White Rock Business Park - Phil Whitehead

In March 1997 Phil Whitehead from Torbay and South Devon Friends of the Earth was involved in the Public Inquiry for the White Rock Business Park in Paignton. His proof of evidence is below.

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Personal Introduction
1.1.1
Sir, my name is Philip Whitehead, I am the senior Transport Campaigner with Torbay and South Devon Friends of the Earth, a position I have held for the past 6 years. In this time I have campaigned on a range of issues and proposals around the Torbay area which potentially relate to a sustainable transport strategy for the area. This includes giving evidence at the recent Public Inquiry which considered the proposals for the Torbay Ring Road Stages 3 and 4.
1.1.2
I have no particular vested interest in these proposals for a business park at White Rock, however, I have lived in Paignton since 1970 and therefore consider myself very much a local resident. During the time that I have lived in Paignton I have seen traffic levels build up in Torbay and the problems this has created in terms of congestion and a general deterioration in the quality of the urban environment.
1.1.3
My interest in the proposals for a business park at White Rock have arisen partly from my membership of and involvement with a number of organisations including Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, Alarm UK, Transport 2000, CPRE and the New Economics Foundation and partly from an interest in how the local area in which I live - Paignton - develops to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing world. Having considered the proposals for a business park at this location I have come to the firm conclusion that this proposed development is environmentally unsustainable in terms of its location and the mitigation proposals that have been put forward fail to address the transport costs that will result from the development. I believe that if this proposed business park is given the go ahead, then a great deal more should be done to reduce the growth in car based traffic on the Torbay Ring Road that would arise from the development.
1.2 Who I represent
1.2.1
The group I am representing is Torbay and South Devon Friends of the Earth. They are an independent voluntary organisation which campaigns for changes of policy at an international, national and local level to bring about sustainable development.
Based in Torbay for nearly ten years, the group have been successful in changing and informing public opinion on a range of environmental issues and bringing pressure to bear on politicians at all levels. There are presently 581 Friends of the Earth members in the Torbay and South Devon area.

2 SCOPE AND PURPOSE OF THIS EVIDENCE
2.1
My evidence on behalf of Torbay and South Devon Friends of the Earth will be restricted to the transport related aspects of the proposed development at White Rock, the mitigation measures proposed and the reasons why these are inadequate if the business park is to go ahead.
2.2
A heavy burden of proof always rests with anyone promoting a scheme such as this. The costs, both in resources and environmental damage are large and certain. The benefits are very uncertain. The scheme, once built, is irreversible, so if it does not work there is very little that can be done about it. There are other sites in and around the Torbay area that are better served by transport infrastructure. However, I am sure that many others will be putting forward these arguments at this inquiry. Friends of the Earth, while believing that the environmental costs of the proposed development outweigh the benefits, are content to argue that if the scheme is to go ahead then a great deal more must be done to mitigate against the environmental costs of the proposed development.
2.3
I believe that the transport proposals which the Highway Authority are attempting to pursue through developer contributions are environmentally unsustainable and relate to the Torbay Transportation Strategy which has already been rejected by the Government.
2.4
The congestion that would arise on the Torbay Ring Road as a result of the proposed development would have an adverse effect on the economic viability of those businesses already located at the Yalberton Industrial Estate, if the proposed development were to go ahead in its present form.
2.5
In my evidence I will dispute the arguments put forward by Devon County Council and the developers, that the proposed development is in keeping with Government Guidance on Sustainable Development as contained in PPG13 'Transport', RPG10 'Regional Planning Guidance for the South West' and Devon County Councils own Structure Plan.
2.6
I will put forward a possible package of alternative transport measures that would not only mitigate against the excessive car based traffic that would arise from the proposed development as it stands, but would also lead to reductions of car based traffic on Torbay's existing road network including the Torbay Ring Road, This would in turn reduce the need for expensive road building proposals that the local authorities are attempting to justify with the extra traffic generated by the 'White Rock' development.

3 WHITE ROCK AND GOVERNMENT POLICY
3.1
The Secretary of State's 'call in' letter in respect of the proposed development identified six matters about which the Secretary of State wished to be informed:
i) the relationship of the proposed development to the guidance contained in PPG4 'Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms', PPG7 'Countryside and the Rural Economy', PPG13 'Transport', RPG10 'Regional Planning Guidance for the South West'. The relevant policies of the Approved Devon Structure Plan and the Adopted Torbay Local Plan;
ii) the suitability of the site for the proposed development, including the likely impact on the AONB, the open countryside and the local highway network;
iii) the implications of the proposed devlopment on the loss of Grade 2 and 3a agricultural land;
iv) the implications of the proposed development on the development plan strategy for employment in Torbay;
v) the need and justification for the proposed development; and
vi) whether any permission granted should be subject to conditions and if so, the form they should take.
3.2
My evidence will relate to the 'call in' letter in relation to i), ii), iv) and vi)
3.2.1
In this evidence I will firstly consider the policy framework in which this application should be considered.
3.2.2
PPG1 'General Policy and Principles 1992 states;
"the sum total of decisions in the planning field, as elsewhere should not deny future generations the best of today's environment.... The planning system has a positive role to play in guiding appropriate development to the right place as well as preventing development which is not acceptable."
3.2.3
Clearly this statement places a great emphasis on the need for a more sustainable form of development where the true long term environmental and economic costs are considered early in the planning process. So far, I believe this has not been the case. Our locally elected representatives have been too easily swayed by the promise of potential employment creation, without considering the application in its wider context.
3.3 Global agreements
3.3.1
At the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro (the Earth Summit) in June 1992, the UK signed the final conference report - a convention on sustainable development normally entitled 'Agenda 21' (the Agenda for the 21st Century). In doing so, the UK has committed itself to achieving a wide range of environmental objectives and targets. This has now been adopted by the Government into the UK Sustainable Development Strategy.
3.4 Bruntland Report
3.4.1
The most widely accepted definition of the term sustainable development is that which originated in the Bruntland Report; (1987)
3.4.2
"Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs."
3.4.3
This statement phrases 'sustainable development' as a wide ranging concept which encompasses social, political, economic and environmental considerations. There are three concepts which arise from the above definition of sustainable development which require precise definition: development, needs and future generations.
3.4.4 Development
Development is not the same as growth, although the two are often used synonymously. Growth involves the physical expansion of the economic system. Sustainable growth is ultimately contradictory, since there are physical limits imposed by the earth and its natural resources. Development, by contrast, implies improvement and progress and includes social and cultural as well as material dimensions. Sustainable development emphasises conservation and the recognition that natural resources are not simply free goods to be pillaged and pilfered at will.
3.4.5 Needs
Needs are defined in the Bruntland Report as 'meeting the needs of all and extending to all, the opportunity to satisfy their aspirations for a better life'. The environment simply cannot cope with meeting the material standards enjoyed by the rich while? at the same time, supplying the basic necessities to the burgeoning populations of the developing world.
3.4.6 Future Generations
The concept of future generations involves the notion of stewardship. We have a moral duty to look after our planet and to hand it on in good order to future generations. This means improving already degradated areas and avoiding irreversible damage (such as the destruction of species such as the Cirl Bunting) or imposing risks on the future (such as changing climatic conditions or rising sea levels from increasing levels of greenhouse gases).
3.5 The UK Sustainable Development Strategy (Jan 1994)
3.5.1
This document sets the basic framework for the development of specific transport proposals in the UK. Chapter 26 begins with:
3.5.2 'A SUSTAINABLE FRAMEWORK'
"* To strike the right balance between the ability of transport to serve economic development and the ability to protect the environment and sustain future quality of life.
* To provide for the economic and social needs for access with less need for travel.
* To take measures which reduce the environmental impact of transport and influence the rate of traffic growth.
* To ensure that users pay the full social and environmental costs of their transport decisions, so improving the overall efficiency of those decisions for the economy as a whole and bringing environmental benefits."
3.5.3
The report goes on to identify in 26.17 under; 'Elements of a sustainable transport policy' "It is not the Government's job to tell people where and how to travel. But if people continue to exercise their choices as they are at present and there are no other significant changes, the resulting traffic growth would have unacceptable consequences for both the environment and the economy of certain parts of the country, and could be very difficult to reconcile with overall sustainable development goals. The Government will need to provide a framework in which people can exercise their transport choice in ways which are compatible with environmental goals."
3.5.4
The above has led to a revision of the Planning Policy Guidance notes to local authorities
3.6 The Planning Policy Guidance notes
3.6.1
These notes issued by the government have been revised to take account of the UK Sustainable Development Strategy setting, the framework for local planning decisions.
3.6.2 PPG 13 Transport March 1994
This guidance note forms an important part of the Governments Sustainable Development Strategy in relation to transport. The main reason for publishing this document is to reduce the environmental impact of road travel.
3.6.3
"The key aim of the guidance is to ensure that local authorities carry out their land use policies and transport programmes in ways which help to:
* reduce growth in the length and number of motorised journeys
* encourage alternative means of travel which have less environmental impact: and hence
* reduce reliance on the private motor car."
3.6.4 PPG13 Transport and the environment
"1.1 An effective transport system is vital or the local and national economy. But continuing growth in road transport and consequent environmental impacts present a major challenge to the objective of sustainable development. Traffic growth on the scale projected could threaten our ability to meet objectives for greenhouse gas emissions, for air quality, and for the protection of landscape and habitats.
1.2 There is scope for further improvements in vehicle emissions, but in themselves will not be sufficient. Further means will be necessary to reduce the environmental impact of transport and influence the rate of traffic growth.
1.3 The location and the nature of development affect the amount and method of travel; and the pattern of development is itself influenced by transport infrastructure and transport policies. By planning land use and transport together in ways which enable people to carry out their everyday activities with less need to travel, local planning authorities can reduce reliance on the private car and make a significant contribution to the environmental goals set out in the Government's Sustainable Development Strategy."
3.7 The Regional Context
3.7.1 Regional Planning Guidance for the South West RPG10 July 1994
This document primarily provides advice for the updating and review of development plans for the South West states:
3.7.2 '3. The Regional Development Framework'
3.1 A key objective of the planning system, and development plans in particular, to ensure that development is sustainable; ie that it meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This does not mean that all change should be resisted or prevented. Planning for change in a way that protect and enhance the distinctive environmental qualities of the Region will assist in attracting new investment and jobs, improve the quality of life of existing residents and protect the environment for future generations.
3.2 Sustainability should be the cornerstone of the Region's development plans and planning decisions. Environmental appraisals of all development plans should ensure that they encompass and promote sustainability objectives as well as showing how environmental and other effects have been appraised in arriving at the plan's policies and proposals."
3.8 Transport: the way ahead South West Debate - Report to the Secretary of State
3.8.1
"Between July and October 1995, the Government Office for the South West (GOSW), with the support of the University of the West of England, and in partnership with the Regional Planning Conference, the seven counties of the region, the Regional CBI, Transport 2000, CPRE, FoE, the Road Haulage and Freight Transport Associations and a range of other interested parties, held a series of invited seminars to discuss the way forward for transport in the region."
3.8.2
The participants came to the consensus view that;
"In the light of the UK Government's clear commitment to the principle of sustainable development, the participants in the South West seminars are agreed that present transport trends and associated policies based on 'predict and provide' do not make economic, environmental or social sense. Urgent steps are now needed to redress this and to promote measures which meet economic, environmental and social objectives in a complementary way rather than trading competing aspects.
The essential basis for any future strategy is:
* seeking to avoid travel demands; and
* management of transport systems to reduce negative impacts and prioritise use.
Future policy needs to reflect that transport is a demand derived from other activities and not something to be provided in its own right or at cost to other objectives.
A new vision is needed for transport to reflect this. We suggest:
Transport policies and programmes, working with land use and economic development policies, should help to provide levels and forms of access appropriate to future economic, social and environmental needs.
To achieve this, transport policies and programmes should be measured against the following objectives:
a a more transport-efficient economy, with lower growth in travel by car and heavy goods vehicles than growth in national economic production
b a more environmentally-efficient transport system, reducing the exposure of individuals to noise and poor air quality, and minimising net impacts from transport infrastructure development
c a positive approach to strengthening communities, support local public and private facilities, local skills and training, and local economies and identity
d a safer system for all, especially vulnerable road users, to remove fear and to encourage children to reclaim their independent movement
e a system which is more predictable in its operation through efficient management, to allow economic development to have a firm basis for decision making
f provision and management of all modes based on desirable access levels which provide choice and reflect local needs, opportunities and development strategies
g local distinctiveness based on active public participation and improved awareness
h coherence in delivering objectives, both geographically and functionally
These objectives should be reflected in developing indicators, targets and measures for new transport approaches."
3.9 Towards a Sustainable Transport Policy for Devon (Nov 1992) Devon County Council.
3.9.1
"3.8 It has become clear that the emphasis placed over the past decades on speed and unlimited personal mobility are not sustainable, and that we must find a redirection of policy which places the various objectives more in balance. There is a need to move towards Sustainable mobility."
3.10 The Devon County Structure Plan First Review - Consultation Draft (August 1995) (Devon 2011)
This document has identified as its first aim (Chapter 4 page 13):
3.10.1
"To plan for the future of the County in such a way as to help safeguard the global environment by seeking to ensure that all development is consistent with the principles of sustainability."
Then it goes on to say:
3.10.2
"4.4 A number of issues can be seen to arise from this Aim, some of which relate to specific topic areas and some to the plan as a whole. The strategy and policies of the plan therefore seek to:
* Reduce the need to travel, especially by private vehicles.
* Promote the use of alternatives to car travel such as public transport, walking and cycling
* Promote measures that conserve fossil fuel
* Conserve other resources
* Promote measures to reduce global atmospheric change."
3.10.3 Devon 2011 Chapter 6 Conserving and Enhancing the Environment, Policy EN1 states:
"In considering proposals for new development, priority should be given to the aims of sustainability so as to ensure that the global environment is not adversely affected, that the natural environment is conserved and the local environment enhanced. Where the environmental effects of a proposed development are uncertain but potentially significant, the Local Planning Authority should request the preparation of an environmental impact assessment."
3.10.4 Devon 2011 Chapter 10 Transport (page 97)
A Hierarchy of Modes states:
"10.21 The need to co-ordinate future investment in transport infrastructure within a comprehensive and integrated framework has encouraged the adoption of a hierarchy of travel modes which builds upon the strengths of each mode and encourages individuals to select the most suitable and environmentally acceptable mode of travel for their journey. The special needs of some sectors of the community may reduce the sustainability of some travel modes for individual journeys. The investment framework will ensure that the desired level of accessibility is achieved for all sectors of the community."
3.10.5 Devon 2011 Policy TR3
"An integrated and balanced transportation system will be developed which promotes the use of the most sustainable and environmentally acceptable modes, uses the following hierarchy:
1. Walking
2. Cycling
3. Public Transport
4. Private Transport"
3.11 Need for Demand Management
Clearly there have been major changes in thinking throughout the policy spectrum and although the recent statements by Devon County Council are encouraging and seemingly in line with government guidance, I do not think the proposals for Stages 3 and 4 of the Torbay Ring Road or the mitigation measures put forward for the proposed White Rock business park are the type of proposals envisaged within the Governments guidance, policies and thinking on sustainable development. Devon County Council as the Highway Authority for the area still believe that it is acceptable to carry on increasing road capacity as long as other modes are considered as well. This approach is incompatible with Government Guidance as it fails to include the necessary complementary demand management measures needed to achieve mode shift. [TPP Submissions for 1996-97 Supplementary Guidance Notes on the Package Approach 4.24 &4.25] (see page 15 of this proof)
3.12 Planning Policy Guidance
3.12.1
The fundamental change in approach is reflected in the recent PPG13 where the need to manage demand is quite explicit:
3.12.2
"1.4 The Government recognises that forecast levels of traffic growth, especially in urban areas, cannot be met in full and that new road building or upgrading of existing highways will in some cases be environmentally unacceptable. It is always Government policy not to build new trunk roads simply to facilitate commuting by car into congested urban centres.
1.5 To maintain the effectiveness of a transport system there are good reasons to place more weight on policies to manage demand, especially in urban areas by:
- promoting acceptable alternatives to the private car
- enabling people to reach everyday destinations with less need to travel; and
- reducing local traffic on trunk roads and other through routes.
1.6 To encourage authorities to develop these policies the Department of Transport has stated that, from 1995-96, authorities bidding for resources for local transport investment in urban areas will be encouraged to do so on the basis of a comprehensive transport strategy covering all forms of transport. These strategies should flow from the authorities planning policies. Guidance on the new arrangements will be given in annual Transport Policies and Programmes circulars of the Department of Transport and accompanying guidance."
3.13 Supplementary Guidance Notes
3.13.1
The above process is followed through in the Supplementary Guidance Notes where great emphasis is placed on the need to manage demand:
3.13.2
TPP Submissions for 1996-97. Supplementary Guidance Notes on the Package Approach major infrastructure and demand management.
3.13.3
"2.18 The Government has already made clear it's view that it is in general not possible to solve the problems of an urban area by a programme of road construction. In particular, there should not be new or improved roads built in urban areas to facilitate commuting by car (as set out in PPG 13). Major road improvements in urban areas may be appropriate in limited cases, but authorities should consider traffic restraint and improvements in alternative modes, and proposals should be grounded in a balanced strategy. Any major urban road proposals should include analysis of alternative solutions and an account of why no alternative is preferable.
4.24 As stated above, the Government believes that it will not be possible to solve the transport problems of urban areas by a programme of road building and investment. this does not mean that a road proposal will not be entertained by the Department. It does mean that if such a proposal is included, the submission must make clear how it balances with the other elements of the package. Roads may, for instance, be needed to relieve town centres to allow parking restraint or pedestrianisation. But road proposals should not bring more traffic into congested town centres; public transport proposals should aim to achieve mode shift; traffic restraint will usually be necessary to maximise the benefits from these schemes. Packages should reflect the guidance, in PPG 13, with its emphasis on reducing the need for travel, and on policies to encourage modal shift."
4.25 Similarly, public transport improvements alone are unlikely to provide a solution to urban transport problems. Public transport improvements in particular should include details of complementary demand management measures, to show that customer take-up and consequential benefits are to be maximised. Such measures may include capacity reductions along parallel roads, the closing of rat-runs, and parking restraint at destinations. Non-transport policies, such as land-use planning, which are capable of being used as an instrument of demand management, should be considered, and details included in the package submission if relevant. If, for whatever reason, restraint measures are not considered appropriate, then authorities should include an explanation.
3.14 Failure to consider traffic restraint in TPP for 1996/97
3.14.1
Despite this quite explicit guidance Devon County Council persisted with applying for funding in their Transport Policies and Programme for 1996/97, for the Torbay Ring Road Stages 3 and 4, within their Package Bid for Torbay. The lack of demand management included in the bid was probably the main reason for the rejection of the whole Package.
3.15 Package Bid
3.15.1
While Devon County Council claim that the proposals are Part of a 'Sustainable Transport Policy' (Environmental Statement Volume 1 Page 5 Para 2) I do,not believe this to be the case and neither do the government, for in a letter to Devon County Council, dated Dec 19th 95, Matthew Quinn, Director, (Environment and Transport) Government Officer for the South West, with regards to 1996-97 Local Transport Capital Expenditure Settlement (page 3 Paragraph 3,4 and 5) states:
3.15.2
"We are unable to support The Torbay package this year. Our main concern about this package relates to demand management.
First the package contains a substantial weight of major and minor highway schemes, which we consider have not been fully justified in strategic terms. The Government's view is that it is not possible to meet rising demand for road space in urban areas by a programme of road construction and improvement. Before giving support to highway proposals within a package, we need to see the case made that alternative measures (including do-nothing) will not work.
Second, while alternatives to the car are proposed in the package, we are concerned about the apparent lack of complementary restraint measures. As stated in the package guidance, investment in alternatives to the car alone is unlikely to provide a solution to urban transport problems. Bids proposing such investment need to include details of complementary demand management measures, to show that customer take-up and consequential benefits are to be maximised. While studies on restrictions in central Torquay are mentioned in the package, these will need to be developed into proposals before this package can be supported."
3.15.3
As the Package Bid bears such a close resemblance to the Torbay Transportation Strategy and the Torbay Ring Road forms an integral part of that strategy, clearly the government is unconvinced by either the Torbay Transportation Strategy or the Torbay Ring Road proposals.

4 MITIGATION PROPOSALS
4.1
I do not believe that the mitigation measures put forward in the application by Sir Robert McAlpine and which are supported by both Devon County Council and Torbay Borough Council meet the stated aims of Government Policy on transport as they attempt to accommodate an additional 7000 car trips per day on the Torbay Ring Road
4.2
While I would certainly have no difficulty supporting the following mitigation proposals:
* footways/cycleway system with links to the existing network
* works and measures to deter traffic from using local roads
* financial contribution towards measures to assist and encourage the development and use of bus services serving the site
* relief of Windy Corner junction by means of proportional contributions to the Park and ride facility at Churston.
I would suggest that the other measures especially the road enhancement measures should be reconsidered as the available financial contributions could be spent in a more imaginative and constructive manner, in ways that do not add to congestion on the already busy Torbay Ring Road.
4.3
I would like to suggest that if the proposed development is to go ahead then the mitigation against the environmental costs of transport should be considerably more comprehensive than at present and should not only attempt to deal with the costs that will arise from the development itself, as this can only ever be partially successful, but that developer contributions from Sir Robert McAlpine should be sought to develop Green Commuter Plans in conjunction with other employers around Torbay and especially along the Torbay Ring Road corridor. Furthermore developer contributions should be sought to support the cost of the development of an 'integrated' transport strategy for the Torbay area as a whole.
4.3.1 FoE's interpretation of an 'integrated' transport strategy.
'Integration', as we see it, is more than simply making provision for certain modes of transport in the local plan. We see integration as:
* the bringing together of various modes of transport so as to provide mobility to meet the needs of everyday life of the citizens of the Borough, with the least environmental and resource impact;
* giving 'choice' to local people as to the mode of transport they use - we do not have such options at the moment;
* protecting and enhancing the local environment through the promotion of 'least impact' modes of transport, and implementing demand management measures to limit those modes which cause damage to the local and global environment.
The point about 'choice' is an important one. At the moment, we do not have the option of using various modes of transport because of the limitations put upon us by the current system. The restrictions can be:
* financial cost - the person cannot afford other modes of transport;
* personal safety - the choice of other modes involves increased risk to the person;
* accessibility - the choice simply does not exist.
4.4 Mitigation Measures-The Alternatives to Road Building and Investment
I would like to suggest the following package of measures for consideration to address both the problems that would arise from the proposed development itself and to tackle the wider transport problems of Torbay as a whole.
4.5 Green Commuter Plans
About 20-25% of daily traffic flows are typically represented by journeys to work. Added to this is the amount of travel undertaken during the day using the current car allowance scheme (usually seen by employees as a perk), as well as personal car trips made during the day.
Plans to reduce commuting, especially by private cars with one occupant only, can be very effective. Studies undertaken in Nottingham and Norwich indicate that cutting car commuting by 50 per cent could be possible in the medium term. Reductions of 10-12% of daily traffic are possible, and growth could be focussed even more strongly into alternatives in the longer term. Such plans have the greatest impact on reducing peak hour traffic, when congestion is most marked.
By encouraging alternatives, involving local business in developing Travel Plans, and integrating these policies with others initiatives such as local Agenda 21 Reports and Green Charters, this process can achieve a momentum of its own. Many firms have private parking not controlled by Road Traffic Acts. However, built in to the traffic growth forecasts is the critical assumption that parking will continue to be provided to cope with the increase. This is amenable to planning controls. Thus the impact of existing private non-residential parking will be eroded as time goes on. In the short term, the share of non-car driver modes will be less than target, but will progress in line with new development, as long as the parking spaces allowed are in line with achieving the long term target.
The ‘Green Commuting' initiative should be seen as a positive step, and a means to involve local businesses. Such plans are widely adopted by Dutch firms, where they are called 'company transport plans'.The costs of implementing such proposals are difficult to quantify, because there are often benefits as well as costs to companies and employees. For example, space saved by reduced parking can be used for more profitable purposes, money saved from car allowances can be recycled back to employees on a more equitable basis. Most of the cost is in the need for a person to lead the initiative from the local authority, plus some cross departmental support and publicity. Some of the positive proposals for walk, cycle and bus modes will support Green Commuting, as well as providing opportunities for other journeys to transfer.
I have included in the appendices at the end of this proof a recent study undertaken for Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust by Professor John Whitelegg as an example of what is possible where large numbers of people are employed and also a recent publication highlighting a number of other examples.
4.6 Safe Routes to School
Journeys to and from school have a strong influence on congestion during peak periods. These trips account for about 16% of cars on the roads during the morning peak. The Department of Transport has recently backed the idea of safe routes to schools, claiming that they are an "attractive and positive way forward in helping bring about change".
Organised car pooling between parents can help. The local authority working with the bus operators may be able to offer suitable services. However, a key element will be the active provision of routes for walking and cycling which are safe and secure. Careful planning and close work between parents, schools and local authorities is essential. Again this may need little more in terms of resources than an officer to be made responsible for stimulating pilot schemes, monitoring, disseminating information and advising on wider implementation.
4.7 Planning and Parking
Designing a parking policy to achieve traffic reduction requires considerable care. Policies include: parking provision (and where it is located); parking charges; and parking permits. Special provision must always be made for residents, and the elderly and disabled. Staff car parking charges at the proposed development which allowed for further reductions in the cost of alternative means of transport is essential if demand for car use is to be suppressed.
In terms of car parking provision at the proposed development, this should be limited to ratio of no more than 0.5 car spaces per employee, this would have a very positive effect on mode shift.
In many ways it is easier to restrain journeys that are not happening yet, but are part of the traffic growth prediction. The most effective way to do this is to work with developers, or those seeking to enlarge or redevelop sites, to produce travel management plans and to set a maximum for the share of travel accounted for by private car drivers. It should be noted that drivers are the yardstick: passengers who raise the level of occupancy of cars are not subject to a target.
There are plenty of examples of how this approach of setting accessibility requirements to development, not just car access, can result in novel and effective schemes. These benefit all employees, not just car drivers. For example, new public transport services can be provided and parking spaces reduced. This can actually result in a more profitable development because land is not consumed by car parking.
4.8 Public Education Programmes
It is important to make the reduction of traffic part of a positive process at the local level. This involves public education and participation. Two schemes illustrate how progress can be made: 'Headstart' and 'Travelwise'.
Headstart is an initiative undertaken by Hampshire County Council to achieve a "fundamental shift in public attitudes" towards car use. The programme starts from the premise that most drivers accept that not all of their mileage is essential, and that if traffic growth could be reduced or slowed, there would be enormous benefits. The alternative, a predicted doubling of traffic within 30 years, would be "economically and environmentally unacceptable".
Headstart seeks to persuade people to use their cars less. There are four key objectives:
To raise awareness of the problem;
To increase acceptance that individuals can personally contribute to solving these problems;
To change attitudes towards car use;
To encourage individuals to take action to change their travel behaviour patterns;
Hampshire county Council estimate the benefits of their programmes would exceed the costs by approximately 25:1. For example, they consider that an expenditure of £1.6 million could lead to savings of £42 million.Travelwise is a similar initiative undertaken by Hertfordshire County Council and aimed at businesses. The suggested measures to reduce car use include: cycling, home working, walking, car-sharing, bus and rail and flexitime working.
4.9 Light Rapid Transit
Light Rapid Transit (LRT) is a name given by transport planners to a range of modern public transport systems. All involve running lightweight, but safe, vehicles on guided (and usually segregated) track. A host of different systems are available to meet almost every urban transport need. Guided bus systems may involve little more than guiding conventional buses on "tracks" bordered by concrete kerbs. Light rail systems are modern versions of the old tram - capable of running on railways or on metal track through city streets. Some systems can even get the best of both worlds by running fast on rail where tracks exist, but converting to normal road use where they don't. Although they should not be regarded as the only solution to our transport problems, light rapid transit could form a significant part of an improved public transport system for south coast towns.
4.10 Better Buses
Nationally, three times as many journeys are made by bus as by train. But many people won't use buses because they are perceived as slow, dirty, unreliable and inaccessible. People who do use them are often looked on as second-class citizens.
It needn't be like that. The use of smaller vehicles in combination with traffic management to help them speed through jams, has enabled bus companies to provide faster, more comfortable services at a profit. The measures below need to be considered before bus networks on the south coast can reach their potential:
4.10.1 A priority network
Travellers will only be persuaded to use public transport if it runs on time, day in, day out. Too often, buses get stuck in traffic jams. Their slowness and unreliability leads people to use their cars, compounding the congestion.
A first step in bus promotion should therefore be the designation of a comprehensive network of routes where buses are given priority. This priority can be achieved by converting lanes of congested main roads into bus lanes - for use by buses and bicycles only. But there is more to bus priority than that.
The old concept of a bus lane taking up a long stretch of road where the road was wide enough, and ending before any junctions so that other traffic was not held up has been changed radically by the new generation of bus priority pioneered in London. The new approach treats the bus route as a whole, and takes opportunities to relocate queues of traffic where buses can easily be given priority. Bus gates and pre-signals at junctions effectively push the bus through the traffic stream and in the end only delay another user by the number of buses that pass. This time delay is negligible in most cases.
Such priority systems can be integrated with computer controlled bus recognition. Local councils can re-prioritise traffic lights to give more time to roads used by buses. They can even introduce traffic lights that ‘go green' seconds before the bus arrives. They can exempt buses from turning restrictions and allow them into pedestrian areas. Or using ‘contra-flow bus lanes', they can enable buses to go the ‘wrong way' down one-way streets. Priority networks will involve using all of these measures and more. They should be accompanied by enforcement of parking restrictions around bus-stops and at the kerbside. If such measures were taken in every town, buses would no longer have to sit in traffic jams caused by cars. These systems can also integrate pedestrian and/or cycle crossings.
4.10.2 Frequent Services
The more frequent bus services are, the more likely they are to be used, and the easier it is to change between them. When services are half-hourly or more, for example, interchange between them takes much longer. Unreliability in an infrequent bus service deters potential users.
By contrast, high frequencies lead to a "network effect" where the need for interchange is not seen as a major deterrent to bus use. Bus operators must therefore also play their part by increasing service frequencies. This is usually in their interest: increases in frequency lead to increases in patronage that pay for the additional services.The bus also has a major role in the evenings and at weekends. In many places congestion is almost as bad on a Sunday afternoon as it is during the week. If bus operators cannot run evening or weekend services at a profit, County Councils should be able to step in and subsidise them.
Finally, bus services also need to link up with rail services: good connections are essential.
4.10.3 Accessible Information
Comprehensive, easy-to-read and easily-available bus and rail timetables are a must for all areas. Services should be run consistently so that people can become familiar with when and where their local bus services go. Good information about bus services at railway stations and bus stops is also vital. Bus offices in town centres and enquiry offices at main railway stations will enable visitors to find out about local services, and residents to find out about those they don't use regularly.
New electronic displays that give passengers information at the bus stop have revolutionised the experience of waiting for a bus. Trials of these in the Southampton area showed that they paid for themselves by attracting more people to use the service.
4.10.4 Cheap Fares
Low cost public transport is successful. Since Brighton and Hove introduced cheap town centre fares, bus use has shot up. Often a low fares policy, coupled with measures to promote bus priority, will lead to increases in bus use and increased revenues - so the policy is not as expensive as it seems. High fares, on the other hand, drive passengers back to their cars (if they have them). This reduces revenue and can lead to further fare increases, and a vicious circle of declining bus use.
4.10.5 A Comfortable Ride
Waiting for a bus (or a train) can be a grim experience in Britain. Shelters, if they exist at all, are often draughty and all too frequently vandalised; seating is often uncomfortable and dirty. By contrast, bus stops in many continental towns are well-lit, with large illuminated route map and comprehensive service information. People need to feel safe waiting at a bus stop in the dark. Installing public phone boxes has the advantage of providing bus users with a valuable service if their bus is late. It increases security by not only allowing people to call for help, but also by attracting other people in the area to us the phone boxes. If we are to encourage people to use public transport, we must smarten up bus stops and stations. Local authorities have responsibility for shelter provision and could be active partners in bus improvement.
Since de-regulation was introduced in 1986 (see box), the number of new buses bought in Britain has fallen dramatically. As a result, the age of the average bus has increased. All too often bus companies in Britain run services with obsolescent, clapped-out vehicles. Some companies even use converted coaches. Not surprisingly, many people now see buses as polluting and dirty.
Few buses have been bought in the last ten years, so bus operators in the UK have rarely been able to take advantage of recent innovations in bus design, such as the "low-floor" entrance, that make buses accessible to people with walking difficulties. Early experience in London, where 70 low-floor buses have been introduced over the last 18 months, is tending to suggest that they are a good investment, as the extra passengers attracted bring in noticeable higher revenues.
Some authorities on the south coast are encouraging investment in new buses, leading by their own commitment to the bus network: Brighton and Hove bus companies have already bought many new buses, and more are on order. But overall, profitability in the bus industry remains low, and Government support will be needed, whether through tax-breaks or direct subsidy, to enable the UK bus industry to modernise the bus fleet.
4.10.6 Better Buses: conclusion
For too long, public authorities have regarded the post-war decline in bus use as inevitable. If we are to save our towns and cities from being swamped with traffic, and our countryside from being wrecked by road-building, we have to recognise the contribution bus services can make to meeting our transport needs - and the need to improve them.
4.11 Cycling
Cycling is much underrated, despite being an ideal way to travel short trips - as long as adequate provision is made. There has recently been a shift in emphasis towards cycling in national policies in the UK, with substantial grants going towards a national network of cycle lanes. As most journeys are under 5 miles, cycling can have significant impacts on reducing car travel.
On average, more bicycles are sold each year in Britain than cars. But most of these are used rarely, if at all, and this is as true on the crowded south coast as it is in the rest of the country. This is almost entirely due to the lack of provision for cyclists on the vast majority of roads, both in towns and the countryside. Cycling is the most energy-efficient way of travelling, using one-sixtieth the energy of a car and one-third that used in walking, as well as being the fastest way of getting around most towns.
Provision for cyclists could reduce the congestion that provokes calls for bypasses. Good cycle facilities are well used. In towns such as York and Cambridge, where there has been a strategic programme to provide for cyclists, the proportion of journeys made by bike is over 20% - high, compared to a national average of 2-3%. Not only does this relieve pollution and congestion, but it also contributes to the health of the cyclist. In a recent report by the Government's Nutrition and Physical Activity Task Force, called "Reversing the increasing problem of obesity in England", it was recommended that there needs to be a shift away from the current car culture to more exercise through cycling and walking.
There is a clear overlap between cycling and public transport. Allowing cyclists to take their bikes on trains, for example, massively expands the range both of the cycle and the railway. At present, bikes can still be carried on most train services along the south coast, but there is much scope for improvement. Secure covered cycle parking is still needed at major railway interchanges. Contrast this with the situation in the Netherlands, where almost all stations have covered cycle parking, with low-price bike hire and repair on offer at the same time. This is run by the railway company, which has found it to be a sound commercial venture in itself, as well as increasing passenger numbers.
Secure, well-designed covered cycle parking provision needs to be made mandatory for all new developments and, where possible, retro-fitted to existing buildings. Installation should be after consultation with cyclists to ensure that usable facilities are provided. Sheffield racks are the best cycle racks for general short-term use. Cycle lockers are the most secure, but they are also expensive, and useful for long-term parking needs at stations, for example. For most places, a communal "cage" with sheffield racks would be more appropriate for day to day use, where the number of people accessing the cage can be strictly controlled. Generally, a combination of cycle facilities is needed to cater for the longer-term parking of a resident, or the shorter-term parking of a visitor.
4.12 Walking
Walking harms no-one, does not pollute the environment and is healthy. It is an option available to over 90% of the population (GLAD, the Greater London Association of the Disabled, recently found that, at any one time, 7% of the population are what they termed 'transport handicapped'). It stimulates the immune system and benefits the entire cardio-vascular system. Walking can also relieve stress and be a relaxing social activity. It brings the walker directly into contact with the environment around them - enabling him or her to enjoy the warmth of the summer sun or the bracing chill of the winter morning. But the biggest single deterrent to people walking is road traffic. As traffic grows, crossing roads becomes more difficult and walking along them becomes more unpleasant. For too long, pedestrians have been considered last by transport planners who are obsessed with the car. As a result, walkers have been shunted into dirty, dangerous subways or forced to wait for streams of traffic to pass before being able to cross the road.
Pedestrianisation of shopping streets is effective as part of an overall plan, as is common in many European towns and cities. Pedestrianisation is a very positive approach and is particularly attractive for smaller retail businesses.
Crossings need to be convenient, quick, pleasant to use and on desire-lines - where people actually want to cross. The pedestrian should be able to cross a road in one go, not be left stranded between heavy flows of traffic. Barriers, built supposedly for pedestrian safety, actually permit freer car movement and allow planners to raise traffic speeds and flows. Meanwhile, they penalise pedestrians by causing narrower pavements and loss of mobility. In fact, reductions in pedestrian accident rates need to be noted with caution: they are often helped by dangerous, noisy and inconvenient street layouts that drive pedestrians off the pavements - to the extent that the average distance walked has fallen by 20% since 1975, with most of that decline (16%) occurring over the past three years.
Compared to our continental neighbours, however, the British walk a great deal (possibly because we cycle so little): a third of all our journeys are walked. We should recognise this fact and promote walking in our towns and cities.
York is a good example of what can be achieved. Within its transport plan, it puts the needs of pedestrians first and has developed a strategic plan to increase the number of journeys made on foot. Many of the streets in the city are "traffic-calmed": car speeds have been reduced using road humps and road narrowings. More pedestrian space made available, which has then been improved by tree planting. Rat runs through residential areas have been closed. As a result, conditions for walkers and cyclists have improved dramatically while traffic levels in the city centre are back down to 1960 levels.

5 CONCLUSIONS
5.1
In this part of the evidence I have shown that the developer and the local authorities could and should go much further with the mitigating measures if they are to meet the requirements of Government policy on demand management at White Rock.
5.2
That the transportation strategy for Torbay as a whole and the Torbay Ring Road in particular is not supported by the Government, who are unlikely to support this type of road based strategy as its main purpose is to cater for commuter traffic.
5.3
If the proposed development is supported in its present form - which would lead to 7,000 additional car trips on the Ring Road corridor per day, the added congestion which would surely result, would have an adverse effect on those businesses located on the Yalberton Industrial Estate.
5.4
I conclude that if the proposed development is not rejected by Secretary of State then the proposers of this development should be made to bring forward a far more comprehensive package of mitigation measures to offset the environmental costs of transport for the development.

comments, enquiries, feedback etc to Phil Whitehead
return to home page