Agenda item

To consider the report of the Head of Scrutiny and Member Development presented to facilitate discussions on the future transport strategy for the city having regard to the recently published West Yorkshire Local Transport Plan

(report attached)

Further to minutes 6 and 7 of the meeting held 16^th June 2011 when the Board discussed the future work programme and identified “transport” as a priority, the Head of Scrutiny & Member Development submitted a report to support discussions on the future transport strategy for Leeds. A copy of “My Journey West Yorkshire” was included within the report which outlined the four themes within the overarching West Yorkshire Transport Plan (WYTP) as being transport assets, travel choices, connectivity and enhancements.

The WYTP had been adopted on 1^st April 2011 and was intended to address all aspects of transport provision until 2026. The aspirations for Leeds were contained within the Leeds Implementation Plan (LIP) due to be considered at the September Executive Board meeting.

Mr Gary Bartlett, Chief Officer Highways & Transportation and Mr Andrew Hall, Acting Head of Transport Policy, attended the meeting for this item and made the following points:

• Recognised Members’ desire to address particular transport routes but suggested the Board take a strategic view of all forms of transport first which would inform detailed discussions later
• Tabled an indicative plan of the proposed transport network for the city showing rail, tram, NGT, motorway and A road routes
• Emphasised the need to consider how to enhance the existing network for the next 15 years
• Introduced the LIP and the agreed transport schemes to be implemented

Members discussed the following matters with officers:

• The expected rise in the population of Leeds in the context of the existing transport infrastructure
• The Inquiry would require the number of commuters travelling into and out of Leeds via all forms of transport

Road

• The need to have regard to the impact of new developments along the key routes identified – Woodside Quarry on A660/A65 and Grimes Dyke on A64

Impact of the NGT-

A660

• LCC working with METRO to ensure implementation of the NGT scheme and mindful of the need to have a fall back position to provide a quality bus offer for Leeds should the NGT bid be unsuccessful, to include the best elements of the NGT scheme (priority lanes, better vehicle stock).

Park and ride –

• Members generally supported provision of P&R schemes and queried whether there were any schemes being drawn up for implementation in the near future
• It was reported that LCC had prioritised provision of the NGT, and P&R was an important element of that scheme. If the NGT bid was unsuccessful, P&R provision on key transport routes would be considered
• LCC was in the process of identifying 2 new sites which could be introduced prior to and independent of the NGT
• Most P&R schemes which served Leeds were provided elsewhere across West Yorkshire as Leeds stations did not have the capacity
• Noted discussions on the P&R scheme at King Lane introduced in 1999 which was not regarded as beneficial to the strategic road network and which highlighted the different views of whether local residents supported or opposed the scheme and the difficulties in implementing schemes.

Rail

• The growing number of commuters travelling through Leeds station daily and whether the station and the network had sufficient the operational capacity
• Successful implementation of the High Speed rail Network would bring greater visitor numbers to Leeds
• Members recalled the discussion at the last meeting on the possibility the high speed rail link would require another station to be built near to Leeds City Centre and they reconfirmed their view that the HSR link should be city located.

New rail stations

• Officers noted the comment about Woodside Quarry, but responded that line capacity was an issue bearing in mind that development of the Kirkstall Forge & Apperley Bridge stations was a priority
• The Woodside development was not of sufficient size to warrant a new rail station or generate the necessary funding
• METRO Rail Plan 6 was currently under review.

Train capacity

• Noted the bid for additional second hand rolling stock from Edinburgh
• Noted the government had not supported the increase of carriages from 3 to 4 on the Trans Pennine routes.

Enforcement

• Officers noted concerns over the misuse of bus lanes by other vehicles and that the lanes should be robustly enforced
• Members cited the approach taken by Edinburgh City Council as an example of good practice
• Reported that a protocol for enforcement in development with Environment & Neighbourhoods with the intention of implementing in the city centre first then rolled out city wide.

Ticketing

• Consider introduction of a travel card similar to Oyster card.

Transport assets

• Commented on the damage to roads caused by utility companies undertaking works necessitating removal of the highway surface
• Poor quality reparation works undertaken by the utility companies incurred additional expense to the LCC to make good those surfaces
• Noted permits were issued by LCC to enable utility companies to undertake works. LCC employed a robust inspection regime of the reparation works and had had some success at claiming costs.

Canals

• Noted that Leeds canals largely recreational use, and not freight/utility due to the number of motorway bridges the freight needed to clear.

To conclude, officers reported the LIP was intended to provide a 15 year strategy and reflect matters discussed at WYITA and city region level with implementation proposed within 3 years. LCC sought to discuss the LIP with partner organisations to enable partners to share and sign up to the transport strategy. Members sought Scrutiny Board involvement in the LIP consultation

RESOLVED –

a)  To thank officers for their attendance

b)  To note the contents of the initial discussions on the WYTP and the  emerging Transport Strategy for the city

c)  To note that the LIP will be discussed in greater detail at the September Board meeting