Given recent government, policy and economic change, we wanted to provide a re-cap on the Standardised Assessment Methodology, or SAM, project for

Transcription

1 Given recent government, policy and economic change, we wanted to provide a re-cap on the Standardised Assessment Methodology, or SAM, project for monitoring travel plans. We are looking to build on the past 7 years and re-assesses how travel plan monitoring can be delivered in the current climate with a view to developing SAM further (potentially linking in with other system enhancements). 1

2 The presentation will provide a recap or reminder to those of you aware of the SAM project but also provide details to those of you new to the UGM or TRICS. I wanted to give a brief overview of the current policy position in light of recent changes and review where travel planning and particularly travel plan monitoring sits generally We are at a bit of a junction in the project in terms of development, funding and we are j p j p g currently reassessing how we can bring about enhancements for the overall benefit of travel planning. While we are just embarking on this process I can give you a couple of pointers of what we are looking at.

3 The TRICS Standard Assessment Methodology (SAM) project was initiated in 2005 to provide the travel planning community with a tool to monitor travel plan data there are now over 30 surveys on the database. Furthermore, the data collected over time would provide a valuable insight into the effectiveness of travel plans and travel demand management measures on trip rates and/or modal shift. The method uses the TRICS standard for multi-modal surveys at individual developments, with the addition of a Travel Plan data section containing information on each site s Travel Plan elements. Given a significant volume of developer TAs and Travel Plans use TRICS as an evidence base in the first place this methodology provides a robust basis to continue with the post implementation monitoring programme to assess actual trip generation against what was promised in the TA. 3

4 The SAM project area can be accessed from the main home page mid way down the site menu on the left. 4

5 The SAM project area web page provides a good introduction into the processes involved. There is a brief overview of SAM s purpose to assess the effectiveness of Travel Plans. It uses long established TRICS methods of multi-modal data collection enhanced with comprehensive information on Travel Plan details to produce robust Travel Plan survey results. You can be reassured that SAM surveys are therefore subject to the same rigorous validation testing as all other TRICS surveys using our tried and tested data collection methodology. If anyone is interested in reading, reviewing or obtaining the multi-modal methodology please contact Ian. The monitoring of the Travel Plan typically takes place in the form of a full multi-modal TRICS survey in years 1, 3 and 5 of the life of the Travel Plan, often with a baseline survey also undertaken prior to the Travel Plan being put in place. Of course, this is a guide and the methodology remains flexible to account for different on site activities or access arrangements. From this page you can find out why Travel Plans need to monitored, The SAM process, associated costs of surveys, information on particular case studies, the ongoing pilot study as well as other useful information. 5

6 Looking at why do Travel Plans need to be monitored? Monitoring is a key element of any travel plan, without a robust programme of monitoring there is the risk that a Travel Plan will become a static document that doesn t change to suit the needs of a site. If we look at the legislative perspective, the NPPF recognises the need for travel plans particularly where developments are likely to have a significant transport impact. Before the keen eyed of you jump in this does replace PPG 13 (Transport) as still shown on this slide. We are currently updating the website to reflect the most up to date policy. There is also guidance from the DfT that a Travel Plan should be developed and should inform the transport assessment process. Given the need to tie in a mandatory requirement to implement and monitor a travel plan with the planning permission we also include guidance and suggested wording for inclusion with a Travel Plan Condition or perhaps more commonly a S106 Heads of Terms document. This advice can be found by clicking on these 2 links on the right hand side. 6

7 Again we are updating the website to reflect latest policy however as a guide: The suggested Travel Plan Condition reads (or would read). Prior to the commencement of development the applicant shall submit for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority a Travel Plan in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework, the Government White Paper 2011, [Enter Local Authority specific Travel Plan guidance], and in general accordance with the Heads of Travel Plan document (if appropriate, specify). The applicant shall implement and monitor the approved Travel Plan in accordance with [Local Authority specific Travel Plan guidance] and for each subsequent occupation of the development thereafter maintain and develop the Travel Plan to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. I think the Local Authority Guidance element is most pertinent here as travel planning & monitoring gpractices will vary from area to area. It is also where we as TRICS would like to engage more with all Local Authorities to try and meet their monitoring needs 7

8 Perhaps more commonly used for securing travel plan obligations, the Consortium has also produced suggested text for a Heads of Terms document or Section 106 Clause. Without reciting the whole of the text, the main point is that it requests TRICS SAM surveys to be undertaken using the current TRICS data collection standards, with the costs of these surveys to be met by the developer/landowner. The data is then submitted to TRICS for data input and validation testing, and is subsequently added to the next quarterly update of the database. Again Local Authority guidance is a vital cog in securing travel plans through the planning system. 8

9 The slides I have just shown you provide information on the principles of Travel Plan monitoring and how such monitoring can be enforced, but what of the actual process in undertaking SAM surveys? In the first instance a request is made by a developer or their appointed consultant, and a site visit is arranged (and possibly a meeting on site with a relevant person such as a Facilities Manager) during which our TRICS Data Collection methodology is applied to ascertain exactly what would be needed to undertake a multimodal TRICS survey at the site. The notes from this site visit are then translated into one of our comprehensive multi-modal survey specifications, which provide our approved data collection contractors with precise instructions on how enumerator staff are to undertake the survey on the day. Our approved contractors then liaise with the site operator to make the final arrangements for the multi-modal survey, which is undertaken and the results then forwarded to JMP for data input and validation. It should also be noted that in addition to the survey count and interview data, the approved data collection contractor would liaise with the site operator to obtain site and development information (which of course is vital for TRICS), including information on the site s Travel Plan elements. 9

10 When people are first introduced to the SAM process there are of course some frequently asked questions that we come across, and we are happy to provide some answers to these. Firstly, there is the question what are the benefits of using SAM? SAM allows the gathering of datasets that can trace the development of Travel Plans (and monitor their effectiveness), using our own tried and tested survey methodology. Another question often asked is will this mean more work for Planning Authorities? Actually, in the long run the amount of work required by Planning Authorities will decrease, as TRICS has the experience and capacity to manage the SAM process and deliver its data. The third often asked question is who will be responsible for paying for the cost of surveys?. This is where the planning conditions and obligations come in. Reasonable costs for SAM surveys can be secured and enforced through h either S106 agreements or planning conditions, and are legally enforceable. If local authorities specify in decision notices that monitoring is required and factor this into the S106 contribution, the monitoring system will be self funded. 10

11 So far, we have worked with a number of developers in delivering TRICS SAM surveys, a few of which you can see in this slide. SAM surveys have come in all shapes and sizes since 2005 when our first pilot surveys were undertaken. As you can see, the range of organisations requesting SAM surveys has been quite varied, with some familiar names participating in the project. 11

12 As a first step towards developing SAM further, the TRICS Consortium have taken a look at the various publications relating to Travel Plan guidance and policy that have emerged in recent years. Our reading material has included the most recent documents of the National Planning Policy Framework; Creating Growth, Cutting Carbon: Making Sustainable Local Transport Happen (a DfT document); and Travel Planning for New Development in London (a TfL document). Older documents include Good Practice Guidelines: Delivering Travel Plans Through the Planning Process (2009); and Guidance on Transport Assessment (2007), both produced by the DfT. 12

13 The National Planning Policy Framework (April 2012) forms the latest emerging central planning policy. The document highlights the importance of travel plans to reduce the impact of non sustainable travel in the future of planning. Travel plans should be based upon sustainable development at their starting point, with clear policies that will guide how the presumption will be applied locally. Transport objectives noted in the NPPF highlight the need to, where practical, encourage solutions which support reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion, therefore a pattern of development should be supported which facilitates the use of sustainable modes of transport. 13

14 Creating growth, cutting carbon (January 2011) identifies that alongside reducing carbon emissions using technological advances and sustainable travel measures are important in tackling the problem of congestion. Therefore the Department for Transport s priority for local transport (as set out in their Business Plan) is to: Encourage sustainable local travel and economic growth by making public transport and cycling and walking more attractive and effective, promoting lower carbon transport and tackling local road congestion. This document states that the Government s approach to sustainable travel is all about enabling choice through provision of better information and education. Travel plans should therefore play an important role in the future to better inform people about their local travel choices and identify where initiatives are working and where they can better be improved through monitoring. 14

15 Next we have Travel Planning for New Developments in London (2012). While this recent document is applicable only in London Boroughs it does set out a very similar mechanism to SAM for the monitoring of travel plans using the Tfl systems itrace and TRAVL as a standardised approach to monitoring. This does closely reflect the SAM objectives and the document demonstrates how monitoring methods can be written into local policy to enforce travel plan targets. This something we as a Consortium are keen to continue with authorities outside of London. 15

16 The DfT travel planning guidance (published in 2009) still provides the most comprehensive and relevant advice on securing travel plans. The document builds on the Planning Obligations Circular 05/05 which remains an appropriate mechanism for securing Travel Plans even with the advent of CIL. The importance of travel plans being seen as living documents and targets are crucial so that the success of the travel plan can be monitored and parties can be informed of the progress made by the travel plan. 16

17 The Guidance on Transport Assessment, while 5 years old, it still provides the framework for producing transport assessments and associated travel plans. TRICS is actively promoted in the Guidance as a robust methodology for deriving likely traffic generation at a site. It is therefore reasonable to assume that this methodology would provide a robust monitoring tool to compare the traffic generation promoted in the transport assessment with the actual generation post delivery of the site. 17

18 Other guidance includes PAS 500:2008 National Specification for Travel Plans (BSI endorsed) Local Transport Plans Local Plans/LDFs Local Authority Guidance 18

19 So where do we go from here Whilst the TRICS Consortium has introduced the SAM methodology and it has been taken up by some local authorities, the aim is to develop SAM further with wider uptake. The Consortium have been recently working on a position statement and a way forward for SAM, and this has included the formation of a SAM Working Group specifically set up to address this particular part of the TRICS project. In fact, the first meeting of this group is scheduled in the next few days in early July, and preliminary work is currently being undertaken for this. There will be regular meetings and updates on progress, and of course we would like the TRICS Community to hear about these through our quarterly TRICS newsletters and other correspondence. Our overall objective in this project is to develop SAM further to meet the needs of our users. The exact direction that this development will take is not yet determined, as there needs to be discussions and a project brief put together and agreed. But we have certainly taken the first steps. There is great potential for some significant changes and enhancements to the TRICS/SAM product soon, and we would of course like to hear your feedback on this. How would you like to see SAM developed? 19

20 We have already undertaken some initial consumer research over the past couple of years. At the end of 2009 beginning 2010 TRICS undertook a questionnaire survey of current travel plan practices at different UK Transport Authorities with the key aims of assessing existing methods of monitoring and also gaining an understanding of the likely tools needed by travel planning professionals to effectively manage substantial portfolios in their respective regions. The distribution of the questionnaire adopted a targeted approach focusing on travel plan professionals from different Authorities to maximise responses. While the response rate was only 34%, data was received from 44 different Authorities throughout England (as proof the green areas responded in some capacity) There was a good split of views from school travel planners, travel plan officers and development control officers. Obviously this something we would look to refresh as part of the SAM working group but an overview of results give an idea of the challenges facing local authorities. 20

21 The results highlighted that few Councils monitored all types of travel plan. The level of government funding for school travel planning in 2010 is reflected in the results with the majority of Authorities monitoring school travel plans (although this is likely to have changed in the meantime). Developer workplace travel plans were also widely monitored, whereas voluntary and residential travel plans were less widely monitored. Almost all Authorities linked travel planning to development control with over 60% assessing developer travel plans alongside the associated TA. It was generally considered that the onus of monitoring should be in partnership between the Authority, developer and/or school. In terms of resourcing, Authorities revealed different staffing levels l with some having no full time dedicated staff and others employing up to 40 individuals (again there is a good chance this will have reduced in recent times). On average Authorities employed approximately 3 full time travel plan staff and generally had an ongoing portfolio of over 130 travel plans. 21

22 In excess of 60% of Authorities did not have a current travel plan monitoring policy with approximately 36% implementing no enforcement measures where travel plans were failing. Where Authorities have implemented a policy, they had experienced a moderate level of success in their implementation with further financial contributions and extended monitoring periods proving the most widely used enforcement measures. Of the Authorities that enforce either further financial contributions or a bonded sum, 60% have successfully collected the additional funds. Only a third of Authorities implemented a travel plan monitoring fee using a wide variety of mechanisms. 22

23 The survey indicated that a typical travel planner was looking for a tool that included an interactive web based database of all travel plan details in their regions supported by a robust enforceable methodology. Additional functional tools including diary reminders, report and survey generators, and GIS mapping, although useful, scored a lower priority. The results highlighted a preference for monitoring travel plan targets through modal split, measures implemented and a commitment to the review process. However, further comments added by respondents indicated a need to move towards an integrated monitoring approach of both modal split and multi-modal trip generation. The results identified a moderate/good level of political support for travel planning within most Authorities. Any monitoring tool would need to provide travel planners with additional support, in particular, information on funding opportunities and a travel plan forum. The general consensus drawn from the survey indicated that a number of Authorities did not have the resources and policy in place to effectively monitor travel plans. The evidence suggested that more and more Authorities were implementing policies and looking to enforce measures where travel plans are failing. Any tool would need to acknowledge the needs of different areas of travel planning and provide a robust methodology to support the planning process. 23

24 A Sample of respondents comments included: We would like to see various agencies developing tools together to avoid multiplication of tools. TAs focus on trips and travel plans on modal split, so there is a difference in approach that we need to rectify if we are going to enforce travel plans against a predefined modal share outcome. A template for travel plans, which hbasically writes it for you, is probably bl the worst thing that could happen to travel plans as has been seen with school travel plans, that are off the shelf models they stay on the shelf! TAs focus on trips and travel plans on modal split, so there is a difference in approach that we need to rectify if we are going to enforce travel plans against a predefined modal share outcome. The standard of travel plans, while improving, still varies from Authority to Authority, the fees we charge, the targets we set and the monitoring that takes place is very inconsistent and while there is this inconsistency organisations will continue to try it on in terms of non-compliance.

25 So, looking forward with SAM development in mind, we can share these final thoughts. It is generally recognised that SAM provides a robust methodology for collection of multi-modal data at a particular site for travel planning purposes. However, there is scope for expanding SAM further across the regions of the UK. The existing policy and funding agenda still recognises the need for travel planning but doesn t necessarily offer the same level of support as previously. An exception to this is the recent TfL Guidance document for travel planning in London which promotes the use of a similar methodology to SAM and demonstrates a policy that could be applied throughout the UK. Travel planners at Local Authorities are faced with constrained budgets, less resource and expanding travel plan portfolios to monitor. Previous research suggests that a travel plan monitoring tool needs to provide a management aid as well as a robust multi-modal counter. While any tool would need to be evermore cost effective to meet budgetary requirements. There is no one system on the market that provides a cost effective and comprehensive travel plan management and monitoring tool with TRAVL and itrace being either too expensive or London centric. There are opportunities to build on the industry standard and wide user base of TRICS to develop SAM into a recognised standard for the UK. Any follow up study would need to address the challenges preventing this, identify potential to enhance SAM to meet market needs and develop an overall delivery strategy. The TRICS Consortium will be busy in the months ahead addressing the challenges that we face. 25