Written evidence submitted by Lawrence Eastwell (URB0009)

Urban Congestion Inquiry

For quite some time, it has been acknowledged that traffic and congestion in urban areas is a problem. However, the UK has not been doing enough to tackle this. I am going to look at ways in which urban areas in the UK (taking Birmingham as an example) can learn from London and other cities around the world in improving congestion.

Bus Priority Measures

London has over 150 miles of bus lanes, whereas Birmingham has just 30 miles. While Birmingham is of course a smaller city than London, this is still a pitifully small figure. I have been on buses before in Birmingham sitting in traffic along with cars, because there is no bus lane. Factor in the extortionate fares and it’s no wonder the car seems a more attractive option.

The map above, from Birmingham City Council, highlights bus lanes in the city centre in dark orange. The total distance doesn’t even total 1 mile (the section from Old Square west down Priory Queensway then south on Moor Street Queensway, which continues under the Bullring towards New Street station on Smallbrook Queensway. This is pitiful and underlines the need for much greater investment in bus lanes to encourage people to use the bus.

Road Pricing Schemes

Road pricing schemes are an established feature in several cities both in the UK and internationally. Congestion charges appear to be most effective in smaller, historical cities. Such a charge was introduced in the historic city centre of Durham in October 2002, in order to protect it from traffic. Within the first week, traffic levels had fallen by 90% according to the city council and stabilised at 85% after a year. Furthermore, 83% of businesses within the zone had had no need to alter their arrangements with regards to deliveries. Other historical cities in Europe have adopted similar charges, such as Riga in Latvia, Valetta in Malta, Znojmo in the Czech Republic. This is certainly a measure that could be considered in other similar towns and cities in the UK, such as Canterbury, Chichester, Winchester and Salisbury.

While the congestion charges mentioned above are designed primarily to stop cars going into historical centres, this would not be appropriate for most other urban areas in the UK. Systems, such as the one in place in London, would be most appropriate, which aim to prevent car drivers driving into the city centre, and to encourage them to use public transport, such as buses, trains and trams instead. The most obvious congestion charge in the UK is the one in force in London. Introduced in 2003, it charges drivers up to £11.50 to enter a zone covering Westminster, Mayfair, the City, Southwark and Lambeth. However, the success of the scheme is not particularly apparent: a 2013 report by TfL concluded that traffic levels within the zone had fallen by 10%, but average travel times have nevertheless increased. Perhaps we can infer from this that it is the lack of parking within Central London which is the main deterrence from driving into the centre.

Congestion charging zones have not been popular, despite success internationally, in places such as Stockholm, Milan and Singapore. Their use seems to be mostly limited to Europe and they do not seem to have popular support: proposed zones for Edinburgh and Manchester were both rejected by margins of 4-1 and 3-1 respectively in referendums in 2008, however these zones would have covered the entire cities (for Manchester, everything within the M60, and everything within the City Bypass for Edinburgh).

Birmingham’s geography does not lend itself well to a congestion charging zone. Indeed the City Council rejected plans for one (along with Wolverhampton and Coventry City Councils) in 2005. Firstly, the main part of the city centre (around New Street, the Bullring and the Cathedral) is already pedestrianised. Furthermore, the A38 runs right through the city centre directly to the M6 and simply could not be shut as it is used by over 50,000 vehicles a day. This would leave an already congested ring road, which itself handles a similar number of vehicles, severely overloaded.

Trams

Whilst trams were once a common feature in many UK towns and cities, every single system in the UK was dismantled between 1920 and 1960 (with the exception of Blackpool). However, since the 1990s, they have been resurgent, with networks in South London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Nottingham, Sheffield and Birmingham. Many of these networks (especially in Manchester, Nottingham and Sheffield) have been very successful - so much so that around 1 in every 10 residents in Manchester uses the tram daily (which has the UK’s largest system at 57 miles).

Trams are an attractive solution, because they can can be built more easily than railway lines, but are more appealing to the public than buses. However it should not be overlooked that they are costly and quite difficult to build - the Edinburgh system (a single 9 mile long line) was estimated to cost £375m, but ran to £775m. The national impact of trams is also small compared to in European cities which retained their trams. For example, Warsaw has 170 miles, Vienna and Berlin each have 270 miles and Prague has over 320 miles.

Meanwhile, Birmingham has just 13 miles of tram tracks and it has struggled to make an impact - until May 2016 the trams didn’t even run into the city centre beyond Snow Hill. There are plans to extend the tram south to Five Ways, and onwards to Edgbaston Cricket Ground and the University of Birmingham via Bristol Road, and out eventually as far as Coventry, although funding is only in place as far as Five Ways and Digbeth. Furthermore, even the 775m extension from Snow Hill to New Street cost over £120m (nearly £160,000 per metre) - in this context, trams seem to represent extraordinarily poor value for money.

This does not mean that trams are not the way forwards - Manchester’s system has been a huge success and shows that it can be done well.

November 2016