THE REGIONAL TRANSPORT PLAN FOR SOUTH WEST WALES

APPENDICES

Introduction This document includes all the Appendices to Regional Transport Plan (RTP) prepared by the South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium (SWWITCH).

The Appendices should be read in the context of the RTP because they provide much of the background evidence and detail for the RTP. They are published as a separate volume to ensure the main document remains as short and focused as possible. This is important because the RTP is a bidding document for (mainly capital) funds from a range of sources to improve transport and access in the region. Please note that there is no Appendix I or O.

List of contents Appendix Content Page number A The South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium 3

B One Wales: Connecting The Nation - The Wales Transport Strategy 5

C Wales Spatial Plan Access Priorities 8

D The South West Wales Economy 13

E SWWITCH Travel Pattern Research 17

F Stakeholder Consultation and Workshop Activities 29

G Current Transport Issues in South West Wales 39

H Mapping Traffic Flows and Congestion in South West Wales 50

J Strategic Accessibility Assessment 60

K Key Settlement Connectivity Report 72

L Problems and Opportunities identified in the consultation 90

M Component Strategies 95

N Public Transport Information Strategy 98

P Traffic Management Act and Network Management Duties 102

Q Delivering Successful Transport schemes 106

R Planned Revenue and Capital Expenditure 110

S WelTAG Appraisal tables 119

Glossary of Abbreviations 234

2 APPENDIX A – THE SOUTH WEST WALES INTEGRATED TRANSPORT CONSORTIUM (SWWITCH)

A1.0 BACKGROUND TO SWWITCH

A1.1 The South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium (SWWITCH) was formed in 1998 and comprises the four South West Wales authorities: Carmarthenshire County Council, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Pembrokeshire County Council and the City and County of Swansea.

A1.2 Since its inception SWWITCH’s remit has included all forms of transport (bus, rail, private car, freight, ports and walking/cycling) and wider access issues including the role of Land Use Planning and the range of behavioural change options.

A1.3 SWWITCH is one of four Welsh transport consortia supported by the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) and is working to develop and promote improved access across the region as a means of facilitating:

• Sustainable economic development • Social inclusion, and • Increased equity

By working together members of the consortium share experience and best practice. In a diverse area like South West Wales, where common access problems require a range of local solutions, working together benefits residents, businesses and visitors.

A1.4 SWWITCH is formally established as a Joint Committee of the four local authorities, which meets quarterly. This committee comprises elected Members with responsibilities for transport in their constituent authorities, with external partners such as transport providers, user and business representatives.

A1.5 Each authority has three Members on the Committee, but only one vote. External partners do not have a vote, but are invited to contribute to discussions. SWWITCH Committee decisions are required to be unanimous under the legally binding constitution that underpins the SWWITCH partnership. However, local government legislation requires policy decisions, (including those necessary for the Regional Transport Plan) to be referred back to, and ratified by, each constituent SWWITCH local authority.

A1.6 The Joint Committee sets the strategic direction for SWWITCH and endorses the necessary policies, proposals and programmes of work to achieve its regional transport vision. The work of SWWITCH is facilitated by capital and revenue budgets funded from WAG grants.

A1.7 The Joint Committee is supported by a Management Group, comprising Chief Technical Officers, which meets monthly. This group develops SWWITCH policy and forward work programmes and provides an essential link to local authority corporate teams.

A1.8 In turn the Management Group is supported by the SWWITCH Officer Working

3 Group (OWG), which meets at least weekly. This group comprises the Transport Planners from each local authority and is responsible for development and delivery of policy and programmes and all the associated work.

A1.9 There are also specific task and finish groups which meet as and when required. These have included specific groups on Walking and Cycling, Concessionary fares, Parking etc.

A1.10 The SWWITCH structure is shown in Figure A1 below, and has evolved since 1998 to reflect changing needs. This process of evolution will continue in order to ensure that SWWITCH is ready to meet future challenges and to facilitate the delivery of transport improvements in the region.

FIGURE A1- SWWITCH Structure

Rail and Bus User Welsh Assembly Government Groups

Business & Economic Rail and Bus SWWITCH Joint Operators community Committee

Sustainable Transport representatives Freight Representatives

SWWITCH Management Group

Links back to Local Authorities SWWITCH Officer Working Group

Sub Groups Sub Groups Sub Groups

4 APPENDIX B – ONE WALES: CONNECTING THE NATION - THE WALES TRANSPORT STRATEGY

B1.0 WALES TRANSPORT STRATEGY

B1.1 The Transport (Wales) Act 2006 places a statutory requirement on the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) to prepare and produce a Wales Transport Strategy (WTS). The WTS demonstrates WAG’s long-term vision to promote and encourage safe, integrated, sustainable, efficient and economic transport facilities and services to, from and within Wales.

B1.2 The WTS sets out how WAG can link transport planning more closely across policy areas, such as health, education and the economy. It works alongside the Wales Spatial Plan, as well as other high-level strategies, to contribute to achieving WAG’s One Wales agenda.

B1.3 A key aspect of the WTS is to ensure that transport makes a positive contribution to equality of access. WAG has a duty to ensure that equality of opportunity is embedded in all its work.

B1.4 The WTS does not include specific proposals and schemes. It is intended to provide a new strategic framework for subsequent plans at the local, regional and national level. In terms of impact, the WTS is framed by three sustainable themes, comprises 17 long-term outcomes and five strategic priorities linked to delivering One Wales.

B2.0 DELIVERING THE WALES TRANSPORT STRATEGY

B2.1 The WTS will be delivered:

• At the national level, through the developing National Transport Plan (NTP) and integration with the wider policy agenda • At the regional and local level, through the Regional Transport Plans (RTPs)

B2.2 The NTP is being developed by WAG and will set out in more detail how WAG will deliver the strategy objectives in the key areas for which it has responsibility, for example:

• The trunk road network (the main roads and motorways) • Railways • Long distance public transport networks • Some funding for community transport

Partnership working with local authorities and service providers will be an important part of delivery since WAG does not have direct control of all the levers for change in transport. For example, working in partnership with local bus companies helps to improve the physical accessibility and community penetration of services.

B2.3 WAG expects the RTPs to set out how transport consortia intend to deliver the WTS outcomes and priorities for their areas, focusing on services and functions for

5 which local authorities have responsibilities.

B2.4 The WTS has three main themes:

• Achieving a more effective and efficient transport system • Achieving greater use of more sustainable and healthy forms of travel • Minimising demands on the transport system

These themes provide the overarching framework for the WTS and the NTP.

B2.5 The WTS long term aims are set out in outcomes as follows:

Social Outcomes • Improve access to healthcare • Improve access to education, training and lifelong learning • Improve access to shopping and leisure facilities • Encourage healthy lifestyles • Improve the actual and perceived safety of travel • Improve access to employment opportunities

Economic Outcomes • Improve connectivity within Wales and internationally • Improve the efficient, reliable and sustainable movement of people • Improve the efficient, reliable and sustainable movement of freight • Improve sustainable access to key visitor attractions

Environmental Outcomes • Increase the use of more sustainable materials in the maintenance of Wales’ transport assets and in the provision of transport infrastructure • Reduce the impact of transport on greenhouse gas emissions • Adapt to the impacts of climate change • Reduce the contribution of transport to air pollution and other harmful emissions • Improve the positive impact of transport on the local environment • Improve the effect of transport on our heritage • Improve the impact of transport on biodiversity

B2.6 WAG long-term outcomes are ambitious and will take time to achieve. There are also some actions which can support improvements towards more than one outcome; while other actions which may achieve one outcome, but reduce the likelihood of improvements in respect of another. A balanced approach will be required and developing this will need the full engagement of a range of partners involved in the delivery of a complex mix and match of policies and projects to ensure that the WTS and NTP result in improved access for all.

B2.7 The WTS recognises the need to focus energy and investment on key areas, called strategic priorities, in the first instance. The adopted priorities for the WTS are as follows: • Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental impacts from

6 transport • Integrating local transport • Improving access between key settlements • Enhancing international connectivity • Increasing safety and security

7 APPENDIX C – WALES SPATIAL PLAN ACCESS PRIORITIES

C1.0 INTRODUCTION

C1.1 In South West Wales the Spatial Plan regional group boundaries are not consistent with the transport consortia boundaries. This means that for SWWITCH there are three Wales Spatial Plan (WSP) areas:

• Swansea Bay: Waterfront and Western Valleys • Pembrokeshire Haven • Central Wales

Due to limited resources and to geographical factors, SWWITCH has been more closely aligned with the Swansea Bay and Pembrokeshire Haven groups.

C1.2 The Central Wales WSP group includes Carmarthen town and the north west of Carmarthenshire. However, Carmarthen town is also included in both of the two other groups in the region and SWWITCH has been co-ordinating with its neighbouring mid Wales consortium (TraCC), which covers the majority of the Central Wales group. This has ensured a two way information flow and the maintenance of a consistent approach whilst recognising spatial diversity.

C1.3 The key access priorities of each of the three WSP regions which SWWITCH covers are shown below. Key settlements as identified for the WSP are shown on Figure C1.

C2.1 SWANSEA BAY: WATERFRONT AND VALLEYS

Introduction - Current car usage trends point to increasing congestion within the area if action is not taken. The overall priority is therefore making better use of the area’s existing transport infrastructure, to deliver sustainable transport. Effective public transport is critical to the creation of an effective transport network within the region and the key settlements must act as transport hubs for smaller surrounding settlements.

Improving access internally - the following key principles are considered vital to the success of the region:

• An emphasis on strengthening the area’s hubs and supporting communities , both in terms of retail, town centres and housing, should create a framework within which SWWITCH can better develop public transport and reduce reliance on the private car • Existing strategic employment sites must be better served by public transport, and new ones need to be in locations that will be well-served by public transport • Health care, education and leisure services need to be easily accessible by public transport from both the key settlements and more remote Valley communities • Innovative public transport services need to offer improved opportunities for concentrations of economically inactive people, both in the main settlements

8

Figure C1 -

Key

Settlements

9 and in the smaller settlements and more remote Valley communities, to gain access to jobs

• Safer routes for walking and cycling need to be developed and promoted

The development of community transport will complement this.

External links - The area needs to improve its accessibility to London, and internationally, to help it attract investment, and appeal to and retain a professional workforce on the scale necessary to function as a successful city-region. This is especially true for the knowledge economy and high value-added services, for links to contacts, for example, international science, finance and business.

Action to make the area more accessible to London and to the international economy is therefore vital to achieving the vision. In doing so, it will improve east-west links more generally to Cardiff, Bristol and the M4 corridor settlements.

Substantial investment is already being committed to the new proposed M4 around Newport and the Port Talbot distributor road to alleviate congestion along the motorway. An improved rail service to Cardiff, Bristol, and London is also very important. The Eddington Report recognises the importance of extra investment in existing intra urban rail services, particularly between city-regions.

Links West with Ireland should also be reviewed through an examination of the need for a Cork-Swansea ferry service and the possibility of an enhanced role for the deep- water harbour at Port Talbot should be explored in partnership with the private sector.

C2.2 PEMBROKESHIRE HAVEN

Introduction - The area is strategically placed with important links to Ireland, and has two key ferry ports at Pembroke Dock and Fishguard Harbour. The related rail links are important, while the A40 road link between the M4 and the ports is designated in the Assembly Government’s forward trunk road programme. Improvements to the A40 are being made with the current scheme of bypasses allowing for dualling of the A40 at a future date if the business case is proven. The need for further investment will be kept carefully under review with the economic case for dualling re-examined at an appropriate time in the future. A study of the short, medium and long-term options for improvements in the South Wales main rail line is also underway.

Key issues for public and community transport are as follows:

• Such transport needs to be particularly strong between the towns that make up the different hubs, so that they can work together as a coherent unit and help create more viable public transport options, reducing reliance on the private car. • Significant new employment sites should be served by public transport. • Public transport to existing sites needs to be strengthened. • Health care, education and leisure services need to be easily accessible by public and community transport from the local service and tourism centres and smaller settlements. Public transport services need to offer improved

10 opportunities for concentrations of economically inactive people to gain access to jobs.

Interventions being considered are:

• Access to Strategic Sites and Ports: improved access to ports and to strategic sites from the rail and road network together with improved port facilities themselves. • Rural Transport Schemes: to provide access to employment and services through key bus corridors and to interchanges for people in rural areas, by public and community transport and other innovative measures. This sits alongside the SWWITCH priority of social enterprise schemes to improve access. Develop sustainable countryside access by providing rural public transport to encourage tourists not to use their cars e.g. the Greenways project. • Key Public Transport Corridors and Interchanges: to develop and improve bus and rail passenger service frequencies and speeds, infrastructure and interchanges at the Haven Hub, the Tenby to Carmarthen corridor and the Haverfordwest to Fishguard corridor, which is part of the Trans European Network. • Park & Ride: specific park and ride initiatives at regional and tourism hubs. • Marketing & Information: development, implementation and promotion of integrated ticketing systems and comprehensive all mode information packages, including in the longer term the introduction of smart cards packages in collaboration with the WAG. • National Cycle Network Development: improvements to Route 4 of the National-Cycle Network. In addition, support to other areas of the cycle network and development of multi-user routes will be developed. • Making town centres more friendly for pedestrians and cyclists, linked to town traffic management plans, and improved access to the countryside and water for sustainable tourism, are important for health benefits and for tourism. • The need for improved links between north and south Pembrokeshire

C2.3 CENTRAL WALES

Introduction - Accessibility is critical to social inclusion and a key factor in increasing economic activity, widening employment opportunities and enabling people to access services. Due to the remote nature of this area a balanced approach is required in relation to the social, environmental and economic impacts / benefits of travel. To deliver the economic and social benefits we all want to realise, integrated transport is therefore critical for this area. This includes providing access to markets within and outside of the region. Personal mobility is essential to access employment, education and training opportunities in rural areas. The work being undertaken in determining the role and function of settlements and their rural wider hinterlands will play a key role in defining the spatial transport priorities for the area.

Central Wales is served by a network of trunk and county roads. There is an extensive rail network that runs through the region, which includes the Cambrian line, Cambrian Coast line and the Heart of Wales line (HOWL). However, the frequency of services, and accessibility to stations means that large parts of the region are dependent on road based transport. Community passenger support services often provide a lifeline for access to services and opportunities in many of the deepest rural

11 areas. There will also be a general aim to reduce or manage the amount of travel. This will be achieved through encouraging more home-working through better ICT links and facilities and a reduction of business miles through encouraging the take-up of travel plans in larger employer organisations (local authorities, national government departments, NHS, universities etc).

Common objectives across the Central Wales area, identified through consultation with stakeholders include:

• Improving safety, accessibility to services, jobs and facilities for all sectors of society and all transport users • Improving the quality and integration of the public transport system including the role of community transport • Providing, promoting and improving sustainable forms of transport • Improving connectivity within and to other regions • Maintaining, improving and maximising the efficient use of the existing highway and transport infrastructure • Seeking to reduce the impact of transport and travel on the local and global environments • Seeking to ensure that transport and accessibility are major influences on land use policy and decisions and locational strategies for public service delivery

12 APPENDIX D – THE SOUTH WEST WALES ECONOMY

D1.0 INTRODUCTION

D1.1 The whole of South West Wales is part of the West Wales and the Valleys area that is eligible for European Union Structural Fund support. This is because prosperity is 75% or less than the European Union average and economic inactivity is one of the main reasons for this. The Lisbon Agenda and targets focus on increasing employment opportunities and reducing economic inactivity. Improving access can help the situation.

D1.2 The Tables below indicate some of the key issues relating to the labour market and economic inactivity.

Table D1 - Comparison of Population and economically active and inactive residents Area Population Working age Economically Economically population active inactive

Carmarthenshire 179,500 104,300 83,600 24,900 (58.1%) (76%) (24%)

Neath Port Talbot 137,400 82,500 59,300 24,900 (60.8%) (69.8%) (30.2%)

Pembrokeshire 117,900 66,900 53,700 16,300 (56.7%) (75.5%) (24.5%)

Swansea 228,100 139,500 106,700 36,200 (61.2%) (73.9%) (26.1%)

Wales 2,980,000 2,408,000 1,423,000 981,000 (60.3%) (75.8%) (24.2%)

Source: Nomis – Official Labour Market Statistics (October 2007 – September 2008)

Table D2 - Comparison of Gross Weekly Earnings and % of Benefit Claimants

Area Gross Weekly % of Working age population on benefits Earnings(£) Male Female Job Incapacity Disabled Other seekers benefits Carmarthenshir 480.6 364.5 2.1% 12.0% 1.3% 4.1% e Neath Port 473.6 367.3 2.6% 15.2% 1.8% 5.6% Talbot Pembrokeshire 417.2 396.5 1.6% 9.4% 1.3% 4% Swansea 478.6 383.8 2.4% 11.3% 1.4% 4.4% Wales 473.6 373.0 2.5% 10.5% 1.3% 4.3% Source: Nomis – Official Labour Market Statistics (2008)

13

Table D3 – Comparison of Economically inactive job seekers

Area % of population % of population % of inactive % of inactive economically economically who want a who do not active Inactive job want a job Carmarthenshire 76.0% 24.0% 6.4% 17.6%

Neath Port Talbot 69.8% 30.2% 7.6% 22.5%

Pembrokeshire 75.5% 24.5% 4.6% 19.9%

Swansea 73.9% 26.1% 5.3% 20.8%

Wales 75.8% 24.2% 6.4% 17.8%

Source: Nomis – Official Labour Market Statistics (October 2007 – September 2008)

D1.3 The role of the Regional Transport Plan (RTP) is to try and facilitate access to employment opportunities and thus reduce one potential barrier to economic inactivity. There is no robust evidence across the region about what proportion of inactivity relates to poor access, although anecdotal evidence suggests that no access to car, limited public transport opportunities and/or little awareness of how to access information on public transport and car sharing all contribute to barriers to employment, particularly for young people and single parents.

D2.0 ACCESS AND DEPRIVATION

D2.1 Deprivation is a wider concept than poverty. Whilst poverty means not having enough money or other essentials to get by, deprivation refers to problems caused by general lack of resources and opportunities, not just money.

D2.2 The Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation (WIMD) is made up of seven separate components of deprivation:

• Income • Employment • Health • Education • Housing • Access to Services • Environment

D2.3 Each of these components is based on a range of different indicators which means that they are measured in different ways using different units. For income and employment it is possible to get the numbers of people classed as deprived living in an area (as well as a deprivation score). For the other five components only the scores are available (because they are worked out using a range of indicators rather

14 than just numbers of people).

D2.4 Wales has been divided into Lower Super Output Areas (LSOA), these are basic geographical units each having approximately the same population. The WIMD has deprivation scores worked out for all the 1,896 LSOAs in Wales, where higher scores mean more deprivation. An LSOA has a higher deprivation score than another one if the proportion of people living there who are classed as deprived is higher. An area itself is not deprived: it is the circumstances and lifestyles of the people living there that affect its deprivation score. And it is important to remember that not everyone living in a deprived area is deprived – and that not all deprived people live in deprived areas.

D2.5 Table D4 below shows all SWWITCH region LSOAs that score in the top 100 in Wales in terms of deprivation.

Table D4 – Overall Deprivation Scores

Rank Deprivation LSOA name Area (out of Score 1896) 5 73.6 Castle 2 Swansea 8 71.9 Penderry 1 Swansea 9 71.4 Townhill 1 Swansea 14 69.3 Townhill 3 Swansea 16 67.5 Castle 1 Swansea 20 66.9 Cymmer 2 Neath Port Talbot 21 66.7 Townhill 2 Swansea 24 65.5 Penderry 4 Swansea 25 65.2 Penderry 7 Swansea 36 61.5 Aberavon 3 Neath Port Talbot 38 61.4 Mynyddbach 1 Swansea 42 60.7 Sandfields west 2 Neath Port Talbot 47 59.9 Penderry 3 Swansea 49 58.6 Bonymaen 1 Swansea 52 58.6 Tyisha 2 Carmarthenshire 53 58.5 Briton Ferry west 1 Neath Port Talbot 55 58.4 Pembroke Dock, Llanion 1 Permbrokeshire 57 58.3 Bigyn 4 Carmarthenshire 61 57.4 Townhill 6 Swansea 63 56.5 Townhill 5 Swansea 68 55.7 Sandfields East 2 Neath Port Talbot 72 54.7 Neath North 2 Neath Port Talbot 76 54.0 Pembroke: Monkton Pembrokeshire 81 52.7 Aberavon 4 Neath Port Talbot 90 51.9 Glanymor 3 Carmarthenshire 98 51.0 Sandfields West 4 Neath Port Talbot Source: Welsh Assembly Government Statistical Directorate

D2.6 Whilst it is clear from the above overall deprivation scores that Swansea has the highest levels of deprivation, for the RTP the main focus is on access deprivation and therefore SWWITCH has examined in more detail the scores in each local authority

15 that relate directly to access.

D2.7 Access to Services - The indicators used in WIMD for geographical access to services are:

• Access to food shop (within 10 minutes) • Access to GP surgery (within 15 minutes) • Access to primary school (within 15 minutes) • Access to post office (within 15 minutes) • Access to public library (within15 minutes) • Access to leisure centre (within 20 minutes) • Access to NHS dentist (within 20 minutes) • Access to secondary school (within 30 minutes)

D2.8 Looking purely at deprivation related only to geographical access indicates that:

• Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire are more deprived than the average for Wales • Swansea is less deprived than the average for Wales • Neath Port Talbot is close to the average for Wales but has the widest spread of scores (that is there is a large disparity in Neath Port Talbot between the various LSOAs, some with very good access scores and some with very poor access scores)

16 APPENDIX E – SWWITCH TRAVEL PATTERN RESEARCH

E1.0 INTRODUCTION

E1.1 In 2006 SWWITCH commissioned Atkins to review a wide variety of traffic and travel data collected by the four UAs and others (e.g. Welsh Assembly Government). The Atkins report concluded that there were a number of key gaps in the available traffic and travel data – most notably an absence of robust and disaggregated information on personal travel habits. In order to plug this gap, SWWITCH commissioned a travel pattern survey and appointed Atkins to carry out the work. This survey was carried out during 2006/7.

E2.0 SURVEY METHODOLOGY

E2.1 Approach - For the survey potential respondents in a random sample of households were invited to participate by surveyors who called at their homes. The survey was aimed at adults aged 18 and over. Respondents were given an explanation on how to complete the diary and questionnaire. It was anticipated that 50% of those who agreed to participate would actually complete and return the survey forms.

E2.2 Travel Diary - The travel survey consisted of a seven day travel diary to record details of individual journeys, followed by a questionnaire to collect information on attitudes towards usage of various modes of transport, school travel patterns and demographic information.

The travel diary sought to establish the following details for every journey made during a fixed seven day period: • Origin and destination of every journey (postcode/street address) • Journey time • Mode(s) of travel • Journey purpose • Whether a car was available for journeys made by non-car modes of transport

The main purpose of the travel diary was to allow the calculation of modal share and trip rate statistics.

E2.3 Questionnaire - The questionnaire sought to clarify respondents’ typical travel patterns, including the frequency with which they use different modes of transport, and their motivations for using particular modes. Respondents were subsequently asked to demonstrate their satisfaction with local pedestrian and cycling facilities, bus and rail services and the road network. The questionnaire also aimed to establish the travel patterns of any children in the household, and to examine respondent demographics, such as age, gender, car ownership, internet access and mobility difficulties. They were also asked to express their views on a number of different transport priorities.

E2.4 Study Area - The survey targeted a random sample of residents within the SWWITCH region. Using 2001 Census data, the total population of this area is approximately 460,000 adults aged 16-74, with over 270,000 households.

17 E3.0 SAMPLING METHODOLOGY AND CONSISTENCY

E3.1 Sample Size - In designing the survey, it was necessary to ensure that the responses could be analysed for both the entire SWWITCH study area and at the unitary authority level. It was agreed that a total sample of 2000 completed surveys, with the proportion of respondents in each local authority area being in line with the overall make up of the study area, would be sufficient to allow this level of disaggregation.

In total, 7000 diaries were successfully placed with participating households. Of those 2253 completed travel surveys were returned.

E3.2 Consistency with Census Data - The gender split and age groups breakdown of the SWWITCH survey sample was fairly similar to the census data for the four local authority areas. However, the age group breakdown by areas showed some inconsistencies compared to census data. These differences were brought back in line with the census after applying weights to the data.

In terms of employment situation, retired respondents were over-represented while the proportions of ‘other’ respondents were lower than the census.

Car ownership levels in SWWITCH were generally higher than the census. Around 80% of SWWITCH survey respondents owned at least one car in their household, compared to the census average of 74%.

E4.0 TRAVEL PATTERNS

E4.1 Travel Diary - In the survey, respondents were asked to complete travel diaries for seven consecutive days, in which respondents could fill in up to a maximum of eight entries a day, one for each journey they made on the day.

• In the SWWITCH area, a total of 21909 diary entries (therefore journeys) were recorded during the survey week and 2.3 journeys per person per day

• All areas demonstrated a higher daily trip rate during weekdays than weekends, apart from Pembrokeshire, which recorded the highest trip rate on a Sunday. This result is potentially influenced by its role as a holiday and leisure destination

• Analysis by demographic subgroup shows that across the region, males tended to make an average of around 0.2 journeys more than females each day

• Analysis by age shows that respondents aged 18-64 made more trips and respondents aged 75+ were likely to make the fewest trips

E4.2 Journey Purpose - For each journey they made, respondents were asked to specify its main purpose, using a pre-coded list of responses.

Analysis for the SWWITCH area (see Table E1 below) shows that the main journey purpose was for commuting, which accounts for 32% of the total journeys made. This is followed by shopping trips which contribute to approximately one-fifth of the total

18 journeys made. Fewest trips made were either in relation to work’s business or personal business.

Table E1 - Journey Purpose

Journey Purpose Frequency % of Total Work (commuting) 6833 31.6 Shopping 4613 21.3 Education 1639 7.6 Work's business 773 3.6 Leisure/recreation 2772 12.8 Medical 935 4.3 Visit friends/relatives 2008 9.3 Personal business 808 3.7 Other 1274 5.9 Total 21656 100 No Response 253 -

Further analysis shows that in the SWWITCH area as a whole, a greater proportion of journeys for commuting purposes (37%) were made during weekdays, while shopping purposes (37%) were more likely to be made on Saturday (as may be expected). On Sundays, over a third of the total journeys were made for leisure/recreation purposes.

E4.3 Journey Time - For each journey, respondents were asked to specify the length of time it took them to travel from their origin to their destination.

The findings (see Table E2 Below) show that the majority of journeys took less than 15 minutes (43%). A fifth of the journeys took between 16-20 minutes. Only 2% of the total journeys took over 2 hours.

Table E2 - Journey time

Journey Time Frequency % of Total Under 15 minutes 9128 43.2 16-20 minutes 4127 19.5 21-30 minutes 4226 20 31-60 minutes 2395 11.3 1-2 hours 805 3.8 Over 2 hours 429 2 Total 21110 100 No Response 799 -

Analysis based on time bands shows that most of the journeys made took less than 15 minutes, followed by journeys between 16-30 minutes long.

E4.4 Journey Time By Purpose - In SWWITCH, for all journey purposes other than ‘Work’s Business’, the most commonly occurring journey time band was ‘Under 15 minutes’.

19 For Work’s business trips the most commonly occurring journey time band was 21-30 minutes, at 26 %. See Table E3 below

Table E3 - Journey Time by Purpose ( %)

E4.5 Modal Split - The majority of trips in the region (71% of the total) were made by car (56 % as a driver; 15% as a passenger). The second most popular means of travel was foot (16%). Ten percent of trips were made by public transport (1% by train; 9% by bus). Table E4 below shows.

Table E4 - Modal Split

Journey Purpose Frequency % of Total

Car driver 12216 56.1

Car passenger 3347 15.4

Foot 3579 16.4 Bus 1881 8.6

Train 168 0.8 Taxi 195 0.9

Bicycle 123 0.6 Motorcycle 47 0.2

Other 207 1 Total: 21764 100

As shown in Table E5 below respondents in Swansea displayed the lowest levels of

20 car use (68%), while car mode share in Carmarthenshire was the highest (76%). Also, Carmarthenshire had the lowest walk mode share (11%) compared to other 3 UAs (~9%). Pembrokeshire respondents were less likely to travel by public transport (6%) than respondents from other UAs (~10%).

The level of car use in the SWWITCH area is higher than the national average (63%) while level of walking is lower than the national average (25%). Additionally bus mode share in all the UAs apart from Pembrokeshire is slightly higher than the national average (7%). Levels of cycling (~2%), rail (~1%) and taxi (~1%) use are in- line with the national shares (2%, 2% and 1%, respectively).

Table E5 - Modal Split by Area (%)

E4.6 Modal Split by Journey Purpose - Analysis of the modes used for different journey purposes shows that the car was the main mode of transport for all types of journeys made, especially work’s business trips (86%). While car was still the main mode for education trips (45%), walking mode was also commonly cited at 40%. Shopping trips had the highest public transport mode share (17%) while work’s business trips were the least likely to be made by public transport (4%), compared to other types of journeys.

Car mode share of commuting and business journeys (commuting: 81%; work’s business: 86%) in SWWITCH is higher than the national average (70%). Shopping and personal business trips in SWWITCH show a higher proportion of public transport mode share (SWWITCH: 17% and 12%, respectively; National average: 10% and 6%, respectively). This is shown in Table E6.

21 Table E6 - Modal Split by Journey Purpose (%)

Generally, walking was the second most popular mode while bus was the third most popular means of transportation for most trip purposes in all UAs. Exceptions included medical and shopping purposes in Carmarthenshire and Swansea, which were more likely to be made by bus compared to foot. The highest level of bus mode share occurs in Swansea – for shopping purposes (22%).

Cycling levels and rail use were low in all areas (~1%) only with a slightly higher proportion of cycle mode shares in Swansea on journeys related to education and work’s business (4% and 6%, respectively).

E4.7 Modal Split by Demographic Group - Analysis of modal split by demographic group demonstrates that men were more likely than women to travel by car. In contrast women undertook more walk journeys than men. Car use in the SWWITCH area was the highest amongst respondents aged 45-54, and lowest amongst the youngest respondent age group. The youngest respondents had the highest walk and cycling mode shares while the oldest respondents made the highest proportions of trips by bus.

Full-time employed residents were most reliant on the car, while students and unemployed respondents were the most likely to travel to their destination on foot. Students also had the highest bus mode shares amongst all employment groups.

E4.8 Modal Split by Car Ownership - Travel patterns are strongly influenced by car ownership - 80% of all trips made by people living in car-owning households were made by car, compared to only 24% of those from non car households. Therefore as more households become car owning, the likely impact will be greater levels of car travel.

22 E4.9 Modal Split by Mobility Issues and Difficulties - The car was the most popular means of transport amongst different mobility groups. In general, respondents with mobility issues were more likely travel as car passengers rather than as car drivers – demonstrating the impact of their disability.

Overall, modal split for respondents with and without mobility issues demonstrates a very similar pattern except respondents with mobility difficulties made slightly greater proportions of bus trips (11%, compared to 8% amongst those without mobility problems).

E4.10 Journey Time by Mode - Analysis of the time taken to travel from origin to destination by different modes (see Table E7 below) shows that the majority of journeys made by all means of transport took less than 15 minutes, except by train in which 58% of all train trips took over an hour. Apart from train, less than 10% of all trips for each mode took over an hour. Over a quarter of the bus trips took under 15 minutes or between 21-30 minutes.

Table E7 - Journey Time by Mode of Travel (%)

Further analysis by area shows that journey time spent on trips made by car and taxi and on foot was less than 15 minutes. The majority of bus journeys also took less than 15 minutes and most of the train trips took at least an hour.

E4.11 Car Availability - For all journeys made by modes of transport other than the car, respondents were asked to state whether a car had been available for the journey (i.e. to examine whether they could have travelled by car if they had wanted to).

In the region the majority of trips were made by alternative transport modes as no car alternative was available, especially for those trips made by bus and taxi (78%). Fifty percent of the small number of trips which respondents had made by bicycle could have been made by car.

23 E4.12 Journey and destinations - The most popular destinations comprise of all four study areas, as shown in the following maps there were also trips to other local authorities in Wales and several commuting trips made to London.

Figure E1 - Trips made by respondents in Carmarthenshire

Figure E2 - Trips made by respondents in Neath Port Talbot

24 Figure E3 - Trips made by respondents in Pembrokeshire

Figure E4 - Trips made by respondents in Swansea

25 E5.0 USE OF DIFFERENT MODES OF TRAVEL

E5.1 Frequency of Travel by Various Modes - Respondents were asked to state the frequency with which they travel by a range of modes of transport, ranging from “five or more days a week” to “never”. The modes of transport investigated are bus, rail, foot, bicycle, and car (both as a driver and passenger), and each mode is analysed in detail below.

E5.2 Bus - Approximately 49% of respondents stated that they used the bus as a mode of transport. Use of the bus was found to be for convenience (35%), due to the lack of alternative transport (28%), and due to a frequent service (15%). Respondents overall showed high levels of satisfaction with local bus services, in particular with the frequency of buses (48% of respondents satisfied), the quality and cleanliness of buses (46%) and the convenience of the routes (43%). Reliability of bus services was also shown to be satisfactory, particularly in Pembrokeshire and Neath Port Talbot.

E5.3 Rail - A total of 28% of respondents used the train for travelling, primarily due to its fast journey time (stated by 22% of respondents). The key aspects of the local rail service that respondents were most satisfied with were the convenience of the rail routes (28% of respondents), with the frequency of trains (27%), the quality and cleanliness of stations (26%), and the waiting facilities at stations (26%).

E5.4 Foot - Approximately 64% of respondents walked as a mode of transport, for health and fitness reasons (stated by 46% of respondents) and for convenience (43%). Respondents noted high levels of satisfaction with most pedestrian facilities, in particular street lighting (67% satisfied), width of pavements (64%) and convenience of routes (64%).

E5.5 Cycle - Only 15% of respondents stated that they use cycling as a mode of transport and, of these, 65% stated that they did so for health / fitness reasons. Aspects of cycling facilities that respondents were most satisfied with were the maintenance of cycle lanes (22%), the convenience of cycle routes (21%), and safety of cycle lanes (19%).

G5.6 Car - In terms of car use, 70% of respondents stated that they drove a car, and 75% travelled as passengers in a car. The main reasons for travelling by car were found to be for convenience (55% of respondents), and due to a fast journey time (29%). In terms of satisfaction with the local road network, 50% of respondents were satisfied with the reliability of the road network, 45% were satisfied with the quality of the roads, and 43% were satisfied with the maintenance of roads.

E5.7 School Travel Patterns - The majority of children in the SWWITCH area travelled under one mile to reach their school (43%), with 22% travelling between 1 and 2 miles, 14% 2-3 miles, and 21% over 3 miles.

In terms of mode share, the majority of children walked to school (41%), followed by car (28%), and bus (27%). Mode choice varied according to the age of children – the tendency to travel on foot decreased as the age of the child increased. The distance travelled to school was also a key determinant of modal choice. As perhaps expected, shorter trips were most likely to be made on foot (80% for those travelling less than one mile, compared to approximately 2% travelling three or more miles).

26 E6.0 OPINIONS OF TRANSPORT PROVISION

E7.1 Respondents were also asked to allocate points between eleven different transport policies to identify their priorities for improvement to the transport network over the next five years. Improving the condition / maintenance of roads was found to have the greatest priority amongst respondents with an average of 22.0 points out of 100 allocated to this policy. Reducing the number and severity of road incidents and controlling traffic in residential areas were also highlighted as priorities for local transport within the SWWITCH area (allocated14.2 and 12.6 points respectively). Figure E5 below shows the outcomes in full

Figure E5 - Overall Rating of Policies

E7.0 CONCLUSION

E7.1 Key points • Over 2200 travel surveys were completed, a response rate of 32%

• Over a third of journeys were for commuting, with just over a fifth for shopping purposes. Over 40% of journeys fell under the journey time band of “Under 15 minutes”

• Over 80% of respondents owned at least one car, and 71% of all journeys were made by car, which is higher than the national average

27 • Around 16% of journeys were on foot (lower than national average)

• Men were found to be more likely than women to travel by car, whereas women were more likely to walk than men

• On average, trips made by different transport modes took less than 15 minutes, apart from train trips which normally took over an hour

• Approximately 49% of respondents used the bus as a mode of transport, 28% used the train, 64% walked, 70% drove a car and 75% were passengers in a car

• Most respondents who used the bus or the car did so because it was convenient for their particular journey. Those who used the train generally did so because of the fast journey time. Those who walked or cycled generally did so for health and fitness reasons

• The majority of children in the study area travelled less than one mile to get to school (43%). Around 41% of children walked to school, 28% travelled in a car, and 27% used the bus

• Bus services have quite high levels of satisfaction amongst users, reliability and quality of buses being particularly impressive. The one or two less well performing areas relate to the cost of fares (which local authorities cannot control) and waiting facilities at bus stops (which they can)

• Rail services generally show lower levels of satisfaction, again the cost of fares is seen as the aspect of the service that people are least happy about

• Improving the condition/maintenance of roads was given the greatest priority by survey respondents

28 APPENDIX F – STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION AND WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES

F1.0 INTRODUCTION TO PARTNERSHIP WORKING

F1.1 SWWITCH has been working in partnership with stakeholders to ensure that the Regional Transport Plan (RTP) reflects the issues and needs of those living and working in the SWWITCH region. There have been more than fifty consultation sessions or workshops during the development of the RTP. These events gathered opinions from a wide range of participants, from technical colleagues in local government to transport operators, key stakeholders and members of the general public. Consultations began in June 2006 and were completed in December of 2008.

F1.2 While the driving force for consultation in the RTP was to produce a well-informed, targeted plan, SWWITCH also considers it to be an invaluable tool for appraisal assessments to be conducted under the Welsh Transport Planning and Appraisal Guidance (WelTAG) framework. WelTAG requires that all transport plans and projects are developed in a bottom up approach, and recommends that consultation is one tool by which this can be achieved. The consultation process undertaken by SWWITCH expresses commitment to the WelTAG approach to planning.

F1.2 This appendix will focus upon the various means of consultation and partnership working that has been employed to inform and direct the development of the RTP, as follows:

• Email • Newsletter • Research into Public Transport Satisfaction • Citizens’ Panel • Formal Consultation sessions

Further stakeholder engagement processes are described in more detail in separate appendices as follows:

• SWWITCH Travel Pattern Research – Appendix E • SWWITCH Strategic Level Accessibility Assessment – Appendix J

F2.0 EMAILS, WEBSITE AND NEWSLETTER

F2.1 As well as specific workshops, SWWITCH has also used a range of other means to engage with partners. A number of smaller consultations were done via email predominantly with stakeholders whom had attended previous consultation sessions, or with those unable to attend the workshops. This was considered to be an important tool to collate the views of those who could not communicate directly through the public consultation sessions.

F2.2 An informal extension to this method of contact was the use of the SWWITCH website which hosts a monthly poll relating to a range of transport issues. Whilst the results are not in any way scientific, they are recorded and the dominant opinions have been recognised and assessed against the results of other more structured engagement exercises.

29 F2.3 SWWITCH publishes a quarterly newsletter, which reports on the latest progress in the development of the RTP. This is considered to be important to keep partners informed of the latest issues affecting the RTP and the direction in which it is developing. The newsletter also reports on major developments in transport across the region, such as new infrastructure and services. The newsletter was distributed at consultation sessions, and other SWWITCH related functions, as well as being available from the SWWITCH website.

F3.0 PUBLIC TRANSPORT SATISFACTION SURVEYS

F3.1 In 2005 SWWITCH commissioned a study into attitudes of existing public transport users in the region. The study was published later that year and the findings demonstrated a general satisfaction with public transport provision and performance, but did highlight areas in need of attention such as the need for investment in rolling stock.

The major findings showed that of those people already using bus services in the region the majority were regular users, as shown in Figure F1, however in stark contrast the use of trains was far more irregular on the whole. Figure F1 – Frequency of Public Transport Use

100% 15 Everyday / almost 50 12 75% everyday 11 2-3 times a week

50% Once a week

50 Less often than 61 once a week 25% 10 10 0% Bus Train

Figure F2 – Satisfaction with train service and bus service

100% 12 29 75% Very Satisfied Fairly Satisfied 51 Neither 50% 46 Fairly dissatisfied Ve ry Dissa tisfie d 17 25% DK 14 11

8 7 0% 3 Bus30 Train F3.2 The survey also confirmed that the users of public transport were broadly satisfied with many aspects of public transport (See figure F2). The respondents were asked about frequency and reliability of public transport services, as well as the issues such as the condition of bus stops and railway stations and the ease of movement for the passenger travelling with large or heavy items. The figures demonstrate the overall satisfaction with bus and rail services.

F3.3 Whilst the survey demonstrated overall satisfaction with the public transport services in the region it does highlight areas for improvement, such as the provision of information. The results also demonstrate which are the dominant public transport modes and they inform which mode may be most effective to serve new development sites.

F4.0 CITIZENS’ PANELS

F4.1 Local authority Citizens’ Panel surveys have been used to record public opinion regarding transport. These surveys demonstrated the dominance of car use, particularly with regard to Swansea City Centre and other urban areas.

F4.2 Citizens’ Panel surveys are performed differently and at different times in each of the four constituent SWWITCH local authorities. This makes it difficult to analyse and compare the results across the region. These surveys have however been useful for raising awareness about the RTP and getting residents thinking about the transport and access issues and priorities.

F5.0 FORMAL CONSULTATION

F5.1 The RTP guidance outlines a clear structure for the development of the plan. This structure was applied to the formal consultation programme to ensure continuity of approach and to ensure that the consultation output relates specifically to the evolving plan. The structure is set into seven separate sections which follow on in sequence as shown below. A five tier approach to partnership working was adopted in the early stages of the RTP development in order to specifically facilitate the bottom up approach: • Key Stakeholders • Political Arena • Stakeholder groups • General Public • Neighbouring consortia

The consultation process, which is shown in Figure F3.

F5.2 The consultation methods identified above were conducted in addition to this formal phase of consultation, but all of the views were collated and considered.

F5.3 Analysis of Transport Problems and Opportunities - This initial stage of consultation set out to establish the issues which the RTP would address. This provided an informed basis on which to begin the partnership working and gave a flavour for the predominant transport problems and opportunities. The various groups identified 105 problems and 49 opportunities for development.

31 Figure F3 – Consultation process

Identification of Problems & Opportunities

C

Identification of Regional Priorities O

N

S Option Identification & Development U

L

Long Term Strategy T

A

Strategy Development & T Appraisal

I 5 Year Programme O

N

Monitoring Framework

F5.4 Those present at the consultation sessions were separated into smaller groups of approximately six to eight people. These groups were then asked to identify the problems with transport in the region at present and list them. On completion the groups were then asked to propose opportunities which might be used to enhance transport or remedy the problems identified in the initial exercise.

F5.5 A number of common issues were raised by different groups; the most frequently raised issues and how they helped to shape objectives and key priorities are shown in Chapter One of the RTP (paragraph 1.43) The complete list is included as Appendix L.

F5.6 Option Identification and Development - In March of 2007 SWWITCH undertook a consultation phase to determine the major strategy directions to be implemented in the RTP. The intention was that the options identified should direct the strategy development. This was considered to be helpful in pursuing the bottom-up approach endorsed by WAG, because it moved from looking at the broad problems and opportunities across the region and sought to compile overarching mechanisms to guide the development of the RTP.

32 F5.7 The initial phase of problem and opportunity identification demonstrated how diverse the region is, with a wide range of issues. It was felt that this should be acknowledged in the approach to the option identification and therefore for the purposes of this phase the SWWITCH region was split into three areas; City Centre, Urban and Rural. These areas have very specific problems and issues which arise from distinctive geographic and demographic make-ups and provided the basis for a sufficiently strategic approach.

F5.8 Those present at the option generation sessions were split into smaller groups of approximately ten to ensure that there was a good representation from across the region. Each of these groups were assigned either the City Centre, Key settlements or Rural areas and asked to consider the appropriateness of seven strategy options and their ability to remedy the transport issues for the specific area. The seven options were:

ƒ Car is King: This scenario considers developing a strategy and programme to support and encourage car use, including additional car parking and road capacity. ƒ Hearts & Minds: This scenario considers developing a sustained pro active campaign relating to the promotion of more sustainable travel, for example car sharing and cycling, and the reduction of non-essential travel. ƒ Demand Restraint: This option would actively discourage, and indeed potentially penalise, car use. Measures could include road user charging, increasing car parking charges and the reallocation of road space in favour of bus services, cycling and pedestrians. ƒ Planning the Future: This scenario would be achieved predominantly through a more integrated approach to land-use planning, with new developments designed and located to reduce the need for the private car and encourage the use of more sustainable transport. ƒ Public Transport Rules: This scenario would focus on developing improved public transport services, including park and ride, express services and enhanced interchange and ticketing facilities, which would attract current car users. ƒ Mix & Match: This option recognises that a mixture of strategies is needed to improve access and transport in a diverse region such as South West Wales.

F5.9 This phase of consultation was carried out in partnership with a range of representatives from both the public and private sectors. The strategy scenarios were used to provoke group discussion, the outputs of which were recorded. The groups were encouraged to discuss how each of the strategy elements might be used to combat the problems identified in the preceding consultation phase. The discussion included the measures that could be used and their appropriateness and from this it was decided whether or not the option would help to achieve the draft RTP objectives. The responses to each of the scenarios from the groups were reviewed and used to produce Figure F4 overleaf.

F5.10 The conclusion of this phase was that no single strategy approach could address all of the issues found in South West Wales, and so the most appropriate response would be to take a mix and match approach, incorporating aspects of a number of strategies.

33

Figure F4 – Option Identification Results

12

10

8

6

4

2

0 Car is King Hearts & Demand Planning the Public Mix & Match Minds Restraint Future Transport Rules

City Urban Rural

F5.11 Long Term Strategy, development and appraisal - SWWITCH undertook 14 consultation workshops to obtain the views of partners on the long-term strategy. The workshops were conducted not only with transport professionals but also with public representatives and various fora with interests in transport, such as Access Groups.

F5.12 The groups were presented a range of potential long term strategy elements which they were asked to prioritise according to their importance in terms of achieving the RTP objectives, over the next 15 – 20 years. The groups were also given the opportunity to create additional elements if they felt that there was a topic of importance which was not covered by one of the original elements. The predefined elements presented to the groups for prioritisation were:

1. Strategic Bus Corridor 2. Demand Management (Restraint) 3. Park & Ride 4. Improving Transport Interchange 5. Strategic East/West road links 6. Road Safety Improvements 7. Travel Planning 8. Rail Enhancements 9. Improved Information/Travel Awareness 10. Maintenance of roads, cycleways, footways etc 11. Land Use Planning Integration 12. Local Road Development 13. Innovative passenger transport development

34 14. Development of Ports & Shipping 15. Improved linkages between main centres 16. Development of walking and cycling infrastructure 17. Improved integration between modes 18. Integrated ticketing developments 19. Sustainable freight (Rail/Shipping/Cleaner fuels, vehicles) 20. Parking strategy development

F5.13 Participants were asked to prioritise the strategic elements using a diamond ranking matrix; each tier of the matrix was weighted, and given a quantifiable score for each element.

F5.14 The final output from the long term strategy phase of consultation comprised the combined scores for each of the elements for all stakeholder sessions. The top priority would receive 100 points while the second tier elements would both score 35 (totalling 70) and so on through the matrix.

F5.15 The long term strategy consultation demonstrated that the overwhelming majority of the partners wanted the RTP to ensure integration of transport and land-use planning. A frequent comment was that the lack of cohesion between the transport and land use planning systems is causing a number of problems.

E5.16 Other strategy elements to score highly during this phase of consultation focused on the development of interchanges, road safety, maintenance of existing infrastructure, road safety initiatives and strategic bus corridors. The output from the collated scores of all these sessions is shown in Figure F5.

F5.17 5 Year Programme - The elements of the long term strategy along with the RTP themes and objectives were used to inform the consultation phase of project appraisal. This phase was undertaken in late 2007 and was the first period of consultation where partners were given the opportunity to comment and suggest specific projects for development in the RTP programme. There was again, as with all phases of the SWWITCH consultation, a concerted effort to work in partnership with a range of stakeholders from across the region in order to take account of local issues and opportunities.

35 Figure F5 – Long Term Strategy Element Ranking

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

e y c t e s t s e s s g et n d t g ort es n f et e nk les) ing itie ink d ation s m ntres i p L sp r Sa e nning pment L p bil ncern op o d gement hi chan o an teg d way l c Pla l a sa r r Service chemes n n l ovements elopmen to e s I ntercha ot Information ve r Roa , Vehic & s Di g I Roa fo e & serviceseve tween mop t Park & Ride velopmens s h /Rural n r D g ave De e m s Dev Man e el t ive t n ntal C rt s, u in r y b d d u or e ravel ni ct en mai T d p nt wi m ism & T t n po ay e ov eg n We a an ng s n r t Rail I t/ o i Urba w nsport development m et t of ince er mpr a l R k l viro Tou Trans cle I Eas a De ic Us Cross Bord \ Stra egratio cia r En en Transport for all mo g cy s g t c oc n North/South Road Links ge betws In gi L fo e d Use Pla a e ted t na ovin ds, n te a i an r a ic Bus Corridorink e a r ping/Cleanervelopmen F F betw L p o g l r Parkin g p e Im f r d Str D o ve Inte Access nks of conceissionary e & walking infrastru Awa li c Strate l r Sustainable Impro (Rail/Shi nan tension e Trave Bette ight Ex ing Innovative passenger tr e Maint is e Fr Ra bl ina a st Development of cycling Su

36

The views of internal technical colleagues from the constituent local authorities, key stakeholders and also public representatives from a number of fora were obtained at a number of sessions.

F5.18 The groups were asked to put forward project ideas which could be undertaken and developed through the RTP. In order to assess these early suggestions the groups were asked to perform a simple appraisal process to assess the suitability of the schemes put forward. This initial process of appraisal identified the project performance against social, economic or environmental impacts.

F5.19 Stakeholders were given advice about the measurement of the social, economic and environmental impacts and asked to consider each project’s ability to deliver on: Social: ƒ Equality ƒ Access to healthcare ƒ Access to education and training ƒ Access to a range of healthcare

Economic: ƒ Access to work ƒ Good internal and external connectivity ƒ Reliable journey times ƒ Access to tourist attractions

Environmental: ƒ Reduction in greenhouse gas emissions linked to transport ƒ Reduction in impact of transport on biodiversity ƒ Reduction in impact of transport on the landscape

The projects were assessed against these criteria using a five point score to indicate the scale of impact: ++ project will make have a very positive impact + project will have a slight positive impact N project has a neutral impact – project has a slight negative impact – – project has a very negative impact

Following the assessment of the projects against this process the groups were given an opportunity to either eliminate projects that had performed particularly poorly against the appraisal mechanism, or conversely to prioritise projects or schemes which had performed well or indeed had exceeded expectations.

F5.20 Figure F6 below shows the results of the appraisal process. Over 300 projects generated through this phase of consultation were assessed and the results have been grouped into categories. The figure shows in a percentage bar graph how these categories scored in the process, for example the economic element of the demand restraint category scored significantly poorly, while rail scored very well in terms of its economic impact.

37

Figure F6 – Results of the Appraisal Process grouped

Positive Neutral Negative

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% n n c v oc nv on oc nv nv co S E c Env con nv co l Socl Env E Soc Econ S E Soc E con t Sot En l E y y E E n n ai et y as as e Rai R king ng et et as Bus BusSoc Env Rai tur ges Soc Bus Econ al Saf Saf alki Saf e Idee Ide ruc ructure iv iv e Ide ructure chan & Walking& W oad iv & W oad oad ast ter ng ng R R fr n nterchanges E ess Raising Soc ng R In Infrast I I nterchangesicketing/Fares E Soc ess Raising Econ & & novatnovat Infrast I Ticketing/Faresen Env & In In novat T Ticketing/Fares Econen emandemand Restrai Restrai CycliCycliycli In D D C ent ent Demand Restraint Econ ent AwarAwareness Raising Env Awar anagemanagem M anagem M M c fic ffi f fic a a f Tr a Tr Tr

F6.0 A MONITORING FRAMEWORK and ANALYSIS OF CROSS CUTTING ISSUES

F6.1 These sections of the RTP have not formed distinct elements of the consultation process, but feedback from the consultation workshops has fed into these sections of the plan.

38

APPENDIX G – CURRENT TRANSPORT ISSUES IN SOUTH WEST WALES

G1.0 INTRODUCTION

G1.1 Demand for transport is dependent on numerous external factors. For reasons of geography, population density and the centralisation of services and facilities for example, residents in South West Wales have become very dependent on the private car.

G1.2 The following sections summarise the key issues in respect of :

• Road Traffic • Road Safety • Car Ownership and Use • Public Transport

G 2.0 ROAD TRAFFIC

G2.1 The SWWITCH road network is extensive and is set out in Table G1 overleaf. However, traffic volumes continue to increase in the region as shown in Table G2 and this puts considerable strain on parts of the network, particularly at peak times.

G2.2 “Statistics for Wales” data indicate that the cumulative traffic growth in South West Wales is 18.4% over the 10 years to 2006. This is more than the overall cumulative growth in Wales over the same period of 15.2%. This hides wide local disparities with traffic volume growth in Neath Port Talbot almost double that of Carmarthenshire.

G2.3 The growing volume of traffic is causing pressures on the road network. Over a number of years insufficient resources to carry out proactive maintenance on highways and transport infrastructures have resulted in a huge backlog throughout the region. The situation is being addressed through partnership with WAG and the Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA). Nevertheless, it will take many years to get the networks into a more acceptable condition and reduce delays and unreliability across the network for freight and bus operators, as well as car drivers and passengers.

G2.4 The Wales Spatial Plan (WSP) groups have identified journey time reliability as a key issue in external connectivity and aspirations to secure internal investment in the region. Many single carriageway trunk roads for example have few overtaking opportunities and therefore traffic speeds are restricted. This is further exacerbated by roads works and traffic collisions. High traffic volumes can lead to congestion in urban areas as well as on motorways and at strategic road junctions. This congestion results in unreliable journey times and the M4 motorway at Port Talbot is an example of this all year. The situation is compounded in the summer when there is increased traffic volumes associated with visitors and tourists, the A40 west of St Clears being a particular example.

G2.5 Increasing volumes of traffic also contribute to air pollution, visual intrusion, community severance, noise, vibration and carbon emissions. This is of particular

39

concern in urban areas and for residents in all areas who live adjacent to busy roads and interchanges.

G2.6 SWWITCH commissioned work to develop a regional assessment to estimate the current levels of congestion and to highlight the key pressures on links and junctions in the region. The work is based on existing data and outputs include :

• A review of existing literature and research on traffic flows, congestion and links/junctions • An analysis of existing traffic/transport counts to assess the extent of current congestion on the SWWITCH area road network • Looking ahead to the future, and based on a “no change” scenario (with current transport growth and investment patterns continuing) assess how congestion will affect the network in 2013 and 2018

G2.7 Further detail on the methodology and outputs from this body of work are set out at in Appendix H. However, the main conclusions of the work are as follows:

• There are a number of measures which can be used to assess the level of congestion, all of which are based around the capacity of the link or junction and the volume of traffic using it at a particular time. Based on the data available in the region a speed flow curve method was adopted • In terms of the strategic link assessment, the M4 corridor is identified as where the greatest congestion currently occurs, other links and junctions were: • The A4138 between the M4 and Llanelli • Links within Carmarthen and Llanelli town centres • Links within Haverfordwest town • All radial routes into Swansea City Centre • The A4067 (Swansea to Swansea Valley) • The A465 (from M4 up Neath Valley) • Junctions on the A4216 Cockett Road corridor • A4076 Merlin’s Bridge junction in Haverfordwest • A4139/Top Road junction • M4/A465 (Llandarcy interchange) • A474/A4230 (Cwrt Herbert) junction • A4216 from A4067 to A483 (Cockett Road corridor)

G3.0 ROAD SAFETY

G3.1 There is public concern in South West Wales about road safety and road traffic collisions. Whilst across the region there is a downward trend in serious injuries as a result of road traffic collisions (see Table G3), this masks significant variations across the region and also year on year. There are also concerns about specific issues including:

40

Table G1 – South West Wales Road Network1 Authority Road Length in Kilometres

Motorway Class A Class A Class Minor surfaced Total (Trunk) (County) B & C

Carmarthenshire 5 147 247 1,579 1,496 3,474 Neath Port Talbot 19 25 114 114 576 848 Pembrokeshire 0 120 157 1,217 1,052 2,546 Swansea 15 0 102 227 732 1,076 Regional total 39 292 620 3,137 3,856 7,944

Table G2 – South West Wales Road Traffic Volumes and Cumulative growth 1997 – 2006 Volume of Road Traffic (Billion Vehicle Kilometres) Cumulative growth Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Area

Carmarthenshire 1.65 1.66 1.64 1.64 1.63 1.72 1.75 1.76 1.79 1.86 12.7% Neath Port Talbot 1.07 1.07 1.10 1.11 1.14 1.18 1.21 1.26 1.28 1.31 22.4% Pembrokeshire 0.91 0.92 0.95 0.97 0.96 1.00 1.02 1.03 1.05 1.09 19.8% Swansea 1.43 1.46 1.51 1.51 1.54 1.62 1.64 1.69 1.70 1.73 20.8% SWWITCH 5.06 5.11 5.20 5.23 5.27 5.52 5.62 5.74 5.82 5.99 18.4% Wales 24.18 24.49 24.91 24.87 25.25 26.20 26.59 27.31 27.28 27.85 15.2%

1 Welsh Assembly Government (2007) – Statistics for Wales web pages

41

Table G3 - South West Wales Road Traffic Casualties by Authority and Severity in Comparison with the 1994 - 98 average2 Authority Casualties by type and year

1994-8 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 % difference average in 2006 from 94/98 average

KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S% % Carmarthenshire 153 446 155 421 137 473 136 448 125 478 130 509 90 501 85 506 -45 13.4 Neath Port Talbot 39 411 50 376 45 368 53 357 45 380 27 360 47 403 61 380 44 -7.6 Pembrokeshire 90 290 96 287 94 270 95 286 93 325 80 361 62 320 78 330 -13.3 13.8 Swansea 57 851 58 684 57 752 59 703 64 762 64 777 84 739 89 805 43.9 -5.5 SWWITCH region 339 1998 359 1768 333 1863 343 1794 327 1945 301 2007 283 1963 313 2021 -7.7 1.2%

Table G4 – Casualties per 100k population by type of road user and severity 2003 and 20063 Authority Pedestrians Pedal Cyclists Motorcyclists Car.Taxi. minibus All road users

KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S KSI S 03 06 03 06 03 06 03 06 03 06 03 06 03 06 03 06 03 06 03 06 Carmarthenshire 9.1 7.9 27.3 30.3 5.1 1.7 15.9 7.3 8.0 7.9 18.8 24.7 65.4 41.0 326.8 323.5 93.2 61.8 419.4 440.9 Neath Port Talbot 9.6 15.3 56.9 38.7 2.2 2.2 12.6 16.8 7.4 12.4 8.9 13.1 15.5 21.9 280.1 318.9 36.2 53.3 390.9 417.4 Pembrokeshire 12.0 6.0 31.8 28.1 3.4 2.6 9.5 9.4 18.9 16.2 17.2 27.3 69.6 51.2 348.2 348.7 107.5 86.1 434.1 442.5 Swansea 12.0 11.0 53.9 60.3 1.8 3.1 8.9 18.5 6.2 10.1 18.7 22.5 10.2 18.9 357.9 376.1 32.5 45.8 471.4 510.0 SWWITCH region 10.7 10.1 42.5 39.4 3.1 2.4 11.7 13.0 10.1 11.7 15.9 21.9 40.2 33.3 328.3 341.8 67.4 61.8 429.0 452.7

*KSI – Killed or Seriously Injured *S – Slight Casualties

2 Statistics Wales, Welsh Assembly Government: 2006 Road Casualties Wales 3 Statistics Wales, Welsh Assembly Government: 2006 Road Casualties Wales

42

G3.2 • The continuing unacceptable level of casualties involving young inexperienced drivers and young pedestrians in the region • Increases in reported “Slight” casualties on rural roads in Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire • Increases in “Killed or Seriously injured” (KSI) casualties in Swansea and Neath Port Talbot

G3.3 The United Kingdom Government’s Road Safety Strategy4 established targets for casualty reduction to be achieved by 2010. These were adopted by WAG in the Road Safety Strategy for Wales5 and are to be measured against the 1994 – 1998 average as a baseline:

• 40% reduction in the total number of people killed or seriously injured (KSI) • 50% reduction in the total number of children killed or seriously injured (KSI) • 10% reduction in the rate of slight casualties per 100 million vehicle kilometres travelled

G3.4 Significant resources have been invested in road safety education, engineering and enforcement over the last ten years, including measures to: • Increase awareness, highlighting dangers and encourage more responsible use of roads and footways, including the development of innovative packages targeted at schools and youth groups across South West Wales • Reduce excessive speed and increase speed awareness through traditional traffic calming measures as well as the use of variable message signing • Develop closer partnerships with the Police through a review of the Safety Camera Partnerships to facilitate better joint targeting of specific problems

G3.5 Table G4 shows the road Casualties per 100,000 of population and compares data from 2003 and 2006. This indicates that with the exception of motorcyclists, KSI trends are reducing in the region. However, there are significant variations across the region, particularly in Swansea and Neath Port Talbot.

G3.6 Slight casualty rates are less variable. Apart from those involving pedestrians (where there is an overall regional reduction which masks variations between local authority areas) every other category of road user has seen an increase in the rate of slight casualties.

G3.7 In April 2009, the Department for Transport announced a consultation on a new Road Safety Strategy for Great Britain, A Safer Way, for the period up to 2020. The document focuses particularly on improving safety on rural roads and on pedestrians in urban areas. New targets are proposed on: • Reducing road deaths by at least 33% • Reducing serious injuries by at least 33% • Reducing road deaths and serious injuries to children and young people by at least 50% • Reducing the KSI rate per km travelled by pedestrians and cyclists by at least 50%

G3.8 There is still clearly a strong need to continue and develop work on road safety. This will inform new generations of road users and tackle issues associated with

4 Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (2000), Tomorrow’s Roads – Safer for Everyone 5 Welsh Assembly Government (2003), Road Safety Strategy for Wales, Crown Copyright 43

advancing age and mobility impairment, for example through concerted campaigns on specific behavioural problems and the development of technology to aid enforcement and traffic calming mechanisms.

G4.0 CAR OWNERSHIP AND USE

G4.1 The increases in car ownership and use over the last 30 years have been associated with the reduction in the real cost of private motoring (see Table G5 page 47), the increasing centralisation of services and facilities and the development of out of town employment, health care, leisure and retail centres. Car ownership varies widely across South West Wales. Generally there is higher ownership in rural areas, often because a car is considered essential to achieve access to services and facilities and to lead a full and active life. In contrast car ownership is much lower in the urban south and east of the region where in some wards almost half of households have no access to a car.

G4.2 People with cars are able to travel and take advantage of better employment and training opportunities, a wider range of retail and leisure options and maintain social and family contacts more easily. People without access to a car who do not live within close proximity to a frequent and reliable public transport service have fewer choices and are potentially more excluded.

G4.3 SWWITCH carried out extensive Travel Pattern Research in 2006/07 to determine how people in the region currently travel to and from activities and services. The project involved more than 2000 households in the region completing seven day travel diaries. The results of the surveys were weighted to ensure that the conclusions are statistically valid at the regional and local authority level. More detail on the outcomes of this research is included in Appendix E, and it was also one of the building blocks for the analysis of problems and opportunities and the long term strategy development. Table G6, based on the Travel Pattern Research, shows the modal split for journeys to work in South West Wales in comparison with the national data.6

G4.4 The table shows a remarkable degree of consistency across the region with only minor variations explained by the availability (or lack) of public transport in some areas. In comparison with the national averages there is a significantly higher proportion of commuting journeys made by car and fewer journeys by train or bicycle.

Table G6 – Modal Split for Journeys to Work

Area Car Car Train Bus Walk Cycle Motor Other driver passenger cycle Carm’shire 74% 9% 1% 5% 6% 1% <1% 4% N’th Port Talbot 73% 4% 1% 7% 12% <1% 1% <1% Pembrokeshire 72% 8% - 3% 17% - <1% - Swansea 72% 10% 1% 5% 10% <1% <1% 2% SWWITCH 73% 8% 1% 5% 11% <1% <1% 2% Wales 61% 9% 6% 7% 11% 3% 1% 2%

6 Department for Transport (2005), National Travel survey 2004, Transport Statistics Bulletin

44

G5.0 PUBLIC TRANSPORT

G5.1 The public transport network broadly matches the population distribution. There is generally more penetration and higher frequency rail, long distance bus and coach and local bus services in the south and east and less frequent and attractive service options in the north and west of the region.

As for the whole of the UK, all rail services in South West Wales are franchised. However, in South West Wales with the exception of First Great Western Swansea to Paddington services, all services are subsidised by the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG), with Arriva Trains Wales currently holding the franchise. With the exception of the Traws Cambria service, long distance bus and coach services are all operated commercially. The vast majority of bus services in the more urban east and south of the region are commercially operated and bus services to the more rural west and north are, in most cases supported by the local authority.

G5.2 The rail network in South West Wales comprises:

• South West Wales Main Line – Port Talbot to Clarbeston Road • Milford Haven Line via Haverfordwest • Pembroke Dock Line from Whitland • Fishguard Harbour Line • Heart of Wales Line – Swansea, Llanelli, Shrewsbury

G5.3 The weekday pattern of passenger services is:

• South Wales Mainline - an hourly Inter City passenger service between Swansea, Cardiff and London Paddington; an hourly service between Manchester and Carmarthen via Cardiff, which extends every two hours to Haverfordwest and Milford Haven and a two-hourly local stopping service between Swansea and Cardiff • The Pembroke Dock line is served by a two hourly service to Swansea • The Fishguard Harbour line is served by two trains a day from Cardiff or Swansea • The Heart of Wales Line by four trains a day.

G5.4 SWWITCH prepared a Rail Strategy in 20027 and updated this with an Addendum in 20058. The Addendum sets out current demand and forecasts for the future demand for rail travel, highlighted constraints and proposed a methodology for removing constraints and developing a better rail service for South West Wales. This earlier work provided the impetus for:

• Partnership working with WAG and Network Rail to investigate the potential for re-doubling the single line section of track west of Swansea and the development of a business case to enhance rail services to reap the benefits of re-doubling • The establishment of the South West Wales Community Rail Partnership and the feasibility work on enhancing rail services to Fishguard and Goodwick • Ongoing work through the Heart of Wales Line Forum to secure additional train services and create a more attractive and sustainable service for the future.

7 SWWITCH Regional Rail Strategy (July 2002), Atkins 8 SWWITCH Rail Addendum Study (October 2005), Atkins 45

G5.5 Improvements to rail services within and beyond the region are critical to delivering the Wales Spatial Plan (WSP) aspirations and to creating an attractive and viable transport option for medium and long distance journeys.

G5.6 Patronage on the South West Wales rail network grew by 11.4% between January 2001 and December 20049. Growth continued with the introduction by Arriva Trains Wales of the Standard Pattern Timetable from December 2005, with improved travel options and frequencies to and from Carmarthen. This resulted in an increase of 11% (to the west of Pyle), between 2005 and the beginning of December 200610. Patronage on journeys in West Wales, operated by Arriva Trains Wales, grew by 4.8% in the first nine months of 200711.

G5.7 The bus network across the region serves a variety of functions from:

• Very local connections to district centres • Town services • Links to strategic employment sites • Inter urban services

G5.8 Services in the east of the region are dominated by a small number of large regional bus operators and the west of the region by a number of smaller bus operators. Many smaller operators focus on the provision of school or limited shopper services. Partly because of this, there is very limited commercial competition between bus operators in the region and the number of tenders received for local authority supported bus service contracts has generally reduced whilst contract prices have risen12. This reflects the increasing costs of bus service operation (fuel, staff, insurance etc) and the takeover of many smaller bus companies by a small number of large public transport providers.

G5.9 Bus patronage has grown by approximately 10% across the region since 200113, but this is due largely to the increasing use of bus services by concessionary pass holders who now travel free of charge. This growth has sustained some previously poorly performing services and in a few cases resulted in additional services or improved frequencies. Generally, there are no indications that the non-concessionary market is increasing or that the growth is due to modal shift.

G5.10 Public Transport fares have risen in real terms above the rate of inflation as shown in Table G5 overleaf.

G5.11 This table shows that whilst over the ten year period private motoring costs fell by almost 8% in real terms, the cost of rail fares rose by over 5% and of bus fares by 13%. This data highlights the access inequity where, in comparison with motorists, who have better, more convenient access and whose costs have risen at less than the rate of general prices in real terms, public transport users and in particular bus users continue to face real terms increases in fares.

9 Same source as 8 10 South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium (2006), notes from SWWITCH Joint Committee Meeting December2006, City and County of Swansea 11 Arriva Trains Wales (September 2007) Report to SWWITCH Joint Committee 12 Association of Transport Co-ordinating Officers (2005) Local Authority Bus Contracts: ATCO Price, Expenditure and Competition Survey 2005 13 First Cymru (2006) Justin Davies, Managing Director First Cymru Ltd - Meeting with SWWITCH December 2006 46

Table G5– Comparison of cost increases from 1996 – 200614 in the United Kingdom

Costs associated with 1996 2006

All costs 100 129.7 Private motoring 100 119.0 Rail Fares 100 136.3 Bus Fares 100 146.6

G5.12 The WSP priorities for all the areas included within the region place great emphasis on improving the range, penetration and quality of bus services connecting key settlements and their residents to employment, education and training, health care and leisure and social facilities.

G5.13 A long distance bus and coach service network operated on a commercial basis by National Express links the main centres of population in South West Wales. The network provides limited opportunities for travel within the region as they are designed specifically to provide long distance through links to other Wales and UK destinations. The main routes are:

• Service 201 – Swansea to Heathrow / Gatwick Airport (approximately two hourly) via Port Talbot, Cardiff and Newport • Service 202 – Swansea to Heathrow Airport (approximately two hourly) via Cardiff and Bristol • Service 322 – Swansea to Hull via Birmingham - one return journey per day with an additional return journey on Fridays and Sundays between Swansea and Birmingham • Service 508 – Haverfordwest to London (two journeys in each direction per day) via Milford Haven, Pembroke Dock, Carmarthen, Swansea, and Port Talbot with an additional daily return journey between Llanelli and London via Swansea, Neath and Chepstow • Service 528 – Haverfordwest to Blackpool – one return journey per day via Pembroke Dock, Tenby, Carmarthen, Swansea, Birmingham and Manchester.

G5.14 A strategic link is also provided between South, West and Mid Wales by the Traws Cambria service X40. This is a partly subsidised service, operated by Arriva and First Cymru which provides hourly connections on a Monday to Saturday between Carmarthen and Aberystwyth via Aberaeron, Lampeter and Pencader. A limited Sunday services is provided by one journey in each direction between Cardiff and Aberystwyth.

G6.0 OTHER TRANSPORT SERVICES AND FACILITIES

G6.1 The freight industry is a valuable contributor to national and local economies. In Wales it is estimated15 that people employed in logistics activities account for up to 7% of employment (around 61,000 people are employed in logistics companies, with a further 30,000 in logistics roles for other organisations) and there are some 7,400

14 Office of National Statistics, (2007), Transport Statistics Great Britain 15 Wales Freight Strategy, WAG 2008 47

logistics workplaces in 2,400 logistics companies. In 2002 SWWITCH commissioned a Freight Strategy16. This included:

• An investigation into the characteristics of freight flows by all modes to, from and through the area and forecasts of future freight flows • The development of a strategy and actions to facilitate a more sustainable distribution system in the region

As well as providing a valuable insight into the nature and scale of commercial freight operations, this commission involved engagement with a wide range of freight operators, many of whom had never previously been involved in the development of forward planning of facilities and services outside of their own businesses.

Headline facts on freight movements in SWWITCH included:

• 26,047,696 tonnes of freight was moved by road, 50% of this remained within the region and 90% of the road freight was moved less than 250kms • 8,044,000 tonnes of freight was moved by rail, most of this was coal and steel

G6.2 The Phase Two report proposed a regional freight strategy which included road and rail infrastructure enhancements, protection for areas suitable for potential freight activity and the establishment of freight quality partnerships and better monitoring of freight operator licensing.

G6.3 In 2006, as part of early preparation of the RTP, SWWITCH commissioned an update of the freight forecasts and a summary of the Phase One data and forecasts is included as Appendix G. The key issues are that:

• Rail freight up to 2015 is expected to remain stable, with a reduction in coal flows matched by an increase in flows of metal • Road freight up to 2015 is expected to grow, but at a lower rate than the growth of goods moved, suggesting improved management and efficiencies

Increasing road based freight traffic in South West Wales has two main impacts; the road network which is already subject to congestion at many junctions at peaks and inter peak, will become more congested without improvements or increased capacity and this will lead to journey time unreliability and increased costs to industry.

G6.4 The four main ports in the region are Fishguard Harbour, Milford Haven, Swansea and Port Talbot as shown in Figure 1.4 of the RTP. The four ports are part of the Trans European Network for Transport (TEN-T). The ports are an important part of the supply chain network and are all in commercial ownership. Key statistics are:

• Milford Haven - is a natural deep water harbour that facilitates the movement of large oil and gas tankers to the UK from a range of world destinations. It is the largest UK energy port and is vital for ensuring strategic energy supplies. In the 2002 Freight Study Milford Haven Port handled almost 34m tonnes of cargo. Irish Ferries provide roll on roll off (RoRo) services from Pembroke

16 MDS Transmodal and Atkins, (July and December 2002), SWWITCH Regional Freight Study Phase One and Two

48

Dock to Rosslare in southern Ireland. In 2004, more than 67, 000 cargo truck units used the port (in both directions).

• Fishguard Harbour- Stena Line provide RoRo links to Rosslare in Ireland from Fishguard and in 2004 more than 44,000 cargo truck units used the port (in both directions).

• Swansea - handles general cargo and until recently there was also a ferry service to Cork in Ireland. In 2002 just over 1m tonnes of cargo used the port of Swansea.

• Port Talbot - this port is strategically important in terms of the import of steel and in 2002 more than 11m tonnes of cargo passed through the port.

G6.5 There are commercial and public sector aspirations for all the ports in the region. These range from infrastructure enhancements (road links, rail links, passenger facilities and cargo handling), to increasing the range and quantity of cargo and attracting cruise liners and the lucrative trade associated with passenger shore trips.

G6.6 SWWITCH places great emphasis on the role that these ports play in supporting the regional and national economies and continues to work with the port operators, WAG and other organisations to enhance access to them and links with the TEN-T networks. Schemes include new access roads at Pembroke Dock and Fishguard Harbour, SA1 highway access at Swansea and the Peripheral Distributor Road at Port Talbot.

G6.7 There are three airports in the region, Swansea, Pembrey and Withybush in Haverfordwest. None of these currently has any scheduled services and they are generally used for flying schools, by small private planes and helicopters and could be further developed to serve business and leisure niche markets.

49

APPENDIX H – MAPPING TRAFFIC FLOWS AND CONGESTION IN SOUTH WEST WALES

H 1.0 INTRODUCTION

H1.1 The objective of mapping congestion flows and the Baseline Review phase of the study is summarised in section G2.6 and below: • To review the existing literature and research in relation to traffic and congestion at and between links and junctions • To undertake an analysis of transport/traffic count data to calculate the extent of congestion on the South West Wales road network • To provide input to the Regional Transport Plan (RTP) development

H1.2 The Study considered the following key information: • Traffic flows on Trunk / Principal roads by mode of travel • The impact of traffic flows on journey time reliability • Travel purpose by mode • Modal split into urban areas • The scale and modal split of the school run; and • Seasonal effects on traffic flows

H2.0 WHAT IS CONGESTION AND HOW IS IT CALCULATED?

H2.1 A summary of potential measures or indicators currently used are: • The Congestion Reference Flow (CRF) may have relevance as an overall headline figure • The Department for Transport (DfT) indicator of average delay for slowest 10% of trips requires more data than is feasibly available • Speed-Flow curves allow an assessment to be made for peak hour, and seasonal conditions, where detailed journey time information is unavailable • The congestion indicators used in the USA may be useful and can potentially be explored when the data set is complete

H2.2 For the majority of links to be included in the study, the only data available was link flows. Therefore, the measure that provides a necessary level of detail, whilst being technically feasible, was the ‘speed-flow curve’ method.

H2.3 Traffic flows were compared to the flow at the breakpoint (that is the point at which the flow of traffic has an impact on the speed or the threshold at which traffic conditions deteriorate) for each link to provide a measure of the level of congestion on the link. For the purposes of the study, the light vehicle speed-flow curves were calculated. This calculation takes account of heavy goods vehicle proportions. It is also possible to calculate heavy goods vehicle speed-flow curves, however this additional level of complication was considered unlikely to provide significant insight beyond the analysis of the light vehicle speed-flow relationship.

H3.0 ESSENTIAL DATA

H3.1 The extent of data that is already available from the Local Authorities (LAs), the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) and DfT is: • Permanent and temporary Automatic Traffic Counts (ATC’s)

50

• Manual Traffic Counts (MCCs) • 2001 Census and National Travel Survey information • Modal split cordon surveys at the edge of urban areas and • School mode split travel data collected from surveys of pupils

H3.2 Many of the measures or indicators require a substantial amount of data. In particular, journey time data is a prerequisite for the DfT indicator of average delay. There was only a limited supply of journey time data available and this was not available for 15 minute time periods, or for each day of the year. However, the analysis needs to be able to reflect the following: • Seasonal variations • Peak period flows • Directional flows • Road characteristics

Therefore, a balance was made in using data that enabled a detailed analysis whilst not being too onerous for the LAs to produce.

H4.0 THE PROCESS ADOPTED

H4.1 The data supplied by the LAs was subsumed within a master spreadsheet, which incorporated the relevant data. These data was supplemented by road attribute data at this stage: • Length of link that is represented by the ATC site • Cost Benefit Analysis (COBA) Classification of link type

H4.2 Traffic flow data were requested from the LAs for all strategic links in the region. However, the available data does not cover all links in the assessment either because there were no ATC counters on the link, or because counters were faulty. A number of assumptions have been made to provide results with an uninterrupted network of strategic road links. In general. Professional judgement was utilised to assess whether it is realistic to apply a flow for a neighbouring link on to the missing link.

Table H1 - Road Classes and Descriptions Road Class Description 1 Rural Single Carriageway 2 Rural all-purpose dual 2-lane Carriageway

3 Rural all-purpose dual 3 or more lane Carriageway 4 Motorway, dual 2-lanes 5 Motorway, dual 3-lanes 6 Motorway, dual 4 or more lanes 7 Urban, Non-central 8 Urban, Central 9 Small town

10 Suburban single Carriageway 11 Suburban dual Carriageway

51

Figure H2 - Flow Diagram for ascertaining Road Class

The link type was entered into the spreadsheet for each row of data.

ATC Site

Is the link in a No Yes built-up area?

No Is it a motorway? Is the link in Swansea/Neath/ Yes Port Talbot or Llanelli? Yes

No

Is it a small- No town link?

Is the link in How many lanes? How many lanes? How many lanes? the CBD?

1 2 3+ 2 3 4+ No Yes Yes 1 2+

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Where numbers refer to road classes shown in Table H1

H4.3 The inclusion of the link type enabled the flow at the breakpoint for each link to be calculated. Comparing this value to the actual flow on the link provides the measure of congestion. Table H3 below provides the definition of how the breakpoint and traffic flow relate to the assumed level of congestion.

Table H3 – Breakpoint Flow and Congestion levels

It should be noted that even if the traffic flow is at 150% of the breakpoint, vehicles may well move relatively freely along a given link, albeit more slowly than if the flow was reduced. Also, the level of service experienced if the traffic flow is approximately equal to the breakpoint may be similar to the level of service of the road with no traffic at all. The purpose of applying these levels of congestion is to provide a broad 52

relationship between the standard of road and the number of vehicles using it. This enables the method to be used as a strategic tool to identify areas where the supply of road space is, or may soon be, insufficient when compared to the demand made on it.

H5.0 ANALYSIS OF RESULTS

H5.1 The Whole Area • Levels of congestion across the region reach a maximum level of that indicated by the “high” threshold • The most congested areas being the M4 corridor and a number of heavily- trafficked routes in the urban centres of the region

Carmarthenshire • In general, the link assessment shows congestion to be at its worst at certain links in Carmarthen and Llanelli • Apart from links in these towns, the A4138 between the M4 and Llanelli is highlighted as the link most prone to congestion

Neath Port Talbot • The M4 and adjacent links, the A4067 and A465 are the most congested • Tidality on the A4067 and A465 suggest that traffic into Swansea and accessing the M4 corridor creates much of the congestion on these routes

Pembrokeshire • Two links in Haverfordwest are prone to congestion at peak times

Swansea • The most consistently congested part of the road network in the Swansea area is the M4 corridor • There is a level of tidality visible, particularly to the west of junction 46 on the M4 corridor, and for radial routes into Swansea

H5.2 Forecast rates of growth (2006-2013)

Figure H1 (page 54) shows a comparison between forecast rates of growth based on actual growth for strategic roads in the SWWITCH area over the last 5 years (in yellow), NRTF, factored using the Department for Transport TEMPRO program (in red) and TEMPRO factors, as used in the assessment (in blue).

53

Figure H1 – Comparison of forecast and actual rates of growth 1.5

1.4

1.3

1.2

1.1

1

0.9 A477 -A477 Kilgetty A40 -A40 Felinwen A40 -A40 Llandeilo A48 -A48 Cwmgwili A40 -A40 Goodwick A487 -A487 Llantood A40 -A40 Bancyfelin A483 -A483 Llandybie A40 -A40 Llandovery A40 -A40 Manordeilo A40 -A40 LlanwrdaE A48 -A48 Llangunnor A40 -A40 Llanwrda W A477 -A477 E.of Carew A477 - Roses A477 Red A477 -A477 W.of Carew A40 -A40 Whitland BP A40 -A40 Wolf's Castle A487 -A487 DinasCross A40 -A40 Llandovery W A40 -A40 Llandeilo NBP A477 -A477 Sageston BP A487 -A487 S.of Cardigan A465 - A465 N.of Llandarcy A40 - ofA40 W. St. Clears -A40 Fishguard WBP A477 -A477 E.of Pembroke A465 -A465 N. of Resolven A4076 -A4076 S.of Johnston A4076 -A4076 N.ofJohnston A40 -A40 Llanddewi Felfry A465 -A465 S.ofAberdulais A48 -BP A48 CrossHands A483 -A483 S.of Ammanford A465 -A465 N. of Aberdulais A483 -A483 N.ofAmmanford A40 -A40 RobestonWathen A40 - Havefordwest IRR - Havefordwest A40 A48 -A48 E. of Cross Hands A40 - Havefordwest EBP - Havefordwest A40 A483 -A483 Ffairfach,Llandeilo A4076 -A4076 Haverfordwest SBP A40 -A40 Carmarthen Section C A487 - A487 Fishguard (OldTown) A483 - ofA483 N.of S B4297 Pont Abraham A40 - Carmarthen EBP (S.- A40 Carmarthenof EBP Tanerdy) A40 - (S.A40 Carmarthen of EBP Pensarn) 2006 - 2013 TEMPRO/NRTF TEMPRO

54

H6.0 ASSESSMENT OF JUNCTIONS

H6.1 This sets out the methodology for providing a strategic assessment for junctions in the south West Wales area. This junction assessment provides an estimation of the level of service (LOS) at which each junction performs. The assessment is at a level of detail consistent with the link data. Indeed the link data is to be used as the main source of data for the assessment.

H6.2 Overview of Approach - It was initially anticipated that modelling a small number of junctions using either ‘stand-alone’ or more sophisticated models, would deliver the understanding of existing junction delay required for this commission. However, the costs of modelling each junction, and the lack of models and / or survey data for certain critical junctions are prohibitive to such a traditional modelling approach. Furthermore, the use of such a highly quantified approach to link delay is more strategic, would also lead to incompatibility in the methodology and its recommendations.

In the light of these issues the approach to junction assessment has been to combine a technical understanding of the capacities of a range of junction types, with the local knowledge of the current extent of delay at the junctions to be assessed.

H6.3 The approach uses headline information from each junction, such as: • The number of arms • The number of lanes on junction approaches • The link flows approaching the junction

Each junction is assigned an LOS – colour-coded in a way that is consistent with the representations of links. The LOS are defined as: • No congestion in peak or off peak – light green • Limited congestion during peak periods but not in off peak – orange • Frequent congestion in peak periods with some in shoulder periods – red; and • Chronically congested throughout peak periods and adjoining shoulders – purple

There are three main types of junctions, roundabouts, priority junctions and signalised intersections, which are considered to have characteristics different enough to need to be assessed separately.

H6.4 Roundabouts - These have been split into four sub-categories, because the relationship between flow and level of service is different for each sub-category. They are:

• Small 3-arm roundabouts • Small 4+ arm roundabouts • Large 3-arm roundabouts • Large 4+ arm roundabouts

Where small is considered to be predominantly single lane approaches and large is considered to be predominately dual approaches.

H6.5 Priority Junctions - In an approach similar to roundabouts, priority junctions are split into four subcategories

55

• Small 3-arm priority junctions • Small 4+ arm priority junctions • Large 3-arm priority junctions • Large 4+arm priority junctions

A small junction has a single carriageway main road. A large junction has a dual carriageway, with wider minor roads.

H6.6 Signalised intersections - These junctions are more complicated as the interaction between side and main road flows is also influenced by the cycle times and phasing of each particular junction.

As a result, a method similar to the roundabout and priority junctions is unlikely to produce results. Therefore, a meta-analysis was carried out on all of the OSCADY mode runs available from a variety of projects carried out over the last few years.

H7.0 RESULTS OF JUNCTION ASSESSMENT

H7.1 Table H4 on page 57 and 58 illustrates the junction assessment.

H7.2 The results highlight the following points:

• There are no junctions in Carmarthenshire that are shown to have an issue with congestion, however, a number of junctions could not be assessed through lack of data. • Of the junctions assessed in Neath Port Talbot, the following junctions are subject to frequent congestion in the peak periods; Junction 43 of the M4 and A474/A4230 (Cwt Herbert) roundabout. • In Pembrokeshire, there are two junctions in which the traffic appears to exceed junction capacity thus resulting in congestion; The Merlin’s Bridge roundabout is a known congestion hotspot and therefore, the results for this junction are unsurprising; the other junction in Pembrokeshire that this analysis suggests is potentially congested is the A4139 / Top Road junction (Pembroke Dock). • Swansea has a great number of junctions with congestion issues; the most congested area is the A4216 Sketty Lane/Vivian Road/Cockett Road route from Mumbles Road to Fforestfach Cross. This is probably a function of the large volume of traffic, and relatively low capacity of junctions. • Other parts of Swansea may have higher flows than the A4216, but in general have a greater road junction capacity, and alternative routes, which make potential congestion less likely.

56

Table H4 Junction AM 2006 AM 2013 AM 2018 PM 2006 PM 2013 PM 2018 Id Authority Junction Description Type LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS

J37 CCC R4S B4304 Trostre Road / A4138 2 2 2 2 2 2 J39 CCC R4L A48/A484 Pensarn, Carmathen 1 2 2 1 1 1 J40 CCC R3L A40 Coracle Way, Carmathen 1 1 1 1 1 1 J50 CCC R4S Sandy Roundabout - A484 Sandy Road / B4304 1 1 1 1 1 1

J13 NPT R4L M4/A465 (j43 Llandarcy) 3 3 3 3 4 4 J15 NPT R4L A48 (T) / A4241 / M4 sliproads (Sunnycroft) 1 1 1 1 1 1 J17 NPT R3S A474/A4230 (Cwrt Herbert) 3 3 3 3 3 3

J1 PCC P4S A4139/B4322/C3154 Top Road Juntion 1 1 1 3 3 3 J2 PCC R3S A40/C3061/A4076 Salutation Square Roundabout 1 1 1 1 1 1 J3 PCC R4S Churnworks A487/W2163/W2222/B4330 1 1 1 1 1 1 J4 PCC R4S Horsefair A487/W2246/W2216/W2131 1 1 1 1 1 1 J5 PCC R4L A477/A478 Kingsmoor Roundabout 1 1 1 1 1 1 J6 PCC R3L Bridgend Square Roundabout A40/A487/B4329 1 1 1 1 1 1 J7 PCC R4S A4075/A4139 East End Square 1 1 1 1 1 1 J8 PCC P3S A477T/A4139 Ferry Lane Junction 1 1 1 1 1 1 J9 PCC R3S Waterloo Roundabout A477/A4139 1 1 1 1 1 1 J10 PCC R4S Prendergast Roundabout A40/Fishguard Road 1 1 1 1 1 1 J11 PCC R4S A40/A478 Penblewin Roundabout 1 1 1 1 1 1 J12 PCC P3L A477/A4075 T Junction (Carew) 1 1 1 1 1 1 J41 PCC S_S Merlins Bridge Roundabout 4 5 5 5 5 5

J18 SCC S_L A4067/A483/A4217 (Tawe Crossings) 3 3 3 3 4 4 J19 SCC S_L A483/A4118/B4489/B4603 (Dyfatty Junction) 2 3 3 2 2 3 J20 SCC R4L M4 Junction 46 (Southern part) 1 1 1 1 1 1 J21 SCC S_L M4 Junction 47 4 4 4 3 3 3 J22 SCC S_L M4 Junction 45 (A4067 north arm) 3 3 3 3 3 3 J23 SCC S_S A48/B4603 Woodfield Street (Morriston x) 2 2 2 2 2 2 J24 SCC R4L A48/Upper Fforest Way 1 1 1 1 1 1 J25 SCC S_S A48/A4217 Nantyffin Rd (Llansamlet Square) 3 3 3 4 4 4 J26 SCC S_L A4067/Sketty Lane 2 2 2 2 2 2 J27 SCC S_S B4489/Heol Ddu 3 3 4 3 4 4

57

Junction AM 2006 AM 2013 AM 2018 PM 2006 PM 2013 PM 2018 Id Authority Junction Description Type LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS LOS

J28 SCC S_S A4216 Cockett Road/ B4295 Cwm Bach Rd 5 5 5 5 5 5 J29 SCC S_S B4489/Cwm Level Road (Brynhhyfryd Square) 3 3 3 3 3 3 J30 SCC S_S B4295/B4296 (Gowerton x) 2 2 2 2 2 2 J31 SCC R4S A4067/B4291 Birchgrove Road 1 2 2 2 2 2 J32 SCC R4L A4067/A48 (Wychtree Roundabout) 1 1 1 1 1 1 J33 SCC R4S A48/A4240 Penllergaer Roundabout 1 1 1 1 1 1 J34 SCC S_L A483/Gors Avenue 1 1 2 1 2 2 J35 SCC S_S A4216/Gors Avenue 4 5 5 5 5 5 J36 SCC P3S B4489 Llangyfelach Rd/Pentre Mawr Road 5 5 5 5 5 5 J42 SCC R3L A484 / Pontardulais Road 1 1 1 1 1 1 J43 SCC S_S Sketty Cross 5 5 5 5 5 5 J44 SCC R4S Normandy Roundabout 2 2 2 1 1 1 J45 SCC R4S White Rock Roundabout 1 1 1 2 2 2 J46 SCC R4S Martin Street Roundabout 3 3 3 3 3 3 J56 SCC S_L A4216 Station Rd/A483 Carmarthen Rd 1 1 1 1 2 2 J57 SCC S_S A483 Carmarthen Rd/Kingsway signals 5 5 5 5 5 5 J58 SCC R4L A483 Carmarthen Rd/Middle Rd (Cwmbwrla R/Bout) 1 1 1 1 1 1 J59 SCC S_L A483 Pontardulais Rd/Ffordd Cynore 1 1 2 2 2 2 J60 SCC S_L A483 Fabian Way/Port Tennant Rd/SA1 signals 1 1 1 1 1 1 J61 SCC S_L A483 Fabian Way/P&R signals 1 2 2 1 2 2

58

H8.0 CONCLUSIONS OF THE WORK

H8.1 The principal conclusions of the study are that whilst much valuable data already exists there are a number of gaps in the existing information that is collected by LAs and SWWITCH.

H8.2 In summary these gaps are:

Traffic flows on Trunk / Principal roads by mode of travel: traffic counts on roads in the Afan and Dulais valleys (Neath Port Talbot); some rural routes in Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire and turning movements at the eleven M4 motorway junctions The impact of traffic flows on journey time reliability: information on free flow and ‘congested’ traffic conditions on the main routes into Swansea and on the holiday routes into Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire Travel Purpose by mode: comprehensive data on travel patterns by all modes of travel for all journey purposes Modal split into urban areas: mode split information for Neath, Port Talbot and the central area of Swansea The scale and modal split of the school run: information on mode split at schools that do not have a travel plan or safe routes to school scheme Seasonal effects on traffic flows: traffic flows on minor roads to coastal destinations in Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire

H8.3 A programme of additional surveys have been proposed as follows:

• Additional temporary traffic counts to plug the geographical gaps in the ATC programme • Car and bus journey time surveys in order to measure the impact of traffic flows on journey time reliability • Motorway junction surveys in order to assess traffic flows on Trunk / Principal roads by mode of travel • Cordon counts in order to assess modal split into urban areas • Additional traffic counts to plug the geographical gaps on the local holiday routes in order to measure the seasonal effects on traffic flows

H8.4 The above surveys are only based on relatively short term needs and in the medium to longer term there is a need to consider developing more cost effective and technically robust solutions that automate some of the data collection surveys, in particular:

• Installation of permanent ATC sites at 10 of the sites identified for the temporary surveys • Use of GPS data from ITIS Holdings Ltd to measure journey time reliability

59

APPENDIX J - STRATEGIC ACCESSIBILITY ASSESSMENT

J1.0 VISION FOR ACCESSIBILITY ACROSS THE REGION

J1.1 The SWWITCH vision is “To improve access to a wide range of facilities and services through better planning and co-ordination of service delivery and by improving access and the range and quality of transport choices across the region.”

J1.2 It is important that the term ‘accessibility’ in the context of the Regional Transport Plan (RTP) is clearly understood. In essence, it is peoples’ ability to get to the key services that they need – either by being able to travel to a service or by a particular service being available where it is required. Accessibility is not just about transport, it is about the location, design and delivery of services.

J1.3 Accessibility is an important strand within the Wales Transport Strategy (WTS) and is a key element underpinning all cross sector pan-Wales strategies. As part of the development of the RTP SWWITCH recognised that in order to formulate an action plan to realise this vision it would need to gain an in-depth understanding of the current accessibility position across the South West Wales region.

J1.4 SWWITCH therefore undertook a Strategic Level Accessibility Assessment (SLAA). This involved a detailed examination of the opportunities and constraints facing those who wish to gain access to key essential services located within the south west Wales region as well as recognised strategic destinations further afield.

J1.5 Key destination types for the purpose of this assessment include education, employment, health, food retail and tourism and leisure. Groups identified for analysis include those with existing support needs and so considered most vulnerable to social exclusion - young people, elderly people, people with mobility restrictions, people with low incomes, people in areas of deprivation and people in households with no access to a car.

J1.6 The strategic assessment incorporated an accessibility mapping audit of the region using the Accession™ accessibility planning modelling software. It was further informed by analysis of consultation responses, detailed geo-demographic analysis and a review of all relevant policy and evidence available. The SLAA therefore provides a robust evidence base for the development of the RTP.

J2.0 STUDY OVERVIEW J2.1 The five key components of the strategic assessment included: a policy and evidence review, analysis of demographic data, accessibility mapping audit, consultation and partnership working. Each element is discussed briefly in turn below.

60

J2.2 Policy and Evidence Review The policy and evidence review was undertaken to identify how accessibility and the RTP complements the wider vision and objectives of SWWITCH. The review considered the key issues and objectives extracted from local, regional and national policy and strategy documents and their linkage to the strategic accessibility assessment, with references to land-use planning, transport networks and services, information and communication technology (ICT), partnerships, appraisal and monitoring, and the key service sectors including education, health, employment, leisure and social services.

J2.3 Analysis of demographic data This identified areas with concentrations of people at risk of social exclusion and has assisted SWWITCH in prioritising areas for action. To understand accessibility problems requires a full understanding of peoples’ residential locations and the locations of the services and facilities which they might seek to use. Data from the 2001 Census and the 2005 Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation (WIMD) was used to identify potential constraints and limiting factors affecting accessibility to key services.

J2.4 The population of the SWWITCH region totals over 659,000, representing 22% of the population of Wales. Around half (55%) of the population is concentrated in the predominantly urban Swansea and Neath Port Talbot authority areas that cover just 17% of SWWITCH land area. Population densities are typically low, with most of the region having a density of less than one person per hectare, reflecting its essentially rural nature. In contrast, there are areas of high population concentrations, reflecting the differing locations - city centre, towns and villages, as illustrated in the population density map, Figure J1.

J2.5 The demographic mix includes a broadly older population than in other parts of Wales, with almost 19% of people being over 65, compared to just over 17% for Wales as a whole. There are clear similarities and correlation between areas with a high proportion of people with low income and areas of high population density, low car ownership and high indices of multiple deprivation (IMD), particularly within the larger settlements of Swansea, Llanelli, Neath and Port Talbot. There are also high proportions of people with low income in Milford Haven and Pembroke Dock.

J2.6 People without access to a car are one of the groups of people that may suffer from social exclusion as a result of not being able to access key services easily. This may be of particular relevance if service provision locally is limited, or for areas that are poorly served by public transport. The level of households in the region without a car is similar to that in Wales as a whole at 26%.

J2.7 Figure J2 shows the spread of households without a car across the region. Rural areas in the region have high levels of car ownership; indeed less than 10% of households in most rural locations do not have access to a car compared to over 30% in urban areas.

61

Figure J1: Population Density in the SWWITCH Region (Persons/Ha)

Figure J2: Proportion of Households with no Car

62

J2.8 Households without access to a car experience, proportionately, a greater level of accessibility to key destinations by public transport than the average household this is due to the fact that households without access to a car tend to be located closer to public transport routes or nodes. The majority of the region can access key opportunities and services in a relatively short journey time by car. Areas experiencing longer journey times by car include the extreme northeast of the region, western Gower and St David’s Head.

J2.9 Accessibility mapping audit The approach to the accessibility mapping audit has followed the guidance developed jointly by the Welsh Assembly Government and the four Regional Transport Consortia. The guidance includes a common set of data inputs, parameters and procedures in undertaking strategic assessments.

J2.10 The key tool used to undertake the mapping audit was the Geographical Information System (GIS) accessibility tool, ‘Accession™’. This package evaluates accessibility by assessing journey times from points representing people’s homes (origins) to points representing the places that people need to get to (destinations) by a given mode (type of transport). The package is very effective in terms of allowing comparisons to be made between different destinations, geographical areas and times of day/days of week.

J2.11 The package allows time and cost contour maps to be produced to identify barriers to access to core services including education, employment, health care and food retail. Threshold calculations for geo-demographic groups can identify accessibility to key services for deprived groups or identify areas of social exclusion.

J2.12 Mapping Outputs There are 3 key outputs to the accessibility assessment: Journey time contour intervals - contour maps demonstrate basic accessibility indicated by journey time contours from the study area to the nearest destination in the assessment concerned. The maps contours are plotted with thresholds at 10, 20, 30, 45, 60, 90 and 120 minutes Thresholds Calculations – the package has been used to calculate the population of the geo-demographic groups within defined journey time thresholds at 30, 60, and 90 minutes Continuous Measures – For assessing the representative employment sites, a further continuous measure has been carried out assessing accessibility from every origin point to all employment sites. The continuous measure produces results as accessibility values or scores rather than journey times

J2.13 Mapping Observations The mapping exercise has demonstrated that accessibility to key centres and important facilities including hospitals and adult education is reasonable at a strategic level across the SWWITCH area, with bus networks providing journey opportunities into urban areas along many interurban routes. There are, however, some significant, predominantly rural, areas that are not well linked. Some towns remain isolated from key opportunities, services and facilities as they are either inaccessible by public transport or require long journey times to reach these activities. The following towns experience no, or poor, accessibility

63

to many key destinations: Llandovery, Llandeilo, Newcastle Emlyn, Fishguard and St Davids. Strategic assessments of accessibility can sometimes disguise locally important issues including the topography of an area as well as time and cost issues related to the delivery of essential services at key facilities. Similarly, whilst accessibility to the main centres and key strategic facilities may be reasonable, some of the journey times can be long and restrict the practical ability to make essential journeys.

J2.14 It is important to note that whilst the Accession™ accessibility mapping audit provides a good strategic overview of the level of access to key services by general public transport, it is unable to represent the real life situation exactly.

J2.15 Consultation This was undertaken using draft mapping in a workshop format to inform key partners about accessibility and to provide a better understanding of local problems, issues and needs. It was also useful in determining priorities and actions. This is particularly the case when key services/facilities are distant from some of their catchment population. A particular example can be seen in the locations of main hospitals, where four of the six main sites in the SWWITCH area are located in Swansea and Neath Port Talbot. The other two sites are some 40km and 90km west of Swansea respectively.

J2.16 Partnership working This ongoing process is essential to inform key partners and stakeholders and will provide opportunities to create links to non-transport sectors and to identify possible partnering arrangements through which future objectives can be delivered.

J3.0 OUTPUT UTILISATION

J3.1 In the first instance the RTP accessibility modelling will be used as a lobbying tool to disseminate accessibility issues to a wider audience and to encourage integrated policy making to improve the recognition of transport impacts in cross-policy decision making.

J3.2 SWWITCH has prioritised the accessibility issues based on the mapping and consultation as shown in Table J1 below. A number of ‘theme-specific’ accessibility objectives are proposed as follows: • Access to further education, particularly for people on a low income and young people in rural areas • Access to employment opportunities particularly for young people and those on a low income • Access to healthcare, particularly from rural areas for elderly people and people with long-term limiting illnesses.

64

Table J1 – Prioritising Accessibility Issues Service or Accessibility in Rating Priority Facility Area with worst access Worst affected for Group Action

Further or Rural areas in north and far west of Young People and Medium High Higher SWWITCH those on low Education incomes

Employment Rural areas and central and northern Low income Medium High Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire Young People /Good Those with Limiting long term illness

Health • All hospitals – Carmarthenshire and Older people Poor/ Medium Pembrokeshire Those with Limiting Medium • Main hospitals – Rural areas long term illness • GP surgeries – Rural areas

Food Retail • Supermarkets – Rural areas Those with Limiting Medium Low • Local Centres – Rural areas long term illness /Good

Leisure Dependent on individual destination Older People Good Low activities Young People

J4.0 MONITORING PROGRESS

J4.1 SWWITCH will monitor the outcomes of measures introduced to improve accessibility. The WTS has set a number of core indicators which relate to the measurement of accessibility and these will be developed in conjunction with the Wales Transport Monitoring Plan. In addition SWWITCH will develop a series of specific accessibility indicators within the region to cover those objectives not covered by national indicators and which relate to regional and local issues.

J5.0 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

J5.1 SWWITCH has devised a series of priorities and actions for the SWWITCH region. Whilst this provides an overview of accessibility problems, issues and priorities, it may not provide sufficient detail to allow the development of all detailed options or actions at a local level. To achieve this, accessibility issues will be examined and reviewed throughout the life of the RTP. Where necessary, it will require the development of local accessibility assessments to consider the outcomes of strategic assessment in more detail. It is also essential to raise awareness of the issue of accessibility requirements for people in the region, to ensure that accessibility concerns are at the forefront of cross-sector decision-making processes.

J6.0 STRATEGIC ACCESSIBILITY MAPPING ANALYSIS

J6.1 The Figures J3 to J12 give an illustration of differing levels of accessibility within the

65

region to: • Further/Higher Education • Workplace Locations • Hospitals • Supermarkets (greater than 1400 sq m) • Key Visitor Attractions

They also provide a comparison between the level of accessibility enjoyed by those with access to a private car and those reliant on public transport.

J7.0 SUMMARY

J7.1 Significant parts of Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire are of a semi-rural nature, characterised by areas of small villages and hamlets connected by low-grade, unclassified roads. Many of these settlements are too small to individually support key services, subsequently creating a need for access to these services elsewhere. Access to them is not satisfied by the supply of public transport services resulting in residents either using cars or not travelling at all.

J7.2 Urban areas generally have key services located within their respective boundaries, or include satisfactory public transport links to enable their residents to access key services in neighbouring urban areas. Some towns, however, remain isolated from key opportunities, services and facilities as they are either inaccessible by public transport or include long journey times. The following towns experience no, or poor, accessibility to many key destinations: Llandovery, Llandeilo, Newcastle Emlyn, Fishguard and St David’s. J7.3 Households without access to a car, proportionately have a greater level of accessibility to key destinations by public transport than the average household. This is because households without access to a car tend to be located closer to public transport routes or nodes. However, there remain a proportion of households with no car that either cannot access key services by public transport or are subject to a journey time of greater than 90 minutes. This population can be considered ‘socially excluded’. The exact number differs depending on destination.

J7.4 Access to healthcare-related destinations varies according to the nature of the facility. More locally focused places such as GP surgeries and ‘all’ hospitals (which includes all the main ‘district’ and local ‘cottage’ hospitals) are typically accessible within 1 hour by public transport for 80%-90% of the population of South West Wales. However, for main hospitals this figure is around 70%. There are significant settlements in the region with poor or no accessibility to main hospitals at the time modelled. The majority of the region can access key opportunities and services in a relatively short journey time by car. Areas experiencing longer journey times by car include the extreme northeast of the region, western Gower and St David’s Head.

66

Figure J3 - Accessibility to Further & Higher Education by Public Transport

Figure J4 - Accessibility to Further & Higher Education by Car

67

Figure J5 - Accessibility to Workplace Locations by Public Transport

Figure J6 - Accessibility to Workplace Locations by Car

68

Figure J7 - Accessibility to all Hospitals by Public Transport

Figure J8 - Accessibility to all Hospitals by Car

69

Figure J9 - Accessibility to Supermarkets >1400 sq m by Public Transport

Figure J10 - Accessibility to Supermarkets > 1400 sq m by Car

70

Figure J11 - Accessibility to Key Visitor Attractions by Public Transport

Figure J12 - Accessibility to Key Visitor Attractions by Car

71

APPENDIX K - KEY SETTLEMENT CONNECTIVITY REPORT

K1.0 INTRODUCTION

K1.1 The Wales Spatial Plan (WSP) was originally adopted by the Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) in 2004 and a revised version was published in 2008. It sets out an agenda for integrating the investment necessary for the sustainable development and regeneration of communities over the next 20 years. In order to prioritise investment the WSP groups have defined a number of key settlements within each spatial plan area, for example as Tier 1, 2 or 3 settlements.

K1.2 The South West Wales region covers three WSP areas, namely Swansea Bay, Pembrokeshire Haven and Central Wales areas. The majority of SWWITCH work on the WSP has been on the first two of these areas.

K1.3 The key settlements hierarchy can be used to focus initial investment with a view to encouraging a cascade of funding to the lower tier settlements. Each WSP area has identified the need for improved transport to and between key settlements, so that the investment achieves the most efficient benefits.

K1.4 As part of developing the Regional Transport Plan (RTP) and to support the WSP aspirations SWWITCH has developed a series of “connectivity graphs” to demonstrate connectivity between the identified key settlements. The intention is to demonstrate the overall level of public transport connectivity, and therefore general accessibility, between the key settlements.

K1.5 In addition to the study of connectivity between the identified key settlements a separate study has been conducted into the connectivity of strategic employment sites. The strategic employment sites have been identified by the WSP groups as centres which are expected to be developed in the short-medium term. However, these sites are located, in many cases, in predominantly brownfield areas, which are often in a somewhat peripheral location in relation to the key settlement centres.

K2.0 USING THE GRAPHS

K2.1 The accessibility has been displayed in a non-conventional format, which helps to demonstrate a much larger amount of information in comparison with the same data shown in a more familiar bar graph.

K2.2 Each diagram shows connectivity from one location (a key settlement or a strategic employment site) to all the other key settlements in the SWWITCH region (i.e. the key settlements of Pembrokeshire Haven and Swansea Bay spatial plan groups). Also, each of the coloured lines on the radar diagram relate to a different type of transport provision to the key settlement:

K2.3 Thus: • Blue: This line represents overall accessibility in terms of the number of possible journeys via public transport, either as a direct service or as a

72

combination of two or more services. (Please note the limitations in section K8 below). • Red: This represents the number of available direct services to a location. • Green: This line represents the number of direct bus services • Orange: Finally the orange line represents the number of available direct train services.

K2.4 By displaying the results in this way a large amount of information can be displayed on one graph, and the level of connectivity demonstrated easily at a glance. Also by grouping key settlements geographically adjacent the graph can demonstrate an agglomeration of accessibility in a particular geographical direction.

K2.5 To demonstrate how the graphs show connectivity in as transparent a manner as possible the Swansea graph (Figure K1) is shown alongside two other more conventional methods to allow a direct comparison see Figure K2.

Figure K1

Swansea: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Haverfordw est 80 70 Porthcaw l/Pyle Milford Haven/Neyland 60 50 40 30 Maesteg Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 20 10 0

Port-Talbot Carmarthen

Neath Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli

Total Routes Direct Bus Train

73

K2.6 Compare the connectivity graph above with the series of figures which relate to the connectivity by public transport between Swansea and Neath in the table below. These figures can be seen mirrored in the spoke running from the centre of the graph to the rim labelled Neath. For example note that the green line, (direct bus services) dissects the spoke at the value 40. Please note that this graph demonstrates only Swansea connectivity to other key settlements, and not vice versa or between other key settlements.

K2.7 The same data from the radar diagram has also been demonstrated in the bar graph below and also a sample table to show that while it is possible to display the connectivity in this way, it is by no means as effective in emphasising the overall accessibility of a particular settlement.

Figure K2 – Traditional Expression of Connectivity

Swansea: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Services by public 80 transport: 70 Swansea to Neath 60 50 Total services 40 30 72 Direct services 20 72 10 Direct Bus 0 d k t n n s lli ot e s e d e lb teg yl 40 e la th n s w y a lan l/P e L Neath -Ta ae rd /N mar ssh rt o n roke Doc r o M aw Direct Train rf e b a P c e v C Cro a / rth Hav H rd Po 32 d ke/Pem nfo o Milfor Amma Pembr Total Routes Direct Bus Train

K3.0 CONNECTIVITY INDEX ASSESSMENT

K3.1 In addition to the connectivity graphs a Connectivity Index Assessment (CIA) is displayed next to each graph. This is to allow a direct quantified comparison between the settlements in reference to their connectivity. Swansea has the best overall connectivity of the Key Settlements, and therefore it is by the Swansea standard that the other Key Settlements are to be compared. Swansea should be considered as the baseline.

K3.2 The CIA is the total direct services (bus & rail) for a given key settlement expressed as a percentage of Swansea’s direct services (bus & rail). Swansea is considered to be 100% because it has the largest number of direct services (406). Direct services were chosen because of the limitations attached to the total services, such as the number of connecting services in some cases. Direct services therefore offer the truest representation of the connectivity.

K3.3 For example: Haverfordwest has 93 direct services which are 22.9% of

74

Swansea’s 406 direct services. Because the CIA is consistent throughout the report, for both the Key Settlement analysis and Strategic Employment sites, it allows for a direct comparison despite the difference in scale in the diagrams used.

These first series of radar diagrams demonstrate the connectivity between the key settlements of the Pembrokeshire Haven and Swansea Bay & Western Valleys spatial plan areas.

Table K1 – Ranked CIA

Key Settlement CIA

Swansea 100% Neath 56.9% Port Talbot 51.5% Llanelli 50% Carmarthen 29.3% Haverfordwest 22.9% Gorseinon 22.4% Milford Haven 17.2% Pontardawe 16.3% Ammanford 13.7% Pembroke 10.6% Maesteg 7.6% Fishguard 4.2% Porthcawl 2.7%

Strategic Employment Sites CIA

SA1 Waterfront 52.2% Baglan Energy Park Phase 1 43.1% Trostre/Pemberton 32.8% Crosshands Food Park 8.3% Coed Darcy 8.9% Felindre 1.2%

75

. Figure K3 – Swansea: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10 0

Neath Carmarthen

Llanelli Ammanford/Crosshands

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Pontardawe/Clydach Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Swansea CIA – 100% (Baseline)

76

Figure K4 – Haverfordwest: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Milford Haven/Neyland 80 70 Maesteg 60 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 50 40 30 20 Port-Talbot Carmarthen 10 0

Neath Ammanford/Crosshands

Swansea Pontardawe/Clydach

Llanelli Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Haverfordwest CIA – 22.9%

Figure K5 – Milford Haven/Neyland: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 50 40 30 20 Port-Talbot 10 Carmarthen 0

Neath Ammanford/Crosshands

Swansea Pontardawe/Clydach

Llanelli Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct) Milford Haven/Neyland CIA – 17.2%

77

Figure K6 – Pembroke/Pembroke Dock: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Port-Talbot 10 Carmarthen 0

Neath Ammanford/Crosshands

Swansea Pontardawe/Clydach

Llanelli Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Pembroke/Pembroke Dock CIA – 10.6%

Figure K7 – Carmarthen: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Port-Talbot 10 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 0

Neath Ammanford/Crosshands

Swansea Pontardawe/Clydach

Llanelli Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Carmarthen CIA – 29.3%

78

Figure K8 – Ammanford: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Fishguard/Goodwick

100

Porthcawl/Pyle Haverfordwest 90

80

70

60 Maesteg Milford Haven/Neyland

50

40

30

20

Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock

10

0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Pontardawe/Clydach

Llanelli Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Ammanford/Crosshands CIA – 13.7%

Figure K9 – Llanelli: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Port-Talbot 10 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Pontardawe/Clydach

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct) Llanelli CIA – 50%

79

Figure K10 – Neath: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10 0

Swansea Carmarthen

Llanelli Ammanford/Crosshands

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Pontardawe/Clydach

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Neath CIA – 56.9%

Figure K11 – Port Talbot: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Neath 10 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 0

Swansea Carmarthen

Llanelli Ammanford/Crosshands

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Pontardawe/Clydach

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Port Talbot CIA – 51.5%

80

Figure K12 – Maesteg: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest

80 70 Port Talbot 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Neath 10 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 0

Swansea Carmarthen

Llanelli Ammanford/Crosshands

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Pontardawe/Clydach Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Maesteg CIA – 7.6%

Figure K13 – Porthcawl: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Fishguard/Goodwick 100

Maesteg 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Port Talbot 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Neath Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10 0

Swansea Carmarthen

Llanelli Ammanford/Crosshands

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Pontardawe/Clydach

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Porthcawl/Pyle CIA – 2.7%

81

Figure K14 – Fishguard/Goodwick: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Haverfordwest 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Milford Haven/Neyland 80 70 Maesteg 60 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 50 40 30 20 Port Talbot 10 Carmarthen 0

Neath Ammanford/Crosshands

Swansea Pontardawe/Clydach

Llanelli Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Fishguard /Goodwick CIA – 4.2%

Figure K15 – Pontardawe/Clydach: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Port Talbot 10 Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct) Pontardawe/Clydach CIA – 16.3%

82

Figure K16 – Gorseinon/Penllergaer: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Fishguard/Goodwick 100 Porthcawl/Pyle 90 Haverfordwest 80 70 Maesteg 60 Milford Haven/Neyland 50 40 30 20 Port Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10 0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli Pontardawe/Clydach Total Routes Direct Bus (Direct) Train (Direct)

Gorseinon/Penllergaer CIA – 22.4%

K7.0 CONCLUSIONS

K7.1 There are a number of important conclusions to be drawn from this analysis:

• The most obvious (and perhaps unsurprising) finding is that universal connectivity to Swansea from the other Key Settlements is the best in the region • The Pembrokeshire Haven tier 1 settlements of Haverfordwest, Milford Haven/Neyland and Pembroke/Pembroke Dock, whilst having good connectivity with each other, have consistently some of the poorest levels of connectivity to the other key settlements. The peripheral aspect of the region is emphasised most acutely with Fishguard/Goodwick having the lowest overall connectivity. This peripherality is a reflection of the lower population density of the area which means it is difficult to serve the area with a good, cost effective public transport service • The key settlements with a mainline railway station have a much better connectivity. This is reflected in the low connectivity scores for Porthcawl (no rail service), Maesteg and Ammanford (no mainline services). • Settlements surrounding Swansea are well connected to its centre because of the concentrations of employment, retail and other social attractors • Key settlements do not always offer a full range of services and

83

facilities so even good connections to Swansea does not necessarily provide good access to health care, employment and leisure facilities etc. See Appendix J for the Strategic Level Accessibility project, which demonstrates accessibility to such services

84

K4.0 STRATEGIC EMPLOYMENT SITE CONNECTIVITY GRAPHS

K4.1 These graphs demonstrate the connectivity of the Strategic Employment sites to the Key Settlements in the two main WSP areas in the region. The major Pembrokeshire employment sites are located in its key settlements, which have been modelled in the preceding section of this report. (For the employment examples in the Pembrokeshire context please refer back to the Haverfordwest, Milford Haven & Pembrokeshire graphs)

K4.2 For the first graph shown below, for the SA1 Waterfront Development, a different scale has been used due to the relatively higher level of connectivity to this area in comparison with the other employment sites. The scale used for the SA1 Waterfront Development is so high that if used for all other Strategic Employment Sites the results would be unreadable.

Figure K17 – SA1 Waterfront: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements

Fishguard/Goodwick 160 Porthcawl/Pyle Haverfordwest 140 120 Maesteg 100 Milford Haven/Neyland 80

60

Pembroke/ 40 Port-Talbot Pembroke/PembrokePembroke Dock Dock 20

0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli Pontardawe/Clydach

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Total Routes Direct Bus Direct Train SA1 Waterfront CIA – 52.2%

85

Figure K18 – Crosshands Food Park: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 70 Porthcawl/Pyle Haverfordwest 60 50 Maesteg Milford Haven/Neyland 40 30 20 Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10

0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford

Llanelli Pontardawe/Clydach

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Total Routes Direct Bus Direct Train

Crosshands Food Park CIA – 8.4%

Figure K19 – Felindre: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 70 Porthcawl/Pyle Haverfordwest 60

50 Maesteg Milford Haven/Neyland 40 30 20 Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10

0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli Pontardawe/Clydach

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Total Routes Direct Bus Direct Train Felindre CIA – 1.2%

86

Figure K20 – Baglan Energy Park Phase 1: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 70 Porthcawl/Pyle Haverfordwest 60 50 Maesteg Milford Haven/Neyland 40

30 20 Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10

0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli Pontardawe/Clydach

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Total Routes Direct Bus Direct Train Baglan Energy Park Phase 1 CIA – 43.1%

Figure K21 – Coed Darcy: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 70 Porthcawl/Pyle Haverfordwest 60

50 Maesteg Milford Haven/Neyland 40

30 20 Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10 0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli Pontardawe/Clydach

Gorseinon/Penllergaer

Total Routes Direct Bus Direct Train

Coed Darcy CIA – 8.9%

87

Figure K22 – Trostre/Pemberton: Frequency of public transport to other Key Settlements Fishguard/Goodwick 70 Porthcawl/Pyle Haverfordwest 60

50 Maesteg Milford Haven/Neyland 40 30 20 Port-Talbot Pembroke/Pembroke Dock 10

0

Neath Carmarthen

Swansea Ammanford/Crosshands

Llanelli Pontardawe/Clydach

Gorseinon/Penllergaer Total Routes Direct Bus Direct Train

Trostre/Pemberton CIA – 32.8%

K5.0 CONCLUSIONS

K5.1 There are a number of conclusions to be drawn from the connectivity diagrams for the Strategic Employment Sites: • The SA1 Development has by far the best overall connectivity to the Key Settlements. This is due to a number of factors. SA1 is a mixed use development, close to Swansea City Centre and also adjacent to Fabian Way, a major bus corridor. Furthermore, SA1 has also made Travel Planning an integral and active part of its development process. The SA1 development is at an advanced stage of implementation and occupation and commercial bus operators have therefore been prepared to divert services through the site. At the other extreme is the Felindre site which at present has no development and therefore any provision of direct service could not be justified. • Overall the connectivity to these sites is low in comparison to the general connectivity between the Key Settlements. • Predominantly the strategic employment sites are located in brownfield sites. These sites tend to be somewhat peripheral and are poorly served by public transport. • A common trend is that the connectivity to the strategic employment sites is focussed mainly to the east of the region, with higher levels of connectivity to the settlements of Neath, Port Talbot, Swansea predominantly. • Baglan Energy Park Phase 1, which at present has good connectivity by

88

public transport, has few penetrating public transport services. However the Energy Park Phase 2 has a number of large developments which are either complete or nearing the end phase of construction. Neath Port- Talbot County Borough Council has recently moved to new offices within the Phase 2 area and has introduced new public transport services to serve this area directly.

K6.0 LIMITATIONS OF CONNECTIVITY GRAPHS AND ASSESSMENT

K6.1 The graphs are to be considered only as a tool and should be used as such. There are certain limitations to the use of these graphs which should be considered in their use: • The data used to create the graphs is a sample from a ‘typical’ Tuesday service (July 2008, 08:00 – 20:00) and therefore it accounts only for the services operating on this day and there will obviously be some minor variations throughout the week and year

• Some of the journeys included in the data require a number of connecting services, which would probably not realistically be used by the majority of the passengers due to inconvenience and uncertainty.

• Some of the key settlements highlighted by WSP groups have been jointly assigned: Pembroke/Pembroke Dock, Ammanford/Crosshands and Porthcawl/Pyle for example. In order to generate these diagrams one of the two in each instance were chosen, because of the need for a precise destination. Therefore the representative settlements for the jointly assigned settlements are:

• Fishguard/Goodwick: Fishguard • Pembroke/Pembroke Dock: Pembroke • Ammanford/Crosshands: Ammanford • Pontardawe/Clydach: Pontardawe • Gorseinon/Penllergaer: Gorseinon • Porthcawl/Pyle: Porthcawl • Trostre/Pemberton: Trostre

89

APPENDIX L – ANALYSIS OF PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES

Main issue Problems Identified By whom Opportunities Identified By Whom Vision/ • Need for clear hierarchy for transport 2 Develop regional political consensus 7 Objectives • More thought needed on determining need 3, 5 Assess real need through research 3 • Need to tie in with Community Plans 4 Planning • Poor linkages between transport and 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 Improve regional working, stop out of town 7, 8 /Economic economic development, planning developments Development • Insufficient use of development agreements 3 • Inaccessible developments 2,3, 4, 5 All new developments to have Travel Plans 7

Access issues • Poor access to range of retail services 2, 5 More Park and Ride for town centres 7 • Poor access by public transport to jobs 2, 4, 5 • Access to health care 2, 4, 5, 7, 8 • Lack of access in rural areas 4, 5 Develop community transport networks 3, 7 • More footway development needed 4, 5, 7, 8 • Access to leisure and tourism poor 5, 7 Use Community transport to plug gaps 3

Organisational • Lack of prioritisation in Wales 3, 7, 8 • Inconsistent approaches across Wales and 3, 7 Harmonise conditions of contract 7 region

Attitudes/ • Poor perceptions and pre conceptions about 2, 3 Consistent campaigns 3,7,8 Behaviours public transport • Real costs of driving unknown 3 Publish data 7 • Public inertia to change 3 Work regionally for culture change 7 • Need for national and regional campaigns 5

90

Main issue Problems Identified By whom Opportunities Identified By Whom Public • Increasing legislative requirements leading to 2 transport high costs general • Networks need to retain flexibility to adapt to 2 changing need • Quality of Public transport needs to be 2 developed sustainably • Lack of competition between operators 3 Encourage partnership approach 3 • Lack of willingness to take commercial risk 3 Re regulation 3,7,8 • Need much more community based transport 6 Strengthen Community Transport (CT) role 3,7

Bus services • Poor condition of bus stops 1, 3 • Frequency of bus services poor 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 7 • Poor reliability of bus services 1, 3, 4 • Difficult to travel with luggage etc 1 • Poor quality of vehicles 2, 3, 5, 8 Reduce emission levels of buses 7 • Lack of accessible buses 3, 7 • Drivers not trained on disability 3 3, 4, 7 Strengthen CT role 3,7 • Not enough evening, weekend services 4 • Better cross boundary services needed 5, 7, 8 Develop quality bus network 7 • More direct bus services needed 8 • Bus priorities needed 8 Re regulation 3,7,8 • Monopoly bus network

Train services • Poor reliability of train services 1, 3 Improve line speeds 3,7 • Frequency of train services poor 1, 3, 5, 7 • Trains carriages in poor condition 1, 3, 8 Investment in rolling stock 7,8 • Lack of staffed stations 3 • Lack of key business routes/times 3 • Address single line rail section 5 Redouble single section of line 3,7,8 • Poor, insufficient connections 7,8 Swansea parkway station 7

91

Main issue Problems Identified By whom Opportunities Identified By Whom Information/ • Not sufficient easy to use information 1,3, 5, 8 Develop consistent regional approach 7,8 Marketing/ • Poor marketing of alternatives to car 2, 8 Promotion • Insufficient or sustained promotion 2,3 • Poor information, before during and after 2 journey • Real time information development 5

Ticketing and • Lack of integrated ticketing 2, 8 Joint initiatives, one ticket for all 3,8 Fares • Public transport fares high 2,3, 4, 5, 7, 8 Free travel for young people 7 • Need for more innovative ticketing 3,8 One ticket for all transport 3, 7

Interchanges • Poor quality of interchange 2, 5,7, 8 • Quadrant Bus station 3, 7, 8 Build bus and train station together 3,7,8 • Bus Rail interchange poor 3, 8 • Need for secured by design 5 • Park and Ride to protect attractions 5 Develop park and cycle, kiss and ride sites 8

Maintenance • Insufficient maintenance leading to poor 2, 3, 4, 8 quality journey experience • Unreliable journey times 2, 3 • Backlog of bridge maintenance 4

Safety • Fear of accidents 2, 5 • Insufficient funding for road safety 3,4, 5 Significant uplift in spend on safety 3,7 improvements • Lack of speed limit enforcement 3 Camera fines monies back to road safety 3,8

Personal • Fear of personal/ possession crime 2 security • Anti social behaviour fears 5

92

Main issue Problems Identified By whom Opportunities Identified By Whom General/ • Increasing car ownership and use 2, 7 Congestion charging in cities 8 Social • Inappropriate flows in residential areas 4 Reduce traffic flows with pedestrianisation 3, 7 • Congestion adding to journey time 2,3, 7 Traffic Management Act opportunities 3 unreliability 3, 8 Traffic Management Act opportunities 3 • Road works causing delays 2, 5, 7 • School run car dependency 2, 5 • Dispersed population and land use 2, 8 Development of non fossil fuel sources 8 • Increasing costs of fuel 2 2 • Finite fuel capacity

• Need to adapt lifestyles to more sustainable 3 Better taxi regulation 3,7 transport 3, 8 Robust demand restraint needed 7 • Lack of taxi services, ranks 3, 5 • Poor traffic management 3 More money for encouraging sustainable 3,7, 8 • More money for transport needed 5 travel, Free school transport for all • Lack of School Travel Plans 5 • Parental choice on schools 5 Non fossil fuel development 7 • Need for more community transport 6 • Air quality problems growing • Concerns about potential road pricing

Integration • Lack of integration between modes 2, 3, 7, 8 One overall operational system 8

Smarter • Poor car sharing facilities 3 Develop car clubs across region 3, 7 Choices • Need for massive modal shift 5, 7 Moe employer flexibility needed 7 • More travel plan encouragement 5, 7 Build confidence and awareness in Travel 3 Plans (TPs) Parking • Indiscriminate parking leading to delays 2, 3, 7 • Need for more consistency on parking 3, 5 Consortia wide parking action 3 • More parking at stations required 5 • Parking too expensive in Swansea 8 Provide more parking in Swansea 3,7

93

Main issue Problems Identified By whom Opportunities Identified By Whom Cycling • Lack of information 3, 8 • Poor interchange with other modes 3 • Lack of links between NCN and attractors 3, 5, 7, 8 • More cycling for short journeys 5 Set up cycle buddy network 7 • Incomplete cycle network 7, 8 Consistent networks to be developed 7,8 • Poor maintenance of cycle paths 8

Infrastructure • Need for new links in west 3, 4, 5 • A40 dualling or selected enhancements 3, 5,6 required • Need infrastructure development to support 3, 5 freight movement • Trunk road network development 4, 5 • M4 relief road needed 5 • New capacity linked to demand restraint 5 Tram system for Swansea 7, 8 required • No new roads unless justified by business 5 case 7 • Access to ports, ferry termini Air • Need to press for improved air services and 5,6, 8 Improved links to Cardiff CIA and beyond 7 connections • No to air services 5 Key 1 = findings from Beaufort Research commission, 2 = outcomes of Key stakeholder consultation in June 2006 3 = outcomes of Internal colleagues consultation in July 2006 4 =Carmarthen Member development session July 2006 5 = comments on draft RTS from June 2005 6 = comments at SWWEF meeting July 2006 7 = Swansea Transport Forum July 2006 8 = CCS Transportation Group May/June 2006

94

APPENDIX M – COMPONENT STRATEGIES

M1.0 INTRODUCTION

M1.1 The Regional Transport Plan (RTP) Component Strategies are set out in Chapter Three of the main document. They were developed with the help of a wide range of internal local authority colleagues with expertise in the specific areas.

M1.2 This Appendix links the strategies to national legislation and to appropriate national, regional and local strategies and plans, using the matrix shown overleaf. This is intended to demonstrate the balance between these strategies and their inter dependencies. Neither the Wales Transport Strategy nor the Wales Spatial Plan have been included because all the Component Strategies relate strongly to both documents.

M1.3 The Component Strategy for Accessibility is not included in the matrix as it is a cross cutting strategy which runs as a common thread through all the other strategies and indeed the RTP as a whole.

M2.0 MATRIX LINKING COMPONENT STRATEGIES AND LEGISLATION/PLANS ETC

M2.1 See Table M1 where shading demonstrates linkages

95

Table M1 – Linkages between legislation, strategies, plans and Component Strategies

Traffic Mgt Walking & Smarter Land Use Freight Main’nce Parking Road Public Cycling Choices Planning Safety Transport

Road Safety Strategy Wales (2003)

Traffic Management Act (2004)

Walking & Cycling Strategy Wales (2003)

Smarter Choices Wales (2007)

Technical Advisory Note: Transport 18 (2007)

Making Smarter Choices Work (2005)

Making Personal Travel Plans Work (2007)

Sustainable Travel Demonstration Towns (2005) Putting Passengers First (2006)

Delivering a Sustainable Railway (2007 White Paper)

Wales Rail Planning Assessment (2007)

Section 106 agreements of the town & country Planning Act (1990)

Wales Freight Strategy (2008)

Freight Best Practice

96

Traffic Mgt Walking & Smarter Land Use Freight Main’nce Parking Road Public Cycling Choices Planning Safety Transport

Planning Policy Wales (2002)

SWWITCH Walking & Cycling Strategy

SWWITCH Regional CarShare Scheme

SWWITCH Regional Public Transport Strategy (2003) SWWITCH Regional Rail Study (2005)

SWWITCH Regional Freight Strategy (2002)

Carmarthenshire Integrated Parking Strategy

Local Authority Bus Strategies (2003)

Local Authority Policies on collision hotspots

Neath Port Talbot Road Safety Strategy

Local Transport Plans (2000)

Unitary Development Plans

97

APPENDIX N – PUBLIC TRANSPORT INFORMATION STRATEGY

N1.0 BACKGROUND

N1.1 This appendix to the Regional Transport Plan for South West Wales sets out a Public Transport Information Strategy for the region. The original version was published by SWWITCH as an Addendum to its Regional Public Transport Strategy (RPTS) in 2003. It was prepared following extensive consultation with stakeholders in the region including the Traffic Commissioner for Wales. The strategy has now been updated and reviewed following further comments received as part of extensive consultations on the RTP.

N1.2 The Information Strategy sets out a plan to address the information needs of existing and potential public transport users. In particular the strategy addresses two key issues raised by the Traffic Commissioner for Wales:

• The inconsistencies across the region in the way that information was prepared and made available to potential and existing users, and the balance of responsibilities associated with that provision between operators and local authorities • The need for a clear plan of focused action to address information deficiencies

N2.0 BUS SERVICE AND INFORMATION PROVISION ACROSS SOUTH WEST WALES

N2.1 The background to the different ways in which bus service information is developed and made available is in large part due to the ways in which the bus service network is financed across the region. In Swansea and Neath Port Talbot the vast majority (>90%) of services are provided commercially by the operators, whereas in Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire the vast majority of services are procured and funded by the local authorities.

N2.2 The bus service networks in Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire are therefore more stable and less subject to change from commercial pressures. In these more rural counties there are a larger number of smaller operators providing services often without the ability and resources to provide effective information. Councils here therefore have a greater incentive to invest in information provision to encourage passenger growth and a potential reduction in contract prices.

N2.3 In Swansea and Neath Port Talbot the market is dominated by commercial operations. Here, the main operator First Cymru provides information about its own services. The provision of information by the local authorities has therefore mainly related to Council funded tendered services.

N2.4 The implementation strategy adopted by SWWITCH recognises these differences and seeks to establish a regional framework and common standards within which individual Councils in the region provides effective information. Progress in doing so is dependent on the availability of funding and particularly revenue grants from WAG.

98

N3.0 THE STRATEGY Improved public transport information and the introduction of targeted marketing N3.1 are of primary importance and are regarded as the number one priority by consultees who helped to develop and strengthen the RTP.

N3.2 Recognising that financial resources are limited, SWWITCH has prioritised support and investment in information provision at three levels Table N1: • Traveline Cymru bus and coach information by phone, text and website and use of Modus Journey Planning facilities • Service Network information – through the provision of county or area timetable booklets and maps distributed by post, through local retail and council outlets, interactive websites and the ongoing development of real time mobile phone texting service

Bus Corridor and Individual Service information – through the provision of roadside timetable displays at bus stops, bus and railway stations, the distribution of timetable leaflets, the branding of services and vehicles.

N3.3 Where conventional bus services are unable to provide an appropriate service because of the nature of the area to be served or because people are unable to access them, Councils have provided and are developing one stop Demand Management and Information Centres where the public can access information by phone about the services available and the most appropriate option for their journey and needs. In certain circumstances passengers can also book their seat in advance.

N3.4 Bus corridor improvements are being prioritised through the development of Priority Bus Corridors, whereby improvements to information provision at bus stops are being pursued as part of a range of other measures to improve the operation of bus services and develop better facilities for passengers. A Package of Priority Bus Corridor Projects in several tranches is included in the RTP programme. These corridors serve the major bus flows along strategic bus corridors usually linking key settlements in the region.

N3.5 In a similar way information facilities are being implemented or are planned as part of the development and improvement of bus and bus/rail interchanges at key settlements across the region. Included in the RTP programme are: • Swansea Quadrant Bus Station • Swansea High Street Station • Carmarthen Railway and Bus Station • Neath Bus Station • Port Talbot Bus and Railway Stations, • Llanelli Railway Station • Milford Haven bus/rail interchange and • Pembroke Dock bus/rail interchange.

99

Table N 1- SWWITCH Public Transport Information Priorities

Information Previous years and ongoing 2010/12 2012/15 Strategy Element

Bus stop • Swansea Metro; • Bus corridor tranche 1 and • Continue to expand into further corridors in urban information • Gower/Mawr areas; • Start development of tranche 2 and rural areas. • Carmarthen to Loughor; Carmarthen to • Work with local communities, operators, tourism and Lampeter and Newcastle Emlyn; schools to provide a wider range of information at • Haverfordwest to Milford Haven and Fishguard bus stops close to local facilities

Interchanges • Bus focal point developments in Pembroke • Local interchange points in • Continue to improve information to facilitate Dock , Milford Haven, Cilibion, Gowerton, Carmarthenshire interchange and look more closely at linkages with Kidwelly • Public Access points unconventional transport • Improvements at: • Personalised travel planning and • Provide information for pedestrian and cyclists • High Street station, Swansea raising awareness in Swansea wishing to connect with public transport • Quadrant bus station, Swansea • Focal points in Fishguard, • Llanelli Bus and Railway stations Pembroke and Tenby. • Haverfordwest Bus station • All Pembrokeshire Railway stations

Website SWWITCH website developed and operational Look to develop public transport Develop more interactive travel planning support development information for display on website

Travel Travel Plan Co-ordinator and Officer have • Continue travel planning work • Improve linkages with other consortia awareness established a series of local forums and contacts in • Develop more guidance on • Continue to develop and expand the role of campaign major public and private sector organisations to application and monitoring of SWWITCH in raising awareness on public transport develop and promote travel planning travel plans and all sustainable transport forms • Develop training programmes • Monitor awareness amongst users and non users An annual Travel plan conference is held • Develop a programme of Annual School Travel Plan training sessions are personalised travel planning organised events • Continue to organise SWWITCH conference to promote information sharing

100

Information Previous years and ongoing 2010/12 2012/15 Strategy Element

Harmonising Discussions with Operators Discussions with Operators Discussions with Operators service changes

One stop call • Part of Access projects in Carmarthenshire and • Expand in rural areas to link with Examine practical application of SWWITCH wide centre Pembrokeshire improved demand responsive scheme. development services • Look at link with transport to work in urban areas

Public Access There are terminals in some key settlements and Look to expand across SWWITCH in Terminals attractors these have generally arisen as result of appropriate locations other policy commitments

Real Time At key locations as part of Swansea Metro scheme • Evaluate costs/benefits of RTPI Passenger (subject to confirmation of funding) and consider whether to expand Information scheme.

101

APPENDIX P - TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ACT

P1.0 INTRODUCTION

P1.1 The main objective of the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA) is to reduce congestion and disruption on the road network. The TMA sets out certain Network Management Duties, to help and encourage local traffic authorities to achieve their traffic aims:

• More effective co-ordination by highway authorities of the various works carried out in the street, whether these are authority road works, utility street works or miscellaneous activities such as the placing of skips, scaffolds and deposits on the highway • Co-ordination of any operation that may effect the highway network for example refuse collection, deliveries, school transport and events such as carnivals, sporting events etc • Introducing a range of new powers to allow utility works to be better controlled by the introduction of The Traffic Management Permit Scheme 2007. Allowing certain contraventions of the law, such as parking offences, to be dealt with by civil means by Civil Enforcement Officers, rather than through the criminal process.

P1.2 The County Surveyors’ Society Wales has prepared an All Wales Action Plan and Framework Manual to enable local authorities to take a consistent approach to the implementation of the TMA.

P1.3 Traffic Officers

Establishing a uniformed on-road 'Traffic Officer' service to manage the traffic consequences of random incidents, such as crashes, obstructions, debris and break downs on the strategic road network.

Traffic Officers employed by the Trunk Road Agency are trained to patrol the motorway, keep traffic moving around incidents and make road users journeys as safe and reliable as possible. They are employed to stop and direct traffic, support the Police, clear up debris after crashes, remove vehicles that have either been damaged or abandoned and carry out high visibility patrols.

P1.4 Network Management by Local Authorities The Network Management Duty (NMD) is a statutory duty placed on all local traffic authorities to help improve the flow of traffic their own networks and on the network of others. The duty applies to all traffic to include pedestrians, horses, motorcycles, lorries, cars and bicycles.

P1.5 Under the Network Management Duty, the local authority has a duty to reduce the causes of congestion and disruption on the road network, by co-ordinating and managing road and street works effectively, the management of incidents, event planning, the control of parking and the network as a whole. These duties

102

must be carried out by working with all partners and stakeholders involving consultation and view from the general public.

P1.6 • SWWITCH local traffic authorities have appointed Traffic Managers who has overall responsibility for these statutory duties.

P1.7 Permit Schemes, Street works and Fixed Penalty Notices Permit schemes provide a new way of managing activities in the public highway. They were introduced by Part 3 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 to improve authorities' abilities to minimise disruption from street and highway works.

P1.8 Permit Schemes provide an alternative to the 'notification system' of the New Road and Street Works Act 1991 (NRSWA). Instead of informing a street authority about is intention to carry out work in the area, a utility company would need to book time on the highway through a permit as would a highway authority for its own works.

P1.9 It is the intention to encourage the use of similar concepts to the notices system in a number of key areas e.g. road categories, works categories etc. This will hopefully ensure consistency and facilitate better coordination. Under the TMA and the Permit Scheme, fees can be charged for the following:

• application for permits; • issuing permits • applications for variations to permits or the conditions attached and • variations to permits or the conditions attached

Under Section 37 (8) regulations can define the amount (or maximum amount) of fees, when they are payable and when not, discounts and the use of income. Permit Schemes are not intended to generate revenue for permit authorities although subject to the constraints an authority may cover its costs.

P1.10 The TMA also contains a series of measures concerning the keeping of apparatus, including apparatus belonging to the highway authorities. It is the intention that a review of the Records Code of Practise will be dealt with by Highway Authorities Utilities Committee (HAUC).

P1.11 The Act also allows for the existing Inspections Code of Practice to be made statutory and for wide ranging changes to be made to the system for authorities charging undertakers fees to inspect their works. The aim is to revise the existing Inspections Code to reflect these.

P1.12 At present, the Safety Code of Practice only has statutory force in relation to undertakers’ works. The TMA allows it to apply equally to works carried out by highway authorities. The code will need to be revised to take account of this and to update it generally. The Permit Schemes became fully operational on 1st April 2008.

P1.13 Street Works This provides for changes to the regulatory regime for utility companies' street works. The TMA also provides for increase in levels of fines of specified offences, and provides for highway authorities to issue Fixed Penalty Notices for

103

certain offences.

P1.14 Highways and Roads The TMA includes special measures to control other works in the street. In particular, it allows the existing powers to impose a daily lane charge on utilities when their works overrun, or to charge them 'lane rental' to be extended to allow charges to cover the placing of skips and scaffolding and the storage of material on the highway.

P1.15 Civil Enforcement This TMA provides a single framework to make regulations for the civil enforcement by local authorities or parking and waiting restrictions, bus lanes and some moving traffic offences. This will allow the Civil Enforcement Officers the powers to cover some moving traffic offences (such as ignoring the rules at boxed junctions and banned turns) using camera evidence, and additional powers in respect of parking enforcement which already exists in London.

P1.16 Miscellaneous & General The final part of the TMA covers two unrelated areas. Firstly it provides new powers allowing the Police, Local Authority Civil Enforcement Officers to require those displaying Blue Badges in their vehicles to provide evidence that they actually do hold a badge. The legislation for Blue Badge Scheme changed as of the 15th October 2007. Changes in particular are:

• extended eligibility to children under the age of two • extension of the eligibility criterion for people with severe disabilities in both arms • allow for badges to be issued for a period of less than to people awarded the Higher Rate Mobility Component of the Disability Living Allowance, or the War Pensioners' Mobility Supplement for less than three years • change of the design of the badge • modernise the regulations, so that the scheme is no longer available to individuals with 'blue trikes' as such vehicles are no longer in use

P1.17 Secondly, this part of the Act extends the purposes for which local authorities surplus income from on-street parking penalties and charges can be used, once the costs of operating the scheme have been covered.

P1.18 It should be noted that sections of the Traffic Management Act are being brought into force at different times. This Appendix will be revised to take account of these changes.

P2.0 PROGRESS TO DATE

P2.1 Table P1 below sets out progress to date across SWWITCH.

104

Table P1

Network Management priorities Progress to date and outcomes Cross boundary identified issues identified

Provision of Travel Information to Road • Local Authorities to review current measures and measure Yes – although Users and the Community effectiveness limited • Authorities to explore other new methods Consultation, Communication and • Authorities to review current processes Yes Engagement with Stakeholders • Authorities to develop new methods of communication using new technologies Regular Reviews of the Network • Authorities have an ongoing process which already takes account of the TMA requirements • Authorities to consider all departments identify the impact of their activities on the network Identifying and Managing Different Road • Authorities to develop a road hierarchy Types • Authorities to complete an annual review of road and modal hierarchies to ensure these represent current network conditions Enforcing Road Traffic Regulations • Authorities awaiting guidance from WAG before proceeding

Making Best Use of Technology • Authorities to identify and develop maximising the best use of new technologies Carry out a Winter Maintenance Review • Authorities may carry out a review of winter maintenance and Yes – although including Gritting Operations cross boundary gritting processes limited

Maintenance Works on Cross Boundary • Authorities may carry out reviews of Cross Boundary Road Yes Roads maintenance Discussions between neighbouring • Discussions to be held between neighbouring Authorities Yes Authorities the processes for exchange of Information Review existing Coordination and • Authorities may carry out a review of procedures Direction of Works

105

APPENDIX Q - DELIVERING SUCCESSFUL TRANSPORT SCHEMES

LOCAL AUTHORITY: CARMARTHENSHIRE

Timescale Project Funding Cost What was project Measure of success source intended to achieve ’03-‘05 Burry Port Distributor Road Obj 1, LRF, £6.5m 3km new road to open up Heavily used and a key aspect of WDA, CCC development areas and the successful regeneration of marina Burry Port Pont Twrch CCC £2m New bridge to replace Award winning, addressed issue of ’02-‘03 existing weak structure plus unsuitable existing structure 500m of highway realignment ’04-‘06 Pont King Morgan TG £3.5m Integrate Railway station Award winning iconic structure with town centre, improve delivered on time and budget well access to Pensarn used, successfully integrated retail/business sites railway station and Pensarn with town centre ’03-‘07 Ammanford Distributor Road TG £10m Relieve urban congestion in Has successfully alleviated many Ammanford congestion issues in the town centre Morfa Berwick Obj1 CCC, £10.5m Completion of coast around Heavily used, greatly improved ’05-‘08 TG south side of Llanelli access to the coast Pemberton Highway infrastructure CCC, land £21m Open up access to retail and Continued success and growth of ’06-‘07 sales stadium retail site and was necessary in allowing the stadium development (now successfully delivered) Cross Hands Interchange CCC, Obj 1, £1.7m Open up access to Cross Continued growth and success of ’03-‘04 WAG Hands business park relieve business park pressure at cross hands roundabout ’06-‘07 Park and Ride Nant y Ci CCC £0.5m Relieve town centre Before reaching the end of it’s first congestion and associated year the service has exceeded the issues 100,000 passengers mark.

106

LOCAL AUTHORITY: NEATH PORT TALBOT

Timescale Project Funding Cost What was project Measure of success source intended to achieve June 2004 – Port Talbot PDR Stage 1C, access TG £12.4M £16.7M As part of the overall PDR Scheme delivered on time and Sept 2005 to Port Talbot industrial area. Approx ERDF £4.2M scheme to provide relief for to budget. 1.1km of dual carriageway, including LRF £130K the M4 around Port Talbot a new river bridge. and provide access to major industrial/commercial locations to facilitate regeneration. Sept 2005 – Port Talbot PDR Stage 1B, dualling TG £19.5M £25.9M As above. As above. July 2007 of Afan Way in the ERDF £5M Aberafan/Sandfields area of Port LRF £1.4M Talbot. Approx 3.1km of dual carriageway, together with junction modifications, subway refurbishments, new footbridges and a new river bridge.

Sept 1999 – Integrated Transport Package of TG £3.6M £3.6M Improved access to Facilities constructed on time April 2004 measures including improved access sustainable modes of travel and to budget. to railway stations, a lift-equipped and hence modal shift. footbridge, improved passenger facilities on bus routes, RTPI, new cycleways, etc . Safe Routes to Schools/in Specific WAG £2.1M Improved safety on walking Improvements identified in Apr 1999 – Communities. Facilities to address Grant and cycling routes to/from collaboration with schools and March 2009 road and other safety issues in schools and more generally communities and implemented respect of routes for walking and within communities and on time and to budget. cycling to/from schools and more hence greater use of these Increased walking and cycling generally within communities. modes of travel. to/from schools.

107

LOCAL AUTHORITY: PEMBROKESHIRE

Timescale Project Funding Cost What was project Measure of success source intended to achieve 2006 Bluestone Access PCC/ S106 £775K Provision of access Infrastructure installed. Contribution roundabout and associated highway works to major new tourist development

2008 (Ongoing Haverfordwest Street Enhancements PCC £1.7m Linked with a Traffic and Works complete with new in phases) (Linked to Haverfordwest traffic & Transportation review, an Leisure Centre opened on 16 parking Review), includes works at St outcome was to seek March – positive feedback on Thomas Green and Rifleman’s Car significant enhancement to schemes. Park existing street-scene and car parks. A number of schemes already completed – linked with major new Leisure Centre development.

2004 Haverfordwest Bus Station TG £1.1m Construction of new bus Scheme constructed – station, and access works. monitored via customer feedback. 2007 Safe Routes in Communities – Bush TG £337K Safer Routes Scheme Infrastructure installed: positive School, Pembroke feedback from School & Community. 2005 Johnston Cutting Shared Use Path PCC / WAG £665K Construction of Shared Use Infrastructure installed: path in railway cutting submitted for 2008 ICE Awards adjacent to live railway

2004 Cleddau Bridge Resurfacing PCC £3.6M Resurfacing of major 820m Resurfacing complete – first steel box girder bridge use of Gussasphalt system in UK 2006 VMS Ferry Sign Project Interreg / £300K Installation of VMS signage Infrastructure installed. WAG on major highways into Monitored via WEFO processes County to provide traffic information to Ferry ports

108

LOCAL AUTHORITY: SWANSEA

Timescal Project Funding Cost What was project intended to Measure of success e source achieve To provide enhancements for rail commuters and visitors to the City. Increased usage of rail service and 2004 High Street Station Enhancement TG £1.5m Improve pedestrian access improved public perception of major arrangements with new vehicle gateway to the City. parking and drop-off facilities. 2004 - 09 Safe Routes to School TG £m Year on year patronage growth. To provide an enhanced public Modal shift for local and leisure transport service to peripheral rural 2004 - 06 Gower Explorer & Lliw Link TG £1.4M journeys. Multi award winning areas. service. Comprehensive marketing

package developed. Increased use of public transportation. Resulting in reduced congestion and pollution along Landore Express Bus Way £3.13m To reduce travel times along the 2005 - 08 TG Neath Road. Increased patronage of (stage 1 and 2) Neath Road/Dyfatty Corridor. Landore Park and Ride. Improved perception of public transportation service. Increase usage and public Provide a rapid transit service for perception of public transport 2006/07 Metro Bus Infrastructure TG £5.9m the city. services. Reduction in commuter journeys and associated congestion. Reduced congestion in the City Reduce City Centre congestion 2006/07 Fforestfach Park & Ride TG £3m Centre. Increased patronage of Park through displacement of car traffic. and Ride usage within the Authority. Reduced congestion within the City Centre and along Fabian Way. Fabian Way Priority Bus Route & Reduces journey times from the Increased patronage of Fabian Way 2007/08 TG £5.22m Sailbridge Fabian Way Park & Ride site. Park and Ride. Improved perception of gateway to the City and public transportation service. Improved

109

APPENDIX R – PLANNED REVENUE AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURE Table R1 - Local Authority Revenue Expenditure (2008/9 – 202011/12)

Neath Port Talbot Elements 2008/9 Revised Budget 2009/10 Revised Budget Expenditure Income Nett Expenditure Income Nett Transport Policy & Planning: Professional, Technical & Engineering 91 28 63 127 29 98

Traffic Management: Professional, Technical & Engineering 211 113 98 239 116 123

Road Safety Education: Professional, Technical & Engineering 276 46 230 303 51 252

School Crossing Patrols 208 0 208 199 0 199

Passenger Transport Management: Professional & Technical 276 0 276 301 0 301

Transport Support: Concessionary Fares 2762 2223 539 2900 2338 562 Bus Operator Subsidies 396 119 277 354 83 271 Community Transport 263 0 263 257 0 257 Bus Shelters 45 0 45 45 0 45 Bus Station 109 41 68 115 41 74 Local Transport Services Grant 533 533 0 550 550 0 Rural Development Funding 0 0 0 0 64 -64

Total 4108 2916 1192 4221 3076 1145 Community Services Transport Unit: Professional & Technical 642 86 556 592 91 501

110

2008/9 Revised Budget 2009/10 Revised Budget Expenditure Income Nett Expenditure Income Nett Education Transport: Home to School Transport 3068 14 3054 3106 20 3096 Home to College Transport 2257 0 2257 2485 10 2475 Special Needs (Adult) Transport Costs 177 0 177 191 0 191

Total 5502 14 5488 5782 30 5752 Highway Maintenance: Planned Roads 801 801 822 822 Ad Hoc Roads 1775 1775 1900 1900 Environmental 127 127 131 131 Safety Maintenance 350 350 316 316 Winter Maintenance 675 675 697 697 Grounds Maintenance 65 65 68 68 Lighting Maintenance 526 526 522 522 Energy 766 766 942 942 Bridge Maintenance 194 194 195 195 Bridge Assessment 200 200 200 200 Rights of Way 58 58 57 57 Signals 132 132 132 132 Surveys 8 8 8 8 Slips & Trips 280 280 280 280

Total 5957 0 5957 6270 0 6270

Grand Total 17271 3203 14068 18034 3393 14641

111

Pembrokeshire County Council ELEMENTS 2008 - 09 ORIGINAL BUDGET 2009 - 10 BUDGET Expenditure Income Net £000 Expenditure Income Net £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Transport Policy and Planning • Professional, Technical and Engineering 940 207 733 1,088 238 850 Highways and Bridges • Structural 3,710 321 3,389 3,793 187 3,609 • Routine 4,166 440 3,726 4,426 580 3,849 • Capital Charges 3,856 - 3,856 3,858 - 3,858 • Highway Maintenance Figures included within Structural & Routine Above • Bridge Maintenance 635 - 635 656 - 656 • Winter Maintenance 622 176 446 586 214 372

Street Lighting • Highway Lighting 1,310 177 1,133 1,516 208 1,308 Traffic Management • Accident Analysis and remediation 292 76 216 287 89 198 • Traffic Calming ------• Local Road Safety Grant Included within Road Safety Education below Road Safety • Road Safety Education -including: Safe Routes to 196 86 110 272 125 147 Communities, Slower Speeds, Safer Streets, Speed Camera Hypothecation Scheme, Road Safety Publicity, N.A.W. Child Protection 240 0 240 204 0 204 • School Crossing Patrols Parking • On Street Parking 34 21 13 57 25 32 • Park & Ride 13 - 13 16 - 16 Public Transport • Bus Operator’s support 1,260 21 1,239 1,328 35 1,293 • Bus Shelters 37 - 37 34 - 34 • Concessionary Fares 938 725 213 1,137 908 229 • Community Transport 145 124 21 92 65 27 • Local Transport Services Grant 561 561 - 579 579 - Education Transport • Home to School Transport 3,575 59 3,516 3,728 51 3,677 • Home to College Transport 526 281 245 546 282 264 • Special Needs Transport 1,660 82 1,578 1,730 84 1,646 Social Services Transport

112

• Special Needs (Adult) Transport Costs 716 60 656 766 49 717 Other (Specify) . Development of School Transport 89 89 - 127 127

City and County of Swansea ELEMENTS 2008-09 BUDGET 2009-10 BUDGET Expenditure Income Net £000 Expenditure Income Net £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 TRANSPORTATION AND ENGINEERING

Transport Planning, policy and strategy 1,105 0 1,105 1,082 0 1,082 Highways/roads (structural) 2,793 0 2,793 2,616 0 2,616 Highways/roads (routine) 2,960 0 2,960 3,093 0 3,093 Street lighting 2,094 0 2,094 2,269 0 2,269 Traffic Management and Road Safety Traffic Management 1,312 442 870 1,534 448 1,086 Road Safety Education 520 252 268 525 257 268 Safe Routes to School 311 0 311 311 0 311 Parking Services On Street Parking 2,151 3,399 -1,248 2,191 3,878 -1,687 Park and Ride 452 375 77 423 373 50 Public Transport Concessionary Fares 6,200 4,900 1,300 7,036 5,715 1,321 Support to Operators 1,582 375 1,207 1,519 374 1,145 Bus Shelters 47 0 47 64 0 64 TOTAL 21,527 9,743 11,784 22,663 11,045 11,618

EDUCATION TRANSPORT SERVICES Home to School Transport 6,053 0 6,053 6,457 0 6,457 Home to College Transport 479 0 479 465 0 465 TOTAL 6,532 0 6,532 6,922 0 6,922

SOCIAL SERVICES TRANSPORT Social Services Transport 2,267 0 2,267 2,263 0 2,263 TOTAL 2,267 0 2,267 2,263 0 2,263

113

Carmarthenshire County Council 2008-09 BUDGET 2009-10 BUDGET ELEMENTS Expenditure Income Net £000 Expenditure Income Net £000 £000 £000 £000 £000

Transport Planning, policy and strategy 1,696 -670 1,026 2,152 -841 1,311 Highways/roads (structural) 6,374 0 6,374 6,802 0 6,802 Construction 2,790 0 2,790 4,895 -1,480 3,415 Highways/roads (routine) 3,617 0 3,617 3,739 0 3,739 Street lighting 1,788 -68 1,720 2,049 -69 1,979 Winter Maintenance 1,490 0 1,490 1,542 0 1,542 Traffic Management and Road Safety

Traffic Management 965 -436 529 938 -450 488 Road Safety Education 685 -154 531 686 -157 529 Parking Services

On Street Parking 1,854 -2,337 -482 2,141 -2,669 -528 Public Transport

Concessionary Fares 2,046 -1,427 619 2,093 -1,482 611 Support to Operators 2,524 -1,018 1,506 2,711 -1,197 1,514 Bus Shelters 173 0 173 191 0 191 TOTAL 26,002 -6,109 19,894 29,938 -8,346 21,593 EDUCATION TRANSPORT SERVICES Home to School Transport 7,487 -45 7,442 7,705 -46 7,659 Home to College Transport 927 -393 534 959 -403 556 TOTAL 8,414 -438 7,976 8,664 -449 8,215

114

Table R2 - Local Authority Capital Expenditure (2008/9 – 202011/12)

Carmarthenshire County Council

Item Budget (£k) Estimated expenditure (£k) 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TRANSPORT GRANT North Carms & Ceredigion Link 159 200 20 Ammanford Distributor Rd Phase 1 1,259 600 Carmarthen Town Package 270 100 2000 500 Rural Public Transport and CT accessibility 159 52 31 Safe Routes to schools 927 680 1300 900 Amman Valley Cycleway 330 350 200 Cross Hands Economic Link 486 700 5000 Carmarthen West 250 SUB TOTAL 3,164 2,468 4501 6400

OTHER Road Safety/ footway Improvement Schemes 295 259 339 750 Morfa Berwick Link 1132 200 50 SUB TOTAL 1427 459 389 750 TOTAL 4591 2927 4890 7150

115

Neath Port Talbot

Item Budget (£k) Estimated expenditure (£k) 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Minor works 146 133 Dropped Crossings 45 37 Off-street parking (Verge hardening) 220 175 Traffic Management 188 154.6 Lighting & Telematics 330 357 Bridge Strengthening 470 310 Drainage 325 280 Landslips 20 20 Priority Footways 115 Miscellaneous 100 Contingency 66 66.4 Total Highways Programme 1,925 1,633 1,650 1,650 Transport Grant 8,631 4,000 Safe Routes to Schools/in Communities 860 548 Special Road Maintenance Grant 560 561.4 Road Safety Grant 356 362 TOTAL 12,332 7104.4

116

Pembrokeshire County Council

Item Budget (£k) Estimated expenditure (£k) 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TRANSPORT GRANT Safe Routes to schools 797 958 800 800 SUB TOTAL 797 958 800 800

OTHER Highway Improvements 300 1600 350 1200 Highway Improvements 178 150 Local Road Safety Schemes 246 200 200 200 Minor works – safety schemes 266 350 350 350 Other Schemes 1031 235 Sustainable Transport 181 Carriageway Reconstruction/resurfacing 824 820 800 800 Bus Shelters 200 176 Traffic Management 254 Car Parks 504 270 150 SUB TOTAL 3984 3651 2000 2550

TOTAL 4781 4609 2800 3350

117

City and County of Swansea

Item Budget (£k) Estimated expenditure (£k) 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 TRANSPORT GRANT Swansea Transport Package 1,595 5,287 2,326 132 Bus Priority Demonstration Corridor 4,684 822 212 Hafod Integrated Transport Study 300 478 Park and ride Package 287 2,210 2,474 40 Safe Routes to schools 654 166 SUB TOTAL 7520 8963 5012 172

OTHER Medium schemes 2297 2297 Small schemes 600 655 Other schemes 515 450 Strengthening and Renewal 600 500 Bus Shelters 55 55 Traffic 85 50 Car Parks SUB TOTAL 4152 4007 TOTAL 11,672 12,970

118

APPENDIX S – WELTAG APPRAISAL TABLES

S1.0 INTRODUCTION

S1.1 Chapter 6 of the RTP explains how WelTAG appraisal has been used to shape the development of objectives, strategy and the programme of projects to improve transport and access in the region.

S1.2 The application of WelTAG by SWWITCH as an integral part of the ongoing development process is also demonstrated throughout the RTP. Tables S1 and S2 (pages 120 to 134) provide the detail of the appraisal and prioritisation process which resulted in a list of 75 potential RTP schemes, that is those schemes which scored 60 points or more in the prioritisation process.

S1.3 The Appraisal Summary Tables (AST) on pages (135 to 232) demonstrate how each of the 75 projects which met the SWWITCH adopted criteria for inclusion in the programme was assessed against the criteria set out in the WelTAG guidance for consideration.

S1.4 It should be noted that ASTs have not been completed for schemes that are substantially completed, such as Metro and the Port Talbot PDR Stages 1A and B. There are two further projects, which successfully passed the prioritisation process, but where it was inappropriate to complete an AST. These are: • Project No 96, Investigate Light Rail schemes. It would be premature to complete an AST at this stage because this project is about investigation rather than implementation. A study is required in order to investigate feasibility and implications. • Project No 29, New Access Road to Morriston Hospital. This project is now being taken forward by the Health Trust and will not require RTP funding.

S1.5 As set out in Chapter 6, the Transport Planning Objectives (TPOs) were not unique to each project, the RTP objectives (shown on 120 overleaf) were used and then summarised against appropriate projects on the ASTs.

119

RTP Objectives

RTP Objectives used as TPOs for the 5 year programme of projects

1. To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care,

tourism and leisure activities

2. To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well being

3.1. To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy

4. To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales

5. To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions.

6. To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including biodiversity

7. To improve road safety and personal security in South West Wales.

120

Table S1 – RTP projects appraised against RTP objectives

1. To improve 2. To improve the 3. To improve 4. To improve 5. To implement 6. To 7. To access for all to a sustainability of the efficiency and integration measures which implement improve wide range of transport by reliability of the between make a positive measures road RTP Objectives services and improving the movement of policies, contribution to which help to safety facilities including range and quality people and service improving air reduce the and employment and of, and freight within and provision and quality and negative impact personal business, awareness about, beyond south modes of reducing the of transport security education and transport options, west Wales to transport in adverse impact of across the for training, health including those support the south west transport on region on the transport care, tourism and which improve regional Wales. health and natural and users in Projects leisure activities. health and well economy. climate change, built south being. including environment west reducing carbon including Wales. emissions. biodiversity. Quadrant Bus Station Interchange +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Metro +++ ++ +++ + + + N Outstanding commitments on Carms TG schemes +++ + ++ + + + + Port Talbot PDR completion of 1A & B +++ N +++ + -- -- + Port Talbot PDR Stage 2 +++ N +++ + -- -- + Swansea High Street station Improvements +++ + ++ ++ + + N Carmarthen Railway Station Improvements +++ + ++ ++ + + N Landore Park and Ride extension ++ + ++ ++ + + N Road Safety package N ++ + ++ ++ N +++ Carmarthen Road bus priority measures +++ + ++ + + + + Carmarthen to Swansea Bus Corridor Package +++ + ++ + + + +

121

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5 Objective 6 Objective 7 Pembroke to Milford Haven Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Haverfordwest to Milford Haven Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Swansea west Park and Ride Site ++ + ++ ++ + + N Port Talbot to Swansea Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Swansea Valley to City Centre Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Neath (Llandarcy) to Swansea Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Port Talbot to Neath Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Cross Hands Economic Link Road +++ N +++ + - - + Bridge improvements package on A4382 Llanwrda and Lampeter ++ N + N - -- N Develop Valleys Cycle Network and Connect 2 routes +++ +++ N + +++ +++ N Haverfordwest to Tenby via Pembroke Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Llanelli Bus Station Improvements / Interchange +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Milford Haven Railway Station Integrated Transport Interchange +++ + ++ ++ + + N Fishguard Bus Focal Point ++ + +++ ++ ++ + + Carmarthen Park & Ride ++ + ++ ++ + + N Pembroke Dock Bus/Rail Interchange +++ + +++ +++ ++ + + New Road Access to Morriston Hospital +++ N ++ + -- -- ++

122

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5 Objective 6 Objective 7 Haverfordwest to Tenby via Narberth Bus corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Introduce sustainable towns concept ++ +++ + + ++ + N Lifestyle Changes Walking and Cycling N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Re-open Goodwick station as a Bus/Rail interchange +++ + +++ +++ ++ + + More variable message signing N ++ + + N N ++ Southern Strategic Route – A477 junction to Energy Site Corridor +++ N +++ + -- -- + Port Talbot Parkway +++ + ++ ++ + + N City Centre urban cycle network N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Improve Oystermouth Road corridor (European Boulevard) +++ N +++ + -- -- + Haverfordwest to Fishguard via St David’s Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Haverfordwest to Fishguard via Letterston Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Fishguard to Cardigan Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Ammanford to Cross Hands Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Tenby Bus Focal Point +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Llanelli Railway Station Improvements +++ + ++ ++ + + N Clynderwen Railway Station Improvements +++ + ++ ++ + + N Newcastle Emlyn Bus Focal Point +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + +

123

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5 Objective 6 Objective 7 Swansea Air Quality Package including Hafod Transport Scheme N + N ++ +++ +++ N Park and Share sites close to M4 junctions ++ + ++ ++ + + N N/S NCN route in Pembrokeshire N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N North Carms – Ceredigion Link Road +++ N +++ + -- -- + Pencader Bus Focal Point +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Llandeilo Bus Focal Point +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Drefach Bus Focal Point +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Carmarthen West Link +++ N +++ + -- -- + Carmarthen East Link +++ N +++ + -- -- + Northern Distributor Network - Bulford Road Link +++ N +++ + -- -- + Baglan Energy Park Link Bridge ++ N + N - -- N Neath Railway Station Improvements +++ + ++ ++ + + N Capital enhancement Schemes for Community Transport +++ + + N - - N Llanelli Park and Ride ++ + ++ ++ + + N Waterston Bypass +++ N +++ + -- -- + Blackbridge Access Improvement ++ N + N - -- N Multi Modal Freight Facility – Margam Wharf N N +++ ++ + + N Pontardawe Cross Valley Link Bridge ++ N + N - -- N 124

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5 Objective 6 Objective 7 Gowerton Station ++ + ++ ++ + + N St. David’s Pedestrian links N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Pembroke Community Regeneration Scheme Phases 1 &2 +++ N +++ + -- -- N Carmarthen Bus Station +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Access to Kenfig Industrial Estate +++ N +++ + -- -- + Ammanford Distributor Road +++ N +++ + -- -- + Swansea west Access Road +++ N ++ + + + + Strategic Bus Corridors around Swansea +++ + ++ + + + + Tenby Park and Ride ++ + ++ ++ + + N Investigate light rail schemes ++ + + + ++ -- N Morfa Distributor Road +++ N +++ + -- -- + Coed Darcy southern link +++ + ++ + + + + Strategic bus corridors, Neath to Amman Valley +++ + ++ + + + + Dualling the A4138 between the M4 and Llanelli +++ N +++ + -- -- + Cycle Route from Morriston to Penllergaer N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Regional call centre for demand responsive services +++ + + N - - N A478 Penblewin to Cardigan improvements +++ N +++ + -- -- +

125

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5 Objective 6 Objective 7 Improve facilities for cyclists at P&R sites and to use buses N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Secure parking at Railway stations ++ + ++ ++ + N + Fabian Way enhancements +++ N +++ + -- -- + St Clears station +++ + ++ ++ + + N Port Talbot Bus Station Improvements +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Kidwelly Railway Station Improvements +++ + ++ ++ + + N Gwendraeth Valley Link Road Phase 2 +++ N +++ + -- -- + Whitland Rail/Bus Interchange +++ ++ +++ ++ + + + More secure cycle parking in town centres N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Saundersfoot Park & Ride ++ + ++ ++ + + N Mumbles Bus Terminus +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Sustainable Rural Accessibility pilot ++ + + N - - + Standardised bus stops in SWWITCH N + N N N + N Haverfordwest Airport Improvements + -- + N --- -- N Haverfordwest Bypass – A40 Golf club to A477 Sentry Cross ++ N ++ + + + + Haverfordwest Park and Ride ++ + ++ ++ + + N Path between Virgin Media offices and Neath Road in Swansea N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N 126

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5 Objective 6 Objective 7 Carmarthen Bus Station +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Carmarthen to Haverfordwest Bus Corridor +++ + ++ + + + + Improvements to Pembrey Peninsula Access Road +++ N ++ + -- -- + Haverfordwest Churnworks roundabout improvements +++ N ++ + -- -- + Introduce Paris Velo type system or cycle pool system N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Trostre to Llanelli Park and Ride ++ + ++ ++ + + N St David’s Bus Focal Point +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Park and Ride for Swansea Enterprise Park ++ + ++ ++ + + N Neath Bus Station redevelopment +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Park and Ride/Park and share sites for large employers ++ + ++ ++ + + N Second bridge over river Cothi at Abergorlech ++ N + N - -- N Water taxi from Landore P&R to SA1 + N + + + -- N Cross Hands Park and Ride for Carmarthen ++ + ++ ++ + + N River Tawe for water taxi + N + + + -- N Cardibach green transport initiative N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Extend Coastal cycle path N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N Shared Use path from Broadhaven to Village N ++ + ++ +++ ++ N

127

Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Objective 5 Objective 6 Objective 7 Bus Station at Swansea Railway Station +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ + + Trostre to Llanelli land train ++ + + + ++ -- N CCTV package to improve safety N + N N N N +++ Good quality overnight HGV parking N - + N -- -- + Hydrofoil along south Wales coast linking key settlements + N + + + -- N Water bus in Pembroke/Milford Haven + N + + + -- N North Devon to Swansea ferry feasibility + N + + + -- N

7 point scale demonstrates whether the project will help deliver objectives, where: +++ = This project will make strong contribution to the objective ++ = This project will contribute towards achieving the objective + = This project will make a slight contribution to the objective N = This project will have no impact on the objective - = This project will have a weak negative impact on the objective -- = This project will have a negative impact on the objective --- = This project will have a strong negative impact on the objective

128

Table S2 - RTP project Screening

Fit with RTP Objectives Value for Regional Environmental Social Economic Money Delivery Impact Total Weighting 1 1 1 3 3 2 Projects Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 2 Ob 7 Ob 1 Ob 3 Ob 4 Outstanding commitments on 1 Carms TG schemes 4 3 5 2 3 3 1 10 10 6 93 Cross Hands Economic Link 2 Road 22424 4178880 3 Carmarthen West Link 21313 3186566 4 Ammanford Distributor Road 22232 2166662 5 Carmarthen East Link 22323 2176666 Carms to Swansea Bus Corridor 6 Package 44444 3258982 North Carms – Ceredigion Link 7 Road 32423 3156867 8 Llanelli Park and Ride 43532 3355665 Llanelli Bus Station 9 Improvements 53432 2178677 Valleys Cycle Network and 10 Connect 2 routes 54413 1187778 Northern Distributor Network - 11 Bulford Road Link 21313 3168566 Pembroke Community Regeneration Scheme Phases 1 12 &2 33323 2157563 Southern Strategic Route – A477 13 junction to Energy Site corridor 32323 3177671 Milford Haven Railway Station 14 Transport Interchange 43523 2278576 Pembroke Dock Bus/Rail 15 Interchange 43433 3186573

129

Environmental Social Economic Value for Regional Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 2 Ob 7 Ob 1 Ob 3 Ob 4 Money Delivery Impact Total

Weighting 1 1 1 3 3 2 Haverfordwest to Tenby via Pemb 16 Bus Corridor 4444 432587 78 Pembroke to Milford Haven Bus 17 Corridor 4444 432589 82 18 Waterston Bypass 3331 331666 65 Blackbridge Access 19 Improvement 3331 331666 65 Haverfordwest to Milford Haven 20 Bus Corridor 4444 432589 82 Quadrant Bus Station 21 Interchange 54 54 4 4110109 105 22 Metro 44 44 4 3210108 101 Swansea west Park and Ride 23 Site 3353 233886 82 Landore Park and Ride 24 extension 4343 232888 85 Carmarthen road bus priority 25 measures 4444 432888 89 Swansea Air Quality Package 26 including Hafod Scheme 5443 223566 68 27 Morfa Distributor Road 3231 321575 61 28 Swansea west Access Road 2131 331666 62 New Road Access to Morriston 29 Hospital 3242 321777 73 Strategic Bus Corridors around 30 Swansea 4343 321556 62 Port Talbot PDR completion of 31 1A & B 43 43 3 3110106 93 32 Port Talbot PDR Stage 2 22 3 2 4 42 8 1010 93 Baglan Energy Park Link 33 Bridge 3123 431675 66

130

Environmental Social Environmental Value for Regional Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 2 Ob 7 Ob 1 Ob 3 Ob 4 money Delivery impact Total

Weighting 1 1 1 3 3 2 34 Port Talbot Parkway 4443 322658 71 Port Talbot to Swansea Bus 35 Corridor 4444 432589 82 Lifestyle Changes Walking and 37 Cycling 4361 312587 73 Multi Modal Freight Facility – 38 Margam Wharf 3422 142567 65 Swansea Valley to City Centre 39 Bus Corridor 4444 432589 82 Pontardawe Cross Valley Link 40 Bridge 4344 321565 64 Haverfordwest to Fishguard via 41 St Davids Bus Corridor 4444 432557 69 Haverfordwest to Fishguard via 42 Letterston Bus Corridor 4444 432557 69 Fishguard to Cardigan Bus 43 Corridor 4444 432557 69 44 Neath to Swansea Bus Corridor 4444 432589 82 Carmarthen to Haverfordwest 45 Bus Corridor 3333 221553 53 Haverfordwest to Tenby via 46 Narberth 4444 432559 73 Port Talbot to Neath Bus 47 Corridor 4444 432589 82 48 Carmarthen Bus Station 4243 331565 63 Port Talbot Bus Station 49 Improvements 5343 221644 58 Bus Station at Swansea 50 Railway Station 4343 331511 41 51 Mumbles Bus Terminus 5343 221545 57

131

Value for Regional Environmental Social Economic Money Delivery Impact Total Value for Regional Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 2 Ob 7 Ob 1 Ob 3 Ob 4 money Delivery impact Total

Weighting 1 1 1 3 3 2 52 Tenby Bus Focal Point 5343 221765 69 53 St Davids Bus Focal Point 3131 121545 49 54 Fishguard Bus Focal Point 5343 221776 74 Swansea High Street station 55 Improvements 4453 322899 92 Carmarthen Railway Station 56 Improvements 4 4 4 2 4 1 1 8 10 8 90 Kidwelly Railway Station 57 Improvements 3352 311555 58 Clynderwen Railway Station 58 Improvements 4452 322567 69 Llanelli Railway Station 59 Improvements 4452 322567 69 Neath Railway Station 60 Improvements 4442 411558 66 Cardibach green transport 61 initiative 3320 200552 44 Hydrofoil along south Wales 62 coast linking key settlements 2011 101524 35 63 River Tawe for water taxi 3022 211552 45 Introduce Paris Velo type 64 system or cycle pool system 3341 311552 50 Good quality overnight HGV 65 parking 2212 121252 36 Regional call centre for demand 66 responsive services 2343 311556 59 Haverfordwest Airport 67 Improvements 1112 321566 56 A478 Penblewin to Cardigan 69 improvements 3231 221566 59

132

Environmental Social Economic Value for Regional Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 2 Ob 7 Ob 1 Ob 3 Ob 4 money Delivery impact Total

Weighting 1 1 1 3 3 2 Haverfordwest Bypass – A40 70 Golf club to A477 Sentry Cross 3232 331537 55

71 Tenby Park and Ride 4343 233555 62

72 St. Davids Pedestrian links 3351 312575 64 Sustainable Rural Accessibility 73 pilot 3343 321554 57 Improvements to Pembrey 74 Peninsula Access Road 2232 221554 52 Dualling the A4138 between 75 the M4 and Llanelli 2232 331557 60 CCTV package to improve 76 safety 2214 111523 39 Bridge ipackage on A4382 77 Llanwrda and Lampeter 3223 431887 80 Gwendraeth Valley Link Road 78 Phase 2 2242 331547 58 Second bridge over river Cothi 79 at Abergorlech 3123 221444 46 Re-open Goodwick station as a 80 Bus/Rail interchange 4343 331865 73 81 Whitland Rail/Bus Interchange 4343 331545 58 82 Haverfordwest Park and Ride 4343 232535 55 Trostre to Llanelli Park and 83 Ride 3332 121544 50 Park and Ride for Swansea 84 Enterprise Park 4343 232515 49

133

Environmental Social Economic Value for Regional Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 2 Ob 7 Ob 1 Ob 3 Ob 4 money Delivery impact Total

Weighting 1 1 1 3 3 2 Park and Share sites close to M4 86 junctions 4343 232567 68 87 Extend Coastal cycle path 3321 111542 43 N/S NCN route in 88 Pembrokeshire 3351 312577 68 Shared Use path from 89 Broadhaven to Village 3241 311352 43 Cycle Route from Morriston to 90 Penllergaer 4361 312555 60 More secure cycle parking in 91 town centres 3351 312662 58 City Centre urban cycle 92 network 4361 312766 71 Improve facilities for cyclists at 93 P&R sites and to use buses 4351 312555 59 Secure parking at Railway 94 stations 4233 223555 59 Capital enhancement schemes 95 for community transport 3253 321567 66 96 Investigate light rail schemes 5142 222638 61 97 Trostre to Llanelli land train 3121 221434 41 Introduce sustainable towns 98 concept 4352 222587 73 Standardised bus stops in 99 SWWITCH 2442 122555 57 100 More variable message signing 3334 222677 72 Improve Oystermouth Road 101 corridor, European Boulevard 4324 321766 70

134

Environmental Social Economic Value for Regional Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 2 Ob 7 Ob 1 Ob 3 Ob 4 money Delivery impact Total

Weighting 1 1 1 3 3 2 Path between Virgin Media offices 102 Neath Road 4361 412552 55 Haverfordwest Churnworks 103 roundabout improvements 2232 321553 51 104 Coed Darcy southern link 3232 321656 61 Water taxi from Landore P&R 105 to SA1 4022 211552 46 Water bus in Pembroke/Milford 106 Haven 3021 111522 34 North Devon to Swansea ferry 107 feasibility 3021 111522 34 108 Carmarthen Park & Ride 4343 232767 74 109 Gowerton Station 3342 311567 64 Newcastle Emlyn Bus Focal 110 Point 5343 221776 74 111 Pencader Bus Focal Point 5343 221774 70 112 Llandeilo Bus Focal Point 5343 221774 70 113 Drefach Bus Focal Point 5343 221774 70 Ammanford to Cross Hands 114 Bus Corridor 4444 432557 69 115 Saundersfoot Park and Ride 3343 122555 58 Neath Bus Station 116 redevelopment 2222 121545 49 117 Fabian Way enhancements 3231 221566 59 118 St Clears station 3352 311555 58 Cross Hands Park and Ride for 119 Carmarthen 2222 121552 46 Strategic bus corridors, Neath 120 to Amman Valley 4444 432544 60

135

Table S5

WELTAG

APPRAISAL SUMMARY TABLES

136

WelTAG Stage One Appraisal Summary Tables (ASTs)

Project 21 - Quadrant Bus Station Interchange Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Improved public transport linkages to the City Centre. Providing benefits to local, regional and national Efficiency services linking to the Quadrant Interchange. EALI The Quadrant interchange would provide enhanced links to Providing benefits to all users linking with the the employment opportunities in Swansea City Centre and Interchange. also to the areas linked to the Quadrant by public transport services. Environmental

Noise The redeveloped interchange will be sited upon the current footprint. Therefore there will be no positive or negative Neutral discriminatory impact. Local Air Quality Modal shift to public transport as a result of this enhanced service would reduce road borne traffic. Greenhouse Gas Modal shift to public transport as a result of this enhanced Emissions service would reduce road borne greenhouse gas emissions. Landscape & The new interchange would entail redevelopment of the Benefits to the Quadrant site and the immediate Townscape present dilapidated Quadrant Bus Station. The surrounding area. redevelopment would provide an attractive new built environment. Bio-diversity The redevelopment will occur on the existing bus station footprint and will therefore not affect local biodiversity Neutral adversely. Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Impacting upon the area affected by constructions works. Social

Transport Safety Encouraging public transport travel will improve safety as a Providing benefits to all users linking with the result of public transport being a safer means of transport Interchange. than private car use.

137

Personal Security The new Quadrant Bus Interchange has been designed to Directly benefiting the users of the Interchange. reduce the opportunity for crime through measures such as reducing blind spots and improving lighting. Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Providing better links to the LC and NCN 4 and NCN 43. Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of road air quality TPO 6 Improving the local built environment TPO 7 Improving personal safety Public Acceptability: The present Quadrant Bus Station has been identified as being in a poor condition by the public for a number of years. A new facility is therefore likely to be widely welcomed. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Bus operators can expect patronage to increase as a result of a better facility. Revised departure charges would need to be applied sensitively. Technical and operational feasibility: The current facility is in a poor state of repair. The new facility will reduce the ongoing maintenance burden of the current bus station. Financial affordability and The scheme will be largely funded through the current Transport Grant arrangements, although the construction will now deliverability: progress into the first year of the RTP. Risks: Low.

Project 32 - Port Talbot PDR Stage 2 Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Cost £114M. The scheme forms the final and main part of the Regional impact through relief of congestion on the Efficiency Port Talbot Peripheral Distributor Road (PDR) connecting the M4. recently completed sections of the route to M4 junction 38. Local impact through reduction of traffic on the A48, It will relieve congestion on the over-capacity elevated which is bounded by residential properties, section of the M4 in the area, as well as on the A48 through particularly by provision of access to major industrial the town. and commercial locations for heavy vehicles. EALI The scheme will open up large areas of land in the Docks area for development and provide a major infrastructure

138

improvement to the Docks, Corus and other development areas on the M4 corridor. Environmental

Noise Increased traffic noise for properties in the vicinity of the route, but offset by reductions for a larger number of properties along the A48 and, to a lesser extent, the M4. Local Air Quality Some deterioration in close proximity to the route, but offset by improvements adjacent to the A48 and M4, particularly by providing a freer flowing alternative to during times of severe congestion on the latter. Greenhouse Gas Increased emissions along the new route and possibly overall Emissions if the increased capacity leads to additional overall traffic. Landscape & Careful design will minimise the visual impact of the road Townscape which over most of its length is close to major industrial and Neutral commercial sites. Bio-diversity There may be some impact on local habitats which would be assessed by appropriate surveys to inform the design and constructions processes. Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

Transport Safety High quality design and the reduction of traffic on existing infrastructure will improve road safety. Personal Security No impact. Neutral Permeability No impact. Appropriate provision will maintain access across Neutral the line of the road. Physical Fitness No impact. Neutral Social Inclusion No impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy.

139

TPO 3 TPO 4 TPO 5 Public Acceptability: No objections received. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Some detailed objections from affected landowners which are being addressed. Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 55 – Swansea High Street Station Improvements Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Improved passenger facilities to encourage modal shift to rail. Efficiency EALI Improved facilities will improve the passenger experience enabling enhanced access to employment opportunity and services. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift to rail replacing car use may afford improvements in air quality. Local to the site. Neutral Greenhouse Gas No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to the site. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The improvements would greatly enhance the local townscape and Complementing the improvements Townscape complement the recent improvements made to the exterior of the station. made to other parts of the City Centre Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to the site. Neutral Heritage The improvements will be sensitive to the existing historical fabric of the Local to the site. building, preserving what is of value. Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to the site. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Social Transport Safety No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Personal Security The enhancements at the station will design out opportunities for crime

through various measures. Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Social Inclusion Improved accessibility will improve the passenger experience for all users. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Human Rights

140

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access to a wide range of services and facilities, including employment. TPO 2 Improving the quality of transport options. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency of the movement of people. TPO 4 To improve integration. TPO 5 To implement measures which reduce the adverse impact of transport on health. TPO 6 Reducing the negative impact of transport. Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Convergence funding will be necessary in conjunction with NSIP to fund the total cost of the scheme. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 56 - Carmarthen Railway Station Improvements Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Improved passenger facilities to encourage modal shift to rail. Efficiency EALI Improved facilities will improve the passenger experience enabling enhanced access to employment opportunities and services. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift to rail replacing car use may afford improvements in air quality. Neutral Greenhouse Gas No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The improvements would greatly enhance the local townscape and Complementing improvements made to Townscape complement the recent improvements made in the vicinity of the station the riverside area of the town centre. building iwhich have included the construction of the Pont King Morgan bridge providing a direct link for pedestrians/cyclists to the town centre, riverside area and NCR, improved facilities for Park & Ride passengers with improved car and coach parking, as well as the installation of improved waiting facilities for bus users and traffic calming measures to reduce speed of vehicular traffic. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage The improvements will be sensitive to the existing historical fabric of the building, preserving what is of value.

141

Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Social Transport Safety Providing a safer environment for pedestrians to access the station Personal Security The enhancements at the station will incorporate design features that minimise the opportunity for criminal activity and will enhance current measures associated with its Safer Station status. Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Physical Fitness The provision of facilities for cyclists and improved pedestrian/cyclist access to the Pont Morgan Bridge providing a direct link to the town centre and NCR will contribute to improved physical fitness. Social Inclusion Improved accessibility will improve the passenger experience for all users. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access to a wide range of services and facilities, including employment TPO 2 Improving the quality of transport operations TPO 3 To improve the efficiency of the movement of people TPO 4 To improve integration TPO 5 To implement measures which reduce the adverse impact of transport on health TPO 6 Reducing the negative impact of transport TPO 7 Improve road safety and personal security Public Acceptability: All are supportive and Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Funding through NSIP and TG monies deliverability: Risks:

Project 24 - Landore Park and Ride Extension Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the City Centre. Reduction in City Centre All road users (light and heavy Efficiency traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The extension of the Park & Ride facility would provide more affordable car parking and access to the employment opportunities in the City Centre.

142

Environment Noise More traffic at the Landore site would result in greater noise levels, but Noise relief benefits the public spaces would be accompanied with less traffic related noise in the City Centre. of the City Centre, while the greater noise levels around the Landore site Neutral should be localised and would be away from residential areas. Local Air Quality City Centre traffic diverted to the Landore site would lead to a reduction of Local to the Landore site, while the traffic travelling through the Hafod AQMA and would therefore be expected benefits would be much more wide- to have a positive effect upon Local Air Quality. ranging. Greenhouse Gas Negligible changes in CO2 emissions, considering the majority of additional Emissions traffic accommodated in the expansion would have been passing the site Neutral enroute to the City Centre. Landscape and The extension of the site would result in the loss of some brownfield green- Landore Park & Ride site and the City Townscape space. However the associated reduction of cars in the City Centre would Centre. reduce the effects of City traffic on the built environment. Bio-diversity The site would be constructed on former industrial land (now green-space). There would therefore be localised impacts on habitats. Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment The site would be situated within 400 metres of the Tawe River, however Neutral the use of SuDS would mitigate against impact here. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Post-construction the use of SuDS could mitigate against localised impact of the site, particularly with regard to surface run-off. Social Transport Safety Few cars travelling into the City Centre would improve safety. All road users to benefit. Personal Security There is greater security provision at Park & Ride sites including staffed facilities, security fencing and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness Park & Cycle from the Park & Ride sites is supported as a mode. Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport

143

Public Acceptability: Mostly supportive; and Park & Ride across the city has experienced significant growth in use since inception. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Improved reliability of journey times and reduced congestion are likely to be supported. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Funding sources have been largely identified. deliverability: Risks: An appropriate and acceptable site is yet to be firmly approved.

Project 68 - Road Safety Package Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Measures to improve road safety and reduce road traffic All road users and businesses and organisations which Efficiency collisions will reduce delays and congestion on the network rely on road freight EALI Reductions in delays and congestion can help to encourage All businesses and local and regional economies inward investment and stimulate employment Environmental

Noise No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Local Air Quality Reduced delays and congestion will improve local air quality All areas where measures are implemented Greenhouse Gas Reduced delays and congestion will help to reduce levels of All areas where measures are implemented Emissions transport related greenhouse gas emissions Landscape & The impact would be specific to measures and locations and Local to the implementation of specific measures Neutral Townscape would require careful evaluation Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Heritage The impact would be specific to measures and locations and Local to the implementation of specific measures Neutral would require careful evaluation Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Soils No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Social

Transport Safety These measures would improve transport safety and reduce All areas were measures are implemented will benefit traffic collisions Personal Security Road safety measures will improve the perception and actual All areas were measures are implemented will benefit safety of individual road users Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral

144

Social Inclusion Vulnerable road users and children from deprived All vulnerable users in areas where measures are communities are more likely to be involved in road traffic implemented will benefit collisions. These measures will improve their social inclusion Equality, Diversity & As for above, equality will be improved for vulnerable road All vulnerable users in areas where measures are Human Rights users implemented will benefit Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To Improve access for all TPO 3 To improve the efficiency of the movement of people and freight in the region TPO 5 To implement measures which contribute to improvements in air quality and reduced greenhouse gas emissions TPO 7 To improve road safety in the region Public Acceptability: These measures are widely supported by the public and businesses organisations across the region Acceptability to other stakeholders : Local residents who may be affected by individual features will need to be involved in the implementation process Technical and operational feasibility: Road safety measures are already widely used across the region and all measures will be implemented to current best practice and technical guidance Financial affordability and deliverability: Road safety measures represent good value for money in terms of the regional costs to the economy of collisions and personal injuries and delays to other road users Risks: Low

Project 25 - Carmarthen Road Bus Priority Measures Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the City Centre by public All road users to benefit from reduced journey times. Efficiency transport. Reduction in traffic associated with modal shift. EALI Faster transport times into the city would increase access All those able to access bus services utilising the opportunities to jobs. priority measures. Environmental

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Possible All those able to access bus services utilising the long-term reductions in noise if modal shift is achieved. priority measures. Local Air Quality Reduced traffic flows and congestion would improve local air Local to the site. quality. Greenhouse Gas Reduced traffic flows and congestion would reduce Local to the site. Emissions emissions. Landscape & Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral

145

Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social

Transport Safety No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the impact of traffic upon the built environment of areas relieved by the road TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as negative impacts to other road users can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Detailed design and costings are yet to be undertaken and therefore funding source has not be identified. Risks: Medium

Project 6 - Carmarthen to Swansea Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into Swansea. Reduction in traffic Bus operators and users along the corridor. Car users Efficiency into Swansea. along the corridor who benefit from reduced congestion. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities Providing benefits to all able to access the bus through reduced travel times. corridor. Environmental

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links Along route of bus corridor may result in improved air quality.

146

Greenhouse Gas Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links Along route of bus corridor Emissions may result in improved air quality. Landscape & Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant local Along route of bus corridor Townscape environment. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site Neutral Social

Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into Swansea would improve safety. Swansea and all areas from Carmarthen to Swansea through which corridor passes Personnel Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will All along length of bus corridor benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services. TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements. TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport. TPO 4 Improving integration. TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport. TPO 6 Improving air quality and reduce the adverse impact of transport on health. TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision. Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to All are supportive of the scheme as long as any environmental impacts can be mitigated. other stakeholders : Technical and Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. operational feasibility: Financial Detailed design is not complete, but these types of schemes are relatively low costs with the potential of big returns per £ spent. Bus corridor affordability and schemes have already been successfully delivered in the region. deliverability: Risks: Low.

147

Project 17 - Pembroke to Milford Haven Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging increased modal shift to bus public transport. Reduction in All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Town Centre traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The development of the bus corridor would provide faster, more reliable public transport connectivity between key settlements and improved access to employment, education and training, healthcare and tourism opportunities. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route. The key settlements may Local to the route. benefit from reduced noise levels if congestion can be reduced through this Neutral measure. Local Air Quality The bus corridor measures may result in reduced congestion at peak hours. The reduction in slow moving congested traffic will result in a reduction in emissions associated with standing traffic. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The bus corridor measures may require the reallocation of some road space. Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Local to the route. Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the route. Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity Neutral to design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal Security measures would be considered in developing the route. Permeability Greatly improves links along the A477 corridor between Pembroke and Milford Haven. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion The measures would result in an enhanced service between key settlements providing improved public transport facilities for non-car users. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights

148

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales.

Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Medium cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 20 – Haverfordwest to Milford Haven Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging increased modal shift to bus public transport. Reduction in All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Town Centre traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The development of the bus corridor would provide faster, more reliable public transport connectivity between key settlements and improved access to employment, education and training, healthcare and tourism opportunities. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route. The key settlements may Local to the route. benefit from reduced noise levels if congestion can be reduced through this Neutral measure. Local Air Quality The bus corridor measures may result in reduced congestion at peak hours. The reduction in slow moving congested traffic will result in a reduction in

149

emissions associated with standing traffic. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The bus corridor measures may require the reallocation of some road space. Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Local to the route. Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the route. Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity Neutral to design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal Security measures would be considered in developing the route. Permeability Greatly improves links along the A4076 corridor between Haverfordwest and Milford Haven. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion The measures would result in an enhanced service between key settlements providing improved public transport facilities for non-car users. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works.

150

Financial affordability and Medium cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 23 - Swansea West Park & Ride Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the City Centre. Reduction in All road users (light and heavy vehicles) to benefit Efficiency City Centre traffic. from reduced journey times. EALI The Park & Ride facility would provide more affordable car parking and access to the employment opportunities in the City Centre. Environmental

Noise Potential increases in localised traffic may result in greater Noise relief benefits the public spaces of the City noise levels, but would be accompanied with less traffic Centre, while the greater noise levels around the site Neutral related noise in the City Centre. should be localised and would be away from residential areas. Local Air Quality City Centre traffic diverted to the Landore site would lead to Local to the Landore site, while the benefits would be a reduction of traffic travelling through the Hafod AQMA and much more wide-ranging. would therefore be expected to have a positive effect upon Local Air Quality. Greenhouse Gas Negligible changes in CO2 emissions, considering the majority Emissions of additional traffic accommodated in the expansion would Neutral have been passing the site enroute to the City Centre. Landscape & The extension of the site would result in the loss of some Landore Park & Ride site and the City Centre. Townscape brownfield green-space. However the associated reduction of cars in the City Centre would reduce the effects of City traffic on the built environment. Bio-diversity The site would be constructed on former industrial land (now green-space). There would therefore be localised impacts on habitats. Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment The site would be situated within 400 metres of the Tawe River, however the use of SuDS would mitigate against Neutral impact here. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Post-construction the

151

use of SuDS could mitigate against localised impact of the site, particularly with regard to surface run-off. Social

Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into the City Centre would improve All road users to benefit. safety. Personal Security There is greater security provision at Park & Ride sites including staffed facilities, security fencing and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness Park & Cycle from the Park & Ride sites is supported as a mode. Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any Neutral Human Rights individual equality impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport Public Acceptability: Largely supportive. This can be demonstrated through large increases in park & ride patronage across the existing 3 sites since their inception. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Due to the proximity to residential properties their may be some local opposition. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Funding sources have been largely identified. deliverability: Risks: An appropriate and acceptable site is yet to be firmly approved.

Project 35 - Port Talbot to Swansea Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into Swansea. Reduction in traffic Bus operators and users along the corridor. Car users Efficiency into Swansea. along the corridor who benefit from reduced congestion. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities Providing benefits to all able to access the bus through reduced travel times. corridor. Environmental

152

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links Along length of corridor may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links Along length of corridor Emissions may result in improved air quality. Landscape & Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant local Local to corridor and in Swansea City Centre Townscape environment. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site Neutral Social

Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into Swansea would improve safety. Swansea Personnel Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will All residents along and near to the corridor benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services. TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements. TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport. TPO 4 Improving integration. TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport. TPO 6 Improving air quality and reduce the adverse impact of transport on health. TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision. Public Acceptability: All are supportive of public transport service improvements. Acceptability to All are supportive of the scheme as long as any environmental impacts can be mitigated. other stakeholders : Technical and Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. operational feasibility: Financial Detailed design is not complete, but these types of schemes are relatively low costs with the potential of big returns per £ spent. Bus corridor affordability and schemes have already been successfully delivered in the region.

153

deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 39 - Swansea Valley to City Centre Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the City Centre. Reduction in A general benefit to the City Centre and specific to Efficiency City Centre traffic. the route. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities Providing benefits to all able to access the bus through reduced travel times. corridor. Environmental

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links Emissions may result in improved air quality. Landscape & Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant local Townscape environment. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact is anticipated. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social

Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into the City Centre would improve City Centre. safety. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements

154

TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impact of transport. TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. stakeholders : Technical and operational Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. feasibility: Financial affordability and Convergence funding will be necessary in conjunction with NSIP to fund the total cost of the scheme. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 44 - Neath (Llandarcy) to Swansea Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into Swansea. Reduction in traffic Bus operators and users along the corridor. Car users Efficiency into Swansea. along the corridor who benefit from reduced congestion. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities Providing benefits to all able to access the bus through reduced travel times. corridor. Environmental

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links Local to site. may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links Local to site. Emissions may result in improved air quality. Landscape & Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant local Local to site. Townscape environment. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to site. Neutral Social

155

Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into Swansea would improve safety. Swansea City Centre and suburbs of Neath Personnel Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will Along length of entire corridor benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services. TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements. TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport. TPO 4 Improving integration. TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport. TPO 6 Improving air quality and reduce the adverse impact of transport on health. TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision. Public Acceptability: All are supportive of improved public transport services. Acceptability to All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. other stakeholders : Technical and Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. operational feasibility: Financial Detailed design is not complete, but these types of schemes are relatively low costs with the potential of big returns per £ spent. Bus corridor affordability and schemes have already been successfully delivered in the region. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 47 - Port Talbot to Neath Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Improved access to bus services along the corridor. Improved Bus operators and users along the corridor. Car users Efficiency bus journey times. along the corridor who benefit from reduced congestion. EALI Improved access to jobs and other facilities Environmental

156

Noise Improvements at existing bus stops along the corridor and to Neutral bus flow. Hence, no impact. Local Air Quality Improved bus flow and transfer of travel to bus. People resident or travelling along the corridor. Greenhouse Gas Improved bus flow and transfer of travel to bus. People resident or travelling along the corridor. Emissions Landscape & Improved design of infrastructure such as bus shelters. People resident close to, using or travelling past Townscape improved infrastructure. Bio-diversity All works within existing highway cartilage. Hence, no Neutral impact. Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible localised impacts of small scale construction works. Social

Transport Safety Encouragement of bus use and transfer of travel from car will improve safety. Personal Security High quality, well designed facilities which encourage greater bus usage will enhance personal safety. Permeability Improved routes to bus stops will improve access to services. Physical Fitness Increased bus usage involving walking to/from bus services. Social Inclusion Improved accessibility to bus services and hence to facilities, job opportunities, etc. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact for mobility impaired people, non drivers. Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy. TPO 4 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions.

TPO 5 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including biodiversity. Public Acceptability: Supported.

157

Acceptability to other stakeholders : Supported. Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 2 - Cross Hands Economic Link Road Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Cost: £25m. Improved access to the existing Food and Retail Parks at Cross All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Hands and to a planned area of economic expansion, relieving pressure on vehicles) to benefit from improved the Trunk Road roundabout at the junction of the A476. access and reduced journey times. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities and services All road users. through improvements to the transport network. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Significantly increased Local to the site. levels of traffic would be anticipated along the route which will result in increased noise levels locally. Local Air Quality Reduced congestion at peak times and during holiday seasons will improve the flow of traffic and may result in improved air quality. Increased overall Neutral traffic flows will deliver poorer air quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and A new road would have to be integrated sensitively because of proximity to Neutral Townscape residential areas. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Reducing the number of vehicles on the Trunk Road roundabout would All road users to benefit. improve safety at this gyratory. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Improved access to this area will promote use of sustainable modes Neutral including walking, cycling and public transport. Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral

158

Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO.2 Improving the sustainability of transport TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through better provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Convergence funding and developer contributions will be sought together with RTP monies to fund the cost of the scheme. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 77– Bridge Improvements package on A4382 Llanwrda and Lampeter Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic The programme will improve accessibility through strengthening and, where All road users (light and heavy vehicles) Efficiency necessary. replacing bridge structures at key locations across the County. The to benefit. programme will address current access problems on the strategic and local highway network and so mitigate against any adverse effects on the local, regional and national economy. EALI The programme will provide improved access to employment opportunities and The programme plays a vital role in services through improved accessibility. The programme is essential to overcome ensuring that communities throughout the economic repercussions that arise when a bridge is deemed as substandard. Carmarthenshire are accessible with The imposition of a weight restriction as a temporary measure to meet good links to the local and strategic regulatory safety standards has detrimental impacts on the economy with the highway network maintained. rural economy experiencing particular hardship. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Local Air Quality Reduced congestion and improvements to the flow of traffic may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Emissions Landscape and No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral

159

Townscape Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Addressing the safety issues relating to substandard bridge structures will All road users to benefit. improve safety for all road users. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Improvements to the design of a number of replacement bridge structures will in some locations enable the promotion of sustainable modes and so aid physical fitness. Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality impact Neutral Human Rights group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services and facilities TPO 2 Improving the sustainability of transport TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through better provision

Public Acceptability: All are supportive of the scheme. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and On-going WAG and RTP monies will be sought to finance the scheme. deliverability: Risks:

160

Project 10 - Develop Valleys Cycle Network and Connect 2 Routes Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Promoting the use of walking and cycling as a mode of Benefits to all road users and to employers and Efficiency transport. employees through creation and promotion of healthy and sustainable transport to work. EALI The improvements to walking and cycling infrastructure To all businesses, organisations and individuals local to would seek to establish modes as a faster more sustainable facilities provided means of moving around. Environmental

Noise Increase in cycling through modal shift may help to reduce Urban centres where improved cycling facilities are traffic noise. provided Local Air Quality Walking and cycling are a sustainable mode of travel and All areas along a route, but particularly urban areas. where modal shift can be achieved air quality will be improved. Greenhouse Gas As above. All areas along a route, but particularly urban areas. Emissions Landscape & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to site of works Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to site of works Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to site of works Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to site of works Neutral Soils No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to site of works Neutral Social

Transport Safety Walking and cycling, as a mode, is consistently safer than All users along routes or at facilities the prevailing car use. Personnel Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability An improved cycle network would likely result in a more All local communities along routes permeable landscape. Physical Fitness Promotion of walking and cycling through the network would All users along routes or at facilities likely result in benefits to physical fitness. Social Inclusion The network could be used by all. All users along routes or at facilities Equality, Diversity & A walking and cycling network would be accessible to the Most local residents Human Rights majority of able bodied users and many users with mobility impairments.

161

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access to all to a wide range of services. TPO 2 Improving the sustainable movement of traffic. TPO 4 Improving integration. TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport. TPO 6 Reducing the impact of traffic upon the built environment of areas relieved by the road. Public Acceptability: Public would likely be supportive of the network. Acceptability to The network would be largely supported providing it does not reduce capacity of road network for strategic route movements other stakeholders : Technical and Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. operational feasibility: Financial Similar schemes have already been delivered in partnership with Sustrans and other partners. affordability and deliverability: Risks: Medium

Project 16 - Haverfordwest to Tenby via Pembroke Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Cost: £m. Encouraging increased modal shift to bus public transport. All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Reduction in Town Centre traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The development of the bus corridor would provide faster, more reliable public transport connectivity between key settlements and improved access to employment, education and training, healthcare and tourism opportunities. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route. The key settlements may Local to the route. benefit from reduced noise levels if congestion can be reduced through this Neutral measure. Local Air Quality The bus corridor measures may result in reduced congestion at peak hours. The reduction in slow moving congested traffic will result in a reduction in emissions associated with standing traffic. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The bus corridor measures may require the reallocation of some road space.

162

Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Local to the route. Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the route. Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity Neutral to design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal Security measures would be considered in developing the route. Permeability Greatly improves links along the A4076/A477/A4139 corridor between Haverfordwest and Tenby via Pembroke. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion The measures would result in an enhanced service between key settlements providing improved public transport facilities for non-car users. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Medium cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

163

Project 9 - Llanelli Bus Station Improvements/Interchange Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Improved public transport links to/from Llanelli Town Centre Providing benefits to local, regional Efficiency and national passenger transport services using Llanelli Bus Station. EALI The redevelopment of the bus interchange would provide enhanced access Providing benefits to all users and opportunities to local employment, health, leisure and educational service providers of the Bus Station establishments within Llanelli town centre and its environs as well as areas linked to Llanelli Bus Station by local, regional and national public transport services. Environment Noise The redevelopment site is in an existing urban centre and is unlikely to add Neutral any detrimental additional noise levels. Local Air Quality Modal shift to public transport as a result of this enhanced facility would reduce road borne traffic. Greenhouse Gas Modal shift to public transport as a result of this enhanced facility would Emissions reduce road borne greenhouse gas emissions. Landscape and The new interchange would entail redevelopment of the present dilapidated Benefits to the Bus Station site and the Townscape Bus Station. The redevelopment would provide an attractive new built Upper Park Street area of the town environment and will form an important part of the Llanelli Eastern Quarter centre which forms an important part development. of the town centre enhancement scheme. Bio-diversity The redevelopment will occur on the existing bus station footprint and will therefore not affect local biodiversity adversely. Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Social Transport Safety Encouraging public transport use will improve safety as a result of public transport being a safer means of transport than private car use. Personal Security The redeveloped interchange has been designed to reduce the opportunity for crime through measures such as reducing blind spots and improved lighting and staffed facilities and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness Providing better links to the Leisure Centre,NCN ??and the Millennium Coastal Park . Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral

164

Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of local air quality TPO 6 Improving the local built environment TPO 7 Improving personal safety Public Acceptability: The current Bus Station has been identified as being in poor condition for a number of years. A new improved facility is likely to be widely welcomed. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All public transport operators are fully supportive of the scheme. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 14 - Milford Haven Railway Station Transport Interchange Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Cost £0.4m. Introduce interchange facilities for public transport users. Increased Milford Haven Station Efficiency rail patronage. √ EALI Improve rail connectivity through rail travel more attractive Milford Haven Station √ Environment Noise Unlikely to significantly impact locally, Modal shift reduces overall noise impact Marginal increase locally, decrease non Neutral locally Local Air Quality Modal shift to public transport encouraged Milford Haven √ Greenhouse Gas No significant impact Neutral Emissions Landscape and Facility and landscaping will improve this gateway Milford Haven Station Townscape √ Bio-diversity No significant impact Neutral Heritage No impact Neutral Water Environment No impact on local watercourses Neutral Soils Minimal impact as any construction will be on already constructed surfaces Neutral

165

Social Transport Safety Improved pedestrian facilities and modal transfer to safer modes Milford Haven Station √ Personal Security Improved personal security due to lighting, CCTV and footfall Milford Haven Station √ Permeability Improved link to Havens Head Retail Park due to bridge Milford Haven Station √ Physical Fitness Access to the station by cycling and walking improved Milford Haven Station √ Social Inclusion Improved public transport for non-car users Milford Haven Station √ Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on improved access to the station Milford Haven Station √ Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Improvement concept previously supported in 2006 public consultation Acceptability to other stakeholders : No critical objections anticipated Technical and operational feasibility: To be confirmed but no critical problems anticipated Financial affordability and deliverability: To be confirmed but no critical problems anticipated Risks: Low

Project 54 - Fishguard Bus Focal Point Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic No impact on bus journey times or traffic conditions. Potential reduction in Neutral Efficiency car travel with transfer to public transport. EALI Could improve perceptions of bus travel for all types of journeys. Improvement of facilities may encourage greater use of public transport. Disability Discrimination Act complaint bus stops would also be beneficial Environment Noise No significant impact on noise. Neutral Local Air Quality Could encourage existing car users to transfer to public transport.

166

Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and No visual impact. Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Impact from excavation associated with construction of hardstanding area in existing verge Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity to design in safety measures. Personal Security Improved and well-maintained waiting facilities, with lighting, will significantly improve perceptions of personal security. Permeability No impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Potential slight increase in physical activity if existing car users walk Neutral to/from public transport focal points. Social Inclusion Investment improves accessibility to public transport vehicles for mobility impaired. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users, encouraging access for all. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated.

167

Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Low cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 108 - Carmarthen Park & Ride Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the town centre. All road users (light and heavy Efficiency vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The Park & Ride facility would provide more affordable car parking and access to the employment opportunities in Carmarthen town centre. Environment Noise Potential increases in localised traffic may result in greater noise levels, but Noise relief benefits the public spaces would be accompanied with less traffic related noise in the town centre. of the town centre, while the greater noise levels around the site should be Neutral localised and would be away from residential areas. Local Air Quality Town centre traffic diverted to the Park & Ride site would lead to a Local to the town centre site, while reduction of traffic accessing the town centre and would therefore be the benefits would be much more expected to have a positive affect on Local Air Quality. wide-ranging. Greenhouse Gas Significant improvement in CO2 emissions as reduction in traffic entering the Emissions town centre. Landscape and The development of the site would result in the loss of some greenfield Townscape space. However the associated reduction of cars entering town centre would reduce the effects of town centre traffic on the built environment. Bio-diversity The site would be constructed on agricultural land there would therefore be localised impacts on habitats. Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment The site would be situated close to the River Towy. However the use of SuDS Neutral would mitigate against impact here. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Post-construction the use of SuDS could mitigate against localised impact of the site, particularly with regard to surface run-offs. Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into centre of Carmarthhen would improve safety. All road users to benefit.

168

Personal Security There is greater security provision at Park & Ride sites including staffed facilities, security fencing and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness Park & Cycle from the Park & Ride sites is supported as a mode. Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO7 Improve road safety and personal security Public Acceptability: All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 15 - Pembroke Dock Bus/Rail Interchange Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Cost: £0.8m. New interchange facilities for rail, bus, coach and taxi Bus, rail, coach and taxi users Efficiency users/passengers with vehicular link to Pembrokeshire Retail Park. Reduced √ congestion on London Road signals due to reassigned traffic. EALI Improvement to facilities encourage greater use of public transport, tourism and The local economy and town centre port interchange interconnectedness. Additional public transport revenue would benefit √ estimated as 100 passengers a day generating £365,000 per annum revenue. Environment Noise Modal shift to rail will reduce overall traffic flows and reduce noise impacts Noise relief to Pembroke Dock area but overall. Localised increase in noise levels for local residents increased noise locally to the station. √ Local Air Quality Encourage existing car users to transfer to public transport General marginal modal shift locally from the car √ Greenhouse Gas Encourage existing car users to transfer to public transport General marginal modal shift locally √

169

Emissions from the car Landscape and Creation of a modern interchange facility at a wasteland site in the centre of Pembroke Dock Centre Townscape Pembroke Dock √ Bio-diversity The site would be constructed on former industrial land. No known deleterious Neutral impact Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Water Environment No impact on local watercourses Neutral Soils Impact from excavation works associated with construction of interchange X facilities Social Transport Safety improved pedestrian facilities Pembroke Dock Centre √ Personal Security Improved personal security due to lighting, CCTV and footfall around the station Pembroke Dock Station √ Permeability permeability improved both within town and to settlements served by public Pembroke Dock Centre transport. √ Physical Fitness Improved physical fitness as people are encouraged to walk/cycle and use public Pembroke Dock transport √ Social Inclusion Improved public transport interchange facility for non-car users Pembroke Dock Centre √ Equality, Diversity & positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments, and those Pembroke Dock Centre Human Rights without a car √

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support shown in the 2006 Pembroke Dock traffic & Transportation Exhibition Acceptability to other stakeholders : Stakeholder support shown in the 2006 Pembroke Dock traffic & Transportation Exhibition Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works Financial affordability and deliverability: Costs to be met through Public Sector support and Private Planning assistance Risks: Specific funding has not yet been identified

170

Project 46 - Haverfordwest to Tenby via Narberth Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging increased modal shift to bus public transport. Reduction in All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Town Centre traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The development of the bus corridor would provide faster, more reliable public transport connectivity between key settlements and improved access to employment, education and training, healthcare and tourism opportunities. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route. The key settlements may Local to the route. benefit from reduced noise levels if congestion can be reduced through this Neutral measure. Local Air Quality The bus corridor measures may result in reduced congestion at peak hours. The reduction in slow moving congested traffic will result in a reduction in emissions associated with standing traffic. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The bus corridor measures may require the reallocation of some road space. Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Local to the route. Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the route. Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity Neutral to design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal Security measures would be considered in developing the route. Permeability Greatly improves links along the A40/A478 corridor between Haverfordwest and Tenby via Narberth. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion The measures would result in an enhanced service between key settlements providing improved public transport facilities for non-car users. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights

171

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Medium cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 98 - Introduce Sustainable Towns Concept Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Improved information and access to sustainable transport All road users to benefit from reduced congestion. Efficiency should result in modal shift and may support reduced traffic Passenger transport companies to benefit from congestion and associated costs to the economy increased patronage EALI Should result in more sustainable and cost effective access Employers benefit from wider pool of employees and to employment and reduce cost barrier to economically all benefit from reduced economic inactivity inactive securing employment and training opportunities Environmental

Noise No negative impact, more sustainable travel could reduce In currently congested areas traffic noise Local Air Quality No negative impact, more sustainable travel could improve In all areas in the region currently experiencing reduce local air quality air quality Greenhouse Gas No negative impact, more sustainable travel could reduce Across the region Emissions greenhouse gas emissions

172

Landscape & No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Soils No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Social

Transport Safety Reduced congestion should lead to fewer road traffic All areas to benefit accidents Personal Security More cyclists and pedestrians should improve actual and All areas to benefit perceived safety Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Physical Fitness More walking and cycling should improve individual fitness All areas to benefit Social Inclusion Sustainable and health access to service and facilities can All areas to benefit promote social inclusion Equality, Diversity & Encouraging sustainable travel will improve travel equality All areas to benefit Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all TPO 2 Improving the range and equality of sustainable transport options TPO 4 Improving the integration between modes of transport TPO 5 Implement measures which contribute towards air quality improvements and reducing carbon emissions TPO 7 Improving road safety and personal security Public Acceptability: All supportive of measures to support improved sustainable transport options and raised awareness Acceptability to other stakeholders : All supportive Technical and operational feasibility: Operationally proven in numerous regions but requires significant revenue input as well as capital investment Financial affordability and deliverability: Capital investment relatively low, but needs to be supported by ongoing revenue funding Risks: Low

Project 37 - Lifestyle Changes Walking and Cycling Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Widespread impact on travel choices across the region. Widespread across the region for short distance Efficiency Increased use of sustainable modes of travel. journeys. EALI Limited. Neutral

173

Environmental

Noise Limited. Possible reduction in local traffic noise where Neutral journeys are transferred from car. Local Air Quality Limited. Possible improvement where journeys are Neutral transferred from car. Greenhouse Gas Limited. Possible reduction where journeys are transferred Neutral Emissions from car. Landscape & No impact. Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity No impact. Neutral Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible localised impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

Transport Safety Possible reduction in casualties through reduced vehicle use Neutral though increased walkers/cyclists may be exposed to risks. Personal Security Limited. Neutral Permeability Improved access to local facilities. Physical Fitness Improved through greater use of active travel modes. Social Inclusion Improved through better access to local facilities and greater community activity. Equality, Diversity & No impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well being. TPO 3 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 4 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including biodiversity. TPO 5 Public Acceptability: Supported

174

Acceptability to other stakeholders : Supported Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 80 - Re-open Goodwick Station as a Bus/Rail Interchange Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Cost £0.5 - £2.0m. Interchange facility serving the communities of Goodwick, Bus, rail and taxi users √ Efficiency Fishguard and North Pembrokeshire. Freight intermodal facility potential. EALI Increased economic activity and spin off effects in Goodwick. Station locality √ Environment Noise Localised noise increase. Encourage inter modality reduce motor vehicle use. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift to public transport encouraged Station locality √ Greenhouse Gas Modal shift to public transport encouraged Station locality √ Emissions Landscape and Development will enhance this derelict site Station locality √ Townscape Bio-diversity No significant impact Station locality Neutral Heritage Preserves and re-opens historic station Station locality √ Water Environment No significant impact known Station locality Neutral Soils Minimal Station locality Neutral Social Transport Safety Improved transfer from road to rail will assist safety General √ Personal Security Improved personal/security due to lighting and activity Station site √ Permeability Improved access to local communities North Pembrokeshire √ Physical Fitness Walk/cycling encouraged General √ Social Inclusion Improved public transport facilities for non-car users North Pembrokeshire √ Equality, Diversity & Improved public transport facilities for non-car users North Pembrokeshire √ Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales

175

TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely Acceptability to other stakeholders : Support likely Technical and operational feasibility: Renovation of existing building pedestrian access audit Financial affordability and deliverability: To be determined Risks: Low

Project 100 - More Variable Message Signing Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Improved driver awareness on speed, local hazards and All road users to benefit Efficiency location of parking etc could help to reduce road traffic collisions EALI Reduction in road traffic collisions will reduce delays and All road users and employers to benefit congestion Environmental

Noise No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Local Air Quality No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Greenhouse Gas No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Emissions Landscape & Siting of signs would need to be considered to reduce impact Local to signs X Townscape and visual intrusion Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Heritage Siting of signs would need to be considered to reduce impact Local to signs X and visual intrusion Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Soils Possible temporary impact of construction Neutral Social

Transport Safety Signs will help to reduce road traffic collisions and improve All road users to benefit road safety Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral

176

Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all TPO 3 Improving the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight TPO 7 Improving road safety Public Acceptability: There is good support for the improved awareness and information provided by these signs Acceptability to other stakeholders : Locations for signs close to residential properties may cause some localised opposition Technical and operational feasibility: Signs are already working in SWWITCH region with proven technology and operational management in place Financial affordability and deliverability: There are initial capital costs and ongoing maintenance, but these are relatively low in relation to benefits which accrue Risks: Low

Project 13 - A477 Fingerpost Jct to Maidenwells Improvement Scheme(Southern Strategic Route) Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic £9.251m Provides a good standard route to Energy Development on the south Pembrokeshire Haven – south bank. √ Efficiency bank of Pembrokeshire Haven, bypassing Pembroke Angle Peninsula EALI Facilitators development on south bank of Haven Pembrokeshire Haven – south bank. √ Environment Noise Displaced traffic noise from Pembroke to this southern bypass route Pembroke √ Local Air Quality Displaced traffic noise from Pembroke to this southern bypass route Pembroke √ Greenhouse Gas No significant change Neutral Emissions Landscape and Maidenwells Bypass would have significant effect. Otherwise mainly on line Maidenwells X Townscape schemes having minimal effect. Bio-diversity Maidenwells Bypass would have significant effect. Otherwise mainly on line Maidenwells X schemes having minimal effect. Heritage No effects Neutral Water Environment No known effects Neutral Soils No known effects Neutral Social Transport Safety Provides an improved and appropriate standard road for Development traffic Angle Peninsula √ Personal Security Lighting, increase use and pedestrian facilities Angle Peninsula √ Permeability The route links the South bank of Pembrokeshire Haven and the Angle Peninsula √

177

to the Trunk Road Network Physical Fitness Improved pedestrian facilities √ Social Inclusion Improved pedestrian facilities √ Equality, Diversity & Improved pedestrian facilities √ Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales.

Public Acceptability: There was general support for these schemes in a Public Consultation in 2005 Acceptability to other stakeholders : Generally supportive Technical and operational feasibility: Schemes are technically feasible Financial affordability and deliverability: Partial funding has been acquired Risks: Low

Project 34 - Port Talbot Parkway Station Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Cost:£4M. Increased rail patronage through high quality Existing and new rail passengers. Road users through Efficiency station facility and improved parking. reduced congestion. EALI The improvement will enhance the attractiveness of rail travel into and out of the region and hence its internal and external connectivity. Environmental

Noise Greater activity in the vicinity of the station may increase Station locality. ? noise levels, although adjacent properties are, and are expected to continue to be, mostly commercial or industrial. Local Air Quality Increased traffic movements to/from the station may reduce Station locality air quality in the vicinity. Greenhouse Gas Transfer of travel from road to rail will reduce greenhouse Emissions gas emissions.

178

Landscape & The vision for the scheme is for a modern, high quality, Townscape iconic structure which will greatly enhance this gateway area to the town centre. Bio-diversity The scheme involves the redevelopment of the existing Station site station site, plus the provision of additional car parking. There may therefore be some impact on local habitats which would be assessed by appropriate surveys to inform the design and constructions processes. Heritage No impact Neutral Water Environment Potential impacts of water run-off will be mitigated by use Neutral of SuDS. Soils Possible impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

Transport Safety Transfer of travel from road to rail will assist safety. Personal Security The improved station environment will improve personal safety. Permeability No impact Neutral Physical Fitness Access to the station on foot and by cycle will be Neutral encouraged. Social Inclusion No impact Neutral Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on mobility impaired people of improved Human Rights access to the station. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy. TPO 4 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 5 To improve road safety and personal security in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: All supportive, particularly in respect of improved access to rail services for mobility impaired people. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All supportive. Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability:

179

Risks:

Project 92 - City Centre Urban Cycle Network Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Promoting the use of walking and cycling as a mode of City-wide benefits to all road users. Efficiency transport for Swansea City Centre. EALI The improvements to walking and cycling infrastructure would seek to establish these modes as a faster more sustainable means of moving around the City Centre than conventional car use. Environmental

Noise Increase in cycling will reduce noise levels in the city centre. City-wide. Local Air Quality Walking and cycling are a sustainable mode of travel and where modal shift can be achieved air quality will be improved. Greenhouse Gas As above. Emissions Landscape & The cycle network can be sensitively and attractively Specific to the site. Townscape implemented into the City Centre. If this investment leads to a reduction in car use this would be considered to have a positive effect upon landscape and townscape. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Social

Transport Safety Walking and Cycling, as a mode, is consistently safer than the prevailing car use. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability An improved cycle network would likely result in a more permeable landscape. Physical Fitness Promotion of walking and cycling through the network would likely result in benefits to physical fitness.

180

Social Inclusion The network could be used by all. Equality, Diversity & A walking and cycling network would be accessible to the Human Rights majority of able bodied users. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 2 Improving the sustainable movement of traffic. TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the impact of traffic upon the built environment of areas relieved by the road Public Acceptability: Public would likely be supportive of the network. Acceptability to other stakeholders : The network would be largely supported providing it does not impinge on the present road network. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Design has not yet been undertaken. Funding sources have not identified. deliverability: Risks: Medium

Project 101 - Improve Oystermouth Road corridor (European Boulevard) Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the City Centre. Improve public transport All road users (light and heavy Efficiency journey times. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The improvement of this link would enhance connectivity into the City Centre on what is presently an often congestion link. Environment Noise More traffic along this route would result in greater noise levels. Local to the Oystermouth Road corridor. Local Air Quality The reduction in congested, slow moving traffic on this route would improve local air quality Greenhouse Gas Negligible changes in CO2 emissions. The increased provision in BRT along Emissions the route may encourage a reduction in single car occupancy and therefore Neutral reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Landscape and The vision for the project is to redevelop the corridor into a European-esque Townscape Boulevard to improve traffic flow, but more importantly to enhance the aesthetic nature of the route as a gateway to the City. Bio-diversity As this proposal involves the redevelopment of existing infrastructure the Neutral impact can be considered to be negligible.

181

Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Social Transport Safety No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Personal Security The enhancement of pedestrian crossing facilities and in particular the removal of the underpass at Salubrious Place improves personal safety and the potential for criminal acts. Permeability Greatly improves links into the City from the East (in particular those accessing the City via M4 Jn 42. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion BRT may result in improved service frequency to the City Centre. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable movement TPO 4 Improving service provision and promoting multi modal transport TPO 7 Improvement to road safety measures Public Acceptability: A solution at this point is likely to be supported in light of the current problems with congestion on this section. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Improved journey reliability associated with the scheme is likely to be supported. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Funding options need to be explored and determined. deliverability: Risks: Negligable.

Project 41 - Haverfordwest to Fishguard via St Davids Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging increased modal shift to bus public transport. Reduction in All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Town Centre traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The development of the bus corridor would provide faster, more reliable public transport connectivity between key settlements and improved access to employment, education and training, healthcare and tourism opportunities. Environment

182

Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route. The key settlements may Local to the route. benefit from reduced noise levels if congestion can be reduced through this Neutral measure. Local Air Quality The bus corridor measures may result in reduced congestion at peak hours. The reduction in slow moving congested traffic will result in a reduction in emissions associated with standing traffic. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The bus corridor measures may require the reallocation of some road space. Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Local to the route. Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the route. Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity Neutral to design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal Security measures would be considered in developing the route. Permeability Greatly improves links along the A487 corridor between Haverfordwest and Fishguard via St Davids. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion The measures would result in an enhanced service between key settlements providing improved public transport facilities for non-car users. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity.

183

TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Medium cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 42 - Haverfordwest to Fishguard via Letterston Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging increased modal shift to bus public transport. Reduction in All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Town Centre traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The development of the bus corridor would provide faster, more reliable public transport connectivity between key settlements and improved access to employment, education and training, healthcare and tourism opportunities. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route. The key settlements may Local to the route. benefit from reduced noise levels if congestion can be reduced through this Neutral measure. Local Air Quality The bus corridor measures may result in reduced congestion at peak hours. The reduction in slow moving congested traffic will result in a reduction in emissions associated with standing traffic. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The bus corridor measures may require the reallocation of some road space. Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Local to the route. Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the route. Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity Neutral

184

to design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal Security measures would be considered in developing the route. Permeability Greatly improves links along the A40 corridor between Haverfordwest and Fishguard via Letterston. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion The measures would result in an enhanced service between key settlements providing improved public transport facilities for non-car users. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Medium cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 43 - Fishguard to Cardigan Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging increased modal shift to bus public transport. Reduction in All road users (light and heavy Efficiency Town Centre traffic. vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The development of the bus corridor would provide faster, more reliable

185

public transport connectivity between key settlements and improved access to employment, education and training, healthcare and tourism opportunities. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route. The key settlements may Local to the route. benefit from reduced noise levels if congestion can be reduced through this Neutral measure. Local Air Quality The bus corridor measures may result in reduced congestion at peak hours. The reduction in slow moving congested traffic will result in a reduction in emissions associated with standing traffic. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The bus corridor measures may require the reallocation of some road space. Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Local to the route. Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the route. Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity Neutral to design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal Security measures would be considered in developing the route. Permeability Greatly improves links along the A487 corridor between Fishguard and Cardigan. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion The measures would result in an enhanced service between key settlements providing improved public transport facilities for non-car users. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy

186

TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Medium cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 114 - Ammanford to Cross Hands Bus Corridor Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Reduced journey time between Ammanford, Saron, Capel Hendre, Benefiting local communities along the Efficiency Penygroes and Gorslas to Cross Hands Business Park and Cross Hands village. route. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities through reduced Benefits to all able to access the bus travel times. corridor. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links may result in Emissions improved green house gas emissions. Landscape and Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant environment. Townscape Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact is anticipated. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Neutral Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling through the communities along the bus corridor would improve safety. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral

187

Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Fewer cars travelling through communities would create a more pleasant and safer environment to promote walking and cycling and so aid physical fitness. Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services. TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements. TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport. TPO 4 Improving integration. TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport. TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport. TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision. Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks: Low

Project 52 - Tenby Bus Focal Point Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic No impact on bus journey times or traffic conditions. Potential reduction in Neutral Efficiency car travel with transfer to public transport. EALI Could improve perceptions of bus travel for all types of journeys. Improvement of facilities may encourage greater use of public transport. Disability Discrimination Act complaint bus stops would also be beneficial Environment Noise No significant impact on noise. Neutral Local Air Quality Could encourage existing car users to transfer to public transport. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and No visual impact. Neutral Townscape

188

Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Impact from excavation associated with construction of hardstanding area in existing verge Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity to design in safety measures. Personal Security Improved and well-maintained waiting facilities, with lighting, will significantly improve perceptions of personal security. Permeability No impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Potential slight increase in physical activity if existing car users walk Neutral to/from public transport focal points. Social Inclusion Investment improves accessibility to public transport vehicles for mobility impaired. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users, encouraging access for all. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Low cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

189

Project 59 - Llanelli Railway Station Improvements Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Improved passenger facilities to encourage modal shift to rail. Efficiency EALI Improved facilities will improve the passenger experience enabling enhanced access to employment opportunities and services. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift to rail replacing car use may afford improvements in air quality. Local to the site. Neutral Greenhouse Gas No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The improvements would greatly enhance the local townscape and would Townscape complement the redevelopment of the Town’s Bus Station and associated bus priority measures which will greatly raise the profile of passenger transport as an attractive and viable option. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage The improvements will be sensitive to the existing historical fabric of the building, preserving what is of value. Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Personal Security The enhancements at the station will incorporate features to minimise opportunities for criminal activity. Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Improved facilities including cycle racks will promote use of rail services by cyclists accessing the NCR. Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access to a wide range of services and facilities TPO 2 Improving the quality of transport options TPO 3 Improving the efficiency of the movement of people TPO 4 Improve integration TPO 5 Implement measures which reduce the adverse impact of transport on health

190

TPO 6 Reduce the negative impact of transport TPO 7 Improve personal safety Public Acceptability: All are supportive Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Convergence funding will be sought in conjunction with NSIP to fund the total cost of the scheme deliverability: Risks: Low

Project 58 - Clynderwen Railway Station Improvements Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic £0.1m Improved Interchange and possible increased rail patronage through better Clynderwen Station √ Efficiency facilities. EALI The improvement will enhance the attractiveness of rail travel into and out of √ the region. Environment Noise Minimal impact Neutral Local Air Quality None Neutral Greenhouse Gas Transfer of travel from road to rail will reduce greenhouse gas emissions √ Emissions Landscape and Improved Landscape Clynderwen Station √ Townscape Bio-diversity None Neutral Heritage None Neutral Water Environment None Neutral Soils None Neutral Social Transport Safety None Neutral Personal Security The improved station environment with better lighting will improve personal Clynderwen Station √ safety Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness Access to the station on foot and by cycle will be encouraged √ Social Inclusion None Neutral Equality, Diversity & None Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s)

191

TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support expected Acceptability to other stakeholders : Subject of proposals developed with Rail companies in 2003 Technical and operational feasibility: To be confirmed but no critical problems anticipated Financial affordability and deliverability: To be explored Risks: Minimal

Project 110 - Newcastle Emlyn Bus Focal Point Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Rural public transport hubs improve accessibility, safety, comfort and Efficiency integration with other transport modes and may assist modal shift. EALI The facility would provide a more attractive focal point for bus passengers and would raise the profile of the passenger transport network as a viable option to access services and facilities. Environment Noise Possible impacts of construction works. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhancements to the passenger transport infrastructure may result in improved air quality within the local community and along the bus route. Greenhouse Gas As above. Emissions Landscape and Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant environment for the Townscape local community. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral

192

Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling would improve safety for all. Personal Security There is greater security provision for bus passengers at a suitably designed Bus Focal Point including shelter with good visibility, lighting, information and communications and CCTV?? . Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness A visible interchange point within the local community raises the profile of the existence of the passenger transport network and potentially attracts additional users thus promoting increased walking/cycling associated with access to/from point of origin and destination. Social Inclusion Improved transport infrastructure provision enhances accessibility benefiting all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improved access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through enhanced provision

Public Acceptability: All are supportive and Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks: Low

Project 26 - Swansea Air Quality Package including Hafod Transport Improvements Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Traffic will be constrained by this measure to largely meet Local to the Haford AQMA, but the displaced traffic

193

Efficiency AQMA targets and improve local air quality. would affect a wider area. EALI Transport improvements on the often congested Neath Road may improve traffic flows. Environmental

Noise It can be expected that local noise levels will diminish Noise relief on the densely populated Neath Road following the package measures as traffic is deliberately corridor would be beneficial. encouraged away from this area. Local Air Quality Air quality can be expected to greatly improve as a result of Local to the Hafod AQMA site, while the benefits these measures. would be much more wide-ranging. Greenhouse Gas Greenhouse Gas Emissions will be expected to reduce. Local to the Hafod AQMA site, while the benefits Emissions would be much more wide-ranging. Landscape & Reduced traffic flows will result in a more pleasant local Townscape environment. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social

Transport Safety No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Personal Security Reduced traffic flows on Neath Road may result in a safer Local pedestrian movements. environment for pedestrians. Permeability A reduced traffic flow on Neath Road is likely to increase pedestrian permeability. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 2 Improving the sustainable movement of traffic. TPO 4 Demonstrates integration of transport and environmental policy. TPO 5 Improving local air quality. TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport Public Acceptability: Local residents are likely to be supportive because of benefits afforded to them. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Other road users are likely to be supportive as long as alternative traffic routes are developed to effectively displace traffic from this area. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Funding sources have been largely identified.

194

deliverability: Risks: Low

Project 86 - Park & Share Sites near M4 Junctions Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic The use of Park and Share sites would help to reduce On the M4 Motorway in South Wales and at locations Efficiency congestion and delays on the Motorway and to reduce near to junctions where P & S sites are located localised indiscriminate parking near the Motorway which creates delays to freight and passenger vehicles EALI Reductions in delays and congestion can stimulate the All businesses and local economies economy and encourage inward investment Environmental

Noise There may be increased noise associated with arriving and Local residents and communities close to sites X departing vehicles at peak times Local Air Quality Localised increases close to P&S sites but reduced congestion Local residents and communities close to sites X and delays on M4 Greenhouse Gas Localised increases close to P&S sites but reduced congestion Local residents and communities close to sites Emissions and delays on M4 will reduce overall gas emissions Landscape & Sites would need to be carefully sited to avoid loss of Local communities Neutral Townscape Greenfield and local amenity land Bio-diversity Possible impact on local habitats through construction Specific to local sites X Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impacts Neutral Water Environment Possible impacts but use of SuDs would mitigate Specific to local sites Neutral Soils Possible impacts during construction phase Specific to local sites Neutral Social

Transport Safety Fewer single occupancy cars and reduced congestion on M4 All Motorway users, freight and passengers and will reduce road traffic collisions companies who rely on road freight for viability Personal Security Car sharing on M4 will reduce any perceived or actual threats All P&S site users to personal safety and security Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impacts Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impacts Neutral Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impacts Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impacts Neutral Human Rights

195

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all TPO 2 To improve sustainability by improving the range of transport options TPO 3 To improve the efficiency of transport to support local economies TPO 4 To improve integration between modes Public Acceptability: Park and Ride is a well accepted method of reducing congestion in urban areas, the idea of Park and Share where more regional facilities are provided is relatively new, but should achieve similar acceptance from public Acceptability to other stakeholders : Local residents and communities close to Park and Share sites may concerned at loss of local amenity and site consideration would need careful consideration Technical and operational feasibility: The creation of Park and share Sites is not new technology what needs to be carefully considered is the marketing and raising awareness which will require some revenue funding to support capital investment Financial affordability and deliverability: No sites have been identified at this stage, design and construction costs would be similar to those for Park and Ride Risks: The risks relate to the procurement of acceptable and effective sites and marketing the product effectively to ensure they are well useed.

Project 88 - North – South NCN Route for Pembrokeshire Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging modal shift to walking, cycling and public transport Efficiency EALI Will provide links to communities, tourist attractions, footpaths, cycle routes and bridleways to provide recreational access and economic opportunites. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route Neutral Local Air Quality Could encourage existing car users to transfer to sustainable forms of transport Greenhouse Gas As above Emissions Landscape and The majority of the route will rely on the recovery and use of former railway Neutral Townscape lines and adjacent road tracks with no visual impact. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to current drainage systems will include mitigation measures Neutral Soils Possible impact of construction works Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity to Neutral design in safety measures. Personal Security Personal security measures would be considered in developing the route Neutral

196

Permeability Greatly improves sustainable access links to local communities along the North- South route Physical Fitness Potential increase in physical activity with more opportunities for residents, visitors and car users to walk and cycle. Social Inclusion Investment will improve accessibility between communities along the route and provide improved facilities for mobility impaired. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on sustainable transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and deliverability: Low cost option Risks: Land ownership issues

Project 7 – North Carms – Ceredigion Link Road Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic This would form the effectively the missing North South link between Ceredigion All road users to benefit from reduced Efficiency and Carmarthenshire, relieving congestion in rural locations of Alltwalis and journey times. Economic benefit from Pencader but primarily would have the overarching benefit of improving inward investment and access to connectivity and reducing journey times along this strategic north south corridor education and employment EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities services as well as to the Added value to the existing Carms M4 corridor from mid and north west Wales, encourage inward investment to the Ceredigion link improving journey time more western regions of south Wales and accessibility along the North South corridor

197

Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Local Air Quality Reduced congestion and improvements to the flow of traffic may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and A new road would have to be integrated sensitively because of proximity to Townscape residential areas, however local communities will benefit from reduction in traffic and congestion as well as improvements to the landscape of this former industrial area. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling directly through local communities would significantly All road users to benefit. improve road safety in this densely populated residential area. New road construction would be more suited to the safe movement of vehicles at relatively high speeds (60+mph) Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Improved accessibility will promote use of sustainable modes and so aid physical fitness. Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality impact Neutral Human Rights group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services and facilities TPO 2 Improving the sustainability of transport TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through better provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive of the scheme. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and RTP monies will be sought to finance the scheme.

198

deliverability: Risks: Low

Project 111 - Pencader Bus Focal Point Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Rural public transport hubs improve accessibility, safety, comfort and Efficiency integration with other transport modes and may assist modal shift. EALI The facility would provide a more attractive focal point for bus passengers and would raise the profile of the passenger transport network as a viable option to access services and facilities. Environment Noise Possible impacts of construction works. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhancements to the passenger transport infrastructure may result in improved air quality within the local community and along the bus route. Greenhouse Gas As above. Emissions Landscape and Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant environment for the Townscape local community. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling would improve safety for all. Personal Security There is greater security provision for bus passengers at a suitably designed Bus Focal Point including shelter with good visibility, lighting, information and communications and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness A visible interchange point within the local community raises the profile of the existence of the passenger transport network and potentially attracts additional users thus promoting increased walking/cycling associated with access to/from point of origin and destination. Social Inclusion Improved transport infrastructure provision enhances accessibility benefiting all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral

199

Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improved access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through enhanced provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 112 - Llandeilo Bus Focal Point Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Rural public transport hubs improve accessibility, safety, comfort and Efficiency integration with other transport modes and may assist modal shift. EALI The facility would provide a more attractive focal point for bus passengers and would raise the profile of the passenger transport network as a viable option to access services and facilities. Environment Noise Possible impacts of construction works. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhancements to the passenger transport infrastructure may result in improved air quality within the local community and along the bus route. Greenhouse Gas As above. Emissions Landscape and Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant environment for the Townscape local community. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral

200

Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling would improve safety for all. Personal Security There is greater security provision for bus passengers at a suitably designed Bus Focal Point including shelter with good visibility, lighting, information and communications and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness A visible interchange point within the local community raises the profile of the existence of the passenger transport network and potentially attracts additional users thus promoting increased walking/cycling associated with access to/from point of origin and destination. Social Inclusion Improved transport infrastructure provision enhances accessibility benefiting Neutral all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improved access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through enhanced provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive and Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 113 - Drefach Bus Focal Point Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Rural public transport hubs improve accessibility, safety, comfort and Efficiency integration with other transport modes and may assist modal shift. EALI The facility would provide a more attractive focal point for bus passengers and would raise the profile of the passenger transport network as a viable option to access services and facilities.

201

Environment Noise Possible impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhancements to the passenger transport infrastructure may result in improved air quality within the local community and along the bus route. Greenhouse Gas As above. Emissions Landscape and Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant environment for the Townscape local community. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling would improve safety for all. Personal Security There is greater security provision for bus passengers at a suitably designed Bus Focal Point including shelter with good visibility, lighting, information and communications and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness A visible interchange point within the local community raises the profile of the existence of the passenger transport network and potentially attracts additional users thus promoting increased walking/cycling associated with access to/from point of origin and destination. Social Inclusion Improved transport infrastructure provision enhances accessibility benefiting Neutral all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improved access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through enhanced provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads.

202

Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 3 - Carmarthen West Link Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Cost: £6.25m. Reduced journey times to the northern part of the town All road users to benefit from reduced Efficiency centre including Trinity University, Parc Dewi Sant and the Model Church in journey times. Wales C.P school. Reducing localised congestion. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities and services All road users. through reduced travel times. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Significantly increased Local to the site. levels of traffic would be anticipated along the route which will result in increased noise levels locally. Local Air Quality Reduced congestion and improvements to the flow of traffic may result in improved air quality. Increased overall traffic flows will deliver poorer air Neutral quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and A new road would have to be integrated sensitively because of proximity to Neutral Townscape residential areas and perception of detrimental impact to the landscape. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into the town centre via Johnstown would improve safety in this highly popular residential area, particularly as the route is used by children accessing the local primary and secondary schools. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Improved access to this area of town will promote use of sustainable modes and so aid physical fitness. Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral

203

Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Improving the sustainability of transport TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through better provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Convergence funding in conjunction with developer contributions will be sought to contribute to the total cost of the deliverability: scheme. Risks: Low.

Project 5 - Carmarthen East Link Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the town centre and providing a direct link to All road users (light and heavy Efficiency the West Wales General Hospital and the strategic road network. Reducing vehicles) to benefit from reduced localised congestion. journey times. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities and services All road users. through reduced travel times. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Significantly increased Local to the site. levels of traffic would be anticipated along the route which will result in increased noise levels locally. Local Air Quality Reduced congestion and improvements to the flow of traffic may result in improved air quality. Increased overall traffic flows will deliver poorer air Neutral quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and Infrastructure would have to be integrated sensitively because of proximity Neutral Townscape to residential areas and perception of detrimental impact to the landscape. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral

204

Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into the town centre would improve safety. Town Centre Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through better provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Convergence funding will be sought in conjunction with RTP funding to fund the total cost of the scheme. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 11 Northern Distributor Network- Bulford Road Link Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic £7.58m – Provides a good standard link between Tiers Cross and the Trunk Road Pembrokeshire Haven. Principal missing √ Efficiency network. Provides traffic relief to Milford Haven & Tiers Cross link in the Northern Distributor Network EALI Help facilitate development on the north bank of the Haven Pembrokeshire Haven √ Environment Noise Reduction in noise in Milford Haven and Tiers Cross Milford Haven √ Local Air Quality Improved air quality in Milford Haven Milford Haven √ Greenhouse Gas Emission partially displaced from the densely populated Milford Haven to rural Milford Haven √ Emissions Bulford Road Landscape and Helps facilitate townscape enhancement in Milford Haven Milford Haven √

205

Townscape Bio-diversity Some impact on habitats Bulford Road Corridor X Heritage No effect Neutral Water Environment Increased asphalt surfaces would require mitigation Bulford Road Corridor X Soils Some construction impact Bulford Road Corridor X Social Transport Safety Improve by 2 lane Bulford Road with shared use path and reduction in traffic Bulford Road and Milford Haven √ through Milford Haven Personal Security Increased activity on Bulford Road improves security Bulford Road √ Permeability This link allows access to the north west bank of the Haven from the Trunk Road Pembrokeshire Haven √ Network Physical Fitness Shared use path facilities walking and cycling Bulford Road Corridor √ Social Inclusion No effect Neutral Equality, Diversity & No effect Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: The project was supported at public consultation Acceptability to other stakeholders : No perceived adverse impacts Technical and operational feasibility: Outline Design completed Financial affordability and deliverability: Funding being sought Risks: Low

Project 33 - Baglan Energy Park Link Bridge Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Cost £3M. Connection between two large economic Road users, including public transport users. Efficiency development sites, improving access to the sites and enabling operation of through bus services. Improved access between the western part of the site and Baglan railway

206

station for pedestrians and cyclists. EALI Improved access to job opportunities, particularly for non car users. Environmental

Noise Some local increase in traffic noise along the route, which is in a commercial/industrial location, will be off-set by traffic Neutral reduction on the existing alternative, longer route, which is closer to residential areas. Local Air Quality The site is very open and traffic is expected to be free flowing so that little impact on local air quality at the site is Neutral expected. Reduced traffic on the existing rouite will improve local air quality at that location Greenhouse Gas Development of the economic development sites, which the Emissions bridge is intended to assist, will lead to increased travel and hence to increased greenhouse gas emissions. Landscape & Imaginative and high quality design is intended to make the Townscape bridge an attractive feature. Bio-diversity There may be some impact on local habitats which would be assessed by appropriate surveys to inform the design and constructions processes. Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

Transport Safety Reduced traffic on the alternative route will improve safety. Personal Security No impact. Neutral Permeability The bridge will enable access between the two development sites, including for pedestrians and cyclists, and facilitate the introduction of through bus services. Physical Fitness No impact except in so far as walking and cycling is Neutral facilitated, including to/from Baglan railway station. Social Inclusion The scheme will facilitate improved access to job opportunities. Equality, Diversity & No impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s)

207

TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy.

TPO 3 TPO 4 TPO 5 Public Acceptability: Supported Acceptability to other stakeholders : Supported Technical and operational feasibility: Ground conditions and the proximity of statutory undertakers services present design challenges. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 60 - Neath Railway Station Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Increased rail patronage through high quality station facility. Existing and new rail passengers. Road users through Efficiency reduced congestion. EALI The improvement will enhance the attractiveness of rail travel into and out of the region and hence its internal and external connectivity. Environmental

Noise Greater activity in the vicinity of the station may increase Station locality. noise levels, although adjacent properties are, and are expected to continue to be, mostly commercial. Local Air Quality Increased traffic movements to/from the station may reduce Station locality. air quality in the vicinity. Greenhouse Gas Transfer of travel from road to rail will reduce greenhouse Emissions gas emissions. Landscape & The scheme is intended to improve the appearance of the Townscape station both internally and within the townscape. Bio-diversity The scheme is within the existing station site and is not Station site Neutral therefore expected to impact on local habitats. Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral

208

Soils No impact. Neutral Social

Transport Safety Transfer of travel from road to rail will assist safety. Personal Security The improved station environment will improve personal safety. Permeability No impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Access to the station on foot and by cycle will be encouraged. Social Inclusion No impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on mobility impaired people of improved Human Rights access to the station. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy. TPO 4 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 5 To improve road safety and personal security in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Supportive. Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 95 - Demand responsive services/Social Enterprise Schemes Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic These schemes can provide improved access for those All in the region with no access to private transport Efficiency without private transport, who cannot access conventional and who cannot use conventional public transport public transport for a variety of reasons to a wide range of options services, training and employment. EALI Social Enterprise Schemes will increase access to All in the region with no access to private transport

209

employment for vulnerable groups and who cannot use conventional public transport options Environmental

Noise No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Local Air Quality No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Greenhouse Gas No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Emissions Landscape & No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Soils No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Social

Transport Safety No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact Neutral Social Inclusion Accessible transport to provide links to services, training and All Areas where schemes operate to benefit employment will help to improve inclusion of vulnerable and isolated individuals and hard to reach communities Equality, Diversity & This transport will focus on the needs of vulnerable residents All Areas where schemes operate to benefit Human Rights who have mobility impairments or live in isolated communities and thus will improve equality of access Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities TPO 2 To improve the range of quality if transport options TPO 3 To improve the efficiency of movement of people TPO 4 To improve integration between service provision and modes of transport Public Acceptability: This has wide support from users and a wide range of representative groups Acceptability to other stakeholders : Public transport operators have expressed concerns that such services are operated under necessary legal constraints and do not impact of existing conventional services thus rendering them unviable Technical and operational feasibility: Similar schemes are already in operation across the UK and in the region, capital and revenue funding required Financial affordability and deliverability: Capital investment would provide vehicles and equipment whilst revenue funding would be required to address driver recruitment and training, marketing and ongoing staff support Risks: That there may be some impact on exiting community transport schemes which would need to be closely involved to avoid duplication

210

Project 8 - Llanelli Park & Ride Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the town centre and Parc Y Scarlets stadium. All road users (light and heavy Efficiency vehicles) to benefit from reduced journey times. EALI The Park & Ride facility would provide more affordable car parking and access to the employment opportunities in the Llanelli town centre and commercial areas at Parc Trostre and Parc Y Scarlets. Environment Noise More traffic at the Park & Ride site would result in greater noise levels at Noise relief benefits the public spaces the site however this would be accompanied with less traffic related noise of the town centre and out of town on the approach roads into Parc Y Scarlets and the town centre. retail areas while greater noise levels around the Park & Ride site should be Neutral localised and measures to minimise any noise detriment to local residents will be incorporated into the design. Local Air Quality Town centre and stadium traffic diverted to the Park & Ride site would lead Local to the Park & Ride site, while the to a reduction of traffic travelling through highly populated residential areas benefits would be much more wide and would therefore be expected to have a positive affect on Local Air ranging. Quality. Greenhouse Gas Significant improvement in CO2 emissions as reduction in traffic entering the Emissions town centre. Landscape and The development of the site would result in the loss of some brownfield Park & Ride site and the town centre Townscape space. However, the associated reduction of cars entering the centre of Llanelli would reduce the effects of town centre traffic on the built environment. Bio-diversity The site would be constructed on former industrial land. There would therefore be potential localised impacts on habitats. Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment The site would be situated close to the River. However the use of SuDS Neutral would mitigate against impact here. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Post-construction the use of SuDS could mitigate against localised impact of the site, particularly with regard to surface run-offs. Social Transport Safety Few cars travelling into centre of Llanelli would improve safety with All road users to benefit. significant benefits in and around the stadium area.

211

Personal Security There is greater security provision at Park & Ride sites including staffed facilities, security fencing and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness Park & Cycle from the Park & Ride site is supported as a mode. Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of movement of people TPO 4 Improving integration between modes TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO7 Improve road safety and personal security Public Acceptability: Due to the potential proximity to residential properties there may be some local opposition. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works : earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Funding sources have been largely identified. deliverability: Risks: An appropriate and acceptable site is yet to be firmly approved.

Project 18 - Waterston Bypass Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic £3.5m – Provides a good standard of road to Waterston energy sites bypassing the Waterston √ Efficiency community of Waterston EALI Helps facilitate commercial development on the north bank of the Haven Waterston √ Environment Waterston Noise Reduction in traffic noise through Waterston Waterston √ Local Air Quality The bypass will provide an alternative route for all vehicles which at present Waterston √ travel through Waterston. Greenhouse Gas Negligible changes to existing CO2 emissions but it should be noted that the Neutral Emissions emissions would be displaced from the built-up area of Waterston. Landscape and Some impact on the road corridor Waterston √ Townscape Bio-diversity Some impact on the road corridor Waterston X

212

Heritage No effect Neutral Water Environment Some mitigation may be required Waterston X Soils May be an impact during construction Waterston X Social Transport Safety Provides a good quality link round Waterston as opposed to poor quality route √ through residential area Personal Security No effect Neutral Permeability Improves access to the industrial development Waterston √ Physical Fitness No positive or negative impact Neutral Social Inclusion No positive or negative impact Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative impact Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: There has been widespread local requests for a bypass Acceptability to other stakeholders : No adverse impacts Technical and operational feasibility: Potential Impacts on dwellings Financial affordability and deliverability: Funding to the sought Risks: Low

Project 19 - Blackbridge Access Improvements Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic £0.62m. Provides a good standard Road from Blackbridge to/from Waterston and North Bank of Pembrokeshire Haven √ Efficiency thence to A477 and Trunk Road network EALI Provides access for development at Blackbridge Blackbridge √ Environment Noise While heavy vehicle traffic noise will predominantly be displaced to this road Noise relief benefits predominantly to from elsewhere, the noise will be displaced from the built-up area of Milford the residents of Milford Haven. √ Haven Local Air Quality The road improvements would provide an alternative route for heavy vehicles Neutral

213

which at present travel through Milford Haven. Greenhouse Gas Negligible changes to existing CO2 emissions but it should be noted that the Neutral Emissions emissions would be displaced from the built-up area of Milford Haven Landscape and No effect Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity No effect Neutral Heritage No effect Neutral Water Environment Increased impermeable asphalt surfaces would require mitigation in order to not X affect the local water environment. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Post-construction the use of SuDS could X mitigate against localised impact of the site, particularly with regard to run-off. Social Transport Safety Improved standard of road for vehicles and pedestrians Milford Haven-Blackbridge-Waterston √ Personal Security No effect Neutral Permeability No effect Neutral Physical Fitness No effect Neutral Social Inclusion No effect Neutral Equality, Diversity & No effect Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales.

Public Acceptability: Support likely Acceptability to other stakeholders : Support likely Technical and operational feasibility: Practically achievable Financial affordability and deliverability: Funding to be sought Risks: Low

214

Project 38 - Multi-Modal Freight Facility – Margam Wharf Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Cost £11M. Transfer of freight from road to rail will reduce Freight movements to/from south west Wales. Efficiency road freight movements, particularly over longer distances. EALI Improved choice of mode for freight movements will improve the region’s connectivity, particularly for movements to/from continental Europe and over longer distances within the UK. Environmental

Noise Possible increase in traffic noise in the vicinity of the facility, offset by reductions elsewhere due to reduced Neutral heavy vehicle movements. Local Air Quality Possible adverse impact in the vicinity of the facility partly offset by improvements elsewhere, although the latter are likely to be widely dispersed and low level. Greenhouse Gas Reduced through transfer of movements onto rail. Emissions Landscape & No impact. Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity There may be some impact on local habitats which would be assessed by appropriate surveys to inform the design and constructions processes. Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible localised impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

Transport Safety Reduction of heavy goods vehicle movements will improve road safety, although primarily outside the south west Wales Neutral region. Personal Security No impact. Neutral Permeability No impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No impact. Neutral

215

Social Inclusion No impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy. TPO 2 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 3 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including biodiversity. TPO 4 To improve road safety and personal security in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Supported Acceptability to other stakeholders : Supported Technical and operational feasibility: To be determined Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks: Decline of freight markets into and out of the region.

Project 40 - Pontardawe Cross Valley Link Bridge Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduction in severance within the town will reduce the need Local movements within the town. Neutral Efficiency for local vehicle movements and facilitate walking and cycling. EALI Reduction in severance within the town will support the local economy. Environmental

Noise No impact. Neutral Local Air Quality No impact. Neutral Greenhouse Gas To the extent that walking and cycling are facilitated for Emissions movements within the town there will be some reduction in Neutral emissions. Landscape & The structure will open up views within the town and with Townscape appropriate design can therefore enhance the townscape. Bio-diversity There may be some impact on local habitats which would be assessed by appropriate surveys to inform the design and constructions processes.

216

Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

Transport Safety Reduction in local vehicles movements and reducing the need for pedestrians to cross the road at-grade will assist road safety. Personal Security Replacing an existing enclosed subway with an area of more open access with increased natural surveillance will improve personal safety. Permeability Improved for movements within the town. Physical Fitness Facilitates walking and cycling. Social Inclusion No impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy. TPO 2 To improve road safety and personal security in South West Wales. TPO 3 TPO 4 TPO 5 Public Acceptability: To be determined. Acceptability to other stakeholders : To be determined. Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 109 - Gowerton Station Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Improved passenger facilities at the station may result in All areas which may access Gowerton as the primary Efficiency increased modal shift to rail. rail station. EALI Improved access to rail services will enhance opportunities All areas which may access Gowerton as the primary

217

for access to employment. rail station. Environmental

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift to rail replacing car use may afford Local to the site. improvements in air quality. Greenhouse Gas No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to the site. Neutral Emissions Landscape & The improvements would greatly enhance the local Local to the site. Townscape townscape and complement the recent improvements made to the exterior of the station. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to the site. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Local to the site. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Social

Transport Safety No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Personal Security The enhancements at the station will design out opportunities for crime through various measures. Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved accessibility will improve the passenger experience for all users. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access to a wide range of services and facilities, including employment. TPO 2 Improving the quality of transport options. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency of the movement of people. TPO 4 To improve integration. TPO 5 To implement measures which reduce the adverse impact of transport on health. TPO 6 Reducing the negative impact of transport. Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Convergence funding will be necessary in conjunction with NSIP to fund the total cost of the scheme. deliverability: Risks: Low.

218

Project 72 - St David’s Pedestrian Links Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Encouraging modal shift to walking and public transport with improved Efficiency pedestrian and public transport infrastructure together with cycle facilities. EALI Will provide better pedestrian links for the community and improve access by public transport and cycling, thus promoting access for economic and recreational activities. Environment Noise Negligible changes in noise levels on the route Neutral Local Air Quality Could encourage existing car users to transfer to sustainable forms of transport Greenhouse Gas As above Emissions Landscape and No visual impact Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment NO impact on local water courses Neutral Soils Possible impact of construction works Social Transport Safety The implementation of the proposed measures would present an opportunity to design in safety measures. Personal Security No significant personal security issues Neutral Permeability Greatly improves sustainable access links within the community of St David’s Physical Fitness Potential increase in physical activity with more opportunities for residents, visitors and car users to walk, cycle and use public transport. Social Inclusion Investment will improve accessibility within St David’s and provide improved facilities for mobility impaired. Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on sustainable transport users with mobility impairments. Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales

219

TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment including bio-diversity. TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and deliverability: Low cost option Risks: Land ownership issues

Project 12 - Pembroke Community Regeneration Scheme Phases 1 and 2 Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Phase 1 Bridgend Terrace Bypass - £1,079m. Phase 2 A4139 Bush Hill to B4320 Pembroke and the Angle Peninsula √ Efficiency Monkton Road £9.137m. Traffic relief to Pembroke and access improvements EALI Improved access to brownfield sites on the south bank of Pembrokeshire Haven Pembroke, Monkton and the Angle √ and improved access to/from the deprived area of Monkton. Peninsula Environment Noise Reduction in noise in the historic town of Pembroke. Increase noise within the Pembroke and environs √ envelope of the bypass route. Local Air Quality Improvement in the historic town of Pembroke. Impact on the envelope of the Pembroke and environs √ bypass route. Greenhouse Gas Reduced congestion lessen emissions Pembroke and environs √ Emissions Landscape and Visual impact on Pembroke Castle. Reduced traffic through the town. Pembroke and environs X Townscape Bio-diversity Possible impact on local habitats Environs of Pembroke X Heritage Traffic taken from Historic town. Transport corridor created visible from castle Pembroke and environs X Water Environment Potential impact of water run-off, particularly on Pembroke River Pembroke River X Soils Probable impact of construction works Envelope of the bypass route X Social Transport Safety Improved transport infrastructure increase road safety Pembroke and environs √ Personal Security No overall effect Neutral Permeability Improved access around Pembroke Pembroke and environs √ Physical Fitness No overall effect Neutral

220

Social Inclusion No overall effect Neutral Equality, Diversity & No overall effect Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 7 To improve road safety and personal security for transport users in South West Wales. Public Acceptability: Supported at Public Consultation in 2005 Acceptability to other stakeholders : Project developed with stakeholder consultation Technical and operational feasibility: Design to Stage 2 DMRB. Financial affordability and deliverability: Funding opportunities being investigated Risks: Low

Project 48 - Carmarthen Bus Station Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Improved public transport links to Carmarthen Town Centre. Providing benefits to local, regional and Efficiency national passenger transport services using Carmarthen Bus Station. EALI The improvements would provide enhanced access opportunities to local Providing benefits to all users and service employment, health, leisure and educational establishments within providers of the Bus Station. Carmarthen town centre and its environs as well as areas linked to Carmarthen Bus Station by local, regional and national public transport services. Environment Noise Improved access and egress at Carmarthen Bus Station will allow for Noise relief benefits public spaces within improved routeing of passenger transport services to and from the town the commercial areas of Blue Street, centre thus reducing the number of bus movements via Lammas Street and Lammas Street and Morfa Lane (including Morfa Lane, a busy commercial part of town with some residential the town park) and the nearby residential properties also benefiting. areas. Local Air Quality Improved use of the bus station will allow bus movements to and from Local to the town centre site, while the Carmarthen town centre to be contained within the lower end of Blue Street benefits would be much more wide-ranging. thus leading to a significant reduction in the number of buses departing via upper Blue Street, Lammas Street and Morfa Lane with a positive

221

improvement to the Local Air Quality. Greenhouse Gas Significant improvement in CO2 emissions. Emissions Landscape and The improved redevelopment would enhance the built environment. Benefits to the Bus Station site and the Townscape immediate surrounding area. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Providing improvements to contain bus movements within the Bus Station All road users to benefit. area and so restricting the number of bus movements routed through Lammas Street and Morfa Lane would significantly improve the overall safety of pedestrians and other road users. Personal Security There is greater security provision at Carmarthen Bus Station including staffed facilities and CCTV. Permeability None Neutral Physical Fitness Promotion of walking and cycling between Carmarthen Rail Station and Bus Station via Pont Morgan Bridge would have positive benefits to physical fitness. Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality Neutral Human Rights impact group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services and facilities TPO 2 Improving sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of passenger transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impact of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impact of transport TPO 7 Improve road safety and personal security Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

222

Project 36 - Access to Kenfig Industrial Estate Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Cost £1.8M. The scheme involves increasing the headroom Businesses on the Industrial Estate and the suppliers and Efficiency under a railway over-bridge on Water Street, enabling direct hauliers who serve them. Residents and businesses in North access between the industrial estate and Junction 38 of the Cornelly. M4 motorway for heavy goods vehicles, thereby obviating the need for them to travel through the village of North Cornelly EALI Improved access to the Industrial Estate will improve its connectivity to the strategic highway network. Environmental

Noise Increased noise from heavy goods vehicles for the small number of properties along water street and the A48 between the Industrial Estate and M4 junction 38, but substantial reduction in noise for the far greater number of properties along the route through North Cornelly. Local Air Quality Improved air quality in North Cornelly, but with some reduction in air quality along the route to M4 junction 38. However, this route is open and free flowing and hence adverse effects here are expected to be limited and more than off-set by the improvements in North Cornelly. Greenhouse Gas The distance travelled by vehicles from the east to the Emissions Industrial Estate is greater via M4 junction 38 than through Neutral North Cornelly. However, this is off-set by freer flowing conditions than via the village. Landscape & The scheme involves lowering the road level on a new Townscape alignment adjacent to the existing and hence has no Neutral significant impact on landscape. Bio-diversity There may be some impact on local habitats which would be assessed by appropriate surveys to inform the design and constructions processes. Heritage No impact Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

223

Transport Safety Diversion of heavy goods vehicles away from North Cornelly onto a less built-up route will improve safety. Personal Security No impact. Neutral Permeability No impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No impact. Neutral Social Inclusion No impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s)

TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional economy. TPO 3 To improve road safety and personal security in South West Wales. TPO 4 TPO 5 Public Acceptability: Strongly supported. Acceptability to other stakeholders : Supported. Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

Project 4 – Ammanford Distributor Road Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Reducing localised congestion accessing Ammanford town centre between All road users to benefit from reduced Efficiency Tycroes and Pantyffynnon, building on the recently completed Phase I scheme, journey times. thereby further contributing to improved efficiency, modal balance and accessibility from the M4 and strategic road network to key sites in the Upper Amman Valley. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities and services to the Important link from the strategic road Upper Amman Valley through improved accessibility to strategic sites and network to Upper Amman Valley premises for inward investors and indigenous expansion. reducing congestion, improving road safety and amenities for residents, facilitating new development and improving access to public transport resulting in environmental and

224

community benefits. Environment Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Local Air Quality Reduced congestion and improvements to the flow of traffic may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and A new road would have to be integrated sensitively because of proximity to Townscape residential areas, however local communities will benefit from reduction in traffic and congestion as well as improvements to the landscape of this former industrial area. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling directly through local communities would significantly All road users to benefit. improve road safety in this densely populated residential area. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness Improved accessibility will promote use of sustainable modes and so aid physical fitness. Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact on any individual equality impact Neutral Human Rights group. Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services and facilities TPO 2 Improving the sustainability of transport TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 7 Improving road safety through better provision

Public Acceptability: All are supportive of the scheme. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. Financial affordability and Developer contributions and RTP monies will be sought to finance the scheme.

225

deliverability: Risks: Low

Project 28 - Swansea West Access Road Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the City Centre. Reducing localised Efficiency congestion. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities and All road users. services through reduced travel times. Environmental

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Significantly Local to the site. increased levels of traffic would be anticipated on the route which will result in increased noise levels locally. Local Air Quality Reduced congestion and improved consistency in the flow of traffic may result in improved air quality. Increased overall Neutral traffic flows will however deliver poorer air quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape & A new road would need to be integrated sensitively because of Neutral Townscape proximity to residential areas. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact is anticipated. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social

Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into the City Centre would improve safety. City Centre. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s)

226

TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 3 Improving efficiency and reliability of transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impact of transport. TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. stakeholders : Technical and operational Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. feasibility: Financial affordability and Convergence funding will be necessary in conjunction with NSIP to fund the total cost of the scheme. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 30 - Strategic Bus Corridors around Swansea Significanc Criteria Assessment Distribution e Economy

Transport Economic Reduced journey times into the City Centre. Reduction in City A general benefit to the City Centre and specific to the Efficiency Centre traffic. route. EALI Providing improved access to employment opportunities through Providing benefits to all able to access the bus corridor. reduced travel times. Environmental

Noise Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Local to the site. Neutral Local Air Quality Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links may result in improved air quality. Greenhouse Gas Modal shift associated with enhanced public transport links may Emissions result in improved air quality. Landscape & Reduced traffic flows may result in a more pleasant local Townscape environment. Bio-diversity Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact is anticipated. Neutral Water Environment Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Soils Possible temporary impacts of construction works. Neutral Social

227

Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into the City Centre would improve safety. City Centre. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion Improved transport links will enhance accessibility which will benefit all. Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all to a wide range of services TPO 2 Promoting sustainable transport movements TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the negative impact of transport. TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision Public Acceptability: All are supportive. Acceptability to other All are supportive of the scheme as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. stakeholders : Technical and operational Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works: earthworks, junctions, side roads, access roads. feasibility: Financial affordability and Convergence funding will be necessary in conjunction with NSIP to fund the total cost of the scheme. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 71 - Tenby Park & Ride Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy Transport Economic Potential transfer of private transport to park & ride service. Potential for Efficiency interchange between local and corridor bus services, again encouraging use of public transport. EALI Improvement to facilities may encourage greater use of public transport. Additionally, the scheme could provide more affordable car parking and access to employment opportunities in the Town Centre Environment Noise More traffic at P&R facility would result in greater noise levels, but with be Neutral

228

accompanied with less traffic related noise in the historic Town Centre. Local Air Quality Town centre traffic diverted to the P&R facility would lead to a reduction of traffic travelling through the historic town centre and would therefore be expected to have a positive effect upon Local Air Quality. Greenhouse Gas As above. Neutral Emissions Landscape and The reduction of traffic in the Town Centre would reduce the effects of Townscape town centre traffic on he built environment. Bio-diversity No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Any change to the existing road layout would utilise the current drainage Neutral systems. No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Post-construction the use of SuDS could mitigate against such impacts. Social Transport Safety Fewer cars travelling into the Town Centre would improve safety. Personal Security Improved and well-maintained waiting facilities, with lighting, will significantly improve perceptions of personal security. Permeability Improved interchange between bus and private transport and local/corridor bus services. Physical Fitness Park & Cycle from the Park & Ride site would be supported as a mode. Social Inclusion Investment improves accessibility to public transport vehicles for mobility impaired.

Equality, Diversity & Positive impact on public transport users, encouraging access for all. Human Rights

Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the sustainability of transport by improving the range and quality of, and awareness about, transport options, including those which improve health and well-being. TPO 3 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people within South West Wales to support the regional economy TPO 4 To improve integration between policies, service provision and modes of transport in South West Wales TPO 5 To implement measures which make a positive contribution to improving air quality and reducing the adverse impact of transport on health and climate change, including reducing carbon emissions. TPO 6 To implement measures which help to reduce the negative impact of transport across the region on the natural and built environment

229

including bio-diversity. Public Acceptability: Public support likely. Acceptability to other stakeholders : All should be supportive of the scheme if consulted at an early stage and as long as environmental impacts can be mitigated. Technical and operational feasibility: Standard design and construction methods on upgrade works. Financial affordability and Low cost option deliverability: Risks: Extent of utility apparatus

Project 27 - Morfa Distributor Road Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Reducing traffic travelling through the city centre, by All road users (light and heavy vehicles) to benefit Efficiency facilitating a route which bypasses it. from reduced journey times. EALI The new road would provide access to a range of riverside developments. Environmental

Noise While traffic noise will predominantly be displaced to this Noise relief benefits predominantly to the residents of road from elsewhere, the noise will be displaced from the Hafod. densely populated area of Hafod. Local Air Quality The road would provide an alternate route for traffic which would at present travel through the Hafod AQMA. Greenhouse Gas Negligible changes to existing CO2 emissions, but it should be Emissions noted that the emissions would be displaced from the Neutral densely populated Hafod area. Landscape & The extension of the site would result in the loss of some Townscape brownfield industrial land. The associated reduction of cars Neutral in the City Centre would reduce the effects of City traffic on the built environment. Bio-diversity The site would be constructed on former industrial land. Neutral There would therefore be minimal impacts on habitats. Heritage No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Water Environment Increased impermeable asphalt surfaces would require mitigation in order to not affect the local water environment. Soils Possible impacts of construction works. Post-construction the

230

use of SuDS could mitigate against localised impact of the site, particularly with regard to surface run-off. Social

Transport Safety The Morfa Distributor Road would provide a better quality link than that currently provided by the narrow single carriageway running through Hafod. Personal Security No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Permeability The link would provide a faster link to the Tawe Bridges and therefore increase permeability. Physical Fitness No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Social Inclusion No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Equality, Diversity & No positive or negative discriminatory impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 Improving access for all TPO 3 Improving efficient and reliable transport TPO 4 Improving integration TPO 5 Reducing the negative impacts of transport TPO 6 Reducing the impact of traffic upon the built environment of areas relieved by the road TPO 7 Improving road safety through better route provision Public Acceptability: It could be expected that the introduction of a new road which increases local road capacity would be acceptable to most road users and local residents who would benefit from improved access. Acceptability to other stakeholders : No perceived adverse impacts. Technical and operational feasibility: The road is a necessity to provide access to the planned Tawe Riverside developments. Financial affordability and Partial funding has been identified within the Local Authority. Convergence Funding is likely to bridge the funding gap. deliverability: Risks: Low.

Project 104 - Coed Darcy Southern Link Criteria Assessment Distribution Significance Economy

Transport Economic Cost £4.7M. Access to/from a planned major residential Residents of the new housing development. People Efficiency development area of up to 4,000 homes for both general employed at or seeking employment at the adjacent traffic and public transport, facilitating the provision of bus employment site. services and reducing the traffic impact on M4 junction 43 and surrounding infrastructure.

231

EALI Access to employment opportunities adjacent to A483 Fabian Way. Reduced impact on existing infrastructure. Environmental

Noise Some local increase in traffic noise along the route, but few Neutral properties affected. Local Air Quality The road is intended to mitigate the traffic and hence air Neutral quality impacts of the residential development. Greenhouse Gas Development of the adjacent housing and employment sites, Emissions which the road is intended to assist, will lead to increased travel and hence to increased greenhouse gas emissions. Landscape & Careful design will minimise the visual impact of the road. Neutral Townscape Bio-diversity There may be some impact on local habitats which would be assessed by appropriate surveys to inform the design and constructions processes. Heritage No impact. Neutral Water Environment No impact. Neutral Soils Possible impact of construction works. The use of SuDS will mitigate against localised surface water run-off impacts. Social

Transport Safety Appropriate design and mitigation of the traffic impact on existing infrastructure will minimise any negative impact on road safety. Personal Security No impact. Neutral Permeability The road will create a through route through the residential development site and facilitate the introduction of through bus services. Physical Fitness No impact except in so far as walking and cycling is Neutral facilitated. Social Inclusion The scheme will facilitate improved access to job opportunities and housing, including by public transport. Equality, Diversity & No impact. Neutral Human Rights Transport Planning Objectives (TPO’s) TPO 1 To improve access for all to a wide range of services and facilities including employment and business, education and training, health care, tourism and leisure activities. TPO 2 To improve the efficiency and reliability of the movement of people and freight within and beyond South West Wales to support the regional

232

economy.

TPO 3 TPO 4 TPO 5 Public Acceptability: Supported Acceptability to other stakeholders : Supported Technical and operational feasibility: Financial affordability and deliverability: Risks:

233

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic AAWT Average Annual Weekly Traffic AST Appraisal Summary Table ATC Automatic Traffic Count (er) BSOG Bus Service Operators’ Grant CCC Carmarthenshire County Council CIA Connectivity Index Assessment COBA Cost Benefit Analysis (DfT mathematical model to assess road schemes) CRF Congestion Reference Flow CT Community Transport DfT Department for Transport EU European Union GIS Geographical Information System GP General Practitioner (Medical Doctor) GPS Global Positioning System HAUC Highway Authorities and Utilities Committee HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle HOWL Heart of Wales Line ICT Information Communication Technology IMD Index of Multiple Deprivation KSI Killed or Seriously Injured LA Local Authority LDP Local Development Plan LOS Level of Service LSOA Lower Super Output Area (Basic geographical areas with approximately the same population) MTC Manual Traffic Count NHS National Health Service NMD Network Management Duty NPT Neath Port Talbot (County Borough Council) NRSWA New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 NRTF National Road Traffic Forecast NTP National Transport Plan (for Wales) OSCADY Optimised Signal Capacity & Delay (Mathematical Model to optimise Traffic Signals) OSGR Ordnance Survey Grid Reference OWG Officer Working Group (SWWITCH) PCC Pembrokeshire County Council PIPs Punctuality Improvement Partnerships RoRo Roll on Roll off (ferries) RPTS Regional Public Transport Strategy RTP Regional Transport Plan SA1 Swansea Central Postcode SCC City and County of Swansea Council SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SLAA Strategic Level Accessibility Assessment SWTRA South Wales Trunk Road Agency SWWITCH South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium TEMpro Trip End Model Presentation Program (DfT Mathematical Model to predict

234

travel demand) TENS Trans European Networks TEN-T Trans European Network for Transport TMA Traffic Management Act TPs Travel Plans TPO Transport Planning Objectives TraCC Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru (Mid Wales Transport Consortium) UA Unitary Authority UDP Unitary Development Plan UK United Kingdom WAG Welsh Assembly Government WelTAG Welsh Transport Planning and Appraisal Guidance WFS Wales Freight Strategy WIMD Welsh Index of Multiple Deprivation WLGA Welsh Local Government Association WSP Wales Spatial Plan WTS Wales Transport Strategy

235