Business Attitudes Toward the Surrey County Transport Plan · Transport Survey 60 Business Attitudes Toward the Surrey County Transport Plan Prepared for Surrey Economic Partnership

Transport Survey

60

Business Attitudes Toward the Surrey County Transport Plan

Prepared for Surrey Economic Partnership

By

ANCER SPA

January 2005

Transport Survey

2

Transport Survey

59

Transport Survey

58

Transport Survey

3

CONTENTS

Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 4 PREFACE 5 - 7 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 8 - 9 2. SCOPE OF THE SURVEY 10 3. BUSINESSES INVOLVED IN THE SURVEY 11 4. OVERVIEW OF SURVEY RESULTS 12

4.1 Level of Support of Outline Objectives 12 4.2 Relevant Importance Attached Between Objectives 13 - 14 4.3 Relative Importance Attached to Specific Actions 15 - 17

5. TACKLING CONGESTION TO REDUCE DELAYS 18

5.1 Introduction 18 5.2 Survey Results 19 5.3 General Comments on Congestion 19

6. INCREASING ACCESSIBILITY TO KEY SERVICES 20 AND FACILITIES 20

6.1 Overview 20 6.2 Survey Results 21 6.3 General Comments 21 - 22

7. IMPROVING ROAD SAFETY AND SECURITY 23

7.1 Overview 23 7.2 Survey Results 23 - 24 7.3 General Comments 24

8. ENHANCING THE ENVIRONMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE 25

8.1 Overview 25 8.2 Survey Results 25 - 26 8.3 Comments 26

9. IMPROVING MAINTENANCE OF OUR TRANSPORT NETWORK 27

9.1 Overview 27 9.2 Survey Results 27 9.3 Comments 28

10 EFFECT OF TRANSPORT ON SURREY BUSINESSES 29 - 30 11. BUSINESSES’ CURRENT TRANSPORT POLICIES 31

11.1 Overview 31 11.2 Other Measures 31 - 33

12. SPECIFIC CONCERNS 34 - 48 APPENDIX 1 49 - 55 APPENDIX 2 56 - 57

Transport Survey

4

Acknowledgements SEP Would like to thank: � The company and organisation representatives who gave their time

to completing the survey � The Action Group Members for finalising the report and formatting

the recommendations � Tony Clift for editing and proof reading � Katy Todd for proof reading and desk top publishing the document � Surrey Chamber of Commerce for the views of their membership

Surrey Economic Partnership is funded by:

Surrey Chambers of Commerce SEP is a member of Surrey Chambers of Commerce

Transport Survey

57

Holiday Inn Guildford Parsons Brinkerhof

IBM Pattonair Ltd.

IMI Norgren Ltd Persimmon Institute for Animal Health

Intec Telecom Systems plc Philips Components Ltd

International Process Technologies Ltd Photo-Me International plc

International Rectifier Company (GB) Ltd Pira International

J Burley & Sons

J Sainsbury plc Premium Credit

Jarvis Hog's Back Hotel Proctor and Gamble

JBS Mailing Services Ltd Progressive Group Ltd

Johnston Sweepers Queen Elizabeth Foundation For Disabled People

K.B.R Rawlinson & Hunter

Kimberly-Clark Europe Reed Recruitment Agency

Kingston Technology Europe Ltd Rentokil Initial plc

Kuoni Travel Reptons Coaches

La Boulangerie Ltd RMC Group plc

Leatherhead Food Research Assoc. Royal Horticultural Society

Legal & General Assurance Society Ltd Sabre Insurance Company Ltd

Lingfield Park Racecourse Securicor Ltd

Logica CMG IT Consultants Skanska

LogicaCMG Stanhope-Seta Ltd

Lythe Hill Hotel TA Group Ltd/ Vantage

Martin Printing Group Taylor Nelson Sofres

Mercer Human Resources Consulting The Exchange

Merchant Navy Pensions (MNPA) Tricon Restaurants International

Miller Centre Unwin Bros Ltd

Montal Group Ltd Vokes Ltd

Mouchell Consulting Ltd

MVA Ltd

National Trust

Nescot College

Nextiraone

Notability Solutions

Novartis Pharmaceuticals

Oatlands Investments Ltd

Oxford Instruments

Handling Ltd. Plane

Pfizer

Transport Survey

56

APPENDIX 2 Our thanks go to the following organisations who participated:

Company Name

Activair Civil Aviation Authority

Air Liquide UK Clyde and Co

Airscrew Continental Airlines

AJ Clift Associates Courage Ltd

Alexander Dennis Ltd Croudace

Alfa Lavel CTS Cubic Transportation Systems Ltd

AMS (Alenia Marconi Systems Ltd) DairyCrest

AON Limited Danzas AEI

AON Ltd DC Leisure (Camberley) Ltd

Arcolectric Switches plc DC Leisure Elmbridge

Avaya Dentsply Ltd

BAA Diagonal Consulting

Bacon & Woodrow DMG World Media Ltd

Balfour Beatty Construction Ltd Dzus Fasteners Europe

BBC Research & Development E M C Computer Systems Limited

Beer & Partners Earlex Ltd

Bhs Edward Thomas & Son

Biocompatibles Ltd Eli Lilley Ltd

Bisley Office Equipment Ltd Epsom Coaches Group

Black & Veatch Ltd. ERA Technology Ltd

BOC Gases Europe Ltd Ericsson Ltd

Bovis Lendlease ( Pharmaceutical Division) Federal-Mogul Camshafts Ltd

Bristow Helicopters Ltd First National Motor Finance

Broadway Malyan Friends Provident

Bytes Technology Gastonia Coaches

Canada Maritime Agencies Ltd Gearbulk (UK) Ltd

Canon Uk Ltd Geologistics (Airfreight)

Centrica plc GFK Marketing Services

Children's Trust Glencross Cleaning Ltd

Chitty Food Group Global Exchange Services

Chubb Electronic Security Ltd. Hilton Cobham Hotel

Transport Survey

5

PREFACE This report was commissioned by the Surrey Economic Partnership Transport Action Group chaired by Steve Whiteway, Commercial Director of Epsom Coaches Ltd. It was a response to a request from Surrey County Council asking SEP to formulate a business response to the proposed changes in the Surrey local Transport Plan. SEP, through its ‘Action Group’, has been active for several years in this field including responses to the South East Regional Assemblies ‘South East Regional Transport Plan’, lobbying for ‘Airtrack’, responding to the review of airport expansion in the UK and promoting company and organisational transport plans. It was appropriate therefore that given SEP’s close working relationship with the major companies in Surrey and with a range of business representative organisations, that it should undertake this work. The report is based on: � A survey of 128 large and significant companies in Surrey � Feedback from the Surrey Chambers of Commerce membership � Comments on our findings from

− CBI SE − FSB (Surrey & Sussex Branch) − IoD Southern Region

Whilst undertaking the study, which are reported in this publication, we also talked to employers about flexible working, it’s strengths and weaknesses so that we could encourage others to adopt good practices. This report will be published in our ‘Good Practice’ series. Surrey Economic Partnership Transport Action Group Steve Whiteway (Chair) - Epsom Coaches Ltd. Jim McAllister - Rutland Group, Dunsfold Park Louise Punter - Surrey Chambers of Commerce Tony Clift - A.J. Clift Associates Nigel Horton-Baker - Surrey Economic Partnership Julia Owen - Surrey Economic Partnership Alan Browne - Runnymede Business Partnership Jim Hutchins - WSP plc Bill Simpson - Alexander Dennis Ann Evett, Damian Ward - Pfizer

Transport Survey

6

As a result of this work the SEP Transport Group, supported by the SEP Board, recommend to Surrey CC that they: � Note the sentiments of business contacted in this report with regard

to the specific objectives and actions Surrey CC have outlined in their review.

� Note the specific geographical issues and problems faced by business in Surrey as described in this report and formulate a response to each concern. � Note the specific company concerns also forwarded in confidence

with this report and respond to each company directly at a senior level and/or through Transport Plans Co-ordinator or Investor

Development Manager. � Prioritise their objective to tackle congestion and set up a hierarchy

of objectives with congestion having overall priority. Further that all objectives should have actions which simultaneously tackle conges-tion or at least do not add to it.

� Rigorously pursue the introduction of the Yellow Bus to take children

to school which has been implemented on a small scale in Runnymede. SCC have implemented a recently curtailed scheme along similar lines called ‘Pegasus’ Given scarce resources and confusion, it was felt that both schemes should begin to merge ideas, join forces and plan forward using the best of both ideas. Such a scheme is particularly relevant to alleviating the peak time congestion problem in Surrey. � Undertake a greater level of market analysis and planning on Park &

Ride schemes, with the objective of making them appropriate to employees accessing the work place (e.g. in Maidstone), not just for residents travelling to the town Centre.

� Should invest heavily in technology, whether it is for intelligent junctions that can adjust to accidents and problems quickly, or high tech plant and machinery to bring preformed replacement bridges in to place in a single operation. � Undertake more repairs and maintenance over night where possible

especially where delays are to be on going for days or weeks. In critical situations contractors should be made to use greater staffing levels to undertake the work quicker. Better co-ordination and

planning with utilities companies should also receive attention.

Transport Survey

55

9. Overall, how big an effect does the issue of local transport have

on your business?

10. Surrey Economic Partnership has a key role in representing the interests of larger businesses in Surrey and can put you in touch with a wide range of organisations that can help your company on various issues. Would you be interested in any of the following types of assistance or support? Where applicable, please state whether you would like to be contacted by an appropriate advisor.

Many thanks for your cooperation in responding to our survey.

Tick

Major effect

Moderate effect

Minor effect

Yes, interested

Yes, would like to be contacted

Advice on formulation of company travel plans

Help on relocation or expansion of your Surrey based operations

Assistance with staff recruitment or retention problems.

Support in enhancing the skills of your employees.

Advice on environmental management.

Advice on corporate social responsibility

Advice on planning issues

Assistance on R&D collaboration

Transport Survey

54

If under iv) respondent has indicated “currently practice” ask the following. You have indicated that you currently operate flexible working arrangements. Would you be prepared to answer further questions at a later date, as we are seeking to prepare case studies on this issue?

6. Many of these approaches are often brought together in travel plans. Please indicate whether your business/organisation

currently has a travel plan or intends to develop one in the near future.

7. If your business had £100 to spend on implementing transport schemes, what percentage would be allocated to each of the above objectives, related to your specific needs and priorities? (Interviewer to read out full list, then ask for allocation of

percentages).

8. We would like to understand how big an effect transport issues have on your business. Firstly, please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.

Yes No

Currently has Is considering having Would not consider Not applicable

% allocated (total = 100 %)

Tackling congestion to reduce delays

Increasing accessibility to key services and facilities

Improving road safety and security

Enhancing the environment and quality of life

Improving maintenance of our transport network

Agree Disagree

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect as we have a lot of traffic move-ments and/or visits into our premises daily

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect as many of our staff have to travel around the area to service clients

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect as we have to make deliveries to around Surrey and the surrounding region

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect because local congestion affects our staff getting to work

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a direct effect on our turnover and profit

There are other factors outside our control affecting our business more than transport e.g. land/ premises costs / availability and planning issues

Transport in Surrey It is the most significant factor outside our control

We accept the level of traffic congestion as an irritating part of life in Surrey

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a direct effect on our ability to recruit staff with appropriate skills

Transport problems are so bad for our company that we may consider relocating from Surrey in the future

Transport Survey

7

� Should ensure that Car Parking volumes and standards, especially in

employment areas, are demand led, otherwise congestion is made worse by people trying to park anywhere they can. Only when the investment has gone in to alternative and reliable public transport can we expect modes of travel to shift and the demand for car

parking to reduce. Ultimately the relationship between where people live and work needs to be brought closer to have an impact. � Consider ‘Road Pricing’ as inevitable if we are to significantly reduce

congestion and therefore it should be planned well in advance, if it is to gain any support and be successful. Take on Board

communication and customer care as being paramount in overcoming peoples frustrations which arise when congestion occurs. This includes well displayed telephone numbers to get advice during the hold ups as well as pre warning people in advance, through web based information. The new Surrey County Council ‘Traffic Management Centre’ at Leatherhead was seen as central to achieving this. � Tackle the impending extra traffic pressures and car parking de-

mands that would be put upon Guildford as a result of the agreed A3 Hindhead improvements and proposed Airtrack rail link to Heathrow.

Transport Survey

8

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The main thrust from businesses is that the main objective of the Surrey County Council should be to tackle congestion. This is also echoed in how they feel that funding should be allocated. Overall, only 16% of businesses believe that transport issues have a major effect on their business, while over 50% agree that they have a moderate effect. The following is a breakdown in order of importance of how businesses support the five main objectives in the Local Transport Plan. Also listed is the initiative in each category that had the most support. • Tackling congestion to reduce delays received 90% support (75% strongly, 15% somewhat). Businesses felt funding for this should be 32% of the overall budget.

♦ 91% believe that junction improvement schemes and the use of CCTV is a good way to control traffic and reduce delays at

bottlenecks (63% strongly, 28% somewhat). • Increasing accessibility to key services and facilities received 81%

support (52% strongly, 27% somewhat). Businesses felt funding for this should be 18% of the overall budget. ♦ Better bus services in partnership with bus operators, including new 'on demand' services - particularly for rural areas received 71% support (37% strongly, 34% somewhat).

• Improving road safety and security received 75% support (48%

strongly, 27% somewhat). Businesses felt funding for this should be 18% of the overall budget. ♦ The Safe Routes to School programme has 78% support.

(62% strongly, 16% somewhat). • Improving maintenance of our transport network received 70% support (44% strongly, 26 somewhat). Businesses felt funding for this should be 18% of the overall budget.

♦ 70% support more investment in maintenance of local roads and pavements (35% strongly, 35% somewhat). 70% also support the use of increased recycling of highway waste materials (35% strongly, 35% somewhat).

Transport Survey

53

4. Are there any other schemes or improvements, under each of the

above sub-headings, which you feel would be beneficial to your business? Please explain briefly why? Interviewer to give examples, such as specific road improvements, extra bus routes, parking in commercial and industrial areas, and ask specifically about the location where this is required. Interviewer to list sub-headings i.e.: − tackling congestion to reduce delays

− increasing accessibility to key services and facilities − improving road safety and security

− enhancing the environment and quality of life − improving maintenance or our transport network

5. Surrey’s Second Local Transport Plan aims to encourage people and businesses to reduce their dependency on the car by promoting sustainable alternatives. Please indicate the extent to which your business could employ the following measures to tackle transport issues in the county? (Interviewer to list options).

i. Encouraging greater use of public transport

ii. Promoting cycling/walking

iii. Encouraging car sharing

iv. Operating flexible working times/locations

v. Other measures (please state)

Required improvement and reason Location

i

ii

iii

iv

v

Currently practice Possibly future practice Not interested/not applicable





Transport Survey

52

iii. Improving road safety and security

iv. Enhancing the environment and quality of life

v. Improving maintenance or our transport network

1. More road safety schemes, including new 20mph zones to improve safety in local communities

Strongly support

Somewhat support

Neither support nor oppose

Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

2. Safe routes to schools activities to reduce child road casualties Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

3. Traffic calming schemes in urban and rural areas Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

4. Increased road safety education and training

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

1. Increased use of noise reducing road surfaces Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

2. Raising awareness of the need to reduce vehicle emissions Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

3. More rural traffic management measures such as ‘quiet lanes’ Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

4. Measures to reduce the impact of lorries on the environment and make lorry use more efficient Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

1. More investment in maintenance of local roads and pavements

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

2. Major investment in lighting and drainage schemes

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

3. Ongoing programme of bridge strengthening and refurbishment Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

4. Increased recycling of highway waste material Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Transport Survey

9

• Enhancing the environment and quality of life received 64% support

(33% strongly, 31% somewhat). Businesses felt funding for this should be 14% of the overall budget.

♦ The use of noise reducing road surfaces received 76% support (39% strongly, 37% somewhat).

69% or respondents said transport issues; particularly congestion are an irritating part of life in Surrey but added they didn’t want to accept it. However, 70% of respondents said they were affected by transport issues and while it was unlikely to affect the bottom line significantly, or cause the company to relocate, congestion and delays often have a major impact on staff journeys to and from work. Businesses are implementing a whole series of activities to alleviate the problems their staff face, including 45% who said they operated flexible working practices, 15% who had travel plans, 38% who encouraged car sharing and 31% who prompted cycling. Many sited the need for Surrey CC to do more to meet the needs of their staff in finding alternative travel and less need to travel options, in order that Travel Plans could be implemented. Often there was a lack of good cycle lanes, bus services not operating when and where required, park & ride sites for shoppers not employees and cycle routes for leisure pursuits not close to employment areas. Enforcement of Travel Plans through section 106 agreements, alone, was not felt to be the complete answer.

Transport Survey

10

2. SCOPE OF THE SURVEY The Surrey Economic Partnership was asked by Surrey County Council to contact the local businesses in Surrey so that they could voice their views on the Surrey Local Transport Plan, for which they have a statutory responsibility. In order to facilitate this, ANCER SPA was asked on their behalf to undertake a survey of large employers in Surrey on their views on the Transport Plan. The first Surrey Local Transport Plan was submitted for the years 2001/02 to 2005/06. The second Surrey Local Transport Plan must be produced for submission in July 2005 to obtain funding in the five-year period 2006/07 to 2010/11. The Local Transport Plan will be worth in the region of another £300m - £400 m of capital and revenue expenditure on road network, passenger transport and major new schemes over the next 5 years. Progress of the plan over the past 4 years and priorities for the next plan period, are outlined in the “Progress Report and Consultation for 2006-2011.” The key objectives that are drawn up in this document focus on the following: • Tackling congestion to reduce delays. • Increasing accessibility to key services and facilities. • Improving road safety and security. • Enhancing the environment and quality of life. • Improving maintenance of our transport network. The questionnaire presented a range of questions dealing with these five main objectives. Over 125 businesses in Surrey were contacted and asked what they saw as the key transport problems in relation to their own company and the Level of funding that should be given to the objectives and priorities outlined in the Local Transport Plan (LTP).

Transport Survey Transport Survey

51

3. I am going to list some of the proposed schemes of the second

Local Transport Plan are listed below (these are also set out in the summary leaflet). Please indicate your business’ level of support for each one. (Interviewer to list options).

i. Tackling Congestion to reduce delays

ii. Increasing Accessibility to key services and facilities

1. Bus priority schemes, including bus lanes Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

2. Better bus services in partnership with bus operators, including new ‘on demand’ services – particularly for rural areas

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

3. Improved park and ride bus services Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

4. Expansion of the cycle network to create more safer cycle routes Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

5. Better facilities for pedestrians, with the emphasis on improving access for the sensory and mobility impaired

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

6. Security and accessibility improvements to bus and rail stations Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

1. Better real-time travel information to help people avoid delays

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

2. Company Travel Plans to reduce car commuting

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

3. Junction improvement schemes and use of technology, including CCTV cameras, to control traffic and reduce bottlenecks

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

4. Improvements to local traffic conditions through the development of more effective on-street parking control Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Transport Survey

50

iii. Improving road safety and security

iv. Enhancing the environment and quality of life

v. Improving maintenance of our transport network

2. For the second Local Transport Plan challenging but realistic targets will need to be developed to ensure effective action is taken to tackle Surrey’s transport problems (see summary leaflet). Please indicate which of the following issues you believe are of primary importance, secondary importance or are of lesser

importance. (Interviewer to recap on those considered or primary importance and indicate the top five).

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Primary Importance

Secondary Importance

Of Lesser importance

Reduce delays on roads

Limit traffic growth (vehicle km)

Increase proportion of journeys by walking, cycling and public transport

Increase the number and length of cycle trips

Increase the proportion of workforce covered by travel plans

Meet national air quality standards

Increase the proportion of the population who can access key services (employment, health, education and shops) within 15-30 minutes Improve reliability of bus services

Extend real time passenger information to improve quality of travel information at bus stops and elsewhere

Improve accessibility of town centres for pedestrians

Reduce number of people killed or seriously injured on roads in Surrey

Increase the number of Safe routes to Schools

Reduce proportion of roads and footways in need of repair

Other (please state)………………………………………………………………………

Transport Survey

11

3. BUSINESSES INVOLVED IN THE SURVEY Those surveyed represented a range of varied businesses. They included large multi-nationals with over 25,000 employees worldwide to small family-run local businesses with less than 20 employees. They also included several charitable organisations, hospitals, universities and research parks. For the purposes of this study, we attempted to target the larger employers. 92 of the institutions surveyed employed over 100 employees on sites in Surrey. Of these, 66 employed over 150 while 40 employed over 250 employees on sites in Surrey. There were 128 full responses. Five of these included members of the Surrey Economic Partnership’s Transport Action Group. Included in Appendix 1 is the full questionnaire that was used. Appendix 2 lists the companies who responded.

Transport Survey

12

4. OVERVIEW OF SURVEY RESULTS 4.1 Level of Support of Outline Objectives

Surrey businesses were asked to what extent they support each of the fol-lowing five outlined objectives of the second Local Transport Plan. Table 4.1 Extent of Support to Key Objectives in the Surrey Transport

Plan

This reveals the following patterns: • It can be seen from these results, that the objective that Surrey businesses most support is tackling congestion to reduce delays. • The second most important objective is increasing accessibility to

key services and facilities.

Objective Strongly Support

Somewhat Support

Neither Support Nor Oppose

Somewhat Oppose

Strongly Oppose

Tackling congestion to reduce delays 75% 15% 8% 2% 0% Increasing accessibility to key services and facilities 52% 29% 17% 1% 0% Improving road safety and security 48% 27% 23% 2% 0% Improving maintenance of our transport network 44% 26% 25% 4% 0% Enhancing the environment and quality of life 33% 31% 30% 4% 2%

Transport Survey

49

APPENDIX 1 Below is the questionnaire that was used in this study.

QUESTIONNAIRE

Local Transport Plan

Company Details

1. To what extent do you support each of the following five outline objectives of the second Local Transport Plan?

(Refer to summary leaflet, if required): Please indicate your support in terms of the following five options interviewer to list).

i. Tackling congestion to reduce delays

ii. Increasing accessibility to key services and facilities

Company

Contact Name

Position

Contact details of person responsible for employee travel arrangements if different from above.

Address

Post Code

Telephone

Email

Line of Business

No. of Employees

Date

I Interviewer

Strongly support

Somewhat support


Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Transport Survey

48

• The Queens Road into Bisley under bridge has difficulties as there is

no right of way to Purbright and left to Brickwood. Access is left to goodwill and not traffic lights which does not prove an ideal solution.

• The river and canal systems near Brookwood Lye flood local roads. • They would value a Park & Ride scheme in the area.

• Safe well lit walking routes and CCTV for dark winter hours (e.g. there have been attacks along the canal path which is a work route for some).

• A31/A25 junction lights are badly phased. • Wisley Lane has become a dangerous rat run. • Local bus service should start at 6:00 a.m. for shift workers.

• More electronic excess speed warning signs (not radar cameras) should be used in the area.

• More road gritting in winter is needed. • Public transport from Woking Station to surrounding businesses

would be well used. • New bus service for Guildford, Brookwood and Woking Stations to

local businesses would be well used. • More road lighting is needed on the A324 where it passes Chobham

Woods.

Transport Survey

13

• Improving road safety and security was the third objective that businesses believed should be dealt with, strongly supported by just under half. • Improving maintenance of the transport network ranked as being

fourth on the agenda. • The least important objective to Surrey businesses was enhancing

the environment and quality of life. The overwhelming comment was that all of these objectives are actually inter-related. If there were less vehicles on the road, then roads would need less maintenance and the environment would be improved. If there weren’t as many vehicles on the roads, the road would naturally be a more environmentally friendly and safer place. If there was more accessibility through buses, there would be less congestion on the roads and, also, a better quality of life. 4.2 Relevant Importance Attached Between Objectives

When told they had £100 to spend on implementing the five transport schemes as they related to their specific needs and priorities, businesses allocated the following percentages to each of the objectives as shown below. Table 4.2 Funding Allocation for the Key Objectives in the Surrey

Transport Plan

Scheme AVE % Allocated

MEAN % Allocated

Tackling congestion to reduce delays 32 30

Increasing accessibility to key services and facilities 18 15

Improving road safety and security 18 20

Enhancing the environment and quality of life 14 10

Improving maintenance of our transport network 18 15

Transport Survey

14

Once again, the most important objective of tackling congestion was given the strongest support. The rest of the objectives had almost the same financial support. This is in stark contrast to how the County Council has spent their capital on transport in Survey. Over the last four years, over £91 million of LTP capital funding has been spent. The largest proportion of capital expenditure (47% or £42.8 million) of the capital expenditure has gone towards the maintenance of the 5,422 km road network, with significant sums also directed to road safety (£11.5 million), passenger transport (£7.1 million), cycling (£3.2 million) and walking schemes (£2.4 million). Over the last four years, there has also been over £300 million spent on a wide range of transport schemes in Surrey. These schemes cover a wide range of areas, including new construction, highway improvement schemes, the Fastway bus service, bridge strengthening/replacement, and a school bus initiative. The second LTP will bring additional funding for major schemes. These will be chosen on the basis of effectiveness in tackling the worst of Surrey’s transport problems whilst addressing the Government objectives. The requirements of the Regional Transport Strategy will be taken into consideration as well as what demonstrates the best value for money. Our survey highlighted the fact that what business feels is the most important and should receive the highest level of funding does not correspond to what is actually being targeted and funded through the current LTP.

Transport Survey

47

• Guildford bypass is slow going north in mornings and south in evenings - 3 lanes down to 2 provides a bottleneck. Weybridge • Parking for staff in the area is difficult . • Parking at Weybridge train station is inadequate. • There is no synchronised bus/train service at present. Currently, one

business supplies a staff minibus to get staff to and from the station for those who go to and from London. • Hammore Lane needs flashing speed signs. • St.Georges College and Heathside School need better defined safe

routes. • Bus services needed from Weybridge Station to local businesses. • Bridge work at Walton causing congestion.

• Heath Road and Addlestone Road need more lighting. • Continuous restructuring of Walton Bridge is a source of frustration.

There are currently two temporary bridges. It is felt that it would be better to have one permanent.

• Better links to the new development at Brooklands Business Park on outskirts of Weybridge need to be developed.

Windlesham • Bus service from Ascot and Sunninghill would be useful to employees. • Flooding occurs on Sunninghill Rd and causes congestion. Woking • Need more secure public parking for employee use, especially in the

town centre. • There is a complete disregard for double yellow lines in the area. • Many cycle in or walk, and would like more designated cycle paths

and wider pavements in the Bisley area near Woking. • Several businesses complained that the nearest railway stations are

a long walk away, with no direct bus service integrated with train times. This also includes the Brookwood train station.

• Increase the frequency of buses in the area of Bisley.

• More car parks for business use are necessary.

Transport Survey

46

• Bus services are not frequent enough (one every hour only) and

there no bus stops near local companies. There is need for a smaller type of bus to turn off tight roads.

• Additional bus service and stops along A217 near Kingswood Warren, Woodlands Way. • There is a lack of choice in local transport - few buses and no rail

transport. • The main issue at this location is reduced bus services, which means

that it is limiting public transport use. • They recently had bus services cut at this location and it has proved

difficult. Walton-on-Thames • Local congestion due to abuse of parking on double and single yellow lines. More enforcement of parking regulations is needed in Walton-on-Thames. • Frequency of trains has been reduced from every 15 mins to on the

hour and half hour at Walton-on-Thames train station. Also, the fast ones have been cut leaving the slow trains. This is a big issue as there was good access to and from London and local companies were trying to encourage staff to use public transport and reduce parking, etc.

• Walton Bridge over the River Thames is an issue. There has been a temporary bridge there for years with a plan to replace it in 2006.

• New bus service is needed from Walton Station and High Street, Esher and Mosely to near this site.

West Byfleet • West Byfleet Park and Woodlands Car Park have security issues. West Ewell • Need more peak time public bus services. • Traffic calming measure near Claygate School too narrow. West Molesey • This is a dangerous area with 20 min. queues with some cutting into

the middle lane - often squealing tyres heard. • The Painshill roundabout off A3 has long delays and frustration.

Transport Survey

15

4.3 Relative Importance Attached to Specific Actions The table below indicates the relative importance attached to specific actions. Ranked in terms of those considered of primary importance, the top five actions were: i. Reduce number of people killed or seriously injured on roads in Surrey ii. Reduce delays on roads iii. Increase the number of Safe routes to Schools iv. Increase the proportion of the population who can access key services v. Extend real-time passenger information to improve quality of travel

information at bus stops and elsewhere Table 4.3 Perceived Relative Importance Attached to Specific Actions

TARGETS Primary Importance Ranking

Secondary Importance Ranking

Lesser Importance Ranking

Reduce delays on roads 79% 2 17% 11 2% 11 Limit Traffic growth (vehicle km) 20% 12 53% 1 25% 4 Increase proportion of journeys by walking, cycling and public transport 40% 7 41% 4 17% 5 Increase the number and length of cycle trips 22% 11 41% 5 34% 1 Increase the proportion of workforce covered by travel plans 29% 9 36% 7 33% 2

Meet national air quality standards 40% 6 44% 3 14% 7

Increase the propor-tion of the population who can access key services: (employment, health, education and shops) within 15-30 minutes. Improve reliability of bus services 64% 4 26% 9 8% 10 Extend real-time passenger information to improve quality of travel information at bus stops and elsewhere 56% 5 30% 8 12% 8 Improve accessibility of town centres for pedestrians 25% 10 40% 6 33% 3 Reduce number of people killed or seriously injured on roads in Surrey 94% 1 2% 12 2% 12

Increase the number of Safe routes to Schools 65% 3 25% 10 9% 9

Reduce proportion of roads and footways in need of repair 39% 8 44% 2 17% 6

Transport Survey

16

When asked if there were any other targets that needed to be developed to ensure effective action is taken to tackle Surrey’s transport problems, the following were indicated. • Improve cross-country routes for public transport. • Enforce parking regulations, e.g. abuse of yellow lines. • Increase railway maintenance. • Increase the cycle lanes on the major road. There are often numerous cycle routes but no cycle lane on the major road. • Have Congestion Charges on busy roads at peak times. • More direct rail links not via London. • Increase frequency of train service. • Introduce more safe routes to work, particularly safer walks for

women. • Extend times of buses and trains. They don't run late enough to suit

the demands of those on shift work. • Reduce number of cars on road at school start and finish times. Improve ways for children to get to schools, e.g. similar to USA yellow school buses. Encourage more walking. • Improve local accessibility with better sign posting. • Minimise the disruption of repair work. The disruption caused by the

time taken to carry out repair work often overshadows the purpose of the repair. With the widening of the M25 will we feel the benefit in 2 yrs time?

• Provide more trains with competitive fares outside London. • Install more lighting for safer walking and cycling routes. • Cycle routes are popular in summer, but not in winter or rain.

Transport Survey

45

• There are to be traffic lights when a housing development is built on

land nearby, which will help exiting at peak times. This could take 2-3 years for the development - could the traffic lights come sooner?

• There are issues relating to safety and access for businesses on Cross Oak Lane, Redhill, leading to the M23.

Reigate • A road railway crossing at Reigate station, to help the flow of traffic,

is necessary. • Close Reigate off with a ring road. There are caves under the road

and road could collapse with all the traffic. • Traffic not bad from Crawley direction, but accidents cause big problems and would like to see more signage/notification as to alternate routes to take. (Crawley to Reigate, M23 / A23 and A217). • Reigate Priory School route safety issues at Rushworth and York

Road junctions with London Road. Staines • Bridge access to Staines is a major bottleneck. • There is a car park security issue at Bridgestreet.

• More lighting is needed near Elmsley Centre on route towards rail station.

• More attention needed for low bridges/HGV -more signs, possible max. height barriers.

Sunbury • More lighting needed in pedestrian underpasses around Sunbury Cross Station. • Flooding occurs in Station Road. • There are security/vandalism issues at Sunbury Station.

• Parking restrictions needed in Brooklands Close to reduce congestion. • A308/A244 roundabout is bad congestion spot. Tadworth • Very congested dual carriageway (A217) due to weight of traffic at

peak times. Standstills occur if there is an accident on the road and alternate routes are limited.

Transport Survey

44

• Pavement in the area needs to be improved for handicapped/

wheelchair users. • Bus service needed from area to Leatherhead that can accommodate wheelchair users (more than one at a time). Lingfield • Several 100's of thousands of visitors each year to the racetrack

needs to be accommodated. • Elevate cycle route status of paths through Ashhurst and Cowden. • Create new bus service from Croydon Stations and "downtown" to

Lingfield Park. Redhill • There should be an increased use in small bus services, e.g. Reigate

to Redhill and back, every 10 mins. Two deckers are too big and not cost effective for most of the day.

• There are not enough car parks in the Redhill area. Those that exist are over used and over priced.

• Roads need mending to a proper standard. There are too many potholes and road surfaces breaking up. Fill-ins are not done well enough and sink quickly. An example of this was given as the Chipstead Valley Road on bend near the park, plus the A217. • There is no public transport to the aerodrome, despite there being

other companies at the aerodrome, so workforce travel in by car. (Redhill Aerodrome, Kings Mill Lane, Redhill).

• Increase gritting of roads in winter (e.g. East Grinstead route to Redhill).

• More lighting for safety reasons in car parks, bus and rail stations and walking areas in dark.

• There are bottlenecks on routes to and from aerodrome especially through towns, especially peak times. For example, East Grinstead to Redhill and the A23 encounters bottlenecks on the way to Horley and Gatwick.

• Bus service needed from Redhill and Horley rail stations to Perryhill Business Park and this location.

• Salford Train Station would be used much more if it was manned and had more frequent service.

• Road repairs on bus routes are poor.

• Increase frequency of buses on Redhill - Horley bus route for commuters of Redhill and Salfords railway stations.

Transport Survey

17

• Better control and management of school drop off zones.

Transport Survey

18

5. TACKLING CONGESTION TO REDUCE DELAYS 5.1 Introduction

The first of the five objectives for the second LTP deals with tackling congestion to reduce delays. The following are examples of the type of schemes likely to be promoted as part of LTP2 over the next five years. • More effective control of congestion via the county’s recently opened Network Management and Information Centre, a major facility to manage the transport network and provide travel information. • Increased use of technology including CCTV cameras to aid management and control of congestion. • Better real-time travel information to help people avoid delays. • Local authority control of on-street parking (Decriminalised Parking Enforcement) extended to every Surrey district. • Further promotion of Company Travel Plans to reduce car commuting and peak hour congestion. • Improved signing and information for heavy goods vehicles. • Junction improvement schemes to reduce delays at bottlenecks.

Transport Survey

43

• Road flooding problems below Hogs Back. • Slyfield Industrial Estate has very little parking for employees - more

would be good. • Need a Park & Ride scheme from Woking to Guildford direction.

Already have one from Godalming area. • St. Peters roundabout on A320 is bad congestion spot. • Vandalism and theft occur in local car parks. • Improvements need to be made at the junction with the A3, the Cathedral roundabout. • Improvements in the A3 will need to be made when the Hindhead

tunnel is completed as this will lead to an increase in traffic and this has yet to be accounted for.

• West Guildford employers are very frustrated and the people in and around the research park are looking to move when their rents

become due. The Surrey Research Park is suffering because of the difficulty in accessing it. • The A3 needs to be rerouted around West Guildford to accommodate the traffic. • Investments should be made in cycle/pedestrian access for actual

economic development instead of for leisure. The cross county route was seen as only used for recreational purposes. Cycle paths should be developed for commuting uses instead.

Haslemere • Pavement repairs should use traditional paving- not cheap alternatives. • Bus service needed to and from Haslemere Station/ Lythe Hill area. • The A283 at Petworth is major congestion location. Leatherhead • Bus service needed from Leatherhead Station to various business

locations. • It is busy and slow with queues all the way off from motorway to work

from junction 9 on M25 to Leatherhead. • More direct rail links are necessary. Many travel from East Sussex

via London to Leatherhead. • Not enough parking for employees in Leatherhead.

• Lighting needed on A245 Leatherhead to Cobham road.

Transport Survey

42

Guildford • Increase bus frequencies.

• Increase 'park and ride'. • Movement is bad on A3 e.g. bottlenecks where 3 lanes move into 2

lanes. • Hogs Back on A3 where 3 lanes move into 2 towards Hampshire

outside Guildford. • The dangerous and congested road serving the Research Park

where not only large numbers from the Research Park access the road, but also a busy hospital, and University, needs to be dealt with.

• There is major congestion due to weight of traffic South from the A3. This creates a bottleneck on the A3 (e.g. Stag Hill and Hogs Back bend).

• The A3 has improved but so has the increase in traffic. • Bottlenecks where 3 lanes converge into 2, e.g. Guildford intersection. • The Hospital, Research Park and University all need an effective

integrated public transport system, where the rail and bus stations act as a hub for their needs. If they are all to continue to succeed, then they must be served and supported by good public transport with long-term investment. The traffic issue is a major factor in the future success of the town/city of Guildford. Housing development needs to be dispersed to other areas for Surrey to cope.

• Several business would like to see more hail and ride small buses. Several provide their own bus transport into the centre for shopping at lunchtimes.

• Issues of poor repair and security at Guildford bus station. • North Street cycle route has safety issues. • Bus service not adequate past normal commuting hours.

• New bus services are required from Godalming/Stourton/Cranleigh to this location.

• Flooding at Bedford Rd B361.

• Salt Box Road needs lighting system. • Low bridge on Salt Box Road needs height limitation signs at the two

approach roundabouts. • Existing bus routes from Guildford to this location are too long and

too infrequent. • Bus service from Guildford Station would be well used.

• Bridges at Ashvale and Frimley Green need more efficient traffic control (lights and signs).

Transport Survey

19

5.2 Survey Results

The table below indicated the relative support by businesses to such

proposed actions.

Table 5.1 Business Attitudes Towards Actions to Tackle Congestion It can be seen that there is overwhelming support for any initiative that will reduce delays. An overwhelming 91% believe that junction improvement schemes and the use of CCTV is a good way to control traffic and reduce bottlenecks. 78% of those surveyed support the idea of using real-time travel information for this. An overwhelming 91% believe that junction improvement schemes and the use of CCTV is a good way to control traffic and reduce delay at bottlenecks. There is the least support for Company Travel Plans with just 50% supporting them. 5.3 General Comments on Congestion

As the vast majority of the businesses surveyed in Surrey have agreed that congestion is the most pressing issue in regard to transport, it comes as no surprise that there were very specific issues that they felt needed to be addressed. Real-time traffic information and more effective use of adaptable roads and lights was seen to be necessary. Overall, there is a general feeling that technology can be better utilised to control and manipulate the traffic patterns. Please see Section 11 for the specific points of action that need to be addressed for specific geographical areas.

Proposed Scheme Strongly Support

Somewhat Support

Neither Support nor Oppose

Somewhat Oppose

Strongly Oppose

1. Better real -time travel information to help people avoid delays 50% 28% 13% 9% 0% 2. Company Travel Plans to reduce car commuting 21% 39% 25% 12% 2% 3. Junction improvement schemes and use of technology, including CCTV cameras, to control traffic and reduce bottlenecks 63% 28% 7% 0% 2% 4. Improvements to local traffic conditions through the development of more effective on-street parking control 28% 36% 23% 12% 1%

Transport Survey

20

6. INCREASING ACCESSIBILITY TO KEY SERVICES AND FACILITIES 6.1 Overview

Outlined below are examples of the type of schemes likely to be promoted as part of the LTP2 over the next five years to enhance the accessibility to key services and facilities. • Further priorities for buses at junctions and additional bus lanes. • Better bus services resulting from new Quality Bus Partnerships

between bus operators and the County Council. • Many more bus routes equipped with Real-Time Passenger Information at bus stops. • Improvements to bus and rail stations. • Improved Park and Ride bus services with new car parking and other facilities. • New demand-responsive bus services, particularly in rural areas. • Enhanced pedestrian facilities for the sensory and mobility impaired,

as part of town centre access studies. • Expansion of the cycle network to create safer cycle routes.

Transport Survey

41

• Children and families are unable to walk to Bourne School from

Bourne Grove. There are no pavements on the lower part of Tilford Road.

• The 30 mph sped limit on Rushmore Road was thought be unreasonably low for the area and conditions. • There have been accidents due to pavements being uneven and

cracked. • Would like to see more fast and frequent trains from Farnham to London and back. There are some very early trains but few during the day. Also, the last train comes back too early for those spending the evening in London. • London to Guildford train service is every 30 mins, but not to Farnham train station. It is also rumored that Farnham rail service is being reduced even more in the future and passengers will need to change trains. Many would like to see direct trains from Farnham to Guildford in evenings for workers and youngsters - at present every one needs to change at Aldershot. • Bus route needed from Guildford bus station to local businesses. • A bus service from Wrecclesham via Farnham to local businesses

would be well used. • Roundabout at Hogs Back Road/A331 is major bottleneck • Wrecclesham Road railway bridge is a congestion problem.

• A322 floods at Normandy. • Local pavements in bad repair. • Upper Hale Road needs parking restrictions.

• East Street floods. • Bus service needed to/from Fleet/Farnham. More and earlier (before

7:30a.m.) needed to/from Guildford/Farnham. Godalming • Bus services from Godalming and Farnham town centres would be

very useful. • Flooding occurs regularly at two points on Shackleton Road in Elstead and stops employees getting to work. Godstone • Traffic light sequencing at roundabout near J6(M25) and Godalming

causes congestion.

Transport Survey

40

• Parking in Esher is too restricted and too expensive. • Pavement verges are in poor repair and appearance. Ewell • There are safety concerns for businesses in Chessington Road,

Ewell. It is difficult getting out on to the road. One business has had to put up a caution sign that there is a concealed exit. Now that 3 people have been killed, a safety crossing with traffic lights has been put up on the bridge approx. 200 yds away, but the pavement does not go up to it from both sides of the road.

• More parking needs to be available. Several businesses are trying to obtain more spaces, but it is proving impossible.

• There is a need for more frequent train service to and from Ewell station. They only run on the half hour. So, if you just miss one, there is an hour wait. This exists despite the expensive train fares.

• Better bus service would result in more usage of the bus system. • There is no safety crossing or traffic lights on the 40mph Reigate Rd,

by the Nescot College, where it is difficult and dangerous to cross. This would also serve to slow heavy and fast moving traffic.

• There is a problem with the all over volume of traffic in the area, especially during school run times.

• Improve frequency of buses to villages. Lack of service means that people are not attracted into Reigate from the surrounding villages.

• Free subsidised bus services would attract people to use buses, therefore less cars on roads and less maintenance. It currently costs too much: £2.40 each way Kingston – Epsom.

• 2,100 cars are often trying to leave Nescot College at same times. There should be traffic lights at peak times to help cars trying to leave the college at the same time.

• Add busses from Sutton/Carshalton to this area. • Epsom one-way system is a nightmare.

• Flooding occurs on the London Road through Kingswood and Purley. Farnham • There is a safety issue with walking to work or schools where there

are no pavements or street lighting. Local roads are road used as a 'rat-runs' and are dangerous due to the speed of traffic.

Transport Survey

21

6.2 Survey Results

The table below indicates the relative importance attached to the types of action proposed to increase accessibility to key services and facilities. Table 6.1 Business Attitudes Towards Actions to Increase Accessibility to Key Services

There was overwhelming support for better bus services with 71% of businesses supporting this initiative. 6.3 General Comments

Individuals whose comments supported bus lanes, qualified their positive responses as follows: • “We are all for public transport services, but not for penalising the

motorist who is being forced to use alternatives when the public services are just not good enough.” • “It can reduce road space.” • “It should be more flexible allowing cars with 2 or more passengers

to also use the bus lanes.”


Somewhat Support


Somewhat Oppose

Strongly Oppose

1. Bus priority schemes, including bus lanes 19% 38% 29% 7% 5% 2. Better bus services in partnership with bus operators, including new 'on demand' services - particularly for rural areas 37% 34% 27% 0% 0% 3. Improved park and ride bus services 29% 25% 28% 12% 4% 4. Expansion of the cycle network to create more safer cycle routes 23% 34% 28% 10% 3% 5. Better facilities for pedestrians, with the emphasis on improving access for the sensory and mobility impaired 28% 29% 38% 3% 1% 6. Security and accessibility improvements to bus and rail stations 33% 25% 37% 0% 2%

Transport Survey

22

• “We would like more bus lanes and high occupancy vehicle lanes on

roads outside London, e.g. M25.” Individual comments from those that opposed bus lanes included: • “There are enough bus lanes but not enough buses.” • “We feel they can create more problems.” • “They can cause more problems if in the wrong places. There are

often empty bus lanes. Maybe other people should use the bus lanes as well, such as taxis and cars with more people in them.”

Of those that supported better bus services, there was a very specific view on the need that existed. One business indicated that they would support better bus services as long as they were cost effective. With regard to better park and ride facilities, one company felt that they would have definite use if one existed in their area. Another company felt that they were too remote to benefit from such a plan. As far as the expansion of the cycle network, it was remarked that the cycle paths should be kept separate and not incorporated onto current pavements. Current regulations coming into effect concerning accessibility were commented on as not being cost-effective. For example, two seats will be taken up for 1 disabled space. From the beginning in 2005, when registering a brand new coach (cost £207,000) each new coach will have to have a lift fitted (costing £12,000). Drivers will also have to be specially trained and insured to operate the lifts. Although the idea of accessibility is universally supported, it was pointed out that not all buses will need this facility and it would be better to target those who need the service with a specially designed bus and service that would be need-specific. Not every bus registered will need a wheelchair for its contracts and to require one by law was seen to be an added cost. It was suggested that a better use of this money would be to provide individual buses on-demand. Please see Section 11 for the specific points of action that need to be addressed for specific geographical areas.

Transport Survey

39

Epsom • Parking and congestion is very bad in and around Epsom. • There is a real problem with illegal parking. • Trains are unreliable and felt not be value for money.

• Maintenance of the transport network in this area was seen to be appalling.

• A bridge needed rebuilding over a stream and it took one year. If a prefabricated unit was used, the road would have only been closed for a weekend. A crane could have been used and a new bridge would have been put in

immediately. Repair times should be tightened up and be more efficient. This bridge work caused major inconvenience for a year. (Ruxley Lane, from London A3 into Epsom). • Looking forward to the Kiln Main Link - a £9m scheme by the government. It will link 2 industrial estates and divert around a height restricted bridge. Although it is still at the planning stage, it will help enormously and is universally supported. • Epsom is divided by a railway line with a height restricted bridge.

Changing this would improve traffic flow. • The new housing development, The Clusters, recently put on the old

mental hospital site has caused problems. £12m was spent on road widening (dual carriageway at Ruxley Lane) and only £1m on bus services. A dual carriage way strictly for cars was seen as not

necessary, as it could have had bus lanes and lane for cars with 2 people or more. • A road is still under construction causing a diversion supposedly from

5 April - Sept. In nearly November it still had not finished. (near East Street, Epsom).

• There are not enough buses for routes and they are too infrequent for the public to want to use them.

• There is a shortage of parking available for commuters in the area. There are 6 buildings empty nearby because there are no parking facilities. One business said they would be willing to contribute to discount parking rents of say 50 parking spaces, which would be useful both to the company and revenue for the council. (Hook Road, Epsom).

Esher • More frequent bus service from Esher Station to Shelbourne Road is

needed. • Repair and flooding problems in Littleworth Road.

Transport Survey

38

• Cycle routes in the Dorking area go to railway stations, but now the

modern trains will not transport cycles. Parking cycles at stations is not secure. Switzerland was seen as model for good practice for this. There are no places to secure a bike outside local shops. In Vancouver, buses have a space rack on the front for bikes at no extra fare.

• Difficulties exist on the A3 to Portsmouth road at Hindhead, 4 miles out of Guildford - through/under the North Downs and Devil's Punch Bowl. A dual carriageway is needed to replace the single lane road.

• Dual carriageway also needed the entire way to link road from Woking to M25, the A320. • The frequency of trains needs to be increased to every 10 minutes.

Many feel that if there were frequent trains than the focus of being “on time” could be diminished. There are also no trains arriving for a 9 am start or between 17:30 – 18:00.

• Flooding on Old Horsham Road at Beargreen needs to be addressed. • Vincent Lane traffic lights are inefficient. • Station Road works entrance is in need of repair.

• Bus service needed from Dorking Station to Horsham. • More pavement repairs needed. • More lighting needed for Deepdene Avenue.

• Road safety needs to be addressed on the A24 south of Dorking as there are too many accidents in this area.

• It is difficult for staff traveling from Guildford or Redhill to station nearby, I.e. Dorking West.

• The roundabout on the A24 just south of the M25 is a major congestion area. It was suggested that relatively low cost projects (right turn lanes, more road signs) could be used to decrease congestion. Elstead • The traffic calming methods at Fernhurst Road were thought to be

ineffective. • Bus services are infrequent in the Shackleford Road area, making at

9 am start for employees impossible. • The nearest train station is 3 miles away and there is no bus from

this station to service the local businesses.

Transport Survey

23

7. IMPROVING ROAD SAFETY AND SECURITY 7.1 Overview

The following are examples of the type of schemes likely to be promoted as part of LTP2 over the next five years in regards to improving road safety and security. • More safety schemes to continue reducing the number of people

killed and seriously injured in road crashes. • New 20 mph zones to reduce the impact of traffic and improve safety

in local communities. • Further development of the highly successful Safe Routes to School

activities, working with schools to encourage ‘greener’ travel choices and to reduce child road casualties.

• Continued programme of road safety education and training focused

particularly on primary and secondary school children. • New pedestrian crossings to improve road safety. • Traffic calming schemes in urban and rural areas. 7.2 Survey Results

The table below indicates the relative importance attached by businesses to the types of action proposed to improve road safety and security. Table 7.1 Business Attitudes Towards Action to Improve Road Safety


Some-what Support


Somewhat Oppose

Strongly Oppose

1. More road safety schemes, including new 20mph zones to improve safety in local communities 22% 36% 15% 23% 2%

2. Safe routes to schools activities to reduce child road casualties 62% 16% 17% 1% 3%

3. Traffic calming schemes in urban and rural areas 10% 38% 25% 13% 13%

4. Increased road safety education and training 45% 35% 13% 2% 1%

Transport Survey

24

There is overwhelming support for the Safe Routes to School programme with 78% support from businesses in Surrey. 7.3 General Comments

In regards to traffic calming schemes, there was overwhelming support for 30mph zones. However, several commented on the fact that slower speed restrictions cause frustration. It was felt that 20mph was too slow, except in very specific areas (such as school zones). 20 mph zones were on the whole regarded as impractical and difficult to enforce. More safe routes to the schools was universally supported, with many believing that children need to be educated to be vigilant. Many would like to see more school buses like the 'Yellow Buses' in USA. It was recognised that there is a safety issue with walking to work or schools where there are no pavements or street lighting. Also, certain roads used as “rat runs” would never be conducive to walking as they pose extreme danger due to the speed of the traffic. While private schools often organise their own successful school buses, the state system has been slow to follow although there is evidence this is a popular idea. One of the companies surveyed operates a bus service with a regular contract with Surrey County Council. It is for about 70 people where they do multi-drops, I.e. pick up children from their houses and take to and from schools. The parents wanted it and the council organised it. At first, residents didn't want buses in the posh roads, now there is universal support for the idea. The council subsidises the cost and children pay. It costs £275 per day for 2 smaller buses which carry 33 seated passengers and 8 standing. One company provided the following interesting statistics: 68%of children walk/cycle to school-they account for 73% of all school accidents, 12% of children go in parent's cars-they account for 18% of accidents, 20 % of children go to school by bus - but account for only 8% of accidents. This respondent felt that the fact facts speak for themselves: children are safer on buses and that encouraging them to travel by bicycle or walk unsupervised would lead to increased deaths and serious injury. Speed bumps provoked a few comments as well. Some were considered reasonable, while the location of others was thought to be awkward. Some even believe them to be very destructive to vehicles and a hazard for emergency services. Please see Section 11 for the specific points of action that need to be addressed for specific geographical areas.

Transport Survey

37

• Congestion on the M3 is unacceptable. Employees are frustrated as

one can sit in one’s car on the M3 only half a mile from the exit for over one hour waiting to get off as not allowed to use the hard

shoulder. It was suggested that there be some traffic device/control to instruct drivers to use hard shoulder at such times to ease traffic flow. If CCTV and traffic control/signage, it may stop abuse and regulate flow of traffic more. (M3, junction 4). • There should there be more traffic light sequencing, e.g. central control via CCTV. For example, it can take three and a half hours to travel 22 miles from Basingstoke to Frimley. • Increased security for walking along the canal path. Caterham • Traffic problems in the Aldershot area need to be addressed. • Need more secure public parking.

• There is a complete disregard for double yellow lines in the area. • OAPs should be able to travel free as in other nearby areas. Just

over the border, OAPs travel free in Croydon (Greater London), but not in Caterham.

Chertsey • Road safety issues for Pyecroft and Eastworth Roads. Cobham • Traffic flow restrictions at Chobham/Byfleet Road junction re-routes

the public away from proper access to businesses in the area. • Theft/vandalism occurs in car parks. Cranleigh • Single track roads in the area of Cranleigh Heath and Holmbury

Schools are being damaged by school run vehicles. There is no provision of parking space for school bus services at these schools.

Dorking • Arches under bridges need to be redesigned in the Surbiton to Basingstoke and Woodham to Purford areas to allow two full lanes of use.

Transport Survey

36

Ashford • No buses at night for staff working nightshifts. • There are no bus services to the fringes of town centers. • Speeding in areas of business needs to be controlled.

• Standards of railway stations are poor. • Clapham Train Station is run down and badly in need of improvement. Bookham • Church Road floods.

• Local traffic calming measures are not working well. They are hazardous and damage vehicles. Camberley • Lyon Way, Frimley Road is a point of frustration for those trying to

enter the road around the bridge and hospital areas. There is one way in and one way out, where 2 lanes merge into one. It proves confusing if one doesn't know the road. There has already been 2 or 3 accidents, some fatal, and it is worse now after changing the road layout.

• Bus routes are not reliable. • The traffic sequence at Meadows roundabout and London Rd/Blackbush Rd junction causes congestion. • New bus routes servicing the Frimley and Camberley areas are

needed. • There is limited parking available. The Council car park is too expensive at £5.50/day. • There are no bus stops near Frimley Business Park. • Frimley Business Park, (between junctions 3 and 4 on the north side

of the M3) is serviced by the nearest station, Frimley. There are no direct trains to places such as Bracknell, Basingstoke, and Kingston. It, therefore, is far easier for people to get into their car.

• There are problems with congestion and bottlenecks at roundabouts, specifically the A316 into Surrey from the London/Twickenham area.

Transport Survey

25

8. ENHANCING THE ENVIRONMENT AND QUALITY OF LIFE 8.1 Overview

The following are likely to be promoted as schemes to enhance the environment and quality of life in the LTP2 over the next five years. • Increased use of noise reducing road surface in sensitive rural and

urban areas • Raising awareness of the need to reduce vehicle emission by events

such as the ‘In town without my car’ days • Greater use of variable message signing and other measures to help

reduce vehicle emissions • More countryside traffic management measures and ‘Quiet Lanes’

initiatives, to protect rural areas • Partnership working with lorry operators to reduce the impact of

HGVs on the environment, and to support the efficient working of freight operations

8.2 Survey Results

The table below indicates the relative importance attached by businesses to the types of action proposed to enhance the environment and quality of life. Table 8.1 Business Attitudes Towards Actions to Enhance the Environment


Somewhat Support


Somewhat Oppose

Strongly Oppose

1. Increased use of noise reducing road surfaces 39% 37% 15% 6% 2% 2. Raising awareness of the need to reduce vehicle emissions 25% 25% 39% 5% 5%

3. More rural traffic management measures such as 'quiet lanes' 7% 29% 52% 6% 3% 4. Measures to reduce the impact of lorries on the environment and make lorry use more efficient 37% 34% 17% 10% 1%

Transport Survey

26

These specific schemes were among the least supported as a group. The scheme that proved the most popular was that of using noise reducing road surfaces. “Quiet Lanes” was definitely not seen as a priority by most. 8.3 Comments

While most people supported the use of noise reducing road surfaces, most qualified their response that it should be replaced as part of the maintenance. They didn’t feel that it was cost-effective to replace surfaces just for the sake of reduced noise pollution. It also was felt that it should be used as long as the cost wasn’t punitive and it proved as durable as the alternative. One person pointed out that there is an extreme difference and cited the York bypass as an example. Another cited its successful use in France and supported its wider use in the UK. One company surveyed even supplies it, and, therefore, spoke very highly of its use. While most people agree with the fact that vehicle emissions needed to be addressed, most did not consider the current air quality to pose an imminent danger, and, therefore, were slightly ambivalent. The “Quiet Lane” initiative and other rural traffic management measures met with the least support as a scheme. Most respondents didn’t have enough knowledge of them or their success. Most thought that it would require educating drivers and weren’t convinced of whether they worked. One even commented that it could even upset the ambience of an area. As far as the more efficient use of lorries, several qualified their support by responding that they though freight companies would be making the most effort to do this as it cuts their own costs. Several believed that more should go by rail. Another pointed out that the use of cars should be more efficient as well. Please see Section 11 for the specific points of action that need to be addressed for specific geographical areas.

Transport Survey

35

• One business has a member of staff who is in the process of developing an intelligent traffic-calming device. It resembles a sleeping policeman whose height adjusts on the basis of vehicle speed. • One respondent suggested that as we currently have speed reductions at peak times, that there could also be speed increases overnight or at quieter times. • There should be more stretches of 'tarmac to reduce spray' to increase visibility in bad weather for safety (e.g. There is a stretch of spray reducing tarmac near the Leatherhead junction of the M25.) • An outside fast lane should be introduced on motorways for the use

of “car sharers.” This would be similar to the car pool lanes used in California.

• Several would like to see more new road building and increased

capacity for the M25. • Several pointed out that a tax incentive from the government would

encourage people to use the buses instead of cars • There should be wider arches under railway tracks to turn bottleneck

single lane traffic into 2-way-lane traffic. The arches and bridges were original built for horses, also dig deeper so that freight lorries can pass under the bridge/arches.

• Many would like better integration between bus and rail networks,

plus more information and awareness for the public. • One respondent would like to see small buses on the road, e.g. 14-

20 seaters, and pay a flat fee to use as in Hong Kong - "Public Light Buses" (PLBs). Also, as in Tel Aviv, the PLBs are franchised and see a line of them like taxis outside cinemas and stations. They are

flexible in use and belong to the drivers.

Transport Survey

34

12. SPECIFIC CONCERNS

Organisations were asked to state specific schemes or improvements that they felt would be beneficial to their specific location and business. They were told to specify such things as specific road improvements, extra bus routes, parking commercial and industrial areas, and state specifically about the location where this is required. A list of these items is being prepared and will be reported to Surrey County Council along with this report. General Comments • Road works need to speed up on the M25. There was overwhelming

frustration at the delays that exist due to its widening. Many believe that there should be round-the-clock work and a more deliberate effort to speed things up.

• More synchronized road improvements. For example, there should

not be road improvements right after the school holidays and intersection improvement should occur at off-peak times. • There could be more congestion charging on busy roads, satellite

controlled to deter people using busy roads at peak hours. An example is a trip to York. If one travels to York at 9pm arriving midnight and if it cost £6, more people would do it. • Park & Ride could be made compulsory in high congestion centres.

There is a huge swap on employees in certain areas. • There should be more “Demand Response” buses. It is pointed out

that there are often large buses that continually go unfilled. Therefore, there should be smaller taxi type buses. These also have the advantage of being able to get into the roads that big buses can't. This would also prove cost effective as 2 smaller buses could be had for the cost of one larger bus. • It was pointed out that less money is now spent by Surrey CC than in

the 80's in “real” terms - £4m then and only £7m now. • There should be more education of the public about transport options

and availability. Travel centres could be formed to centralise information about transport.

Transport Survey

27

9. IMPROVING MAINTENANCE OF OUR TRANSPORT NETWORK 9.1 Overview

Examples of the type of schemes likely to be promoted as part of LTP2 over the next five years in relation to improving maintenance of the transport network are as follows: • New approach to maintenance of local roads and pavements to • improve the quality of the streets and local environment • Major investment in highway maintenance, lighting and drainage

schemes to improve the 5,422 km local road network • Ongoing programme of vital bridge strengthening and refurbishment

works to maintain the 2,300 highway structures in Surrey • Increased recycling of highway waster materials, generating substantial cost savings 9.2 Survey Results

The table below indicates the relative importance attached by businesses to the types of action proposed to improve the maintenance of the transport network. Table 9.1 Business Attitudes Towards Actions to Improve Maintenance

70% of Surrey businesses support more investment in maintenance of local roads and pavements. 70% also support the use of increased recycling of highway waste materials.


Somewhat Support


Somewhat Oppose

Strongly Oppose

1. More investment in maintenance of local roads and pavements 35% 35% 29% 1% 0%

2. Major investment in lighting and drainage schemes 29% 39% 30% 1% 0% 3. Ongoing programme of bridge strengthening and refurbishment 14% 20% 57% 3% 2%

4. Increased recycling of highway waste material 35% 35% 35% 0% 2%

Transport Survey

28

9.3 Comments

Maintenance of roads and pavements received universal support. Potholes were seen as hazardous to all: cyclists, walkers, and vehicles. However, a majority wanted to see these repairs coordinated more effectively. Lighting and drainage were seen as two separate issues. Many respondents had differing views on each of these issues. Where this happened, the lower level of support was used for the survey results. The responses in this category seemed to represent the specific concerns of which the respondent was aware. While over half of the respondents neither supported nor opposed a programme of bridge strengthening and refurbishment, almost all agreed that the proper maintenance should be done to ensure the integrity of the structures. It was also pointed out that the time taken for repairs should be reduced and working methods made more efficient. A specific example was cited that said that more pre-fabricated units should be used and then fitted by a crane, thereby reducing the time taken for repairs and inconvenience. Again, it was felt that there was great scope for the use of modern technology and engineering instead of old-fashioned methods. Most people believed that there should be an increased use of recycling highway waste materials as long as it proved cost effective. Many were unaware that this was a possibility and, therefore, could not offer support or opposition. Please see Section 11 for the specific points of action that need to be addressed for specific geographical areas.

Transport Survey

33

All staff entering on foot, by cycle, and by public transport, gain £5 per day. If a car is carrying a driver and 3 passengers, one person will lose the £5 reward but the other 3 will still gain £5 for car sharing. The scheme offers £5 per day at the Walton Oaks site in Surrey and £2 per day at the site at Sandwich in Kent. Another interesting scheme being used is where one large company employs its own employees to drive buses 'home to work and back'. The company also pays the workforce £5 per day to use it. Still, it points out, most prefer to use their own car. The downside to this particular scheme was that the workforce must leave work on time to get home, thus making its use restricting. The most popular measure that organisations currently employ is that of flexible working times and locations. Nearly half of those surveyed operate formal methods of working flexible hours or working from home. However, there are some sectors where customer requirements or other working prac-tices could not support it (i.e. hospitals, universities, call centres). A good summary of most attitudes towards Company Travel Plans was expressed by the following respondent: “To make company travel plans work you need the 'tools', i.e. safe cycling and walking paths and more buses, not just one every hour.”

Transport Survey

32

Several companies would like to see a greater uptake on the use of cycling. One is about to subsidise the buying of the cycle and give a discount on National Insurance if it is used. There is an overall view that the currently Cycle Network is being developed more for leisure use than for true business and commuting. An example of this was seen to be the Cross-Surrey Path. It was felt that the money spent on it had been wasted as someone commuting by bike would not have the need to travel in this way. The companies that support cycling routes would like to see specific business commuting cycling routes. They would also like to see them moved off the roads completely and kept separate. They don’t feel that a route that comes up and ends at every roundabout is an effective route. Many are frustrated that the modern trains no longer accommodate bicycles. Several companies have shower facilities/locker rooms for those who cycle. Those organisations that have shift work comment that it is not possible or safe to ask their staff to cycle in when it is dark. Several responded that they just felt that cycling was too dangerous and that their staff lived too far away for it to be possible. The Surrey Research Park is an excellent example of a company that has been pro-active in encouraging the use of public transport and cycling. They paid the County Council £250,000 in 1997 for a cycle route that has still not been implemented. They have posted and paid for their own real-time travel information on buses that run to and from their campus. They also have a dedicated shuttle service to the train station. A majority of companies support the idea of car sharing. The practice of it, however, has brought mixed reviews. The uptake of it has never fully come to fruition. Some offer special parking facilities for those who car share. The intranet is often used to link up those who would be available for car sharing. Other companies have commented that they have tried running car-share schemes, but they had not proved effective. Those that are not interested in car sharing often are those where travelling on the job is necessary or where shift work makes it impossible. Pfizer has also developed a rather innovative scheme for encouraging public transport, car sharing and cycling/walking. Pfizer currently uses a "Fiver Parking Cash Out Scheme" where the workforce is encouraged to car share (Amber code), or travel on public transport, walk or cycle (Green code). If one person comes alone to work and uses a car parking space (Red code) there is no reward. It works by the personal security swipe card on entering the company building. On entry, 50 points which are worth £5 is added to that person's salary per day, but if the security card is swiped on leaving the car park, the 50 points and £5 is deleted from their wage total.

Transport Survey

29

10. EFFECT OF TRANSPORT ON SURREY BUSINESSES In order to understand how significant an effect transport issues have on their businesses, the respondents were asked to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statements. Table 10.1 The Effect of Transport Difficulties on Surrey Businesses

Although 69% accept the level of traffic congestion in Surrey as an irritating part of life, many commented that they didn’t want to have to accept this. 79% of businesses agreed that transport difficulties have a big effect as they affect their staff getting to work. One business commented that they felt time lost due to this was equal to or greater than time lost to sickness. Again, the overall picture is that businesses are most concerned with the congestion. Almost 1 in 4 of the businesses believe that transport is the most prominent factor outside of their control. One in ten businesses is actually considering relocating from Surrey due to the transport problems.

Statement

Agree Disagree

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect as we have a lot of traffic movements and/or visits into our premises daily 76% 21%

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect as many of our staff have to travel around the area to service clients 46% 48%

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect as we have to make deliveries to around Surrey and the surrounding region 29% 67%

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a big effect because local congestion affects our staff getting to work 79% 17%

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a direct effect on our turnover and profit 29% 63%

There are other factors outside our control affecting our business more than transport e.g. land/premises cost/availability and planning issues 72% 24%

Transport in Surrey is the most significant factor outside our control 27% 64%

We accept the level of traffic congestion as an irritating part of life in Surrey 69% 25%

Transport difficulties in Surrey have a direct effect on our ability to recruit staff with appropriate skills 33% 62%

Transport problems are so bad for our company that we may consider relocating from Surrey in the future 10% 83%

Transport Survey

30

When businesses were asked how big an overall effect the issue of local transport has on their business, they responded as follows. Table 10.2 Overall Effect on Transport Difficulties on Surrey Businesses

Over half of businesses in Surrey agree that transport issues have a moderate effect on their business.

Major effect Moderate effect Minor

Overall Effect 16% 52% 28%

Transport Survey

31

11. BUSINESSES’ CURRENT TRANSPORT POLICIES 11.1 Overview

Surrey’s Second Local Transport Plan aims to encourage people and businesses to reduce their dependency on the car by promoting sustainable alternatives. Institutions surveyed were asked to what extent they employed the following measures to tackle transport issues in the county. Table 11.1 Transport Measures Taken by Surrey Businesses

Many of these approaches are often brought together in travel plans. The following table indicates how many of the organisations have a travel plan or intend to develop one in the near future. Table 11.2 Travel Plans of Surrey Businesses

22% of those surveyed were not fully aware of what a Travel Plan entailed and, therefore, didn’t respond. 11.2 Other Measures

Organisations were given the opportunity to discuss specific transport measures that they currently utilise or encourage among their workforce. Several give reduced cost travel passes or subsidise interest-free loans on rail season tickets. Another even uses discount incentives to travel at off-peak times. Larger companies are more prone to regulate the amount of cars being brought on site by making requirements that the vehicles be properly insured and have accurate MOTs. One large organisation has restricted car use to certain days and charges £250 annually for the ability to park on-site. This has encouraged greater use of car-sharing and public transport.

Measure Currently Practice

Possibly future practice

Not interested/applicable

5. Encouraging greater use of public transport 25% 31% 37%

5. Promoting cycling/walking 31% 22% 42%

5. Encouraging car sharing 38% 22% 36%

5. Operating flexible working times/locations 45% 10% 40%

5. Other measures (please state) 1% 0% 29%

Currently has Is considering Would not consider Not applicable

Company/Organisation Travel Plan 15% 21% 14% 28%

Documents

Business Attitudes Toward the Surrey County Transport Plan · Transport Survey 60 Business Attitudes Toward the Surrey County Transport Plan Prepared for Surrey Economic Partnership