2006-2011 Main LTP

Introduction

Over time, competition for finite available road space has resulted in increased congestion. The main reason for increasing congestion is the growth of road traffic, but there are other causes such as temporary restrictions on the highway network during road works.

This growth in traffic and increased investment by utilities and the Highway Authority is a sign of strong economic performance. As individuals become more affluent and businesses grow the demand for travel increases. Congestion can therefore be regarded as a sign of economic success.

However, high levels of congestion could have an adverse impact on economic performance and the quality of life for residents, pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. Therefore if left unchecked congestion could compromise the achievement of overall LTP objectives, particularly objectives 2 and 3.

For these reasons Local and Central Government have made tackling congestion a Shared Priority for Transport and therefore a key performance indicator.

The specific contribution of LTP strategies and policies to reducing congestion is detailed within the mode and delivery strategies. The figure below highlights the links between the LTP mode and delivery strategies and the Congestion Strategy.

Figure 8 Relationship between the Congestion Strategy and the mode and topic strategies

Open large scaleable image in Popup

Congestion in Warwickshire

Congestion in Warwickshire occurs mostly in peak periods as a result of commuter and school related traffic. It is limited to certain key routes in the urban areas and to some key junctions on the strategic rural highway network. When compared to larger urban areas in the UK, congestion in Warwickshire is limited in geographical scope, occurs only at limited times of the day and is substantially removed during school holidays.

However, there is a considerable weight of public opinion that congestion is the most significant transport and access issue in Warwickshire. In a survey carried out in early 2004 for the review of the first LTP, 84% of respondents thought that congestion was a major or significant problem.

Average traffic growth on the local urban highway network in Warwickshire was 11.9% between 1994 and 2004. However, traffic growth is not uniform across the County. Over this 10 year period there was 7% growth in Kenilworth, 9% in Leamington Spa, 13% in Nuneaton, 11% in Stratford-upon-Avon, 10% in Warwick and 25% in Rugby. Traffic growth in Bedworth showed a small decline up to 2002, but has seen a sharp increase over the last three years. This growth in traffic has meant that congestion has become worse over the last 10 years.

Warwickshire has a growing population and economy, and it can be expected therefore that traffic and congestion will continue to grow. However, as over the last 10 years, future growth is unlikely to be evenly distributed across the towns and districts.  Traffic growth is influenced by a complex range of factors including: social-economic well being, car ownership and use, the level of new development and local economic performance.  Many of the land allocations for housing and employment outlined in the District/Borough Local Plans have been achieved and so the rate of new development over the next five years should reduce in the County, with the focus being on the main towns.  Background traffic levels might be expected to increase less quickly in the north, which is generally less affluent than the south, although North Warwickshire Borough has made the least progress in its housing allocation and therefore has more development still to come. 

Congestion monitoring has been carried out in Warwickshire’s main towns each year for the last seven years by carrying out repeated timed journeys on set routes. Of necessity this data is a snapshot and is indicative only of congestion levels. A comparison of average journey speeds derived from these timed journey runs is shown below. The data suggests that journey times are significantly slower in Warwick than in any other town.

Options for Dealing with Congestion

The possible approaches for addressing congestion are:

1. Do nothing and leave drivers to respond to increasing congestion by travelling at different times (peak spreading) or via alternative routes;
2. Build major new road capacity;
3. Build small scale capacity improvements at localised congestion hotspots eg: junction improvements;
4. Improved traffic management through the use of Intelligent Transport Systems and CCTV to make more efficient use of existing road space;
5. Improved management of road works, events and incidents on the highway network to reduce the extent or duration of congestion caused;
6. Decriminalisation of certain traffic offences to allow better enforcement and hence reduce delays caused by illegal movements such as banned right turns;
7. Reduce the demand for travel. A reduction in the need to travel could be achieved over a long period of time through appropriate planning policies;
8. Reduce traffic volumes by encouraging travel by modes of transport other than the private car. This could be achieved through a variety of initiatives including: encouraging greater use of public transport, encouraging more walking and cycling, school and green travel plans, parking policy, multi occupancy vehicle lanes and provision of Park and Ride services; and
9. Introduction of fiscal measures to discourage traffic from driving in congested areas, e.g.: congestion charging or road pricing.

All of the above approaches may be appropriate in certain circumstances and none are ruled out in the long term. However, major new road construction is unlikely to feature as a significant policy option in the Plan period 2006-2011 except in Rugby where construction of the Western Relief Road is planned.  It is also unlikely that road pricing will be considered during this Plan period.

The LTP survey carried out in early 2004 asked respondents to prioritise potential solutions to transport problems they had highlighted. Although respondents gave congestion as their top concern there was little support for new road building. Only 21% of respondents considered new road building to be extremely or very important. However 62% of respondents considered that traffic management on existing roads to reduce congestion was extremely or very important. Respondents also gave strong support for improvements to public transport, walking and cycling.

Policy objectives aimed at encouraging the use of public transport, walking and cycling may require reallocation of road space or time for maximum effectiveness. For example introduction of a pedestrian phase at a traffic signal junction will increase safety for pedestrians and remove a potential impediment to walking, but it also will increase congestion because there will be less capacity for traffic. There is therefore a potential conflict between policies that will need to be carefully managed.

Picture 3 Congestion occurs at key junctions at specific times of day

Open large scaleable image in Popup

The Congestion Strategy for Warwickshire

The objective of this strategy is to promote measures aimed at limiting the rate of growth in congestion. The strategy recognises that some limited increases in highway capacity will be necessary, but the primary aim of the strategy is to mitigate the growth in congestion through measures aimed at discouraging growth of peak period traffic in urban areas, and encouragement of more sustainable modes of transport. Improvements to reduce congestion will not normally be implemented if they conflict with other transport policies and objectives.

There is significant scope for achieving a “quick win” to reduce congestion through better management of road works, events and incidents on the highway network.  As a matter of priority therefore we will aim to achieve better management and co-ordination of works and events affecting the highway. We will also aim to reduce the time that temporary works are present in the highway by such methods as increased working hours and weekend working. The County Council has powers to influence the working practices of utilities so that their works in the highway are carried out with less disruption. It is intended that these powers will be used robustly but fairly to achieve a reduction in the impact of utilities works in the highway.

Through effective planning and control the County Council will aim to minimise the disruption and congestion caused by its own works in the highway.

If there is evidence that moving traffic offences are causing congestion we will consider using powers in the Traffic Management Act to achieve better enforcement of such offences through decriminalisation of the offences.

The County Council has appointed a Traffic Manager who will be responsible for achieving reductions in congestion using powers under New Roads and Street Works Act and the Traffic Management Act (NRASWA).

Achieving a reduction in traffic growth in urban areas would contribute to a number of policy objectives and targets, including mitigating the growth of congestion. Tackling congestion by increasing capacity will tend to encourage traffic growth, which could be detrimental to some policy objectives. Measures aimed at reducing traffic growth will therefore be regarded as a higher priority response to tackling congestion than measures aimed at increasing capacity for traffic.

New development is a significant cause of traffic growth and increased congestion. It will be a requirement that new development will provide funding for improvements aimed at mitigating the impact of new trips generated.

Action Plan for 2006 to 2011

It is anticipated that in this LTP period (2006 to 2011) the measures listed below will be the principal initiatives that will contribute to reduced congestion in the County. Only measures f, g, h, i and j are aimed specifically at congestion. The remainder are aimed primarily at achieving other objectives but will contribute to reducing congestion as a secondary outcome. Given the combination of existing slower journey speeds and higher forecast traffic growth in Warwick, Leamington Spa and Stratford-upon-Avon, specific measures aimed at reducing congestion will be prioritised for these urban areas.  A particular priority will be to identify opportunities to reduce the percentage of pupils transported to school by car.

Measures that will contribute to reduced congestion during this LTP period are:

1. Reduce traffic growth by encouraging modal shift from car to walking and cycling for short journeys in urban areas;

2. Promote changes in travel habits and modes of travel through workplace travel plans;

3. Reduce traffic growth in the most congested urban areas through provision of Park and Ride facilities for Warwick and Leamington Spa;

4. Reduce traffic growth in the North/South Corridor (Leamington Spa and Warwick to Nuneaton) by encouraging use of public transport. Specifically, two Major Scheme bids are planned to provide a step-change in public transport in Warwick/Leamington Spa and the North/South Corridor;

5. Reduce traffic growth through a continued programme of Safer Routes to School, in conjunction with school travel planning to reduce the number of children driven to school;

6. Increase the efficiency of the existing highway network through introduction of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) and CCTV. A Major Scheme bid for ITS is planned later in the LTP period in either Warwick/Leamington Spa, Rugby or Nuneaton;

7. Increase the capacity of the highway network through a programme of capacity improvements at local congestion hotspots. Primarily this will comprise small-scale junction improvements aimed at increasing the efficiency of operation of junctions. Priority will be given to improving junctions on important public transport routes where buses will derive benefit from reduced congestion and for schemes offering a cost-benefit ratio of at least 3 when assessed using COBA;

8. Construction of the Rugby Western Relief Road will significantly reduce congestion in Rugby town centre and on some radial routes;

9. Improvements planned by the Highways Agency at M40 Junction 15 (Longbridge) and the A45/A46 interchange at Tollbar End will contribute significantly to reducing congestion at these key nodes on the strategic highway network in Warwickshire; and

10. Construction of Stratford Western Relief Road in conjunction with new housing would reduce the volume of traffic in the town centre and forms a key element of the Stratford Transport Strategy.   However, it is now expected that this scheme will be implemented after 2011.

Congestion Targets

The target included in the 2000 LTP for congestion was “To avoid congestion increasing journey times on the local highway network by more than half between 1999 and 2011”. The monitoring table shown earlier in this strategy illustrates that on average across the County there has been a slow deterioration in journey speeds, but if the trend since 1999 continues it appears that the above target as an average across the County will be easily met.

The Government’s 10-year Plan for Transport contains a national target to reduce congestion to 2000 levels by 2010. It is unlikely that it will be possible to achieve this target in Warwickshire with the levels of investment likely to be available for schemes that will reduce congestion. However, given the relatively modest levels of congestion experienced in Warwickshire it is considered acceptable that this Government target is not adopted for Warwickshire.

Using the County Council's QVIEW and PARAMICS transport models maintained for the main urban areas of Warwickshire it is possible to predict changes in journey speeds for future years. Predicted peak hour average journey speeds for 2006 and 2011 are given in the table below. The predicted average speeds for 2011 assume National Road Traffic Forecast (NRTF) low traffic growth plus traffic generation from committed developments but no improvements, except in Rugby where it is assumed that the Western Relief Road will be built.

Table 7 Predicted average peak hour journey speeds (mph)

Predicted Average Peak Hour Journey Speeds (mph) (Source: QVIEW & PARAMICS urban traffic models)
	2006	2011	Change
Warwick/Leamington Spa/Kenilworth	15.4	13.7	-11.4%
Nuneaton	18	16.9	-6.4%
Bedworth	20.5	20	-2.7%
Rugby	14.3	13.7	-4.2%
Stratford-upon-Avon	13.1	10.3	-8.3%
Warwickshire	16	14.7	-8.7%

There is insufficient data available in Warwickshire to facilitate the multi-modal modelling that would be necessary to assess the impact on congestion of the multi modal measures listed in the action plan. Without such an assessment it is not possible to model how the journey speeds predicted in Table 2.7 would be modified by the measures listed. Given the relatively modest levels of congestion experienced in the County it is not considered cost effective or a priority to invest in the creation of a multi-modal model.

Any comparison between the predicted speeds given and the speeds resulting from the timed journey runs in Table 2.6 should be treated with caution.  The data in Table 2.6 is averaged from a series of ‘snapshots’, it is obtained from the AM peak period only and the areas are calculated in a slightly different manner from those in Table 2.7. 

In order to assess the likely impact of the measures listed in the Action Plan, consultants were employed to produce a simple spreadsheet multi modal model for Warwick, Leamington Spa and Kenilworth that could be used in conjunction with the County Council’s fixed matrix QVIEW model. This showed that with the modest level of improvements likely to be feasible using Integrated Transport Block allocation it was likely that average peak hour journey speeds would reduce by about 10% between 2005 and 2011 in Warwick and Leamington. This compares to the predicted reduction without improvements (2006 to 2011) of 11.4%.  It also compares with observed traffic speeds in Table 2.6, which remained unchanged in Warwick and deteriorated by 12% in Leamington Spa and 10% in Kenilworth. The observed data covered a three-year period.

Warwickshire's Congestion Targets

The above modelling and observed evidence suggests that a target of a 5% deterioration in average peak hour traffic speeds across the whole County over the five year period 2006 to 2011 could be stretching. Given the relative low priority (compared to other Shared Priorities) that will be given to congestion in the Plan period 2006 to 2011, it is considered inappropriate to set such a stretching target. However, if congestion is allowed to grow unchecked it will have significant adverse impacts. It is therefore appropriate to set targets. The urban transport models predict a difference in deterioration of traffic speeds in different towns; therefore two different targets will be set. 

The County Council will seek to avoid congestion on the main urban highway networks causing deterioration in average journey speeds between 2006 to 2011 in the key urban areas as follows:

• Warwick/Leamington Spa, Stratford-upon-Avon     -  10%
• Nuneaton, Bedworth, Rugby and Kenilworth            -   5%

Setting targets that journey speeds should not deteriorate over the Plan Period by more than 10% in Warwick, Leamington Spa and Stratford-upon-Avon and 5% in Nuneaton, Bedworth, Rugby and Kenilworth, will, when added to the observed change to date, represent a stretched target compared to that set in the first LTP.

The source of data for of assessing highway network journey speeds will continue to be the annual journey runs already well established. However, other sources of data such as in vehicle tracking devices are becoming available which may provide a more statistically significant measure of journey speeds. The availability of such data will be kept under review and when such data is reliable and available at reasonable cost it may be adopted.

There is no existing data on the scale of congestion caused by road works, moving traffic offences and other events affecting the highway network. It is not possible therefore to set outcome targets for reducing congestion resulting from road works and other incidents. However, the Traffic Manager will develop output targets for incorporation in the Network Management Duty Strategy.