to calculate generalised journey speeds (GJS) in mph. 5. Each OD movement was categorised into either an urban movement or an inter-urban movement. Atkins Version 4.0 December

61 D.4. Target setting For each of the road and rail OD movements; ambitious but achievable GJS and GJT targets were developed. The detailed methodology is as follows: Road STEP 1: A target for the improvement to the free-flow road speed was derived as follows: a) A scatter diagram of crow fly distance against the free-flow GJS was plotted for the movements in the table above, and an equation for the quadratic line of best fit was calculated. b) The line of best fit was considered to be an appropriate measure to benchmark generalised free-flow speeds for each movement compared to other movements within the Midlands Connect study area. From this it was possible, for each OD movement, to determine a target GJS using the line of best fit as a reasonable benchmark. c) Free-flow GJS improvement targets were set by comparing the percentage difference between the actual free-flow GJS for each OD movement and the free-flow GJS if it were to fall on the line of best fit. d) Where actual GJS were better than the line of best fit GJS, improvement targets were set to 0%, because average speeds for these movements were considered to be relatively good. e) OD movements categorised as urban movements had an improvement target set to 0% to avoid setting targets to increase speeds in urban areas. STEP 2: A target for the improvement to congested road speeds was derived as follows: a) For road, the target was set by comparing the percentage difference between the freeflow GJS and the congested AM peak GJS. b) It was considered appropriate to assume that it will never be possible to totally remove congestion, but an ambitious target would be to halve congestion. It would therefore be appropriate to set a congestion target as 50% of the difference between the free-flow GJS and AM peak congested speed. STEP 3: Combined targets using the improvements in free-flow speeds and congested speeds were set as follows: a) The combined target was set by multiplying the percentage improvement required for free-flow speeds in step 1 by the percentage improvement required in congestion in step 2. STEP 4: The combined targets were weighted to reflect scale of economic importance as follows: a) The 2026 agglomeration impacts for each OD movement were obtained from the Conditional Outputs work in the Economic Impact Study, which was based on theoretical 20% reductions in GJT; b) The GJS targets derived from Step 3 were converted into equivalent GJT targets using the crow-fly distances for each OD movement, and the proportionate GJT reductions were calculated; c) The work in the Economic Impacts Study demonstrated that agglomeration impacts were approximately linear in relation to changes in GJT. Agglomeration impacts, based on the GJT targets, were therefore calculated as follows: (Target GJT Reduction (%) / 20%) x (Agglomeration Impact from Economic Impact Study ( )) d) The overall weighted impact for each movement was therefore determined from the agglomeration calculation in step c) above. Rail STEP 1: A target for the improvement to the fastest speed was derived as follows: Atkins Version 4.0 December

62 a) A scatter diagram of crow fly distance against the fastest GJS were plotted and an equation for the quadratic line of best fit was calculated. b) The line of best fit was considered to be a reasonable and sensible measure of improvement to generalised fastest speeds as each specific OD movement was compared to other movements within the Midlands Connect study area. Therefore, for each OD movement, a target GJS was calculated using the line of best fit as a reasonable benchmark. c) Fastest GJS improvement targets were set by comparing the percentage difference between the actual fastest GJS for each OD movement and the fastest GJS if it were to fall on the line of best fit. d) Where actual GJS were better than the line of best fit GJS, improvement targets were set to 0%. STEP 2: A target for the reduction in congestion was derived as follows: a) For rail, the target was set by comparing the percentage difference between the GJS fastest journey and the GJS for the slowest journey; b) It will never be possible to completely remove the differences between slowest and fastest journeys, in part because slower journeys reflect stopping services. However, an ambitious target would be to reduce the difference by 50%. The target was therefore set to reduce by 50% of the difference in GJS between the fastest and slowest journeys. STEP 3: Combined targets using the improvements in fastest speeds and slowest speeds were set as follows: a) The combined target was set by multiplying the percentage improvement required for the fastest speeds in step 1 by the percentage improvement required in congestion in step 2. STEP 4: The combined targets were weighted to reflect scale of economic importance as follows a) The 2026 agglomeration impacts for each OD movement were obtained from the Conditional Outputs work in the Economic Impact Study, which was based on theoretical 20% reductions in GJT. b) The GJS targets derived from Step 3 were converted into equivalent GJT targets using the crow-fly distances for each OD movement, and the proportionate GJT reductions were calculated; c) The work in the Economic Impacts Study demonstrated that agglomeration impacts were approximately linear in relation to changes in GJT. Agglomeration impacts, based on the GJT targets, were therefore calculated as follows: (Target GJT Reduction (%) / 20%) x (Agglomeration Impact from Economic Impact Study ( )) e) The overall weighted impact for each movement was therefore determined from the agglomeration calculation in step c) above. D.5. Additional origin-destination movements For completeness the remaining conditional outputs were also included within the target setting process. For each additional movement, targets were set using the methodology described in the Target Setting section. However, targets for free-flow GJS improvements and fastest GJS improvements for road and rail, respectively, were set against the existing line of best fit based on the top 40% of OD movements. The following were the additional OD movements selected (with agglomeration impacts for 20% improvements in GJTs by road and rail shown respectively). Atkins Version 4.0 December

63 Origin Destination Road Agglomeration ( m) Rail Agglomeration ( m) Wolverhampton Hub@UKC (Solihull) Stoke on Trent Derby Milton Keynes Leicester Nottingham Mansfield Nottingham Newark Nottingham Hub@UKC (Solihull) Leamington / Warwick Hub@UKC (Solihull) Leicester Hub@UKC (Solihull) Telford / Shrewsbury Hub@UKC (Solihull) Brierley Hill / Dudley Hub@UKC (Solihull) Nottingham Lincoln Derby Chesterfield Milton Keynes Kettering/Corby Telford / Shrewsbury Hereford Nottingham East Midlands Airport 4.0 x Leicester East Midlands Airport 4.0 x Northampton Kettering/Corby 3.8 x Northampton Hub@UKC (Solihull) 2.8 x Derby Hub@UKC (Solihull) Derby Coventry East Midlands Airport Coventry 2.8 x East Midlands Airport Derby 2.8 x Leicester Lincoln Lincoln East Midlands Airport 0.3 x Lincoln Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Mansfield East Midlands Airport 0.7 x Mansfield Derby Newark Birmingham (& HS2 Curzon) Newark East Midlands Airport 0.7 x Newark Lincoln Newark Leicester Nottingham Leamington / Warwick Nottingham Northampton 2.9 x Stoke on Trent East Midlands Airport 1.0 x Stoke on Trent S Staffs / North GBS Walsall Nottingham Walsall Stoke on Trent Walsall S Staffs / North GBS Wolverhampton Nottingham Atkins Version 4.0 December

64 Appendix E. Preliminary journey speed improvement targets E.1. Preliminary targets for road conditional outputs Atkins Version 4.0 December

65 E.2. Preliminary Targets for rail conditional outputs Atkins Version 4.0 December

66 Appendix F. Potential agglomeration benefits from preliminary targets F.1. Agglomeration impacts of road targets Atkins Version 4.0 December

67 F.2. Agglomeration impacts of rail targets Atkins Version 4.0 December

68 Jonathan Foster-Clark Atkins 10 Holliday Street Birmingham B1 1TF Atkins Ltd except where stated otherwise. The Atkins logo, Carbon Critical Design and the strapline Plan Design Enable are trademarks of Atkins Ltd.

EAST WEST RAIL EASTERN SECTION. prospectus for growth

EAST WEST RAIL EASTERN SECTION. prospectus for growth EAST WEST RAIL EASTERN SECTION prospectus for growth September 2018 executive summary The East West Rail Consortium, a partnership of local authorities, rail operators and Network Rail, continues to promote

More information

Agenda Item 5: Rail East Midlands Rail Franchise Consultation

Agenda Item 5: Rail East Midlands Rail Franchise Consultation Strategic Transport Forum 15 th September 2017 Agenda Item 5: Rail East Midlands Rail Franchise Consultation Recommendation: It is recommended that the Forum agree (subject to any amendments agreed by

More information

Midlands Connect Strategy: Powering the Midlands Engine

Midlands Connect Strategy: Powering the Midlands Engine Midlands Connect Strategy: Powering the Midlands Engine March 2017 Midlands Connect Powering the Midlands Engine Sir John Peace Chairman of Midlands Engine and Midlands Connect Foreword I am honoured to

More information

Emerging Strategy. Executive Summary November Midlands Connect Powering the Midlands Engine

Emerging Strategy. Executive Summary November Midlands Connect Powering the Midlands Engine Emerging Strategy Executive Summary November 2016 Midlands Connect Powering the Midlands Engine Foreword Sir John Peace Chairman of Midlands Engine and Midlands Connect As we get closer to the finalisation

More information

East Lancashire Highways and Transport Masterplan East Lancashire Rail Connectivity Study Conditional Output Statement (Appendix 'A' refers)

East Lancashire Highways and Transport Masterplan East Lancashire Rail Connectivity Study Conditional Output Statement (Appendix 'A' refers) Report to the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport Report submitted by: Director of Corporate Commissioning Date: 1 June 2015 Part I Electoral Divisions affected: All East Lancashire Highways and

More information

33 Horseferry Road HP20 1UA London SW1P 4DR. Tuesday 10 th October Dear Sir,

33 Horseferry Road HP20 1UA London SW1P 4DR. Tuesday 10 th October Dear Sir, East Midlands Rail Franchise Programme Office Consultation Co-ordinator c/o Buckinghamshire County Council Zone 2/21 County Hall Department for Transport Walton Street Great Minster House Aylesbury 33

More information

The Government s Aviation Strategy Transport for the North (TfN) response

The Government s Aviation Strategy Transport for the North (TfN) response The Government s Aviation Strategy Transport for the North (TfN) response Transport for the North Background Good transport links are a crucial part of a strong economy supporting labour markets and delivering

More information

East West Rail Consortium

East West Rail Consortium East West Rail Consortium EWR Wider Economic Case: Refresh 18 th November 2015 Rupert Dyer Rail Expertise Ltd Rail Expertise Ltd. Tel: 01543 493533 Email: info@railexpertise.co.uk 1 Introduction 1.1 The

More information

BARNSLEY METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL

BARNSLEY METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL BARNSLEY METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL This matter is a Key Decision within the Council s definition and has been included in the relevant Forward Plan REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PLACE TO CABINET

More information

N4 Carrick-on-Shannon to Dromod Road Project. 2.1 Introduction

N4 Carrick-on-Shannon to Dromod Road Project. 2.1 Introduction Chapter 2 Need for the Scheme 2.1 Introduction The National Primary Route N4, Dublin to Sligo is a strategic corridor from Dublin to the northwest and border counties (See RCSR 101 in Volume 2). The National

More information

WELLINGTON $422 MILLION $614 MILLION $83 MILLION 22% SPEND $1.9 BILLION

WELLINGTON $422 MILLION $614 MILLION $83 MILLION 22% SPEND $1.9 BILLION WELLINGTON WELLINGTON $1.9 BILLION FORECAST TOTAL WELLINGTON INVESTMENT The Wellington region s transport challenges are dominated by the region s concentration of population in the metropolitan cities,

More information

A TRANSPORT SYSTEM CONNECTING PEOPLE TO PLACES

A TRANSPORT SYSTEM CONNECTING PEOPLE TO PLACES THE MAYOR'S VISION FOR TRANSPORT A TRANSPORT SYSTEM CONNECTING PEOPLE TO PLACES VISION We will build a transport system that works for everyone, connecting people to the places they want to go within the

More information

Strategic Transport Forum 21 st September 2018

Strategic Transport Forum 21 st September 2018 Strategic Transport Forum 21 st September 2018 Agenda Item 4: Heathrow Airport Expansion: Surface Access Strategy Update Recommendation: It is recommended that the Forum consider the update provided by

More information

Strategic Transport Forum 7 th December 2018

Strategic Transport Forum 7 th December 2018 Strategic Transport Forum 7 th December 2018 Agenda Item 7: East West Rail Recommendation: It is recommended that the Forum: a) Endorse the East West Rail Consortium s position in relation to the draft

More information

CONGESTION MONITORING THE NEW ZEALAND EXPERIENCE. By Mike Curran, Manager Strategic Policy, Transit New Zealand

CONGESTION MONITORING THE NEW ZEALAND EXPERIENCE. By Mike Curran, Manager Strategic Policy, Transit New Zealand CONGESTION MONITORING THE NEW ZEALAND EXPERIENCE 26 th Australasian Transport Research Forum Wellington New Zealand 1-3 October 2003 By, Manager Strategic Policy, Transit New Zealand Abstract New Zealand

More information

M6 CORRIDOR. Strategic Infrastructure Prospectus

M6 CORRIDOR. Strategic Infrastructure Prospectus CORRIDOR Strategic Infrastructure Prospectus May 2017 IntRODuCtIOn cumbria has real potential. We have a strong economy with major capability in energy, advanced manufacturing, logistics, agri-food and

More information

Foregone Economic Benefits from Airport Capacity Constraints in EU 28 in 2035

Foregone Economic Benefits from Airport Capacity Constraints in EU 28 in 2035 Foregone Economic Benefits from Airport Capacity Constraints in EU 28 in 2035 Foregone Economic Benefits from Airport Capacity Constraints in EU 28 in 2035 George Anjaparidze IATA, February 2015 Version1.1

More information

South of England north-south connectivity

South of England north-south connectivity South of England north-south connectivity An outline economic case for the inclusion of north-south connectivity improvements to form part of the government s road investment strategy (RIS2) Weston-super-Mare

More information

SHAPING REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE

SHAPING REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE SHAPING REGIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITIES FOR GROWTH YORKSHIRE AND THE HUMBER APRIL 2017 1 Introduction As the UK begins its exit from the EU, there will need to be a renewed focus on delivering growth

More information

A140 study and Major Road Network

A140 study and Major Road Network A140 study and Major Road Network Executive Summary The Government s new Transport Investment Strategy sets out a new long-term approach for government infrastructure spending. Funding will be targeted

More information

January EASTERN SECTION prospectus for growth

January EASTERN SECTION prospectus for growth January 2019 EASTERN SECTION prospectus for growth Contents 2 Foreword 4 Our objectives 5 Our offer 10 Our ask 11 How rail improvements will unlock growth 16 Moving forward Front row, from left to right:

More information

CABINET 1 MARCH 2016 DEVELOPMENT OF A RAIL STRATEGY FOR LEICESTER AND LEICESTERSHIRE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT PART A

CABINET 1 MARCH 2016 DEVELOPMENT OF A RAIL STRATEGY FOR LEICESTER AND LEICESTERSHIRE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT PART A 21 Agenda Item 5 CABINET 1 MARCH 2016 DEVELOPMENT OF A RAIL STRATEGY FOR LEICESTER AND LEICESTERSHIRE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT Purpose of the Report PART A 1. To present the

More information

1.2. The meeting agreed a set of guiding principles that officers were to use in developing the revised Terms of Reference.

1.2. The meeting agreed a set of guiding principles that officers were to use in developing the revised Terms of Reference. East West Rail Consortium 14 th June 2018 Agenda Item 3: Terms of Reference Recommendation: It is recommended that the meeting consider and agree subject to any amendment agreed by the meeting the revised

More information

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015 LAND USE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2015 EAST MINILANDS EAST MINILANDS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT DHL eastmidlandsairport.com OUR AIRPORT FOREWORD by Andy Cliffe Managing Director

More information

International gateways and the strategic road network

International gateways and the strategic road network International gateways and the strategic road network This report was commissioned by Highways England to inform the emerging Strategic Economic Growth Plan (SEGP) and better understand the relationship

More information

Report to: Greater Cambridge Partnership Joint Assembly 18 January A10 Foxton level crossing bypass and travel hub

Report to: Greater Cambridge Partnership Joint Assembly 18 January A10 Foxton level crossing bypass and travel hub Report to: Greater Cambridge Partnership Joint Assembly 18 January 2018 Lead officer: Chris Tunstall GCP Director of Transport A10 Foxton level crossing bypass and travel hub 1. Purpose 1.1 The list of

More information

CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS ACHIEVED BY HS2 AND HIGH SPEED UK FOR: MANCHESTER AIRPORT. (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere)

CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS ACHIEVED BY HS2 AND HIGH SPEED UK FOR: MANCHESTER AIRPORT. (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere) APPNDIX M2 CONNCIVIY IMPOVMNS ACHIVD BY HS2 AND HIGH SPD UK FO: MANCHS AIPO (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere) Appendix M2 : Airport Page 292 Introduction & key results Page 293 imeline of comparative

More information

The Rail Network in Wales

The Rail Network in Wales The Rail Network in Wales The Case for Investment Summary Professor Mark Barry 12 July 2018 Mark Barry M&G Barry Consulting Ltd www.mgbarryconsulting.com Mae r ddogfen yma hefyd ar gael yn Gymraeg. This

More information

High Speed Rail Connected to our Regions

High Speed Rail Connected to our Regions 12 th September 2014 High Speed Rail Connected to our Regions Key Speaker: Baroness Kramer, Senior Minister of State for Transport Moderator: David Brown, Chair of PTEG and Chief Executive and Director

More information

Strategic Cross Border Planning in the West Midlands

Strategic Cross Border Planning in the West Midlands Strategic Cross Border Planning in the West Midlands RTPI Planners, Birmingham 21/02/2018 Adam Harrison, TfWM Transport Governance and WMCA Renaissance: Why the West Midlands? Transforming our place? Challenges

More information

Update on the Thameslink programme

Update on the Thameslink programme A picture of the National Audit Office logo Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General Department for Transport Update on the Thameslink programme HC 413 SESSION 2017 2019 23 NOVEMBER 2017 4 Key facts

More information

Wellington $312 $49 $456 OVERVIEW WELLINGTON REGIONAL SUMMARY

Wellington $312 $49 $456 OVERVIEW WELLINGTON REGIONAL SUMMARY National Land Transport Programme 2015 18 Wellington WELLINGTON REGIONAL SUMMARY OVERVIEW The Wellington region is made up of a number of cities, urban areas and supporting rural hinterland. The city is

More information

CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS ACHIEVED BY HS2 AND HIGH SPEED UK FOR: (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere)

CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS ACHIEVED BY HS2 AND HIGH SPEED UK FOR: (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere) APPNDIX L2 CONNCTIVITY IMPROVMNTS ACHIVD BY HS2 AND HIGH SPD UK FOR: LICSTR (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere) Appendix L2 : Leicester Page 262 Introduction & key results Page 263 Timeline of comparative

More information

Section A: Scheme Summary

Section A: Scheme Summary Section A: Scheme Summary Name of Scheme: PMO Scheme Code: Lead Organisation: Senior Responsible Officer: Lead Promoter Contact: Case Officer: North East Calderdale Transformational Programme WYTF-PA4-054

More information

Consultation on Draft Airports National Policy Statement: new runway capacity and infrastructure at airports in the South East of England

Consultation on Draft Airports National Policy Statement: new runway capacity and infrastructure at airports in the South East of England Tony Kershaw Honorary Secretary County Hall Chichester West Sussex PO19 1RQ Telephone 033022 22543 Website: www.gatcom.org.uk If calling ask for Mrs. Paula Street e-mail: secretary@gatcom.org.uk 22 May

More information

Submission to the Airports Commission

Submission to the Airports Commission Submission to the Airports Commission Greengauge 21 February 2013 www.greengauge21.net 1 1. Introduction Greengauge 21 is a not for profit company established to promote the debate and interest in highspeed

More information

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF NEW CONNECTIONS TO CHINA

THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF NEW CONNECTIONS TO CHINA THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF NEW CONNECTIONS TO CHINA A note prepared for Heathrow March 2018 Three Chinese airlines are currently in discussions with Heathrow about adding new direct connections between Heathrow

More information

Chapter 8. Capacity and Service Disbenefits. Prepared by Christopher Stokes

Chapter 8. Capacity and Service Disbenefits. Prepared by Christopher Stokes Chapter 8 Capacity and Service Disbenefits Prepared by Christopher Stokes 8 CAPACITY AND SERVICE DISBENEFITS Prepared by Christopher Stokes 8.1 This chapter relates to the following questions listed by

More information

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Economic Impact of Tourism Epping Forest - 2014 Economic Impact of Tourism Headline Figures Epping Forest - 2014 Total number of trips (day & staying)

More information

MAXIMUM LEVELS OF AVIATION TERMINAL SERVICE CHARGES that may be imposed by the Irish Aviation Authority ISSUE PAPER CP3/2010 COMMENTS OF AER LINGUS

MAXIMUM LEVELS OF AVIATION TERMINAL SERVICE CHARGES that may be imposed by the Irish Aviation Authority ISSUE PAPER CP3/2010 COMMENTS OF AER LINGUS MAXIMUM LEVELS OF AVIATION TERMINAL SERVICE CHARGES that may be imposed by the Irish Aviation Authority ISSUE PAPER CP3/2010 COMMENTS OF AER LINGUS 1. Introduction A safe, reliable and efficient terminal

More information

West Midlands & Chilterns Route Study Technical Appendices

West Midlands & Chilterns Route Study Technical Appendices Long Term Planning Process West Midlands & Chilterns Route Study Technical Appendices Contents Network Rail West Midlands & Chilterns Route Study Technical Appendices 02 Technical Appendices 03 A1 - Midlands

More information

Response to the London Heathrow Airport Expansion Public Consultation

Response to the London Heathrow Airport Expansion Public Consultation Response to the London Heathrow Airport Expansion Public Consultation Summary This report sets out the response to the Heathrow Airport s consultation on airport expansion and airspace change. The consultation

More information

Open Report on behalf of Executive Director for Environment & Economy. Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee

Open Report on behalf of Executive Director for Environment & Economy. Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee Agenda Item 9 Policy and Scrutiny Open Report on behalf of Executive Director for Environment & Economy Report to: Date: 13 June 2016 Subject: Summary: Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee Rail Update

More information

West Midlands Sustainable Urban

West Midlands Sustainable Urban West Midlands Sustainable Urban Transport Strategy and its Delivery: Movement for Growth Liveable City Conference Transport and Connectivity Seminar - 30/11/2017 Adam Harrison, Strategy & Intelligence

More information

UNLOCKING THE BRIGHTON MAINLINE

UNLOCKING THE BRIGHTON MAINLINE UNLOCKING THE BRIGHTON MAINLINE The highly successful Coast to Capital region, which runs from South London to Brighton and across the coast to Chichester, needs significant long-term rail investment to

More information

TfL Planning. 1. Question 1

TfL Planning. 1. Question 1 TfL Planning TfL response to questions from Zac Goldsmith MP, Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Heathrow and the Wider Economy Heathrow airport expansion proposal - surface access February

More information

5 Rail demand in Western Sydney

5 Rail demand in Western Sydney 5 Rail demand in Western Sydney About this chapter To better understand where new or enhanced rail services are needed, this chapter presents an overview of the existing and future demand on the rail network

More information

As part of our transport vision, Leeds City Council, working with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority and Leeds Bradford Airport Company, is

As part of our transport vision, Leeds City Council, working with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority and Leeds Bradford Airport Company, is As part of our transport vision, Leeds City Council, working with the West Yorkshire Combined Authority and Leeds Bradford Airport Company, is considering options for improving surface access and connectivity

More information

Strategic Transport Forum

Strategic Transport Forum Strategic Transport Forum Friday 16 th March 2018 www.englandseconomicheartland.com Item 3: Innovation www.englandseconomicheartland.com Innovation work stream - EEH 1. Policy modelling 2. MaaS 3. EEH

More information

30 th January Local Government s critical role in driving the tourism economy. January 2016 de Waal

30 th January Local Government s critical role in driving the tourism economy. January 2016 de Waal 30 th January 2016 Local Government s critical role in driving the tourism economy January 2016 de Waal Contents Local Government can make or break tourism in their jurisdiction... 3 TNQ Tourism Vision...

More information

CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS ACHIEVED BY HS2 AND HIGH SPEED UK FOR: (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere)

CONNECTIVITY IMPROVEMENTS ACHIEVED BY HS2 AND HIGH SPEED UK FOR: (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere) APPNIX H2 CONNCTIVITY IMPROVMNTS ACHIV BY HS2 AN HIGH SP UK FOR: HURSFIL (extract from HS2 High Speed to Nowhere) Appendix H2 : Page 244 Introduction & key results Page 245 Timeline of comparative journey

More information

Appendix 12. HS2/HS1 Connection. Prepared by Christopher Stokes

Appendix 12. HS2/HS1 Connection. Prepared by Christopher Stokes Appendix 12 HS2/HS1 Connection Prepared by Christopher Stokes 12 HS2/HS1 CONNECTION Prepared by Christopher Stokes Introduction 12.1 This appendix examines the business case for through services to HS1,

More information

THE GATWICK DIAMOND INITIATIVE BUSINESS PLAN

THE GATWICK DIAMOND INITIATIVE BUSINESS PLAN THE GATWICK DIAMOND INITIATIVE BUSINESS PLAN 2018-2021 Our Vision is: To be an internationally recognised, world-class, business location achieving sustainable prosperity' What does this look like? By

More information

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Economic Impact of Tourism Oxfordshire - 2016 Economic Impact of Tourism Headline Figures Oxfordshire - 2016 number of trips (day & staying) 27,592,106

More information

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Economic Impact of Tourism Oxfordshire - 2015 Economic Impact of Tourism Headline Figures Oxfordshire - 2015 Total number of trips (day & staying)

More information

Demand and Appraisal Report

Demand and Appraisal Report Demand and Appraisal Report HS2 London - West Midlands Report for HS2 Ltd MVA Consultancy, In Association With Mott MacDonald and Atkins April 2012 Document Control Project Title: MVA Project Number: Document

More information

Rail Delivery Group. Consultation on the future of the East Midlands rail franchise

Rail Delivery Group. Consultation on the future of the East Midlands rail franchise Rail Delivery Group Response to: Department for Transport Consultation on the future of the East Midlands rail franchise Date: 11 October 2017 Rail Delivery Group Limited Registered Office, 2nd Floor,

More information

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Economic Impact of Tourism North Norfolk District - 2016 Contents Page Summary Results 2 Contextual analysis 4 Volume of Tourism 7 Staying Visitors

More information

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Economic Impact of Tourism Norfolk - 2016 Contents Page Summary Results 2 Contextual analysis 4 Volume of Tourism 7 Staying Visitors - Accommodation

More information

East West Rail - Central Section Conditional Outputs Statement East West Rail Consortium

East West Rail - Central Section Conditional Outputs Statement East West Rail Consortium East West Rail Consortium Final Report 8 August 2014 This page is intentionally blank Atkins EWR Central Section COS Version 2.2 8 August 2014 5123752 Notice This document and its contents have been prepared

More information

Chapter 12. HS2/HS1 Connection. Prepared by Christopher Stokes

Chapter 12. HS2/HS1 Connection. Prepared by Christopher Stokes Chapter 12 HS2/HS1 Connection Prepared by Christopher Stokes 12 HS2/HS1 CONNECTION Prepared by Christopher Stokes 12.1 This chapter relates to the following questions listed by the Committee: 3.1 Business

More information

Summary Delivery Plan Control Period 4 Delivery Plan More trains, more seats. Better journeys

Summary Delivery Plan Control Period 4 Delivery Plan More trains, more seats. Better journeys Summary Delivery Plan Control Period 4 Delivery Plan 2009 More trains, more seats Better journeys Network Rail aims to deliver a railway fit for the 21st century. Over the next five years (Control Period

More information

The Economic Impact of BT Group plc in the UK

The Economic Impact of BT Group plc in the UK 2018 Edition The Economic Impact of BT Group plc in the UK A report by Hatch Regeneris for BT Group plc 1 Contents 2 Introduction 3 BT Group plc across the UK 11 London & the South East 12 3 Our Report

More information

Appendix 8. Capacity and Service Disbenefits. Prepared by Christopher Stokes

Appendix 8. Capacity and Service Disbenefits. Prepared by Christopher Stokes Appendix 8 Capacity and Service Disbenefits Prepared by Christopher Stokes 8 CAPACITY AND SERVICE DISBENEFITS Prepared by Christopher Stokes Introduction 8.1 This appendix considers the following major

More information

PO Box 257 PO Box 257 PARRAMATTA NSW 2124 PARRAMATTA NSW 2124

PO Box 257 PO Box 257 PARRAMATTA NSW 2124 PARRAMATTA NSW 2124 31 March 2017 Sean O Toole Sheridan Dudley District Commissioner - West District Commissioner - South West Greater Sydney Commission Greater Sydney Commission PO Box 257 PO Box 257 PARRAMATTA NSW 2124

More information

Kilometres. Blacktown. Penrith. Parramatta. Liverpool Bankstown. Campbelltown

Kilometres. Blacktown. Penrith. Parramatta. Liverpool Bankstown. Campbelltown 0 5 10 15 20 Kilometres Penrith Blacktown Parramatta Liverpool Bankstown Campbelltown accessibility outcomes Legend Outcomes targeted in Western Sydney are: public transport that is accessible throughout

More information

CHRISTCHURCH MOTORWAYS. Project Summary Statement February 2010

CHRISTCHURCH MOTORWAYS. Project Summary Statement February 2010 CHRISTCHURCH MOTORWAYS Project Summary Statement February 2010 Table of Contents 1. Purpose of Document 2. Strategic Context 3. Benefits 4. Project Scope and Economics 5. Implementation Plan 1 ROADS OF

More information

SUFFOLK PARK BURY ST EDMUNDS IP32 7QB NEW INDUSTRIAL AND LOGISTICS PARK. BUILD-TO-SUIT OPTIONS FROM 50, ,000 sq ft suffolk-park.

SUFFOLK PARK BURY ST EDMUNDS IP32 7QB NEW INDUSTRIAL AND LOGISTICS PARK. BUILD-TO-SUIT OPTIONS FROM 50, ,000 sq ft suffolk-park. BURY ST EDMUNDS IP32 7QB NEW INDUSTRIAL AND LOGISTICS BUILD-TO-SUIT OPTIONS FROM 50,000-750,000 suffolk-park.uk Suffolk Park is the only major allocated employment site in with outline planning for up

More information

Wales. Andy Thomas. Route Managing Director Wales. Ken Skates, Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, Welsh Government

Wales. Andy Thomas. Route Managing Director Wales. Ken Skates, Cabinet Secretary for Economy and Infrastructure, Welsh Government Wales The railway in Wales and Borders plays a critical role in connecting people, businesses and communities to support both regional and national economic growth. We run the safest railway in Europe,

More information

Gold Coast. Rapid Transit. Chapter twelve Social impact. Chapter content

Gold Coast. Rapid Transit. Chapter twelve Social impact. Chapter content Gold Coast Rapid Transit Chapter twelve Social impact Chapter content Social impact assessment process...235 Existing community profile...237 Consultation...238 Social impacts and mitigation strategies...239

More information

Introduction to European Commission Funding: ERDF and JESSICA

Introduction to European Commission Funding: ERDF and JESSICA Developing interest - appendix: March 2013 Appendix 1: Introduction to European Commission Funding: ERDF and JESSICA European Regional Development Funding (ERDF) aim[s] to strengthen economic and social

More information

TOWN PLANNING SUBMISSION TO THE GREATER SYDNEY COMMISSION LANDS AT ARTARMON

TOWN PLANNING SUBMISSION TO THE GREATER SYDNEY COMMISSION LANDS AT ARTARMON TOWN PLANNING SUBMISSION TO THE GREATER SYDNEY COMMISSION LANDS AT ARTARMON March 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 3 2.0 THE SUBJECT SITE 4 3.0 STRATEGIC PLANNING CONTEXT 6 4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

More information

Transport Delivery Committee

Transport Delivery Committee Agenda Item No. 11 Transport Delivery Committee Date 6 th March 2016 Report title Accountable Director Accountable Employee Virgin Trains Partnership Agreement Update Pete Bond, Director of Transport Services

More information

HSR the creation of a mega-project

HSR the creation of a mega-project HSR the creation of a mega-project Jim Steer Director Greengauge 21 Omega Centre May 2009 2oth May 2009 omega centre: transport mega-projects 1 Outline Motivations The formative history on HSR: how a mega-project

More information

Doncaster Chamber of Commerce. Andy Taylor Head of Public Affairs, HS2 Ltd

Doncaster Chamber of Commerce. Andy Taylor Head of Public Affairs, HS2 Ltd Doncaster Chamber of Commerce Andy Taylor Head of Public Affairs, HS2 Ltd HS2 one railway, two phases 330 miles of new track 9 HS2 stations High speed trains running on HS2 and existing lines Up to 18

More information

3. Coach Supporting Statement

3. Coach Supporting Statement 3. Coach Supporting Statement Content 1. Setting the Scene 2. Vision 3. Coaches and the Shared Priorities 4. Issues 5. Delivery Programme in the first Plan Period 2001/02 2005/06 6. Good Practice 7. Strategy

More information

Major Scheme Business Case Summary Report for Programme Entry

Major Scheme Business Case Summary Report for Programme Entry Paper A Heart of South West Local Transport Board Major Scheme Business Case Summary Report for Programme Entry M5 Junction 25, Taunton July 2016 1 SCHEME SUMMARY Scheme Name M5 Junction 25, Taunton Date

More information

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director

Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Produced by: Destination Research Sergi Jarques, Director Economic Impact of Tourism Norfolk - 2017 Contents Page Summary Results 2 Contextual analysis 4 Volume of Tourism 7 Staying Visitors - Accommodation

More information

Summary Proof of Evidence Traffic

Summary Proof of Evidence Traffic Adran yr Economi a r Seilwaith Department for Economy and Infrastructure The M4 Motorway (Junction 23 (East of Magor) to West of Junction 29 (Castleton) and Connecting Roads) and The M48 Motorway (Junction

More information

City employment: An overview from the Business Register & Employment Survey (BRES)

City employment: An overview from the Business Register & Employment Survey (BRES) employment September 2012 employment: An overview from the Business Register & Employment Survey (BRES) Rachel Smith, September 2012 On 28 September, the latest employment estimates for 2011, taken from

More information

Performance Criteria for Assessing Airport Expansion Alternatives for the London Region

Performance Criteria for Assessing Airport Expansion Alternatives for the London Region Performance Criteria for Assessing Airport Expansion Alternatives for the London Region Jagoda Egeland International Transport Forum at the OECD TRB Annual Meeting 836 - Measuring Aviation System Performance:

More information

A Master Plan is one of the most important documents that can be prepared by an Airport.

A Master Plan is one of the most important documents that can be prepared by an Airport. The Master Plan A Master Plan is one of the most important documents that can be prepared by an Airport. A Master Plan is a visionary and a strategic document detailing planning initiatives for the Airport

More information

LSCC London. Stansted. Cambridge.Consortium

LSCC London. Stansted. Cambridge.Consortium LSCC London. Stansted. Cambridge.Consortium Covering letter to Airports Commission We are pleased to submit a report undertaken for the London Stansted Cambridge Consortium (LSCC) on the economic impact

More information

Gold Coast: Modelled Future PIA Queensland Awards for Planning Excellence 2014 Nomination under Cutting Edge Research category

Gold Coast: Modelled Future PIA Queensland Awards for Planning Excellence 2014 Nomination under Cutting Edge Research category Gold Coast: Modelled Future PIA Queensland Awards for Planning Excellence 2014 Nomination under Cutting Edge Research category Jointly nominated by SGS Economics and Planning and City of Gold Coast August

More information

PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL. Enterprise and Infrastructure Committee 4 November 2009

PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL. Enterprise and Infrastructure Committee 4 November 2009 PERTH AND KINROSS COUNCIL 4 09/494 Enterprise and Infrastructure Committee 4 November 2009 STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR TOURISM AND AREA TOURISM PARTNERSHIP ARRANGEMENTS Report by Depute Director (Environment)

More information

Draft Western District Plan

Draft Western District Plan Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org) Draft Western District Plan Submission_id: 31732 Date of Lodgment: 15 Dec 2017 Origin of Submission: Online Organisation name: APP Corporation Pty Ltd Organisation type:

More information

FUTURE TRANSPORT STRATEGY AND GREATER SYDNEY SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN. Western Parkland City

FUTURE TRANSPORT STRATEGY AND GREATER SYDNEY SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN. Western Parkland City FUTURE TRANSPORT STRATEGY AND GREATER SYDNEY SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Western Parkland City 2 Transport for NSW Future Transport Strategy and Greater Sydney Services and Infrastructure Plan Western

More information

RUGBY GATEWAY RG-2 290,000 SQ FT SPECULATIVE UNIT TO LET JUNCTION 1 M6 CV23 0XF OCCUPATION FROM SEPTEMBER

RUGBY GATEWAY RG-2 290,000 SQ FT SPECULATIVE UNIT TO LET JUNCTION 1 M6 CV23 0XF OCCUPATION FROM SEPTEMBER RUGBY GATEWAY JUNCTION 1 CV23 0XF A 1.8 MILLION SQ FT (167,225 SQ M) LOGISTICS DEVELOPMENT OCCUPATION FROM SEPTEMBER 2016 IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO JUNCTION 1 OF THE AT THE HEART OF THE LOGISTICS GOLDEN

More information

Jim Steer. Director Greengauge 21. HS2 and the North. Transport Times Conference. October October 2016 Transport Times, London 1

Jim Steer. Director Greengauge 21. HS2 and the North. Transport Times Conference. October October 2016 Transport Times, London 1 Jim Steer Director Greengauge 21 HS2 and the North Transport Times Conference October 2016 October 2016 Transport Times, London 1 overview Bringing together HS2 and the northern powerhouse Getting beyond

More information

The case for rail devolution in London. Submission to the London Assembly Transport Committee. June Response.

The case for rail devolution in London. Submission to the London Assembly Transport Committee. June Response. Response The case for rail devolution in London Submission to the London Assembly Transport Committee Pedro Abrantes Senior Economist pteg Support Unit Wellington House 40-50 Wellington Street Leeds LS1

More information

SUFFOLK PARK BURY ST EDMUNDS IP32 7QB NEW INDUSTRIAL AND LOGISTICS PARK. BUILD-TO-SUIT OPTIONS FROM 50, ,000 sq ft suffolk-park.

SUFFOLK PARK BURY ST EDMUNDS IP32 7QB NEW INDUSTRIAL AND LOGISTICS PARK. BUILD-TO-SUIT OPTIONS FROM 50, ,000 sq ft suffolk-park. SUFFOLK PARK BURY ST EDMUNDS IP32 7QB NEW INDUSTRIAL AND LOGISTICS PARK BUILD-TO-SUIT OPTIONS FROM 50,000 750,000 suffolk-park.uk Suffolk Park is the only major allocated employment site in Bury St Edmunds

More information

SRA FUTURE FARES POLICY

SRA FUTURE FARES POLICY SRA FUTURE FARES POLICY This response has been prepared by PTEG on behalf of the 7 Passenger Transport Authorities and Executives in England and Scotland. We welcome the publication of the consultation

More information

Meeting the capacity challenge: The case for new lines

Meeting the capacity challenge: The case for new lines Meeting the capacity challenge: The case for new lines NewLineStudy_v7.indd 1 21/08/2009 15:02:42 Meeting the capacity challenge Our railways are getting full. At some point, in the not too distant future,

More information

Tourism Development Framework for Scotland. Executive Summary- Development Framework to 2020 for the Visitor Economy (Refresh 2016)

Tourism Development Framework for Scotland. Executive Summary- Development Framework to 2020 for the Visitor Economy (Refresh 2016) Tourism Development Framework for Scotland Executive Summary- Development Framework to 2020 for the Visitor Economy (Refresh 2016) Introduction The Tourism Development Framework for Scotland refresh 2016:

More information

THE STOPS ARE JUST THE START

THE STOPS ARE JUST THE START HS2 AND NORTHERN POWERHOUSE RAIL GROWTH STRATEGY THE STOPS ARE JUST THE START 1 2 This is an exciting time to be living, working, studying and investing in Greater Manchester. The region has always been

More information

The Strategic Commercial and Procurement Manager

The Strategic Commercial and Procurement Manager Item 3 To: Procurement Sub Committee On: 8 June 2016 Report by: The Strategic Commercial and Procurement Manager Heading: Renfrewshire Council s Community Benefit Strategy 2016 1. Summary 1.1. The purpose

More information

ECONOMY & SURFACE ACCESS SUMMARY LAND USE LAND USE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2016 DHL. manchesterairport.co.uk

ECONOMY & SURFACE ACCESS SUMMARY LAND USE LAND USE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2016 DHL. manchesterairport.co.uk ECONOMY & SURFACE ACCESS LAND USE LAND USE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2016 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT DHL manchesterairport.co.uk OUR AIRPORT FOREWORD by Ken O Toole Managing Director, Manchester Airport

More information

West Midlands and Domestic Tourism

West Midlands and Domestic Tourism and Domestic Tourism The comprises the counties of, Herefordshire, Shropshire, Worcestershire, Warwickshire and Staffordshire. It has a population of 5.7 million, representing 11% of the total England

More information

2nd March, 2017 Corporate Report Format. Conisbrough Mexborough Sprotbrough

2nd March, 2017 Corporate Report Format. Conisbrough Mexborough Sprotbrough 2nd March, 2017 Corporate Report Format To the Chair and Members of the Full Council HIGH SPEED TWO PHASE 2B PROPERTY AND ROUTE REFINEMENT CONSULTATIONS Relevant Cabinet Member(s) Mayor Ros Jones Cllr

More information

Sheffield City Region, Leeds City Region High Speed Rail to Yorkshire Technical Report

Sheffield City Region, Leeds City Region High Speed Rail to Yorkshire Technical Report Sheffield City Region, Leeds City Region FINAL REPORT September 2010 Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Admiral House Rose Wharf 78 East Street Leeds LS9 8EE United Kingdom www.arup.com This report takes into account

More information