Public Document Pack
Transport Delivery Committee
Date: Monday 9 November 2020
Time: 1.00 pm Public meeting Yes
Venue: This meeting is being held entirely by video conference faciities Click here to view the meeting
Membership Councillor Kath Hartley (Chair) Birmingham City Council Councillor Richard Worrall (Vice-Chair) Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Timothy Huxtable (Vice-Chair) Birmingham City Council Councillor Pervez Akhtar Coventry City Council Councillor Shaheen Akhtar Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Samiya Akhter Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Robert Alden Birmingham City Council Councillor Adrian Andrew Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Linda Bigham Coventry City Council Councillor Mohammed Fazal Birmingham City Council Councillor Mary Locke Birmingham City Council Councillor Celia Hibbert City of Wolverhampton Council Councillor Diana Holl-Allen Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Les Jones Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Chaman Lal Birmingham City Council Councillor Roger Lawrence City of Wolverhampton Council Councillor Ted Richards Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Alan Taylor Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council
The quorum for this meeting is seven members
If you have any queries about this meeting, please contact:
Contact Wendy Slater, Senior Governance Services Officer Telephone 0121 214 7016 Email [email protected] AGENDA
No. Item Presenting Pages Time
Meeting business item
1. Apologies for absence Chair None
2. Declarations of Interest Chair None Members are reminded of the need to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests they have in an item being discussed during the course of the meeting. In addition, the receipt of any gift or hospitality should be declared where the value of it was thought to have exceeded £25 (gifts) or £40 (hospitality).
3. Chair's Remarks Chair None
4. Minutes of the last meeting Chair 1 - 6
5. Matters Arising Chair None
6. Correspondence/ Petitions Chair None
7. Financial Monitoring Report Paula Martyn 7 - 16
8. Capital Programme Delivery Monitoring Report Sandeep 17 - 24 Shingadia 9. Rail Business Report Tom Painter 25 - 32
10. Bus Business Report Richard 33 - 42 Hardman/Richard Mayes 11. Enhanced Partnership Plan & Scheme Edmund Salt 43 - 220
12. Notices of Motion Chair None To consider any notices of motion by the deadline of 12 noon on 5 November 2020.
13. Questions Chair None To consider any questions submitted by the deadline of 12 noon on 5 November 2020 for written questions and 12 noon on 6 November 2020 for oral questions.
14. Forward Plan Chair 221 - 222
15. WMCA Board Transport Reports (for information Laura Shoaf None only)
Agenda Page 2 of 3 16. Date of Next Meeting -11 January 2021 None
Agenda Page 3 of 3 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 4
Transport Delivery Committee
Monday 14 September 2020 at 1.00pm
Minutes
Present Councillor Kath Hartley (Chair) Birmingham City Council Councillor Tim Huxtable (Vice-Chair) Birmingham City Council Councillor Richard Worrall (Vice-Chair) Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Pervez Akhtar Coventry City Council Councillor Robert Alden Birmingham City Council Councillor Adrian Andrew Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Mary Locke Birmingham City Council Councillor Celia Hibbert City of Wolverhampton Council Councillor Diana Holl-Allen Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Councillor Chaman Lal Birmingham City Council Councillor Roger Lawrence City of Wolverhampton Council Councillor Ted Richards Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council
In Attendance Councillor Cathy Bayton Transport Scrutiny Sub-Committee
36. Apologies for Absence Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Les Jones (Dudley), Councillor Alan Taylor (Dudley) and Councillor David Welsh (Coventry).
37. Chair’s Remarks The Chair updated the committee on a number of developments since the last meeting, including the 21st anniversary of the commencement of Midland Metro services, the work being undertaken by Transport for West Midlands to support pupils and parents in the return to school, progress being made with the Longbridge Park & Ride car park and Pool Meadow bus station projects, the trial of free wifi at Walsall bus station, and news that Travel de Courcey had recently gone into administration which had led to its school services being taken over by other operators.
38. Minutes The minutes of the meeting held on 20 July 2020 were agreed as a correct record.
Page 1 39. Action Tracker The actions taken on matters determined at previous meetings of the committee were noted. The Chair indicated that she would like the briefing note on the award of the new security contract to be submitted also to the Bus Alliance and to passenger champions. Councillor Robert Alden requested an update to the next meeting of the committee on the rail schemes within the capital programme. Councillor Tim Huxtable noted concerns that the stakeholder engagement relating to rail schemes may not be comprehensive. The Managing Director, Transport for West Midlands, undertook to liaise with Councillor Tim Huxtable on this issue outside of the meeting to ensure any concerns were addressed.
40. Financial Monitoring Report The committee considered a report from the Director of Finance setting out the financial position of the transport delivery revenue and capital budgets as at 31 July 2020.
The favourable variance in the transport revenue budget was primarily driven by lower patronage volumes across the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme and child concessions, along with savings realised during the set up of the Regional Transport Co-ordination Centre. These savings were somewhat offset by the impact of COVID-19 driving lower digital advertising revenue and the implementation of the departure charge holiday until June 2020.
Councillor Ted Richards noted that the report indicated the annual budget was £276.3m, but this had been reported as £268.8m at the meeting of the committee on 20 July. The Financial Controller undertook to clarify this matter and update the committee accordingly. Councillor Cathy Bayton noted the reduction in Metro fares revenue in recent months. The Managing Director, Transport for West Midlands, reported that the Government had provided financial support until 24 October to help with this reduction in fare receipts. It would then be necessary to negotiate further support, and this had been highlighted within the WMCA’s Comprehensive Spending Review consultation response to Government.
Resolved:
(1) It be noted that the year to date net revenue expenditure to the end of July 2020 showed a favourable variance of £0.093m compared to budget.
(2) It be noted that total capital expenditure to the end of July 2020 for the overall transport programme was £45.4m, which was £22.6m below the budget of £68.0m. The annual forecast had been reduced to £255.6m, which was £20.7m below the annual budget of £276.3m.
41. Capital Programme Delivery Monitoring Report The committee considered a report from the Managing Director, Transport for West Midlands, on progress on the approved Transport for West Midlands-led 2020/21 capital programme and projects.
Page 2 The report provided detailed monitoring of the capital programme, including deliverables and target completion dates. During July/August, elements of the capital programme had been completed relating to Perry Barr, Bradley Lane Park & Ride and University station. There had been variations to the baseline programme in respect of the network-wide cycling programme, digital panel rollout and network-wide Park & Ride lighting enhancements.
In respect of updates on the delivery of the Commonwealth Games Transport Plan, the Director of Development & Delivery, Transport for West Midlands, indicted that he would ensure regular updates were submitted to this committee, as well as making use of a pre-committee briefing sessions to keep members updated.
Resolved:
(1) The achievements since the July meeting of the Transport Delivery Committee be noted.
(2) The progress of deliverables and outturn of the 2020/21 capital programme be noted.
(3) Variations from the baseline programme be noted.
42. Transport Network and COVID-19 The committee considered a briefing note from the COVID-19 Transport Recovery Cell setting out recent actions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic and its implications for public transport across the region.
The briefing note provided details on the latest Government guidance, developments on the bus, rail, tram and road networks, as well as developments within the wider public realm and active travel initiatives. The briefing note also set out the work planned to support pupils’ return to school in September.
Councillor Chaman Lal enquired as to the support being provided to smaller bus operators. The Head of Bus, Transport for West Midlands, reported that the Bus Service Operators Grant was being paid at pre-pandemic levels and the Department for Transport was also making COVID-19 support payments to operators. Concessionary travel reimbursements were also being paid at pre-pandemic levels.
The Director of Network Resilience undertook to update the briefing note further with the most recent developments and to circulate this to members of the committee.
Resolved:
The report be noted.
43. Bus Alliance Update The committee considered a report from the Director of Integrated Transport Network Services, Transport for West Midlands, on matters relating to the governance, operation, delivery and performance of the West Midlands Bus Alliance.
Page 3 At its meeting in February, the Bus Alliance approved the ‘Bolder Bus Alliance’ aspirations and associated governance structure and had asked for further development and confirmation of the deliverables and commitments under each aspiration, noting that the Alliance needed to be stronger to ensure that bus travel was safe, available and accessible to help in the economic and wider recovery of the region. The report also set out the work being undertaken by each thematic sub-group reporting to the Bus Alliance.
Resolved:
(1) The content of the report and current status of the West Midlands Bus Alliance be noted.
(2) The report be submitted to the WMCA Board for information.
44. Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme Update The committee considered a report from the Director of Integrated Transport Network Services, Transport for West Midlands, on the development of the Enhanced Partnership Plan being developed for the West Midlands and the associated scheme covering the A34 (north) and A45/Lode Lane corridors.
An Enhanced Partnership was a formal agreement between a local transport authority, local highway authorities and local bus operators to work together to improve local bus services. The public consultation on these proposals were delayed due to the COVID- 19 pandemic and necessitated a change to the consultation strategy to limit any physical interaction with members of the public whilst ensuring the widest coverage and accessibility. The consultation period ran through to 13 September. A full report on the outcome of the formal public consultation would be submitted to the next meeting of the committee along with any subsequent changes to the enhanced partnership plan or scheme. Subject to approval, this report would also seek formal sign-off of the Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme for the West Midlands.
Resolved:
(1) The update on the development of the Enhanced Partnership and the proposed next steps be noted.
(2) The progress with the formal (public) consultation, as authorised by the committee at its meeting in March 2020, be noted.
45. eScooters The committee considered a report of the Managing Director, Transport for West Midlands, on the activity undertaken during July and August on the eScooter trial throughout the West Midlands region.
Page 4 In a wider initiative to promote walking and cycling as part of a green and healthy recovery from COVID-19, the Secretary of State for Transport announced the acceleration of eScooter trials around the country. The West Midlands, led by Birmingham City Council, developed a regionally co-ordinated programme that incorporated trial zones within each constituent authority. Additionally, areas within Warwickshire formed a key part of the programme, connecting Coventry to Kenilworth, plus offering opportunities within Leamington Spa and Warwick.
The report set out details of the procurement process that led to the contract being awarded to Voi, along with local authority activities and obligations.
The committee was informed that a number of measures were being looked at to eliminate anti-social use of the eScooters, including the possibility of number plates to help with identification and pressure pads to prevent multiple passengers riding at the same time. In response to a question from Councillor Chaman Lal, it was confirmed that Voi had public liability insurance to cover accidents that occurred during public use.
Resolved:
(1) The progress in planning the eScooter trial be noted.
(2) The intended rollout plans and next steps for the programme be noted.
46. Questions The committee considered a report of the Managing Director, Transport for West Midlands, on a question submitted by Councillor Richard Worrall and the response from the Director of Rail. The question related to whether the Rail Delivery Group, who organised the national railcard scheme, would compensate railcard holders for pandemic-related loss of discounted rail travel opportunities by extending the validity of the expiry dates by the amount of time that had been lost as a result of restrictions on travel.
The Director of Rail had responded:
Transport for the West Midlands has contacted the Department for Transport and has been informed that there has not been much change in the position since the question was originally raised. Department for Transport officials have been engaging with colleagues at the Rail Delivery Group to explore what options may be possible regarding a potential redress offer to railcard holders.
Transport for West Midlands has been informed by the Department for Transport that they are close to reaching a decision on the preferred option, although they haven’t been able to share any details at this stage. The Department for Transport advised that they are expecting an announcement to be made this month, and that this will likely come from the Rail Delivery Group.
The Managing Director, Transport West Midlands, confirmed that West Midlands Rail Executive had lobbied on this issue to support the concerns of Councillor Richard Worrall.
Page 5 Resolved:
The question submitted by Councillor Richard Worrall and the response from the Director of Rail be noted
47. Forward Plan A plan of items to be reported to future meetings of the committee was noted.
48. Date of Next Meeting Monday 9 November 2020 at 1.00pm
The meeting ended at 2.55pm.
Page 6 Agenda Item 7
Transport Delivery Committee
Date 9 November 2020
Report title Financial Monitoring Report
Accountable Director Linda Horne Finance Director Tel 0121 214 7508 Email - [email protected]
Accountable employee(s) Louise Cowen, Financial Controller Tel 0121 214 7454 Email - [email protected]
Report to be/has been Councillor Akhtar considered by
Recommendation(s) for action or decision:
The Transport Delivery Committee is recommended to:
1. Note that the year to date net revenue expenditure to the end of September 2020 shows a favourable variance of £0.579m compared to budget. The second revenue forecast of the year will take place during October and will be included in the November report. 2. Note that total capital expenditure to the end of September 2020 for the overall transport programme was £64.6m, which was £50.4m below the year to date budget of £115.0m. The second capital forecast was completed during September and has been reduced to £215.2m, which is £65.3m below the annual budget of £280.5m.
1. Purpose
1.1 This report sets out the financial position as at 30 September 2020. The content relates to the financial position of the Combined Authority’s Transport Delivery Revenue and Capital Budgets and consists of the following Sections:
Section A Summary TfWM Revenue Budget Section B Summary TfWM Capital Budget
Page 7 Page 1 of 10 SECTION A
2. Section A - Summary Revenue Position
2.1 The year to date position on the Transport revenue budget as at the end of September 2020 shows an overall favourable variance of £0.579m against budget.
2.2 This favourable variance is primarily driven by lower patronage volumes across the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme and Child Concessions reflecting operators continuing to be paid at pre-COVID-19 levels, as well as savings realised during the set- up of the RTCC through prudent purchasing decisions. The full year forecast also reflects government support in the form of Coronavirus Bus Services Support Grant and Light Rail Restart Grant along with favourable staffing variations.
2.3 These savings are largely offset by the impact of Covid-19 driving lower than budgeted digital advertising revenue and the implementation of a departure charge holiday until the end of June 2020, aiming to support bus operators during the crisis.
2.4 It is important to note that the underlying assumptions used to forecast the latest position in the table overleaf do not reflect the impact of Tier 2 restrictions recently introduced in parts of the region. An updated forecast position will therefore be provided within the November financial position which will be shared at the next meeting of the Committee. 2.5 It is also important to note that TfWM is continuing to see drops in income and the commercial bus and metro network are still seeing reduced levels of patronage, however, the Combined Authority is able to access a package of funding to support a proportion (75% of losses after the first 5% which will not be funded) of the loss of income from fees and charges for services. The claim for the period 1 April 2020 to 31 July 2020 has been submitted and is currently being reviewed. 2.6 The Department for Transport has also indicated that short-term funding for Metro in the form of Light Rail Restart Grant is anticipated to continue until the end of the financial year. 2.7 Further details of net spending are set out in the table overleaf.
Page 8 Page 2 of 10 Transport for West Midlands financial monitoring position – 2020/2021
Key: Headlines Favourable Variance As at the end of September 2020 there is a £0.579m favourable year to date variance. This is primarily driven by lower bus patronage leading to savings across Concessions budgets along with efficient RTCC purchasing No Variance or Offset by Grant decisions offset by significantly reduced adverising revenue and a departure charge holiday for operators as a result of Covid-19. Adverse Variance
SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR 2020/21 VARIANCE EXPLANATION(S)
ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
TRANSPORT FOR WEST MIDLANDS
INCOME Specific resources: % %
Transport Levy 57,360 57,360 0 0 114,720 114,720 (0) 0 2
% % The profile of CWG expenditure has been impacted by Covid-19, as such grant draw down will be Commonwealth Games 418 909 (490) 4 1,905 2,157 (252) 2 2 5 1 lower than budgeted in year. % % 5
Use of Reserves 0 0 0 0 5,259 3,633 1,626 1 Additional reserves will be utilised to balance the revised full year position. 4 % %
TOTAL INCOME 57,779 58,269 (490) 1 121,884 120,510 1,374 1
EXPENDITURE
Concessions % %
National Bus Concession 24,936 25,499 563 2 48,938 51,006 2,067 4 3 Forecast spending on concessions reflects the latest patronage and fare reimbursement % %
Metro / Rail 2,209 2,219 10 0 4,557 4,575 17 0 3 assumptions. % %
Child Concession 2,751 3,640 888 4 6,579 7,837 1,258 6 3 2 1 29,896 31,358 1,462 60,075 63,417 3,342
Bus Services % %
Bus Stations / Infrastructure 4,070 2,213 (1,857) 4 6,546 4,542 (2,005) 4 1 Loss of bus infrastructure income (bus stations, shelter advertising, IBSS) as a result of Covid-19. 8 4
Subsidised bus is currently being supported by the Bus Services Support Grant to help mitigate % %
Subsidised Network 5,204 5,204 0 0 10,409 10,409 (0) 0 2 against the impact of Covid-19. % %
Accessible Transport 3,263 3,309 46 1 6,617 6,617 0 0 2 12,537 10,726 (1,811) 23,572 21,567 (2,005)
Rail and Metro Services The award of the DfT Light Rail Restart grant to the end of October assumes a largely breakeven % % 1 5
Metro Services 520 612 91 6,630 2,642 (3,988) 5 1 position up until then. However, from that point the forecast assumes revenue will only return to 1 1 75% of pre-Covid levels. % %
Rail Services 1,404 1,339 (65) 5 2,827 2,805 (22) 1 1
1,924 1,951 27 9,457 5,447 (4,010)
Integration % %
Safety and Security 410 614 204 3 1,136 1,274 138 1 3 Driven by increased CCTV income 3 1 % %
Passenger Information 2,774 2,857 83 3 5,666 5,729 62 1 3 % % 7
Sustainable Travel 232 279 47 527 567 40 7 3 1
3,416 3,750 334 7,330 7,570 241
% % Favourable variance driven by efficient purchasing decisions meaning the budgeted contingency
Network Resilience 915 1,533 618 0 2,501 3,100 599 9 3 4 1 for delivery of RTCC is no longer required, alongside staffing variations.
% % The CWG external advice budget has not been spent as plans and recruitment were updated to
Commonwealth Games 418 911 492 4 1,905 2,157 252 2 2 5 1 account for Covid-19. Fully offset by lower grant draw down. % %
Business and Democratic Support 1,724 1,773 49 3 3,723 3,764 41 1 3 % %
Strategic Development 1,719 1,614 (104) 6 2,975 3,141 166 5 3 % %
Transport Governance 63 66 3 5 133 132 (1) 1 1 % %
Capital Finance Charges 4,836 4,836 0 0 10,214 10,214 (0) 0 2 % %
TOTAL EXPENDITURE 57,447 58,517 1,069 2 121,884 120,510 (1,374) 1 % % 4 5
NET 331 (248) 579 3 (0) (0) 0 1 2
Page 9 Page 3 of 10 SECTION B
3.0 Summary Position TfWM Capital Budget
3.1 Many of the schemes within the Capital Programme take some time to develop and implement over a period of some years and therefore considerable variations can arise.
3.2 Overall, TfWM Capital Programme expenditure totalled £64.6m at the end of September 2020, which was £50.4m (44%) below the year to date budget of £115.0m, with the variance primarily contained within the Investment Programme portfolio (£25.3m) and the CWG Programme (£13.6m).
3.3 The second capital forecast was completed during September. The forecast variance was £65.3m (23%) below the annual budget £280.5m, representing a further reduction in expenditure of £40.4m compared to the July forecast. The primary variances to budget are contained within the Investment Programme (£27.6m) and CWG Programme (£25.5m), with the majority of the further reduction from the July forecast driven by the CWG Programme (£25m).
TRANSPORT PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR
ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Investment Programme 42,224 67,542 25,318 119,334 146,891 27,557 CWG Programme 13,171 26,802 13,631 59,282 84,772 25,490 Other Major Programmes 7,143 13,795 6,652 20,831 25,906 5,075 Minor Work Programme 2,062 4,010 1,948 13,434 14,721 1,287 Grants to Local Authorities 0 2,854 2,854 2,277 8,209 5,932 % %
TOTAL 64,600 115,003 50,403 4 215,158 280,499 65,341 3 4 2
3.4 The TfWM delivered Investment Programme portfolio comprises the largest of the five Programmes within the Transport Programme, containing the schemes which feature in the WMCA Devolution Deal Investment Programme to be delivered by TfWM. These schemes are all, to some extent, funded from the West Midlands Combined Authority Devolution Deal funding arrangements.
3.5 The Transport Programme has been categorised into five sub programmes. The largest of these is the Investment Programme with a Budget of £146.9m (53%), including all the Rail, Sprint & Metro Extension Schemes. At the end of September, actual costs totalled £42.2m, which was £25.3m below the budget of £67.5m. The main variances at the end of September were contained within the Metro Programme totalling £19.0m. Although delivery schedules are not currently anticipated to be impacted by rephasing of expenditure plans, it’s likely that the Covid-19 pandemic will lead to further rescheduling and prioritisation of capital expenditure plans.
3.6 The variance against the Metro Wednesbury to Brierley Hill of £10.6m was reflective of Covid-19 restrictions, where utility operators were only responding to emergency works, resulting in diversions not commencing as scheduled. Work is still progressing to acquire land and therefore limited construction has taken place during the month. WMCA are working on mitigation measures including the approval of advanced work packages and granting access to land under License.
Page 10 Page 4 of 10 3.7 The Birmingham Eastside extension variance of £5.3m relates to HS2 Utility diversions which have not commenced due to final sign off on the development agreement with HS2, now expected in October 2020, with work to catch up over the coming months, reflected in the annual forecast.
3.8 The favourable variance on the SPRINT-Hagley Road scheme of £3.1m reflects an ongoing review of design with Birmingham Council and a S278 agreement (public highway improvements notice) requires a revised Target Cost (TC2) so MMA works have not progressed as anticipated.
3.9 The other primary variance related to the Rail–Walsall to Wolverhampton Local Enhancements £2.2m (Package 1), where land acquisition earmarked for 20/21 will not now reach a conclusion until Q1 21/22 at the earliest.
3.10 The Commonwealth Games Programme with a budget of £84.8m (30%) includes all the schemes (SPRINT, Perry Barr & University Rail Stations, and Games) scheduled to be delivered in advance of the Games in July and August 2022. At the end of September 2020, actual costs totalled £13.2m, which was £13.6m below the budget of £26.8m. The main variances related to the Sprint A34 Walsall to Birmingham (£5.2m) and the Sprint A45 Birmingham to Airport & Solihull (£4.9m), both owing to the Covid-19 restrictions on the highways, impacting on utility diversion works. Both projects have commenced phase one works, following WMCA Board approval in March 2020 to submission of Final Business Case to DfT.
3.11 Other Major schemes budget of £25.9m (9%) includes trials of new transport innovation encompassed within Future Transport Zones, to discover new ways to help people and goods move around, in addition to Connected and Autonomous Vehicles trialling new technology, and Key Route Networks, to manage congestion and keep the West Midlands moving. At the end of September 2020, actual costs totalled £7.1m, which was £6.7m below the budget of £13.8m. The main variance relates to A435 Alcester Road Bus Priority Revitalisation £1.7m where a revised scheme has been proposed, following a review in liaison with Birmingham City Council. Consequently, most of the works are not anticipated to progress until 21/22 pending approval by Birmingham City Council Cabinet in Q4 20/21. The Connected and Autonomous Vehicles Testbed (CAV) variance of £1.0m was due to rescheduling of the construction contract award, coupled with Covid-19 restrictions. Work commenced in Q1 20/21 allowing some of the backlog to be addressed.
3.12 The Minor Works Programme with a budget of £14.7m (5%) includes a broad range of relatively small schemes. At the end of September 2020, actual costs totalled £2.1m, which was £1.9m below the budget of £4.0m, with only minor variations at this early stage of the year. The Annual Budget has been increased in September to include the upfront costs relating to the West Midlands Cycle Hire project (£5.0m).
3.13 The Grants to Local Authorities Budget of £8.2m (3%) relates primarily to the schemes funded within the Transforming Cities Fund which are in the early stages of development. There has been no expenditure yet at the end of September 2020, due to the finalisation of agreements with the Local Authorities. Therefore, there is currently a favourable variance of £2.9m.
Page 11 Page 5 of 10 3.14 A review of the annual forecast was completed in September 2020, resulting in a revised forecast of £215.2m, a reduction of £65.3m against the annual budget of £280.5m. The main variances are contained within the Investment Programme £27.6m, and CWG Programme £25.5m with only relatively minor variances against the other Programmes. Within the Investment Programme, the variance is primarily contained within the Metro Programme (£20.3m), relating to Wednesbury Brierley Hill (£11.9m), and Network Enhancements (£5.3m), reflective of actual spend to date. Within the Rail Programme, the Walsall- Wolverhampton (Package 1) variance of £2.3m is due to a deferral of land acquisition costs (Willenhall Land Triple R Site) now projected for Q1 21/22 put back from Q2 2020.
3.15 Within the CWG Programme, the annual forecast variance of £25.5m is primarily contained within the SPRINT schemes. The A45 Birmingham to Airport and Solihull £13.3m, and the A34 Walsall to Birmingham (£8.3m) have both been hampered by Covid-19 restrictions, which has led to a rescheduling of the utility diversion work, and consequently the construction works originally anticipated to follow on, have in the main been reprofiled into Q1 21/22. In both cases, the scheme delivery dates are not impacted by this change.
TfWM Delivered Investment Programme Schemes
INVESTMENT PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Rail Rail - Camp Hill Line Local Enhancements (Package 2) 1,324 2,299 975 3,535 6,299 2,764 Rail - Walsall to Wolverhampton Local Enhancements (Package 1) 1,481 3,561 2,080 4,021 6,812 2,791 Rail - Sutton Coldfield Gateway (6) 15 21 127 127 0 Coventry South Package - Tile Hill Station Improvements 0 40 40 100 100 0 Metro 0 Metro Birmingham Eastside Extension 5,178 10,521 5,343 26,822 28,064 1,242 Metro Wolverhampton City Centre Extension 1,228 1,452 224 3,091 4,057 966 Metro Wednesbury to Brierley Hill Extension 13,869 24,449 10,580 39,020 50,941 11,921 Metro Centenary Square/Edgbaston Extension 14,745 14,136 (609) 27,005 28,345 1,340 Bilston Road Track Replacement Phase 2 7 0 (7) 875 884 9 Metro Network Enhancements - Traction Power and OLE Upgrades with Power Modelling 109 648 539 1,341 2,892 1,551 WIP Station and Car Park works 916 1,084 168 1,084 1,084 0 Metro Network Enhancements - Wednesbury Depot Upgrades 1,132 1,170 38 3,019 4,561 1,542 Metro Network Enhancements – Comms and Control 267 1,823 1,556 1,878 4,105 2,227 Buy Before Boarding 62 234 172 317 743 426 MML Life Cycle Projects 798 1,788 990 4,437 3,555 (882)
Sprint \ Sprint - Hagley Road Phase 1 1,050 4,190 3,140 2,530 4,190 1,660 Sprint - Sutton Coldfield to Birmingham (via Langley) 63 132 69 132 132 0 % %
TOTAL 42,224 67,542 25,318 7 119,334 146,891 27,557 9 3 1
3.16 Expenditure against the TfWM delivered Investment Programme schemes totalled £42.2m at the end of September 2020 which was £25.3m below the budget of £67.5m. The main contributors to the favourable variance were as follows:
Metro Wednesbury to Brierley Hill Metro Extension (£10.580m) reflective of Covid- 19 restrictions, where utility operators were only responding to emergency works, resulting in some of the diversions not commencing as scheduled. The railway corridor with Network Rail was secured on 10th July 2020, which has only allowed limited construction to take place to-date. WMCA are working on mitigation measures including the approval of advanced work packages and granting access to land under License. Metro Birmingham Eastside extension (£5.343m) relating to HS2 Utility diversions which have not commenced due to final sign off with the development agreement with HS2, expected in October 2020, with work to catch up over the coming months, as reflected in the annual forecast. Page 12 Page 6 of 10 SPRINT-Hagley Road (£3.140m) due mainly to the ongoing review of design with Birmingham Council and agreement of S278 which requires a revised Target Cost (TC2), and consequently the MMA works have not progressed as anticipated. Rail – Walsall to Wolverhampton Local Enhancements (£2.080m) (Package 1) where land acquisition costs (Willenhall Land Triple R Site) have been reprofiled to April 2021.
3.17 The annual forecast has been reduced to £119.3m in September 2020, which is £27.6m below the budget of £146.9m. The main variances are as follows
Metro Wednesbury to Brierley Hill Metro Extension (£11.921m) reflects actual spend to date and reduced construction costs anticipated in year. This has no impact on overall delivery schedules. Rail-Walsall-Wolverhampton Local Enhancements (Package 1) (£2.791m) is due to land acquisition costs now projected for April 2021 (from Q2 2020). Rail –Camp Hill Local Line Enhancements (£2.764m) (Package 2) is reflective of land acquisition costs being reprofiled to Q1 21/22, together with Network Rail Industry and Risk fees, which are rescheduled to Q2 21/22, to align with changes to the Programme. Metro Network enhancements (£2.227m) is due to commissioning work for PID (Passenger Information Display) & PAU (Passenger Assistant Unit) upgrades, which have proceeded later than anticipated due to COVID-19 restrictions. The Subcontract Package (e.g. SmarTrams Enhancements & Radio system) has been rephased and pushed back to Phase two of the project after further review with MML to identify optional Enhancements.
Commonwealth Games Programme
COMMONWEALTH GAMES PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
DfT- Regional Integrated Control Centre (RICC) 25 25 0 53 53 0 Perry Barr Interchange Development 0 6 6 12 12 0 University Station Improvement Project 2,328 3,564 1,236 11,859 13,693 1,834 Perry Barr Rail Station 2,658 2,678 20 9,337 8,308 (1,029) Sprint - A45 Birmingham to Airport and Solihull 4,847 10,017 5,170 18,520 31,773 13,253 Sprint - A34 Walsall to Birmingham 2,138 7,021 4,883 9,981 18,329 8,348 A34 Sprint Park & Ride 32 172 140 200 200 0 RTCC-Design & Layout/Commercialisation 89 525 436 1,805 1,853 48 RTCC-Data (Tactical & Operational Intelligence) 485 577 92 1,110 1,110 0 RTCC-ICT 0 0 0 58 58 0 RTCC-Operations 154 215 61 317 317 0 RTCC-Customer Information 1 72 71 107 107 0 RTCC-Highway Interventions 301 1,579 1,278 5,251 8,287 3,036 RTCC NWM Customer Interface Tool (Journey planner/Website) 113 351 238 672 672 0 % %
TOTAL 13,171 26,802 13,631 1 59,282 84,772 25,490 0 5 3
3.18 Expenditure against the Commonwealth Games Programme totalled £13.171m at the end of September 2020 which was £13.631m below the budget of £26.802m. The main contributors to this favourable variance were as follows:
SPRINT – A45 Birmingham to Airport and Solihull (£5.170m) due mainly to lower than expected progress of utility diversion costs, as a result of temporary Covid-19 restrictions on the highways. SPRINT – A34 Walsall to Birmingham (£4.883m) also owing to the Covid-19 restrictions impacting on utility diversion works.
Page 13 Page 7 of 10 University Station Improvement Project (£1.236m) Network Rail Industry and Risk fees originally anticipated in June 2020, have been reprofiled to Q4 20/21, to align with changes to the Programme. RTCC-Highway Interventions (£1.278m) variance due to CCTV Package costs (i.e. Perry Barr Mitigation) and Traffic Signals Package, where Covid-19 restrictions have hampered progress, and Local Authority agreements have not yet been confirmed.
3.19 The annual forecast has been reduced to £59.3m in September 2020, which is £25.49m below the Budget of £84.772m. The main variances are as follows
SPRINT – A45 Birmingham to Airport and Solihull (£13.253m). The reprofiling of the utility diversions into Q3, has had a knock-on impact on commencement of the construction works, the majority of which will take place in Q1 and Q2 21/22. There is however no impact on delivery of the scheme. SPRINT – A34 Walsall to Birmingham (£8.348m). In a similar vein to the A45, the forecast has been reduced owing to the re-profiling of the utility diversions and construction works. RTCC Highway Interventions (£3.036m). The variance is a continuation of the current position.
Other Major Works Programme
OTHER MAJOR MORKS PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR
ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Snow Hill 3rd Access 51 301 250 50 570 520 Snow Hill Public Realm 0 0 0 150 150 0 Dudley Bus Station Development 16 8 (8) 16 16 0 Clean Bus Technology Fund 2017-2019 528 931 403 1,764 1,764 0 Cross City Bus - City Centre Package 87 135 48 412 412 0 Cross City Bus - Dudley – Druids Heath Package 64 169 105 391 465 74 Longbridge Connectivity Package 375 760 385 760 760 0 Connected and Autonomous Vehicles TestBed (CAV) 1,074 2,076 1,002 2,239 2,239 0 NPIF 2 Birmingham Growth Point 22 512 490 705 705 0 Key Route Network Safety 66 669 603 1,283 1,413 130 Dudley Interchange 354 405 51 444 1,110 666 Autonomous Highway,Rural & Parking Test Facilities (Meridian 3) 859 1,144 285 3,015 3,015 0 Future Mobility Zone - Human Centered Data 44 95 51 179 174 (5) Future Mobility Zone - Enabling Data Exploitation 189 354 165 883 619 (264) Future Mobility Zone - Innovation Showcases 115 368 253 1,287 1,240 (47) Future Mobility Zone - Programme Mgmt & Monitoring Evaluation 143 125 (18) 425 330 (95) 5G 477 787 310 880 1,992 1,112 ConVEx-Connected Vehicle data Exchange 1,615 1,855 240 2,293 2,015 (278) Major Route Network - Programme 3 0 (3) 101 101 0 A435 Alcester Rd Bus Priority Revitalisation 76 1,800 1,724 236 2,771 2,535 Future Mobility Zone - Enhanced Ticket Platform 652 738 86 1,695 1,551 (144) Major Road Network-A4123 Corridor -A4150 Ring Road to A456 Hagley Road 0 50 50 200 200 0 Major Road Network- A454 Wolverhampton to Neachells Phrases 1,2, And 3 0 68 68 274 274 0 Major Road Network-A449 Stafford Rd M54 J2 to A4150 Ring Road 0 35 35 141 141 0 Major Road Network- A46 Link Road Ph2 Coventry 0 38 38 150 150 0 Major Road Network- A38 Kingsbury Road Birmingham 0 15 15 30 60 30 Future Mobility Zone - Transport Network Data 333 357 24 828 1,669 841 % %
TOTAL 7,143 13,795 6,652 8 20,831 25,906 5,075 0 4 2
3.20 Expenditure against the Other Major Works Programme totals £7.143m at the end of September 2020 which was £6.652m below the budget of £13.795m. The main contributors to this favourable variance were as follows:
A435 Alcester Rd Bus Priority Revitalisation (£1.724m) A review of the scheme has been conducted in liaison with Birmingham City Council, resulting in a revised scheme, which is expected to be approved by
Page 14 Page 8 of 10 Birmingham City Cabinet in Q4 20/21. Consequently, much of the works are not anticipated to commence until Q1 21/22. CAV’s (Connected and Autonomous Vehicle) (£1.002m) variance is due to a delay in appointment of the construction contract, coupled with the disruption of the Covid-19 restrictions in Q1 20/21.
3.21 The annual forecast has been reduced to £20.831m in September 2020, which is £5.075m below the budget of £25.906m. The main variances are as follows
A435 Alcester Rd Bus Priority Revitalisation (£2.535m) owing to the current position, with much of the works not anticipated until 21/22. 5G (£1.112m) Finalisation of internal agreements have slowed progress in the Programme, resulting in a rescheduling of some activity into 21/22. Dudley Interchange (£0.666m) the project is awaiting progression from the current RIBA3 design stage to formal tender once funding arrangements have been confirmed.
Minor Works Programme
3.21 Expenditure against the Minor Works Programme totalled £2.062m at the end of September 2020 which was £1.948m below the budget of £4.010m. The main variances of note were as follows: Page 15 Page 9 of 10 ADEPT Live Lab (£0.487m) The costs anticipated in Q1/Q2 have not materialised due to Covid-19 restrictions. It is anticipated most works will be caught up later in the year, however a marginal underspend is expected in year, reflected in the Annual Forecast. Real Time Information Upgrades (£0.397m) is due to rescheduling of procurement activity. It is anticipated the contract award will take place late November, with phase 1 of the project to be completed in Q4 20/21.
3.22 The annual forecast has been revised to £13.434m in September 2020, which is £1.287m below the Budget of £14.271m. The variances are broadly reflective of the current position identified previously.
Grants to local Authorities
GRANTS TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Low Emission Bus Scheme (Coventry CC) 0 237 237 237 237 0 B4106 Spon End (Coventry CC) 0 1,692 1,692 1,000 4,697 3,697 New St/High St/Victoria Sq Public Realm (Birmingham CC) 0 925 925 1,040 3,275 2,235 % % 0
TOTAL 0 2,854 2,854 2,277 8,209 5,932 2 0 7 1
3.23 There was no expenditure against the Grants to Local Authorities Programme as at the end of September 2020, resulting in a £2.854m favourable variance against budget.
3.24 The annual forecast has been reduced to £2.277m in September 2020, which is £5.932m below the budget of £8.209m. The variances of note are as follows:
B4106 Spon End (Coventry CC) £3.697m. The project will commence on conclusion of the funding agreement with the Local Authority. The forecast has been updated to reflect the anticipated spend profile for the scheme, which will roll over into 21/22. New St/High St/Victoria Square Public Realm (Birmingham CC) £2.235m due to a revised programme from the Local Authority. The full business case is scheduled for approval in January 2021, at which point, draw down against the budget is expected to begin.
Page 16 Page 10 of 10 Agenda Item 8
Transport Delivery Committee
Date 9th November 2020
Report title Capital Programme Delivery Monitoring Report Accountable Chief Laura Shoaf, Managing Director, TfWM Executive 0121 214 7444 [email protected] Accountable Sandeep Shingadia, Director of Employee Development & Delivery, TfWM 0121 214 7169 [email protected] Report has been Councillor Akhtar considered by
Recommendation(s) for action or decision:
Transport Delivery Committee is requested to:
1. To note achievements since the September meeting of the Transport Delivery Committee. 2. To note the progress of deliverables and outturn of the 2020/21 Capital Programme. 3. To note, where indicated, any variations from the baseline programme.
Page 17 Page 1 of 8 [PUBLIC]
1.0 Purpose
1.1 To provide this committee with a progress monitoring update on the approved TfWM led 2020/2021 programmes and projects.
1.2 The financial aspects of the TfWM Capital Programme are reported separately under the Financial Monitoring Reports to this committee.
2.0 Background
2.1 The 2020/21 Capital Programme was approved by WMCA Board as part of the wider Transport Plan in February 2020.
2.2 The ITB allocation for 2020/2021 has been fully utilised on continuing committed schemes and in attempting to manage the existing asset base with respect to replacement and or renewal of life expired/obsolete equipment, in order to endeavour to maintain a steady state of asset condition across the estate.
2.3 Attached to this report (Appendix 1) is the detailed monitoring report for the TfWM Capital programme outlining deliverables, indicating the baseline date with an indication of the current forecast date with a RAG indicator.
3.0 Achievements
3.1 The following elements within the 2020/21 Capital Programme have been completed during September/October:
Perry Barr - Birmingham City Council and their contractors have commenced work on the design for the Bus Interchange.
University Station – Design and build contract has been awarded
Network Wide Cycling Programme - Installation of cycle parking at Birmingham New Street is completed.
4.0 Variations to Baseline Programme
4.1 Dudley Interchange – Delay to programme due to ongoing discussions regarding funding package and land acquisition
4.2 Network Wide P&R Lighting Enhancements – Delay in completion of outstanding sites due to increased costs incurred due to Contractor issues. This has led to a shortfall in available budget. Sponsor has now reprofiled budgets to ensure that funds are available to complete the programme.
Page 2 of 8 Page 18 [PUBLIC]
4.3 Digital Panel Roll Out – Completion of installation delayed. Programme for completion established now staff have returned from being furloughed due to COVID 19.
5.0 Financial Implications
5.1 The detailed financial aspects of the TfWM 2020/2021 Capital Programme are reported separately under the Financial Monitoring Report to this Committee. A summary of the position in financial terms is, however, attached to this report as Appendix 2
6.0 Legal implications
6.1 There are no direct legal implications arising from the recommendations set out in this report. However, legal and procurement will support, as necessary, any deliverables that may arise throughout 2020/2021.
7.0 Equalities implications
7.1 There are no equality implications arising from the recommendations set out in this report. The Equalities & Diversity Manager will support as project required any deliverables within the 2020/2021 capital programme.
8.0 Inclusive Growth Implications
8.1 The transport interventions set out within this report form an integral part of an efficient and resilient transport system which support inclusive growth objectives by:
Enabling wider labour markets, Providing access to skills, education and training Supporting regeneration and place making initiatives
9.0 Geographical Area of Report’s Implications
9.1 The report deals with schemes to be funded through the Integrated Transport Block which are located within the Metropolitan Area, but will serve to improve connectivity across the wider WMCA.
10.0 Other Implications
10.1 No implications
11.0 Appendices
11.1 APPENDIX 1 – Progress of Deliverables against 2020/21 Baseline Programme 11.2 APPENDIX 2 – Financial Summary
Page 3 of 8 Page 19 [PUBLIC]
12.0 Glossary of Terms
BCC = Birmingham City Council BCCI = Birmingham City Centre Interchange CA = Combined Authority CC = City Council CCTV = Closed Circuit Television DfT = Department for Transport GRIP = Guide to Rail Investment Projects HIL = Highway Improvement Line HOPS = Host Operator or Processing System HoT = Heads of Terms HS2 =High Speed 2 ICT = Information and Communications Technology IT = Information Technology ITB = Integrated Transport Block KRN = Key Route Network LED = Light Emitting Diode LTP = Local Transport Plan NR = Network Rail OBC = Outline Business Case OJEU =Official Journal of the European Union P & R = Park and Ride RIBA = Royal Institute of British Architects RTI = Real Time Information TBT = Transforming Bus Travel TCF = Transforming Cities Fund TfWM = Transport for West Midlands TWA = Transport and Works Act UAT = User Acceptance Group WMCA = West Midlands Combined Authority WMM = West Midlands Metro WMT = West Midlands Trains
Page 4 of 8 Page 20 APPENDIX 1 - PROGRESS OF DELIVERABLES AGAINST 2020/21 BASELINE PROGRAMME Transport Delivery Committee Dashboard
2020/21 Programme Summary
Baseline Forecast DCA Project Name Status DCA Summary Comp Date Date Trend
Major Works Programme
Practical completion of the car park and handover to TfWM took place on Thursday 14th May. Following suspension of Delivery and 1. Longbridge Connectivity Project May 2020 May 2020 Green Same services work due to Covid-19, the power supply has now been completed and final works are being undertaken on the Handover telecommunications connections. Snagging, testing and commissioning took place during August and September. Final snagging works are now in the process of being completed. – An opening date to be determined. The RIBA3 design stage is complete for the Dudley Interchange scheme and tender documents are being compiled in readiness for going out to market. Work continues to progress with Dudley MBC on the interface with the local highway improvement scheme. The business case has been refreshed for the scheme and will be used to support applications for a 2 Dudley Interchange Detailed Design May 2022 August 2022 Amber Worse funding contribution. There is ongoing dialogue with Dudley MBC and Midland Metro on project interfaces, and progress. Programme has slipped due the development of a robust funding strategy. Key next steps: secure funding to progress land acquisition; agree programme and interfaces with Metro & DMBC Highways; complete tender documents; issue tenders.
The first Regional Road Safety Strategic Group meeting was held on 26 June 2020 with the next meeting scheduled for 22nd
Page 21 Page October 2020. A trends in road safety report for 2019 is in the process of being prepared. Alongside this, the first road safety 3 Making the KRN Safer Contribution Mar 2019 Mar 2021 Amber Same action plan for the region is in development. This will provide a mechanism for stakeholders to make road safety commitments in the first action plan. A review of the plan will take place before it’s presented to WMCA Board in January 2021.
The Hybrid Planning Application for the Rail Station and Bus Interchange was submitted in early September and was validated by the local planning authority towards the end of September. GRIP 4 Outline Designs are now with Network Rail Perry Barr Rail Station and Bus 4 Development Dec 2021 Mar 2022 Amber Same and West Midlands Trains for their review. WMCA FBC is continuing to progress through to the WMCA Assurance Process, Interchange with work ongoing on finalising funding sources. Birmingham City Council and their contractors have commenced work on the design for the Bus Interchange.
rd The close out of Snow Hill has been completed as per the recommendation presented to TDC in January 2020. 5 Snow Hill 3 Access Closed Closed Out Out
The University Station Redevelopment GRIP 5-8 Design and Build Contract has been awarded. The contractors have produced a programme which has been reviewed and accepted by the project team. Going forward, this programme will GRIP 4 – Outline 6 University Station May 2022 May 2022 Amber Same provide the new baseline for the project, which notes project completion in time for the Commonwealth Games. Key Design construction documentation has been produced and is currently going through the review process. Non-intrusive surveys are underway, with archaeological survey enabling work complete. The project continues to work on other legal documents and consents required. Minor Works Programme
The outstanding 21 shelters for the 19/20 period were all installed by the end of March 20. 40 new advertising panels have 7 TBT Platinum Route shelter upgrades Complete Complete been delivered and are in storage awaiting future programme.
Park & Ride construction works completed 5th Feb 2020 and car park officially opened on 6th February 2020. Landscaping 8 Bradley Lane Metro Park and Ride Complete Complete works to the adjacent playing fields will commence post COVID19 lock-down, completion is required by 1st April 2021 in accordance with the associated planning condition.
Programme for 2020/21 has been scheduled to start from the middle of this financial year due to COVID19 restrictions. Main Network Wide Bus Station 9 Design & Delivery Mar 2020 Mar 2021 Green Same parts of the programme are: Refurbishment Phase 1 Resurfacing works at Lea Hall, Tipton and Hall Green have been completed.
Page 5 of 8 [PUBLIC]
Baseline Forecast DCA Project Name Status DCA Summary Comp Date Date Trend
Marston Green bus interchange resurfacing, City centre shelter enhancements in Coventry, West Bromwich bus station automatic door renewals, cycling schemes at Wolverhampton & Moor Street as well as CCTV upgrades.
Work continues with Coventry City Council and City of Culture to establish any associated budget and work streams that they are able to pursue to further improve Pool Meadow Bus Station ahead of 2021.
7 sites have been completed and are awaiting confirmation from Network Rail regarding closure of Land Lords Consent applications. Network Wide P&R Lighting Delivery and 10 May 2019 Amber Same There are 5 outstanding sites which include Sandwell & Dudley, Sutton Coldfield, Berkswell, Stourbridge Junction and Enhancements Handover March 2021 Canley to deliver this financial year. Sponsor has now reprofiled budgets to ensure that funds are available to complete the programme.
The Park & Ride strategy has been finalised and a development plan is being created to direct focussed Park & Ride expansion based on the policies and principles agreed within the strategy. This is being taken forward by the newly Network wide Park & Ride Expansion Development / 11 Mar 2020 Mar 2021 Green Same established Park & Ride steering group. Developments – Phase 2 Feasibility We are continuing to develop Park & Ride expansion opportunities for sites already approved, including Tile Hill, Whitlocks End, key locations in Sandwell, Darlaston, Willenhall, for SPRINT and for the Commonwealth Games.
The new Asset Management System is now implemented and operational. Key assets including Summer Lane, Bus Stations and Park and Ride work orders have now been raised and actioned on the new system. 12 IDOX – Asset Management System Complete Complete Discussions are taking place around a Phase 2 to utilise the new system to incorporate Land owned to enable effect management. Page 22 Page RTI upgrade capex allocated to replacement of Birmingham City Centre totem screens (colour LED). Project completed in 13 Asset Management – RTI Upgrades Complete Complete March 2020.
A meeting was held with Walsall MBC officers in October to discuss the current position of the scheme. A workshop is to be Walsall Town Centre Interchange set up with Walsall and TfWM officers, to be facilitated by Walsall’s consultants for the Town Centre Master Plan. It is the 14 On Hold Feasibility Study intention to consider the Bradford Place project as part of the wider town centre aspirations to improve transport and connectivity, including St Pauls Interchange and the Walsall Rail Station.
Green Coventry and Wolverhampton Bus station cycle parking complete, as well as Solihull rail station.
Network Wide Cycling Programme 3A Delivery and Green/Amber Same Installation of cycle parking at Birmingham New Street completed, with minor works remaining to complete opening of facility. 15 Mar 2019 Amber (NWCP) Handover November Legal agreement drafted by Network Rail and currently being finalised with WMCA, capturing ownership and asset 2020 management considerations. Slight delay to scheme completion due to availability of contractors to complete final Comms setup.
Green Preferred scheme supplier identified following procurement exercise. Mandatory standstill period now completed, with 16 West Midlands Bike Share Scheme Procurement March 2022 March 2022 Same inception meeting undertaken with preferred supplier. Various workstreams underway with supplier to progress scheme development.
Contract year 4 (July 19 to July 20) – a further 50 digital advertising panels to be installed in TfWM bus shelters by Clear Channel. 45 new shelters with 43 digital advertising screens have been installed to date. The remaining 5 shelters have now Green/Amber been installed. The remaining 7 screens and associated feeder pillar upgrades are being programmed for installation by Rolling 17 Digital Panel Rollout July 2020 Worse Clear Channel as all staff are now back from furlough due to COVID 19. Programme November 2020 Contract year 5 (July 20 to July 21) – a further 30 digital advertising panels to be installed in TfWM bus shelters by Clear Channel. TfWM are awaiting confirmed sites from Clear Channel to determine how many new shelters will need to be installed.
Project Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA) Definitions
Page 6 of 8 [PUBLIC]
Successful delivery of the project/programme to time, cost and quality appears highly likely and there are no major outstanding issues G that at this stage appear to threaten delivery significantly G/A Successful delivery appears probable however constant attention will be needed to ensure risks do not materialise into major issues threatening delivery Successful delivery appears feasible but significant issues already exist requiring management attention. These appear resolvable at this A stage and if addressed promptly, should not present a cost/schedule overrun A/R Successful delivery of the project/programme is in doubt with major risks or issues apparent in a number of key areas. Urgent action is needed to ensure these are addressed, and whether resolution is feasible Successful delivery of the project/programme appears to be unachievable. There are major issues on project/programme definition, R schedule, budget required quality or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable. The project/ programme may need re-base lining and/or overall viability re-assessed Page 23 Page
Page 7 of 8 [PUBLIC]
TRANSPORT PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR
ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Investment Programme 0 0 0 753 753 0 CWG Programme 32 178 146 1,625 212 (1,413) Other Major Programmes 442 1,069 627 1,476 3,409 1,933 Minor Work Programme 635 985 350 2,804 3,135 331 % %
TOTAL 1,109 2,232 1,123 0 6,658 7,509 851 1 5 1
INVESTMENT PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Sprint \ Sprint - Hagley Road Phase 1 0 0 0 753 753 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 % 753 753 0 % 0 0
COMMONWEALTH GAMES PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Perry Barr Interchange Development 0 6 6 12 12 0 University Station Improvement Project 0 0 0 1,000 0 (1,000) Perry Barr Rail Station 0 0 0 413 0 (413) A34 Sprint Park & Ride 32 172 140 200 200 0 % % 7
TOTAL 32 178 146 2 1,625 212 (1,413) 6 8 6
OTHER MAJOR MORKS PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR
ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000
Snow Hill 3rd Access 51 301 250 50 570 520 Snow Hill Public Realm 0 0 0 150 150 0 Dudley Bus Station Development 16 8 (8) 16 16 0 Key Route Network Safety 0 0 1,413 1,413 Longbridge Connectivity Package 375 760 385 760 760 0 A435 Alcester Rd Bus Priority Revitalisation 0 0 0 500 500 0 % %
TOTAL 442 1,069 627 1,476 3,409 1,933 7 0 5
MINOR WORKS PROGRAMME SEPTEMBER 2020 YEAR TO DATE FULL YEAR ACTUAL BUDGET VARIANCE FORECAST BUDGET VARIANCE £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 £000 Bus Shelter Appeals (1) 4 5 3 9 6 TBT Platinum Route RTI Equipment Upgrades 11 14 3 11 14 3 Rail Park and Ride Delivery 4 165 161 139 461 322 Tipton Park and Ride 0 12 12 24 24 0 Dudley Port Integrated Transport Hub (10) 6 16 50 50 0 Aldridge Rail Station Study 14 32 18 32 32 0 Metro 0 Bradley Lane Park and Ride 202 52 (150) 348 348 0 Cycling 0 Network Wide Cycling Programme (NWCP) 11 24 13 24 24 0 Bike Life Report 0 0 0 15 15 0 Network Wide Park and Ride Expansion Developments -Phase 2 15 23 8 23 23 0 Network Wide P and R Lighting Enhancement 1 11 10 17 17 0 IDOX - Asset Management System 1 2 1 35 35 0 Asset Management Programme 360 448 88 1,592 1,592 0 Other 0 Asset Management- RTI Upgrades 0 0 0 170 170 0 Project Development Costs 2 3 1 7 7 0 LTP Technical Development Nims Mattisse 0 0 0 19 19 0 Gateway Controlled Project Development 0 154 154 154 154 0 Top Slice 25 35 10 141 141 0 % %
TOTAL 635 985 350 6 2,804 3,135 331 1 3 1
Page 8 of 8 Page 24 Agenda Item 9
Transport Delivery Committee
Date 9 November 2020
Report title Rail Business Report
Accountable Director Malcolm Holmes, Director of Rail, Transport for West Midlands
Email [email protected] Tel 0121 214 7058 Accountable Tom Painter, Head of Rail Franchising and Employee Partnerships, West Midlands Rail Executive
Email [email protected] Tel: 07432104161 Report has been Councillor Roger Lawrence – Lead Member Rail and considered by Metro
Recommendation(s) for action or decision:
The Transport Delivery Committee is recommended to:
Note the content of the report
1.0 Purpose
To provide an update relating to the performance, operation and delivery of rail services in the West Midlands including on rail operator partnership agreements and West Midlands Rail Executive (WMRE) activity.
2.0 Section A – Background
2.1 Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) and WMRE currently work to influence the management and delivery of rail services and projects.
2.2 This report provides a summary of rail activity in the TfWM and wider WMRE areas between June and October 2020. Page 25 Page 1 of 8 [PUBLIC]
3.0 Section B – Williams Rail Review
3.1 Williams Rail Review 3.2 The long-awaited Williams Review of the structure of the rail industry, which is expected to form the basis of a new government White Paper, has still not been published. However, with all rail franchises now under “Emergency Recovery Measures Agreements” (see below), one of the review’s expected recommendations, that of shifting revenue risk from the operator to the Government and replacing franchises with “Management Contracts”, has effectively taken place, at least for the duration of the COVID19 situation. 3.3 Whatever the outcome for the review, TfWM and WMRE will continue to make the case with government for greater local accountability and control over our local rail network. 4.0 Section C – West Midlands Franchise
3.1 On 20 September the Emergency Measures Agreement (EMA) for West Midlands Trains (WMT) that had been in place since the end of March expired, and was replaced with a new contract known as an Emergency Recovery Measures Agreement (ERMA).
3.2 Like the EMA, the ERMA sees cost and revenue risk remain with the DfT, with WMT receiving a fixed fee that can be supplemented through a performance bonus payable in the event of certain targets being achieved. However, the key difference is that the value of the management fee has been reduced, whilst the value of the performance bonus has increased. This is to incentivise the operator to deliver continually excellent standards of customer care and train service delivery.
3.3 In another subtle change from the EMA, the number of criteria against which the performance bonus is assessed has increased. The new category relates to collaborative behaviours. This is a very positive development, as the industry has not necessarily been known for its partnership working in the past. This is principally because the industry structure created in the 1990s was based on competition. However, now that COVID-19 has caused revenues to collapse, competition has ceased in any meaningful sense. Now WMT and other train companies can increase their margins through collaboration, which should transform the way they work with each other and better the outcomes the industry provides to customers.
3.4 WMT’s ERMA will last until late 2021, at which point will either move to a direct award contract, or revert to the previous Franchise terms. Other train companies’ ERMAs have slightlyPage different 26 terms depending on their particular Page 2 of 8 [PUBLIC]
circumstances. The general policy direction is to use the ERMA and Direct Award process to stabilise the rail industry so that it will be able to smoothly transition to the new industry structure that the Williams Review or White Paper will create (see Section 3 above). WMRE is working closely with DfT both on the management of WMT during the ERMA, and also on the specification for the Direct Award.
3.5 The growth of rail patronage has slowed in October, as the rise in local lockdowns and changing government advice have started suppress demand. Prior to this, patronage had risen to between 35-40%, with some routes starting to experience difficulties in carrying customers in a socially distanced way. However, the drop off in demand has solved some of these issues, as has the introduction of a new timetable on 7th September. For example, the timetable change increased the frequency on certain key routes, such as the Cross City Line and the Chase Line to Walsall and Rugeley. Both had experienced capacity challenges prior to September.
3.6 Unfortunately, the September timetable was not without its challenges. The planned increase in frequency on the Snow Hill Lines proved to be too ambitious for the number of traincrew available to WMT. This led to an unacceptable number of cancellations and overcrowding on the trains that did operate. The cause of the problem was a backlog of essential training that had built up during COVID. Following intervention by WMRE and DfT, WMT introduced an interim timetable that reduced the number of services to the level that could be robustly resourced. This is a far from ideal solution, but it is better for customers to have a service that can be relied upon, rather than one might look good but only works on paper.
5.0 Section D – Rail Programme
5.1 At University, the initial contract Programme has been reviewed and accepted confirming completion ahead of the Commonwealth Games. The enabling works are continuing, with archaeological works now complete and a report being prepared, while the highways works for the power cable diversion are ongoing. The application for additional funding from the WMT performance fund continues for the platform canopies and tactiles. A lessons learnt session has been carried out and the outputs issued. Finally, good progress made on incorporating the medical facility into the baseline station design.
5.2 The planning application for Perry Barr has been submitted to Birmingham City Council, whilst feedback has been received from Network Rail on the GRIP 4 Designs. The planning application has prompted a lively debate on social media and the comments received from the public are under review. A meeting has been held with BCC planners to discuss options. Finally, work is ongoing to refine the current estimate to Pagemeet 27the project budget target, alongside Page 3 of 8 [PUBLIC]
discussions around additional funding. BCC have mobilised their designer for the Bus Interchange works.
5.3 On Package 1 (Darlaston and Willenhall), survey works and consultation with the Environment Agency have now given much greater clarity on the contaminated land and mine working risks which will now be incorporated into the design and estimates. At Willenhall, agreement has been made for the acquisition of some required land from AUM Construction. On both stations work is being undertaken to compare costs in line with other station builds to provide assurance the projects provide good value for money. The invitation to tender was also issued to market in October.
5.4 The main focus of the Package 2 (Camp Hill Line) work remains the resolution of the timetable proposals. Work has commenced on the short- and medium- term timetable options which will be performance tested and assured by Network Rail by the end of November. Other work continues around constructing new badger setts and signalling design. Procurement planning is underway for the design and build and the FBC has been completed, ready to be submitted once the timetable proposals are agreed with Network Rail.
6.0 Section E – West Midlands Grand Rail Collaboration (GRC)
6.1 After several months of coordinating the industry’s response to COVID, the GRC is transitioning to a more strategic mindset. In particular, the Board is keen to develop an operator agnostic strategy to rejuvenate patronage once the pandemic has subsided to the point where this would be possible. The ERMAs and their focus on partnership working will be an enabler for this enterprise, as will the realisation that with the revenue base so low, it will be mutually beneficial for operators to pool resources rather than compete with one another.
6.2 The relative lack of revenue being taken by train companies also has caused the GRC to focus on ticketing modernisation. A proposal for a regional fare capping trial is being considered by the Board, although this would be subject to approval by the DfT. The system under consideration can work with both the existing fares structure and also a reformed model. Consequently, it is not a barrier to the fares reform work referenced in section 7 below. 7.0 Section F –Rail Investment Strategy and West Midlands Stations Alliance
7.1 TfWM/WMRE has continued to actively engage with DfT over the Restoring Your Railway initiative. Malcolm Holmes and WMCA Mayor Andy Street attended a meeting on 6th August to discuss the Department for Transport’s various Restoring Your Railway funds with the Rail Minister Chris Heaton-Harris and DfT officials. This was followed by an officer level meeting the following Monday. The key messages were:
DfT want a strategic overview of the various local authority sponsored Restoring Your Railway IdeasPage Fund 28 bids across the WMRE area Page 4 of 8 [PUBLIC]
Previous advice from DfT, that unsuccessful Ideas Fund bids could be resubmitted as soon as any areas of feedback had been addressed, was incorrect. Revised bids will only be considered (alongside other new bids) at the next formal round of Ideas Fund application process
There is still no clarity on the application process to the RYR “Accelerating Fund” for existing station schemes which are already well-developed
7.2 It is understood that DfT will launch the next round of RYR in November, however there is currently no clarity on the timescales for this.
7.3 WMRE will be undertaking a refresh to the West Midlands Rail Investment Strategy in light of various underlying assumptions changing and recognising the impact of COVID-19. A detailed proposal has been developed by SLC Rail and this was endorsed by WMRE Officers Group. A programme of activities spreading into next year has been identified, which will include engagement partner authorities and other stakeholders. There will be a number of challenges associated with dealing with the considerable uncertainties associated with the long-term impact that COVID-19 will have on rail demand as part of this work. WMRE remains close to industry workstreams assessing the impact of COVID.
7.4 A short overview of a number of schemes referenced within the Rail Investment Strategy is as follows:
Cannock – GRIP1/SOBC report being finalised, 4 options being assessed
Solihull – Stage 3 of study underway (including public consultation)
Aldridge – business case work underway alongside timetabling and rolling stock work. Proposal for GRIP3 study received from Network Rail.
Dudley Port Integrated Transport Hub – Consultants Arcadis undertaking study, stakeholder meetings held, December completion
Birmingham International Interchange Hub – Plans published by UGC, project seeking further development funding
Snow Hill Lines Decarbonisation – Network Rail SOBC proposal awaiting funding approval by DfT. Note Rail Industry’s Traction Decarbonisation Network Strategy published in September, with further electrification programme business case due to be published imminently
Birmingham Moor Street – Industry Working Group held. Work on short- term Moor St-New St link improvements suspended.
7.5 Sponsorship of the Midlands Rail Hub (MRH) project has moved from Midlands Connect to DfT with a new governance process in place. Elements of the MRH programme that can be accelerated have been identified and funding allocated Page 29 Page 5 of 8 [PUBLIC]
to undertake further design work on Snow Hill Platform 4 restoration. WMRE/TfWM are pressing for the proposed MRH upgrade work at Kings Norton to be accelerated, noting the planned introduction of services on the Camp Hill line.
7.6 WMRE work on reforming rail fares continues, with consultants Steer undertaking technical development and analysis work on the four detailed options that have been identified as potential approaches for reforming rail fares. These include two radical options which would introduce distance-based pricing, and two less radical options that build on the current structure.
7.7 Informal discussions have been held with a number of interested parties, including DfT and Rail Delivery Group, and our proposals remain strongly aligned with national aspirations to simplify rail fares. The DfT has specifically expressed a desire to accelerate the introduction of tickets appropriate for part- time commuters as part of the post-COVID19 recovery process.
7.8 The Stations Alliance is making good progress with its Stations as Places prospectuses. It has nearly concluded the first of its ‘partner’ prospectuses, with Leamington Spa as the trial location. This is the first time that the Stations as Places approach has been used at a station where West Midlands Trains are not the managers, and the response from the local Chiltern Railways team has been excellent. 8.0 Section G – Financial Implications
8.1 There are no direct financial implications as a result of this update report. Although the latest status position covering the Rail Programme, Rail Investment Strategy and Stations Alliance is for noting in this report there are a number of financial risks and challenges against these that will be need to be carefully considered. This will form a key element as part of progressing the further development and/or delivery of these.
8.2 Any costs incurred or support provided by TfWM or West Midlands Rail Executive from supporting the activity in relation to the GRC will be met from within agreed funding and resources.
9.0 Section H – Legal Implications
9.1 There are no specific legal implications arising from this report.
10.0 Section I – Equalities Implications
10.1 There are no equality implications in relation to this update report. Individual schemes and projects need to undergo in-depth equality impact assessments to ensure inclusion and accessibility compliance. Page 30 Page 6 of 8 [PUBLIC]
11.0 Section J – Geographical Scope
11.1 This report covers rail services within the WMRE geographical area, which includes the seven authorities which make up WMCA as well as the nine Shire and Unitary authorities which ring the Met area.
12.0 Section K – Inclusive Growth Implications
12.1 As an update report for noting, there are no inclusive growth implications associated with the allocation of resources arising from this report. However, the schemes referenced in the report are likely to have the following implications, in line with the Future Generations and Universal Design inclusive growth tests:
12.2 Future Generations:- The Midlands Rail Hub will be an important mechanism to ensure that the benefits of HS2 are felt across the region in terms of improvements to local rail services and the opportunities those services create. However, the majority of people in this region do not use heavy rail services as part of work and life. The implications of the transition from lockdown – assuming that we retain the aspirations laid out in WM2041 – are that walking and cycling will be vital in order to achieve a balance between connectivity and good health. Buses are the public transport mode of choice for most people in the region, and will continue to play an important role in the region’s future. As such, all investments into heavy rail also need to be made with a view to encouraging people away from car ownership and towards active travel and mass transit. This can be realised in a number of ways, but notably in how stations connect to their localities, and in how train stations and carriages are designed to encourage walking and cycling. This also means that economic improvements that happen ahead of new heavy rail services can still be open to people via public transport.
12.3 On balance, the increased heavy rail capacity that HS2 brings is a positive for tackling climate change (assuming that people and freight move by train instead of by road) – however, anything that involves construction has an impact on the natural environment. The commitment to biodiversity net gain must be upheld, and opportunities to improve resilience to locked-in climate change should be designed in, including by developing sustainable urban drainage schemes.
12.4 In the interests of building strong regional economies across the UK it is important that stakeholders from the West Midlands are involved in shaping connectivity between our region and the regions of the Northern Powerhouse. Relationships and supply chains cross administrative boundaries. Furthermore, good relationships between the regions will serve the West Midlands well as it seeks further devolution of powers from Whitehall. Page 31 Page 7 of 8 [PUBLIC]
12.5 Universal Design:- In improving rail services and assets, new stations and carriages should adhere to universal design principles – ensuring that disability, additional needs or age are no barrier to using a station, its surrounds or a train service safely and logically.
Page 32 Page 8 of 8 Agenda Item 10
Transport Delivery Committee
Date 9th November 2020 Report Title Bus Business Update Accountable Director Pete Bond, Director of Integrated Network Services Email: [email protected] Tel: 0121 214 7388 Accountable Richard Hardman, Bus Services Manager Employee Email: [email protected] Tel: 0121 214 7986 Richard Mayes, Bus Infrastructure Manager Email: [email protected] Tel: 0121 214 7332 Report has been Putting Passengers First Lead Members Group considered by
Recommendation(s) for action or decision:
To note the contents of this report.
1.0 Purpose of Report
1.1 To report matters relating to the performance, operation and delivery of bus services in the West Midlands. This report includes: Section A Bus Services Performance Summary Punctuality and reliability – October 2020 Section B Tendered Bus Services Contracts – October 2020 Section C Bus Operational Matters and Passenger Impacts Network Recovery and Response during Covid-19 - School Return - Supporting Operators - Bus Stop Information Update - Social Distancing & Key Messaging at Stops - Task Force - Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF) - NHS Key Worker Shuttles Local Bus Network Updates - Birmingham - Westside - Birmingham - HS2 - Birmingham - Bus Gate: Moor Street Queensway - Birmingham - Perry Barr - Coventry Station Masterplan
Page 33 Page 1 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
Bus Stop Infrastructure
2.0 Section A – Bus Services Performance Summary
2.1 As reported in the previous Bus Business Report TfWM is reviewing how bus network performance is measured and reported.
2.2 A Bus Performance Board through the West Midlands Bus Alliance has been established involving the Traffic Manager from each of the seven constituent authorities, TfWM Director of Integrated Network Services, TfWM Head of Network Delivery and local bus operators.
2.3 This Board will enable improved accountability of how well bus services are operating and what we can do to improve them.
2.4 The available data to inform the bus performance reporting is being reviewed with the proposed bus performance measures, approach and reporting governance to be agreed by the Board and will be brought to the Transport Delivery Committee.
2.5 Due to Covid-19 pandemic and the resultant significant network changes and changes in network operating conditions the Bus Performance Board was paused during the period between March 2020 and September 2020. However, with the return of a more stable bus network, the Board has now re-commenced.
2.6 Following a recommendation from a Coventry City Council Scrutiny Panel an additional Bus Performance Board has been established which will cover the performance of the Coventry bus network. As a result, Coventry City Council will no longer sit on the main Bus Performance Board which will now be made up of six constituent authorities.
3.0 Section B – Tendered Bus Services Contracts – October 2020
3.1 Due to unusual and difficult market conditions, including ongoing financial support provided to the bus industry and a level of uncertainty in estimating future demand, Page 34 Page 2 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
Officers considered it was not an appropriate time to issue tenders as part of a competitive tender round.
3.2 Taking the above into consideration the Bus Delivery Team have worked with the existing operators to agree an extension of applicable contracts for a period of approximately two months, which results in those contracts which have been extended having a revised expiry date of Saturday 2nd January 2021.
3.3 There were a total of 84 contracts due to expire in October 2020. A total of 78 contracts have been extended and the remaining six contracts have either been commercialised by the bus operator or the provision has been revised.
3.4 The contracts with a revised provision include enhancements to service A7, A8 and A10 in Solihull and services 63, 64 and 65 in Wolverhampton.
3.5 Revised provision on service A7, A8 and A10 was originally due to commence in April 2020 and includes new provision and network links to the Blythe Valley employment and residential development in Solihull. The commencement of the provision was delayed due to Covid 19 but following discussions with Solihull Council and the Blythe Valley site a revised October start date has now been agreed.
3.6 Wolverhampton local services 63, 64 and 65 have been extended for a longer period and the vehicles used on the contract enhanced to Euro VI vehicle emissions standards. This enhancement has been funded through a Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) clean air grant. The revision to this contract will introduce a further three Euro VI vehicles into the subsidised bus network with effect from October 2020. This will further contribute to the enhancement of the West Midlands bus fleet working towards our clean air objectives.
4.0 Section C – Bus Operational Matters and Passenger Impacts
Network Recovery and Response During Covid-19
4.1 This section of the report provides an update to the previous report on bus services and infrastructure provided in September 2020 in relation to the bus network recovery and response to operating during the Covid-19 pandemic.
4.2 As lockdown restrictions have continued to be eased and the demand for travel and local bus travel has increased. Bus patronage has shown a steady rate of growth.
4.3 The bus network is carrying approximately 60% of expected patronage in comparison to what would be expected for the equivalent period pre-Covid. This usage on the West Midlands Bus Network is the highest proportion of bus patronage of all the City Regions in the UK outside London.
4.4 Most buses across the network continue to operate to around 50% of their standard capacity due to social distancing requirements on vehicles.
Page 35 Page 3 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
4.5 To ensure the West Midlands Bus network has been able to continue to meet the demand for bus travel, despite these capacity restrictions, TfWM have worked very closely with bus operators. This has ensured that the level of service available has continued to be sufficient, maintaining accessibility and connectivity for the region.
4.6 The network has maintained flexibility to ensure where passenger demand grows quickly service levels can be revised accordingly. This has been especially important since the schools have re-opened in September resulting in increased demand across the network at school times.
4.7 TfWM has worked with all operators to understand usage of bus services which has enabled any journeys which are regularly busy to be identified and suitable mitigations implemented. In addition, National Express have providing a number of dynamic spare vehicles across the network which can be deployed to meet any acute increases in demand.
School Return
4.8 A significant amount of planning has taken place across TfWM, bus operators and other bodies such as Local districts, Local Education Authorities, schools and Further Educational Establishments. This planning work informed the areas of the network which needed additional capacity.
4.9 TfWM and bus operators has also accessed funding from the Department for Transport and the Department for Education to provide additional journeys at school times to meet the extra demand. Along with other measures such as ensuring double deck vehicles are on the most appropriate routes, duplication of journeys at school times, some dedicated school bus provision and the availability of spare vehicles to be deployed where required.
4.10 The network changes have coincided with TfWM’s most comprehensive ever back to school marketing and communications strategy which has covered multiple aspects of return to school travel for all passengers and stakeholders.
Supporting Bus Operators
4.11 As bus operators continue to carry reduced passenger numbers the associated revenue generated is also reduced. To support bus operators through this period and to ensure the bus network continues to operate TfWM have worked with the Department for Transport to develop and administer a number of measures.
4.12 TfWM have continued to provide support in the form of maintaining subsidised bus payments, English National Concessionary Travel Schemes and Child Concessionary Travel.
4.13 Commercial bus operators and TFWM are receiving funding from the DfT’s COVID- 19 Bus Services Support Grant (CBSSG) which is designed to ensure bus services can continue to operate to full service levels during the pandemic. The grant has Page 36 Page 4 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
been extended to run through to October 2020 and the DfT have committed to a notice period ahead of the discontinuation of the funding which has not been realised as yet. The funding is designed to cover some of the loss of operating revenue and enable a comprehensive bus network to continue to operate and ensure connectivity for the region.
Bus Stop Information Update
4.14 TfWM carried out a complete refresh of roadside printed information through July and August to update and reflect service changes on 5th July and 30th August. This refresh coincided with anticipated points of network stability across the region.
4.15 This refresh has resulted in the production of over 10,000 posters and approximately 1,500 flags, with information being posted over the course of several weeks and key areas and interchange locations being prioritised.
4.16 TfWM has agreed with bus operators to update roadside information approximately every 4 weeks.
4.17 Digital information, through journey planners and apps, is being kept up to date on a weekly basis and real-time information screens are being updated as service changes occur.
Social Distancing & Key Messaging at Stops
4.18 Throughout lockdown and recovery, TfWM has worked with Local Authority partners to prepare bus stops and bus stations to ensure compliance with new regulations and to improve social distancing. This has involved messaging on shelters, on totems, in bus stations, and through our online presence.
4.19 A series of messages continues to be displayed in bus stations and across roadside infrastructure. These include reminders to Stay Safe – Stay Apart, and the need to wear face coverings when travelling by public transport.
4.20 Through a robust campaign, which saw all bus infrastructure receiving an internal classification, every bus shelter in the West Midlands receive prominently displayed vinyls with these key messages.
4.21 Key interchange locations have also seen footways being stencilled to further guide customers to keep apart, reminding them to socially distance whilst waiting for their service, keep to one side, follow one-way systems, and not sit next to each other.
4.22 On the network, at key points, bus service stopping patterns have been reviewed and amended.
4.23 Additional temporary stops have been added to Colmore Row and Livery Street in Birmingham to help spread services, and their intending passengers, across a larger area and reduce the potential for crowding.
Page 37 Page 5 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
4.24 Set-down only stops have been introduced in Chelmsley Wood and Solihull interchanges, to reduce the potential for boarding and alighting customer conflicts in some of TfWM’s more enclosed infrastructure. Walsall St Paul’s Bus Station has also seen the introduction of set-down stops on a nearby approach road, to help reduce the footfall and pedestrian flow conflicts within the facility
4.25 In some locations with narrow footways, for example Carrs Lane in Birmingham, existing stops have become set-down only in order to reduce congestion and potential conflicts between pedestrians and intending passengers.
4.26 Regular monitoring of social distancing and face covering compliance has been taking places at bus stations and at key stops on the network.
4.27 To further assist in directing appropriate interventions at or around stops on the network where social distancing may be an issue, TfWM continues to work closely with operators and Local Authority partners in considering intelligence related to bus boarding at key times and, in particular, in relation to school traffic uplift.
4.28 Early engagement was undertaken around business parks due to peaks in demand associated with shift patterns and, more recently, there has been engagement with the Local Education Authority and educational establishments based on emerging patterns.
Task Force
4.29 Following the announcement of the mandatory use of face masks on vehicles TfWM worked with operators and partners to ensure a high level of compliance was adhered to across the network.
4.30 Free masks were made available across bus stations, Travel & Information Centres, were handed out at transport hubs and on the Metro and this continues to date to keep the network safe and to build passenger confidence in the use of public transport.
4.31 The use of face coverings remains high but where lower compliance has been seen in specific groups targeted campaigns have been implemented.
4.32 The Safer Travel Police Team (STPT) were deployed to help with enforcement across the network and implement the ‘direction to leave’ used on non-compliant passengers and TfWM along with the STPT recently started a pilot project where a ‘task force’ from both agencies, supported by National Express provide additional assistance at ‘hotspot’ locations.
4.33 The joint Task Force initially commenced on Tuesday 6th October, with the objective of increasing face covering compliance on the transport network, providing customer assurance and providing a high visibility presence. This high visibility is intended to help prevent and deter further issues.
4.34 In the first two days of operation the team had talked to over 1700 people about not wearing their face covering which has been well received by members of the public.
Page 38 Page 6 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
4.35 We also have as part of the DfT ‘Journey Makers’ group and our own TfWM ‘Passenger Champion scheme’ a team of volunteers who also support at the busiest locations to help distribution face masks, support passengers, assist with crowd management activities, social distancing, as well as providing active management to prevent passengers accessing services that are at capacity and guide them to other vehicles.
Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF)
4.36 Since lockdown, TfWM has been working closely with Local Authorities regarding Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF) Tranche 1 measures, which has seen pop- up cycle schemes and some more permanent measures being developed as part of Tranche 2.
4.37 Through collaboration, TfWM and operator partners have provided vital feedback on proposals to Local Authority colleagues, and this has resulted in several schemes being amended for the benefit of bus and coach customers.
4.38 Key EATF Tranche 1 Schemes are being monitored and some have been withdrawn or amended by Local Authority partners as the demands of the network have changed through the recovery period.
NHS Key Worker Shuttles
4.39 As previously reported, shuttle services, which were introduced through TfWM’s work with National Express Accessible Transport (NEAT) in order to support NHS Trusts, their staff and partner organisations.
4.40 This was undertaken through the repurposing of the Ring & Ride service to help support the wider public transport network.
4.41 Four shuttle operations continue to be provided free of charge to NHS staff at the present time, and these link Good Hope, Russells Hall, New Cross and Manor Hospitals, with Park & Ride and Transport Interchange facilities
4.42 The service has now carried over 24,000 passengers since its introduction at the beginning of April 2020, with around 750 people a week now being carried.
Local Bus Network Updates
Birmingham - Westside
4.43 As reported previously, phase two of the Birmingham Westside extension is ongoing, as the metro is extended from Centenary Square along Broad Street to Hagley Road on Edgbaston (just west of Five Ways).
4.44 Significant bus mitigation measures have been implemented, in order to facilitate and maintain bus services in the area and provide suitable passenger facilities. These mitigation measures, including traffic regulation orders, parking restrictions, traffic management and physical highway works, are benefiting bus services operating along this corridor. Page 39 Page 7 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
4.45 It is anticipated that services will be able to return to Broad Street from late Spring 2021, subject to Metro work progress.
Birmingham - HS2
4.46 On Sunday 5th July 2020 HS2 undertook their permanent closure of the section of Park Street in Birmingham City Centre, between Masshouse Lane and Bordesley Street to facilitate construction of the new Curzon Street station.
4.47 Bus services that previously used Park Street have been diverted along Moor Street Queensway, and the opportunity was taken to revise some bus stopping patterns in Birmingham City Centre.
Birmingham - Bus Gate: Moor Street Queensway
4.48 Birmingham City Council is currently introducing a bus gate on Moor Street Queensway, by Moor Street Station and Primark. By prevent the movement of other vehicles along Moor Street Queensway.
4.49 This work was proposed as part of a mitigation measure for HS2’s closure of Park Street in July 2020, however the implementation date for this was changed to October 2020 due to challenges regarding the advertising of Traffic Regulations Orders during the period of lockdown.
4.50 The bus gate will help ensure that sustainable transport modes are prioritised within the city core, also preventing dispersed car traffic from routing along Moor Street Queensway, as this would have a detrimental effect on the bus network.
4.51 The introduction of the bus gate will also help with the introduction of the Clean Air Zone in Birmingham during 2021.
Birmingham - Perry Barr
4.52 TfWM is working closely with National Express West Midlands and the Birmingham City Council team regarding the ongoing project to remove the Perry Barr fly-over in advance of the Commonwealth Games in 2022.
4.53 All parties are working collaboratively to mitigate the impact that the work may having on bus services and key interventions, mostly in the formal of signal optimisation, have been introduced to assist services through the area.
4.54 The mitigation and intervention opportunities to assist bus customers remain a key focus as traffic management requirements on site change.
Coventry Station Masterplan
Page 40 Page 8 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
4.55 Following the move from the bus interchange to the temporary stops by the canopy at the front of the station building in January 2020, as the work on the Coventry Station Masterplan (CSMP) project has continued, the next phase saw buses resume operation from the interchange on 12th July 2020.
4.56 Work is ongoing with the CSMP project team regarding the introduction of the new bus interchange, which will be located the other side of the Warwick Road from the existing facility and will provide space for both scheduled and rail replacement services.
Bus Stop Infrastructure
4.57 In accordance with a key West Midlands Bus Alliance deliverable, and reported previously, TfWM continues to invest in improving the safety, security and appearance of our bus stop infrastructure estate.
4.58 Digital advertising is being introduced as part of a committed programme that also seeks to provide further capital upgrades, and re-branding of existing infrastructure as part of the West Midlands Bus brand update.
4.59 Since March 2020, up to 20th October 2020, a further 120 new shelters have been installed across the network, of which 105 have been installed this financial year. This brings the total number of new shelters to 243.
4.60 TfWM has completed upgrades to 1161 bus shelters, rebranded with the new West Midlands Bus colours as part of the re-branding programme. This is an additional 141 shelters since the last update.
5.0 Financial Implications
5.1 The considerable impact of Covid 19 on Bus service and infrastructure provision has resulted in significant financial pressures. Bus operators have lost ticketing revenue on both commercial and tendered bus routes and additional costs have been incurred by both operators and the WMCA on Covid19 related activity such as enhanced cleaning, infrastructure modifications and additional information provision on social distancing.
5.2 DfT has provided financial support to compensate operators for lost income on commercial and tendered routes, the latter passported through the WMCA from CBSSG funding. CBSSG has also helped to fund additional enhanced cleaning and information provision as a result of the pandemic.
5.3 Funding from the DfE has also been passported to Authorities to fund additional services and measures required for the safe transportation of children to and from home and schools and colleges. TfWM has also used some of the £2.4m funding allocation to provide additional services on the network to facilitate social distancing. Funding was made available for the first Autumn half-term and notification has now been received that further funding will be available for the second half-term although the amount has yet to be confirmed.
Page 41 Page 9 of 10 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
5.4 The WMCA has also provided financial assistance to operators through its Concessionary and Subsidised Services payments. DfT has issued Public Policy Notices (PPNs) outlining the support it will provide to operators. The PPNs state that its support is based on the assumption that Authorities will continue to provide financial assistance to operators by basing Concessions and other Local Policy payments for the period from March 2020 on what would have happened in the absence of Covid19. The last PPN covers the period up to 31st October so the WMCA has agreed to continue to support operators up to that date. Tendered services are now operating at pre-Covid levels. Payment arrangements for Concessions beyond 31st October 2020 has yet to be determined and will be reviewed in the light of any further notices from Government.
6.0 Legal Implications
6.1 There are no specific legal implications arising from the contents of this report.
7.0 Equality Implications
7.1 There are no equality implications arising from this report
8.0 Inclusive Growth Implications
8.1 There are no specific inclusive growth implications arising from noting this update: however, buses are the most important part of the public transport system to the majority of people in the West Midlands, and it is therefore crucial that people can access bus services in a way which is safe, convenient and affordable. Buses will also be an important component of the region’s transition to net zero. As such, bus patronage will be a key indicator of how clean and inclusive the region’s economy is, and should be, watched closely.
9.0 Geographical Area of Report’s Implications
9.1 This report covers the constituent area of the Combined Authority but due to the importance of cross boundary services – into and out of the constituent area – partnership working with non-constituent and shire authorities is crucial in undertaking activities referred to in this report.
Page 42 Page 10 of 10 Agenda Item 11
Transport Delivery Committee
Date 9 November 2020 Report Title Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme Accountable Director Pete Bond, Director of Integrated Network Services Email: [email protected] Tel: 0121 214 7388 Accountable Edmund Salt, Network Development Manager Employee Email: [email protected] Tel: 0121 214 7305 Report Considered by Putting Passengers First Lead Members
Recommendation(s) for action or decision:
To note the outcomes from the formal (public) consultation.
To approve that TfWM issue a notice of intention to make the Enhanced Partnership Plan and modified Enhanced Partnership Scheme.
To approve the making of the Enhanced Partnership Plan and associated Enhanced Partnership Scheme with modifications, subject to passing the operator objections.
To authorise the WMCA Head of Governance to ‘make’ the Enhanced Partnership Plan and associated Enhanced Partnership Scheme, subject to passing the operator objections, as set out in section 4 (Next Steps) of this report, and more particularly within section 4.4.
1.0 Purpose of Report
1.1 To provide an update on the development and seek approval for the Enhanced Partnership (EP) Plan for the West Midlands and associated EP Scheme covering the A34 (north) and A45 / B425 Lode Lane corridors.
2.0 Background
2.1 An Enhanced Partnership (EP) is a formal agreement between a local transport authority, local highway authorities and local bus operators to work together to improve local bus services and is one of the new powers available in the Bus Services Act 2017. It requires a clear vision for the improvements that the EP is aiming for, known as the EP Plan. The actions, requirements and commitments to
Page 43 Page 1 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
achieve the objectives within the EP Plan are set out in one or more accompanying EP Schemes.
2.2 The West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) Board approved Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) to give formal notice of the intention to prepare an Enhanced Partnership Plan and accompanying Enhanced Partnership Schemes as set out in section 138F of the Bus Services Act 2017, at its meeting on 28 June 2019.
2.3 The WMCA Board also delegated authority to the WMCA Transport Delivery Committee to oversee the development and subsequent making of the Enhanced Partnership Plan and Schemes.
2.4 TfWM issued the Notice of Intention to prepare an EP Plan for the area of the West Midlands Combined Authority1 excluding the three existing Advanced Quality Partnership Scheme (AQPS) areas due to the way the legislation is written and applied, as they cannot both apply within the same geography; and associated EP Schemes for the A34 (north) and A45 / B425 Lode Lane corridors. This was published on 17th July 2019 on the TfWM website. All local bus operators were made aware of this notice and invited to participate in the formal discussions for the EP Plan and Scheme (defined below).
2.5 The formal discussions have been held, with the drafting of an EP Plan, based on the TfWM Strategic Vision for Bus2, and a Scheme. The EP Plan is a high-level vision and objectives for bus services in the West Midlands. Through the formal discussions, it was agreed by the partners to prepare one Scheme covering both the corridors of the A34 (north) and A45 / B425 Lode Lane (‘Scheme’).
2.6 Within the Scheme the details of the infrastructure commitments, service specification and standards, customer standards, performance requirements and maintenance have been agreed between partners. It is intended that this Enhanced Partnership Scheme will complement the introduction of Sprint by providing bus priority as well as higher bus standards for all bus services in the area, in readiness for the 2022 Commonwealth Games.
2.7 A notice was published on 20th December 2019 by TfWM (https://www.tfwm.org.uk/operations/enhanced-partnership/), giving operators until 24th January 2020 (at least 28 days as required by legislation), within which to make an objection to either the EP Plan and/or Scheme. TfWM are required to assess any objections using two criteria – if either is satisfied, it is a legal requirement that the consultation exercise on the EP Plan and Scheme cannot go ahead. TfWM did not receive any operator objections to the EP Plan or the Scheme.
2.8 Subsequently, a further review of the Scheme was undertaken with partners. It was agreed to undertake another operator objection period on the Scheme. TfWM
1 As defined by the West Midlands Combined Authority Constitution, excluding the three existing Advanced Quality Partnership Schemes 2 https://www.tfwm.org.uk/media/38969/final-strategic-vision-for-bus.pdf Page 44 Page 2 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
issued a further notice on 28th February 2020, giving the relevant local bus operators until 27th March 2020 to lodge a formal objection to the Scheme.
2.9 No operator objections were received, and the Scheme could proceed to formal (public) consultation as approved by TDC at its meeting on 16th March 2020.
3.0 Public Consultation
3.1 The Covid-19 pandemic necessitated a delay in the commencement of the consultation and necessitated a change to the consultation strategy to limit any physical interaction with members of the public whilst ensuring the widest coverage and accessibility. The consultation strategy was revised to make greater use of digital technologies including on-line response forms and greater promotion through social media. Awareness of the consultation was raised through printed media and radio.
3.2 A consultation for the proposed EP Plan and Scheme ran for 10 weeks from Monday 6th July to Sunday 13th September 2020.
3.3 A consultation booklet and online questionnaire were produced and available online throughout the consultation period. Stakeholders were also able to request hard paper copies of all consultation materials with a business reply envelope from TfWM, either by email or phone.
3.4 The consultation was publicised on buses, at bus stops and transport hubs, on digital bus screens, on local radio, and across TfWM’s and WMCA’s various social media channels. No consultation events were able to take place due to the national and local social distancing guidance imposed to limit the spread of Covid-19.
3.5 A total of 347 responses were received to the online questionnaire, with a further 14 responses received by email. Among the 347 responses received via the online questionnaire: 68% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with the vision laid out in the EP Plan, 11% of respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed with the vision in the EP Plan, 17% neither agreed nor disagreed. 47% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the Scheme will raise standards along the three route corridors. 12% either disagreed or strongly disagreed that the Scheme would raise standards, 26% neither agreed nor disagreed. However, it was noted that 53% of respondents did not use the bus services in the Scheme area, so this could explain the higher percentage neither agreeing nor disagreeing.
3.6 The key themes to arise from the comments in the open questions were: Support or Opposition to the EP Plan and/or Scheme Economics and cost General travel experience Onboard experience Comments on the consultation
Page 45 Page 3 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
3.7 A consultation report (Appendix A) has been prepared by Jacobs UK Ltd on behalf of TfWM to support the statutory consultation exercise carried out for the EP Plan and Scheme. The consultation responses have been analysed for any modifications to be made to the EP Plan and / or Scheme.
3.8 Following the review of the responses, it is recommended that the EP Plan is unchanged following the consultation. The EP Scheme, however, is proposed to be modified to take account of the consultation responses. This has been discussed and agreed with the EP Reference Group (chaired by Bus Users UK) and comprising partners and directly impacted and interested stakeholders:
Partners Transport for West Midlands (part of the West Midlands Combined Authority) Birmingham City Council Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council Bus operators providing qualifying local bus services
Stakeholders Birmingham Airport Bus Users UK (Independent Chair of the EP Reference Group) Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT) Greater Birmingham & Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership Transport Focus Warwickshire County Council
3.9 The EP Reference Group with independent chair was established to oversee the work on the EP with the authorities, bus operators, representatives of passenger groups, Local Enterprise Partnership and business and local authorities whose areas neighbour any proposed EP as recommended by the Enhanced Partnership guidance3.
4.0 Next Steps
4.1 An essential legal requirement after the consultation exercise on the EP Plan and Scheme, and before either can be finalised or implemented is that operators of local bus services are legally entitled to object to a modified Plan or Scheme being made.
4.2 Therefore, the modified Scheme must be put to the local bus operators for a further objection period (to be held for a minimum of 28 days), before it can be legally made.
3 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/918800/ bus-services-act-2017-enhanced-partnerships-guidance.pdf Page 46 Page 4 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
This requires TfWM to issue a notice of intent to make the EP Plan and modified Scheme.
4.3 TDC is asked to approve that TfWM issue a notice of intent to make the EP Plan (unchanged) and a modified Scheme. This will be sent to all operators of qualifying local bus services for the EP Plan and Scheme to inform them of the intention to proceed and will published on the TfWM website. This will trigger the operator objection period on the modified Scheme.
4.4 If the modified Scheme passes the operator objection period, the WMCA and WMCA’s constituent authorities (subject to their own approvals) can legally ‘make’ the EP Plan and Scheme (‘make’ being the legal term for finalising the content of both and then implementing the requirements of the scheme ‘on the ground’).
4.5 It is recommended that TDC approve the making of the EP Plan (unchanged) and modified Scheme, subject to the modified Scheme passing the operator objection period.
4.6 TDC is asked to authorise the WMCA Head of Governance to ‘make’ the EP Plan (unchanged) and modified Scheme, subject to the modified Scheme passing the operator objection period. This is in line with the WMCA Constitution and follows the other formal partnership approval process followed in the West Midlands Combined Authority.
4.7 The relevant WMCA constituent authorities will be seeking to provide their own approval to ‘make’ the EP Plan and modified Scheme with WMCA. It is expected, subject to passing the operator objection period, that the EP Plan and Scheme can be made in January 2021.
4.8 Once an EP Plan is made, other potential Schemes may be put forward by TfWM, constituent or neighbouring authorities or local bus operators, if there is an identified benefit and scope to improve local bus services in an area of the EP.
5.0 Competition Test Part 1
5.1 A transport authority can only make an Enhanced Partnership (EP) if it satisfies the requirements of the Competition Test in Part 1 of Schedule 10 to the Transport Act 2000. The test is satisfied if: the scheme does not have or is not likely to have a significantly adverse effect on competition, or the effect it has on competition is proportionate to the achievement of one or more of the following purposes: o improving the quality of vehicles or facilities covered by the scheme; o securing other improvements to local services of benefit to their users; o reducing or limiting traffic congestion, noise or air pollution.
5.2 The EP is subject to the test in Part 1 of Schedule 10 to the Transport Act 2000. This test has three stages.
Page 47 Page 5 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
Part 1 Test – 3 Stages West Midlands Combined Authority assessment a) Is there or is there likely to be We do not think that there is likely to be a a significantly adverse effect significantly adverse impact on on competition? competition. We have reached this conclusion on the basis of our interpretation of Competition Law.
In terms of fairness, we have fully completed the assessment to demonstrate why we think there is no significant adverse effect on competition. b) If Yes, is the LTA’s The implementation of an EP Plan for the involvement with a view to West Midlands region (excluding the securing one or more of the existing 3 AQPS) and a Scheme for the three purposes specified A34(N) and A45 / B425 Sprint corridors (known as ‘bus improvement is aimed at delivering the Sprint bus objectives’), either: priority and bus infrastructure, as well as to secure improvements the Sprint service standards in a de- in the quality of vehicles regulated bus market in readiness for the or facilities used to provide local services, 2022 Commonwealth Games. to secure other This is expected to secure improvements improvements in local in all local bus services; improve the services, or quality of vehicles used to provide local to reduce or limit traffic bus services; and improve vehicle congestion, noise or air emission standards in the Scheme area. pollution; c) Is the effect on competition We conclude that the effect on proportionate or likely to be competition is proportionate to the proportionate to the achievement of the purposes set out in achievement of that purpose? the Second Stage and, therefore, the ‘Part 1’ test is met.
5.3 All operators in the West Midlands will be part of the EP Plan, but only bus operators operating services in the Scheme area will be affected by the Scheme requirements. There are currently 5 operators in the Scheme area. The Scheme requirements have been set in consultation with the affected bus operators.
5.4 All these operators are likely to be affected by future vehicle standards that will apply in the Scheme, without improvements being made to their fleets.
5.5 It is deemed reasonable that the future standards that will be specified in the Scheme, to achieve the bus improvements objectives, are proportionate to achieving the aims and are acceptable.
Page 48 Page 6 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
6.0 Financial Implications
6.1 There are no direct financial implications as a result of this update report. Costs incurred or support provided by TfWM from undertaking activity referred to in this report will be from within agreed overall Sprint and Integrated Transport Services budgets and resources.
7.0 Legal Implications
7.1 It is noted that the request for advance approval to make the EP Plan and Scheme is subject to the statutory objection period by operators for the modified Scheme, being satisfied. This can be considered to be a ‘conditional’ advance approval from TDC, which legal considers this to be acceptable. This is however subject to the proviso that the appropriate TfWM officers, namely the Accountable Director and employee report back to TDC without delay, in the event the conditionality referred to above, is not satisfied.
8.0 Equality Implications
8.1. An Equality Impact Assessment has been undertaken on the Scheme, which noted some groups of people are more likely to be reliant on public transport and are more likely to face barriers to public transport. The Enhanced Partnership is likely to enhance the travel experience for everyone but will especially positively impact these groups. From a disability perspective measures such as audio-visual availability will help address some of the key information barriers.
8.2 The implementation of cashless ticketing options may exclude individuals who rely on cash as a means of purchase. This can have an adverse effect on individuals who do not have access to a bank account (only a small %) thus being unable to use debit/credit cards to make transactions. Similarly, some of the elderly population feel more comfortable using cash to purchase tickets. In addition, those from a low socio-economic background may not have enough cash within their bank accounts to reach the cap threshold via contactless/card and therefore will rely on cash purchasing being available. Cashless ticketing may restrict the accessibility for these groups. To ensure the measures do not have negative impact on a number of groups (disabled people, people from lower socio-economic backgrounds and different age groups) it is important to ensure a) ticketing options are broad and cash payments continue to be an option, and b) pricing remains at the same level for Enhanced Partnership area services as with other services. This assessment has been taken into account during the development of the Scheme.
9.0 Inclusive Growth Implications
9.1 Bus is a vital component to inclusive growth as it directly supports access to the labour market, and allows people to access education, employment and services. The flexibility of the bus network also makes bus the perfect means of providing public transport options in areas of growth, changing travel demand and new
Page 49 Page 7 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
housing; directly supporting our West Midlands Housing Deal and Local Industrial Strategy. This means that buses are central to supporting regeneration, inclusive growth and social integration. Where there may not be a case for investing in permanent rail and light rail infrastructure, new bus infrastructure can be planned to connect new communities and support housing and jobs growth.
10.0 Geographical Area of Report’s Implications
10.1 This report covers the constituent area of the West Midlands Combined Authority. Whilst the Enhanced Partnership Plan covers all of this area, the Enhanced Partnership Scheme only covers the A34 (north), A45 and B425 Lode Lane corridors, through Birmingham, Sandwell, Solihull and Walsall.
Page 50 Page 8 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
Appendix A – Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Page 51 Page 9 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
Appendix B – Enhanced Partnership Plan (unchanged)
Page 52 Page 10 of 11 [NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED]
Appendix C – Enhanced Partnership (modified) Scheme
Page 53 Page 11 of 11 This page is intentionally left blank
Enhanced Engagement Lead Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
001 R3 22 October 2020
Transport for West Midlands
Enha nced Par tne rship Co nsulta tio n Re po rt Trans por t f or West Midla nds
Page 55
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Enhanced Engagement Lead
Project No: CENTF018 enhanced engagement lead Document Title: Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report Document No.: 001 Revision: R3 Document Status:
Please select a legal entity...
NONE
www.jacobs.com
© Copyright 2019 Please select a legal entity from the Change Document Details option on the Jacobs ribbon. The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of Jacobs. Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of Jacobs constitutes an infringement of copyright.
Limitation: This document has been prepared on behalf of, and for the exclusive use of Jacobs’ client, and is subject to, and issued in accordance with, the provisions of the contract between Jacobs and the client. Jacobs accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for, or in respect of, any use of, or reliance upon, this document by any third party.
Document history and status
Revision Date Description Author Checked Reviewed Approved
001 13 Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report CW JD RN HB October 2020
001 R2 21 Oct Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report CW JD RN HB 2020
001 R3 22 Oct Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report CW JD RN HB 2020
Page 56
001 i
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Contents 1. Executive Summary ...... iii 2. Introduction ...... 1 2.1 Why change? ...... 1 2.2 The EP Plan ...... 1 2.3 The EP Scheme ...... 2 2.4 Structure of the report ...... 3 3. The EP Plan and Scheme Consultation ...... 4 3.1 Summary of engagement ...... 4 3.2 Stakeholder events...... 4 3.3 Publicity ...... 4 3.4 Summary of consultation ...... 5 3.5 Equalities Impact Assessment ...... 5 3.6 What happens next ...... 6 4. Data analysis and interpretation ...... 7 4.1 Sample ...... 7 4.2 Analysis of the responses ...... 7 5. Responses to the online questionnaire ...... 8 5.1 Demographics ...... 8 5.2 Views on the Enhanced Partnership Plan ...... 16 5.3 Views on the Enhanced Partnership Scheme...... 20 6. Key themes and TfWM responses – online questionnaire ...... 27 6.1 EP Plan ...... 27 6.2 EP Scheme ...... 28 6.3 Enhancements to bus user experience ...... 29 7. Email responses ...... 30 8. Alternative suggestions...... 32 8.1 EP Plan ...... 32 8.2 EP Scheme ...... 33 8.3 Other suggested enhancements ...... 33
Appendix A. Additional Information
Page 57
001 ii
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
1. Executive Summary
Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) is responsible for making transport “happen”. They are accountable for delivering improvements in transport across the region, to create a happier, healthier, better connected and more prosperous West Midlands.
Whilst significant progress in improving bus services is being achieved through the West Midlands Bus Alliance and the Advanced Quality Partnership Schemes already in place in central Birmingham, Wolverhampton city centre and Solihull town centre, an Enhanced Partnership (EP) is considered the best way to ensure delivery of the more ambitious plans to transform bus travel with Sprint whilst protecting the significant investment levels being made by the authorities and operators.
A consultation for the proposed Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme ran for 10 weeks from Monday 6th July to Sunday 13th September 2020.
A consultation booklet and online questionnaire were produced and available online throughout the consultation period. Stakeholders were also able to request hard paper copies of all consultation materials with a business reply envelope from TfWM, either by email or phone.
The consultation was publicised on buses, at bus stops and transport hubs, on digital bus screens, on local radio, and across TfWM’s and WMCA’s various social media channels. No consultation events were able to take place due to the national and local lockdown rules imposed to limit the spread of Covid-19.
A total of 347 responses were received to the online questionnaire, with a further 14 responses received by email.
Among the 347 online responses received via the online questionnaire: • 68% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with the vision laid out in the EP Plan, 11% of respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed with the vision in the EP Plan, 17% neither agreed nor disagreed • 47% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the EP Scheme will raise standards along the three route corridors. 12% either disagreed or strongly disagreed that the EP Scheme would raise standards, 26% neither agreed nor disagreed. However, it was noted that 53% of respondents did not use the bus services in the EP Scheme area, so this could explain the higher percentage neither agreeing nor disagreeing.
The key themes to arise from the comments in the open questions (Q5, Q7 and Q8) were: • Opposition to the EP Plan and/or Scheme • Support for the EP Plan and/or Scheme • Economics and cost • General travel experience • Onboard experience • Comments on the consultation
The consultation responses have been analysed for any modifications to be made to the EP Plan and /or Scheme. It is recommended following the review of the responses that the EP Plan is unchanged following the consultation. The EP Scheme, however, is proposed to be modified to take account of the consultation responses
Page 58
001 iii
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
2. Introduction
This public consultation report has been prepared by Jacobs UK Ltd on behalf of Transport for West Midlands to support the statutory consultation exercise carried out for the proposed Enhanced Partnership (EP), Plan and Scheme. Once agreed, the EP Plan and EP Scheme, subject to no modifications following the consultation exercise, will go to the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) Transport Delivery Committee and relevant local authorities for approval to ‘make’ the EP (‘make’ being the legal term for finalising the content of both and then implementing the requirements of the scheme ‘on the ground’).
Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) is responsible for making transport “happen”. They are accountable for delivering improvements in transport across the region, to create a happier, healthier, better connected and more prosperous West Midlands.
Whilst significant progress in improving bus services is being achieved through the Bus Alliance and the Advanced Quality Partnership Schemes already in place in central Birmingham, Wolverhampton city centre and Solihull town centre, an Enhanced Partnership (EP) is considered the best way to ensure delivery of the more ambitious plans to transform bus travel with Sprint whilst protecting the significant investment levels being made by the authorities and operators.
An EP is a formal agreement between local transport authorities and local bus operators to work together to improve local bus services. It provides a legally binding commitment on all parties that will ensure delivery of our vision for better bus travel, setting the standard across the West Midlands.
In June 2019, WMCA gave approval for TfWM to proceed with the development of the EP Plan (or vision for improvement of bus services) and Scheme (the actions to be taken to deliver the vision). The EP Scheme focuses on the A34 (north) Walsall – Birmingham City centre, the A45 and B425 Lode Lane Corridors, from Birmingham Airport and Solihull – Birmingham City Centre.
An important element in the development of the EP is consultation. TfWM held a statutory consultation exercise for a period of ten weeks between 6th July and 13th September 2020, to understand the views of key stakeholders, and of the wider public, on the proposed EP Plan and Scheme.
2.1 Why change?
Buses are key to the provision of public transport in the region, with around 4 out of 5 public transport journeys taken by bus. Between April 2018 and the end of March 2019, 267 million journeys1 were made using bus services across the region – the equivalent of 71.5 million vehicle miles. The West Midlands has the largest commercially operated bus network in Western Europe. Given the importance of bus travel to the region’s society and economy, better bus services are vital to achieving inclusive growth in the West Midlands.
2.2 The EP Plan
The EP Plan sets out our overall vision to improve bus services in the region, building on the 9 objectives set out in TfWM’s Strategic Vision for Bus2: 1) UK leading low emission bus fleet with zero emission corridors serving the most affected areas of air quality. 2) Fully integrated bus network including local demand responsive and rapid transit services supporting rail, coach and Metro interchange as one network. 3) Simple, convenient and easy to use payment options including full capping providing a network which is value for money and affordable for customers.
1 DfT, Bus statistics 2018/19 2 https://www.tfwm.org.uk/media/38969/final-strategic-vision-forPage-bus.pdf 59
001 1
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
4) Fewer private car journeys by making bus the mode of choice and creating better access to jobs and long- term change. 5) Creating a safe, secure and accessible mode for all and tackling long held barriers and perceptions. 6) Accountable network performance management – tackling issues causing congestion and reliability problems. 7) World-leading customer information, utilising 5G and all available technologies and platforms. 8) All younger people under 25 supported by discounted travel, as well as addressing barriers for excluded groups. 9) Evolve a network to support the 24/7 thriving economy, connecting people to new and developing destinations and attractions.
2.3 The EP Scheme
The EP Scheme provides the framework and operational requirements to improve and deliver better bus travel in the scheme area. The first Scheme put forward will set minimum standards for the delivery of bus services along the A34 (north), A45 and B425 Lode Lane Corridors, forming part of our integrated transport network. More schemes may be brought forward under the EP Plan in the coming years, if it is necessary to formally agree bus improvements for an area.
This EP Scheme involves the delivery of facilities and measures to provide better bus travel, alongside improved bus service standards. These corridors will run from: ▪ A34 (north): Walsall to Birmingham City Centre (passing the 2022 Commonwealth Games venue of The Alexander Stadium at Perry Barr). ▪ A45 and B425 Lode Lane: Birmingham Airport and Solihull to Birmingham City Centre (passing the Games venues at the NEC).
TfWM has developed this Scheme as a priority to help facilitate the transport element of the 2022 Commonwealth Games. This will see significant investment both in vehicle standards (by operators) and infrastructure (by TfWM and local authorities), as well as complementary supporting measures (by TfWM and the local authorities).
Delivered by TfWM and the local highway authorities, the EP Scheme sets out 12km of new bus lane, 77 enhanced bus stops and improvements to traffic signal priority. The Scheme will set minimum standards for 52 existing bus services3 and the 320 buses that operate these routes, covering approximately 550 miles across the West Midlands. Any new routes introduced into the Scheme area will also need to meet these standards.
Due to begin in 2021, the EP Scheme aims to deliver the following improvements in collaboration with bus operators and local authorities: ▪ Investment in bus priority facilities and bus stop upgrades, providing pleasant and safer waiting environments and real-time information that will provide reassurance to passengers, on the next bus arrival. ▪ A safer and more enjoyable travel experience including minimum standards for buses to ensure a high quality. This will include CCTV, Wi-Fi, USB charging points, audio/visual next stop announcements, provision of induction hearing loops at every wheelchair space and priority seat, and integrated travel information onboard, enabling passengers to link journeys with other transport modes. ▪ Setting of minimum vehicle specifications for emission standards that will help improve air quality in the region and provide a roadmap towards a zero-emission fleet.
3 As at January 2020 Page 60
001 2
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
▪ Contactless payment options available for every operator. Continued availability of operators ticketing products, as well as network-wide multi-operator tickets, enabling passengers to easily interchange between services within the scheme area without payment of a separate fare. ▪ Provision of better integrated bus services which will help support the shift towards use of more sustainable forms of transport, reducing the need for private car trips. ▪ Closer management, collaboration and response to highway disruption, maintenance and traffic enforcement. ▪ Improved sharing of bus performance data.
2.4 Structure of the report
The next section of the report summarises the engagement, consultation and publicity carried out to encourage stakeholders to participate. The remainder of the report analyses the responses to the questionnaire, including a breakdown of individual questions, to identify the main themes and issues raised by respondents. The final section concludes the report and summarises how TfWM intends to act on the issues raised by respondents going forwards.
Page 61
001 3
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
3. The EP Plan and Scheme Consultation
In line with the procedures of both TfWM and the WMCA, we held a consultation to gather opinions of stakeholders, customers and local residents about the proposed EP Plan and Scheme, and to identify any concerns they had. This section summarises the engagement and consultation activities carried out, the means by which the consultation was publicised, the steps taken to ensure equal outcomes, and the next stage of the project.
3.1 Summary of engagement
In July 2019 WMCA wrote to 26 Bus Operators, to inform them of their intent to prepare the EP Plan and Scheme, as required under Section 138F of the Bus Services Act 2017. As part of this process, relevant Bus Operator companies were invited to participate by: ▪ joining one or both Reference Groups established by TfWM and chaired by Bus Users UK to oversee the development of the EP Plan and Scheme ▪ attending individual meeting(s) with TfWM to discuss the EP and the measures and facilities that might be included in Scheme ▪ making written submissions to TfWM with ideas and suggestions regarding the EP ▪ attending existing partnership meetings of the West Midlands Bus Alliance (i.e. Bus Operators Panel)
A Stakeholder Reference Group was formed to oversee the development and preparation of the EP, attended by the partners of TfWM, local authorities and local bus operators as well as other key stakeholders for passenger groups, the bus industry and business in the region. This included Bus Users UK (appointed as Chair), Transport Focus, Confederation of Passenger Transport, Local Enterprise Partnerships and Birmingham Airport. A representative from The Department for Transport, and neighbouring authorities were also invited to attend as observers. Awareness was also raised through the Bus Satisfaction Steering group and Bus Passenger Champions Scheme.
During the development and preparation of the EP Plan and Scheme, there was discussion and input with members as part of the WMCA Transport Delivery Committee. Bus operators were also formally engaged at stages in the EP development, when the EP Plan and Scheme has been prepared.
The local bus operators also had the formal opportunity to determine whether the EP proceeded to public consultation, with the EP Plan subject to one, and the EP Scheme subject to two separate operator objection periods. During these statutory processes, no objections were received from operators on either the EP Plan or Scheme. This allowed TfWM to commence with the next stage of the EP development – public consultation.
3.2 Stakeholder events
Due to the global pandemic caused by the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 (also known as Covid-19), no stakeholder events were able to take place in order to adhere to both social distancing rules, and the various national and local lockdowns imposed throughout the engagement and consultation periods.
3.3 Publicity
At the beginning of the public consultation period, an email was sent out to TfWM’s customer database. Included in this were individuals, organisations and councillors who had asked to be kept informed, so they could then relay this to their network of contacts on behalf of TfWM. The consultation was also advertised on buses, digital bus screens, and at bus stops and bus stations.
In addition, both TfWM and WMCA published posts through various social media channels throughout the consultation period advertising the consultation and encouraging stakeholders to take part and have their say. Page 62
001 4
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
The social media campaign had a total reach of 1.1 million and proved highly effective in engaging with the wider public, resulting in 11,749 views on the consultation website, generated through link clicks, shares and other interactions with TfWM’s social media posts.
Additionally, TfWM conducted a radio campaign to further raise awareness. This involved advertising on Free Radio Birmingham and sponsoring the Traffic & Travel segment on Greatest Hits Radio. This campaign was also highly effective in engaging with stakeholders. The Greatest Hits Radio campaign had a reach of over 370,000 listeners, generating 11,401,934 campaign impacts (one impact being equal to one person listening to one advertisement). This raised awareness of TfWM by engaging with listeners whilst they were already driving or travelling. Additionally, the Free Radio campaign generated a further 9,264,690 campaign impacts across its broadcast network (including the Birmingham, Coventry, and Black Country stations).
3.4 Summary of consultation
The consultation period lasted for a total of 10 weeks, running from 00.01am on Monday 6 July 2020 until 11.59pm on Sunday 13 September 2020. During this period, stakeholders were encouraged to complete and return the EP questionnaire, either online through the consultation website, by emailing [email protected], or by post.
All consultation materials, including the consultation booklet and questionnaire, were published online and available on the consultation website throughout the consultation period. Stakeholders wishing to respond by post were able to request a printed hard copy of the questionnaire and consultation booklet, together with a freepost Business Reply envelope, by contacting TfWM via phone or email.
The EP Partners, including operators, will consider how the proposed EP Plan and Scheme need to change to reflect suggestions made in this consultation. If changes are made to the EP Plan and/or Scheme, the EP will be subject to another operator period, for a minimum 28 days. Once agreed, the EP Plan and EP Scheme will go to the WMCA Transport Delivery Committee for approval. The EP Plan and EP Scheme will then be made by the WMCA and the local authorities. The figure below provides our current timeline for the making of the Enhanced Partnership.
Bus Operator, Preparation of an Operator Period Public 28 days Consultation LA & WMCA EP Approvals
EP Plan 20 6 July to 13 September June - December 2019 November 2020 - December 2019 - 24 2020 January 2021 January 2020
EP Scheme 28 February - 28 March 2020
3.5 Equalities Impact Assessment
An Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) has been undertaken by TfWM to ensure that the informal engagement and formal consultation meet statutory requirements under the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), part of the Equality Act 2010. The Equality Act 2010 protects people who share a ‘protected characteristic’, along with other groups in society that may have differential needs.
The EqIA ensures that methods can be put in place to ensure all stakeholders are treated fairly and feel their diverse views and needs are considered, not only during engagement and formal consultation on the EP Plan and Scheme, but also throughout the Sprint projectPage design. 63 It should be noted that consultation on the Sprint
001 5
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
project design and infrastructure ran separately to the consultation on the EP Plan and Scheme. This involved significant consultation and engagement with local residents, business and community groups and transport professionals.
3.6 What happens next
The consultation responses have been analysed for any modifications to be made to the EP Plan and /or Scheme.
It is recommended following the review of the responses that the EP Plan is unchanged following the consultation. The EP Scheme, however, is proposed to be modified to take account of the consultation responses.
The modified EP Scheme will be put to the local bus operators for a further objection period, before it can be legally ‘made’. TfWM will issue a notice of intent to make the EP Plan and a modified EP Scheme, to make local bus operators aware of the modified version. This will be discussed with the EP Reference Group, prior to issuing the notice.
If the modified version passes the further operator objection period, , the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) and WMCA’s constituent local authorities can legally ‘make’ the Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme (‘make’ being the legal term for finalising the content of both and then implementing the requirements of the scheme ‘on the ground’).
Page 64
001 6
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
4. Data analysis and interpretation
This section presents the results from the questionnaire responses. This includes a summary of who responded, and analysis of the main themes and issues raised in the responses.
4.1 Sample
The consultation was open to all interested parties, including bus users across both the West Midlands generally and the wider region, but was most heavily advertised on bus services along the A34 (north), A45 and B425 Lode Lane route corridors.
In total, 361 responses were received.
It should be noted that respondents to a consultation are a self-selecting sample made up of those who have chosen to respond, that is to say a non-scientific sample. Responses therefore reflect the views of only those who respond. This provides an invaluable insight into the concerns, themes and issues surrounding a proposal, although these views may be skewed towards a particular viewpoint and thus should not be considered a fully representative sample of the population.
Regardless of this, all responses and comments have been duly noted and considered.
4.2 Analysis of the responses
A total of 347 responses were received to the online questionnaire, with a further 14 respondents submitting direct email responses. The analysis in Chapter 5 reflects only the responses to the online questionnaire, with email and letter responses discussed in Chapter 6.
The online questionnaire comprised a mix of questions, including some closed ‘tick-box’ questions, and open questions allowing for longer, written answers.
In order to effectively analyse the written responses to the open questions, a codeframe was developed comprising wider themes and, within these, individual codes or issues. This allows for all concerns, opinions and suggestions to be captured.
Page 65
001 7
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
5. Responses to the online questionnaire
The graphs and charts below summarise the responses to the closed questions in the questionnaire. In total, 347 online responses were received.
5.1 Demographics
Question 1: Respondent type
Of the 347 online responses received, 97% of the respondents completed the questionnaire as an individual, with 1% responding on behalf of an organisation, group or club, 1% selecting ‘Other’, and 1% left Q1 unanswered.
Respondent type
1% 1% As an individual 1% On behalf of an organisation, group or club Other
No answer 97%
Figure 1 shows responses to Question 1: Are you responding to this consultation as an individual, or on behalf of an organisation, group or club?
Page 66
001 8
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Question 10: Purpose of bus journeys
This question allowed respondents to select multiple options, asking them to ‘Please tick as many as apply’. The results indicate that the most common purposes of the respondents’ bus journeys were: Shopping (occurring in 188 responses, 54%), Other leisure/recreation (174 responses, 50%), Work/business (150 responses, 43%), and Visiting friends/relatives (128 responses, 37%).
Purpose of bus journey(s) 200 188 174 180 160 150 140 128 120 100 72 80 60 40 20 11
Number of respondents of Number 20 0
Figure 2 – responses to Question 10: What are the main purposes of the journey(s) you make by bus?
Question 11: Respondent gender
Of the 347 online responses received, 56% of the respondents were male, 37% were female, 0.3% were transgender and 5% preferred not to say. The remaining 2% of respondents chose not to answer Q11.
Respondent gender 37%
5% 0.3% Male 2% Female Prefer not to say Transgender No answer
56%
Figure 3: responses to Question 11, showing a breakdown of respondents by gender. Page 67
001 9
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Question 12: Respondent age
Of the 347 online responses received, 37% of respondents were aged 60 or over (the largest group), 32% were aged 45-59, 11% of respondents were aged 35-44, 8% were aged 25-34, 5% were aged 16-24, and 1% were under 16. Of the remaining respondents, 4% selected ‘Prefer not to say’, and 2% left Q12 unanswered.
Respondent age
4% 16-24 1% 2% 37% 25-34 5% 35-44 8% 45-59 60 or over Prefer not to say Under 16 32% 11% No answer
Figure 4 shows responses to Question 12: Which of these age groups do you belong to?
Question 13: Respondent ethnic background
Of the 347 online responses received, 77% were from white British respondents, 4% of respondents selected ‘White Other’, whilst ‘Black or Black British’ and ‘Asian or Asian British’ were both selected by a further 2% of respondents. Of the remaining respondents, 1% selected ‘Mixed race’, 1% selected ‘Other’, 10% selected ‘Prefer not to say’ and 2% left Q13 unanswered.
Respondent ethnic background
4% Asian or Asian British 2% Black or Black British 2% 2% Mixed race 2% Other 10% 1% Prefer not to say 77% White British White Other No answer
Figure 5 shows response to Question 13: Which of the following best describes your ethnic background?
Page 68
001 10
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Question 14: Disability
Of the 347 online responses received, 67% did not consider themselves to have a disability, 23% selected ‘Yes’, whilst 7% preferred not to say and 3% of respondents left Q14 unanswered.
Do you consider yourself to have a disability?
7% 23% 3% No Prefer not to say Yes No answer
67%
Figure 6 shows responses to Question 14: Do you consider yourself to have a disability?
Page 69
001 11
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Frequency of bus use
Question 9 asked respondents: ‘How often do you use bus services within each of these areas or routes across the West Midlands?’, allowing respondents to indicate which routes they used and the frequency of their travel on these routes.
After analysing the responses to Question 9, all respondents were grouped into either ‘Users’ or ‘Infrequent or non-users’ of each route corridor, according to their bus use frequency. Respondents were designated as ‘User’ if they selected the ‘Daily’, ‘Weekly’ or ‘Monthly’ options, and ‘Infrequent or non-user’ if they selected ‘Less often’ or ‘Never’. Those who left Q9 unanswered were not included in either group.
Question 9(a): A34 (north)
The results below show that, of the 347 online responses received, 34% of respondents never use the A34 (north) for bus travel, 32% left Q9(a) unanswered, 5% of respondents use the A34 (north) daily, 8% use it weekly and 3% use it monthly. This indicates that 16% of respondents are A34 (north) users.
A34 (north) travel frequency
32% Daily 5% Weekly 8% Monthly Less often Never 34% 3% 18% No answer
Figure 7 shows responses to Question 9(a), reflecting bus use frequency on the A34 (north).
Page 70
001 12
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Question 9(b): A45
The results below show that, of the 347 online responses received, 32% of respondents never use the A45 for bus travel, 32% left Q9(b) unanswered, 3% of respondents use the A45 daily, 6% use it weekly and 6% use it monthly. This indicates that 16% of respondents are A45 users.
A45 travel frequency 32%
Daily 3% Weekly 6% Monthly Less often 6% Never No answer 32% 21%
Figure 8 shows responses to Question 9(b), reflecting bus use frequency on the A45.
Question 9(c): Lode Lane
The results below show that, of the 347 online responses received, 35% of respondents never use the A45 for bus travel, 33% left Q9(c) unanswered, 5% of respondents use the Lode Lane corridor daily, 5% use it weekly and 5% use it monthly. This indicates that 15% of respondents are Lode Lane users.
Lode Lane travel frequency 33%
Daily 5% Weekly 5% Monthly Less often 5% Never 17% No answer 35%
Figure 9 shows responses to Question 9(c), reflecting bus use frequency on Lode Lane.
Page 71
001 13
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Question 9(d): West Midlands generally
The results below show that, of the 347 online responses received, 6% of respondents never travel by bus across the West Midlands generally, 5% left Q9(d) unanswered, 41% of respondents use buses across the West Midlands daily, 24% use them weekly and 11% use them monthly. Of the remaining respondents,13% selected ‘Less often’ and 5% never travel by bus.
West Midlands generally travel frequency
13% 11% 5% 6% Daily Weekly Monthly Less often 24% Never No answer 41%
Figure 10 shows responses to Question 9(d), reflecting bus use frequency across the West Midlands generally.
Page 72
001 14
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
To provide a clear picture of bus usage among those who responded, we have divided respondents into groups based on their responses to all parts of Q9. The groups, together with the numbers in each group, are shown on the diagram below.
Figure 11 shows the combined results of Q9, sections (a), (b), (c) and (d).
Bus travel behaviour Number of respondents Percentage of total
Use the A34 (north) corridor only 23 7%
Use the A45 corridor only 12 3%
Use the Lode Lane corridor only 17 5%
Use both the A34 (north) and A45 corridors 10 3%
Use both the A45 and Lode Lane corridors 15 4%
Use both the Lode Lane and A34 (north) 1 0.3% corridors
Use all three corridors and buses in the 18 5% West Mids. generally
Use buses outside all three corridors 185 53%
Use no bus 58 17%
No answer 8 2%
Grand Total 347 100%
Page 73
001 15
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
As shown in the table and Venn diagrams above, 53% of respondents use bus services outside all three target corridors (i.e. across the West Midlands generally), and 17% of respondents use no bus.
28% of respondents use any combination of the target corridors, including a singular corridor, a pair, or all three corridors (and across the West Midlands generally). The remaining 2% did not answer Q9.
5.2 Views on the Enhanced Partnership Plan
Question 4: The vision in the EP Plan
Q4 asked respondents the extent to which they agreed with the vision set out by TfWM in the EP Plan. Q5 gave respondents the opportunity to provide comments about the EP Plan if they wished.
The results below show that, of the 347 online responses received, 68% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed with the vision laid out in the EP Plan, 11% of respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed with the vision in the EP Plan, 17% neither agreed nor disagreed, 3% selected ‘Don’t know’ and 1% left Q4 unanswered.
Agreement with the vision in the EP Plan
17% 5% Strongly agree 6% 3% 1% Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree 38% 30% Don’t know No answer
Figure 12 shows responses to Question 4: To what extent do you agree with our vision to improve local bus travel across the West Midlands network, as laid out in the Enhanced Partnership Plan?
Page 74
001 16
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Question 5: Comments on the EP Plan
This question was included to enable respondents to expand on their response to Q4.
Of the 347 online responses received, 53% of respondents answered Q5, that is to say 183 respondents provided comments. Of those who provided comments, 28 respondents (8%) commented that they had nothing further to add.
Analysis of the responses to Q5 with the codeframe allowed the issues and concerns raised by respondents to be grouped into the following themes: Theme Number of responses
Opposition to or negative comments on the Plan 35
Economics and cost 34
New routes suggestions or requests for wider coverage* 34
Support for the Plan 26
Travel experience 24
Suggestions for improving the Plan 17
Onboard experience 13
Comments on the consultation 12
Impact of Covid-19* 6
Comments about Sprint 5
Accessibility 4
Other 32
*These themes lie beyond the scope of the Enhanced Partnership Plan and will be discussed separately.
A table showing a full breakdown of results can be found in the Appendix.
Opposition to or negative comments on the Plan
This theme was identified in 35 responses to Q5. Among these, 7 respondents voiced general opposition to the EP Plan, with typical comments including: “No it will not work” EPC20-150
“Cant [sic] see the reason to have this partnership plan at all” EPC20-193
“Scrap it” EPC20-277
“You lot really are clueless about what is required.” EPC20-288
6 respondents expressed a preference for trams and/or trains, requesting either more of these, or investment and improvements to existing trams and trains. Typical comments included: “I [sic] tramway or light rail would be a better option” EPC20-087 Page 75
001 17
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
“more trams” EPC20-089
“I would prefer any monies invested in a vast expansion of the tram network” EPC20-296
“[…] more and speedier investment is required in urban rail and light rail to help reduce the car congestion which delays bus traffic.” EPC20-339
4 respondents expressed the view that the EP Plan was too expensive, or would deliver poor value for money, with typical comments including: “An unwanted and expensive exercise.” EPC20-299
“Waste of money where only the contractors benefit” EPC20-254
4 respondents stated that the EP Plan was irrelevant to them, either because they do not use the target corridors, or because they believed it would not deliver improvements to the services they do use. Typical comments included: “Not relevant to services I use.” EPC20-046
“[…] I live approx 1.5 km away from a NXWM bus service, so public transport use has become nonviable for me” EPC20-154
“Personally where I live the scheme has no relevance.” EPC20-180
Some respondents voiced opposition to the choice of the routes themselves. Concerns included that the EP Plan ignored bus routes in need of improvement whilst targeting the same areas or routes which have been improved or upgraded regularly in the past. A typical comment was: “Focused on the usual corridors that you always enhance bus services on, and are already earmarked for SPRINT so don't require Enhanced Partnership Plans. “ EPC20-009
Economics and cost
This theme was identified in 34 responses. 12 respondents requested cheaper bus fares and/or passes, or made general comments that public transport should be cheaper than driving, in order to discourage private car use. Typical comments included: “Cheaper travel to get cars off roads” EPC20-085
“Make fares cheaper for all and give school children and elderly free passes.” EPC20-274
“Why don't you address the astonishing cost of bus travel?” EPC20-337
“Bus fares relative to the cost of driving need to be looked at as it's currently far cheaper to drive by private car even for one person.” EPC20-293
8 respondents stated the view that bus travel should be a solely public service run according to need, not profitability, with some respondents calling for buses to be renationalised. Typical comments included: “We need an integrated transport service in response to need, not profitablility [sic].” EPC20-006
“Just renationalise the buses” EPC20-112
“Nationalise the while network, remove the profit element and have a truely [sic] integrated bus network for the users and not a single bus company” EPC20-224
Page 76
001 18
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
8 respondents made comments asking for a single or joint ticketing system, allowing bus passengers to make their entire journey using one ticket, rather than having to purchase multiple tickets for different travel operators. Typical comments included: “The more joined up the services are, including being able to have joined up payment options, the better for everyone” EPC20-062
“of [sic] all bus companies came together and accepted any ticket this would be much easier for the customer” EPC20-143
“Only way you can have a world class fully integrated transport system with less car journeys is to have a single 1 type ticket system rather than the collection of operator own specific tickets which need to become a thing of the past.” EPC20-231
Support for the Plan
This theme was identified in 26 responses, in which 19 respondents voiced general support for the Plan. Typical comments included: “It's a fantastic idea and as a bus user, I know this would stimulate many people who drive to switch to the bus.” EPC20-016
“Think it is a very good idea” EPC20-080
“It has lofty but achievable aims and, if achieved, will benefit the people who use the services.” EPC20-147
“Excellent plan” EPC20-298
Other respondents voiced conditional support for the Plan, often indicating that they would support the Plan only if it is adhered to. Typical comments included: “If it provides a genuine improvement in coordination and cooperation, removing anomalies and unnecessary duplication, then it should work.” EPC20-216
“Great but make sure it is delivered!” EPC20-227
“You can write a plan but if approved stick to it.” EPC20-263
Travel experience
This theme was identified in 24 responses. 10 of these respondents made comments about the reliability or punctuality of bus services (or lack of), with typical comments including: “Bus could be improved since timetable change utterly shocking service” EPC20-108
“Just need the buses to run on time” EPC20-124
“Improve reliability of buses never run to time table” EPC20-125
6 respondents made comments requesting faster and/or more frequent bus services, with typical comments including: “Anything that makes frequency improvement better and is more comprehensive over a wider area is a good plan” EPC20-336
“buses must be frequent on time clean and safe;“ EPC20-328
“More frequent buses ,” EPC20-032 Page 77
001 19
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Other respondents made comments requesting that bus timetables be synchronised with the relevant smartphone app(s), allowing passengers to access information about bus delays, passenger numbers, or see when their next bus is due, in real time. Typical comments included: “Run to the timetables and sync timetables with phone apps so you know when a bus is due.” EPC20-085
Other respondents made comments requesting more electric or hydrogen-powered buses, with typical comments including: “I would like to see a commitment to green energy buses and trains.” EPC20-205
“I would like high green standards for buses. […] Electric buses or trams please.” EPC20-309
5.3 Views on the Enhanced Partnership Scheme
Question 6: Improving travel standards with the EP Scheme
Q6 asked respondents the extent to which they agreed that the EP Scheme would raise the standards of bus travel on the three corridors. Q7 allowed respondents to make further comments about the EP Scheme if they wished, and Q8 allowed respondents to make any further comments they had.
The results below show that, of the 347 online responses received, 47% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the EP Scheme will raise standards along the three route corridors. 12% either disagreed or strongly disagreed that the EP Scheme would raise standards, 26% neither agreed nor disagreed, 14% selected ‘Don’t know’, and 1% left Q6 unanswered.
Agreement that the EP Scheme will raise standards
4% 8% Strongly agree 14% 1% Agree Neither agree or disagree 26% Disagree 21% Strongly disagree Don’t know No answer
26%
Figure 13 shows responses to Question 6: To what extent do you agree that our proposed EP Scheme will raise the standard of bus travel along the A34 (north), A45 and Lode Lane Corridors?
Question 7: Comments on the EP Scheme
This question was included to enable respondents to expand on their response to Q6.
Of the 347 online responses received, 32% of respondents answered Q7, that is to say 112 respondents provided comments. Of those who provided comments, 29 respondents (8%) commented that they had nothing further to add. Page 78
001 20
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Analysis of the responses to Q7 with the codeframe allowed the issues and concerns raised by respondents to be grouped into the following themes: Theme Number of responses
Opposition to or negative comments on the Plan 39
Travel experience 13
New routes suggestions or requests for wider coverage* 10
Comments on the consultation 8
Comments about Sprint 7
Onboard experience 6
Support for the Plan 6
Economics and cost 4
Suggestions for improving the Plan 3
Impact of Covid-19* 2
Accessibility 0
Other 30
*These themes lie beyond the scope of the Enhanced Partnership Plan, and will be discussed separately.
A table showing a full breakdown of results can be found in the Appendix.
Opposition to or negative comments on the Plan
This theme was identified in 35 responses. 14 respondents stated that the EP Plan was irrelevant to them because they do not use the target corridors. Typical comments included: “Don't use these routes, so no idea.” EPC20-006
“Not relevant to my location.” EPC20-046
“Really no good to me, won’t help me to swap to public transport” EPC20-075
“It is too far away to be relevant to my transport needs. You might as well be telling me about a transport scheme happening in Manchester or London!” EPC20-285
Some of these comments went further, indicating that schemes like the Enhanced Partnership seem to target the same areas which see continual improvement, whilst neglecting other areas or routes. Typical comments included: “This is not local to me and so have no comment. How about those of us who live outside Birmingham and Solihull and need a share of this money spending on us?” EPC20-023
“this would have absolutely no impact on me or my journeys. Seems like yet another scheme for Birmingham thats [sic] not going to benefit anyone other than those who use this route already yet will impact cost wise on other customers.” EPC20-143 Page 79
001 21
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
6 respondents commented that the Enhanced Partnership would not achieve its objective of reducing congestion, with some respondents believing that congestion would only worsen. Typical comments included: “It will not help local traffic and will effect [sic] residents.” EPC20-126
“I think it will cause more tail backs for car drivers” EPC20-307
5 respondents made comments stating that no improvements are required to the target corridors, with typical comments including: “Already have excellent service along A34. […] I bet my journey will take longer than 20mins when you lot have finished.” EPC20-093
“The A34 (North) is already well served by modern low - emission buses. Improvements are not required.” EPC20-299
Travel experience
This theme was identified in 13 responses. 10 of these respondents made comments about the reliability or regularity of bus services (or lack of), with typical comments including: “More regular service.” EPC20-028
“Buses need to be more regular along Lode Lane and Old Lode Lane” EPC20-124
Some respondents also requested upgrades to electric or hydrogen-powered buses, with typical comments including: “[…] alter the road system but continue to use or upgrade to electric powered buses.” EPC20-029
Some respondents made comments about the ease and convenience of bus travel, citing the lack of these as a barrier to bus travel. These responses raised the idea that if bus travel were to be made easier and more accessible across the region (including in rural areas), this would encourage more bus use. Typical comments included: “You need better cross region connections, not just fast links into the city centres” EPC20-224
“We just need to get people back onto public transport” EPC20-176
Comments on the consultation
This theme was identified in 8 responses in Q7 and a further 12 responses to Q5. They are reported together, here, as the issues mentioned are similar. The key issues arising from these responses included a lack of information within the consultation about the scheme, a lack of clarity or difficulty in understanding the consultation, and the importance of continuing to consult with bus users and keeping the public fully informed before implementing any changes. Typical comments included: “No real evidence provided. What happens when these are being implemented? Where is the information regarding alternative routes for those that have to commute on public transport while these routes are being built?” EPC20-113
“well for a start only pages 63,64,65 and 66 in your online document are of any practical use ,all the rest is waffle really who is going to read all those pages” EPC20-210
“Ensure you talk to bus users when planning any changes and not just implement plans you think may work” EPC20-085
“You just need to make sure the general public are kept fully informed (but without using 'corporate' language)” EPC20-216 Page 80
001 22
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Other comments highlighted that the size of the maps and fonts was not accessible for all respondents. Other respondents were of the opinion that the statistics contained in the consultation documents would not be reflected when the Plan is implemented. Typical comments included: “I would have liked to be able to see the map in a larger format and more details” EPC20-251
“Far too many buzzwords and overly positive statistics. A highly suspicious document, given previous experiences with such documents and such plans. More goes into the planning than to the execution.” EPC20-217
Question 8: Enhancements to bus user experience
This question was included to enable respondents to add any further comments or concerns they had, inviting respondents to set out ideas or suggestions as to how the experiences of bus users could be enhanced.
Of the 347 online responses received, 54% of respondents answered Q8, that is to say 187 respondents provided comments. Of those who provided comments, 14 respondents (4%) commented that they had nothing further to add. Analysis of the responses to Q8 with the codeframe allowed the issues and concerns raised by respondents to be grouped into the following themes: Theme Number of responses
Travel experience 70
Onboard experience 55
Economics and cost 30
New routes suggestions or requests for wider coverage* 23
Impact of Covid-19* 10
Suggestions for improving the Plan 9
Accessibility 9
Opposition or negative comments on the Plan 7
Comments on the consultation 2
Support for the Plan 1
Comments about Sprint 0
Other 20
*This lies beyond the scope of the Enhanced Partnership Plan, and will be discussed separately.
A table showing a full breakdown of results can be found in the Appendix.
Travel experience
This theme was identified in 70 responses. 13 of these respondents made comments about the reliability of bus services (or lack of), usually stressing the importance that buses run and keep to timetable. Typical comments included: “Buses running on time (not late, early or never)” EPC20-038 Page 81
001 23
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
“If bus drivers will stick to timetable would be great.” EPC20-195
“More predictable arrival times would be useful.” EPC20-346
8 respondents made comments requesting more frequent bus services as a means of encouraging greater bus use and reducing crowding on buses, with typical comments including: “More frequent services in some areas. […] Do not miss out certain services as sometimes occurs on my local bus.” EPC20-055
“Efficient safe services with frequent buses are the way forward and reduce over crowding” EPC20-085
“More frequent buses especially late evening.” EPC20-232
“More frequent buses in mere green maybe the 78 diamond run every half a hour” EPC20-166
8 respondents made comments requesting real-time information at bus stops, to inform passengers about waiting times and delays to services. Typical comments included: “Real time information at every stop.” EPC20-157
“more up to date information at bus stops when buses are not running or delayed ,also where different bus services interlink don't leave at the same time” EPC20-307
“More real time at bus stops on single bus routes e.g. No. 27 as these routes are more affected by a bus being late or not available” EPC20-298
Similarly, 7 respondents called for other improvements to bus stops and shelters. Some of these responses were more generalised, whilst others highlighted specific areas for improvement, such as queuing systems at bus stops, cleanliness, or concerns for safety when awaiting buses at night. Typical comments included: “improve bus stops, and security at bus stops” EPC20-042
“Visible, active steps to eliminate anti-social behaviour on buses and at stops and interchanges. Better design, cleaning and maintenance of stops and their immediate environs.” EPC20-064
“,clean bus shelters, good lighting at night , some need cleaning with power washers not bucket and a broom, they stink as some are used as toilets, the roofs are a disgrace on the outsides, not been cleaned for years” EPC20-210
“I would like to see more improvements to Bus Stops. They should be made to feel safer. Maybe with the ‘help call button’ that is available on station platforms. It’s not good making improvements if people don’t feel safe waiting for a bus, especially late at night. There also needs to be better queuing systems at bus stops as many times people just push forwards & pile on. For users with puschairs [sic] (& I’m sure those with mobility issues too) this can be incredibly frustrating, especially when you are then told the bus is full & you need to wait for the next one despite having been amongst the first there.“ EPC20-313
6 respondents made comments calling for bus travel to be made equally accessible across all regions and routes, often voicing dissatisfaction with services in rural areas. Typical comments included: “Have all the buses capable of operating to the same standards [to avoid having] two companies running the same service (50) competing with each other and having 30 buses an hour on the route when other areas of the city barely get a bus an hour.” EPC20-009
“Yes , one company running all services. Then we might have some sort of proper service in semi rural areas. Public transport in Knowle is appallingly. [sic]” EPC20-075 Page 82
001 24
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
“This project should ensure that all buses are accessible and affordable to all communities served.” EPC20-348
Onboard experience
This theme was identified in 55 responses. 13 of these respondents voiced safety concerns, calling for increased measures to make buses and bus travel safer. Typical comments included: “More confidence in safety especially at night” EPC20-048
“Feeling safe & secure when using buses, both whilst waiting for a bus to arrive & when on the bus is vital to encouraging more people to use the service” EPC20-260
“Safety should help passengers especially the elderly feel threatened” EPC20-301
Similarly, 8 respondents made comments requested that inspectors and/or conductors be reinstated on buses. For many respondents this was linked to the idea of increasing personal safety and security when using the bus. Typical comments included: “Bring back conductors! It is too much to expect a driver to concentrate on busy road conditions and look after the welfare of passengers, especially on double deckers. A lot of would-be bus passengers won't use them because they don't feel safe.” EPC20-006
“Bring back conductors to help combat anti social behaviour” EPC20-087
Some respondents developed this idea further, citing antisocial or aggressive behaviour from passengers as a deterrent to bus travel. Many of these respondents called for an officer, guard, or some other physical security presence on buses to help drivers to control poor passenger behaviour. Examples given of such behaviour included eating, drunkenness, shouting, playing loud music and cannabis use. Typical comments included: “I do not consider public transport safe, consider an officer/guard on each bus, help unemployment and give people the confidence to travel on public transport” EPC20-136
“I would like to see a physical presence of security on buses. As personal safety is the main reason I would not currently use buses as transport.” EPC20-159
“More cleaning, stronger support to drivers when faced with non payers, weed smokers etc“ EPC20-041
“Bus travel is not safe these days. Increased muggings and anti social behaviour. What measures are you introducing to combat this? Drivers understandably do not want to get involved. If they can’t legally that needs to be made clear.” EPC20-113
“No loud music, swearing or shouting.” EPC20-011
“Stopping buses when there is anti social behaviour on buses and drivers asking for the poilce. [sic] Too often we can be stuck on buses for an hour and a half with thugs swearing, smoking, playing loud music and we just have to suffer it throughout the whole journey” EPC20-106
“How will you stop the drunks and aggressive people getting on your new bus service so you can encourage me to get on?” EPC20-123
Many respondents made other suggestions for improving their overall onboard experience. These included improving bus cleanliness and improving air conditioning and ventilation. Other respondents continued with the theme of passenger behaviour, or even driver behaviour, with calls for a ban on smoking, eating and drinking on buses, measures to limit the number of passengers who have to stand, and comments made about bus drivers’ driving style. Typical comments included: Page 83
001 25
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
“Buses to be clean (some are a disgrace), on time and not smell of drugs would be great” EPC20-143
“Cleaner buses, conductors ensuring people have feet off seats, no smoking etc.” EPC20-274
“Cleaner buses. Friendly bus drivers make a big difference. More time for the bus drivers to drive the route, so they can go slow,y [sic] and steadily and wait for people to sit down before starting off.” EPC20-309
“Clean them more regularly. Improve ventilation & air con in summer. Stop people eating on the bus. […] Do not have standing as this leads to crowded stuffy conditions.” EPC20-275
“Make buss [sic] a no eating and no drinking experience!” EPC20-054
“Stop allowing more people on the bus when it is already over full. Limit standing. It’s often impossible to get off the bus with so many standing. There are also many drivers who think they are at Brands Hatch - too fast approaching bus stops then suddenly braking and generally throwing people around.” EPC20-330
Economics and cost
This theme was identified in 30 responses. The most frequently occurring issues from this theme in Q8 were related to ticketing, with 13 respondents requesting cheaper fares and passes, 10 respondents requesting a single, joint-ticket system with tickets valid for all bus operators, and 4 respondents requesting the integration of bus, tram and rail tickets. Typical comments included: “Can only afford to use bus once a fortnight. Bus passes for 1950s women ROBBED of SIX YEARS OF STATE PENSION.” EPC20-027
“Cheaper bus fares. London is cheaper than wes [sic] midlands” EPC20-098
“I would like to see fully flexible ticketing, integrated ticketing and a 24-hour service” EPC20-101
“Scrapping the operator specific tickets and having a just one ticket type to be used anywhere on the networks” EPC20-231
“As we live in a 24/7 culture we need a more frequent service at night linked to the tram system” EPC20-022
“More info re fare "capping". The opportunity to more easily purchase combined bus / train / tram tickets. For example an easy to use daysaver style ticket that combines all three travel options. “ EPC20-315
Page 84
001 26
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
6. Key themes and TfWM responses – online questionnaire TfWM has reviewed all comments received during the consultation and, where possible and appropriate, incorporate these into the final EP Plan and Scheme.
Following the analysis of the online responses received, a number of key themes emerged across the open questions. TfWM has considered these concerns and has provided a response to each.
6.1 EP Plan Suggestion TfWM response
Opposition or negative comments on the plan The EP Plan is the high-level strategic document that A preference for trams/trains. sets the bus network in the EP area into context, focusing on bus. Concern over value for money noting that the EP Plan is too expensive. The EP Plan cannot be costed, as the commitments made by TfWM and the local authority are contained The EP Plan ignored bus routes in need of in the EP Scheme that has been assessed for its improvement. financial viability. Bus services will continue to be reviewed by TfWM through their review of services with local bus operators.
Economics and cost Ticketing schemes for nBus and nNetwork are specified in the EP Scheme. These ensure multi- A call for cheaper bus fares and/or passes, or operator and multi-modal tickets are available at the that public transport should be cheaper than lowest cost for travel in the scheme area. driving. The development of an Outline Business Case to Bus travel should be a solely public service run assess powers (including franchising) within the Bus according to need rather than profitability, with Services Act 2017 to help improve bus services in the some respondents calling for buses to be West Midlands was approved by the WMCA Board on renationalised. 28th June 2019. This consultation on an EP is separate to that Outline Business Case assessment. A single or joint ticketing system, allowing passengers to make their entire journey without the need to purchase multiple tickets for
different travel operators.
The EP Scheme includes a combination of existing Travel experience designated bus lanes, newly-created bus lanes and also priority through areas of congestion that will The reliability and punctuality of bus services, or contribute to significant bus journey time reliability. lack of. Route requirements could be included; however, this A faster and/or more frequent bus services. would not deliver more frequent bus services, so has not been proposed in this EP Scheme. Bus timetables be synchronised with the relevant smartphone app(s) to provide Many of the local bus operators already have apps information about delays and disruption in real that display real time location for buses, including time. delays and disruption.
Page 85
001 27
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
6.2 EP Scheme Suggestion TfWM response
The EP Plan provides the backdrop for specific EP Opposition or negative comments on the plan Schemes that will detail actions and developments The EP Scheme targets the same areas and to be taken jointly by partners to deliver a marked routes which see continual improvements, improvement in bus services. The first EP Scheme to neglecting others. be introduced will support the implementation of Sprint, including improved highway infrastructure for The EP would not achieve its objective of buses in the Scheme area. Future schemes may be reducing congestion, but instead would only suggested and promoted by TfWM, local authorities worsen congestion. or bus operators that could focus on other areas and No improvements are required to the target routes. corridors. Congestion is an issue for us all and we need to take responsibility for the demands on the transport system. Continuing to build capacity into the bus network to improve the performance of bus travel and investing in integrated ticketing options to make it easier and cheaper to travel are key components to tackle congestion in the region and encourage people to switch from using their car.
Our region is growing, and we want the growth to be inclusive and sustainable so that everyone can benefit from the opportunities. Investment in our passenger transport network will help to provide the capacity and quality of service needed to support the growth ambitions.
Travel experience The EP Scheme includes a combination of existing designated bus lanes, newly-created bus lanes and Reliability or regularity of bus services, or lack also priority through areas of congestion that will of. contribute to significant bus journey time reliability. Upgrades to either electric or hydrogen- The EP Scheme includes requirements and powered buses. timeframes for the transition to zero emission buses. If bus travel were to be made easier and more Bus services will continue to be reviewed by TfWM equally accessible across the region, including through their review of services with local bus in rural areas, this would encourage more bus operators. use.
Comments on the consultation The consultation website had 11,749 views, with a social media reach of 1.1 million and radio impact of The consultation was difficult to understand, or over 20 million people. that it lacked sufficient detail and/or clarity. A separate website for the Enhanced Partnership will The importance of continuing to consult with continue to provide updates on the development of bus users before implementing changes, and the EP. the importance of keeping the public fully https://www.tfwm.org.uk/operations/enhanced- informed throughout the process. partnership/ The size of the maps and/or text fonts was not Whilst engagement to provide updates on the Sprint accessible for all respondents. project design and infrastructure runs separately to the EP Plan and Scheme. Page 86
001 28
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
The statistics contained in the consultation Consultee’s were able to request documentation in documents would not be reflected when the different formats to ensure accessibility for all. plan is implemented.
6.3 Enhancements to bus user experience Suggestion TfWM response
Travel experience The EP Scheme includes a combination of existing designated bus lanes, newly-created bus lanes and Ensure buses run to timetable. also priority through areas of congestion that will Provide real-time information at bus stops to contribute to significant bus journey time reliability. inform passengers of waiting times or delays. The EP Scheme includes operator requirements for Various improvements to bus stops and CCTV on-vehicle to improve safety and security, as shelters, including better cleanliness, queuing well as enhanced bus stops with CCTV for security systems, and increased security when waiting and real time information displays. for buses at night. Bus services will continue to be reviewed by TfWM Dissatisfaction with services in rural areas. through their review of services with local bus operators.
Onboard experience The EP Scheme includes operator requirements for CCTV on-vehicle to improve safety and security, as Concerns about safety during bus travel. well as enhanced bus stops with CCTV for security. Inspectors and/or conductors be reinstated on buses. The legislation does not allow for inspectors and/or conductors to be specified as a requirement for Improvements to bus cleanliness and/or operators. ventilation. Antisocial or aggressive behaviour from other passengers. Some went further to request an officer or security guard on buses to help bus drivers to combat this.
Economics and cost Ticketing schemes for nBus and nNetwork are The integration of bus, tram and rail tickets. specified in the EP Scheme. These ensure multi- operator and multi-modal tickets are available at the lowest cost for travel in the scheme area.
Page 87
001 29
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
7. Email responses
In addition to the 347 online responses submitted on the online questionnaire, a total of 14 emails were received in response to the consultation. Of these enquiries, 7 were closed during the consultation, as these were mostly short comments or questions. The majority of these comprised requests for hard paper copies of the consultation materials, booklet and questionnaire.
TfWM has duly noted all the concerns and suggestions received through the separate email responses. Suggestion from email response TfWM Response
Three respondents emailed TfWM expressing support for The EP Scheme includes operator requirements the Enhanced Partnership. One of whom made additional for CCTV on-vehicle to improve safety and suggestions, including maintaining bus cleanliness, security, as well as enhanced bus stops with CCTV increased security on buses to manage passenger for security and real time information displays. misbehaviour, lower bus fares for those aged 60 and Ticketing schemes for nBus and nNetwork are over, improvements to electronic displays at bus stops specified in the EP Scheme. and contactless payment systems, more frequent bus services, and increased driver training to enable drivers The legislation does not allow driver training to be to be more helpful to passengers. specified as a requirement for operators.
Route requirements could be included; however, this would not deliver more frequent bus services, so has not been proposed in this EP Scheme.
One respondent emailed to provide comment on the Modifications are proposed to the EP Scheme to vehicle parameters, ticketing arrangements and remove references to voluntary partnerships. governance of the EP development. Ticketing schemes for nBus and nNetwork are specified in the EP Scheme.
The partners and stakeholders forming the EP Reference Group, independently chaired by Bus Users UK, have contributed to the development of the EP proposals prior to public consultation. It has ensured discussions in the EP development have been open, honest and productive.
One respondent requested that the overall passenger The legislation does not allow driver training to be experience be considered as part of the improvements. specified as a requirement for operators. This respondent also suggested increased driver training to enable them to better assess whether a passenger should be permitted to board the bus if they appear to be under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Two respondents emailed to express dissatisfaction with The EP Scheme does not cover this area. bus services to and from Cannon Park shopping centre in Coventry, namely highlighting the issue of having to Bus services will continue to be reviewed by TfWM catch two separate buses in order to travel there. through their review of services with local bus operators.
Page 88
001 30
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Another respondent emailed to voice comments from Modifications are proposed to the EP Scheme to TfWM’s cycling and walking team. The main theme here strengthen the role of bus with walking and was disappointment that the consultation does not cycling. mention active travel, but is instead focused on buses and vehicles, rather than people. This respondent offered guidance for the design of schemes in which bus and active travel enhance one another, such as bike- sharing and ‘floating’ bus stops.
Another respondent emailed offering their opinion of Ticketing schemes for nBus and nNetwork are approaches taken by other combined authorities, namely specified in the EP Scheme; as well as ensuring all Transport for London (TfL) and Transport for Greater bus operators offer contactless ticketing; and Manchester. The respondent provided a comprehensive improved passenger information including on account of what they perceive to be both positive and disruptions. negative aspects of public transport in both London and Manchester and suggested TfWM learn from these The development of an Outline Business Case to approaches. The main suggestions highlighted include assess powers (including franchising) within the provision of a convenient, cashless payment system with Bus Services Act 2017 to help improve bus ‘smartcards’, active social media to provide real-time services in the West Midlands was approved by the information about delays and disruption to services, and WMCA Board on 28th June 2019. This the use of intuitive branding utilising street signs, consultation on an EP is separate to that Outline integrated maps and journey planners. The respondent Business Case assessment. also states the importance of lowering emissions, suggesting that the bus network links to other measures such as car share, ring and ride, and Hong Kong-style taxi buses. The respondent a raised concern about franchising, namely whether it is responsible to fully entrust the private sector to deliver services.
Page 89
001 31
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
8. Alternative suggestions Many respondents also offered ideas to improve the Plan. This section responds directly to those which fall within the remit of TfWM as part of the Enhanced Partnership, and sets out steps to be taken to enact these where possible.
The suggestions raised covered a variety of themes, including real-time information, active travel provisions, bus routes, bus lanes, ticketing and costs, and franchising.
8.1 EP Plan Suggestion TfWM response
Take a good look at Blackpools bus and tram Many of the local bus operators already have apps scheme, when I visit I pay by app and the app tells that allow on-vehicle payment via mobile and me exactly where the buses and trams are. EPC20- display real time location for buses. 253
Why is there precious little about cycling? EPC20- Modifications are proposed to the EP Scheme to 337 strengthen the role of bus with walking and cycling.
I didn’t see any provisions for cyclists EPC20-344
Why don't you address the astonishing cost of bus Ticketing schemes for nBus and nNetwork are travel? EPC20-337 specified in the EP Scheme.
Through the West Midlands Bus Alliance we have A range of bus operators need to be working within worked collaboratively with bus operators, local this partnership plan and corridor. Frequencies must authorities and other partners to invest in be maintained even if Sprint is using the same space. improvements to the West Midlands bus network, Buses must be given their own lane which is shared improving fares, passenger experience, vehicle with Sprint. EPC20-018 emissions and network performance. The development of the EP has involved bus operators working together to improve bus travel in the region.
The concept of a fully integrated bus network has TfWM’s move towards of an integrated transport been talked about for some time now with little system is epitomised through the new West Midlands obvious progress aside from a handful of routes in Transport brand, which brings a single identity to the the Sandwell area. The idea of a single, unified West public transport system in the West Midlands, with Midlands Bus identity should be expanded. EPC20- each mode having its own distinctive livery. 024
I would like to see a franchising approach taken The development of an Outline Business Case to instead. Other combined authorities have progressed assess powers (including franchising) within the Bus plans for this and West Midlands should make the Services Act 2017 to help improve bus services in the use of powers available by taking control of fares, West Midlands was approved by the WMCA Board on routes etc entirely. EPC20-072 28th June 2019. This consultation on an EP is separate to that Outline Business Case assessment.
Page 90
001 32
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
8.2 EP Scheme Suggestion TfWM response
The EP Plan sets out the need to protect existing bus We need more bus lanes and clean air zones in town lanes and provide more. This is demonstrated centres across the WM EPC20-112 through the EP Scheme with additional bus lanes on the A34 (north), A45 and B425 corridors, whilst across the West Midlands there is a £45m bus priority programme being delivered.
8.3 Other suggested enhancements Suggestion TfWM response
Provide a service that is a reasonable comparison to The EP Scheme includes a combination of existing the car. Journey times are diabolical EPC20-332 designated bus lanes, newly-created bus lanes and also priority through areas of congestion that will contribute to significant bus journey time reliability.
Routes tend to be focussed on city centre. More The EP Plan provides the backdrop for specific EP non-radial routes would be good, to avoid the need Schemes that will detail actions and developments to go in and then out again. This would cut journey to be taken jointly by partners to deliver a marked times and close the gap to efficiency of car usage. improvement in bus services. The first EP Scheme to EPC20-339 be introduced will support the implementation of Sprint, including improved highway infrastructure for buses in the Scheme area. Future schemes may be suggested and promoted by TfWM, local authorities or bus operators that could focus on other areas and routes.
Bus services will continue to be reviewed by TfWM through their review of services with local bus operators.
Page 91
001 33
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Appendix A. Additional information
A.1 Online questionnaire: full breakdown of results
Table (a): breakdown of codes used, and themes raised, in response to Q5. Comment theme Number of responses General support 19 Support new/longer bus lanes 1 Plan will reduce/eliminate emissions (by encouraging bus use instead of driving) 2 Support plan but only if TfWM stick to it 4 General opposition 7 Services will be reduced rather than enhanced / current regular stopping services 1 will be cut Waste of money/too expensive/poor value for money 4 Will disrupt/lengthen journey times Ignores (a lot of) routes 3 Corridors are already earmarked for Sprint; no need for EP as well 1 Targets the same routes/areas which see continual improvement while neglecting 3 others Not relevant to services I use / I don't use these routes 4 More/improved trams/trains/light rail would be preferred 6 No improvement required 2 Proposed plans would bring little/no improvement / don't solve current issues with 2 buses Poor connections to main route; pointless improving main route if people can't 3 access it easily EP doesn’t address congestion / will cause/worsen congestion / improved bus 2 service will be pointless if roads still congested Environmental impact of the scheme (e.g. removing trees) does not outweigh the 1 benefits Concerns about disruption whilst routes being constructed Solihull likely to become increasingly car-orientated / shouldn't be focusing on 1 buses Opposition to anything which discourages/reduces capacity for private car usage 1 Support for Sprint 1 Opposition to Sprint (incl. Sprint is a waste of money / won't bring benefits) 3 Request for more information about Sprint 1 More reliable service / run to timetable 10 Faster / more frequent buses 6 Make bus travel easier / encourage more bus use 2 Make bus travel equally accessible across all regions / areas (incl. better service in 2 rural areas) More bus lanes 1 More park and ride facilities More local services 1 Real-time information at all bus stops Sync timetables with phone app to show when next bus is due in real time / how 2 busy bus is Prioritise early-morning/rush hour bus commuters/key workers 1 Consider the effects of big events (e.g. Christmas markets/Commonwealth Games) 1 which lengthen bus journeys for those trying to get home from work Page 92
001 34
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Label bus routes with colour-coding 1 Upgrade to electric / hydrogen-powered buses 3 Remove bus lanes and allow cars to flow more freely (to reduce congestion) Wait until passengers are seated before moving off Make sure alighting passengers do so before others board CCTV is inadequate / doesn’t cover all areas of the bus Penalties for bus operators who refuse to accept valid tickets Don’t stop for longer than necessary if the bus is running ahead of time Run all bus services 24/7 / more frequent services during the night Dual-door buses to speed up entry and exit Improvements to bus stops: better cleaning / queuing systems / should be made safer at night Create simple diagrammatic map (based on TfL map or TfWM train/metro map) 1 showing all bus routes to encourage confidence in using buses across West Midlands Safer buses / safety concerns 5 More professional/friendlier staff 1 More inspectors / bring back conductors 4 More double-deckers / opposition to articulated/bendy buses (so fewer people have to stand) Cleaner buses / improve cleanliness 4 Unpleasant experience on the 51 service due to drunk passengers 1 Improve air conditioning / better ventilation / stop windows steaming up in winter 1 Ban eating and drinking on buses 1 Complaints about passenger behaviour (incl. eating, playing music, shouting, 1 smoking, cannabis use) Audio announcements on all vehicles and routes Officer / guard onboard to help drivers with antisocial behaviour / aggressive passengers (incl. drivers can’t (be expected to) drive as well as manage passenger behaviour) Penalties / police fines for those who smoke / don’t wear masks / are aggressive Remove seats facing each other to prevent people putting feet on opposite seats Dedicated buses for schoolchildren in term time to allow for social distancing / prevent them from crowding in buses / blocking gangways Ensure that children do not sit down if there are adults standing Improve bus WiFi More plugs for charging phones Limit standing / don’t allow more passengers onboard when bus is already full Some bus drivers drive too fast / brake too suddenly/harshly Printed / paper tickets for customers on all routes / regardless of payment method More individual seats to allow easier distancing / remove need to sit next to someone Extend Lode Lane corridor (from Chelmsley Wood to Shirley via Solihull) 1 Bring back 288 service (from Broadway Norton / via Greyhound Lane) 1 Better connections to/from Wolverhampton / include Wolverhampton in plans 2 Better connections to/from Hodge Hill / no buses in Hodge Hill 1 Direct bus to/from Merry Hill 3 Service between Coleshill and Birmingham/Coventry 1 Service between Dudley and Great Bridge 1 More services/routes to/from Castlevale 1 More services/routes to/from Shard End More services/routes to/from Tipton Reinstate direct bus service to Blackheath Town Centre 1 Page 93
001 35
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Extend bus lane on A45 eastbound / improve transport issues on A45 1 Keep / increase frequency of / extend X1 service to improve direct access to Birmingham Airport / Birmingham International Station Support for improving the 51 / X51 route 3 Reinstate 38 route between Walsall and Wednesbury – lifeline for elderly/disabled 2 Reinstate 27 route between Kings Heath and West Heath Reinstate 29 service for Weoley Castle / improve services in Weoley Castle 1 Reinstate the 54/54A service between Wolverhampton to Stafford Introduce a service between Walsall and Sutton Coldfield / integrate the 77 and 78 services More stops on the 11 service (particularly in Stirchley and Cotteridge) Extend network to reduce number of changes / transport modes required to reach 3 destination More / better bus connections / routes to areas bordering / surrounding West 5 Midlands Extend bus pass coverage / validity outside West Midlands 2 Widen the area to include Lichfield at a later stage 1 Opposition /concerns about demolition of Perry Barr flyover Black Country / South Black Country needs improving / is always left behind / 1 ignored / forgotten Reinstate bus routes where elderly make up high proportion of residents / users Create / protect routes whose users are reliant on bus travel 1 Stagecoach buses should use Pool Meadow bus station in Coventry City Centre Look at services from Fox Hollies to Birmingham City Centre 1 More / better services to/from Rowley Regis Do not cancel direct service from Walsgrave Hospital to Eastern Green Rd Improve the 3 service between Cannock and Walsall 1 Improve the 66 service between Birmingham and Sutton Coldfield Improve the 6 service 1 Improve the route between Leamington Spa and Warwick / University of Warwick 1 Cheaper fares and passes / ensure public transport cheaper than driving / 12 discourage driving Make bus travel cheaper for all, especially elderly (not just students/unemployed) 2 Free bus passes for elderly / under-18s 1 Renationalise buses / should be public service run according to need, not 8 profitability (incl. comments about certain provider(s) having a monopoly on bus travel) Single / joint / 1-ticket system (rather than multiple tickets for different operators) 8 Integrate bus, tram and rail tickets 1 Introduce daily/weekly/monthly bus tickets/passes 2 Enable contactless payments / integrate contactless across multiple bus providers 1 Ensure scheme is cost-effective 1 NX buses have a monopoly over bus travel Free bus passes for 1950s / WASPI women who lost state pension 1 Introduce ‘night out’ pass valid from early evening until early hours the next day 1 Companion fares for those who need to accompany disabled bus users Cheaper fares for short journeys 1 Set up website (like TfL with Oyster) showing statement / record of trips to provide 1 receipts to claim expenses Support for contactless but also important that cash is still accepted as payment Improve accessibility for elderly passengers / wheelchair users / those with limited 1 mobility Ability to reserve disabled seating for disabled passengers 1 Page 94
001 36
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Higher seats for those with longer legs / difficulty getting up from lower seats More driver training (some drivers do not lower the ramps / ask non-disabled passengers to vacate disabled seats) More awareness /consideration of disability issues (during the 1 consultation/planning process) Consider facilities for carrying bikes / luggage on buses 1 Improvements / more awareness required for blind / partially sighted Should be a single / unified / fully integrated West Midlands bus service / identity 3 Maintain a range of bus operators within Plan / corridor 1 Want greater choice of routes 1 Would prefer a city-wide plan 1 Prioritise routes less well-served by train / introduce small ‘feeder routes’ to rail 3 stations Important that scheme is completed within short period of time to deliver benefits 2 Important that scheme delivers noticeable improvements to journey times Need public transport network / infrastructure that is comparable with other 1 European cities Introduce car-free / clean air zones in town centres Better / larger route maps showing connections to rail / other bus routes / places of interest TfWM should take full franchise control of fares/routes entirely (comparison with 2 TfL / other combined authority) Scheme should involve (greater) provision for cyclists / cycling 3 More non-radial routes (to avoid travelling into the city centre and then out again) New buses for the scheme Question(s) posed by respondent / consultation provides insufficient detail(s) 6 Too much / excess information in materials / unclear / difficult to understand 1 No knowledge / understanding of the scheme / not informed / never heard of EP Too many ‘buzzwords’/overly positive statistics / more work put into planning than 2 execution Map format was too small 2 Consultation ineffective / responses ignored/unacknowledged Consult with bus users before implementing any changes / keep public fully informed No information about challenges faced while implementing the Plan 3 Questions about if scheme is viable due to Covid-19 (i.e. fewer people using public 3 transport) / won’t be using any public transport until there is a vaccine Won’t work with mandatory face masks / objection to wearing face masks 1 Ensure drivers wear face masks if passengers have to (Better) enforcement of face mask /social distancing rules 1 Hand sanitiser on buses / wear gloves to hold rails or press stop button Scheme is premature / roads may yet need complete overhaul/redesign to suit new 1 travel patterns after Covid-19 Concerned about customer information due to government position on 5G 1 Re-open Bushbury railway station 1 Government should give more support to sustainable public transport Fewer average speed check cameras Demand-response transport Generalised request for improvement / dissatisfaction with current service 1 Cheaper car parking No comment at this time 28 General other / miscellaneous 1 Page 95
001 37
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Table (b): breakdown of codes used, and themes raised, in response to Q7. Comment theme Number of responses General support 4 Support new/longer bus lanes 2 Plan will reduce/eliminate emissions (by encouraging bus use instead of driving) Support plan but only if TfWM stick to it General opposition 4 Services will be reduced rather than enhanced / current regular stopping services will be cut 1 Waste of money/too expensive/poor value for money 1 Will disrupt/lengthen journey times 1 Ignores (a lot of) routes 2 Corridors are already earmarked for Sprint; no need for EP as well 1 Targets the same routes/areas which see continual improvement while neglecting others 3 Not relevant to services I use / I don't use these routes 14 More/improved trams/trains/light rail would be preferred 2 No improvement required 5 Proposed plans would bring little/no improvement / don't solve current issues with buses 1 Poor connections to main route; pointless improving main route if people can't access it easily EP doesn’t address congestion / will cause/worsen congestion / improved bus service will be pointless if roads still congested 6 Environmental impact of the scheme (e.g. removing trees) does not outweigh the benefits 2 Concerns about disruption whilst routes being constructed 2 Solihull likely to become increasingly car-orientated / shouldn't be focusing on buses Opposition to anything which discourages/reduces capacity for private car usage 1 Support for Sprint Opposition to Sprint (incl. Sprint is a waste of money / won't bring benefits) 6 Request for more information about Sprint 1 More reliable service / run to timetable 4 Faster / more frequent buses Make bus travel easier / encourage more bus use 2 Make bus travel equally accessible across all regions / areas (incl. better service in rural areas) 1 More bus lanes 1 More park and ride facilities 1 More local services Real-time information at all bus stops Sync timetables with phone app to show when next bus is due in real time / how busy bus is Prioritise early-morning/rush hour bus commuters/key workers 1 Consider the effects of big events (e.g. Christmas markets/Commonwealth Games) which lengthen bus journeys for those trying to get home from work Label bus routes with colour-coding Upgrade to electric / hydrogen-powered buses 3 Remove bus lanes and allow cars to flow more freely (to reduce congestion) 1 Wait until passengers are seated before moving off Make sure alighting passengers do so before othersPage board 96
001 38
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
CCTV is inadequate / doesn’t cover all areas of the bus Penalties for bus operators who refuse to accept valid tickets Don’t stop for longer than necessary if the bus is running ahead of time Run all bus services 24/7 / more frequent services during the night Dual-door buses to speed up entry and exit Improvements to bus stops: better cleaning / queuing systems / should be made safer at night Create simple diagrammatic map (based on TfL map or TfWM train/metro map) showing all bus routes to encourage confidence in using buses across West Midlands Safer buses / safety concerns 3 More professional/friendlier staff More inspectors / bring back conductors More double-deckers / opposition to articulated/bendy buses (so fewer people have to stand) 2 Cleaner buses / improve cleanliness 2 Unpleasant experience on the 51 service due to drunk passengers Improve air conditioning / better ventilation / stop windows steaming up in winter 1 Ban eating and drinking on buses Complaints about passenger behaviour (incl. eating, playing music, shouting, smoking, cannabis use) 1 Audio announcements on all vehicles and routes Officer / guard onboard to help drivers with antisocial behaviour / aggressive passengers (incl. drivers can’t (be expected to) drive as well as manage passenger behaviour) Penalties / police fines for those who smoke / don’t wear masks / are aggressive Remove seats facing each other to prevent people putting feet on opposite seats Dedicated buses for schoolchildren in term time to allow for social distancing / prevent them from crowding in buses / blocking gangways Ensure that children do not sit down if there are adults standing Improve bus WiFi More plugs for charging phones Limit standing / don’t allow more passengers onboard when bus is already full Some bus drivers drive too fast / brake too suddenly/harshly Printed / paper tickets for customers on all routes / regardless of payment method More individual seats to allow easier distancing / remove need to sit next to someone 1 Extend Lode Lane corridor (from Chelmsley Wood to Shirley via Solihull) Bring back 288 service (from Broadway Norton / via Greyhound Lane) Better connections to/from Wolverhampton / include Wolverhampton in plans Better connections to/from Hodge Hill / no buses in Hodge Hill Direct bus to/from Merry Hill Service between Coleshill and Birmingham/Coventry Service between Dudley and Great Bridge More services/routes to/from Castlevale More services/routes to/from Shard End More services/routes to/from Tipton Reinstate direct bus service to Blackheath Town Centre Extend bus lane on A45 eastbound / improve transport issues on A45 2 Keep / increase frequency of / extend X1 service to improve direct access to Birmingham Airport / Birmingham International Station 2 Support for improving the 51 / X51 route 1 Reinstate 38 route between Walsall and Wednesbury – lifeline for elderly/disabled 1 Page 97
001 39
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Reinstate 27 route between Kings Heath and West Heath Reinstate 29 service for Weoley Castle / improve services in Weoley Castle Reinstate the 54/54A service between Wolverhampton to Stafford Introduce a service between Walsall and Sutton Coldfield / integrate the 77 and 78 services More stops on the 11 service (particularly in Stirchley and Cotteridge) Extend network to reduce number of changes / transport modes required to reach destination 1 More / better bus connections / routes to areas bordering / surrounding West Midlands Extend bus pass coverage / validity outside West Midlands Widen the area to include Lichfield at a later stage Opposition /concerns about demolition of Perry Barr flyover 3 Black Country / South Black Country needs improving / is always left behind / ignored / forgotten 1 Reinstate bus routes where elderly make up high proportion of residents / users Create / protect routes whose users are reliant on bus travel Stagecoach buses should use Pool Meadow bus station in Coventry City Centre Look at services from Fox Hollies to Birmingham City Centre More / better services to/from Rowley Regis Do not cancel direct service from Walsgrave Hospital to Eastern Green Rd Improve the 3 service between Cannock and Walsall Improve the 66 service between Birmingham and Sutton Coldfield Improve the 6 service Improve the route between Leamington Spa and Warwick / University of Warwick Cheaper fares and passes / ensure public transport cheaper than driving / discourage driving 3 Make bus travel cheaper for all, especially elderly (not just students/unemployed) Free bus passes for elderly / under-18s Renationalise buses / should be public service run according to need, not profitability (incl. comments about certain provider(s) having a monopoly on bus travel) 1 Single / joint / 1-ticket system (rather than multiple tickets for different operators) Integrate bus, tram and rail tickets Introduce daily/weekly/monthly bus tickets/passes Enable contactless payments / integrate contactless across multiple bus providers Ensure scheme is cost-effective NX buses have a monopoly over bus travel Free bus passes for 1950s / WASPI women who lost state pension Introduce ‘night out’ pass valid from early evening until early hours the next day Companion fares for those who need to accompany disabled bus users Cheaper fares for short journeys Set up website (like TfL with Oyster) showing statement / record of trips to provide receipts to claim expenses Support for contactless but also important that cash is still accepted as payment Improve accessibility for elderly passengers / wheelchair users / those with limited mobility Ability to reserve disabled seating for disabled passengers Higher seats for those with longer legs / difficulty getting up from lower seats More driver training (some drivers do not lower the ramps / ask non-disabled passengers to vacate disabled seats) More awareness /consideration of disability issues (during the consultation/planning process) Page 98
001 40
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Consider facilities for carrying bikes / luggage on buses Improvements / more awareness required for blind / partially sighted Should be a single / unified / fully integrated West Midlands bus service / identity Maintain a range of bus operators within Plan / corridor Want greater choice of routes Would prefer a city-wide plan Prioritise routes less well-served by train / introduce small ‘feeder routes’ to rail stations Important that scheme is completed within short period of time to deliver benefits Important that scheme delivers noticeable improvements to journey times Need public transport network / infrastructure that is comparable with other European cities Introduce car-free / clean air zones in town centres 1 Better / larger route maps showing connections to rail / other bus routes / places of interest TfWM should take full franchise control of fares/routes entirely (comparison with TfL / other combined authority) Scheme should involve (greater) provision for cyclists / cycling 2 More non-radial routes (to avoid travelling into the city centre and then out again) New buses for the scheme Question(s) posed by respondent / consultation provides insufficient detail(s) 2 Too much / excess information in materials / unclear / difficult to understand 2 No knowledge / understanding of the scheme / not informed / never heard of EP 1 Too many ‘buzzwords’/overly positive statistics / more work put into planning than execution Map format was too small Consultation ineffective / responses ignored/unacknowledged 1 Consult with bus users before implementing any changes / keep public fully informed 2 No information about challenges faced while implementing the Plan Questions about if scheme is viable due to Covid-19 (i.e. fewer people using public transport) / won’t be using any public transport until there is a vaccine 2 Won’t work with mandatory face masks / objection to wearing face masks Ensure drivers wear face masks if passengers have to (Better) enforcement of face mask /social distancing rules Hand sanitiser on buses / wear gloves to hold rails or press stop button Scheme is premature / roads may yet need complete overhaul/redesign to suit new travel patterns after Covid-19 Concerned about customer information due to government position on 5G Re-open Bushbury railway station Government should give more support to sustainable public transport Fewer average speed check cameras Demand-response transport Generalised request for improvement / dissatisfaction with current service 1 Cheaper car parking No comment at this time 29 General other / miscellaneous
Page 99
001 41
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Table (c): breakdown of codes used, and themes raised, in response to Q8. Comment theme Number of responses General support Support new/longer bus lanes 1 Plan will reduce/eliminate emissions (by encouraging bus use instead of driving) Support plan but only if TfWM stick to it General opposition 1 Services will be reduced rather than enhanced / current regular stopping services will be cut Waste of money/too expensive/poor value for money Will disrupt/lengthen journey times Ignores (a lot of) routes Corridors are already earmarked for Sprint; no need for EP as well Targets the same routes/areas which see continual improvement while neglecting others 1 Not relevant to services I use / I don't use these routes More/improved trams/trains/light rail would be preferred 1 No improvement required 2 Proposed plans would bring little/no improvement / don't solve current issues with buses Poor connections to main route; pointless improving main route if people can't access it easily 2 EP doesn’t address congestion / will cause/worsen congestion / improved bus service will be pointless if roads still congested Environmental impact of the scheme (e.g. removing trees) does not outweigh the benefits Concerns about disruption whilst routes being constructed Solihull likely to become increasingly car-orientated / shouldn't be focusing on buses Opposition to anything which discourages/reduces capacity for private car usage Support for Sprint Opposition to Sprint (incl. Sprint is a waste of money / won't bring benefits) Request for more information about Sprint More reliable service / run to timetable 13 Faster / more frequent buses 8 Make bus travel easier / encourage more bus use 2 Make bus travel equally accessible across all regions / areas (incl. better service in rural areas) 6 More bus lanes 5 More park and ride facilities More local services Real-time information at all bus stops 8 Sync timetables with phone app to show when next bus is due in real time / how busy bus is 5 Prioritise early-morning/rush hour bus commuters/key workers 4 Consider the effects of big events (e.g. Christmas markets/Commonwealth Games) which lengthen bus journeys for those trying to get home from work Label bus routes with colour-coding Upgrade to electric / hydrogen-powered buses 5 Remove bus lanes and allow cars to flow more freely (to reduce congestion) 1 Wait until passengers are seated before moving off 2 Make sure alighting passengers do so before others board 1 Page 100
001 42
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
CCTV is inadequate / doesn’t cover all areas of the bus 1 Penalties for bus operators who refuse to accept valid tickets 1 Don’t stop for longer than necessary if the bus is running ahead of time 1 Run all bus services 24/7 / more frequent services during the night 4 Dual-door buses to speed up entry and exit 1 Improvements to bus stops: better cleaning / queuing systems / should be made safer at night 7 Create simple diagrammatic map (based on TfL map or TfWM train/metro map) showing all bus routes to encourage confidence in using buses across West Midlands 1 Safer buses / safety concerns 13 More professional/friendlier staff 2 More inspectors / bring back conductors 8 More double-deckers / opposition to articulated/bendy buses (so fewer people have to stand) Cleaner buses / improve cleanliness 13 Unpleasant experience on the 51 service due to drunk passengers Improve air conditioning / better ventilation / stop windows steaming up in winter 2 Ban eating and drinking on buses 3 Complaints about passenger behaviour (incl. eating, playing music, shouting, smoking, cannabis use) 11 Audio announcements on all vehicles and routes 2 Officer / guard onboard to help drivers with antisocial behaviour / aggressive passengers (incl. drivers can’t (be expected to) drive as well as manage passenger behaviour) 13 Penalties / police fines for those who smoke / don’t wear masks / are aggressive 3 Remove seats facing each other to prevent people putting feet on opposite seats 1 Dedicated buses for schoolchildren in term time to allow for social distancing / prevent them from crowding in buses / blocking gangways 2 Ensure that children do not sit down if there are adults standing 1 Improve bus WiFi 2 More plugs for charging phones 2 Limit standing / don’t allow more passengers onboard when bus is already full 4 Some bus drivers drive too fast / brake too suddenly/harshly 3 Printed / paper tickets for customers on all routes / regardless of payment method 1 More individual seats to allow easier distancing / remove need to sit next to someone 1 Extend Lode Lane corridor (from Chelmsley Wood to Shirley via Solihull) Bring back 288 service (from Broadway Norton / via Greyhound Lane) Better connections to/from Wolverhampton / include Wolverhampton in plans 2 Better connections to/from Hodge Hill / no buses in Hodge Hill Direct bus to/from Merry Hill 2 Service between Coleshill and Birmingham/Coventry Service between Dudley and Great Bridge More services/routes to/from Castlevale 1 More services/routes to/from Shard End 1 More services/routes to/from Tipton 1 Reinstate direct bus service to Blackheath Town Centre Extend bus lane on A45 eastbound / improve transport issues on A45 Keep / increase frequency of / extend X1 service to improve direct access to Birmingham Airport / Birmingham International Station Support for improving the 51 / X51 route Reinstate 38 route between Walsall and Wednesbury – lifeline for elderly/disabled 2 Page 101
001 43
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Reinstate 27 route between Kings Heath and West Heath 1 Reinstate 29 service for Weoley Castle / improve services in Weoley Castle 1 Reinstate the 54/54A service between Wolverhampton to Stafford 2 Introduce a service between Walsall and Sutton Coldfield / integrate the 77 and 78 services 1 More stops on the 11 service (particularly in Stirchley and Cotteridge) 1 Extend network to reduce number of changes / transport modes required to reach destination More / better bus connections / routes to areas bordering / surrounding West Midlands 3 Extend bus pass coverage / validity outside West Midlands 1 Widen the area to include Lichfield at a later stage Opposition /concerns about demolition of Perry Barr flyover Black Country / South Black Country needs improving / is always left behind / ignored / forgotten 1 Reinstate bus routes where elderly make up high proportion of residents / users Create / protect routes whose users are reliant on bus travel Stagecoach buses should use Pool Meadow bus station in Coventry City Centre 1 Look at services from Fox Hollies to Birmingham City Centre More / better services to/from Rowley Regis 1 Do not cancel direct service from Walsgrave Hospital to Eastern Green Rd 1 Improve the 3 service between Cannock and Walsall 1 Improve the 66 service between Birmingham and Sutton Coldfield 1 Improve the 6 service Improve the route between Leamington Spa and Warwick / University of Warwick Cheaper fares and passes / ensure public transport cheaper than driving / discourage driving 13 Make bus travel cheaper for all, especially elderly (not just students/unemployed) Free bus passes for elderly / under-18s 1 Renationalise buses / should be public service run according to need, not profitability (incl. comments about certain provider(s) having a monopoly on bus travel) Single / joint / 1-ticket system (rather than multiple tickets for different operators) 10 Integrate bus, tram and rail tickets 4 Introduce daily/weekly/monthly bus tickets/passes 3 Enable contactless payments / integrate contactless across multiple bus providers 2 Ensure scheme is cost-effective NX buses have a monopoly over bus travel Free bus passes for 1950s / WASPI women who lost state pension 1 Introduce ‘night out’ pass valid from early evening until early hours the next day 1 Companion fares for those who need to accompany disabled bus users 1 Cheaper fares for short journeys 2 Set up website (like TfL with Oyster) showing statement / record of trips to provide receipts to claim expenses 1 Support for contactless but also important that cash is still accepted as payment 1 Improve accessibility for elderly passengers / wheelchair users / those with limited mobility 2 Ability to reserve disabled seating for disabled passengers 1 Higher seats for those with longer legs / difficulty getting up from lower seats 1 More driver training (some drivers do not lower the ramps / ask non-disabled passengers to vacate disabled seats) 1 More awareness /consideration of disability issues (during the consultation/planning process) 1 Page 102
001 44
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
Consider facilities for carrying bikes / luggage on buses 2 Improvements / more awareness required for blind / partially sighted 1 Should be a single / unified / fully integrated West Midlands bus service / identity 2 Maintain a range of bus operators within Plan / corridor Want greater choice of routes Would prefer a city-wide plan Prioritise routes less well-served by train / introduce small ‘feeder routes’ to rail stations Important that scheme is completed within short period of time to deliver benefits Important that scheme delivers noticeable improvements to journey times 1 Need public transport network / infrastructure that is comparable with other European cities Introduce car-free / clean air zones in town centres 1 Better / larger route maps showing connections to rail / other bus routes / places of interest 2 TfWM should take full franchise control of fares/routes entirely (comparison with TfL / other combined authority) Scheme should involve (greater) provision for cyclists / cycling 1 More non-radial routes (to avoid travelling into the city centre and then out again) 1 New buses for the scheme 1 Question(s) posed by respondent / consultation provides insufficient detail(s) Too much / excess information in materials / unclear / difficult to understand No knowledge / understanding of the scheme / not informed / never heard of EP Too many ‘buzzwords’/overly positive statistics / more work put into planning than execution Map format was too small Consultation ineffective / responses ignored/unacknowledged 1 Consult with bus users before implementing any changes / keep public fully informed 1 No information about challenges faced while implementing the Plan Questions about if scheme is viable due to Covid-19 (i.e. fewer people using public transport) / won’t be using any public transport until there is a vaccine 1 Won’t work with mandatory face masks / objection to wearing face masks 1 Ensure drivers wear face masks if passengers have to 1 (Better) enforcement of face mask /social distancing rules 6 Hand sanitiser on buses / wear gloves to hold rails or press stop button 2 Scheme is premature / roads may yet need complete overhaul/redesign to suit new travel patterns after Covid-19 Concerned about customer information due to government position on 5G Re-open Bushbury railway station Government should give more support to sustainable public transport 1 Fewer average speed check cameras 1 Demand-response transport 1 Generalised request for improvement / dissatisfaction with current service 2 Cheaper car parking 1 No comment at this time 14 General other / miscellaneous
Page 103
001 45
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
A.2 Additional information and supporting materials
Page 104
001 46 Public consultation Proposals to transform bus services in the West Midlands Page 105 Page Page 106 Transforming bus The Enhanced Partnership is formed We will be running a 10-week by a Plan and a Scheme. The EP Plan consultation from Monday 6 services in the sets out our overall vision to improve July 2020. All responses must be West Midlands bus services. This is accompanied by received by 11.59pm on Sunday 13 the EP Scheme which sets out how September 2020. Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) we aim to achieve this vision along is responsible for making transport the A34 (north) Walsall – Birmingham Further information about the “happen”. We are accountable for City Centre, the A45 and Lode Lane consultation process and how to take delivering improvements in transport Corridors, from Birmingham Airport / part can be found in the ‘Have your across the region, to create a Solihull – Birmingham City Centre. say’ section of this document. happier, healthier, better connected and more prosperous West We would like to hear your The EP Scheme follows some of the Midlands. views on the proposed Enhanced bus corridors that are included within
Page 107 Page Partnership, Plan and Scheme. the proposed Sprint programme, The Bus Services Act 2017 offers This document summarises the which will deliver a Bus Rapid us new powers and opportunities proposals, or you can find a copy of Transit (BRT) service. Work on to bring together local authorities the full Enhanced Partnership Plan the first stages of the project is and bus operators in an Enhanced and Enhanced Partnership Scheme due to commence in the second Partnership (EP) to develop a by visiting the consultation webpage half of 2020. For more information coordinated approach to improving www.EPConsultation.tfwm.org.uk about proposed infrastructure bus travel in the West Midlands. This improvements related to the delivery will help all partners involved in the of Sprint, please go to www.tfwm. EP to achieve the ambition to deliver org.uk/development/sprint/ a world-class integrated transport system which is clean, safe and affordable. More information about the act itself is available on the consultation webpage www.EPConsultation.tfwm.org.uk Why change? Given the importance of bus travel Our Enhanced to the region’s society and economy, The EP will see all partners invest in better bus services are vital to Partnership (EP) bus improvements to support the achieving inclusive growth in the An EP is a formal agreement delivery of a world class integrated West Midlands. between local transport authorities transport system that will allow and local bus operators to work seamless, convenient and more Unemployed residents and those on low incomes are much more together to improve local bus reliable journeys by public transport, services. It provides a legally binding and help to reduce journeys made reliant on bus services and as a result, improvements to bus commitment on all parties that by car. will ensure delivery of our vision Page 108 Page travel are essential to tackling Buses are key to the provision of transport inequalities. for better bus travel, setting the public transport in the region, with standard across the West Midlands. around 4 out of 5 public transport Whilst significant progress in journeys taken by bus. Between April improving bus services is being 2018 and the end of March 2019, 267 achieved through the Bus Alliance million journeys were made using and the existing Advanced Quality bus services across the region – the Partnership Schemes in place in equivalent of 71.5 million vehicle central Birmingham, Wolverhampton miles. The West Midlands has the and Solihull, these schemes do largest commercially operated bus not cover the whole of the West network in Western Europe. Midlands. The EP Plan provides the strategic vision across the West Midlands, adopting the objectives from our Strategic Vision for Bus1, with the EP Scheme ensuring the delivery of specific improvements to transform bus travel.
1 https://www.tfwm.org.uk/media/38969/final-strategic-vision-for-bus.pdf Map of Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme areas Page 109 Page
© Crown copyright 2020 OS 100019543. West Midlands Combined Authority. You are permitted to use this data solely to enable you to respond to, or interact with, the organisation that provided you with the data. You are not permitted to copy, sub-licnence, distribute or sell any of this data to third parties in any form. How was the EP Plan The EP Plan 5. Creating a safe, secure and accessible mode for all and and Scheme developed? The EP Plan sets out our overall tackling long held barriers and In June 2019, the West Midlands vision to improve bus services in the perceptions. region, building on the 9 objectives Combined Authority (WMCA) gave 6. Accountable network performance approval for TfWM to proceed with set out in TfWM’s Strategic Vision for Bus: management – tackling issues the development of the EP Plan (or causing congestion and reliability vision for improvement) and Scheme 1. UK leading low emission bus problems. (the actions to be taken to deliver fleet with zero emission corridors the vision). 7. World-leading customer Page 110 Page serving the most affected areas of air quality. information, utilising 5G and The EP Plan and Scheme have been all available technologies and developed with the agreement of 2. Fully integrated bus network platforms. participating partners (TfWM, the including local demand responsive seven local authorities and local and rapid transit services 8. All younger people under 25 bus operators) as well as other key supporting rail, coach and Metro supported by discounted travel, stakeholders, including passenger interchange as one network. as well as addressing barriers for groups, industry and business. excluded groups. 3. Simple, convenient and easy to Further information on the use payment options including 9. Evolve a network to support the EP Plan and Scheme documents full capping providing a network 24/7 thriving economy, connecting can be found by visiting the which is value for money and people to new and developing consultation webpage affordable for customers. destinations and attractions. www.EPConsultation.tfwm.org.uk 4. Fewer private car journeys by making bus the mode of choice and creating better access to jobs and long-term change. Page 111 The EP Scheme - This EP Scheme involves the delivery We have developed this Scheme of facilities and measures to provide as a priority to help facilitate the A34 (north), A45 and better bus travel, alongside improved transport element of the 2022 Lode Lane Corridor bus service standards. These Commonwealth Games. This will improvements corridors will run from: see significant investment both in vehicle standards (by operators) and The EP Scheme provides the • A34 (north): Walsall to Birmingham infrastructure (by authorities), as framework to improve and deliver City Centre (passing the well as complementary supporting better bus travel in the scheme area. Commonwealth Games Athletes measures (by the authorities). The first Scheme put forward will set Village and Games venue The minimum 112 Page standards for the delivery Alexander Stadium at Perry Barr). Delivered by TfWM and the of bus services along the A34 (north), local highway authorities, the EP • A45 and Lode Lane: Birmingham A45 and Lode Lane Corridors, Scheme includes many new bus Airport and Solihull to Birmingham forming part of our integrated lanes, 77 enhanced bus stops and City Centre (passing the Games transport network. More schemes improvements to traffic signal venues at the NEC). may be brought forward under the priority. The Scheme will set EP Plan in the coming years, if it minimum standards for 52 existing is necessary to formally agree bus bus services and the 320 buses improvements for an area. that serve these routes, covering approximately 550 miles across the West Midlands. Any new routes introduced into the Scheme area will also need to meet these standards. Due to begin in 2021, this Scheme • Setting of minimum vehicle • More joined-up maintenance aims to deliver the following specifications for emission standards of infrastructure and traffic improvements in collaboration with that will help improve air quality in enforcement at roads, bus stops bus operators and authorities: the region and provide a roadmap and traffic signals. towards a zero-emission fleet. • Investment in bus priority facilities • Better managed and a more and bus stop upgrades, providing • Contactless payment options joined-up response to highway pleasant waiting environments available for every operator. disruption such as roadworks. and real-time information that will Continued availability of operators provide reassurance to passengers, ticketing products, as well as • Improved sharing of bus on the next bus arrival. network-wide multi-operator performance data. tickets, enabling passengers • A safer and more enjoyable travel to easily interchange between
Page 113 Page experience including minimum services within the scheme area standards for buses to ensure a without payment of a separate fare. high quality. This will include CCTV, Wi-Fi, USB charging points, audio/ • Provision of better integrated bus visual next stop announcements, services which will help support provision of induction hearing loops the shift towards use of more at every wheelchair space and sustainable forms of transport, priority seat, and integrated travel reducing the need for private information onboard, enabling car trips. passengers to link journeys with other transport modes. Benefits of the Reducing bus emissions is an Whilst improvements are made to important and vital part of the the network we will work together EP Scheme programme to improve people’s with partners to manage disruption Investment in bus priority health and quality of life by cleaning and keep this to a minimum. up the air in the West Midlands. infrastructure and bus measures The EP Plan and Scheme are will provide a more enjoyable, more Andy Street, the Mayor of the West Midlands, and West Midlands Bus available from the consultation reliable and safer travel experience webpage and provides more detailed relative to current bus provision, Alliance have committed to create the cleanest bus fleet in the UK, information on the objectives and with the improvement of bus journey the expected benefits of the scheme. times. The EP Scheme improvements outside of London. Page 114 Page www.EPConsultation.tfwm.org.uk will help to support a greater use of In addition to setting standards bus services – encouraging people to for electric/zero emission buses, use bus in place of private transport. encouraging people to use bus This proposed EP Scheme runs services instead of private vehicles through some of the most deprived will also help improve air quality in areas of the region, with 11 of the the region by reducing congestion. 14 areas served being in the 50% most deprived in the West Midlands. The EP Scheme will ensure clear The EP will help to tackle transport accountability of partners to deliver, inequalities in the region. maintain and manage better bus services that is more binding than traditional partnerships, to ensure a better passenger experience. Page 115 Next steps The EP Partners, including operators, then be made by the WMCA and the will consider how the proposed EP local authorities. The figure below Once the consultation closes on Plan and Scheme need to change provides our current timeline for the Sunday 13 September 2020, we to reflect suggestions made in this making of the Enhanced Partnership. will carefully consider all feedback consultation. If changes are made to received and prepare a consultation the EP Plan and/or Scheme, the EP report. This report will summarise will be subject to another operator the key themes and note how your period, for a minimum 28 days. Once responses have been used to inform agreed, the EP Plan and EP Scheme the final EP Plan and EP Scheme. will go to the WMCA Transport The 116 Page report will be published on the Delivery Committee for approval. TfWM website. The EP Plan and EP Scheme will
Preparation Operator Public LA & WMCA of an EP Period Consultation Approvals 28 days June - 6 July to November 2020 December 2019 EP Plan 13 September 20 December 2020 2019 – 24 January 2020 EP Scheme 28 February – 28 March 2020 Have your say To support the environment, we encourage you to respond using the Our public consultation will run online questionnaire if you can. between Monday 6 July to Sunday 13 September 2020. All responses must Printed copies of this consultation be received by 11.59pm Sunday 13 booklet, questionnaire and business September 2020. reply envelope are available by request from Transport for There are a number of ways for you West Midlands. to comment on our proposals during the consultation period: For digital copies of all consultation materials and • Online: further details please visit the
Page 117 Page www.EPConsultation.tfwm.org.uk consultation webpage and completing the questionnaire www.EPConsultation.tfwm.org.uk
• By email: [email protected]
• By post: Request a printed copy of the questionnaire and Business Reply envelope by contacting TfWM To request a copy of these documents in a different format please contact Transport for West Midlands. Phone: 0345 303 6760 Email: 118 Page [email protected] Page 119 This consultation will close on Sunday 13 September 2020 Page 120 Page Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme Consultation
We’d like to hear your views on our proposals to improve bus travel across the West Midlands through an Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme. Details of our proposals can be found in the consultation booklet and other materials available on our webpage. Please read them before completing this form.
This consultation questionnaire should take no more than 10 minutes to complete. The information you provide will help us to develop a better transport network and services in the West Midlands.
Please submit your comments by 11.59pm on Sunday 13 September 2020. If you require information in another format (e.g. large print, braille, audio, other language) please phone TfWM on 0345 303 6760 or email.
Section A - How are you responding to this consultation?
Q1 Are you responding to this consultation as an individual, or on behalf of an organisation, group or club?
As an individual On behalf of an organisation, group or club Other
Other (please specify)
Q2a Organisation Details: Please provide the following details about the organisation, group or club that you represent:
Organisation name Page 121 Postcode Web address
Your role
Q2b Please describe how the views of members were gathered:
Q3 What is your home postcode? Please fill this in clearly and accurately so that we can understand where people are responding from. All data will be treated as confidential and it will be used for research purposes only; it will never be passed onto any marketing or advertising companies.
Section B - The Enhanced Partnership Plan
The Enhanced Partnership Plan sets out the overall vision for Transport for West Midlands, local authorities and bus operators to work together to improve local bus travel in the West Midlands. Information about the Plan can be found in the consultation booklet and the EP Plan document. These documents are available on our webpage.
Q4 To what extent do you agree with our vision to improve local bus travel across the West Midlands network, as laid out in the Enhanced Partnership Plan?
Strongly agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know
Q5 Do you have any comments on our proposed Enhanced Partnership Plan?
Page 122 Section C - Enhanced Partnership Scheme: A34 (north), A45 and Lode Lane Corridors
The Enhanced Partnership Scheme (EP Scheme) sets out the actions we propose to take to improve, develop and deliver better bus travel on the A34 (north), A45 and Lode Lane Corridors. Information about the EP Scheme can be found in the consultation booklet and the EP Scheme document. These documents are available on our webpage.
Q6 To what extent do you agree that our proposed EP Scheme will raise the standard of bus travel along the A34 (north), A45 and Lode Lane Corridors ?
Strongly agree Agree Neither agree or disagree Disagree Strongly disagree Don’t know
Q7 Do have any other comments you would like to make about the EP Scheme for the A34 (north), A45 and Lode Lane corridors? If you are commenting on a specific paragraph in the EP Scheme document, please make reference to the paragraph number in your response.
Q8 If there are any other standards or services that you feel would enhance the experience of the bus user, please provide details below:
Section D - Your travel habits
The following questions relate to your travel habits pre-COVID-19 restrictions. Please answer the questions with this in mind.Page 123 Q9 How often do you use bus services within each of these areas or routes across the West Midlands? Daily Weekly Monthly Less often Never
A34 (north)
A45
Lode Lane
West Midlands generally
Q10 What are the main purposes of the journey(s) you make by bus?
Work/ business Study Shopping Visiting friends/relatives Other leisure/recreation Personal business Other
Other (please specify)
Section E - About You
Transport for West Midlands is committed to the principle that all our customers have the right to equality and fairness in the way they are treated and in the services that they receive. It will help us to check that we are providing services fairly if you answer the questions below. Information you give will be used to see if there are any differences in views for different groups of people, and to check if services are being delivered in a fair and accessible way. By providing data about your age, gender, ethnic group and disability you consent to it being used for this purpose. The information in this section will be used for no other purpose. We will follow our Data Protection Act guidelines to keep your information secure and confidential.
Q11 Are you:
Male Female Transgender Other Prefer not to say Page 124 Q12 Which of these age groups do you belong to?
Under 16 16-24 25-34 35-44 45-59 60 or over Prefer not to say
Q13 Which of the following best describes your ethnic background?
White British White Other Mixed race Asian or Asian British Black or Black British Prefer not to say Other
Other (please specify)
Q14 Do you consider yourself to have a disability?
Yes No Prefer not to say
Data protection All data will be treated as confidential and will never be passed onto any marketing or advertising companies. Personal data will only be used for its original purpose, i.e. consultation on the Enhanced Partnership Plan and Scheme. We will publish anonymised responses, parts of responses, or a summarised version of responses to the questions within our “Consultation Summary” document. Your response will be stored electronically on a secure system for two years following the end of the consultation period.
If you wish to discuss this questionnaire in further detail or you want further information on how your data will be collected, stored and used, please email.
Transport for West Midlands is part of the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA). Further information on how your data will be collected, stored and used please refer to WMCA's Privacy Policy here.
Thank you for taking the time to completePage this 125survey Please click 'Submit' to send us your feedback Consultation Web Page
Page 126
Page 127 Bus Information Board
Page 128 Social Media Posts
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Enhanced Partnership Consultation Report
001
Page 132
West Midlands Enhanced Partnership Plan DecemberOctober 2020 2019 Page 133 Page
1 1 INTRODUCTION West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) In accordance with statutory requirements for an EP Plan, this document includes: seeks to develop and promote a fully integrated transport system, where each public transport • Details of the area covered mode (rail, Metro, bus and demand responsive • Factors affecting the local bus market transport) contributes towards the overall • A summary of passengers' experiences of using bus services and the priorities of users objective of enabling all residents to have and non-users for improvements easy access to a range of services and facilities. • Trends in bus journey speeds and the impact of congestion on bus services Bus is central to this and an Enhanced Partnership offers a mechanism to help • Objectives that are sought for bus service provision achieve the objective. • Interventions needed to achieve the desired outcomes
Drawing on Transport for West Midlands’ Strategic Vision for Bus, this document fulfils the statutory requirements set out by the Bus Services Act 2017 of an Enhanced Partnership (EP) Plan for the West Midlands. Initially, this will facilitate the introduction of an EP Scheme
Page 134 Page for the first two Sprint corridors (A34 and A45) that have been prioritised to support the 2022 Commonwealth Games. However, over the Plan period, other potential EP Schemes may be put forward by Transport for West Midlands (TfWM), constituent authorities or bus operators and promoted through the West Midlands Bus Alliance.
Whilst significant progress in improving bus services is being achieved through the Bus Alliance and the Advanced Quality Partnership Schemes already in place in central Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Solihull, an Enhanced Partnership is considered the best way of ensuring that some of the more ambitious plans to transform bus travel are achieved. Amongst these are the Sprint bus rapid transit corridors, which will rely on investment both in vehicles (by operators) and infrastructure (by local authorities). The EP will place binding commitments on partner organisations to provide the necessary enhancements, as well as ensuring on-going provision of high-quality bus services.
2 BUS TRAVEL IN THE WEST MIDLANDS Overview The West Midlands has strong growth ambitions to improve productivity and the quality of life for everyone who lives and works in the region. The development of HS2, 2021 UK City of Culture in Coventry, and the 2022 Birmingham Commonwealth Games will help transform the region and drive investment, offering opportunities for the bus to play an important role in meeting existing and new travel demands. Figure 1: Main public transport mode used Transport is key to economic growth, but traffic to access work (based on LSOA areas) congestion can constrain this ambition. TfWM is supporting local authority partners and investing Main PT modes to work to develop a world-class integrated transport system that will allow seamless, convenient Bus (7509 areas) travel across the region, thereby reducing the Train (933 areas) need for journeys to be made by car. Page 135 Page In 2017/18, 71.91 million bus service miles were operated in the West Midlands by 26 bus operators. This represents the largest number of bus service miles for a metropolitan area in England (outside of London) and the largest commercially-provided bus network (66.5 million bus service miles). Some 5.4 million bus service miles operate with financial support from TfWM and local authority partners.
With its widespread coverage, bus plays a vital role across the region. The bus accounts for 4 out of 5 public transport journeys and remains the most important, adaptable and flexible mode, serving and supporting a better quality of life for West Midlands residents. The importance of the bus for access to employment is illustrated in Figure 1.
1 DfT 2017/18, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/bus02-vehicle-distance-travelled 3 BUS TRAVEL IN THE WEST MIDLANDS Bus passengers’ views The 2018 Bus Passenger Survey, undertaken by Transport Focus, reported that overall satisfaction with bus travel in the West Midlands stood at 84%. While this demonstrates high levels of satisfaction, this was slightly below the levels in the equivalent metropolitan areas of West Yorkshire (85%) and Greater Manchester (87%) and somewhat lower than Merseyside and Tyne & Wear (both 91%). 66% 66% Bus driver Value for money greeting/welcome fare-payers only Page 136 Page 82% 84% 71% Journey time Overall journey Punctuality
84% 74% Availability of seating Interior cleanliness or space to stand and condition
4 INFLUENCES ON BUS TRAVEL Influences on bus travel Across the UK, bus use has been in general decline, mainly due to growing car ownership and use. However, in recent years, some areas or specific bus routes have seen growth.
Research into changing patterns of bus use (illustrated in Figure 2) suggests that about a half of the reduction in bus patronage can be explained by changing customer needs, particularly due to changes in car ownership and economic circumstances and the availability and acceptability of alternatives to travel, such as online services. Much of the remainder of the reduction in bus patronage is explained by increases in bus journey times (linked to increasing traffic levels) and rises in bus fares. In contrast, there are some factors that have helped to increase bus use, attributable to population growth and reduced car use.
40 35.5m Drivers of change Figure 2 (Source: KPMG analysis)
30
20 1 7.4m
10
Page 137 Page 5.5m 2.8m Employment working Flexible Online services fares Bus times journey Bus Rail Taxi Residual Car ownership Car Economy
0 (0.1)m (0.3)m (1.8)m (2.9)m (4.7)m (4.7)m (10) (10)m use Car Population Bus qualityBus
Bus journeys (M) journeys Bus (20) (18.6)m
(30)
Demongraphic studies 1,004M (31.4)m Journeys in 2011/2012 (40)
Overall estimated impact (50) (46.4)m over the time period (journeys)
(60) 67M Economic and labour Alternatives (0.8%) Socio-demographics (0.7%) (1.0%) market impacts to travel 938M Journeys in 2016/2017 Price and quality Price and quality (4.4%) (0.5%) (0.3%) Residual of bus services of other modes Figures based on UTG member areas
5 CAR IN THE WEST MIDLANDS Car ownership Car parking In the West Midlands, over half of bus users have no access to a car and so rely on public transport for In Birmingham city centre, the their travel needs. Where people have access to a car, their likelihood of using the bus reduces2, from region’s strategic economic centre, on average of 181 bus journeys per year to 55 (part access to a vehicle) and 14 (full access to a vehicle). there are about 60,000 public and private non-residential car parking spaces available, both on-street and off-street. This is against an Figure 3: Car ownership in the West Midlands average weekday vehicle demand for parking spaces in the city centre of No car in household Car in household about 45,000 vehicles. This suggests an over-supply of parking, which undermines local and regional policies to see a shift towards reducing 32% private car use and encouraging more 53% sustainable forms of travel.
Page 138 Page The high level of parking availability in Birmingham city centre also contributes to peak period traffic 68% congestion and associated travel unreliability, together with problems 47% of poor air quality.
Bus users All West Midlands
Figure 4: Car ownership usage and characteristics in the West Midlands
6 2 National Travel Survey BUS TRAVEL IN THE WEST MIDLANDS Congestion Traffic Kilometres vs. Speed
Traffic congestion is a significant challenge 16750 15 for buses, restricting their ability to reach 16700 their potential by increasing journey times 14.5 and impacting negatively on service reliability. 16650 Since 2015, average traffic speeds have fallen as 14 16600 levels of traffic have increased. If congestion is unmanaged, it will continue to have detrimental 16550 13.5 impacts on people and businesses, increasing 16500 business costs, affecting productivity and 13 reducing accessibility to labour markets, as 16450 (Kph) Speed Average Million Vehicle Kilometres Million Vehicle well as being responsible for harmful emissions. 12.5 16400 Equally, if unchecked, congestion could worsen from increased travel demand resulting from 16350 12 development and population growth. Also, 2014 2015 2016 2017 major infrastructure projects, such as HS2, might have impacts on bus services during their construction period. Traffic Average Speed Page 139 Page
Without addressing major sources of congestion, • Decreasing accessibility – slower average bus One measure of the passenger experience is the buses will continue to suffer delays, variability speeds lead to reduced accessibility, as fewer real journey time incurred and the reliability of and increases in journey times and operating people can access places in a reasonable journey times. A tool to measure this has been costs, leading to declining attractiveness of the journey time. devised and is shown in Appendix B, with some service and thus fewer passengers. Bus operators example journeys listed to highlight what it shows. are forced to respond to congestion in one of • Decreasing attractiveness of bus – greater two ways – both with a similar outcome in terms journey time variability and declining Accessibility analyses are another way of of patronage decline. First, to maintain levels of accessibility reduce the appeal of buses, highlighting the relative ability of buses to provide service where congestion worsens, bus operators meaning they are at risk of further services that people want. Such analysis shows may need to run more buses, which adds to the patronage decline. that while 54.5% of residents could access at least costs of providing services. A second response is three main centres within 45 minutes by public • Higher bus operating costs – a 10 per cent to operate services less frequently. transport in October 2011, this had fallen to decrease in operating speeds leads to an 8 44.8% in October 2017. Congestion causes: per cent increase in operating costs. If this is passed on to passengers through higher fares The impact of slower average traffic speeds on • Journey time increases and variability – it results in a 5.6 per cent fall in patronage3. levels of accessibility is illustrated in Appendix whereby bus services become unreliable, A. For example, in the context of Birmingham with journey times varying from advertised Reduced use of the bus may lead to greater car between 2008 and 2018 increasing bus journey timetables and overall journeys taking longer. use, creating further congestion. times resulted in 216,000 fewer people being within a 45-minute bus journey of the city centre.
3 The impact of congestion on bus passengers, Green Journeys, Professor David Begg 7 BUS TRAVEL IN THE WEST MIDLANDS Air Quality “Poor air quality is the largest Air pollution in the West Midlands affects some 2.8 million people, reducing average environmental risk to public life expectancy by up to 6 months, and is responsible for economic costs estimated at health in the UK" [DEFRA, 2017] £860 million per year. It is estimated that road transport emissions account for around 1,460 premature deaths in the region each year, with 890 in Birmingham alone.
In all seven constituent authorities in the region, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and/or particulate matter concentration thresholds are currently exceeded (relative to EU limits). The authorities have been instructed by DEFRA to take local action. Birmingham City Council plans to implement
Page 140 Page a Class D Clean Air Zone, no earlier than July 2020.
Reducing bus emissions is an important vital part of the programme to improve people’s health and quality of life by cleaning up the air in the West Midlands. The Mayor of the West Midlands and West Midlands Bus Alliance have committed to create the cleanest bus fleet in the UK, outside London. The aim is for the entire bus fleet in the West Midlands metropolitan area to meet at least Euro VI emissions standards by April 20214, cutting harmful pollution from buses by up to 95 per cent.
Since 2015, over 350 new vehicles have entered service, older vehicles retrofitted to Euro VI standards, supported bus contracts specified as Euro VI standard, and orders placed for zero- emission buses (electric and hydrogen).
4 West Midlands Combined Authority Board 28 June 2019 https://governance.wmca.org.uk/ 8 ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=137&MId=221&Ver=4 POLICY CONTEXT This section sets out the policy • Support an accessible network background to the EP Plan. Addressing transport barriers (accessibility, availability and affordability) for excluded Strategic Economic Plan groups. The bus has a significant role to play in helping • Deliver support that connects overcome the strategic challenges outlined in the SEP, with transport interventions that: people to key employment and skills opportunities Ensuring growth is inclusive by helping the most vulnerable and isolated groups share in economic prosperity. • Ensure alignment with the Public Service Reform agenda and Local Industrial Strategy Targeting interventions which secure better for less from public services, improving the Page 141 Page 500,000 20,000 life changes and the health and wellbeing of new jobs more businesses local communities.
Movement for Growth ‘Movement for Growth’, the West Midlands Strategic Transport Plan, sets out improvements to the transport system to support the economic growth and regeneration of the region, support new developments and housing and improve air quality, the environment and social inclusion. 16,000 215,000 additional additional homes hectares of employment land
9 ENHANCED PARTNERSHIP PLAN
Plan area The EP Plan covers the entire area of the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA), excluding the areas within the existing Advanced Quality Partnership Schemes (AQPS) for Birmingham and Wolverhampton city centres and Solihull town centre. Page 142 Page
© Crown copyright 2019 OS 100019543. West Midlands Combined Authority. You are permitted to use this data solely to enable you to respond to, or interact with, the organisation that provided you with the data. You are not permitted to copy, sub-licnence, distribute or sell any of this data to third parties in any form.
10 ENHANCED PARTNERSHIP PLAN OBJECTIVES Objectives The Plan provides the backdrop for specific • Ensuring incident conditions are managed EP Schemes that will detail actions and effectively on a collaborative basis The EP Plan provides the framework to developments to be taken jointly by partners to • Providing a mechanism for sharing data and contribute towards meeting the 9 objectives set deliver a marked improvement in bus services reporting on corridor performance out in the ‘Strategic Vision for Bus’: on certain corridors or in defined areas that will help meet the above objectives, particularly by • UK leading low emission bus fleet with zero speeding up bus journeys times and improving emission corridors serving the most affected journey time reliability. Such schemes may be Strategic Vision for Bus areas of air quality. suggested and promoted by TfWM, constituent Outlining the role of bus in supporting the • Fully integrated bus network, including local authorities or bus operators. overall transport aspirations, ‘Strategic Vision demand responsive and rapid transit for Bus’ sets out the following vision: services supporting interchange with rail, The first EP Scheme to be introduced will coach and Metro to form one network. support the implementation of two Sprint corridors, including improved infrastructure and “A world-class integrated, • Simple, convenient and easy to use payment the operation of high-quality buses, as follows: options, including full capping, providing reliable, zero emission a network which is value for money and • Birmingham Airport and Solihull to transport system providing affordable for customers. Birmingham City Centre (A45) inclusive travel for all across • Fewer private car journeys by making bus • Walsall to Birmingham City Centre (A34) Page 143 Page the mode of choice and creating better the West Midlands, with access to jobs and long-term change. Ultimately, a network of Sprint corridors will be excellent customer service established across the West Midlands, as shown • Creating a safe, secure and accessible mode in Figure 5. and simple payment and for all and tackling long-held barriers and perceptions. The Plan supports the key principles ticketing options. Customers underpinning the provision of Sprint corridors, will be able to make easy • Accountable network performance in respect of: management, tackling issues causing and safe door-to-door congestion and reliability problems. • Providing confidence to operators to invest journeys, benefiting from • World-leading customer information, in high quality vehicles utilising 5G and all available technologies • Ensuring reliable journey time performance new innovative transport and platforms. • Managing access at certain stops solutions that meets the needs • All young people under 25 supported by • Enhanced vehicle standards of a modern and diverse 21st discounted travel, as well as addressing barriers for excluded groups. • Enhanced vehicle environmental standards Century economy, reducing • Evolve a network to support a 24/7 thriving • Vehicle, driver and customer service the reliance on private single economy, connecting people to new and standards are enhanced and maintained occupancy car journeys.” developing destinations and attractions. • Infrastructure is maintained and enforced The 9 key objectives set out in the Vision for • Continued availability of inter-operable Bus also underpin the EP Plan. ticketing
11 11 ENHANCED PARTNERSHIP PLAN Governance A Reference Group, comprising the following, developed this Plan:
• TfWM • Constituent local authorities • Bus operators • Confederation of Passenger Transport • Local Enterprise Partnerships • Bus Users UK • Transport Focus • Birmingham Airport • Neighbouring authorities (as observers)
The Group will be reconvened in the future if Page 144 Page variations to the Plan are necessary.
The Enhanced Partnership is overseen by the West Midlands Bus Alliance and WMCA, who will also monitor progress made towards achieving the EP Plan objectives.
An EP Plan can only exist if there is at least one associated EP Scheme in place. Therefore, for as long as an EP Scheme is in place, a Plan must also be in place.
12 ENHANCED PARTNERSHIP PLAN Small and medium-sized operators The needs of small and medium-sized operators (SMOs) have been considered in the development of the Enhanced Partnership, with opportunities for all bus operators to participate throughout, either through individual discussions or through attendance at the Reference Group meetings. The Plan seeks to support improvements in all aspects of bus provision, regardless of the size of operators providing services. With the Enhanced Partnership Scheme area, smaller operators have been given extended periods to comply with the improved standards. Competition The Enhanced Partnership has been subject
Page 145 Page to the Competition Test as set out in Part 1 of Schedule 10 of the Transport Act 2000. The assessment, undertaken by TfWM and shared with the Competition and Markets Authority, concluded that there will be no adverse impact on competition. The implementation of an Enhanced Partnership Plan and associated Scheme is aimed at delivering improvements to bus services for passengers in a deregulated environment. In particular, this will include improved quality of vehicles and emission standards (minimum standard of Euro VI). All operators in the Enhanced Partnership Scheme area will be required to make improvements in their fleet, which are considered proportionate in respect of the Climate Emergency declared by the WMCA. The Enhanced Partnership will not impact on competition, as operators will be free to amend and introduce services in the area, provided that the standards that apply to all operators are met.
13 ENHANCED PARTNERSHIP PLAN Variations to the Plan If there is not full agreement of all stakeholders Review of the EP Plan present, then the proposed variation will be put Consideration will be given to potential EP to the operator objection mechanism, but with Once the EP Plan is made, it will be reviewed by Plan variations highlighted either by one a reduced objection period of 14 days replacing the EP Plan Reference Group at least annually. of the organisations represented on the EP Part 2 of the Transport Act 2000 section 138L (2) TfWM will initiate each review and it will take no Reference Group or an operator of qualifying (c). The proposed variation will be advertised longer than 6 months to complete. local bus services. The proposer of a variation on the TfWM website and emailed to operators As part of the review process, at least every should demonstrate how this might contribute of qualifying local services in the EP Plan area. 2nd year consideration will be given to the to achieving the objectives set out in the EP If the proposed variation passes the operator appropriateness of the milestone dates for the Plan and current local transport policies. Such objection mechanism, TfWM will make the EP implementation of non-diesel vehicles, which requests should be set out in writing and Plan variation, subject to the approval of the will take into account changes in national and submitted to [email protected]. relevant local highway authorities and TfWM. regional guidance and policy. On receipt of a valid request for a variation, TfWM will reconvene the EP Plan Reference Depending on the outcome of the Outline 5 Group, giving at least 14 days’ notice for the Business Case assessment to consider the meeting, to consider the proposed variation. best future delivery model for bus services in the West Midlands from the Bus Services Act
Page 146 Page If the proposed variation is agreed by all bus operator and local highway authority and TfWM 2017, due to be completed in 2021, it may be representatives present, TfWM will make the EP necessary to review the EP Plan. Plan variation with the relevant local highway authorities. Stakeholders not represented at the meeting will be deemed to be abstaining from Revocation of the EP Plan the decision. If, for some reason, it becomes necessary for the EP Plan to be revoked, the EP Plan Reference Group will be reconvened and follow the same process as outlined in the section ‘Variations to the Scheme’ (noting that the agreement will be for revocation and not variation).
If at any point in the future the EP Plan area is included in a Bus Franchising Area, the relevant requirements set out in this EP Plan document will cease to apply from the commencement date of the Franchising Scheme.
5 As approved by the WMCA Board at its meeting on the 28 June 2019: https://governance.wmca.org.uk/ 14 ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=137&MId=221&Ver=4 APPENDIX A: ACCESSIBILITY BY BUS
Figure A1: AM Peak Journey Times to Birmingham City Centre by Bus (2008 and 2018)
Up to 15 minutes Up to 15 minutes 15 to 30 minutes 15 to 30 minutes 30 to 45 minutes 30 to 45 minutes Page 147 Page 45 to 60 minutes 45 to 60 minutes
2008 2018
Population living within 60 minutes by bus from Birmingham: 1,511,350 in 2008, 1,287,810 in 2018.
© Crown copyright 2019 OS 100019543. West Midlands Combined Authority. You are permitted to use this data solely to enable you to respond to, or interact with, the organisation that provided you with the data. You are not permitted to copy, sub-licnence, distribute or sell any of this data to third parties in any form.
15 APPENDIX A: ACCESSIBILITY BY BUS
Figure A2: AM Peak Journey Times to Coventry City Centre by Bus (2008 and 2018)
Up to 15 minutes Up to 15 minutes Page 148 Page 15 to 30 minutes 15 to 30 minutes 30 to 45 minutes 30 to 45 minutes 45 to 60 minutes 45 to 60 minutes
2008 2018
Population living within 60 minutes by bus from Coventry: 288,603 in 2008, 295,594 in 2018. The increase is due to improved service provision to Solihull.
© Crown copyright 2019 OS 100019543. West Midlands Combined Authority. You are permitted to use this data solely to enable you to respond to, or interact with, the organisation that provided you with the data. You are not permitted to copy, sub-licnence, distribute or sell any of this data to third parties in any form.
16 APPENDIX A: ACCESSIBILITY BY BUS
Figure A3: AM Peak Journey Times to Wolverhampton City Centre by Bus (2008 and 2018)
Up to 15 minutes Up to 15 minutes 15 to 30 minutes 15 to 30 minutes 30 to 45 minutes 30 to 45 minutes Page 149 Page 45 to 60 minutes 45 to 60 minutes
2008 2018
Population living within 60 minutes by bus from Wolverhampton: 712,552 in 2008, 569,458 in 2018.
© Crown copyright 2019 OS 100019543. West Midlands Combined Authority. You are permitted to use this data solely to enable you to respond to, or interact with, the organisation that provided you with the data. You are not permitted to copy, sub-licnence, distribute or sell any of this data to third parties in any form.
17 (actual and scheduled) APPENDIX B: MEASURE OF BUS JOURNEY TIME Real Journey Time (RJT) is a measure of how long passengers allow for a bus journey. This is not just a slowly-extending timetabled journey time, but also the contingency they add for delay, as passengers seek to reduce the risk of significant lateness more than to minimising their total travel time. Research suggests the contingency typically added to make up the RJT is that needed to cover the 95th percentile journey time.
An online tool (www.realjourneytime.co.uk) can be used to measure RJT for many services in the West Midlands. The output of the RJT for a selection of routes (April 2019) highlights some of the poorest passenger experiences of RJT compared with timetabled journey speed (TJS).
AM Peak journey times (mins) Performance measures Real journey Current (all day) Additional (AM peak) Journey from >to Service Timetable time Must add % service punctual RJ Speed /TJ Speed
Bloxwich > Walsall 31/32 12 21 9 65% 57%
Cape Hill > Birmingham 82/87 21 25 4 76% 84%
Foleshill > Coventry 20 13 21 8 69% 62% Page 150 Page
Great Bridge > Birmingham 74 59 68 9 63% 87%
Halesowen > Birmingham 9 63 73 10 74% 86%
Harborne > Birmingham 23/24 25 41 16 80% 61%
Keresley > Coventry 16/A 31 47 16 77% 66%
Maypole > Birmingham 50 31 46 15 58% 67%
Solihull > Birmingham 4 45 55 10 63% 82%
Walsall > Oldbury 4 41 50 9 76% 82%
Wednesfield > Wolverhampton 59 14 22 8 82% 64%
Willenhall > Walsall 529 19 27 8 61% 70%
Wolverhampton > Dudley 1 47 51 4 69% 92%
One approach to improving network performance is to reduce the amount of contingency that passengers need to allow for their journeys, particularly targeting the worst ones first.
18 THIS DEED IS DATED:
PARTY SEALS
(1) THE WEST MIDLANDS (2) BIRMINGHAM CITY (3) COVENTRY CITY (4) DUDLEY METROPOLITAIN COMBINED AUTHORITY COUNCIL of The Council COUNCIL of Council House, BOROUGH COUNCIL of (WMCA) of 16 Summer Lane, House, Victoria Square, Earl Street, Coventry, CV1 5RR Council House, Birmingham, B19 3SD affixed Birmingham B1 1BB affixed affixed hereto in the presence Priory Road, Dudley, DY1 1HF hereto in the presence of its hereto in the presence of its of its duly Authorised Officer affixed hereto in the presence duly Authorised Officer duly Authorised Officer of its duly Authorised Officer Page 151 Page
(5) SANDWELL (6) SOLIHULL (7) WALSALL (8) CITY OF METROPOLITAN BOROUGH METROPOLITAN BOROUGH METROPOLITAN BOROUGH WOLVERHAMPTON COUNCIL of Sandwell Council COUNCIL of Council House, COUNCIL of Civic Centre, COUNCIL of Civic House, Freeth Street, Oldbury, Manor Square, Solihull, West Darwall Street, Walsall, Centre, St. Peter’s Square, B69 3DE affixed hereto in Midlands, B91 3QB affixed WS1 1TP affixed hereto in Wolverhampton, WV1 1SH the presence of its duly hereto in the presence of its the presence of its duly affixed hereto in the presence Authorised Officer duly Authorised Officer Authorised Officer of its duly Authorised Officer
19 Page 152 Page
Transport for West Midlands Building a healthier, happier, better connected 16 Summer Lane, Birmingham, B19 3SD | 0345 303 6760 and more prosperous West Midlands. To request a copy of this document in a different format, please get in touch. 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
West Midlands Enhanced Partnership Scheme for Buses
Supporting the development of bus services on two corridors: A34(N) Walsall – Birmingham City Centre and A45 Birmingham Airport / B425 Solihull – Birmingham City Centre
1 Page 153 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Contents
Organisations Making the Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425 . 4
Definitions used in the document ...... 5
1. Introduction ...... 9
2. Scope of the EP Scheme ...... 11
3. Requirements of the Authorities ...... 14
4. Requirements in respect of qualifying local bus services ...... 21
5. EP Scheme Management ...... 32
Schedule A: List of qualifying local services as of 09/11/2020 ...... 35
Schedule B: Facilities provided and maintained by local highway authorities ...... 37
Schedule C: Bus stops, shelters and information ...... 50
Schedule D: Reporting Mechanisms to Local Highway Authorities and Transport for West Midlands ...... 57
Schedule E: Maps of the EP Scheme area ...... 63
Signatory page ...... 67
Table 1 Obligations for buses of 15m-18.75m length ...... 21 Table 2 Obligations for Double Deck vehicles not operating on designated feeder services 22 Table 3 Obligations for Single Deck vehicles not operating on designated feeder services of operators with less than 21 local service buses...... 24 Table 4 Obligations for Single Deck vehicles not operating on designated feeder services of operators with more than 20 local service buses ...... 26 Table 5 Obligations for vehicles of operators on Designated feeder services ...... 28 Table 6 Qualifying services on the A45 / B425 corridor as of 09/11/2020 ...... 35 Table 7 Qualifying services on the A34 (N) corridor as of 09/11/2020 ...... 36 Table 8 Current bus lanes to be maintained ...... 37 Table 9 New bus lanes to be provided by 30/06/2022 ...... 39 Table 10 New bus lanes to be provided by a future target date of 31/12/2024 ...... 42 Table 11 Bus lane enforcement locations ...... 44 Table 12 Bus gates to be implemented by 30/06/2022 ...... 46 Table 13 Bus gates to be implemented by a future target date of 31/12/2024 ...... 46 Table 14 Traffic signal upgrades to be implemented by 30/06/2022 ...... 47
2 Page 154 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Table 15 Traffic signal upgrades to be implemented by a future target date of 31/12/2024 . 47 Table 16 Pedestrian crossings to be upgraded by 30/06/2022 ...... 49 Table 17 Pedestrian crossings to be upgraded by a future target date of 31/12/2024 ...... 49 Table 18 Enhanced bus stops on the A34 towards Birmingham City Centre ...... 51 Table 19 Enhanced bus stops on the A34 towards Walsall ...... 52 Table 20 Enhanced bus stops on the A45 towards Birmingham City Centre ...... 53 Table 21 Enhanced bus stops on the A45 towards Birmingham Airport/Solihull ...... 54 Table 22 Enhanced bus stands to be implemented by a future target date of 31/12/2024 ... 55 Table 23 Designated feeder service Bus Stands ...... 56
Figure 1 Map of the EP Plan and EP Scheme ...... 13 Figure 2 Indicative map of enhanced bus stops to be provided on the A34 corridor (MAP TO BE UPDATED) ...... 63 Figure 3 Indicative map of bus lanes to be provided on the A34 corridor...... 64 Figure 4 Indicative map of enhanced bus stops to be provided on the A45 and Lode Lane corridor (MAP TO BE UPDATED) ...... 65 Figure 5 Indicative map of bus lanes to be provided on the A45 and Lode Lane corridor .... 66
3 Page 155 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Organisations Making the Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
THE WEST MIDLANDS ENHANCED PARTNERSHIP SCHEME FOR BUSES IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 138R(1) OF THE TRANSPORT ACT 2000 BY:
(1) THE WEST MIDLANDS COMBINED AUTHORITY (WMCA) of 16 Summer Lane, Birmingham, B19 3SD;
(2) BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL of The Council House, Victoria Square, Birmingham B1 1BB;
(3) SANDWELL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL of Sandwell Council House, Freeth Street, Oldbury, B69 3DE;
(4) SOLIHULL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL of Council House, Manor Square, Solihull, West Midlands, B91 3QB;
(5) WALSALL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL of Civic Centre, Darwall Street, Walsall, WS1 1TP.
4 Page 156 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Definitions used in the document
AQPS – means an Advanced Quality Partnership Scheme made pursuant to section 114(1) of the Transport Act 2000 [as amended by the Local Transport Act 2008 and the Bus Services Act 2017].
Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) – is a means for automatically determining and transmitting the geographic location of a vehicle, allowing it to be tracked in real time.
Bus Franchising Area – an area in which a statutory franchising scheme operates, as prescribed in the Transport Act 2000, as amended by the Bus Services Act 2017 (section 123). Bus services in the area are controlled and specified by the transport authority, with bus operators providing services under one or more contracts.
Bus Gate – is a short stretch of road carriageway that is restricted to use by buses and (where specified) taxis and other authorised vehicles as indicated on appropriate signage on the approach.
Bus Lane – is a signposted lane, designated for use by buses and (where specified) taxis and other authorised vehicles, at the times also indicated by signage.
Bus lane enforcement – means the action taken to ensure that bus lanes are used only by authorised vehicles. This is often carried out by using cameras to record unauthorised use, with the issue of civil penalties to offenders under section 144 of the Transport Act 2000.
Bus Stand – means a bus stop clearway as defined in accordance with paragraph 1(a) of Part 1 to Schedule 19 of The Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 but which will permit a local bus to stand within the clearway for as long as maybe necessary up to a maximum period of 10 minutes.
CCTV – means closed circuit television system, whereby static or mobile cameras are used to record offences or for surveillance and security purposes.
CVRAS – means Clean Vehicle Retrofit Accreditation Scheme (CVRAS) and is a certification scheme for manufacturers of retrofit emissions reduction technology that will enable Clean Air Zone (CAZ) compliance of legacy fleet vehicles to address the air pollution emissions from buses.
Designated feeder service – means a bus service that is specifically designed by the operator and accepted by Transport for West Midlands as one that connects with another service allowing passengers to interchange at designated stops or stands
5 Page 157 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Enforcement camera – means a roadside camera that records and produces suitable evidence of unauthorised use of bus lanes or bus gates for the local highway authority to issue civil penalties under section 144 of the Transport Act 2000.
EP Scheme Area – means the area to which this EP Scheme document applies; namely the A34 (Birmingham to Walsall), A45 (Birmingham to Birmingham Airport) and B425 Lode Lane (Yardley to Solihull) corridors.
Euro VI equivalent standards – Euro VI diesel bus or a bus with CVRAS approved technologies retrofitted to a diesel bus to reduce NOx and PM emissions and achieve Euro VI equivalent standards
Facilities – means the physical assets that are provided at specific locations along particular routes (or parts of routes) within the EP scheme area or new and improved bus priority measures. This is deemed for such purposes of section 138D(1) of the Transport Act 2000.
Measures – means the improvements with the aim of: • Increasing the use of local bus service serving the routes to which the measures relate or ending or reducing a decline in their use; or • Improving the quality of local bus service.
Slot Booking System – means the system and process set out to manage the number of buses using a particular bus stop and their headway.
Local Authorities – as prescribed under section 23 of the Local Government Act 2003.
Local Highway Authorities – this is a local authority with responsibility for the maintenance of highway infrastructure in its local authority area. In the case of this EP Scheme, this means either Birmingham City Council, Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council, Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council or Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council.
Local transport authority – collectively means the West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) and Transport for West Midlands (TfWM).
Local Qualifying Bus Services – means those Registered Local Bus Services operating within the EP Scheme area that must meet the requirements and obligations set out in the EP Scheme document.
Multi-Operator Capping – means a common fares and ticketing system, applied across multiple bus operators, that will cap a user’s travel cost according to the lowest price available for the journey or journeys made.
6 Page 158 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Multi-Operator Ticketing – means a common fares and ticketing system applied and accepted by multiple operators. In the West Midlands this currently means nBus and nNetwork products.
Network Stability Protocol – this covers the specified dates through the year, agreed between WMCA and bus operators, on which local bus service changes take place.
Real Time Information – using technology to track the location of buses in real time, information is transmitted to bus stops or devices to indicate to passengers the predicted arrival time at a particular point.
Registered Local Bus Service – has the meaning set out in Section 2 of the Transport Act 1985.
Strategic Vision for Bus – approved in November 2018 by the WMCA to provide a clear view of what the region requires from its bus network. The Vision supports the region’s Strategic Economic Plan and supporting West Midlands Strategic Transport Plan “Movement for Growth” in defining a longer-term strategy for bus in the West Midlands.
Highway Works Permit – is a permit issued by local highway authorities to any organisation that wishes to undertake street works promoted by a public utility company or highway works promoted by the Local Highway Authority, with the aim of managing all works on the public highway. Local authorities have powers to operate permit schemes under Part 3 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 and The Traffic Management Permit Scheme (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2015.
Swift – is the brand name for smartcard ticketing products promoted and managed by Transport for West Midlands and that can be used on all public transport modes.
TRO – means a Traffic Regulation Order, made under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 or any other enactment regulating the use of roads or other places.
Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) – means the organisation within the West Midlands Combined Authority with responsibility for transport.
West Midlands Bus Alliance – established in 2015, this is an alliance of bus operators, local councils, and other partners that have agreed to work together to deliver high levels of passenger satisfaction and drive forward investment in bus services.
7 Page 159 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
West Midlands Enhanced Partnership Plan – means the document made pursuant to section 138A of the Transport Act 2000 and which is required to be in place for an EP Scheme to be made.
Zero emission vehicle – means a vehicle that emits no pollutants at its tailpipe.
8 Page 160 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
1. Introduction 1.1 This document fulfils the statutory requirements set out by the Bus Services Act 2017 for an Enhanced Partnership (EP) Scheme. In accordance with statutory requirements in section 138 of the Transport Act 2000, this EP Scheme document sets out: • Area covered (Section 2) • Commencement date (Section 2) • Overall interventions to be made by the authorities (Section 3) • Requirements imposed on local qualifying bus services (Section 4) • Details for reviewing the operation of the EP Scheme (Section 5)
1.2 The EP Scheme can only be put in place if an associated Enhanced Partnership Plan has been made. Therefore, this document should be considered alongside the West Midlands Enhanced Partnership Plan.
1.3 The EP Scheme has been jointly developed by Transport for West Midlands (TfWM), local highway authorities and those bus operators that provide local qualifying bus services in the EP Scheme area. The EP Scheme aims to support improvements to bus services on two corridors. It sets out obligations and requirements on both the local transport authority, local highway authorities and operators in order to achieve the intended improvements, with the aim of passengers benefitting from attractive and convenient bus services.
1.4 The EP Scheme aims to contribute towards meeting the 9 objectives set out in the ‘Strategic Vision for Bus1: 1. UK leading low emission bus fleet with zero emission corridors serving the most affected areas of air quality. 2. Fully integrated bus network, including demand responsive and rapid transit services supporting interchange with rail, coach and Metro to form one network. 3. Simple, convenient and easy to use payment options, with fare capping, providing a network which is value for money and affordable for customers.
1 https://www.tfwm.org.uk/media/38969/final-strategic-vision-for-bus.pdf
9 Page 161 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
4. Fewer private car journeys by making bus the mode of choice and creating better access to jobs and long-term change. 5. Creating a safe, secure and accessible mode for all and tackling long-held barriers and perceptions. 6. Accountable network performance management, tackling issues causing congestion and reliability problems. 7. World-leading customer information, utilising 5G and all available technologies and platforms. 8. All young people under 25 years supported by discounted travel, as well as addressing barriers for excluded groups. 9. Evolve a network to support a 24/7 thriving economy, connecting people to new and developing destinations and attractions.
10 Page 162 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
2. Scope of the EP Scheme 2.1 The EP Scheme will support the improvement of all local bus services operating in the following two corridor areas:
2.1.1 Walsall to Birmingham City Centre (A34(N)) 2.1.2 Birmingham City Centre to Birmingham Airport and Solihull Town Centre (A45 / B425)
2.2 The EP Scheme does not include the areas of the current Advanced Quality Partnership Scheme (AQPS) for Birmingham City Centre and Solihull Town Centre, as there can be no overlap between different types of AQPS and EP Schemes. A map of the EP Plan and EP Scheme is shown in Figure 1.
2.3 The EP Scheme start date will be 70 days after it has been made, with subsequent milestone dates by which certain facilities and measures (Section 3) and bus service operator obligations will be introduced (Section 4). The EP Scheme will have no specific end date but will be subject to a review by TfWM at least annually (Section 5).
2.4 Registered Local Bus Services with one or more stopping places within the EP Scheme area are classed as ‘qualifying local services’, except those with locally-agreed exemptions, as set out below:
2.4.1 Services run under sections 89 to 91 of the Transport Act 1985 where the authority retains all the revenue. 2.4.2 Registered local services that are excursions or tours. 2.4.3 Services operated under section 22 of the Transport Act 1985 (community bus services). 2.4.4 Services that have 10% or less of their overall distance registered as local bus services. 2.4.5 Services operated by vehicles that by law do not permit standing. 2.4.6 Services operating under contract to local transport authorities outside of the area of the West Midlands Combined Authority2.
2.5 Bus services where all journeys operate under contract to WMCA through TfWM, will not need to comply with the vehicle requirements set out in this document for the duration of the current contract period, with the exception of the Euro VI equivalent standards engine standard or better by 28th April 2021. Any services procured after the making of the EP Scheme must comply with the Scheme requirements.
2 As defined in the West Midlands Combined Authority Constitution
11 Page 163 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
2.6 A list of qualifying local bus services (as of 9th November 2020) is given in Schedule A.
2.7 Before the expiry of the Birmingham City Centre AQPS (9th July 2022) and Solihull Town Centre AQPS (20th November 2027), TfWM will review these schemes to determine whether the boundaries between the AQPS and EP Scheme areas should be amended. Such reviews will commence by July 2021. Any proposed amendments to the EP Scheme will be determined through the EP Scheme variation process outlined in section 5.
12 Page 164 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Figure 1 Map of the EP Plan and EP Scheme
Page 165 Page
13
09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
3. Requirements of the Authorities
Facilities – Transport for West Midlands
3.1 TfWM will provide the Facilities detailed in Schedule B2 to B6. These include: 1. New bus lanes 2. Bus Gates 3. Pedestrian crossing upgrades 4. Traffic signal upgrades
3.2 TfWM will provide new bus stop infrastructure at locations listed in Schedule C1 to C3, prior to the introduction of the standards for buses of 15m-18.75m length.
3.3 The bus stops to be improved, as detailed in Schedule C1 to C3, will incorporate: 1. Real time information displays 2. Lighting 3. CCTV for security 4. Bench seating
3.4 TfWM will maintain bus stop infrastructure in accordance with the standards set out in Schedule D5.
Facilities – Local Highway Authorities
3.5 Each local highway authority will maintain all existing (Schedule B1) and new facilities (Schedules B2 to B6) in good order for the use of qualifying local bus services in accordance with its published Highway Maintenance policies and procedures.
3.6 Local highway authorities will endeavour to protect these bus stops, where required by partners, by appropriate Bus Stop Clearway Orders, or other suitable action to ensure passengers have un-restricted access to the qualifying local bus services. Any changes requiring the introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) will be subject to the statutory consultation process.
14 Page 166 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Provision of Measures – Local Highway Authorities
3.7 The following measures will be provided by the local highway authorities in the EP Scheme Area: 1. Local Highway Authority Mechanisms and Procedures 2. Bus lane enforcement 3. Junction enforcement 4. Managing highway works in the EP Scheme Area 5. Management and co-ordination of specific highway works
Local Highway Authority Mechanisms and Procedures
3.8 The reporting mechanisms for each local highway authority are shown in Schedule D (D1 to D4). Should the telephone numbers, email addresses or other aspects of the reporting procedures provided in Schedule D1 to D4 change, local highway authorities will inform TfWM and bus operators operating in the EP Scheme area at least 1 week in advance of the change via email to the bus operators and to [email protected].
3.9 Each local highway authority will use its powers and resources to enforce Traffic Regulation Orders, to improve compliance and make journey times for bus reliable.
Bus lane enforcement
3.10 Local highway authorities will use the discretionary powers granted in the Traffic Management Act 2004 to enforce bus lanes with CCTV equipment. The local highway authorities are approved local authorities under The Bus Lane Contraventions (Approved Local Authorities) (England) Order 2005 for the purposes of section 144 of the Transport Act 2000 (Civil Penalties for Bus Lane Contraventions).
3.11 The Enforcement cameras and recording systems will be approved in accordance with the requirements of The Bus Lanes (Approved Devices) (England) Order 2005.
3.12 Local highway authorities will implement an evidence-based assessment process to help determine the initial need and continued operational business case of any enforcement system used under this EP scheme, which must be provided and operated with due consideration to the whole enforcement process and the requirements of the Investigatory Powers Commissioner's Office.
15 Page 167 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
3.13 Should a local highway authority deem it necessary to relocate an Enforcement camera then it will provide a response as to the reasons why to the EP Reference Group.
3.14 A list of potential sites for Enforcement cameras to be installed is provided in Schedule B3, Table 11.
Junction Enforcement
3.15 If additional powers are provided to local highway authorities or WMCA to deter vehicles from blocking junctions, these will be taken up and used in the EP Scheme area. Bus operators will be able to report problem areas for enforcement action through the same processes given by the local highway authorities in Schedule D, unless otherwise notified.
Managing Highway works in the EP scheme area
3.16 Each local highway authority will establish mechanisms by the EP Scheme commencement date to minimise disruption to qualifying local bus services from both planned and emergency highway works, in accordance with the New Roads and Street Works Act (1991) available under a noticing scheme.
3.17 Each local highway authority will commit to investigating implementation of Highway Lane Rental Schemes 12 months after the implementation of the relevant permitting scheme referenced in section 3.16.
3.18 Where bus operators report a highway issue affecting bus travel to a local highway authority for investigation, they must also report the matter to TfWM using the [email protected] email address.
Management and co-ordination of specific highway works
3.19 Birmingham City Council (BCC) will work with TfWM, Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council, Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council and relevant local bus operators to maximise the benefits to bus users of the changes to the transport network in the Perry Barr area. This will include BCC holding meetings with those partners, at least monthly, through the Perry Barr Cross Partner (Transport) Mitigations Group, to minimise bus disruption during construction by seeking to coordinate programmed activities, maximise available road space for bus and minimise traffic demand along the whole corridor, but particularly through the Perry Barr area, before and during the changes to the transport network in the Perry Barr area.
3.20 When necessary for future major highway works impacting bus travel in the scheme area, the relevant lead local highway authority will work with the relevant partners, including local bus operators, to maximise the benefits to bus
16 Page 168 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
users of the changes to the transport network and minimise bus disruption during construction. Any partner can make a request for partner mitigation groups to major highway works, as they deem necessary.
17 Page 169 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Provision of Measures – Transport for West Midlands 3.21 The following measures will be provided by TfWM in the EP Scheme Area: 1. Promoting and prioritising bus travel 2. Monitoring of bus journey times 3. Helping the delivery of transport during Birmingham Commonwealth Games 2022 4. Working closely with stakeholders 5. Integration with other sustainable travel modes 6. Slot Booking System
Promoting and prioritising bus travel in the EP Scheme Area
3.22 TfWM will actively promote bus travel in the EP Scheme area through the actions within its Communication Strategy and those of the Bus Alliance Communications and Marketing Steering Group.
Monitoring of bus journey times
3.23 TfWM will monitor bus journey times in the EP Scheme area by collecting and analysing Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) data and reporting these on a quarterly basis. The following measures will be made and compared with a first quarter baseline (after the EP Scheme is made) for each service that operates more than two journeys per day between defined stop points (as detailed in section 3.25): 1. RJT or Real Journey Time (95th percentile journey time) 2. TJT or Timetabled Journey Time 3. CT or Contingency Time passengers must allow = RJT – TJT 4. Performance against TJT of TJT with CT added = % (TJT / (TJT + CT)) = % (TJT / RJT)
3.24 Measurements will be made on stop pairs (defined by TfWM) during the morning and afternoon peak periods (07:00-10:00 and 15:30-18:30) within the EP Scheme Area linking: 1. A local centre with its nearest district centre 2. A local centre with its nearest strategic centre 3. A district centre with its nearest strategic centre 4. Two strategic centres
3.25 This data will be published on TfWM’s website and used to identify the need for further possible measures, facilities and influence on the management of roadworks in the EP Scheme area.
3.26 Through its monitoring of bus journey times, TfWM will influence the management and mitigation of roadworks by local highway authorities in order
18 Page 170 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
to minimise disruption to bus services and inconvenience to bus passengers in the EP Scheme Area.
An EP scheme to help the delivery of transport during Birmingham Commonwealth Games 2022 3.27 The EP Scheme will be used as a tool in the ‘Games Strategic Transport Plan’, compiled by TfWM to ensure people in the EP Scheme area can continue to travel around the region during the Commonwealth Games. Certain key improvements and works will be completed by the start of the Games, helping to minimise disruption. This will include the development of an interchange at Perry Barr, offering a gateway for the games. Working closely with stakeholders 3.28 TfWM will work with key stakeholders at Birmingham Airport and Network Rail to promote the best possible interchange facilities and routing around Birmingham Airport and Birmingham International Station. Integration with other sustainable travel modes
3.29 Improved access for people to and from bus stop infrastructure, and to board and alight buses will be considered. Pavement audits provide one means to identify improvements for the needs of pedestrians in areas of interchange, which can be investigated when identified by partners.
3.30 The current Local Cycling and Walking Investment Plan (LCWIP) identifies infrastructure within the Scheme area3. Bus and active travel modes need to be integrated to ensure high quality improvements are delivered that enhance sustainable travel. This will consider improvements to bus stop design to allow for safe bus passenger access, whilst considering the needs of other non- motorised users as referenced in the West Midlands Cycle Design Guidance4.
Slot booking system
3.31 TfWM may introduce a ‘Slot Booking System’ at a stop in the EP Scheme area in situations where TfWM or an operator highlight the inability of that stop to accommodate all scheduled departures. Stops in this position will be considered on a case by case basis. An operator wishing to request consideration of slot booking at a particular stop should do so by emailing [email protected] . 3.32 TfWM will review the slot booking system, together with any stops to which such a system is applied, based on demand and quality, when requested or when the threshold of a full slot allocation is reached at a bus stop. This will be
3 https://www.tfwm.org.uk/media/47547/feb19-759487472899466-lcwip-roadmap_v30.pdf 4 https://www.tfwm.org.uk/media/2713/2019-07-15-wm-guidance-wcovers.pdf
19 Page 171 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
reviewed against a quality framework process agreed through the West Midlands Bus Alliance within a 28-day period. 3.33 Operators wishing to use a stop that is subject to slot booking must submit a request for slots to TfWM. Such requests should be emailed to [email protected] at least 14 days prior to submitting the service registration or variation to TfWM (itself at least 70 days before the service takes effect).
20 Page 172 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
4. Requirements in respect of qualifying local bus services Vehicle standards
4.1 Vehicles used on qualifying local bus services will be required to meet specified standards, dependent on their type and age. These will apply differently according to the number of vehicles deployed on local bus services by each operator.
4.2 The implementation period for completing obligations for buses of 15m-18.75m length are detailed in Table 1:
Table 1 Obligations for buses of 15m-18.75m length Phase Obligations for buses of 15m-18.75m length Milestone date 1 All vehicles will have: On • Multiple doors for boarding and alighting completion • Zero emission (at tailpipe), as deemed zero emission (at tailpipe) of enhanced infrastructure by TfWM. listed in • Heating and cooling for customer comfort Table 9 • Ability to pay for tickets by contactless payment Table 11 Table 12 • Audio visual announcements: Table 18 o Next stop audio announcements, including through an Table 19 induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and Table 20 priority seats. Table 21
o Next stop visual announcements. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle. • A display showing onward connection details by bus (including Designated feeder services), train, Metro or air, where applicable, from open data sources. • CCTV installed. This will provide images inside the vehicle for the safety and security of passengers. A forward-facing camera will help identify issues with traffic and road conditions. • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • USB charging available, including at every wheelchair spaces and priority seats • Free Wi-Fi • A specific livery agreed with TfWM
21 Page 173 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
4.3 The implementation period for completing obligations for Double Deck vehicles not operating on Designated feeder services are detailed in Table 2:
Table 2 Obligations for Double Deck vehicles not operating on designated feeder services Phase Obligations for Double Deck vehicles not operating on designated Milestone feeder services date 1 New vehicles registered on or after the EP scheme start date must meet Scheme the following requirements: start date • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic issues. • Free Wi-Fi • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • USB charging available, including at every wheelchair space and priority seats • Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements on both decks, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements on both decks. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers on both decks to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers on both decks to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle. • A display showing onward connection details by bus, train, metro or air, where applicable, from open data sources. • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. 2 All vehicles will have: 28/04/2021 • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic issues • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. 3 All vehicles will have: 29/05/2022 • Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements on both decks, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements on both decks
22 Page 174 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers on both decks to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers on both decks to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle. • A display showing onward connection details by bus, train, metro or air, where applicable, from open data sources. • Free Wi-Fi 4 New Vehicles registered on or after 25/05/25 will have: 25/05/2025 • Vehicles must be non-diesel. 5 All vehicles will have: 26/05/2030 • Vehicles must be non-diesel.
23 Page 175 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
4.4 The implementation period for completing obligations for standard Single Deck vehicles not operating on Designated feeder services of operators with less than 21 local service buses, are detailed in Table 3:
Table 3 Obligations for Single Deck vehicles not operating on designated feeder services of operators with less than 21 local service buses Phase Obligations for Single Deck vehicles not operating on designated Milestone feeder services of operators with less than 21 local service buses date 1 New vehicles registered on or after the EP scheme start date must Scheme meet the following requirements: start date • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic issues. • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • USB charging available, including at every wheelchair space and priority seats • Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle. • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. 2 All vehicles will have: 28/04/2021 • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic issues • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. 3 All vehicles will have: 25/05/2026 • Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle.
24 Page 176 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
• A display showing onward connection details by bus, train, metro or air, where applicable from open data sources 4 New Vehicles registered on or after 25/05/26 must meet the following 25/05/2026 requirements: • Vehicles must be non-diesel. 5 All vehicles will have: 29/05/2033 • Vehicles must be non-diesel.
25 Page 177 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
4.5 The implementation period for completing obligations for standard Single Deck vehicles not operating on Designated feeder services of operators with more than 20 local service buses, are detailed in Table 4:
Table 4 Obligations for Single Deck vehicles not operating on designated feeder services of operators with more than 20 local service buses Phase Obligations for Single Deck vehicles not operating on designated feeder Milestone services of operators with more than 20 local service buses date 1 New vehicles registered on or after the EP scheme start date must meet Scheme the following requirements: start date • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic issues. • Free Wi-Fi • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • USB charging available, including at every wheelchair space and priority seats • Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle. • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. 2 All vehicles will have: 28/04/2021 • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic issues • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. 3 All vehicles will have: 29/05/2022 • Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle.
26 Page 178 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
• A display showing onward connection details by bus, train, metro or air, where applicable, from open data sources. 4 New Vehicles registered on or after 25/05/25 will have: 25/05/2025 • Vehicles must be non-diesel. 6 All vehicles will have: 26/05/2030 • Vehicles must be non-diesel.
27 Page 179 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
4.6 If requested by an operator and in agreement with TfWM or designated by TfWM, a service that is specifically designed to connect with services at interchange points outlined in Schedule C3 Table 23, may be defined as a Designated feeder Service. Vehicles on such services will carry additional branding and have a co-ordinated timetable to facilitate connections.
4.7 The implementation period for completing obligations for vehicles used on Designated feeder services are detailed in Table 5:
Table 5 Obligations for vehicles of operators on Designated feeder services Phase Obligations for vehicles of operators on Designated feeder services Milestone date 1 New vehicles registered on or after the EP scheme start date must Scheme meet the following requirements: start date • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic issues. • Free Wi-Fi • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • USB charging available, including at every wheelchair spaces and priority seats • Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle. • A display showing onward connection details for bus services operating in the Scheme area. • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. • A specific livery agreed with TfWM 2 All vehicles will have: 28/04/2021 • Euro VI equivalent standards or better • CCTV installed for safety and security. This will provide images inside the vehicle for safety and security and also facing forwards from the vehicle to help identify traffic and road maintenance issues • Automatic Vehicle Location equipment installed that will feed into TfWM’s real time information system • Heating and cooling for customer comfort • Option to pay for tickets through contactless ticketing. 3 All vehicles will have: 29/05/2022
28 Page 180 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
• Audio visual announcements: o Next stop audio announcements, including through an induction hearing loop at every wheelchair space and priority seats. o Next stop visual announcements. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through audio announcements on the vehicle. o Take all reasonable steps to alert passengers to route diversions through visual displays on the vehicle. • A display showing onward connection details by bus, train, metro or air, where applicable, from open data sources. • A specific livery agreed with TfWM 4 New Vehicles registered on or after 25/05/25 will have: 25/05/2025 • Vehicles must be non-diesel. 5 All vehicles will have: 26/05/2030 • Vehicles must be non-diesel.
29 Page 181 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Timetable changes
4.8 Qualifying local bus services within the EP Scheme Area may only be changed on the dates agreed with TfWM and in line with the Network Stability Protocol. In exceptional circumstances, and in agreement with TfWM, services may be changed on other dates.
4.9 Copies of registration applications and variations must be submitted to TfWM with at least 70 days’ notice before the service takes effect.
Ticketing schemes.
4.10 The following ticket types must be offered and accepted by relevant services in the EP Scheme Area, subject to their validity in the given ticket types area. Services offering no more than 2 journeys in each direction per day (as highlighted in the Tables of qualifying services in Schedule A), will not be required to participate in the multi-operator ticketing scheme. The overall schemes for these tickets will be managed by TfWM. The following ticket types must be offered: 1. nBus (full suite) 2. nNetwork (full suite)
4.11 Ticket vending machines may be provided by TfWM at some selected bus stops. These will be capable of selling operators’ own tickets, as well as network tickets. Operators wishing to use this facility will need to agree an arrangement and fee with TfWM.
4.12 Subject to TfWM progressing multi-operator capping schemes, the following ticket types must be offered and accepted by all services in the EP scheme (excluding those services offering no more than 2 journeys in each direction per day): 1. Multi-operator capping on TfWM’s Swift smartcard 2. Multi-operator capping contactless
4.13 Advertisements carried on ticket rears on qualifying services (including campaigns on behalf of TfWM) should not conflict with the required standards outlined below, which supplement the requirements of the Advertising Codes. The regulation of advertising in the UK is the responsibility of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA). The ASA applies the Advertising Codes which are written by the Committees of Advertising Practice (CAP). Advertising will not be acceptable if: 1. It is likely to cause widespread or serious offence to reasonable members of the public on account of the product or service being advertised, the content or design of the advertisement, or by way of implication;
30 Page 182 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
2. It relates to lap-dancing, ‘gentlemen’s clubs’, escort agencies, massage parlours, or unproven health and weight loss products; 3. It promotes (directly or indirectly) food or non-alcoholic drink which is high in fat, salt and/or sugar (‘HFSS’ products), according to the Nutrient Profiling Model managed by Public Health England. It is for the advertiser to demonstrate (in case of any doubt) that any product is not HFSS, and/or that an advertisement is not promoting HFSS products, and/or that there are exceptional grounds. 4. It is unacceptable for some other substantial reason (which TfWM will identify and explain as reasonably required).
Providing information to the public
4.14 Operators providing multi-operator tickets will display a range of nBus and nNetwork day ticket prices at the point of entry to buses on qualifying local bus services using information posters provided by TfWM.
4.15 nBus and nNetwork information will be provided and maintained by TfWM on displays at bus stops.
4.16 Operators will display details of relevant planned route changes and timetable changes on vehicles at least 2 weeks prior and 1 week following the change.
4.17 Operators will publish the bus journey times data collected and processed by TfWM (referred to in section 3.23 – 3.26) on their website and on buses in the scheme area, as a minimum for the public.
The West Midlands Bus Alliance Customer Charter
4.18 Operators of qualifying local bus services will display the principles of the West Midlands Bus Alliance Customer Charter on all their buses in the EP Scheme Area. This must include a means of contacting the local bus service operator with comments or complaints and an escalation option if the passenger is not satisfied with the response they receive. This escalation option should be a registered Alternative Dispute Resolution body. Copies of the Customer Charter can be provided by TfWM if requested to [email protected].
31 Page 183 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
5. EP Scheme Management . Governance
5.1 The EP Scheme has been developed by an EP Scheme Reference Group of partners and directly impacted and interested stakeholders, comprising:
Partners
5.1.1 Transport for West Midlands (part of the West Midlands Combined Authority) 5.1.2 Birmingham City Council 5.1.3 Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council 5.1.4 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council 5.1.5 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council 5.1.6 Bus operators providing qualifying local bus services
Stakeholders
5.1.7 Birmingham Airport 5.1.8 Bus Users UK 5.1.9 Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT) 5.1.10 Greater Birmingham & Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership 5.1.11 Transport Focus
5.2 The Group will be responsible for considering future variations, in accordance with the processes detailed in sections 5.3 to 5.5.
Variations to the EP Scheme
5.3 Consideration will be given to potential EP Scheme variations highlighted either by one of the organisations represented on the EP Reference Group or an operator of qualifying local bus services. The proposer of a variation should demonstrate how this might contribute to achieving the objectives set out in the EP Plan and current local transport policies. Such requests should be set out in writing and submitted to [email protected].
5.4 On receipt of a valid request for a variation, TfWM will reconvene the EP Scheme Reference Group, giving at least 14 days’ notice for the meeting, to consider the proposed variation. If the proposed variation is agreed by all bus operator and local highway authority and TfWM representatives present, TfWM will make the EP Scheme variation, subject to the approval of the relevant local highway authorities and TfWM. Partners not represented at the meeting will be deemed to be abstaining from the decision.
5.5 If there is not full agreement of all partners present, then the proposed variation will be put to the operator objection mechanism, but with a reduced objection
32 Page 184 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
period of 14 days replacing Part 2 of the Transport Act 2000 section 138L (2) (c). The proposed variation will be advertised on the TfWM website and emailed to operators of qualifying local services in the EP Scheme area. If the proposed variation passes the operator objection mechanism, TfWM will make the EP Scheme variation, subject to the approval of the relevant local highway authorities and TfWM.
Review of the EP Scheme
5.6 Once the EP Scheme is made, it will be reviewed by the EP Scheme Reference Group at least annually, commencing no later than on the anniversary of the scheme commencement date. TfWM will initiate each review and it will take no longer than 6 months to complete.
5.7 As part of the review process, at least every 2nd year consideration will be given to the appropriateness of the milestone dates for the implementation of non- diesel vehicles, which will take into account changes in national and regional guidance and policy.
5.8 Depending on the outcome of the Outline Business Case5 assessment to consider the best future delivery model for bus services in the West Midlands from the Bus Services Act 2017, due to be completed in 2021, it may be necessary to review the EP Scheme.
5.9 Should Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) required for the facilities listed in Schedule B2, Table 9, not be made, TfWM will recognise the need to vary the EP Scheme for section 4.2 (Table 1) through the variation process set out in sections 5.3 to 5.5. Any such necessary changes will be considered as part of the first annual review.
5.10 Any changes to the future target dates within Table 13, Table 15, Table 17, Table 22 will be agreed, as required, between TfWM and the relevant local highway authority responsible for maintaining the infrastructure, and automatically varied in the EP Scheme, without the need to follow the variation process set out in sections 5.3 to 5.5.
5.11 The audio visual announcement requirements, set out in Table 1 to Table 5 inclusive, will be automatically amended, as necessary, to align with national legislation, when adopted, without the need for a variation to the EP Scheme. This will not change the milestone dates in the EP Scheme or the requirements specified for every wheelchair space.
5 As approved by the WMCA Board at its meeting on the 28 June 2019: https://governance.wmca.org.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=137&MId=221&Ver=4
33 Page 185 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
5.12 Any changes to the contact information contained in Schedule D, will be automatically updated, without the need to follow the variation process set out in sections 5.3 to 5.5. This only applies to amendments to existing contact information or additional information with regard to the mechanism for reporting issues. Any proposal to remove a mechanism for reporting issues will be subject to the variation process set out in sections 5.3 to 5.5.
Revocation of the EP Scheme
5.13 An EP Scheme can only exist if an EP Plan is in place. If, for any reason, the EP Plan is revoked, it would automatically mean that the EP Scheme would cease. Equally, if all EP Schemes ceased, the EP Plan would be revoked.
5.14 If, for some reason, it becomes necessary for the EP Scheme to be revoked, the EP Scheme Reference Group will be reconvened and follow the same process as outlined in sections 5.3 to 5.5 (noting that the agreement will be for revocation and not variation).
5.15 If at any point in the future the EP Scheme area is included in a Bus Franchising Area, the relevant requirements set out in this EP Scheme document will cease to apply from the commencement date of the franchising scheme.
34 Page 186 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule A: List of qualifying local services as of 09/11/2020
Schedule A1: A45 / B425 Corridor
Table 6 Qualifying services on the A45 / B425 corridor as of 09/11/2020 Service Description Operator 58 Kingshurst – Solihull West Midlands Travel Ltd. 60 Birmingham – Cranes Park West Midlands Travel Ltd. 71W Buckland End – Jaguar Land Rover West Midlands Travel Ltd. 72 Chelmsley Wood – Solihull West Midlands Travel Ltd. 72A Chelmsley Wood – Solihull West Midlands Travel Ltd. 73 Heartlands Hospital – Solihull West Midlands Travel Ltd. 75 Birmingham International – Birmingham Business Park Diamond Bus Ltd. 75A Birmingham International Stn – Bishop Walsh School Claribels Coaches Ltd. 89 Coventry – Solihull Diamond Bus Ltd. 844* King Edward VI School – Sheldon* The Green Bus Company Ltd. 871* King Edward VI School – Sheldon* The Green Bus Company Ltd. 876* Blossomfield – South Yardley* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 877* Bordesley – St Peters School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 883* Hockley – King Edwards VI Five Ways The Green Bus Company Ltd. 891* Bordesley – Cosehill School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 897* Sheldon – Lode Heath School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 898* Sheldon – St Peters RC School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. A1 Solihull – Damsonwood circular Diamond Bus Ltd. Tendered until 24/04/2021 A2 Solihull circular Diamond Bus Ltd. Tendered until 24/04/2021 A10 Cranes Park – Solihull Silverline Landflight Ltd. S16 Yardley – Solihull Claribel Coaches Ltd. X1 Birmingham – Airport – Coventry West Midlands Travel Ltd. X2 Birmingham – Solihull West Midlands Travel Ltd. X12 Birmingham – Solihull West Midlands Travel Ltd.
* - These services are exempt from the multi-operator ticketing scheme requirements.
35 Page 187 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule A2: A34 (N) Corridor
Table 7 Qualifying services on the A34 (N) corridor as of 09/11/2020 Service Description Operator 7 Birmingham – Perry Common West Midlands Travel Ltd. 28 Heartlands – Great Barr West Midlands Travel Ltd. 33 Birmingham – Pheasey West Midlands Travel Ltd. 46 West Bromwich – Great Barr West Midlands Travel Ltd. 51 Birmingham – Walsall West Midlands Travel Ltd. 52 Birmingham – Perry Beeches West Midlands Travel Ltd. 54 Perry Barr – Hamstead West Midlands Travel Ltd. 54A Perry Barr – Hamstead West Midlands Travel Ltd. 61 Perry Barr – Handsworth Diamond Bus Ltd. Tendered until 25/04/2020 68A Perry Barr and Aston circular Diamond Bus Ltd. Tendered until 25/04/2020 68C Perry Barr and Aston circular Diamond Bus Ltd. Tendered until 25/04/2020 74 Walsall – Gillity Village Diamond Bus Ltd. Tendered until 28/10/2023 77 Sutton Coldfield – Walsall West Midlands Travel Ltd. 424 Birmingham – Queslett Claribel Coaches Ltd. Tendered until 25/04/2020 700* Darlaston Comp School - Ryecroft West Midlands Travel Ltd. 705* Gillity Village – Barr Beacon School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 788* Walsall – Barr Beacon School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 842* Hill Hook – King Edward VI Aston * The Green Bus Company Ltd. 848* Great Barr – King Edward VI Aston* The Green Bus Company Ltd. 851* Edgbaston – Queen Mary’s School* The Green Bus Company Ltd. 881* Palfrey – Barr Beacon School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 888* Birmingham – Perry Beeches School* West Midlands Travel Ltd. 907 Birmingham – Sutton Coldfield West Midlands Travel Ltd. 907A Birmingham – Sutton Coldfield West Midlands Travel Ltd. 934 Birmingham – Walsall West Midlands Travel Ltd. 935 Birmingham – Walsall West Midlands Travel Ltd. 936 Birmingham – Brownhills West West Midlands Travel Ltd. 937 Birmingham – Brownhills West Midlands Travel Ltd. 937A Birmingham – Brownhills West West Midlands Travel Ltd. 997 Birmingham – Walsall West Midlands Travel Ltd. X51 Birmingham – Cannock West Midlands Travel Ltd.
* - These services are exempt from the multi-operator ticketing scheme requirements.
36 Page 188 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule B: Facilities provided and maintained by local highway authorities B1 Current bus lanes The current bus lanes detailed in Table 8 will be maintained by the relevant local highway’s authority as part of the EP Scheme. Maps of the proposed bus lanes on the two corridors are shown in Schedule E:
Table 8 Current bus lanes to be maintained
Intervention Bus lane Hours of Category of vehicle Responsibility number description operation permitted for Maintaining
Bus lane from the junction of Birchfield Bus services, bicycles, 7 am to Birmingham City 1. Rd/Heathfield Rd to motorcycles, hackney 7pm Council Perry Barr Island carriage vehicles (northbound)
Bus lane from Aston Six Ways to junction 7 am to Bus services, bicycles, of New Town 10 am Birmingham City 2. motorcycles, hackney Row/New Town and 4pm Council carriage vehicles Middleway junction to 7pm (southbound)
Bus lane from after Bus services, bicycles, Dovehouse Lane to 3. 24hrs motorcycles, hackney Solihull MBC before Rowood Drive carriage vehicles. (southbound)
Bus lane from the junction of Lode Bus services, bicycles, Lane/Lighthorne Rd 4. 24hrs motorcycles, hackney Solihull MBC to the junction of carriage vehicles Lode Lane/Hermitage Rd (southbound)
Bus lane from o/s 42 Lode Lane to EP Bus services, bicycles, 5. scheme boundary 24hrs motorcycles, hackney Solihull MBC north of Solihull carriage vehicles (southbound)
37 Page 189 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Bus lane from Walsall Rd bridge over River Bus services, bicycles, 7 am to Birmingham City 6. Tame to Cliveden motorcycles, hackney 7pm Council Avenue bus stop carriage vehicles (northbound)
Bus lane from after Livingstone Road bus Bus services, bicycles, 7 am to Birmingham City 7. stop to the junction of motorcycles, hackney 7pm Council Walsall Rd/Trinity Rd carriage vehicles (southbound)
Bus lane on the A34 Bus services, bicycles, flyover of Junction 7 8. 24hrs hackney carriage Sandwell MBC of the M6 vehicles (southbound)
Bus lane from before Marathon Point to the Bus services, bicycles, 7am to Birmingham City 9. junction of Walsall hackney carriage 10am Council Rd/Church Road vehicles, Motorcycles (southbound) Bus lane from New Town Row canal Bus services, bicycles, 7 am to Birmingham City 10. bridge to before hackney carriage 7pm Council Aston Six Ways vehicles, Motorcycles (northbound) Bus lane from after Aston Six Ways to Bus services, bicycles, 7 am to Birmingham City 11. junction of Birchfield hackney carriage 7pm Council Rd/Wilson Rd vehicles, Motorcycles (northbound)
38 Page 190 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
B2 New bus lanes The new bus lanes detailed in Table 9 will be implemented by TfWM by 30th June 2022, and then maintained by the local highway authority as part of the EP Scheme.
Table 9 New bus lanes to be provided by 30/06/2022 Intervention Hours of Category of Responsibility Bus lane description number operation vehicle permitted for maintaining Bus lane from Clay Bus services, Ln/Coventry Rd to the bicycles, Birmingham City 12. junction of Coventry 24hrs motorcycles, Council Rd/Charles Edward Rd hackney carriage (westbound) vehicles Bus services, Bus lane from junction of bicycles, Coventry Rd/Forest Rd to Birmingham City 13. 24hrs motorcycles, the junction of Coventry Council hackney carriage Rd/Redhill Rd (westbound) vehicles Bus lane from junction of Bus services, Small Heath bicycles, Birmingham City 14. Highway/Energy Rd to the 24hrs motorcycles, Council proposed Poets Corner bus hackney carriage stop (westbound) vehicles Bus lane on Small Heath Bus services, Highway from approx. bicycles, 40959, 285240 OSGR co- Birmingham City 15. 24hrs motorcycles, ordinates to approx. 408851, Council hackney carriage 285709 OSGR co-ordinates vehicles (westbound) Bus lane from junction of Bus services, Lawden Rd/Small Heath bicycles, Birmingham City 16. Highway to Small Heath 24hrs motorcycles, Council Highway before Bordesley hackney carriage Circus (westbound) vehicles Bus lane from approx. Bus services, 408873, 285722 OSGR co- bicycles, Birmingham City 17. ordinates to Small Heath 24hrs motorcycles, Council Highway before Poets hackney carriage Corner (eastbound) vehicles Bus services, Bus lane from after Poets bicycles, Birmingham City 18. Corner to proposed Poets 24hrs motorcycles, Council Corner bus stop (eastbound) hackney carriage vehicles Offside bus lane from approx.. 410210, 284767 Birmingham City 19. OSGR co-ordinates to after 24hrs Bus services Council Heybarnes Circus (eastbound) Bus services, Bus lane from junction of bicycles, Coventry Rd/Deakins Rd to Birmingham City 20. 24hrs motorcycles, junction of Coventry Council hackney carriage Rd/Howard Rd (eastbound) vehicles Bus lane from junc. of 7 am to Bus services, 21. Walsall MBC Birmingham Rd/Skip Lane to 7pm bicycles, hackney
39 Page 191 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Walsall carriage vehicles, boundary(southbound) Motorcycles Bus lane from Walsall Bus services, Boundary to junction of 7 am to 22. bicycles, hackney Sandwell MBC Birmingham Rd/Chapel Ln 7pm carriage vehicles. (southbound) Bus services, Bus lane from Scott Rd stop 7am to bicycles, hackney 23. to the junction of Walsall Sandwell MBC 7pm carriage vehicles, Rd/Sundial Ln (southbound) Motorcycles Bus services, Bus lane from after Booths 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 24. Farm Rd to the Beeches Rd 7pm carriage vehicles, Council bus stop (southbound) Motorcycles Bus services, Bus lane from Marathon 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 25. Point to opposite Cliveden 10am carriage vehicles, Council Avenue (southbound) Motorcycles Bus services, Bus lane from junction of 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 26. Birchfield Rd/Trinity Rd to 10am carriage vehicles, Council Arden Road (southbound) Motorcycles Bus services, Offside Bus lane from after 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 27. Mansfield Road to before 7pm carriage vehicles, Council Aston Six Ways Motorcycles Northbound underpass Bus services, between James Watt bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 28. 24hrs Queensway and New Town carriage vehicles, Council Row under Lancaster Circus Motorcycles Bus services, Bus lane from Tennis Court 4pm to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 29. bus stop to o/s 392 Walsall 7pm carriage vehicles, Council Rd (northbound) Motorcycles Bus services, Bus lane from o/s 514 4pm to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 30. Walsall Rd to o/s 616 7pm carriage vehicles, Council Walsall Rd (northbound) Motorcycles Bus lane from after the Bus services, junction of Walsall 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 31. Rd/Booths Farm Rd to 7pm carriage vehicles, Council before Old Walsall road Motorcycles (northbound) Bus lane from after the Bus services, junction Old Walsall road to 7am to 32. bicycles, hackney Sandwell MBC Scott Arms junction 7pm carriage vehicles. (northbound) Bus services, Bus lane from the junction of bicycles, New Town Row/Manchester Birmingham City 33. 24hr motorcycles, Street to New Town Row Council hackney carriage canal bridge (southbound) vehicles Bus lane from Chapel Lane Bus services, 7am to 34. bus stop to Peak House bicycles, hackney Sandwell MBC 7pm Road carriage vehicles. Bus services, Bus Peak House Road to 35. 24hrs bicycles, hackney Sandwell MBC Walsall Boundary carriage vehicles.
40 Page 192 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Bus services, Bus lane from Walsall 7am to bicycles, hackney 36. Boundary to o/s The Bell Inn Walsall MBC 7pm carriage vehicles, PH (northbound) Motorcycles Bus services, Contraflow bus lane on bicycles, hackney 37. Ablewell Street towards, 24hrs Walsall MBC carriage vehicles. Walsall Motorcycles Bus lane on Lancaster Bus services, Street from Bagot St to 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 38. Lancaster Circus 7pm carriage vehicles. Council Queensway Motorcycles Bus lane on James Watt Bus services, Queensway from Lancaster 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham City 39. Circus Queensway to 7pm carriage vehicles. Council Coleshill Street Motorcycles
41 Page 193 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
TfWM will look to implement the new bus lanes detailed in Table 10 by a future target date, which will then be maintained by the local highway authorities under the terms of the EP Scheme. Table 10 New bus lanes to be provided by a future target date of 31/12/2024 Intervention Hours of Category of vehicle Responsibility Bus lane description number operation permitted for Maintaining Bus lane from junction Bus services, Coventry Rd/Horse Shoes bicycles, Birmingham 40. Ln to the junction of 24hrs motorcycles, City Council Coventry Rd/Sheaf Ln hackney carriage (eastbound) vehicles Bus lane from junction of Bus services, Birmingham Coventry Rd/Arden Oak Rd bicycles, City Council 41. to the junction of Coventry 24hrs motorcycles, and Solihull Rd/Terminal Rd hackney carriage MBC (eastbound) vehicles Bus lane from junction of Bus services, Birmingham Hobs Moat Rd/Jillcot Rd to bicycles, City Council 42. the junction of Coventry 24hrs motorcycles, and Solihull Rd/Hobs Moat Rd hackney carriage MBC (northbound) vehicles Bus lane on Darwall Street, 43. 24hrs Local bus services Walsall MBC Walsall Bus lane from junction of Bus services, Birmingham Rd/Queens Rd 7am to bicycles, hackney 44. to the junction of Walsall MBC 7pm carriage vehicles. Birmingham Rd/Broadway Motorcycles (northbound) Offside bus lane from Bus services, junction of Springhill Rd/Hill bicycles, hackney 45. 24hrs Walsall MBC St to the junction of Ablewell carriage vehicles. St/Town Hill Motorcycles Bus lane from Jaguar- Bus services, Landrover works Lode Lane bicycles, 46. North Gate to Jaguar- 24hrs motorcycles, Solihull MBC Landrover main gate hackney carriage (southbound) vehicles Offside bus lane from junction of Birmingham Bus services, Rd/Chapel Lan to the 47. 24hrs bicycles, hackney Sandwell MBC southern end of M6 carriage vehicles Motorway J7 flyover (southbound) Bus lane from junction of Bus services, Coventry Rd/Damson bicycles, Birmingham 48. Parkway to junction of 24hrs motorcycles, City Council Coventry Rd/Glencroft Rd hackney carriage (westbound) vehicles Bus lane from before the Bus services, junction of Coventry bicycles, Birmingham 49. Rd/Lyndon Rd to the 24hrs motorcycles, City Council junction of Coventry hackney carriage Rd/Clay Lane vehicles Bus services, After Dyas Avenue (658 bicycles, 7am to Birmingham 50. Walsall Rd) to Opp Booths motorcycles, 7pm City Council Farm Rd (northbound) hackney carriage vehicles
42 Page 194 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Bus lane from after Walsall Bus services, Rd/Stanford Avenue to 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham 51. Booths Farm Rd 7pm carriage vehicles, City Council (southbound) Motorcycles Bus services, Bus lane from Canal Bridge 7am to bicycles, hackney Birmingham 52. Marathon Point 10am carriage vehicles, City Council (southbound) Motorcycles Bus lane from junction of Bus services, Coventry Rd/Glencroft Rd to bicycles, Birmingham 53. the junction of Coventry 24hrs motorcycles, City Council Rd/Hobs Moat Rd hackney carriage (westbound) vehicles
43 Page 195 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
B3 Bus lane enforcement
Bus lane Enforcement cameras will be provided in at least 10 locations across the EP Scheme Area and will be implemented or retained as agreed by TfWM with the relevant local highway authority from 30/06/2022, subject to approved business cases where applicable. These will be maintained and operated by the local highway authorities as part of the EP Scheme. These, minimum 10 locations will be provided at locations listed in Table 11:
Table 11 Bus lane enforcement locations Intervention Responsibility for Description number Maintaining Install bus lane enforcement from Ada Road to Redhill Rd Birmingham City (westbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Holder Rd to Howard Rd Birmingham City (eastbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Lawden Rd to Bordesley Birmingham City Circus (westbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Poets Corner to Camp Birmingham City Hill Line Rail Bridge (westbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Small Heath Bridge to Birmingham City Poets Corner (eastbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Ackers to Poets Corner Birmingham City (westbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement in the central reserve before Birmingham City Heybarnes Circus Council Install bus lane enforcement before Old Walsall Rd Birmingham City (northbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement before Dyas Avenue Birmingham City (southbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement before Cliveden Avenue Birmingham City (southbound). In operation at peak hours only. Council Birmingham City 54. – 63. Install bus lane enforcement before Trinity Rd (southbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Mansfield Rd to Aston Birmingham City Six Ways (southbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement before Aston Six Ways Birmingham City (northbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Milton Street to Newton Birmingham City Road (northbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Moorsom Street to Birmingham City Newtown Middleway (southbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Price Street to Princip St Birmingham City (northbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement at the Lancaster Circus Birmingham City Underpass (southbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Birmingham/Solihull Birmingham City boundary to Wells Rd (westbound) Council Install bus lane enforcement from Damson Parkway to Solihull MBC Birmingham/Solihull boundary (westbound) Birmingham/Solihull boundary to Damson Parkway Solihull MBC (eastbound) To retain bus lane enforcement from JLR South Entrance Solihull MBC to Henley Crescent (southbound)
44 Page 196 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Install bus lane enforcement on the approach to the Walsall MBC junction of Walstead Road (northbound) Install bus lane enforcement on the approach to the Walsall MBC junction of Broadway (northbound) Install bus lane on the approach to the junction of Botts Walsall MBC Lane (northbound) Install bus lane enforcement for the Ablewell Street/Town Walsall MBC Hill bus gate (northbound)
45 Page 197 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
B4 Bus Gates
The bus gates detailed in Table 12 will be implemented by TfWM by 30th June 2022 and then maintained by the relevant local highway authority as part of the EP Scheme.
Table 12 Bus gates to be implemented by 30/06/2022
Intervention Hours of Description Implementation Responsibility Number Operation for Maintaining Bus gate at Haybarns Circus Birmingham City 64. TfWM 24hrs (eastbound) Council Bus gate at the southern end 65. of M6 motorway J7 flyover TfWM Sandwell MBC 24hrs (southbound) Bus gate at junction of 66. Birmingham Road/Chapel TfWM Sandwell MBC 24hrs Lane (southbound) Bus gate at the entry to Birmingham City 67. northbound underpass as TfWM 24hrs Council Lancaster Circus
TfWM will look to implement the new bus gates detailed in Table 13 by a future date, which will then be maintained by the local highway authority as part of the EP Scheme.
Table 13 Bus gates to be implemented by a future target date of 31/12/2024
Intervention Hours of Description Implementation Responsibility Number. Operation for Maintaining Bus gate southbound at Birmingham City 68. TfWM 24hrs Lancaster Circus Underpass Council
46 Page 198 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
B5 Traffic Signal upgrades to include priority for local bus services
The traffic signal upgrades detailed in Table 14 will be implemented by TfWM by 30th June 2022 the dates given and the maintained by the relevant local highway authority as part of the EP Scheme.
Table 14 Traffic signal upgrades to be implemented by 30/06/2022 Intervention Responsibility for Description Implementation number Maintaining Birmingham City 69. Coventry Rd/Kings Rd TfWM Council Birmingham City 70. Coventry Rd/Berkeley Rd TfWM Council Birmingham City 71. Coventry Rd/Holder Rd TfWM Council 72. Lode Ln/Moat Ln TfWM Solihull MBC Birmingham City 73. New Town Row/New John St West TfWM Council Birmingham City 74. New Town Row/St. Stephens St TfWM Council Birmingham City 75. High St/Newbury Rd/Park Ln TfWM Council Birmingham City 76. Walsall Rd/Cliveden Ave TfWM Council Birmingham City 77. Walsall Rd/Church Rd TfWM Council Birmingham City 78. Walsall Rd/Rocky Ln TfWM Council Birmingham City 79. Walsall Rd/Beeches Rd TfWM Council Birmingham City 80. Walsall Rd/Old Walsall Rd TfWM Council 81. A34/Walstead Rd TfWM Walsall MBC
TfWM will look to implement traffic signal upgrades detailed in Table 15 by a future target date, which will then be maintained by the local highway authorities under the terms of the EP Scheme.
Table 15 Traffic signal upgrades to be implemented by a future target date of 31/12/2024 Intervention Responsibility for Description Implementation number Maintaining Birmingham City 82. Coventry Rd/Gilbertstone Ave TfWM Council Birmingham City 83. Coventry Rd/Wagon Ln TfWM Council Birmingham City 84. Coventry Rd/Lyndon Rd TfWM Council Birmingham City 85. Coventry Rd/Sheaf Ln/Hobs Moat Rd TfWM Council Birmingham City 86. Coventry Rd, Morrisons access TfWM Council Birmingham City 87. Coventry Rd/Hatchford Brook TfWM Council
47 Page 199 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
88. Jaguar Landrover north access TfWM Solihull MBC 89. Lode Ln/Dovehouse House TfWM Solihull MBC Birmingham City 90. Birchfield Rd/Trinity Rd TfWM Council
48 Page 200 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
B6 Pedestrian Crossing upgrades The pedestrian crossing upgrades detailed in Table 16 will be implemented by TfWM by the dates given and maintained by the local highway authority as part of the EP Scheme:
Table 16 Pedestrian crossings to be upgraded by 30/06/2022 Intervention Responsibility for Description Implementation number Maintaining E2916/7 – Walsall Rd nr Tuckers Birmingham City 91. TfWM Fasteners Crossing Council E2911/3 – Walsall Rd nr Tennis Birmingham City 92. TfWM Court Crossing Council C0711 – Sundial Lane Dual 93. TfWM Sandwell MBC Crossings 94. Beacon Rd Dual Crossings TfWM Walsall MBC Ablewell St / Town Hill dual crossings 95. TfWM Walsall MBC (bus gate) TfWM will look to implement pedestrian crossing upgrades detailed in Table 17 by a future date, which will then be maintained by the local highway authorities as part of the EP Scheme.
Table 17 Pedestrian crossings to be upgraded by a future target date of 31/12/2024 Intervention Responsibility for Description Implementation number Maintaining E2124/5 Coventry Rd nr Clay Ln Birmingham City 96. TfWM Crossing Council E2004/5 Coventry Rd nr Steyning Rd Birmingham City 97. TfWM Crossing Council E2106/7 Coventry Rd Nr Brays Rd Birmingham City 98. TfWM Crossing Council Birmingham City 99. E2002 Coventry Rd nr Arden Oak TfWM Council New pedestrian crossing nr Old Lode 100. TfWM Solihull MBC ln 101. B0966 – Nr Queen’s Rd Crossing TfWM Walsall MBC 102. Nr Metro Inns Crossing TfWM Walsall MBC 103. New crossings nr Hill Street TfWM Walsall MBC E2000/1 Coventry Rd nr Wells Green Birmingham City 104. TfWM Crossing Council E2113 Coventry Rd nr Wells Rd Birmingham City 105. TfWM Crossing Council E2918/9 – Walsall Rd nr Perry Park Birmingham City 106. TfWM Cres Council E2906 – Walsall Rd nr Booths Farm Birmingham City 107. TfWM Rd Council
49 Page 201 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule C: Bus stops, shelters and information C1 Enhanced Bus Stops
The enhanced bus stops detailed in Table 18, Table 19, Table 20, Table 21 will be equipped to accommodate vehicles of 15m-18.75m length by TfWM, facilitating multi- door boarding and alighting, by 30th June 2022 and maintained by TfWM as part of the EP Scheme.
These bus stops will also include: • Real time information displays • Lighting • CCTV for security • Bench seating
Local highway authorities will be responsible for maintaining bus stop clearway orders associated with the enhanced bus stops.
Although all stops will allow multi-door boarding.
Enhanced bus stops will be available to all local bus services to use.
50 Page 202 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Table 18 Enhanced bus stops on the A34 towards Birmingham City Centre Intervention Location number 108. Walsall Town Centre (location to be confirmed) 109. Walsall Town Hall 110. Walsall Six Ways, Birmingham Road 111. Jesson Road, Birmingham Road 112. Travelodge, Birmingham Road 113. Queens Road, Birmingham Road 114. Bell Inn, Birmingham Road 115. Skip Lane 116. Chapel Lane, Birmingham Road 117. Scott Road, Birmingham Road 118. Scott Arms, Walsall Road 119. Beeches Road, Walsall Road 120. Rocky Lane, Walsall Road 121. The Tennis Court, Walsall Road 122. Cliveden Avenue 123. Perry Barr One Stop Birchfield Rd 124. Livingstone Road 125. Trinity Road, Birchfield Road 126. Fentham Road 127. Six Ways Aston, Birchfield Road 128. Swimming Baths, Newtown Row 129. St Stephens Street, Newtown Row 130. Lower Tower Street
51 Page 203 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Table 19 Enhanced bus stops on the A34 towards Walsall Intervention Location number 131. Lower Tower Street, Newtown Row 132. Milton Street, Newtown Row 133. Swimming Baths 134. Six Ways Aston, Birchfield Road 135. Hatfield Rd 136. Heathfield Road, Birchfield Road 137. Livingstone Road 138. Perry Barr Interchange 139. Cliveden Avenue 140. The Tennis Court, Walsall Road 141. Rocky Lane, Walsall Road 142. Beeches Road, Walsall Road 143. Old Walsall Road 144. Scott Arms, Walsall Road 145. Cross Lane, Birmingham Road 146. Chapel Lane, Birmingham Road 147. Skip Lane 148. Bell Inn, Birmingham Road 149. Queens Road, Birmingham Road 150. Travelodge, Birmingham Road 151. Jesson Road, Birmingham Road 152. Walsall Six Ways, Springhill Road
52 Page 204 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Table 20 Enhanced bus stops on the A45 towards Birmingham City Centre
Intervention Location number 153. Keresley Close, Lode Lane OR Solihull Hospital (this stop lies OUTSIDE the EP Scheme area) 154. The Hermitage 155. Lode Heath School, Lode Lane 156. Henley Crescent, Lode Lane 157. Castle Lane, Lode Lane) 158. Solihull Ice Rink, Lode Lane 159. Old Lode Lane, Lode Lane 160. The Wheatsheaf, Coventry Road 161. Lyndon Road, Coventry Road 162. Keswick Road 163. Brays Road, Coventry Road 164. Steyning Road, Coventry Road 165. Swan Island, Coventry Road 166. Kathleen Road, Coventry Road 167. Kings Road, Coventry Road 168. Small Heath Highway, Poets Corner
53 Page 205 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Table 21 Enhanced bus stops on the A45 towards Birmingham Airport/Solihull
Intervention Location number 169. Small Heath Highway, Poets Corner 170. Kings Road, Coventry Road 171. Kathleen Road, Coventry Road 172. Swan Island, Coventry Road 173. Sunnymead Road, Coventry Road 174. Brays Road, Coventry Road 175. Keswick Road 176. Lyndon Road, Coventry Road 177. Old Lode Lane, Lode Lane 178. Ulleries Road, Lode Lane 179. Lode Lane, (opp Olton Tavern) 180. Dovehouse Lane, Lode Lane 181. Henley Crescent, Lode Lane 182. Rowood Drive, Lode Lane 183. The Hermitage 184. Solihull Hospital
54 Page 206 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
C2 Enhanced Bus Stands
TfWM will look to implement the new bus stands detailed in Table 22 by a future target date. These will be designated as bus stands capable of accommodating vehicles of 15-18.75m length, with buses able to stand for up to 10 minutes depending on the location.
Table 22 Enhanced bus stands to be implemented by a future target date of 31/12/2024 Intervention Stand location number 185. Swan Island, Coventry Road 186. Sandwell/Walsall boundary 187. Walsall Town Centre (position to be confirmed) 188. Perry Barr One Stop, Birchfield Road
55 Page 207 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
C3 Designated feeder bus Stands
TfWM will look to implement Designated feeder service Bus Stands listed in Table 23 at a future date. These stands will be specifically for ‘feeder bus services’ that are advertised to connect with other key bus services in the corridor, with buses able to stand for up to 10 minutes depending on the location. TfWM will define when these locations will be designated as feeder bus stands, as and when required. Standing buses will not be permitted to idle. These stops may be used by other qualifying local bus services.
Table 23 Designated feeder service Bus Stands Intervention Stop location number 189. Birmingham International Stn, Station Way (NEC Grounds) 190. Perry Barr One Stop, Birchfield Road 191. Swan Island, Coventry Road 192. Sandwell/Walsall boundary 193. Walsall Town Centre (position to be confirmed)
56 Page 208 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule D: Reporting Mechanisms to Local Highway Authorities and Transport for West Midlands
Schedule D1: Birmingham City Council reporting mechanisms
Highway Issues
All highway defects reported to Birmingham City Council will be dealt with in accordance with the City Council’s current highway maintenance and management service contract requirements. Highway defects should be reported through: https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/info/20110/report_road_and_pavement_issues
This includes: a. Potholes (or other road and pavement problems); b. Faulty or broken street lights; c. Faulty traffic lights, signs or signals; d. Flooding or drainage issues; and e. Defects with or damage to other council street furniture. Response times to defects will be prioritised according to their assessed urgency and the council’s current service provisions.
Parking Issues For specific parking issues, operators can report these by using the online form at: https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/info/20109/parking/1983/report_an_illegally_parke d_vehicle The parking team can be contacted at: [email protected]
Roadwork notifications Information on roadworks, including Urgent, Emergency and notified roadworks, can be requested from [email protected]
Any operators wanting to join the list should contact [email protected]
57 Page 209 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule D2: Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council reporting mechanisms
Highway Issues In the first instance all highway related defects related to carriageways, footways, potholes, manhole covers, road markings, road signs, streetlights, traffic lights, bridges and structures and blocked drains should be reported through the ‘Report a Problem’ page on Sandwell Council’s website: http://www.sandwell.gov.uk/reportit
Alternatively, defects can be reported through Sandwell Council’s call centre (currently 0121 368 1177). In the event of an emergency response being required, this is the route we would encourage.
Defects will be automatically allocated to the correct team. Highway Safety Inspections will typically be assigned and undertaken the following working day. Defects will be prioritised and rectified in line with Sandwell Council’s Asset Management Plan
Parking Issues For the reporting of specific parking issues, operators can notify the council through the MySandwell Web Portal or contact centre by calling (currently) 0121 368 1177.
Roadwork notifications Sandwell use one.network to make roadwork information available to operators on a self-help basis through a link on the council’s website: https://one.network/custom/sandwell/.
Operators can also follow on twitter on @sandwellroads.
Upcoming traffic management information is emailed on a weekly basis, normally a Wednesday. If any bus operators wish to be added to the weekly email distribution, they should request this via TfWM using [email protected].
58 Page 210 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule D3: Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council reporting mechanisms
Highway Issues Solihull has a dedicated web page for reporting highway related issues, including potholes, street lights and flooding: https://www.solihull.gov.uk/About/report
In using this website it is possible to create an account on which a response to an enquiry will be posted. There is a daytime Contact Centre telephone (currently) 0121 704 8001 and an out of hours telephone (currently) 0121 704 8000.
Response to any reported defect will be assessed depending on the severity and risk, any repairs required will be prioritised using a risk-based approach with a standard defect response within 28 days.
Parking Issues For specific parking issues, bus operators can notify the council by calling (currently) 0121 704 611 or e-mail [email protected]
Highway work notifications Details of all planned and approved works are published on the One Network system at: https://www.solihull.gov.uk/solihullroadworks
59 Page 211 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule D4: Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council reporting mechanisms
Highway Issues Walsall Council specifies that all defects relating to roads and pavements, potholes, manhole covers, road markings, road signs and blocked drains be reported through its ‘Report a street problem within Walsall’ webpage: https://go.walsall.gov.uk/forms/Report-A-Street-Problem-Within-Walsall
All Street lighting defects should be reported via: www.walsallstreetlighting.amey.co.uk
All Traffic Signal Defects should be reported to Walsall and Wolverhampton shared urban traffic control service by:
Calling (currently) 01902 555795 or through: [email protected]
Defects will be rectified in line with Walsall Council’s procedures (shown on page https://go.walsall.gov.uk/highway_maintenance), giving priority to those sites which are most urgent.
Parking Issues For specific parking issues operators can notify the Civil Parking Enforcement Team by calling (currently) 01922 652433 or e-mail [email protected].
Roadwork notifications Roadworks Notices will be e-mailed to operators and other stakeholders on a mailing list managed by the Traffic Management Team. They are also available on Walsall Council’s website: - https://go.walsall.gov.uk/roadworks Any operators wanting to join the list should contact: - [email protected].
60 Page 212 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule D5: Transport for West Midlands Bus stop infrastructure maintenance
We know that sometimes things can get damaged, dirty or show the wrong information and we want you to tell us as soon as you see anything wrong so we can Fix It. This should be done via the following link: https://www.networkwestmidlands.com/get-in-touch/report-a-problem/
TfWM will maintain bus stop infrastructure in accordance with the following standards. Response within 4 hours of being reported, where a defect is identified, which requires an immediate response to ensure infrastructure is safe for use, with repairs carried out within 48 hours: • Bus shelter
Response within 4 hours of being reported, where a defect is identified, which requires an immediate response to ensure infrastructure is safe for use, with repairs carried out within 5 working days to ensure all elements are fully functional: • Advertisement panel • Lighting panel • Digital screen • Stop flag • CCTV • Real time information
Response within 4 hours of being reported, where a defect is identified, which requires an immediate response to ensure infrastructure is safe for use, with repairs carried out within 10 working days: • Feeder pillar
Response and removal within 24 hours of being reported • Bus shelter offensive graffiti
61 Page 213 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Response within 4 hours of being reported, where a defect is identified, which requires an immediate response to ensure infrastructure is safe for use: • Ticket machine
Planned maintenance of bus stop infrastructure: • Weekly shelter and floor cleaning within the shelter footprint, including litter removal • Annual shelter roof clean • Every 5 years full electrical tests and inspections
62 Page 214 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Schedule E: Maps of the EP Scheme area
Figure 2 Indicative map of enhanced bus stops to be provided on the A34 corridor (MAP TO BE UPDATED)
63 Page 215 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Figure 3 Indicative map of bus lanes to be provided on the A34 corridor
64 Page 216 09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Figure 4 Indicative map of enhanced bus stops to be provided on the A45 and Lode Lane corridor (MAP TO BE UPDATED) Page 217 Page
65
09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Figure 5 Indicative map of bus lanes to be provided on the A45 and Lode Lane corridor Page 218 Page
66
09/11/2020 Enhanced Partnership Scheme for A34(N) and A45 / B425
Signatory page
THIS DEED is dated ______
PARTY SEALS
(1) THE WEST MIDLANDS COMBINED AUTHORITY (WMCA) of 16 Summer Lane, Birmingham, B19 3SD affixed hereto in the presence of its duly Authorised Officer
______
(2) BIRMINGHAM CITY COUNCIL of The Council House, Victoria Square, Birmingham B1 1BB affixed hereto in the presence of its duly Authorised Officer
______
(3) SANDWELL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL of Sandwell Council House, Freeth Street, Oldbury, B69 3DE affixed hereto in the presence of its duly Authorised Officer
______
(4) SOLIHULL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL of Council House, Manor Square, Solihull, West Midlands, B91 3QB affixed hereto in the presence of its duly Authorised Officer
______
(5) WALSALL METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL of Civic Centre, Darwall Street, Walsall, WS1 1TP affixed hereto in the presence of its duly Authorised Officer
______
67 Page 219 This page is intentionally left blank TRANSPORT DELIVERY COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA SETTING MEETING REPORT AND AUTHOR
Date of Meeting Date Final Reports Date of Meeting Date Reports to be to be submitted to submitted to Governance Governance Services Services
11 January 2021 22 December Financial Monitoring Report (Linda Horne) 16 December 14 December Page 221 Page
Capital Programme Delivery Monitoring Report (Sandeep Shingadia)
PPF LMRG Annual Report (Edmund Salt)
Regional Road Safety Partnership Update (Anne Shaw)
Cycling Charter Update (Hannah Dayan) Agenda Item 14
Update on Freight (David Harris)
8 February 27 January Bus Alliance Update (Edmund Salt) 21 January 18 January
15 March 3 March Financial Monitoring Report (Linda Horne) 26 February 22 February TRANSPORT DELIVERY COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA SETTING MEETING REPORT AND AUTHOR
Date of Meeting Date Final Reports Date of Meeting Date Reports to be to be submitted to submitted to Governance Governance Services Services
Page 222 Page Capital Programme Delivery Monitoring Report (Sandeep Shingadia)
14 June 2021 2 June Financial Monitoring Report (Linda Horne) 24 May TBA Note- first meeting Capital Programme Delivery Monitoring Report of new municipal (Sandeep Shingadia) year