See original document
1.Introduction
The Thames Valley is a key European economic region, a major contributor
to the success of the UK economy and a major target for inward Business
investment.
Road congestion is a considerable inhibitor to the continuing success
of this Region.
The Thames Valley Chamber of Commerce Group therefore welcomes the
Orbit study and supports the objectives of the Strategy in reducing
delays, congestion, and thereby improving reliability. We recognise
the causes of congestion identified but will require the on going
discussions to produce more detail on exactly what impact the Strategy
proposals will have on current problems.
Many of the changes must be in place before 2016 if the Strategy is
to have an impact and the final version of the Strategy must reflect
a strong sense of urgency.
2.Best Practice Traffic Management
The Chamber supports the recommendations to improve traffic management
and urges that priority be given to early implementation in order
to achieve the improvements in traffic flow that they will bring.
3.Travel Reduction Measures
Businesses would not wish to incur costs through unnecessary travel.
We therefore recognise the need to concentrate more development in
areas accessible to public transport. However, we are concerned that
strict adherence to such a strategy, if not preceded by major transport
improvements, could lead to economic stagnation.
More planning regulations will further restrict business development,
without necessarily matching the economic needs of the area.
Businesses will need to be reassured that the transport system is
being designed around the needs of the economy and not that the economy
is being restricted to the limits of the transport system. We see
this as a crucial issue.
This Chamber does not support compulsory travel plans. This would
be seen by our Members as an unjustified intrusion into business operations.
We do, however, support voluntary Green Travel Plans and are actively
involved in encouraging our Members to adopt good practice. We also support the increased use of tele-working
and video conferencing and an emphasis, where practical, on recruiting
staff who live locally to their place of work.
We oppose workplace parking levies, which we see as a tax on business,
jobs and economic growth and do not believe that they will have any
impact on car usage.
The reality is that many people drive to work, simply because they
have no realistic alternative to the car.
4.Alternatives to the car
The report recognises that it will be difficult to replace the flexibility
of car travel in matching the wide variation of journey lengths and
destinations.
This Chamber is generally supportive of the completion of Crossrail
, Airtrack, and Thames Link 2000. We also support the upgrading of
the rail network with particular regard to reducing the bottleneck
at Reading station where congestion has an adverse effect on rail
traffic flow both East West and North South.
We generally support a new Strategic Coach Authority but consider
that more discussions are required before businesses are convinced
that the proposed orbital coach network will provide choices that
are genuine and practical alternatives to the flexibility of travel
by car.
Simple measures such as more parking places at rail stations, with
sensible low fees, unlike at some present locations, will surely encourage
more people to travel by rail.
5.New Road Infrastructure
The Chamber agrees that traffic and demand management, and public
transport improvements alone, do not mitigate the need for an upgrading
of the M25, to provide additional capacity. We would also suggest
that other routes that access the M25 should also be considered for
upgrading.
6.Managing Traffic Levels
We do not support the assumption that new roads simply encourage new
traffic and that this is undesirable. Consideration must also be given
to the economic benefits.
We generally support proposals for road charging, but stress that
these should only be introduced when there are viable public transport
alternatives. All income from road charging must be ring fenced for
transport projects of direct benefit to businesses and to the community.
We also believe that road charging should apply to some local as well
as to strategic roads to avoid rat runs through already over congested
routes. We would welcome further discussions on the detail once the
Mayor’s Central London charges scheme has been assessed.
If road charging does not reduce congestion, in particular locations,
this should be considered as evidence that road upgrading is after
all required.
We strongly oppose the introduction of road charging in the Thames
Valley as proposed by the South East England Regional Assembly in
its draft Regional Transport Strategy.
We would only consider any road charging proposals as part of a National
Policy following major improvements to the transport infrastructure
and especially to public transport.
Consideration be should also be given to the following proposals
on, or around the M25:
- permit vehicles to turn left through red traffic lights, when there
is no conflicting traffic. This practice is already permitted in the
USA and some parts of South Africa, and it works well. It would help
keep traffic moving.
- reserve fast lanes for vehicles with two or more people in them,
during peak travel times.
- as happens in a number of countries, put traffic lights at “flashing
amber”, where low off-peak traffic levels allow this to be done
safely. Vehicles would then operate on the “give way” rules.
This can be from 8 p.m. onwards in some rural areas, and later, in
built-up areas.
- encourage car sharing for travel to work.
- enforce clear street numbering of buildings, especially in built-up
areas, so that vehicles do not trail around streets, trying to find
the right address (thus adding to congestion, pollution, cost and
poor productivity).
7. Conclusion
Road congestion in the UK has reached critical levels, costing businesses
billions a year in lost productivity. This must be addressed, through
two key actions.
- a firm commitment to improve the public transport infrastructure
quickly.
- a firm commitment to improve the road network in congested areas.
We understand that a1% reduction in car usage requires a 15% increase
in train
capacity. A serious level of new investment for the provision of additional
rail capacity cannot be put off any longer.
We recognise that the Provisional Strategy has attempted to introduce
a balanced proposal to overcome the considerable problems emanating
from traffic congestion on the M25. Timing has excluded reference
to the likely impact of the proposals in the airport and seaport studies
and there is still much more discussion needed on the detail, which
must then be followed by swift action.
This Chamber is supportive of the strategic objectives of the Provisional
Strategy
and would welcome inclusion in future discussion.
Frank Stroud
Chief Executive
