6 - Transport Measures

6.2 Enhancement of Public Transport

Overview

The radical enhancement of public transport services within B& NES is at the heart of the Transport Vision. It cannot be restricted to improvement of a single mode but is an holistic treatment of all public transport. The Transport Strategy envisages a wide range of interventions for public transport including measures associated with the following:

• Development of accessibility criteria;
• Enhancement of bus services;
• Introduction of rapid transit;
• Park & Ride services;
• Rail services;
• Improvement of interchanges; and
• Other measures.

The public transport proposals are founded on two main concepts; firstly of defining public transport accessibility criteria which are to be applied throughout B&NES but differentiating between areas based on area type and population density, and secondly on the need to achieve substantial modal shift. The following sections describe how the public transport elements of the Transport Strategy might be implemented.

Accessibility Criteria

The Transport Strategy seeks to make public transport an attractive alternative to the private car for a wide range of journeys within B&NES and to achieve this it is proposed that set of accessibility criteria are defined and services provided to meet these criteria.

In examining bus accessibility, reference has been made to the thresholds of service levels envisaged in the Regional Planning Guidance for the South West (RPG 10, September 2001) and existing levels of service and facilities. The underlying objective in setting these accessibility criteria is to provide a reasonable choice of mode, particularly in urban areas, and to provide a minimum level of service for all residents.

Regional Planning Guidance

RPG 10 presents a series of accessibility criteria. These are intended to guide the location of new development and the provision of new transport services and infrastructure in the South West.

For residential developments, maximum walking distances to transport facilities are identified. The maximum desirable distance that people should be expected to walk to a bus stop in principal urban areas or other significant towns (e.g. Bath and Keynsham) is 200m. 400m is stated as a maximum walking distance to bus stops in other areas. It is noted that in areas where there are steep gradients these distances should be reduced.

The standards presented in RPG recognise that people are often prepared to walk further to access a larger transport interchange point, such as a bus or train station. Maximum walking distances to bus stations and rail stations are stated as 600m and 800m respectively.

The maximum travel times, within which facilities are considered to be adequately accessible by public transport are also considered. For those living in the principal urban areas and other larger settlements, shopping and education facilities should be accessible within 25 minutes, by public transport and other non-residential facilities should be accessible within 30 minutes. For those living in other areas, longer journey times are likely to specified. The maximum travel times set out by RPG 10 suggest that shopping and education facilities should be accessible from these areas within 45 minutes using public transport and other facilities within 60 minutes. These times include the time taken to walk to the bus stop/station, transport time (including interchange) and walking from the bus stop/station to the destination.

Public transport must provide a frequency of service appropriate for all journey purposes. The frequency of service that can realistically be achieved depends on settlement size. In principal urban areas services should be of a 15-minute frequency Monday to Saturday between 07:00 and 19:00 and a 30-minute frequency during the evenings and on Sundays. In other urban areas and other areas, corresponding frequencies should be 30 minutes and 60 minutes and 60 minutes and 120 minutes respectively.

In rural areas, the RPG recognises that a different approach is necessary. There are particular challenges arising from the changing nature of the rural economy and the separation of home and workplace. Personal mobility means that many choose to live in the countryside and travel long distances to urban areas for work, shopping and leisure activities. However, this choice is not available to all sections of the community, notably those without access to a car. The RPG seeks to addresses the social exclusion that can arise through lack of access to adequate local services and facilities.

It does this through Policy TRAN 7: The Rural Areas.

Policy TRAN 7: The Rural Areas

Local authorities, transport operators and other agencies should work together to encourage more sustainable travel choices and reduce travel distances in rural areas. In particular they should:

• support the development of public and community transport and maximise the potential for walking, cycling and bus use, in accordance with Policy TRAN 10;

• develop parking standards to reflect the size and role of rural settlements, within the context set by the regional parking standards;

• encourage partnerships working to deliver sustainable transport solutions in rural areas and the maintenance of public transport at a reasonable level;

• support the retention of local retail, education, healthcare and leisure facilities so as to minimise the need to travel by vehicle and to foster the integrated delivery of services at the local level;

• encourage the development of rural transport strategies and management measures to improve safety for pedestrians, cyclists and other road users and, while recognising the need for local rural access for freight, to move heavy traffic wherever possible to more appropriate strategic routes;

• in accordance with policy, support investment in appropriate telecommunications and information technology that will facilitate business and social interaction whilst reducing the need to travel.

The Transport Strategy supports this policy approach for B&NES.

6.2.3 Accessibility Criteria for B&NES

Using the criteria set out in RPG 10 it is possible to develop a matrix, based on a settlement hierarchy, showing a ‘vision’ for public transport service levels in Bath and North East Somerset.

A four category system is used to classify settlements, as follows:

• Settlement size A – Main cities;
• Settlement size B – Small/medium sized towns;
• Settlement size C – Major villages; and
• Settlement size D – Rural areas

Accessibility standards are considered for three different time periods:

• Monday to Saturday 07:30 to 19:00;
• Monday to Saturday 19:00 to 23:00; and
• Sundays.

For each settlement type and time period, accessibility targets are set. An initial set of targets are shown in table 6.1. It should be stressed that further work will be required to refine these criteria as the Strategy is taken forward.

Table 6.1 – Desirable Minimum Level of Public Transport Service

A – Bath and Bristol

B - Keynsham, Saltford, Radstock, Midsomer Norton and Peasedown St. John.

C – Bathampton, Batheaston, Bathford, Bishop Sutton, Clutton/Temple Cloud, Farmborough, High Littleton, Paulton, Timsbury, Whitchurch, Camerton, Compton Martin, East Harptree, Farrington Gurney, Hallatrow, Hinton Blewett, Ubley and West Harptree, Chew Magna, Chew Stoke, Claverton, Combe Hay, Corston, Englishcombe, Freshford, Hinton Charterhouse, Kelston, Marksbury, Monkton Combe, Newton St. Loe, Pensford, Priston, Shoscombe, South Stoke, Stanton Drew, Tunlet, Upper Swainswick and Wellow.

D – Other rural areas.

In addition to the consideration of service frequency, journey time to access services and facilities is an equally important element of the quality of public transport services. Table 6.2 contains some indicative maximum travel times, within which, activities are considered to be adequately accessible by public transport. Again these are likely to require refinement through further study.

Table 6.2 Desirable Maximum Journey Time

6.2.4 Delivery of Public Transport Accessibility

In general, it is anticipated that the public transport accessibility described above will be delivered through enhancements to bus services, although a role for rapid transport has been identified. The bus service network required to satisfy the criteria would be based around a series of core bus routes, supported by local bus services and interchange. The B&NES area benefits from being geographically small and with its network of main roads, journey times for most journeys can be accomplished within the criteria set. There is already an established core bus network largely in place, however with the introduction of high quality interchange points; there would be benefit in developing a network of limited stop ‘X’ services.

Using the settlement size bands above, the A and B settlements would be linked via the core bus network with a half-hourly service frequency. In order to maintain regular and frequent service, the core bus network services would be limited stop away from the urban areas. They would call at villages on route, which would form interchange points with local and demand responsive services.

The C settlements, the villages, would be served in different ways depending upon on their location. Some are fortunate to be located on the core bus network route, and will thus benefit from this high level of service. Others will be located on local bus service routes which will either terminate in the A or B settlements. Whilst the level of service will not be of the standard achieved by the core bus network, the services will be timetabled and operated as stage bus services. Extension of village services through to A or B settlements at peak times would supplement core route services.

The rural area would be served by demand responsive and community based services and, where possible, the local bus network. In order to serve the hamlets and isolated dwellings, a highly flexible form of public transport is required. Whilst there is considerable experience in the provision of ‘conventional’ stage bus services, it is only recently that:

• the technology (GPS, real time information, call centre technology);
• the emphasis on rural access within transport policy has emerged; and
• central government funding to provide innovative bus services has become available.

Taken together these changes have resulted in the development of bus-based demand responsive public transport services suitable for rural areas. The need to consider such services has resulted from increasing awareness of the problems associated with poor accessibility in rural areas associated with the centralisation of many facilities. The provision of a basic level of rural transport, in a variety of forms, is an essential element of a socially inclusive transport system.

Interchange will form a vital element of the strategy. It will not be possible to provide direct journeys to class A or B settlements for all residents of B&NES. However, through the provision of rural interchange points, it will be possible to provide public transport access opportunities for all residents. The interchange points will allow local and demand responsive bus service passengers to access limited stop inter urban services (between A and B class settlements).

Bus Services

The Transport Strategy anticipates that bus services will still be the main form of public transport in the future within B&NES although supplemented by other modes such as rapid transit described in section 6.2.6. The bus is a very flexible, cost efficient form of public transport and should play an increasingly effective role in the transport of people within B&NES. It is fair to say that, at present, the bus is perceived by the majority of the travelling public as a mode of ‘last resort’ only to be used when all other modes are not available. The major weaknesses that need to be resolved are:

• Reliability – largely due to problems of congestion, although issues such as lack of drivers and vehicle breakdowns also contribute;
• Service frequencies – frequencies are often not attractive, requiring people to gear their activities around the bus timing rather than serving the public with simple clockface timetables;
• Network coverage – extent of existing services; and
• Period of operation – many services only operate over a limited period of the day and are often non-existent or very infrequent during evenings and weekends.

Many of these problems will be addressed by the Strategy, through the implementation of the accessibility criteria. The provision of such services was described in Section 6.2.4.

Rapid Transit

The Transport Strategy recognises the importance of achieving modal shift. On key corridors, particularly within Bath, the double requirements of achieving modal shift and accommodating the required scale of public transport passengers suggests that some form of mass rapid transit should be implemented. This study has not defined the exact form that this rapid transit should take but suggests that it should have the following characteristics:

• A minimum frequency of 6 services per hour;
• A relatively limited stopping pattern – in order to achieve attractive journey times (stop spacing 750-1000m) except within Bath City Centre where more frequent stops would be appropriate;
• Have a carrying capacity per service of at least 100 passengers although this might be increased on particular corridors
• Achieve overall operating speeds of at least 30kph

Although this study has not attempted to define in detail the network that should be served by rapid transit, the following routes are considered to be those most appropriate for development as rapid transit corridors:

• Newbridge to City Centre
• Lambridge to City Centre
• Batheaston to City Centre
• Odd Down to City Centre via Bear Flat
• Odd Down to City Centre via Oldfield Park
• Weston to City Centre
• Lansdown to City Centre

Park & Ride

Whilst the Strategy intends to make it attractive to make door-to-door journeys by public transport, it is accepted that for some journeys it will be more convenient to start the journey by private vehicle. For these cases it is then essential to provide efficient Park and Ride services to access central area destinations. Whilst the only City (and Principal Urban Area) within B&NES is Bath, it is recognised that there are significant social, employment and economic links between B&NES and Bristol. The Strategy therefore requires that there is comprehensive Park & Ride provision made on the main approaches to both Bath and Bristol.

In the early days of the Strategy it is anticipated that all of these facilities will be bus-based but within the 20 year timescale there is potential for conversion of these to rapid transit. In addition, the proposed new station at Newton/Saltford (see below) could also serve as a rail-based Park and Ride facility.

In terms of the location of Park and Ride sites and scale of provision (over 10-15 yrs), the Strategy anticipates the following:

• Newbridge: expanded to accommodate at least 2,000 spaces in the first instance– bus-based to be converted to rapid transit using the Bath Western Riverside public transport corridor;
• Lansdown: capacity as existing (approx 500 spaces) but with potential need for expansion in the longer term (after Year 15) – bus-based to be converted to rapid transit in the medium term;
• Odd Down: as existing (approx 1000 spaces) - bus-based to be converted to rapid transit in the medium term;
• University : to be converted to all week operation, capacity to be confirmed in conjunction with University parking strategy – bus based to be converted to rapid transit in the medium term;
• Lambridge: as per existing proposals (approx 800 spaces) – bus based to be converted to rapid transit in the medium term with the creation of a largely segregated route to Bath City Centre. Potential for linking to Newbridge site creating cross-city services;
• Bathford (area): recognising the limited capacity at the Lambridge site which we would expect to be full within approximately 10 years, consider an additional site in the Bathford area will be needed in the medium/long term serving demand on the A4 corridor and also on the A363 – should be initially designed as a bus-based site requiring appropriate bus priority measures on the A4 Batheaston Bypass. In due course it could be converted to be served by rapid transit with an extension of the rapid transit proposals from Lambridge through to Batheaston. Indicative capacity 500 spaces;
• Newton/Saltford: a new station in this location was recommended within the SWARMMS strategy and is seen to be a valuable element of the Transport Strategy for B&NES. It could act as a rail-based Park and Ride site serving both Bristol and Bath. Its location will be attractive to those travelling from both South and the West of the B&NES area, although achievement of a sufficiently frequent rail service would be dependent on a significant rail capacity increase between Bath and Bristol Temple Meads. One possible solution is the extension of rapid transit from Newbridge, out to Newton/Saltford as an alternative to being heavy rail served although this would remove the attraction of the facility for those accessing Bristol;
• Other Sites: with the future growth in travel demand it will be necessary to closely monitor the usage of Park and Ride facilities and bring forward additional facilities if required. Conversely, if the growth in demand for Park and Ride is not as great as is anticipated the implementation of additional sites could be delayed. Potential additional sites which might be considered are:
  • A36 – Bathampton area
  • A431 – Kelston area;
  • A46 – Swainswick area.

All of these Park and Ride proposals will need to be refined and should be subject to detailed modelling and demand forecasting before being pursued, and the impact of implementing new sites should be carefully examined. In particular, the potential need to provide extra parking capacity to accommodate additional demand on specific corridors in the longer term will require careful monitoring.

Rail Services

Rail currently performs an important function in linking B&NES to other parts of the Region, in particular Bristol but also in providing the important link to London, Reading and the South East. The Strategy envisages four forms of rail development:

• Expansion of the local services within the Bristol-Swindon corridor;
• Longer term creation of a new station at Saltford/Newton associated with the upgrading of the Bristol-Bath line to a 4-track operation possibly with two tracks operating LRT services;
• Increase frequency of long-distance services to London to reduce over-crowding; and
• Improvement of links to Bristol North Fringe, in the shorter term by expanding heavy rail services to Filton Abbeywood/Bristol Parkway but in the longer term through LRT linkages either via Bristol TM or via Bristol -Bath cycleway track bed.

In the short term, there is some potential to expand rail services through the Bath area without undertaking any additional infrastructure or signalling works. However, the rail network between Bristol and Bath is operating close to practical capacity, particularly in the vicinity of Temple Meads Station and therefore additional services would further reduce reliability.

In the longer term, with the expansion of rail capacity, there are significantly greater opportunities to expand services by operating essentially segregated fast and slow services between Bristol and Bath. However, the difficulty in expanding this rail capacity should not be under-estimated due to the tunnels on this section of line. Such improvements would be dependent on them achieving sufficient priority within the SRA’s national programme and this is a challenge for B&NES, in common with all other local authorities attempting to promote rail schemes of this nature.

The concept of operating new rail services from Radstock via existing freight and disused lines through to Frome and onto the Berks and Hants line have been discussed for some years, as has the re-opening services along the Somerset & Dorset line south from Bath via Midford to Radstock. It is not believed that heavy rail is the most appropriate form of public transport to serve such corridors and therefore has not been included in the Strategy. However, this Study has not carried out an engineering assessment of the current state of these transport corridors and it is therefore recommended that such a study is carried out to determine whether such corridors might usefully be used for transport purposes in the future.

6.5 Changes to Relationship between Traffic, People and Places

Overview

To reap the potential benefits from an integrated approach to traffic movement and social activity, two critical features need to be addressed. The first involves the introduction of slower speeds in urban areas and rural lanes. The second involves the creation and definition of clear gateways to mark transition points between the major roads with higher traffic speeds (such as motorways, trunk road and principal routes) and the public realm of town and city centres.

The application of an innovative approach to traffic in towns suggests a number of key principles to be applied as part of the planning, transport and urban design framework. These would include the following:

• Development of a slower vehicle speed culture for urban areas and rural lanes;
• Principles of highway design and streetscape;
• Pedestrian and cycle networks; and
• Home zones / Living zones

Slower Vehicle Speeds

A wide public debate is required concerning the establishment of a slower speeds regime for built-up areas and rural lanes. This should be initially introduced separately from subsequent discussion concerning education, engineering and enforcement, and should concentrate on the balance between the political acceptability of adapting driver behaviour and the advantages for safety, social inclusion and urban vitality. It is strongly recommended that the authority studies further examples from mainland Europe.

Highway Design and Streetscape

A strong distinction should be introduced in highway design and detailing, reinforced by gateways at entrypoints to urban areas, between "transit roads" and "shared-use" streets in town centres. Similar principles could be applied to selected rural lanes with low levels of traffic. Design principles within "shared use" areas will include the reduction of traffic signage, road markings, barriers and kerb separations, and an increase in treatments that emphasise a distinct sense of place. Junction treatments should avoid establishing priorities, and safe movement should be premised upon informal negotiation and the use of eye contact. Many of these principles follow advice in the DTLR’s companion guide to Design Bulletin 32, and again we would urge examination of recent applications in mainland Europe.

Cycle and Pedestrian Networks

In principal urban areas, special emphasis should be given to routes serving railway stations and public transport nodes. We would recommend further developing pedestrian and bicycle networks serving central destinations to become clearly identified (legible) components, particularly where they intersect with the highway network.

Strongly legible pedestrian and bicycle networks should also be incorporated into the transport infrastructure around schools and colleges as a means to build on "Safe Routes to Schools" initiatives. The latter have proved to be important frameworks for linking education and health with long-term decisions about transport, and we would recommend that schools provide a key input into the public debate about speed and wider transport issues.

Home Zones / Living Zones

B&NES has been successful in winning DTLR Challenge funding for two "home zone" schemes, one in Bath (Malvern Buildings) and one in Peasedown St. John. Home zones are residential streets in which road space is shared between motor vehicles and other road users, with measures taken to encourage social activity. Home zones are supported in the government’s 10-year transport plan, and represent the first formal recognition of the benefits from integrating transport infrastructure with the public realm.

Although small in scale, the first home zones in B&NES represent an important opportunity for the public to gain understanding of the implications and potential advantages of this new approach to traffic in towns. We would recommend that, during the first five years of the programme, further home zone proposals are drawn up in partnership with resident groups, and that these proposals, together with the initially funded schemes, are carefully monitored and publicly debated. As has been the case in The Netherlands and elsewhere, home zones have proved to be an important starting point for improving the relationship between traffic and towns over a 15-20 year period, with the principles being applied to town/city centre areas as well as residential streets.

The projected increase in volumes of traffic calls for radical innovative measures if the quality and economic vitality of the built and natural environment is to be retained. These measures will take many years to introduce, but it is important that experience is built up and confidence gained through early examples. It should be stressed that a new approach to traffic in towns and in rural areas has to be introduced in parallel with other measures to reduce congestion and car dependency, to encourage the use of public transport, and to divert through traffic away from towns and villages. It is also important to consider such measures in combination with parking controls, congestion charging, and initiatives such as business travel plans, personalised travel planning, and the introduction of car clubs.

6.6 Goods and Freights

Overview

The movement of freight and goods within B&NES is important for the local economy but routes passing through the authority also provide important links to other parts of the region. At present, the vast majority of freight and goods movements that come from or go to B&NES (or even pass through) are made by road goods vehicles. These vehicles are generally large and tend to produce significant adverse local impacts due to noise, air quality and severance. In addition due to their scale, they tend to intimidate pedestrians, cyclists (and equestrians). The Strategy therefore seeks to facilitate freight movement to support growth in the local economy but to incorporate sufficient safeguards to reduce the impact of lorry traffic on communities.

Road

The Strategy therefore seeks to promote the transfer of freight from road to rail but accepts that the potential for such transfers are very limited.

The Strategy requires that where possible, HGV (heavy goods vehicle) ‘through’ movements are removed from communities and that local movements are restricted to those required to serve local businesses and residents. However, it is accepted that unless one were to embark on a major bypass building programme, that the potential to achieve this objective is very limited. Given that the Strategy does not advocate such a programme, the emphasis therefore has to be on the management of HGVs. It is therefore important to apply the principles set out in Section 6.5, within urban areas or on rural lanes, where the speeds of HGVs need to be lower in order to reduce noise, severance, intimidation and risk of accident. Where possible, weight restrictions should be placed on minor routes and within residential areas to prevent use by all heavy vehicles except those needing direct access. In addition, the establishment of clearly signed lorry routes within the authority area will build on existing initiatives.

Further measures relating to timing constraints regarding deliveries should be considered in order to reduce the impact on the pedestrian environment.

Rail

At present, little freight is moved in the B&NES area by rail, with the exception of waste exports and aggregates from the quarries, located to the south of the district. Whilst the Strategy seeks to increase this volume it recognises that there are serious constraints on substantially increasing the use of rail.

These constraints are as follows:

• The existing scale and pattern of movement is goods is such that rail is not an economic alternative to road for business, even when freight facilities and track access grants are taken into account;
• The existing rail line through Bath currently carries little freight due to the demand for passenger services;
• There are few operational freight sidings within B&NES and no inter-modal freight terminals.

In looking to the future, the Strategy requires that all potential opportunities required to make use of rail freight rather than road transport are exploited. This ranges from protection of rail sidings from development for non-rail purposes, promotion of rail served sites for manufacturing, to working closely with neighbouring authorities such as Bristol City Council to promote the use of their proposed intermodal freight terminal.

6.8 Timetable and Phasing

This recommended Transport Strategy incorporates a wide range of measures, schemes and policies, which are described in the sections above. Whilst some of these elements are recommended for immediate introduction and can be readily implemented, other parts of the Strategy will take a significant period of time to develop even if work starts immediately and many will only be appropriate in the future when other conditions pertain, for example new developments have taken place or other measures have been implemented.

Table 6.3 sets out an indicative timetable for the introduction of the measures. This indicates that for many aspects, the initial tasks during the first five years involve undertaking feasibility studies, developing strategies and designing measures. From Years 5-10 the construction of infrastructure takes place with the introduction of additional public transport services and the public transport corridor through Bath Western Riverside. Beyond year 10, the strategy envisages the major development of rapid transit routes, the extensive implementation of home zones/living zones and the use of more vigorous traffic restraint measures.

Previous | Next

7 Page of 8