Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan 2009

050235_Hemel_Hempstead_urban transport plan.qxp
17/02/2009
08:23
Page C2
Hemel Hempstead
Urban Transport Plan
These are only some of our services.
Find out more at www.hertsdirect.org
or email us at hertsdirect@hertscc.gov.uk
Every Hertfordshire library has internet access
for the public
Highways House
41-45 Broadwater Road Welwyn Garden City
Herts AL7 3SP
January 2009
printed on recycled paper with a minimum of 75% made from de-inked post consumer waste
Care for older people
Support for schools, pupils and parents
Support for carers
Fire and rescue
Fostering and adoption
Support for people with disabilities
Libraries
Admission to schools
Road maintenance and safety
Protection for adults and children at risk
Trading standards and consumer protection
Household waste recycling centres
Design ref: 050235
Hertfordshire County Council making Hertfordshire an even better
place to live by providing:
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
01438 737320
www.hertsdirect.org
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Overarching Strategy Development
Report
JMP Consultants Limited
Audrey House
16-20 Ely Place
London EC1N 6SN
T 020 7405 2800
F 020 7430 9049
E london@jmp.co.uk
www.jmp.co.uk
Job No. H080017
Report No. 1
Prepared by DP/NA
Verified DP
Approved by JB
Status Final
Issue No. 2
Date 02 January 2009
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Overarching Strategy Development
Report
Contents Amendments Record
This document has been issued and amended as follows:
Status/Revision
Revision description
Final
Issue Number
Approved By
Date
1
LEB
10/11/2008
Final
Updated
2
JB
24/11/2008
Final
Updated
3
SP
02/01/2009
Contents
0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................1
1
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................6
Context .......................................................................................................................................6
Approach ....................................................................................................................................7
2
LEGISLATION AND POLICY CONTEXT...................................................................................9
Overview.....................................................................................................................................9
European Policy .........................................................................................................................9
National Policy............................................................................................................................9
Regional and Local Policy ........................................................................................................11
3
DEVELOPMENT IN HEMEL HEMPSTEAD.............................................................................15
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................15
Existing Development in Hemel Hempstead ............................................................................15
Forthcoming Developments......................................................................................................18
Impact of Development.............................................................................................................22
4
ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES .............................................................................................23
Background...............................................................................................................................23
Socio-Economic Profiling..........................................................................................................23
Journey to Work .......................................................................................................................23
Congestion................................................................................................................................25
Parking......................................................................................................................................30
Sustainable Transport ..............................................................................................................33
Safety........................................................................................................................................44
Freight and Distribution ............................................................................................................50
Summary ..................................................................................................................................51
5
UTP AIMS AND OBJECTIVES.................................................................................................55
LTP2 Objectives .......................................................................................................................55
County Council targets .............................................................................................................55
UTP Aims and Objectives.........................................................................................................58
6
STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT ..................................................................................................62
Introduction ...............................................................................................................................62
Identification of measures.........................................................................................................62
Appraisal...................................................................................................................................63
7
PROPOSED MEASURES ........................................................................................................65
Overview...................................................................................................................................65
Smarter Choices measures ......................................................................................................65
Sustainable transport measures...............................................................................................67
Passenger transport .................................................................................................................70
Social Inclusion.........................................................................................................................72
Highways and freight ................................................................................................................73
Traffic and network management.............................................................................................74
Parking and Park & Ride ..........................................................................................................75
Contribution towards LTP2 objectives......................................................................................76
8
DELIVERY PROGRAMME.......................................................................................................78
Programme Summary ..............................................................................................................78
The involvement of partners .....................................................................................................84
Tables and Figures
Table 4.1 Census 2001: Travel to Work town comparison (KS15 & KS17 data sets).................... 24 Table 4.2 Hemel Hempstead rail services ...................................................................................... 33 Table 4.3 Main bus routes............................................................................................................... 38 Table 4.4 Bus corridor improvements .............................................................................................. 39 Table 4.5 All accidents by severity 2004-2007 ................................................................................ 44 Table 4.6 Child accidents by severity 2004-2007 ........................................................................... 46 Table 4.7 Pedestrian accidents by severity 2004-2007 .................................................................. 46 Table 4.8 Cycle accidents by severity 2004-2007 .......................................................................... 48 Table 5.1 LTP Indicators and Targets............................................................................................. 56 Table 7.1 Contribution to LTP2 objectives ....................................................................................... 77 Table 8.1 Code for measures.......................................................................................................... 78 Table 8.2 Very short term measures............................................................................................... 79 Table 8.3 Short term measures....................................................................................................... 80 Table 8.4 Medium term measures .................................................................................................. 82 Table 8.5 Long term matters for consideration ............................................................................... 84 Figure 1.1 Study Area ....................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 3.1 Residential and commercial areas................................................................................. 16 Figure 3.2 Urban development possibilities highlighted within the Core Strategy.......................... 19 Figure 4.1 Hemel Hempstead Journey to Work Mode.................................................................... 24 Figure 4.2 Traffic flows on key routes ............................................................................................. 26 Figure 4.3 Trip Purposes in Hertfordshire (Hertfordshire Travel Survey 2005) .............................. 27 Figure 4.4 Congestion in Dacorum ................................................................................................. 28 Figure 4.5 DBC and non-DBC car parks and major roads.............................................................. 32 Figure 4.6 Rail network map ........................................................................................................... 34 Figure 4.7 Hemel Hempstead bus network map............................................................................. 37 Figure 4.8 Topography assessment................................................................................................ 41 Figure 4.9 All accidents (2004-2007) .............................................................................................. 45 Figure 4.10 Pedestrian accidents (2004-2007)............................................................................... 47 Figure 4.11 Cycle accidents (2004-2007) ....................................................................................... 49 Appendices
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
APPENDIX F
Hemel Hempstead UTP Interventions Approach Public Transport Survey List of ‘Planning for Real’ Attendees Glossary Summary Maps 0
Executive Summary
Introduction
0.1
In April 2007 Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) commissioned JMP Consultants (JMP) to
develop an Urban Transport Plan (UTP) for Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire. The purpose of a
UTP is to identify short, medium and long-term strategies to shape travel patterns and provide a
transport framework for related policy issues. The framework developed within the UTP provides
the focus for transportation improvements over the next 15 to 20 years. These are given final focus
in section 8 and Appendix A. Appendix A provides the interventions, priorities, costs, lead
agencies, and time-scales.
0.2
This Hemel Hempstead UTP supplements and expands the ambitions and proposals contained in
the second Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan for the period 2006/07-2010/11.
0.3
The UTP covers only the Hemel Hempstead urban area which has a population of over 82,000 and
a plan is shown in Figure 1.1.
Approach
0.4
A series of separate tasks were carried out within the development of the UTP report including:
•
A review of relevant legislation and policy
•
A review of available data and a gap analysis as well as a ‘Health Check’
•
A review of planned major developments
•
Walking and cycling audits
•
A survey of public transport use
•
The development of targets
•
A ‘Planning for Real’ event
•
The identification of potential measures
•
The appraisal of potential measures
Legislation and Policy Context
0.5
To be an effective strategic tool the Hemel Hempstead UTP will support national, regional and local
policy objectives. Furthermore, any proposals within the UTP must abide by current legislation.
0.6
The legislation and policy review covered five levels of government but the focus was at the
regional and sub-regional level:
0.7
•
European Union;
•
National (Department for Transport, Department for Communities and Local Government);
•
Regional (East of England Regional Assembly, East of England Development Agency etc);
•
County (Hertfordshire County Council); and
•
District (Dacorum Borough Council).
The policy review provides the context for the analysis and assessment of current and future issues
and problems in the area. With the publication of the Stern Report, The Economics of Climate
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
1
Change, and also The Eddington Transport Study: the Case for Action, national policy appears to
be shifting further to the promotion of sustainable transport.
Development in Hemel Hempstead
0.8
0.9
Hemel Hempstead will experience significant major developments over the next 20 years:
•
The redevelopment of Waterhouse Square/ Civic Zone.
•
The regeneration of Maylands Business Park following the Buncefield oil terminal explosion.
•
Major residential development around Hemel Hempstead proposed in the East of England Plan
(EEP) – 12,000 dwellings by 2021, along with employment provision, and allowance for further
growth to 2031.
•
Hemel Hempstead Hospital - a number of services have recently been transferred to other
facilities and more will follow in the near future.
•
The Urban Capacity Study (2005) reviewed all sites in the town that could potentially be used
for housing or other development. Potential development could arise in Apsley, Central Hemel
and Nash Mills in addition to those planned in EEP.
•
Other significant developments – the Kodak building, as well as the Spencer Park and Jarman
Park are in the process or are planned to be redeveloped.
The cumulative effects of the proposed developments needs to be considered in order to fully
understand the transport requirements in the town. It will be important to ensure that, wherever
feasible, the growth in movement generated through developments is catered for by sustainable
transport modes and the necessary transport and other infrastructure must also be provided to
serve this expansion.
Issues and Opportunities
0.10
Mobility and transport is an integral part of society and a key issue for Hemel Hempstead.
Increasing car ownership and usage in line with national trends result in a high dependency on the
private car to satisfy movement needs. While the car is a convenient and versatile means of
transport for many but at increasing social, environmental and economic cost the resulting increase
in traffic volumes and road congestion contribute to and create a poorer quality environment.
Unfortunately on average some four accidents occur every week in the town. However it is
interesting to note that Hemel Hempstead is one of the most self contained towns in Hertfordshire
where people work and enjoy leisure activities within the same locality.
0.11
While car dependency, the resulting highway infrastructure and the lack of alternative modes play
an important part in the transport issues for Hemel Hempstead, there are a number of other
challenges faced by the town such as promoting sustainable transport in improving public
transport, congestion management, improved cycling and walking provision which are discussed
further in this UTP.
0.12
The issues and opportunities identified have been gathered from several sources which include key
stakeholder interviews, policy reviews, walking and cycling audits, the public transport survey, and
a planning for real consultation day with stakeholders.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
2
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
LTP2 Objectives
0.13
In its LTP Hertfordshire County Council sets out nine objectives for transport policy for the period
up to 2010/11. These fall into the categories of safety, congestion, accessibility, air quality and
quality of life. This UTP helps deliver these nine LTP2 objectives and the targets set by the County
Council.
UTP Aims and Objectives
0.14
The purpose of the UTP is to identify short, medium and long-term strategies to shape travel
patterns and provide a transport framework for negotiations associated with development control.
0.15
The aims of the UTP are to:
•
Locate developments to reduce travel needs/ distances and encourage public transport,
walking and cycling use;
•
Provide opportunities to reduce car use through sustainable transport choices;
•
Promote modal shift and active travel;
•
Improve road safety, especially for non-car modes;
•
Support ‘smarter choices’ travel demand management measures;
•
Promote efficient freight and distribution;
•
Reduce negative impact of transport on the environment; and
•
Improve traffic management.
Strategy Development
0.16
The proposed new developments in and around Hemel Hempstead, whilst generating new trips,
also provide an excellent opportunity to promote sustainable travel and reduce car dependency in
the area. To achieve this, however, will require appropriate policy measures to ensure that access
by public transport, on foot or cycle becomes a viable alternative option to travel by private car.
0.17
An outcome from the work of this plan is that further traffic modelling is now taking place.
Appraisal
0.18
0.19
These transport needs were subjected to an objective-led appraisal process. Each proposed
measure was assessed not only for its contribution against the UTP objectives but also against a
series of criteria representing the extent of deliverability. The ‘deliverability’ criteria encompassed
the following four area:
•
Policy fit (the extent to which the measure supported national, regional and local policy);
•
Value for money (whether the measure provides value for money);
•
Feasibility (whether implementation is technically feasible); and
•
Acceptability (whether the measure is likely to be publicly and politically acceptable).
Each measure was given a rating of high, medium, low for all four areas and a weighted score
applied accordingly.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
3
0.20
A total score was generated for each measure combining the ‘contribution to objectives’ rating and
the ‘deliverability’ rating from which the following the measures were then ranked and then
classified in terms of priority: high; medium; or low.
0.21
In total 129 measures were identified that target on or more of the UTP objectives. Of these around
36 (28%) were considered to be high priority schemes in terms of both the range of objectives that
they would target and their deliverability. A further 47 schemes (36%) were rated with medium
priority with the final 46 (36%) considered to be lower priority, although still worthwhile. (This is
discussed further in Chapter 8 and appendix A).
Proposed measures
0.22
The proposed measures that have been identified as meeting one or more of the UTP objectives
are presented within seven key themes:
•
Promoting Smarter Choice measures;
•
Encouraging sustainable transport;
•
Promoting passenger transport use;
•
Promoting social inclusion;
•
Highways and freight;
•
Traffic and network management (including road safety); and
•
Parking and Park & Ride.
Delivery Programme
0.23
A detailed programme of interventions and measures that comprise the Hemel Hempstead UTP
has been set out, categorised by mode and type of measure.
0.24
The programme covers four distinct timescales:
•
Very short term wins – measures that could be implemented within 2-3 years;
•
Short term – measures that could be implemented over the next 5 years;
•
Medium term – measures that could be implemented 5-10 years from now; and
•
Long term – measures that could be implemented 10-20 years from now i.e. over the lifetime of
the Local Development Framework.
Partnering
0.25
The active involvement of partners will be needed to ensure that all the proposed measures are
implemented according to the required timescale. Amongst the multi-agency issues that will
influence implementation are the following:
•
Political drivers (e.g. EEP) for new housing developments will require close liaison with the
Regional Assembly, for example regarding funding for transport infrastructure;
•
The impact of the Buncefield explosion and need to liaise with national and regional agencies
to regenerate the business park will be important for the Maylands Partnership;
•
Partnerships for transport systems, e.g. no bus quality partnership currently exists in Hemel
Hempstead, but might be considered;
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
4
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
•
The Council will need to liaise with the healthcare and education sectors, Highways Agency
and regional bodies e.g. the East of England Development Agency;
•
Cross-boundary working with other councils, notably the City and District of St Albans and
Three Rivers.
Preplanning and Consultations for the Plan
0.26
With all the developments for the area on line detailed discussions took place with interested
parties (over 36 interviews at the commencement of the study). This work resulted in a ‘Health
Check’ and as a result a further report was put together to make suggestions of how to solve the
transport planning issues and a transport model was commissioned.
0.27
As work continued senior officers in Dacorum and HCC steered progress as a steering officers’
forum was used to agree the way forward.
0.28
Elected members representing the Borough and the County met at regular intervals. As work
continued a planning for real day was held where some 40 organisations from Hemel Hempstead
were invited and many ideas and proposals of that day have been taken forward.
0.29
This document is now in the public domain and any further comments will be taken on board where
appropriate. The Plan will be presented to the Dacorum Council for approval and then ratified by
the County Highways and Transport Panel before being adopted.
Delivery of Schemes
0.30
It is anticipated the Plan will have its necessary Governance by Spring 2009. The Plan will be the
agreed template for transport planning for Hemel Hempstead for the next five years.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
5
1
Introduction
Context
What is an Urban Transport Plan?
1.1
In April 2007 Hertfordshire County Council (HCC) commissioned JMP Consultants (JMP) to
develop an Urban Transport Plan (UTP) for Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire.
1.2
The purpose of a UTP is to identify short, medium and long-term strategies to shape travel patterns
and provide a transport framework for related policy issues. The UTP should provide a practical
tool for negotiations associated with development control but also consider links to wider policy
issues such as health, education, social inclusion and community safety. The framework developed
within the UTP will provide a focus for transportation improvements over the next 15 to 20 years.
Relationship with the Local Transport Plan
1.3
This Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan supplements and expands the ambitions and
proposals contained in the second Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan for the period 2006/072010/11 that was published in March 2006. It also elaborates on proposals contained in the West
Hertfordshire Area Transport Plan (March 2007). Thus it is a more detailed plan that addresses the
particular issues and challenges that affect the town which is only part of the Dacorum Borough
Council area.
1.4
It should be noted, however, that highway maintenance is not part of the scope of this UTP, as it is
covered by the Hertfordshire Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP).
Geographic Area
1.5
The UTP does not cover the whole of the Dacorum Borough Council area, only the Hemel
Hempstead urban area. This incorporates a population of over 82,000, approaching 8% of the
residents of Hertfordshire. Whilst a large proportion of the area is residential there are also key
employment areas, retail centres and leisure attractors.
1.6
Figure 1.1 overleaf provides an overview of the study area.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
6
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Figure 1.1 Study Area
Key
- - - - Study Area Boundary
Major Road Network
Rail Line
Approach
1.7
A series of separate tasks have been carried out within the development of the UTP report. These
have focused on ensuring that the emerging strategies fit both within local, regional and national
policy, as well as emphasising that they address the identified issues and objectives for Hemel
Hempstead. These tasks are summarised in Appendix B and include the following:
•
A review of relevant legislation and policy;
•
A review of data and a gap analysis;
•
A review of planned major developments;
•
Officer and key stakeholder consultation;
•
Preparation of the modelling report;
•
Preparation of the ‘Health Check’ report;
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
7
1.8
•
Walking and cycling audits;
•
A survey of public transport use;
•
The development of targets;
•
‘Planning for Real’ event;
•
The identification of potential measures; and
•
The appraisal of potential measures.
The report is structured as follows:
Section 2 reviews all the relevant legislation and local, regional and nation policy;
Section 3 examines the extent of current development in Hemel Hempstead and presents the
potential future development opportunities;
Section 4 summaries the key transport issues within the town and the opportunities available for
improvements;
Section 5 utilises the background data collated alongside the policy context to determine the key
aims of the UTP. These aims are then qualified in terms of specific objectives and, where
appropriate, targets;
Section 6 sets out the process of overall strategy;
Section 7 outlines the proposed measures; and
Section 8 sets out an overall programme for transport, including potential “very short term” and
short-term scheme measures for implementation and medium/longer term areas for development.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
8
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
2
Legislation and Policy Context
Overview
2.1
To be an effective strategic tool the Hemel Hempstead UTP should support national, regional and
local policy objectives. National policy is primarily set out by the Department for Transport (DfT).
Furthermore, any proposals within the UTP must abide by current legislation.
2.2
There is a vast array of legislation and policy documents which provide the context for the UTP.
The extent of their influence depends on their strategic level and scope, timeframe, and relevance
to local transport in a town such as Hemel Hempstead. Some documents are now quite dated
(albeit still extant), while others are in draft form or are in the process of being revised or replaced.
2.3
The section below seeks to establish the key policy influences on the development of the Hemel
Hempstead UTP.
European Policy
European Transport White Paper (2001)
2.4
The European Transport White Paper, although now seven years old and pre-dating the eastward
expansion of the EU, still carries significance in setting the wider European transport policy
framework. At its heart is the need to minimise the environmental impacts of transport across the
EU while supporting local economic development and promoting sustainable forms of transport. It
highlights a range of policy tools to help achieve this including the use of economic, fiscal, social,
educational, urban transport and land-use planning policy to reduce the demand for, and the need
to travel. Of particular relevance are international commitments to reduce CO2 emissions and the
need to apply these at a local level, and the need to ensure that everyone has adequate access to
mobility. This UTP has been developed within the framework of the European Transport White
Paper.
National Policy
2.5
The development of the UTP has been influenced by a range of national legislation and policy. The
principal documents, and their influence, are set out below.
Transport White Paper: The Future of Transport (DfT, 2004)
2.6
The 2004 Transport White Paper: The Future of Transport, sets out the Government’s vision for
transport over the next 30 years. Three key objectives relevant to Hemel Hempstead are that:
•
The road network should provide a more reliable and freer-flowing service for both personal
travel and freight, with people able to make informed choices about how and when they travel;
•
Bus services should be reliable, flexible, convenient and tailored to local needs; and
•
Walking and cycling should be developed as real alternatives for local trips.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
9
Smarter Choices – Changing the Way We Travel (DfT, 2004)
2.7
Smarter Choices – Changing The Way We Travel is having an increasing influence on local
authority transport policy in England, with its emphasis on changing travel behaviour and
increasing the use of sustainable modes of transport through ‘soft’ measures. This document
highlights the scope for ‘modal shift’ as a result of a range of measures aimed at increasing
awareness and information and providing incentives to people to use alternatives to the car.
Examples of Smarter Choices measures include travel plans, personalised travel planning and
improved public transport information provision.
2.8
Smarter Choices have a significant part to play alongside physical infrastructure measures.
Smarter Choices initiatives are aimed, in particular, at reducing commuter and school traffic and
the associated congestion and pollution, but also at raising awareness generally about sustainable
transport options.
Draft Local Transport Bill (2007)
2.9
The Draft Local Transport Bill, published in May 2007, is likely to influence transport in Hemel
Hempstead in the future, although it is primarily concerned with the larger metropolitan
conurbations. The Bill’s three key strands are: reforms to bus policy; changes to transport
governance in relation to Passenger Transport Authorities (PTAs); and changes to the road pricing
approval process.
2.10
Of these three strands, the most relevant to Hemel Hempstead are the changes to bus regulation.
New powers will give local authorities – in the case of Hemel Hempstead it would be Hertfordshire
County Council - greater ability to enter into and specify the terms of bus quality contracts. In
particular they will be able to subsidise services to increase the standard of service on a particular
route (such as frequency, hours of operation or type of vehicle); and set minimum frequencies,
timings and maximum fares. The Bill also extends the maximum length of bus subsidy contracts
from five to eight years, and allows quality contracts to run for at least ten years with the option of
renewal at the end. These provisions will allow the County Council to enter into more prescriptive
bus quality contracts with bus operators in Hemel Hempstead to the benefit of passengers.
2.11
Although the Bill allows the creation of PTAs outside metropolitan areas under secondary
legislation, the political indication is that this is unlikely to be pursued in Hertfordshire. The third
strand of the Bill strengthens the powers for Local Authorities to implement road pricing schemes
and re-invest the revenues into local transport improvements. This builds on the provision of the
Transport Act 2000 which also permitted authorities to introduce workplace parking levies.
Although, in theory, both road pricing and workplace parking levies are options for Hemel
Hempstead, in practice they would need to the considered in a regional context where schemes
are consistent and interoperable.
Other Documents
Making the Connections (2003)
2.12
The social inclusion agenda and its relationship to transport is set out in Making the Connections
(2003). This emphasises the importance of improving access to employment and key services
(including healthcare, fresh food shopping and leisure activities), particularly for those without
access to a car. In view of the relatively low level of car ownership in Hemel Hempstead and
relatively high levels of social deprivation in some areas, this agenda is of particular relevance.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
10
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Climate Change Bill (draft March 2007)
2.13
The climate change agenda, as highlighted by the Stern report, is embedded in the Climate
Change Bill (draft March 2007). Achieving a shift to more sustainable modes of transport will play a
key role in achieving the CO2 reductions required to meet the UK targets – a 60% reduction by
2050 is required. Transport is seen to be a major contributor to CO2 emissions and therefore this
is a key issue to be addressed within the UTP.
Current Planning Bill
2.14
The Planning Bill, currently in Parliament, will introduce a new system for approving major
infrastructure of national importance, including transport, and will replace current regimes under
several pieces of legislation.
2.15
There will also be a new Community Infrastructure Levy on developments to finance infrastructure
which would allow local authorities to raise money from developers to pay for facilities needed as a
consequence of new developments, such as transport, schools, hospitals and sewage plants.
2.16
Given the extent of future development proposals in and around Hemel Hempstead the Planning
Bill provides opportunities for associated transport provision.
Planning Policy Guidance Note 13
2.17
2.18
Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 (PPG13: Transport) integrates land-use and transport decisions.
The key aims of PPG13: Transport are to:
•
Promote sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight;
•
Promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport,
walking and cycling; and
•
Reduce the need to travel, especially by car.
PPG13 sets out the circumstances where it is appropriate to change the emphasis and priorities in
provision between different transport modes, in pursuit of wider government objectives. The car will
continue to have an important part to play and for some journeys, particularly in rural areas, PPG13
acknowledges that it will remain the only real option for travel. Conversely, in town centre areas,
such as Hemel Hempstead, the opportunities to reduce the dependence upon the car are viable
and so should be pursued.
Regional and Local Policy
East of England Plan
2.19
At a regional level the key influence is the East of England Plan (EEP) – the Regional Spatial
Strategy. The EEP is the key driver for the planned expansion of Hemel Hempstead in terms of
new housing (12,000 dwellings between 2001 and 2021, of which 1,860 were built as of March
2006) and employment development. Building the remaining 10,140 houses requires almost
doubling the rate of construction from 370 units a year to 680. It will be important to ensure that the
necessary transport and other infrastructure are provided to serve this expansion.
2.20
The EEP defines Hemel Hempstead as a key centre for development and change as well as being
a major town centre and regional transport node. The measures in Policy T5 (Inter Urban Public
Transport) include improved access, particularly by sustainable local transport to main line railway
stations, improvement to rail services to enhance capacity and passenger comfort, facilities to
support and encourage high quality interurban bus/coach services, particularly east-west links and
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
11
other situations where rail is not available, coordinated with rail and local public transport, and
strategic park and ride with the aim of reducing car use. The Plan permits reviewing and altering
Green Belt boundaries around the town. Much of the proposed new development could take place
to the east of Hemel in the St Albans District Council area.
2.21
The EEP aims to make more efficient use of existing infrastructure, make greater provision for
housing and achieve a better balance of homes/jobs in an area seen as having good underlying
economic prospects. The vision for Hemel Hempstead aims to capitalise on its strategic links to
Watford, proposed major development at Brent Cross/ Cricklewood, Central London and other
growth points at Luton and Milton Keynes. The EEP calls for improved strategic infrastructure
including creating the conditions for significant increased potential for public transport usage within
the town, particularly within areas of new development, as well as better conditions for walking and
cycling. Hemel Hempstead is also part of the Central Hertfordshire Transport Priority Area.
Hertfordshire Second Local Transport Plan
2.22
Hertfordshire’s Second Local Transport Plan (LTP2) sets out the County Council’s vision for the
future of transport in Hertfordshire over the next 20 years. This is: ‘to provide a safe, efficient and
affordable transport system that allows access for all to everyday facilities. Everyone will have the
opportunity and information to choose the most appropriate form of transport and time of travel. By
making best use of the existing network we will work towards a transport system that balances
economic prosperity with personal health and environmental well being.’
2.23
The vision assumes that the car will remain the dominant form of transport in terms of the number
of journeys made, but that its physical dominance will be reduced so as to allow everyone a choice
of travel mode. This means:
•
People will be and will feel safer travelling on Hertfordshire’s roads;
•
Hertfordshire will have a transport network that moves freely and efficiently transporting people
and goods;
•
People will have a reasonable cost and time to their journeys to access key facilities such as
education, healthcare, work and shopping;
•
People will have access to information to inform their travel choices by different modes to their
choice of destination; and
•
Hertfordshire will have a network that is managed in a sustainable manner to ensure residents
do not have their quality of life impeded.
2.24
However Hemel Hempstead received little specific mention in the LTP2, which covers investment
priorities for the period from 2006/07 to 2010/11, and no major transport schemes were planned for
the town.
2.25
Dacorum Borough Council’s priorities in relation to the LTP, as set out in its Commitment
Statement, are:
•
Tackling Congestion – through parking management and park and ride, and addressing the
impact of congestion on air quality;
•
Delivering Accessibility – through supporting non-commercial bus services and the
concessionary fares scheme, implementing the Dacorum Cycling Strategy, and using the
planning process to secure Section 106 monies for sustainable transport and to reduce the
need to travel;
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
12
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
•
Safer Roads – through accident reduction and safer routes to schools projects; and
•
Better Air Quality – through continued monitoring, although there are no air quality
management areas declared at present.
West Hertfordshire Area Transport Plan
2.26
The West Hertfordshire Area Transport Plan is one of a series of area transport plans emanating
from the Herts LTP1. It provides a framework for West Hertfordshire, setting out the direction for
transport improvements over the next 15-20 years. The plan covers Hemel Hempstead,
Berkhamsted and Tring. Sixteen actions are identified covering a range of interventions in the area
including parking management; local traffic management; safety improvements; funding for public
transport; an emerging cycling strategy; and School Travel Plans. It does not set out a detailed
programme of work.
Local Development Framework Core Strategy Issues & Options Paper (2006)
2.27
2.28
2.29
The Local Development Framework (LDF) will be prepared in general conformity to the EEP. There
will be significance to transport needs of the emerging local development framework and Hemel
2020. The Core Strategy is the most important document of the LDF and will set out the framework
for planning policy, identifying the pattern of development over the next 20 years. The Issues and
Options paper covers:
•
vision and objectives;
•
sustainable development;
•
the settlement development strategy;
•
housing, employment and retailing;
•
transport and infrastructure;
•
community development;
•
landscape, wildlife and bio-diversity; and
•
monitoring and implementation.
The consultation paper sets out options for consideration, including eleven elements of a draft
vision promoting an integrated transport network and the re-use of urban sites for new
developments. The twenty-two draft objectives include the following:
•
Encouraging high density development;
•
Maximising the use of places with high transport accessibility;
•
Initiating the regeneration of urban sites;
•
Using previously developed land for development first;
•
Reducing pollution;
•
Reducing car use and encouraging the use of public transport, cycling and walking; and
•
Providing convenient transport opportunities to meet residents’ needs; and providing access to
goods and services.
Three transport issues for Dacorum are highlighted in the paper, namely congestion, parking, and
accessibility. The document also points out that the Council proposes to use planning obligations to
secure investment for transport and access.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
13
Hemel 2020: Our Vision, Our Future (2006)
2.30
This document describes the vision for the future of Hemel Hempstead, aiming to inspire future
developments and respond to the town’s regeneration challenges, some 60 years after the first
Masterplan for the new town in 1947. It emphasises the need for sustainable housing and
communities; a thriving town centre; the rejuvenation of the Maylands industrial area; and the need
to improve the natural and natural environment. It does not set out any detailed proposals nor the
timescale for implementation.
2.31
The current Local Plan, the emerging Local Development Framework and the Hemel 2020
document form the basis for future development planning in the town. This local planning is very
important for providing the context for the UTP’s aims and objectives (in particular in respect to the
location of future development). Thus this plan will be revised as the locations for growth become
clearer.
Hemel Hempstead Town Centre (including the Old Town Centre) Strategy
2.32
This strategy is based on work undertaken by the Hemel Hempstead Town Centre Management
Partnership and builds on the success of the Hemel Hempstead Town Centre Plan (included in the
Dacorum Borough Local Plan adopted in 1995) which led to the modernisation of the town centre.
2.33
The strategy is also a basis for action plans - programmes of projects and activities to be
undertaken by the Hemel Hempstead Town Centre Management Partnership (HHTCM), or where
HHTCM will seek to influence decisions by other agencies.
2.34
The vision aims to be the starting point for a stronger commercial performance and a high quality
environment. Future development of the town centre is intended to build on the good accessibility
and an attractive environment. It has four aims:
2.35
•
To achieve a quality environment for the benefit of those who live, work and shop in the town
centre;
•
To maintain a high standard of day-to-day management and security for the comfort,
convenience and safety of all town centre users;
•
To provide a range of facilities and services for all age groups so as to add to the vitality and
attraction of the town centre; and
•
To promote, encourage and guide development and investment in order to attract new
businesses and improve the viability of the town centre.
Many of the principles behind the Strategy are being taken forward through the work on
Waterhouse Square/Civic Zone.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
14
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
3
Development in Hemel Hempstead
Introduction
3.1
Current transport and travel behaviour in Hemel Hempstead is largely determined by the pattern of
development that has evolved since the new town was created. Land-use planning decisions and
settlement policy have a significant influence on travel behaviour. In developing the UTP it is
therefore very important to understand both the existing array of land-use as well potential changes
in the future.
3.2
The LDF Core Strategy sets out considerable scope for development in and around Hemel
Hempstead
with
potential
for
higher
density
town
centre
development
and
development/redevelopment around the town. Such is the scale of this potential change it is
important that not only are the implications for travel demand understood but that the opportunities
for influencing the manner of this travel are pursued. In particular, the UTP needs to provide the
framework to ensure that the development takes place in accordance with the principles of
sustainable transport.
Existing Development in Hemel Hempstead
Background to Hemel Hempstead New Town
3.3
Hemel Hempstead was one of several new towns developed in Hertfordshire as part of post-war
planning policy to cater for London overspill. The original 1947 development plan was a forwardlooking, ambitious scheme with provision for parks and open spaces and other amenities as well as
business centres, including Maylands. Much of the original plan has since been accomplished.
3.4
Now over 82,000 residents are housed in Hemel Hempstead, in 33,000 households. The main
areas of development in the town as a whole can be segmented as follows:
3.5
•
The Town Centre;
•
The Old Town Centre;
•
Existing Neighbourhoods; and
•
Developments since the New Town was created.
A map of Hemel Hempstead featuring the residential and commercial areas, as well as key
developments can be found in Figure 3.1.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
15
Figure 3.1 Residential and commercial areas
The Town Centre
3.6
Hemel Hempstead town centre is over a mile long from the Plough roundabout in the south to
Queensway in the north. It is bounded on the west side by Leighton Buzzard Road and housing
areas beyond. On the east side the steep sloping valley side rises up to the hospital on Hillfield
Road and other residential areas. The area incorporates the Dacorum Civic Centre, the Bus Station
and Marlowes Shopping Centre.
3.7
The town centre is clearly defined by the geography of the area being at the confluence of two
valleys (of the rivers Gade and Bulbourne). The structure of the town centre is also defined by the
road network which enables through traffic to bypass the centre. Vehicles requiring access to car
parks and premises have to circulate around the centre. This network does, however, have the
tendency to sever the links between the town centre and surrounding areas.
3.8
The town centre has developed a number of distinct areas, or zones, which have predominant land
use characteristics or common themes. These zones form the basis of the town centre strategy.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
16
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Civic Area
3.9
The area which contains the Dacorum Civic Centre is due to be redeveloped with additional
housing, retailing and public agency functions (see below). At present the site also hosts the
library, car parking, the police station, bus station and some retailing functions. The market used to
be adjacent to the civic area, however now only the bric-a-brac market remains, as the general
market has been relocated into the Marlowes.
Marlowes Shopping Area
3.10
The prime retail area in Hemel Hempstead has been consolidated around the Marlowes pedestrian
area and in the Marlowes Centre. Nevertheless there are opportunities for further modernisation
and redevelopment of existing buildings for retail use. The quality environment attracts shoppers.
The present pedestrian environment is excellent and could be extended to other parts of the town
centre as part of the Waterhouse Square development (see below).
Old Town Centre
3.11
Based around the High Street and Queensway, the historic quality of the built environment of the
Old Town is recognised in its designation as a conservation area, containing buildings of special
architectural or historic importance.
3.12
Whilst the Old Town was the original commercial centre of Hemel Hempstead it has declined in the
economic strength. Its character, however, suggests an opportunity for quality specialist shops as
well as local services for residents within the immediate catchment. The evening economy in the
area is well developed and includes the Old Town Hall Arts Centre.
Apsley
3.13
To the south of the town lies Apsley, now a suburb and major retail centre. Originally the area was
a centre for paper making, but it is now home to many warehouse outlets set in Retail Parks and
includes a large J Sainsburys Supermarket. While this has led to growth in HGV movements
improvements have been made to London Road to accommodate additional traffic.
Existing Neighbourhoods
3.14
Around the town centre Hemel Hempstead comprises several neighbourhoods, each with distinct
characteristics and travel requirements. They are:
•
Adeyfield – located on a hill to the east of the old town, this was the first of the new town
districts to be started (Area K).
•
Bennetts End – located on the rising ground to the south east and another original district of
the new town (Area N).
•
Boxmoor – a mostly Victorian developed district to the south-west which grew up because of its
proximity to railway station and trains to London (Area A).
•
Chaulden – a 1960s estate south west of the town (Area B).
•
Corner Hall – south of the town centre with access to Apsley Rail Station (Area Q).
•
Cupid Green – a 1960s estate north east of the town on the site of an old fireworks factory
(Area H).
•
Gadebridge – a later 1960s development located northwest of the old town. The area
dominated by an expansive public park, with leisure facilities (Area E).
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
17
3.15
•
Grovehill – a small estate towards the northern edge of Hemel Hempstead which contains a
community centre and local playing fields (Area G).
•
Highfield – a district of the original new town located north east of the Old Town (Area F).
•
High Street Green – a residential area bordering Maylands, separated by a playing field and
Mayland Woods (Area J).
•
Leverstock Green – a village which existed before the new town and which has now been
subsumed into it, although retaining its original village centre (Area L).
•
North End Farm – a residential area in the south of Hemel which is north of Bunkers Park (Area
M).
•
Nash Mills – the southernmost ward of Hemel, which is dominated by green space, especially
to the east and south. There is residential development in the central and western parts and an
industrial estate in the west (Area O).
•
Stoneycroft – a residential area (Area C).
•
Warner's End – a residential area comprising high quality housing (Area D).
•
Woodhall Farm – a housing estate on the north-eastern edge of town towards Redbourn built
in the mid to late 1970s (Area I).
As part of the Hemel Hempstead 2020 project, the potential for environmental and access
improvements at certain neighbourhood centres has been identified.
Developments since the new town was created
3.16
A number of significant changes have occurred in the town since the foundation of the new town.
3.17
The Jarman Park Leisure Centre was opened containing a cinema, ten pin bowling, ice rink,
water park and night clubs. There is also an adjacent restaurant and superstore. Land was also
reserved for a hotel, but to date this remains vacant.
3.18
The former Dickinsons factory site, straddling the canal at Apsley, has been redeveloped with
housing, a mooring basin, and a hotel. An office block is also planned.
3.19
An indoor shopping mall (The Marlowes Centre) was developed adjacent to the south end of the
Marlowes retail area and, in 2005 the Riverside development was opened effectively extending
the main shopping precinct towards the Plough roundabout. These two developments have moved
the "centre of gravity" of the retail centre further south.
Forthcoming Developments
3.20
Hemel Hempstead will experience significant major developments over the next 20 years. The
current Local Plan includes housing proposal sites on the edge of town: Manor Estate (300),
Leverstock Green (Green Lane – 100, Pancake Lane – 55), North East Hemel Hempstead (350),
and Redbourn Road (30). The forthcoming urban development possibilities around Hemel
Hempstead, extracted from the DBC’s Core Strategy document, are highlighted geographically in
Figure 3.2 and the key proposals are described in the sections below. The sites are distinguished
between proposed and previously rejected sites, proposed sites, and possible sites.
3.21
In addition to the development potential around Hemel Hempstead which is described in Figure
3.2, there are also a number of regeneration sites within the town centre area.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
18
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Figure 3.2 Urban development possibilities highlighted within the Core Strategy
Waterhouse Square/ Civic Zone
3.22
3.23
Proposals for the redevelopment of the town centre are well-advanced. This is a 14ha site bounded
by Queensway, Marlowes, Bridge St. and Leighton Buzzard Road. It is likely to include:
•
A new ‘civic district’ featuring a new town hall, library and college;
•
A high quality shopping and entertainment district including a performance venue and new
80,000 sq ft supermarket;
•
A river walk/cycle path along the banks of the River Gade linking Gadebridge Park to the new
civic district and beyond;
•
1,000 residential units 2/3/4 bedroom houses overlooking the river and Marlowes;
•
A new covered market and cinema;
•
Rejuvenation of the Old Town with a new public space, new homes and traffic calming in
Queensway; and
•
New bus facilities, car and cycle parking.
The mixed-use nature of the development will bring residents, shoppers and visitors throughout the
day and at night with implications for transport provision. The residential units will be provided with
parking at less than one space per unit potentially putting pressure on the Hammerfield, Highfield
and Gadebridge area, which may lead to a need for parking controls.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
19
3.24
A new bus station is proposed as part of the Waterhouse Square / Civic Zone redevelopment. The
main bus stops and shelters would be arranged around a new market square with the bus station
acting as an interchange and serving less frequent routes In addition, car parks are planned
alongside the Water Gardens between Bridge Street and Moor End Road.
Maylands Business Park
3.25
The Maylands Masterplan sets out a vision for the future development of the business park. The
aim is to create it into a sustainable, well connected, green business park hosting high quality
employment facilities and accommodation, within a pleasant environment, complemented by a
range of shops, cafes and restaurants set in a network of open spaces. The development aims to
reach the highest environmental standards and will incorporate an on-site Energy Centre. Thus a
wider range of activities is likely to arise over time generating different movement patterns.
3.26
One objective of the Masterplan is to make Maylands an accessible place to work, through
introducing high quality public transport, encouraging sustainable forms of travel via a variety of
modes, and promoting ease of movement and reducing congestion in and around Maylands. The
Masterplan establishes a number of Character Areas, including Maylands Gateway, the Face of
Maylands, the Engine Room, and the Service Centre.
3.27
For Maylands Gateway, the Masterplan sets out several important elements for access and
parking:
•
New buildings should not be dominated by car parking. Parking should be avoided on the
Breakspear Way frontage, and the potential for underground and undercroft provision explored.
•
Secure and conveniently located cycle parking to be provided for each development.
3.28
HCC is still considering new vehicular access points into Maylands. For the Face of Maylands, the
key parking and access points are that secure and conveniently located cycle parking should be
provided for each development.
3.29
For the Engine Room, the key elements include sufficient space to be provided for lorry parking
and manoeuvring. Secure and conveniently located cycle parking should be provided for each
development. Parking at the front of buildings should be limited to two rows of vehicles.
3.30
In the Service Centre, sufficient space should be provided for lorry parking and manoeuvring, and
secure and conveniently located cycle parking should be provided for each development.
3.31
A new access road is being considered by the HCC and would lead into Maylands through the
Gateway to accommodate traffic from currently congested routes into Maylands. The eastern
fringes of the Gateway could also include a Park and Ride facility serving both Maylands and the
town centre, with a dedicated and secure HGV parking area.
Potential Development to the East of Hemel Hempstead
3.32
The East of England Plan (EEP) is the key driver for the planned expansion of Hemel Hempstead.
Significant new housing (potentially 12,000 dwellings by 2021) and employment development is
due to arise. EEP has recommended that the Green Belt boundaries around the town are
reviewed, and altered, to accommodate the growth. Much of the proposed new development would
take place to the east of Hemel in St Albans District.
3.33
EEP designates Hemel Hempstead as a key centre for development and change as well as being a
major town centre and regional transport node. The Plan aims to make more efficient use of
existing infrastructure, greater provision for housing and the achievement of a better homes/jobs
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
20
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
balance in an area with good underlying economic prospects.
regeneration of the low density post-war town centre.
The plan also promotes the
Potential Development in Apsley, Central Hemel and Nash Mills
3.34
The Urban Capacity Study (2005) reviewed all sites in the town that could potentially be used for
housing or other development. The Study identified sufficient capacity for a large increase in
housing within the town (2,500 dwellings by 2021) in addition to those planned in EEP. The main
areas for expansion are likely to be Apsley, Central Hemel (including those in the Waterhouse
Square redevelopment) and Nash Mills. This would represent a very large increase in
accommodation that would have a significant impact on the transport networks.
Priorities for development from the LDF
3.35
The LDF Core Strategies Issues and Options Report has identified seven areas as priorities for
future development:
•
North East Hemel Hempstead – Wood End Farm/ Redbourn Road South
•
West Hemel Hempstead – Chaulden/ Pouchen End
•
Old Town/ Highfield Extension
•
North Hemel Hempstead - Marchmont Farm
•
North Hemel Hempstead – Grovehill and Woodhall Farm
•
South East Hemel Hempstead - Leverstock Green
•
South Hemel Hempstead - Shendish
Two other possible development areas for Hemel Hempstead lie within the St Albans District
Council boundaries:
•
North East Hemel Hempstead – Holtsmere End/ Redbourn Road North
•
East Hemel Hemptead – Breakspear Way/ East of Buncefield
Hemel Hempstead Hospital
3.36
Hemel Hempstead Hospital (HHH) site currently has poor access on a very steep hill with difficult
access on foot or by public transport and car. The site is very cramped with multiple buildings
located on a small site with narrow roads and footpaths. A number of services have recently been
transferred to other facilities and more will follow in the near future. The demands on HHH will
therefore change as a result.
3.37
The longer term vision for the site depends upon a Hertfordshire-wide review of acute care
provision. It is likely, however that HHH will provide primary care as a local general hospital with
out-patients and day care facilities. The hospital authorities are unlikely to need the entire site after
2014. Nevertheless since there are problems at both HHH and Watford of poor accommodation for
nurses etc the site could be redeveloped for this use.
3.38
The construction of a new link, to provide access into HHH from the A414 is still a possibility, since
it might be funded by developers’ contributions.
Other significant developments
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
21
3.39
The redevelopment of the Kodak building, as well as the Spencer Park and Jarman Park
developments are the other most advanced schemes.
3.40
The Kodak building is due to include over 400 residential units, office and retail outlets. Planning
permission has been given, subject to S106 contributions being agreed. The development will
provide a new pedestrian link to the riverside area into Debenhams. Traffic generation from the
building is a potential issue and therefore the exit from the building will be onto Leighton Buzzard
Road and new traffic lights will be installed next to the existing ones on Leighton Buzzard Road.
Car parking under the tower will be shared between residential and commercial users.
3.41
A development brief has been prepared for mixed use activities at Spencer Park and consultation
undertaken but the site could become 100% residential. Progress on this development has been
hindered by the influence of the Buncefield explosion but a Planning Agreement is due in summer
2008 and work is due to start during the winter of 2008/09.
3.42
Discussions are proceeding over the future redevelopment of Jarman Park, and Tesco had applied
for a mezzanine level and decking for the car park but this has since been withdrawn. Retail
warehousing is also likely to be located there. Additional possible developments include an Indoor
Ski Centre on St Albans Hill and a new stadium on the eastern side of the town.
Impact of Development
Implications of new developments
3.43
The proposed developments in and around Hemel Hempstead will generate demands for extra
movement, putting additional pressure on the existing transport networks. Much of this movement
would be vehicular traffic, including freight movements, leading to additional congestion, more road
accidents, worsening air quality and noise pollution. The traffic growth from these developments
will need to be modelled to assess their impact in greater detail (Note: a transport model is
currently being constructed for the town).
3.44
The cumulative effects of the links between all the proposed developments needs to be considered
in order to fully understand the transport requirements.
3.45
It will be important to ensure that, wherever feasible, the growth in movement generated through
developments is catered for by sustainable transport modes and the necessary transport and other
infrastructure must also be provided to serve this expansion. Section 106 agreements will form an
important aspect of securing funding for these measures.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
22
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
4
Issues and Opportunities
Background
4.1
Mobility and transport is an integral part of society and a key issue for Hemel Hempstead.
Increasing car ownership and usage in line with national trends result in a high dependency on the
private car to satisfy movement needs.
4.2
The resulting increase in traffic volumes and road congestion contribute to and create a poorer
quality environment. The car is a convenient and versatile means of transport for many but at
increasing social, environmental and economic cost.
4.3
While car dependency, the resulting highway infrastructure and the lack of alternative modes play
an important part in the transport issues for Hemel Hempstead, there are a number of other
challenges within the transport context faced by the town which are described in this chapter. An
important one to consider is the impact of potential future development in Hemel Hempstead, as
this could have a significant effect on the transport network.
4.4
The issues and opportunities at the core of this section have been gathered from several sources
which include key stakeholder interviews, policy reviews, a walking and cycling audit, a public
transport survey, and a planning for real consultation day with stakeholders (a list of attendees can
be found in Appendix D).
4.5
The issues and opportunities have been highlighted after each section and have been abbreviated
and numbered (e.g. Congestion Opportunity 1=CO1 or Accessibility Opportunity 1=AO1) within the
key areas of the UTP.
Socio-Economic Profiling
4.6
Nearly 82,000 residents are housed in Hemel Hempstead, in 33,000 households. Almost a further
60,000 people live in other parts of the Dacorum Council area that encompasses Berkhamsted,
Tring and surrounding rural areas. In total over one million people live within 12 miles of the town.
4.7
Nearly half of residents in Hemel Hempstead are of working age (25-59). Less than 5,000 people
are classified as being from ethnic groups according to the 2001 Census but 12% of the population,
over 12,000 people, suffer from some kind of disability. By comparison with both the county and
national population, Hemel has a higher proportion of under 4 year olds and of 10-14 year olds.
4.8
Any future developments will have an impact on the socio-economic profile of the town and should
be considered when decisions are finalised.
Journey to Work
4.9
Table 4.1 shows that the town’s public transport mode share is on the low side. 9% of people use
this mode to travel to work, compared to 13.7% in Hertfordshire, 10.9% in the East of England and
16.5% in the whole of England. This figure is also lower than the nearby towns of St Albans
(20.5%), Watford (18.1%) and Luton (12.8%). This lower figure is due to high commuting into
London and other Hertfordshire destinations.
4.10
The proportion of car drivers is subsequently higher than average, with 69.2%, compared to 64.4%
in Hertfordshire, 64.7% in the East of England and 61.0% in the whole of England.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
23
4.11
Non-motorised transport (NMT), i.e. walking and cycling, was slightly higher in Hemel than the rest
of Hertfordshire (11.8% versus 10.6%) and slightly lower than the East of England (13.0%) and
England (12.8%).
4.12
The average distance travelled to work (11.79 miles) was lower than the rest of Hertfordshire
(14.65), the East of England (15.88) and the whole of England (13.31). Hemel has a lower share
working from home than Hertfordshire and the East of England (8.1% versus 9.4% for the latter
two). The share of public transport users in households without a car or van was high, compared
to the region. The Hemel figure was 19.5%, compared to 12.5% for Hertfordshire, and 14.5% for
the East of England. England overall had a higher share, with 30.45%. Nevertheless it is one of the
most self-contained towns in Hertfordshire.
Table 4.1 Census 2001: Travel to Work town comparison (KS15 & KS17 data sets)
District/
Borough
Cars per
household
Work
from
Home
(%)
PT
mode
share
(%)
Car
mode
share
(%)
NMT
mode
share
(%)
Distance
travelled
to work
(in miles)
PT users in
households
without car
or van (%)
Hemel
Hempstead
1.27
8.1
9.0
69.2
11.8
11.79
19.5
Hertfordshire
1.34
9.4
13.7
64.4
10.6
14.65
12.5
East of England
1.27
9.4
10.9
64.7
13.0
15.88
14.5
England
1.11
9.2
16.5
61.0
12.8
13.31
30.45
Excludes motorcycles, taxis and ‘other’ categories; Source: Census 2001
4.13
An overview of the journey to work modes for Hemel Hempstead is illustrated in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1 Hemel Hempstead Journey to Work Mode
Source: Census 2001
CI1: High car use to work
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
24
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Congestion
Car Ownership
4.14
According to Census data, Hemel has a higher level of car ownership than many comparable
nearby towns, with 1.27 cars per household. This figure is, however, lower than the average car
ownership across the county, though it is equal to the East of England figure.
4.15
While car ownership is high, over 20% of households lack access to a vehicle - higher than the
average for Hertfordshire. But in parts of Gadebridge and Adeyfield around 40% of households lack
access to a car. Fewer households in Hemel are multiple car owners than in the rest of the county;
car occupancy rates appear to be growing.
Highway Description and Traffic Flows
4.16
Hemel Hempstead has several locational benefits in terms of transport. The town is served by the
M1 motorway from London to Leeds - junction 8 is less than 2 miles away, while junction 20 of the
M25 London orbital is less than 4 miles from the town centre.
4.17
The M1 is one of the busiest motorways in Britain and is a strategic link between London, the
Midlands and the North and is adjacent to Hemel. The section between Junctions 6A and 10 is
approximately 10 miles long, stretching from the M25 to Luton. It carries an average of 160,000
vehicles per day with long delays experienced at peak times. Works to widen the M1 constructing
new parallel roads are due to be completed by autumn 2008. The objective is to reduce
congestion and improve both safety and journey time reliability.
4.18
The M25 is one of Europe's busiest motorways, handling around 200,000 vehicles every day. It is
at the core of the Highways Agency’s national network, and there are plans for future widening to
help tackle congestion and improve journey times. Widening plans entered the Government's
Targeted Programme of Improvements in April 2004 and since then the Agency has been
developing design, programming and procurement arrangements. The sections to be widened
include from Junction 16 to Junction 23 (M40 - A1 (M)) – 22 miles that serve as a southern bypass
for Hemel Hempstead.
4.19
The M10 link from the M1 to the A414 and the M25 provides the town with connections towards the
eastern ports and onwards towards the Channel Tunnel.
4.20
To the west, the A41 is now a dual carriageway and serves as a by-pass to the town. Although
Hemel Hempstead lacks a designated ring road the A414, A4146 and A4147 currently serve this
purpose, at least in part.
4.21
Close proximity to major motorways has disadvantages however. Suburban roads suffer whenever
there is an incident on the motorways, or other main roads, that cause traffic to be diverted. This
can delay buses and freight movements. In the past a northern bypass and a north east relief road
have been proposed to help address the problems of congestion in the town centre.
4.22
Other than the motorways, the main traffic routes for Hemel Hempstead are the A414 (Breakspear
Way, St Albans Road, Leighton Buzzard Road, and Two Waters Road) and the A41 bypass.
Figure 4.2 shows the traffic counts on the roads in the town where counts are made.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
25
Figure 4.2 Traffic flows on key routes
Source: Herts Highways
4.23
The Hertfordshire Traffic & Transport Data Report 2007 shows that the total number of vehicle
kilometres per day was 3.83 million on all roads and 2.70 million on HCC roads. This represents a
decrease of -2.79% on all roads but an increase of 3.91% on HCC roads between 2006 and 2007.
The highest recorded flow (annual average weekday) was on the M1 with 128,200 (in 2007).
4.24
The Data Report also includes local traffic forecasts, using 2001 as the base year. For Dacorum,
an 18.8% increase is predicted by 2011 and a 30.8% increase is predicted by 2021. These
increases are largely due to the proposed growth in new households and jobs in the district, as
identified in the East of England Regional plan.
4.25
In the document Tackling Congestion in Hertfordshire (HCC 2007), with the exception of trips
home, the main trip purposes are for work (20%), followed by shopping (14%) and recreation
(13%). These figures (seen in Figure 4.3) cover the whole day and indicate that the causes of
congestion are not simple and straightforward to solve.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
26
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Figure 4.3 Trip Purposes in Hertfordshire (Hertfordshire Travel Survey 2005)
Trip Purposes
Transport
connection
6%
Education
4%
Home
33%
Other
10%
Recreation
13%
Shop
14%
4.26
Work
20%
The main congestion hotspots can be seen in Figure 4.4. The main corridors affected within the
town are Link Road, London Road, parts of Leighton Buzzard Road, parts of the A414, Redbourn
Road and Leverstock Green Road. Outside the town, Box Lane, used to access the A41 and the
M1, is also affected.
4.27
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
27
Figure 4.4 Congestion in Dacorum
Source: HCC - Tackling Congestion in Hertfordshire, 2007
Note: The locations are marked by a D for ‘Dacorum’ followed by the site number.
4.28
The new developments in and around Hemel Hempstead will generate demands for significant
extra movement, putting additional pressure on the existing transport networks. Much of this
movement would be vehicular traffic, including freight movements, leading to additional congestion,
more road accidents, worsening air quality and noise pollution. The traffic growth from these
developments will need to be modelled to assess their impact in greater detail.
4.29
The cumulative effects of the links between all the proposed developments need to be considered
in order to fully understand the transport requirements.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
28
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
4.30
It will be important to ensure that as much as possible of the likely growth in movement is catered
for by sustainable transport modes but the necessary transport and other infrastructure must also
be provided to serve this expansion.
4.31
Any new developments will have an impact on the highways and levels of traffic flows and
congestion. This impact will need to be considered and mitigated as much as is feasible. Section
3.18 and Figure 3.2 highlighted the urban development possibilities, extracted from DBC’s Core
Strategy Issues & Options document.
CI10: Future developments will impact on the A414, Link Road, Leighton Buzzard Road, and
public transport
4.32
The following issues and opportunities arose from the Planning for Real event in relation to
highways and traffic flows.
CI1: High car use to work
CI2: Large commuting flows to London
CI3: Congestion on key highway routes
•
East-west on A414, back to M1
•
Maylands roundabouts
•
Plough Roundabout
•
Box Lane to Bovingdon
•
Two Waters Road
•
Redbourn Road
•
London Road
•
Leighton Buzzard Road
CI4: Congestion caused by conflicts between general traffic and HGV vehicles
CI7: Crowded rail services to London in peak periods
CI8: Delays to local bus services due to highway congestion
CI9: Links to new developments will put pressure on east-west routes
CO1: Promote sustainable transport modes for likely increase in personal trips to address
current and future problems
CO2: Improve public transport
CO3: Encourage walking and cycling for local trips as well as for access to other modes
(e.g. rail station)
SO1: Highways improvements
Junctions and Signals
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
29
4.33
A SCOOT signal with bus priority exists at junction A4251 London Road/B4505 Box Lane/Felden
Lane (installed 05/12/05).
4.34
MOVA controlled signals can be found at the following junctions: A414 Link Road/A4215 London
Road, Apsley Mills/London Road and A4251 Hempstead Road/Rucklers Lane.
4.35
The following opportunities regarding junctions resulted from the Planning for Real consultation
event.
CO4: Junction improvements on A414
Road Schemes
4.36
The two committed road schemes for Hemel are the works on the M1 and M25.
4.37
The section of the M1 between junctions 6a and 10 is in the process of being widened and is due
to be completed by the end of 2008. The objective is to reduce congestion and improve safety and
journey time reliability.
4.38
As mentioned above, there are plans to widen the M25 from Junction 16 to Junction 23 which
represent a southern bypass for Hemel. These plans were submitted in April 2004 and are in the
process of being developed.
4.39
The two suggested schemes are a north east relief road and a northern bypass, neither of which
has been approved.
4.40
The potential for a north east relief road has been identified to help address the problems of
congestion, which arises especially when an incident on the motorways or other main roads causes
traffic to be diverted onto the A414, A4146 and A4147. It was also proposed to serve Maylands.
4.41
A northern bypass was considered as part of the Hemel Hempstead Transport Plan (1995), with an
indicative route linking the A41 near Bourne End to the M1 at its crossing with Redbourn Road.
This option, however, was previously disregarded due to its environmental impacts.
CO5: North East Relief Road
Air and Noise Pollution
4.42
The proposed new developments will cause an increase of movement which will have an impact on
air and noise pollution. This should be mitigated from the outset through improved infrastructure
and the promotion of more sustainable transport modes.
4.43
Currently no AQMAs (Air Quality Management Areas) exist in Hemel Hempstead. Due to the
relatively high levels of HGV traffic in the area air problems exist however, for example on the
Leighton Buzzard Road. Problems also arise at Junction 8 of the M1 but the responsibility for the
motorway lies with the Highways Agency, not the County or Borough Councils.
Parking
4.44
The Borough Council acquired Decriminalised Parking Enforcement (DPE) powers in 2003 and
introduced a management regime in its car parks and on-street which gives priority to residents
and short stay parking, with lesser priority being given to long stay, commuter parking. The
enforcement regime run by the Council aims to control obstructive parking which can lead to traffic
delays.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
30
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
4.45
The Council manages 1200 off-street controlled spaces (inherited from the New Towns
Development Commission in 1999) but these were not charged for until October 2003.
4.46
Four non-DBC managed car parks exist in Hemel:
4.47
•
Marlowes (1995 created) 1200 spaces mainly for short stay parking;
•
NCP: first of this design in UK; 200 spaces; 15 min segment charging;
•
Riverside (next to Debenhams): 350 spaces owned by Arlington property; and
•
Hospital: over 100 spaces.
New levels of charges for DBC-managed parking in the town have recently been approved.
Nevertheless parking is generally cheap; the Water Gardens car park costs £0.50p for parking up
to 1 hour and £1.70p for up to 4 hours. In the Old Town car parking costs just £1.10 a day while in
Apsley it is also inexpensive – long-stay parking costs only £2.00 a day. Parking at the hospital is
expensive however, £3 for up to 3 hours but £12.50 for over 5 hours, in order to deter staff from
using their cars.
CI5: Abundance of parking in town centre and parking charges too low to discourage
driving into centre or to support effective P&R
4.48
CPZs (Controlled Parking Zones) are being provided where a parking problem manifests itself and
the residents support its introduction. Two CPZs exist adjacent to town centre: hospital (operates
up to 8pm Monday – Saturday) and in town centre (operates up to 5pm Monday – Saturday). Two
more are committed – Boxmoor and Old Town but there has been public opposition to these
proposals. There is a possibility of a CPZ in Cotterells and Heath Lane which could be extended
north to include Astley Road.
4.49
A small CPZ is planned on Lamsey Road (South of St Albans Road) on the same timescale as
Cotterells. A new CPZ may be provided next to Kodak with extended hours but no Kodak residents
will have access to Cotterells CPZ
4.50
A CPZ may be provided on Roughdown Road (near station) and Catlin Street. In Apsley a possible
CPZ could be introduced in the Weymouth Street area but this could create possible problems for
local shops.
4.51
The Council has recently ended funding the Hemel Hempstead Park & Ride scheme in Gadebridge
Park which had been intended to provide an alternative for commuters working in the town centre
as well as serve the hospital. In 2004 a report was prepared regarding Park & Ride for Herts
Highways by the House consultants and presented to the Dacorum Borough. The conclusion was
that “with the present parking fees charged in Hemel Hempstead it would be many years before
Park and Ride in Hemel Hempstead would be a feasible proposition with the present policy. Hence
consideration for increasing Park and Ride schemes has not been progressed."
4.52
A map of the main DBC and non-DBC car parks can be found in Figure 4.5. Additional parking is
located in Apsley, Chaulden, Gadebridge, Grovehill, Highfield, Nash Mills and Woodhall Farm.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
31
Figure 4.5 DBC and non-DBC car parks and major roads
4.53
The following issues and opportunities related to parking arose from the consultation event.
CI6: Congestion caused by double parking in some residential areas
CO6: Congestion management including travel plan development, development control
requirements including car parking
SI2: Inappropriate parking
SO2: Parking enforcement
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
32
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Sustainable Transport
Rail
4.54
Hemel Hempstead is served by London Midland and has several services running to London
Euston, Milton Keynes Central, Tring and Northampton. London Midland is a new company which
has combined the former Silverlink County and most of Central Trains into a single franchise.
4.55
Rail services also serve Bedford (via Bletchley) and St Albans (via Watford Junction). The growing
city of Milton Keynes, also served by London Midland, is the gateway to the 400 mile-long West
Coast Main Line, which is currently being upgraded and has services to Birmingham New Street
Liverpool, Manchester, Preston, North Wales and Glasgow.
4.56
The ticket numbers at Hemel Hempstead and Apsley equal over 2 million every year. The majority,
over 1.6 million, use Hemel Hempstead, including about 2% who interchange at the station (DfT).
4.57
An overview of rail service frequencies from Hemel Hempstead can be found in Table 4.2 and a
map of the rail network can be found in Figure 4.6.
Table 4.2 Hemel Hempstead rail services
Line
4.58
Peak frequency
Off-peak frequency
Hemel Hempstead to London Euston
4 per hour
4 per hour
Hemel Hempstead to Milton Keynes Central
1 per hour
1 per hour
Hemel Hempstead to Tring
2 per hour
2 per hour
Hemel Hempstead to Northampton
1 per hour
1 per hour
Apsley to London Euston
2 per hour
2 per hour
Apsley to Tring
2 per hour
2 per hour
Nearby St Albans is also well situated for rail journeys. St Albans City railway station provides a
fast and regular service into the capital, St Pancras International and Gatwick and Luton airports,
as well as links to the East Midlands services, via Luton and Bedford. The East Coast mainline (at
Stevenage) is also accessible, at a distance of about 30 miles by car.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
33
Figure 4.6 Rail network map
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
34
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
4.59
As part of the South Midlands Route Utilisation Strategy there is a proposal for a rail link to
Stansted, via Bletchley, that could open new opportunities in the future.
4.60
Unfortunately Hemel Hempstead station is separated from the town by Boxmoor so nearly all
access is vehicular. There are 519 parking spaces at the station costing £5.50 per day. The
occupancy rate (6th Jan to 2nd Feb 2008) was 100%. Hertfordshire County Council is establishing
the feasibility and funding for a DDA-compliant access scheme at Hemel Hempstead station to
make travel easier for the mobility impaired.
4.61
Access to the station is poor and movements for buses often require them to divert off the main
road into the forecourt although plans are in progress to improve access.
AI1: Lack of public transport linkages between the main destinations
•
Hemel Hempstead railway station;
•
Town Centre; and
•
Maylands business park
AI5: Poor reliability of trains
4.62
Apsley Station serves a local function by comparison to Hemel Hempstead so it provides a lower
parking provision. It has only 23 parking spaces with a daily charge of £3 and again has a 100%
occupancy rate.
AO1: Improved integration of public transport services
•
Rail station
•
Waterhouse Square redevelopment
Bus
4.63
Hemel Hempstead Bus Station is currently in Waterhouse Street, next to the Market. This is a very
central location, with easy access to the pedestrianised area and shops, but the quality of the bus
station is poor. It is due to be relocated as part of the Civic Zone/ Waterhouse Square
redevelopment, over the next 5-10 years.
4.64
Bus and coach services are operated by several independent commercial companies, e.g. Arriva,
UNO, Red Rose and Woottens, in and around Hemel Hempstead, although Arriva dominate the
market. The network covers most of the town and around 5% of residents travel to work within the
town by bus but the mode is used more by shoppers. Some rural routes and evening or Sunday
services are run under contract to Hertfordshire County Council e.g the Woottens public transport
link started July 2008.
AI6: Insufficient rail and bus services especially on Sundays, evenings and mornings
AI7: Poor bus linkages to Old Town
4.65
Bus services in and around Hemel Hempstead are often constrained by congestion. Due to the
nature of the highway network it is difficult to provide extensive bus priority measures in some
areas, such as the old town. Service levels are often inadequate – the train service into London
operates at higher frequency than many local bus services – further reducing the attractiveness of
buses. Inter-urban bus links exist to Watford, St Albans, Luton, Tring, Aylesbury and London
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
35
Victoria and widen the travel opportunities. Hemel Hempstead has good coach links to the main
airports: London Gatwick is served by an hourly service from the bus station run by National
Express which also serves Heathrow, Stansted and Luton airports.
AI3: Low bus frequency and reliability
AI4: Lack of timetable and route information
4.66
There is a lack of public transport linkages between the main destinations, especially Hemel
Hempstead railway station, the town centre and Maylands Business Park. The lack of bus
connections to the Old Town is especially difficult for the elderly and young people who have to
walk or use taxis.
AI2: Lack of east-west connections
4.67
Hemel Hempstead is covered by the Intalink Partnership, a collaboration between local authorities
and bus and train operators in Hertfordshire. This Partnership aims to achieve:
•
Better customer information on bus and rail services in Hertfordshire;
•
Better awareness of journey opportunities available by using passenger transport;
•
Co-ordination between service providers;
•
An integrated bus and rail network and ticketing (Plusbus); and
•
Higher standards of information and service provision.
AO2: Improved information provision
•
4.68
Real-time information
The map overleaf (Figure 4.7) shows the bus routes in Hemel Hempstead.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
36
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Figure 4.7 Hemel Hempstead bus network map
Source: Intalink website (June 2008) http://www.intalink.org.uk/Maps/Hemel-Hempstead.pdf
4.69
The main bus routes serving Hemel Hempstead are listed in Table 4.3.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
37
Table 4.3 Main bus routes
Route
Number
Route
500/32
Hemel Hempstead – Aylesbury via Berkhamsted and Tring
500/550
Watford – Hemel Hempstead section via Kings Langley
51/52
Hemel Hempstead – Chesham via Bovingdon
352
Hemel Hempstead – Watford via Bovingdon and Sarratt
46
Hemel Hempstead – Luton via Redbourn and Markyate
320
Hemel Hempstead – St Albans section via Harpenden
H2/3
Hemel Hempstead (Woodhall Farm & Chaulden)
H4/5
Hemel Hempstead (Bennetts End, Grovehill and Nash Mills)
H1/10/11/12
Hemel Hempstead (Adeyfield and eastern areas)
H13/14
Hemel Hempstead business area services
W5/6
Hemel Hempstead – Maple Cross via Watford and Rickmansworth
300/301
Hemel Hempstead – Stevenage via St Albans and Welwyn GC
634
Hemel Hempstead – Hatfield – Stevenage (Primarily for the University of
Hertfordshire)
4.70
HCC have recently undertaken an area network review of buses in the county. The review
suggested that the bus network should be separated into about 100 corridors across the county, or
related routes, so as to identify local issues and enable appropriate strategies to be developed. It
also proposed that, in the initial years, development work with operators concentrated on 20 of
these, reflecting the resources likely to be available and the routes with the soundest case to
promote passenger use. This does not mean that the other 80 are ignored as they will still have
accessibility and needs issues to address.
4.71
The West/ Central Herts area needs review (including Dacorum, St. Albans and Welwyn/Hatfield)
covered both local area issues and looked at themes which reflect different types of operation
across all areas. It considered services provided and funded by local authorities as well as the
issues affecting services run as commercial businesses. The County Council has policies and
strategies to assist commercial provision, make them more successful in delivering LTP outcomes
for the County and achieve a proper split of function and responsibility if this is possible.
4.72
The themes and challenges reviewed were:
4.73
•
Urban bus operation;
•
Small town bus services;
•
Interurban and most rural services;
•
Publicity and marketing;
•
Punctuality and congestion; and
•
Infrastructure.
The corridor analysis helped focus on which corridors should be developed and the following
criteria were used:
•
There is a significant level of business for improvement to yield a meaningful contribution to
increasing LTP passenger targets;
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
38
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
4.74
•
There is a sufficient flow of buses to justify highway measures and improvements in passenger
facilities; and
•
There should be a commitment by the operator or an external partner to improve vehicle quality
and service marketing.
The corridors that are considered best to meet these criteria serving Hemel Hempstead are listed
in the following table:
Table 4.4 Bus corridor improvements
4.75
Bus number
Bus route
Delivery programme
500/550
Hemel Hempstead – Watford
By end 2008
300/301
Hemel Hempstead – St. Albans – Stevenage
2008-09
W5/6
Maple Cross – Watford – Hemel Hempstead
2008-09
H2/3
Hemel Hempstead – Woodhall Farm & Gadebridge
2009-11
H4/5
Hemel Hempstead – Bennetts End/Grovehill
2009-11
The content of each corridor improvement would cover:
•
Investment in either new or accessible vehicles to meet DDA requirements;
•
Introduction of Quality Bus stop and shelter improvements at main stops to complement vehicle
improvements;
•
Package of marketing measures to increase awareness of the service and changes;
•
Where necessary, the corridor would be part of a Bus Improvement Partnership covering wider
issues relating to reliability, punctuality and service delivery;
•
Attention to customer service and driver training issues; and
•
Monitoring of performance by relevant partners to project.
4.76
Funding for these improvements is due not only from the County Council but also DBC, central
government and developers.
4.77
However DBC have given notice to withdraw from the joint funding of contract bus services, with
effect from 2009/10, and that it will be unable to meet the full contribution requirement in 2008/09.
Plans are therefore being drawn up to modify service provision and manage the network within a
reduced overall level of funding.
4.78
The County Council is now considering the network it can afford out of its own resources.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
39
Public Transport Survey Results
4.79
The public transport survey carried out in spring 2008 (details are provided in Appendix C)
highlighted the reasons for passenger transport use. One third of respondents use public transport
because they have no access to a car, especially women, the young and the elderly. Another third
travel by public transport due to its greater convenience or faster journey times, especially men and
those travelling to work.
4.80
Public transport is used during peak periods mainly for the convenience or faster journey provided
but at other times it is due to passengers not having access to a car. Nearly one fifth choose not to
use a car and one tenth use public transport because it is cheaper than a car.
4.81
Public transport is used primarily for work trips (by 56% of male respondents and 40% of females).
It is also used significantly for shopping (by 28% of women and 23% of men).
4.82
A significant number consider the connections to the key destinations to be poor, notably Jarman
Park, Hemel Hempstead railway station (although more considered them to be good), Maylands,
Apsley and the Old Town. Connections to the town centre are viewed as being good (by 60% of
respondents).
4.83
Nevertheless public transport users generally feel that the journey rating is good: journeys were
ranked as ‘convenient/ very convenient’ by three quarters of respondents but as ‘difficult/very
difficult’ by a quarter. Four out of five stated that public transport is convenient or very convenient
during the morning peak period. The main inconveniences cited were: price (by 30% of
respondents); journey time (18%); and interchanging (15%).
4.84
Access to Hemel Hempstead and Apsley stations is mainly on foot (42% walk) but nearly one third
(30%) go by car (as a driver or passenger) and one fifth by bus.
4.85
The survey, and consultation, highlighted a number of concerns of travellers, including: the
inconvenient location of some bus stops; low bus frequencies and reliability (that especially affects
the elderly); the lack of timetable and route information; long waiting times, insufficient sheltered
seating for waiting; insufficient services, especially during the evenings and early morning on
Sundays; bus driver attitudes toward passengers; and access to some schools being difficult by
bus. Some schools’ catchment areas are quite large so that people drive their children rather than
have them take the bus while some road layouts at schools may not be suitable for bus routes.
4.86
The Nickey Line has been suggested as one option for a new bus corridor. However analysis has
shown that it is not feasible for bus services, and is not suitable to provide a link between the town
centre and Maylands.
Walking and Cycling
4.87
Around 10% of residents walk to work, although this mode is more important for shopping trips;
only 1.5% cycle to work.
4.88
While Hemel Hempstead features a newly re-designed dedicated pedestrian zone and a large
network of cycling routes outlined in the Dacorum Cycling Strategy, walking and cycling are often
neglected in a town-wide context. Although some facilities exist, especially in the town centre, in
general provision for walking and cycling elsewhere is poor.
4.89
The HCC cycling strategy has, however, identified Hemel Hempstead as having potential for
cycling based as the population size, housing density (proportion of terraced housing) and self-
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
40
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
contained nature. These opportunities exist mainly in the eastern part of town (around Maylands)
and in the river valleys which are mostly flat.
4.90
4.91
The main issues which impact on walking and cycling usage are:
•
Topography;
•
Barriers to movement;
•
Connectivity and legibility;
•
Interchange potential to other modes; and
•
Streetscape and environment, including safety and security.
A map of the topography of Hemel Hempstead is included in Figure 4.8 which highlights the one
mile radius from the town centre (roughly Debenhams).
Figure 4.8 Topography assessment
4.92
The key routes for pedestrians and cyclists are perceived to be the main routes from the housing
estates into the town centre, the railway station, to schools and to Maylands. The stakeholder
consultation identified the main problems on these routes as:
•
Poor road conditions and uneven roads on sections of highways where cyclists cycle, due to
potholes, uneven surfaces, tarmac is breaking up, drains are sinking;
•
Cycle tracks too narrow, where they exist;
•
Severance caused by main roads notably the A414;
•
Getting across the town;
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
41
4.93
•
Navigating the Plough roundabout;
•
Lack of dropped kerbs and formal crossings;
•
Lack of seating;
•
Lack of route continuity and signage;
•
Difficulties for those with visual/ audio impairments;
•
Traffic calming too narrow to accommodate cyclists in some areas; and
•
Poor maintenance of cycle tracks.
The following issues and opportunities were gathered from the walking and cycling audit and well
as the consultation event.
AI8: Pedestrian and cyclist movement and severance issues
•
Topography
•
A414
•
Narrow pavements
•
Lack of crossings
•
Plough roundabout
AO3: Improve walking and cycling provision
•
Integrated route network
•
Pedestrian / cycling environment
•
Crossing facilities
•
Routes to hospital
•
Training, especially children
Travel Planning and Behavioural Change
4.94
Over half of schools in the town have a travel plan (26 have implemented travel plans and a further
2 are about to be submitted).
4.95
Only four businesses have implemented workplace travel plans and a further 7 have been
submitted, the majority of which are in Maylands.
4.96
Smarter Choices cover a range of ‘soft’ measures often designed to complement the provision of
infrastructure that will encourage more sustainable travel. They include a range of measures such
as public transport information and marketing, travel awareness campaigns, personalised travel
planning, car sharing, car clubs, teleworking, teleconferencing, home shopping etc, often brought
together within a travel plan.
4.97
Through requiring the adoption of area, residential, company, school or station travel plans, DBC
can influence travel behaviour. Expenditure on such schemes whilst small can have large impacts.
CO7: Design for sustainable transport in the proposed new developments
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
42
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Intelligent Transport Systems
4.98
No intelligent transport systems exist in Hemel Hempstead. There is an electronic bus information
in the Marlowes area. Real-time information would be useful, especially at key interchange points,
such as the rail stations and at key bus stops.
Accessibility
4.99
Hemel Hempstead was not specifically highlighted in the Hertfordshire Accessibility Strategy (July
2006, part of LTP2).
4.100
Accessibility relates to being able to reach sites of employment, shopping, education, leisure and
health facilities, including those without a car and those who are mobility impaired.
4.101
Certain parts of Hemel Hempstead have less access to a vehicle than others, such as Gadebridge
and Adeyfield. This should be taken into account when planning public transport provision.
4.102
Accessibility will need to be considered with any future peripheral urban extensions, particularly to
the town centre and hospital. With changes to the organisation of health services accessibility will
be very important in terms of linking residents in Hemel Hempstead to A&E services at Watford
General Hospital.
Community Transport
4.103
Hemel Hempstead has various community transport providers.
4.104
Community Action Dacorum (CAD) provides a minibus service for voluntary groups in the area. It
also coordinates transport for the local Good Companions Club.
4.105
Community Wheels has nine minibuses for hire to Dacorum-based groups concerned with the
welfare of people who are elderly, young, disabled or in community activities. Seven of the vehicles
have tail-lifts and can carry up to three passengers in wheelchairs.
4.106
Community Cars provide a special needs transport service for the residents of DBC who are
unable to use public transport or taxis, due to infirmity, disability or any other reason, permanent or
temporary. The scheme uses volunteer drivers and their own cars. A charge is agreed upon for the
service. The service is available seven days a week, subject to the availability of a volunteer
driver.
4.107
Hertfordshire Dial-a-Ride provides door to door transport for the elderly, disabled and those people
who cannot easily use passenger transport. The vehicles used are designed to offer easy access
and have tail-lifts/ramps that can be used by those who cannot easily climb steps or who use a
wheel chair.
4.108
The scheme is available to residents of Hertfordshire who have a permanent disability, are in
receipt of a mobility allowance or those who qualify on age. Membership of the scheme is required
before the scheme can be used.
4.109
The service can be used for local journeys to shops, libraries, visiting friends or places of interest
and local GPs and dentists. Dial-a-Ride does not provide transport to hospitals as an outpatient, to
full time education or to social services/health service day centres.
4.110
Dial-a-Ride fares are comparable with passenger transport; the fares are quoted for a single
journey.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
43
4.111
A Shopmobility service is provided at the Marlowes Centre.
AI9: Needs of the disabled population (represents 12%)
Safety
Overall Accident Levels
4.112
On average some four accidents occur every week in the town, although the majority of these are
classified as slight and these figures have been decreasing over the past four years, in line with
national trends.
4.113
The Plough roundabout - where the A414 and A4146 meet - is particularly difficult for visitors to
negotiate, although one of the six arms has now been closed to general traffic. Nevertheless it
remains an area where traffic conflicts arise.
4.114
The total number of accidents in Hemel Hempstead reported for the years 2004 to 2007 was 691.
Of these, there were 100 pedestrian and 49 cyclist accidents.
SI1: Accident hotspots
4.115
Table 4.5 shows a summary of accidents over the last 3 years.
Table 4.5 All accidents by severity 2004-2007
Period
Fatal
Serious
Slight
October 2004 - September 2005
1
30
260
October 2005 - September 2006
3
29
263
October 2006 - September 2007
3
22
168
Total
7
81
691
Figure 4.9 shows the locations of accidents that took place between 2004 and 2007, according to
degree of severity.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
44
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Figure 4.9 All accidents (2004-2007)
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
45
Child Safety
4.116
A child safety audit of killed or seriously injured (KSI) casualties identified Hemel Hempstead as
being an area with high child KSI collisions. Nearly half of all child casualties in Hertfordshire occur
while they are travelling in vehicles, and pedestrians account for over a quarter of such injuries.
Work is planned to implement several schemes in Hemel Hempstead to help remedy the problem.
Table 4.6 Child accidents by severity 2004-2007
4.117
Period
Fatal
Serious
Slight
October 2004 - September 2005
0
13
67
October 2005 - September 2006
1
12
48
October 2006 - September 2007
1
2
42
Total
2
27
157
The data in the Herts LTP2 Road Safety Plan indicates, however, that in the county, these figures
have been decreasing each year. From the baseline average of years 1994-98 until 2004, the
numbers have fallen by 43%.
SO3: Use school travel plans to encourage road safety
Pedestrians
4.118
Table 4.7 shows a summary of accidents over the last 3 years.
Table 4.7 Pedestrian accidents by severity 2004-2007
Period
Fatal
Serious
Slight
October 2004 - September 2005
0
7
26
October 2005 - September 2006
0
10
22
October 2006 - September 2007
0
5
30
Total
0
22
78
4.119
Only slight and serious accidents were recorded during the past 3 years. Accident locations are
fairly dispersed, though a number are located across the town centre area, with a small cluster at
the west end of Queensway and another adjacent to the intersection of Gadebridge Road and
Warners End Road. Two serious accidents were recorded on the non-pedestrianised section of the
Marlowes, two on Leverstock Green Road and two on Bennetts End Road.
4.120
At the consultation event the lack of crossing facilities was raised for Leighton Buzzard Road as
well as the impermeability of the A414 for pedestrians.
4.121
A figure of all the pedestrian accidents from 2004-2007 can be found overleaf (Figure 4.10).
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
46
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Figure 4.10 Pedestrian accidents (2004-2007)
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
47
Cyclists
4.122
One fatal accident was reported during the 3 year period and occurred on Maylands Avenue.
4.123
A small cluster of slight and serious accidents can be found on Station Road and around the
Plough roundabout.
4.124
Table 4.8 shows a summary of accidents over the last 3 years.
Table 4.8 Cycle accidents by severity 2004-2007
4.125
Period
Fatal
Serious
Slight
October 2004 - September 2005
0
4
18
October 2005 - September 2006
1
1
11
October 2006 - September 2007
0
5
8
Total
1
10
37
Figure 4.11 shows the plots of these accidents.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
48
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Figure 4.11 Cycle accidents (2004-2007)
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
49
Freight and Distribution
4.126
4.127
Hemel Hempstead currently has three distinct freight and distribution requirements:
•
access into and around the Maylands Business Park;
•
access to the town centre shops (including Jarman Park); and
•
access to the Apsley Mills Retail Park and nearby shops.
A new International Rail Freight Terminal at Radlett would create new opportunities for freight
movement. Although this proposal was recently rejected, a new planning application is due to be
submitted.
Maylands – The economic driver for Hemel Hempstead
4.128
Maylands Business Park is of significant regional economic importance, employing around 25,000
people. The Maylands Partnership was set up to maintain and improve Maylands and to work
towards establishing a clear vision to attract inward investment.
4.129
Most freight from Maylands Business Park, where several logistics and distribution companies are
located, goes onto the M1 (currently being widened) at junction 8, or uses the A414 to access the
M25 via the M10, when travelling eastwards. Currently the site is suffering from the economic
consequences of the Buncefield oil terminal explosion in December 2005. This had a dramatic
impact on the Maylands Business Park: many jobs have been relocated, albeit temporarily, while
companies resolved accommodation issues. But the employment position is not yet stable. As a
result of the Buncefield explosion, and redevelopment of the Maylands site, much vacant property
currently exists, particularly for distribution centres but also for offices.
4.130
Since the Buncefield explosion, the task of improving Maylands is considered to be more vital and
urgent. A Masterplan has been prepared so that regeneration work can be undertaken as soon as
possible. The aim is to restore confidence in the area to those businesses which are located there,
to assist those businesses affected by the explosion to flourish and to attract new companies to
Maylands.
4.131
Ultimately the Masterplan is intended to lead the regeneration of this key employment location as
well as attracting investment, providing new jobs and business opportunities. This will attract more
freight traffic to the area.
Town Centre and Jarman Park
4.132
In addition to the generation of lorry movements in Maylands, the town centre also generates
deliveries by lorries, as do the retail establishments at Jarman Park. Heavy use is made of
Leighton Buzzard Road by HGVs, both for access to the town centre as well as approaching the
A41and the industrial units on London Road. It may be necessary to review the status of the road
and to downgrade it from an A-road or to introduce some limits on HGV use in combination with
other measures.
4.133
Jarman Park is served via the A414 dual carriageway and does not suffer from access problems
for business other than the problem of peak-period congestion on the road.
4.134
Stores in the recently developed part of the town centre benefit from rear access for
loading/unloading but businesses located at the northern end of Marlowes still rely on front door
access. However these issues do not, at present, generate significant problems. Access by freight
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
50
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
to the town centre may be from the M1 along the A414 or alternatively from the A41 from the south
into Hemel Hempstead via the Plough roundabout.
Apsley Mills Retail Park and Nearby Shops
4.135
Access to the Apsley Mills Retail Park and nearby shops is more of a problem. The narrow London
Road and heavy car traffic from the surrounding residential areas already causes potential conflicts
and congestion in the area.
International Rail Freight Terminal
4.136
An International Rail Freight Terminal was proposed at Radlett adjoining the M25 and the London
to Bedford mainline railway. This proposal would have a significant impact in Hemel Hempstead by
introducing more HGVs onto the A414/M10 and the surrounding roads. This proposal was recently
rejected; however a new planning application is due to be submitted.
4.137
The following issues and opportunities were gathered from stakeholder interviews and the
consultation event:
FI1: Lack of freight data
FI2: Heavy freight movement
FI3: Impact of Maylands regeneration on freight
FO1: Freight Quality Partnership study
FO2: Create lorry park at Maylands
FO3: Freight planning for new developments
Summary
4.138
The following table summarises the key issues arising from the review of the baseline conditions
surveys. The identified issues were often detailed and added to by participants at the Planning for
Real’ day held in May 2008.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
51
Key area
Current
or Future
Issues
Opportunities
Congestion
Current
CI1: High car use to work
CO1: Promote sustainable transport modes for likely
increase in personal trips to address current and future
problems
CI2: Large commuting flows to London
CO2: Improve public transport
CI3: Congestion on key highway routes
CO3: Encourage walking and cycling for local trips as well
as for access to other modes (e.g. rail station)
•
East-west on A414, back to M1
•
Maylands roundabouts
•
Plough Roundabout
•
Box Lane to Bovingdon
•
Two Waters Road
•
London Road
•
Leighton Buzzard Road
CI4: Congestion caused by conflicts between general
traffic and HGV vehicles
CO4: Junction improvements on A414, signing of HGV
routes, freight quality partnership
CI5: Abundance of parking in town centre and parking
charges too low to discourage driving into centre or to
support effective P&R
CO5: North East Relief Road, Northern Bypass
CI6: Congestion caused by double parking in some
residential areas
CO6: Congestion management, including travel plan
development, development control requirements (e.g. car
parking), required
CI7: Crowded rail services to London in peak periods
CI8: Delays to local bus services due to highway
congestion
Future
CI9: Links to new developments will put pressure on eastwest routes
CI10: Future developments will impact A414, Link Road,
Leighton Buzzard Road, and public transport
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
52
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
CO7: Design for sustainable transport in the proposed
new developments with linkages to the existing built-up
areas
Key area
Current
or Future
Issues
Opportunities
Accessibility
Current
AI1: Lack of public transport linkages between the main
destinations, Hemel Hempstead railway station; town
centre; and Maylands business park
AO1: Improved integration of public transport services
•
Rail station
•
Waterhouse Square redevelopment
AI2: Lack of east-west connections
A02: Improve information provision
• Real-time information
AI3: Low bus frequency and reliability
A03: Improved walking and cycling provision
AI4: Lack of timetable and route information
AI5: Poor reliability of trains
AI6: Insufficient rail/bus services especially on Sundays,
evenings and mornings
•
Integrated route network
•
Pedestrian / cycling environment
•
Crossing facilities
•
Routes to hospital
•
Training, especially children
AI7: Poor bus linkages to Old Town
AI8: Pedestrian and cyclist movement and severance
issues
• Topography
• A414
• Narrow pavements
• Lack of crossings
• Plough roundabout
AI9: Needs of the disabled population (represents 12%)
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
A04: New developments
Page
53
Key area
Current
or Future
Issues
Opportunities
Safety
Current
SI1: Accidents hotspots
SO1: Highway improvements
SI2: Inappropriate parking
SO2: Parking enforcement
SO3: Use school travel plans to encourage road safety
Freight
Current
FO1: Freight Quality Partnership study
FI1: Lack of freight data
FI2: Heavy freight movement
Future
FI3: Impact of regeneration of Maylands on freight
FO2: Lorry park at Maylands
FO3: Freight planning in new developments
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
54
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
5
UTP Aims and Objectives
LTP2 Objectives
5.1
In its LTP Hertfordshire County Council set out nine objectives for transport policy during the period
up to 2010/11. This UTP must support these nine LTP2 objectives.
Safety
1. To improve safety for all by giving the highest priority to minimising the number of collisions
and injuries occurring as a result of the transport system.
Congestion
2. To obtain the best use of the existing network through effective design, maintenance and
management.
3. To manage the growth of transport and travel volumes across the county, and thereby secure
improvements in the predictability of travel time.
4. To develop an efficient, safe, affordable and enhanced transport system which is attractive,
reliable, integrated, and makes best use of resources.
Accessibility
5. To develop a transport system that provides access to employment, shopping, education,
leisure and health facilities for all, including those without a car and those with impaired
mobility.
6. To ensure that the transport system contributes towards improving the efficiency of commerce
and industry and the provision of sustainable economic development in appropriate locations.
Air Quality
7. To mitigate the effect of the transport system on the built and natural environment and on
personal health.
Quality of Life
8. To raise awareness and encourage use of more sustainable modes of transport through
effective promotion, publicity, information and education.
9. To reduce the need for the movement of people and goods through integrated land use
planning, the promotion of sustainable distribution and the use of telecommunications.
County Council targets
5.2
The County Council sets out a range of performance indicators and their associated targets within
LTP2; 17 mandatory indicators plus 5 locally developed indicators were included.
5.3
The County Council publishes progress in delivering targets through the LTP Annual Progress
Report, and this will be assessed by DfT.
5.4
The county-wide targets listed in Table 5.1 have been set for 2010/11. This UTP must contribute to
their achievement. In setting targets the County Council must have regard to public expectations,
DfT minimum standards and the likely available resources in the future for delivery programmes.
Not all targets are of direct relevance to Hemel Hempstead. Of those that are, Table 5.1 identifies
them and also the LTP2 indicator to which they relate.
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
55
Table 5.1 LTP Indicators and Targets
Indicator
Definition
Baseline (2003/04)
Target (2010/11)
LTP Objectives
Principal Road Condition
% of the network with negative
residual life
8%
8%
2 ,4
Non-Principal Classified
Road Condition
% where structural maintenance
should be considered - nonprincipal roads
19.44%
19.44%
2, 4
Unclassified Road Condition
% where structural maintenance
should be considered - unclassified
19.29%
19.29%
2, 4
Roads
Footway Condition
% of footways where maintenance
should be considered
52%
52%
1, 2, 4, 5
Killed and Seriously Injured
Number of people killed or seriously
injured on roads in the authority (all
ages)
1,084 (1994-98
average)
No more than 600
1
Children Killed and Seriously
Injured
Number of children (aged less than
16) killed or seriously injured in the
county
113 (1994-98
average)
No more than 56
1
Total Slight Casualties
Number of slight injuries (all ages)
5,509
No more than 5,509
1
Public Transport Patronage
Number of bus passenger journeys
(i.e. boardings) per year in the
county
31 million journeys
per year
31 million journeys
per year
3, 4, 5, 7, 8
Bus Service, User
Satisfaction
% of bus users satisfied with the
local provision of passenger
transport services
55%
60% (2009/10)
4, 5
Bus Punctuality
%of buses keeping to schedule (for
services at intermediate timetabled
points)
80% (2004/05)
80%
2, , 4, 5
Accessibility
Percentage of people who find it
difficult to travel to a local hospital
29%
24%
2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
56
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Indicator
Definition
Baseline (2003/04)
Target (2010/11)
LTP Objectives
Change in Area-Wide Traffic
Mileage
Change in Area- Wide Traffic
Mileage (vehicle-kilometres per
day)
20.7 million
22.4 million
3, 7, 9
Cycling Trips
Number of cycling trips across the
authority
2,397 trips per day
(2004/05)
2,658 (11% increase)
2, 5, 7, 8
To be established
To be set
2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9
Congestion
Air Quality
New indicator to be developed
To be established
To be set
2, 3, 7, 8, 9
Mode Share of Journeys to
School
% of pupils who travel to school
using sustainable modes
57.5%
60% sustainable
modes
3, 5, 8
Passenger Transport
Information, User
Satisfaction
% of users satisfied with local
provision of passenger transport
information
39%
50%
4, 5, 8
Rights of Way
% of the total length of footpaths
and other rights of way that were
easy to use by members of the
public
61% (2004/05)
80%
2, 4, 5, 7, 8
School Travel Plans
% of schools with school travel
plans
14%
83%
1, 3, 5, 7, 8
Speed Limit Compliance
% level of compliance with 30mph
speed limit
56% (2004/05)
60%
2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
57
5.5
The proposed measures set out in the following chapters are designed to help achieve these
targets and deliver the LTP objectives.
UTP Aims and Objectives
5.6
The purpose of the UTP is to identify short, medium and long-term strategies to shape travel
patterns and provide a transport framework for negotiations associated with development control.
5.7
The aims of the UTP are to:
5.8
5.9
•
Locate developments to reduce travel needs, travel distances and encourage public transport,
walking and cycling use to improve accessibility;
•
Provide opportunities to reduce car use through providing sustainable transport choices, for
example through new development;
•
Promote modal shift towards sustainable transport and active travel;
•
Improve road safety, especially for non-car modes;
•
Support ‘smarter choices’ travel demand management measures;
•
Promote efficient freight and distribution;
•
Reduce the negative impacts of transport on the environment; and
•
Improve traffic management, including directing traffic onto suitable routes.
The overall approach adopted in this UTP is based on those measures and interventions identified
by stakeholders as being significant:
•
Public transport operations and technology, with a particular focus on bus and intermediate
mode systems e.g. guided buses;
•
Freight and sustainable distribution, whether road or rail-based, and with consideration of
access to airport and port activities;
•
Information technology and advanced transport telematics;
•
Demand management, including ‘smarter choices’ and more radical options for physical reallocation of road space and the possible introduction of pricing measures for use of
infrastructure;
•
Network management and congestion management including travel plan development,
development control requirements including car parking;
•
Quality of Life Improvements delivered through management of associated transport air and
noise pollution by traffic management and public information techniques;
•
Active Lifestyles Promotion – health improvements through cycling and walking schemes; and
•
Promote the emerging Local Development Framework and Hemel 2020.
Table 5.2 indicates how the UTP objectives relate to those set out in the Hertfordshire LTP, broken
down into: congestion, accessibility, safety, environment and health, and freight.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
58
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Table 5.2 UTP Objectives
Congestion objectives
Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Related Policy Documents
To obtain the best use of the existing network
through effective design, maintenance and
management
C1: Manage and make best
use of existing infrastructure
and services
HCC 2006: LTP2
To manage the growth of transport and travel
volumes across the county, and thereby
secure improvements in the
predictability of travel time
C2: Reduce demand for car
travel, particularly journeys
to work and school
DfT 2004 Transport White Paper: The
Future of Transport
HCC 2007: West Herts ATP
DfT 2004 Smarter Choices – Changing
The Way We Travel
HCC 2006: LTP2
HCC 2007: West Herts ATP
To develop an efficient, safe, affordable and
enhanced transport system which is attractive,
reliable, integrated and makes best use of
resources
To reduce the need for the movement of
people and goods through integrated land use
planning, the promotion of sustainable
distribution and the use of telecommunications
HCC 2006: LTP2
HCC 2007: West Herts ATP
C3: Minimise the
negative impacts of new
developments on congestion
GO-East 2008: East of England Plan
HCC 2006: LTP2
DBC 2006: LDF Core Strategy
DBC 2006: Hemel 2020
To ensure that the transport system
contributes towards improving the efficiency of
commerce and industry and the provision of
sustainable
economic
development
in
appropriate locations
C4: Encourage the use
of sustainable modes as
alternatives to the car
HCC 2006: LTP2
To raise awareness and encourage use of
more sustainable modes of transport through
effective promotion, publicity, information and
education
C5: Develop travel plans, especially for schools,
area travel plans, residential travel plans,
businesses and S106 agreements
DfT: Smarter Choices – Changing The
Way We Travel
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
59
Accessibility objectives
Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
To ensure that the transport system that
provides access to employment, shopping,
education, leisure and health facilities for all,
including those without a car and those with
impaired mobility
Related Policy
A1: Improve access to HH hospital by sustainable
transport modes
DfT 2004: Smarter Choices – Changing
The Way We Travel
A2: Improve access to employment, especially in the
town centre and Maylands, by sustainable transport
modes
SEU 2003: Making the Connections
A3: Improve access to schools by sustainable
transport modes
DBC 2006: Hemel 2020
HCC 2006: LTP2
HCC 2007: West Herts ATP
A4: Improve physical access to the transport network
and city centre
A5: Maintain and enhance the viability and vitality of
retail centres, promoting local shopping and
employment
To reduce the need for the movement of
people and goods through integrated land
use planning, the promotion of sustainable
distribution
and
the
use
of
telecommunications
A6: Improved integration of land-use and transport
planning
To develop an efficient, safe, affordable and
enhanced transport system which is
attractive, reliable, integrated and makes
best use of resources
A7: Improve east-west access by public transport
HCC 2006: LTP2
DBC 2006: LDF Core Strategy
DBC 2006: Hemel 2020
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
60
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
HCC 2006: LTP2
Safety objectives
Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
To improve safety for all by giving the
highest priority to minimising the number of
collisions and injuries occurring as a result of
the transport system
S1: Improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists
S2: Improve child safety
S3: Reduce the number of road traffic collisions
Related Policy
DfT 2004 Transport White Paper: The
Future of Transport
DfT 2000: Tomorrow's roads: safer for
everyone
DfT 2002: Child Road Safety - Achieving
the 2010 Target
HCC 2006: LTP2
HCC 2007: West Herts ATP
Environment and Health Objectives
Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
To mitigate the effect of the transport system
on the built and natural environment and on
personal health
Related Policy
E1: Reduce the adverse impacts of transport on
health and the environment
DfT 2004: Smarter Choices – Changing
The Way We Travel
E2: Minimise visual intrusion and community
severance arising from transport infrastructure
HCC 2006: LTP2
HCC 2007: West Herts ATP
E3: Promote personal health through increased
levels of walking and cycling
Freight Objective
Hertfordshire Local Transport Plan
To reduce the need for the movement of
people and goods through integrated land
use planning, the promotion of sustainable
distribution
and
the
use
of
telecommunications
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Related Policy
F1: Minimise negative impacts of freight accessing
Maylands and the city centre through improved
management
DfT 2004 Transport White Paper: The
Future of Transport
HCC 2006: LTP2
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
61
6
Strategy Development
Introduction
6.1
Having identified the aims and objectives of the UTP, this section assesses the development
process of the overall strategy for achieving the stated targets. It examines the process of
identifying measures and the principles behind the development of the delivery programme.
Section 7 then provides an overview of the measures themselves and Section 8 presents the
delivery programme.
Identification of measures
6.2
An extremely wide range of potential options could be implemented within the context of the UTP
framework. Many of these relate directly to transport interventions to resolve current issues;
however there are others that relate to the widespread future land-use and planning proposals and
the impact these will have upon trip generation.
6.3
The proposed new developments in and around Hemel Hempstead, whilst generating new trips,
also provide an excellent opportunity to promote sustainable travel and reduce car dependency in
the area. To achieve this, however, will require appropriate policy measures to ensure that access
by public transport, on foot or cycle becomes a viable alternative option to travel by private car.
Long-List
6.4
6.5
The initial strategy development process was to produce a ‘Long-List’ of potential measures
through assessment of the issues and opportunities established in Section 4. Measures were
derived from a variety of sources including:
•
Analysis of the existing data, policies, etc.;
•
Stakeholder consultation;
•
The walking and cycling audits;
•
The passenger transport survey;
•
The HCC/DBC Planning for Real event; and
•
Research sources1.
The following areas provided the basis for the generation of measures and schemes:
•
Network Management (ITS, signage)
•
Smarter Choices (Travel Plans, Personalised Travel Plans, car clubs, car sharing, travel
awareness campaigns)
•
Social inclusion measures (mobility impaired access)
•
Walking (Pedestrian routes, crossings, Rights of Way, street scene, signage)
1
Developing Urban Transport Strategies (IHT, 1996),
Konsult (the Knowledgebase on Sustainable and Urban Transport, Leeds University- http://www.konsult.leeds.ac.uk/))
The Demand for Public Transport (TRL, 2004)
The EU Optimum2 Cookbook (European Commission, 2008)
Smarter Choices: Changing the Way We Travel (DfT, 2005)
The EU ELTIS website http://www.eltis.org
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
62
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
6.6
•
Cycling (Cycle routes, crossings, street scene, signage, secure parking, ASLs)
•
Local buses (new station, bus priority, increased frequencies, low-floor buses, bus stops,
concessionary fares, subsidise old/ young people, QBP/PIP)
•
Community transport and taxis (Dial-a-Ride, taxis for home to school/ hospital)
•
Passenger rail (increased frequencies, capacity enhancements, integrated interchange)
•
Improved integration (integrated timetabling, integrated ticketing)
•
Improved information (PTP, RTPI, bus stop information)
•
Travel demand restraint (road user charging, reduce parking availability, higher charges for
parking, land-use planning)
•
Highways (new roads, HOV/HGV lanes, wider roads, new links, highway maintenance
including traffic calming features)
•
AQMAs (LEZ)
•
Parking and P&R (reduce parking standards for new developments, reduce parking availability,
higher charges for long-stay parking, coach parking, motorcycle parking, HGV parking, price
matching with nearby towns)
•
Road safety improvements (safety cameras, re-engineering, encourage safer driving, visible
speed limits, lower speed limits, greater enforcement, road safety training)
In addition, planning policy measures relating to developments were also considered.
Option Sifting and development
6.7
The initial long list was then subjected to a sifting process through comparison against the UTP
objectives. Those measures which were not considered to provide a solution to one or more of the
objectives were discounted.
Appraisal
Process
6.8
The measures were then subjected to an objective-led appraisal process. Each proposed measure
was assessed not only for its contribution against the UTP objectives (set out in Table 5.2) but also
against a series of criteria representing the extent of deliverability.
6.9
In terms of the assessment against the UTP objectives any measure that was considered likely to
provide a strong contribution to achieving a UTP objective was ranked twice as important as a low
contribution. In addition, those measures delivering against more UTP objectives scored higher
accordingly.
6.10
The ‘deliverability’ criteria encompassed the following four areas:
•
Policy fit (the extent to which the measure supported national, regional and local policy);
•
Value for money (whether the measure provides value for money);
•
Feasibility (whether implementation is technically feasible); and
•
Acceptability (whether the measure is likely to be publicly and politically acceptable).
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
63
6.11
Each measure was giving a rating of high, medium, low for all four areas and a weighted score
applied accordingly.
6.12
A total score was generated for each measure combining the ‘contribution to objectives’ rating and
the ‘deliverability’ rating from which the measures were ranked and then classified in terms of
priority: high; medium; or low.
Results
6.13
In total 129 measures were identified that target one or more of the UTP objectives. Of these
around 37 (28%) were considered to be high priority schemes in terms of both the range of
objectives that they would target and their deliverability. A further 47 schemes (36%) were rated
with medium priority with the final 46 (36%) considered to be lower priority, although still
worthwhile.
6.14
Section 7 provides an overview of the proposed measures, whilst Section 8 highlights the proposed
delivery programme based upon the timeframes for delivery and the prioritisation.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
64
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
7
Proposed measures
Overview
7.1
7.2
This section sets out the proposed measures that have been identified as meeting one or more of
the UTP objectives. For ease of reference they are presented within seven key themes as follows:
•
Promoting Smarter Choices measures
•
Encouraging sustainable transport
•
Promoting passenger transport use
•
Promoting social inclusion
•
Highways and freight
•
Traffic and network management (including road safety)
•
Parking and Park & Ride.
Each measure is provided a unique reference which is then referred to throughout the rest of the
report.
Smarter Choices measures
7.3
Smarter Choices - the strategy of focusing on more sustainable transport options such as public
transport, walking and cycling - play a key role in this UTP.
7.4
Potential options to take forward include the development of various types of travel plans to cover
workplace and school travel as well as travel to leisure facilities and to destinations such as the
hospital and the mainline stations. A key element of the Smarter Choices measures is to look at
ways to discourage excessive car use and, in particular, single occupancy trips and therefore
schemes incorporating car sharing and car clubs are considered very important. Overarching the
whole Smarter Choices concept is a need to ensure greater awareness of different travel options
and so ensuring the spread of knowledge is also important. This should encompass both high level
marketing campaigns as well as individual personalised travel plans.
Expand school, workplace and area travel planning
7.5
Further school and workplace travel plans and area travel plans should be developed and
promoted through the planning process, especially in the new development areas. All schools
should have a Travel Plan, if they do not already have one, and even those that do need to be
encouraged to keep them up-to-date and to implement measures, such as walking buses and safer
routes to schools
7.6
All large firms (over 500 employees) should be encouraged to develop workplace travel plans. New
Area Travel Plans should also be developed for businesses in areas such as Maylands. A Station
Travel Plan could be developed for Hemel Hempstead along the lines of those proposed for St
Albans and Hatfield by HCC. The Travel Plan for the hospital will need to be revised in view of the
proposed operational changes. Personal travel planning can also provoke behavioural change,
similar to a scheme currently being implemented in Watford.
7.7
Encouraging and promoting alternative work and shopping patterns, such as working from home,
teleconferencing, Internet purchasing etc. addresses peak commuting traffic by removing the need
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
65
to travel at busy times. All these elements should be promoted within travel plans and travel
awareness campaigns.
7.8
To summarise the proposed travel planning-based interventions:
•
Develop and implement School Travel Plans (SC1): for all schools and for West Herts college
since they need regular refreshing due to the turnover of pupils including the development of
Joint School Travel Plans e.g. Astley Cooper and Eastbrook
•
Introduce walking buses at primary schools (SC2) e.g. in Chaulden
•
Introduce more Safer Routes to School measures (SC3) e.g. in Chaulden
•
Workplace Travel Plans (SC4): encourage all large-scale firms to develop and implement travel
plans. Ensure that all new developments produce appropriate travel plans, that they implement
the agreed measures and that a robust process of monitoring is established.
•
Leisure Travel Plans (SC5): work with leisure facilities (e.g. at Jarman Park and the ski centre)
to encourage visitors and employees to access these sites and facilities by sustainable modes.
•
Destination Travel Plans (SC6): pursue the development of travel plans for Hemel Hempstead
Railway Station and the Hospital.
•
Area Travel Plans including residential travel plans (SC7) – encourage and assist large-scale
development areas, such as Maylands, to produce area travel plans encompassing all
occupiers of the site. Also to encourage and assist local residential area plans.
•
Personalised Travel Plans (SC8) – establish a project for providing individual households with
travel planning advice in order to influence their travel behaviour. These measures should be
targeted at areas where good public transport or walking/cycling infrastructure is provided to
maximise the potential for behavioural change.
Promote car sharing and car clubs
7.9
Mode shift from single occupancy vehicles to more sustainable modes can be encouraged through
promoting car sharing (ride sharing, specifically addressing car usage to businesses) and car clubs
(commercial short notice car hire provision, short term car hire, specifically addressing car
ownership and on-street parking issues). Car sharing (and perhaps a car club) should be
developed in Maylands as part of the Area Travel Plan. These features should also be introduced
for other new developments. Measures include:
•
Promote and develop formal and informal car sharing schemes (SC9): e.g. for businesses in
Maylands, and in new developments
•
Promote and encourage car clubs (SC10): proactively encourage the development of car clubs
in Hemel Hempstead with the provision of dedicated parking bays.
Promote travel awareness campaigns
7.10
Mode shift requires change in people’s travel behaviour, a change which can only be initiated
through awareness campaigns, e.g. addressing healthy and responsible lifestyles. Specific
measures therefore include:
•
Travel awareness campaigns (SC11);
•
Prevent or discourage parents and pupils from driving to school through travel awareness
campaigns and site specific travel strategies (SC12).
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
66
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Sustainable transport measures
7.11
7.12
A detailed list of investment priorities was provided in the report on Walking and Cycling. The
suggested improvements were ranked on the three criteria of:
¾
Completion of existing walking and cycling networks;
¾
Improved access for these modes to major developments; and
¾
Ease of implementation.
A particular concern exists over the access arrangements to schools in Hemel Hempstead.
Encouraging more pupils to travel by sustainable modes will not only benefit the road network by
reducing congestion due to the school run but it will also have benefits in terms of improved health
and fitness for the students themselves.
Walking
7.13
Based on the audits and analysis undertaken, a number of potential improvements were identified
which would improve the existing pedestrian network as well as connecting to the expanding new
developments in Hemel Hempstead. These include:
•
Investigate the appropriateness of guardrailing with the objective to improve the public realm in
general (W1)
¾
¾
¾
¾
•
Rail Station
London Road / Station Road
Waterhouse Street
Heath Lane
Add tactile information to accommodate the blind and partially sighted (W2)
¾ London Road / Station Road
¾ Waterhouse Street/Combe Street Roundabout
¾ Waterhouse Street/Bridge Street Roundabout
•
Introduce appropriate and improved signage to make walking routes easier to follow (W3)
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
•
St Albans Road
Fishery Lane
Gadebridge Lane
Piccotts End/Fletcher Way
Cambrian Way
Briery Way
Access to Nickey Line
Longlands
Improve the pedestrian environment to make the walking experience more pleasant and
enjoyable e.g. to the Nickey Line for pedestrians and cyclists (W4)
¾ Waterhouse Street
¾ Leighton Buzzard Road
¾
•
Nickey Line
Introduce seating to assist the elderly and infirm (W5)
¾ Between the station and town centre
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
67
¾
•
Along the Grand Union Canal to Apsley
Introduce new crossings, both formal (e.g. Pelican crossings) and informal (e.g. pedestrian
refuges), to make crossing roads safer (W6)
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
London Road / Station Road at Cotterells
St Albans Road (e.g. at Jarman Park)
Cambrian Way
Gadebridge Lane
Great Elms Road
The Queens Square
Aycliffe Drive
¾ Queensway (e.g. at junction with Allandale)
•
Widen pavement extensions and resurfacing schemes to make walking easier (W7)
¾ London Road / Station Road
¾ Bennetts End Road
•
Introduce new pavements to close gaps along key walking routes e.g. routes into town centre,
access to the hospital and links to the Old Town from the town centre (W8)
¾
¾
¾
¾
•
Re-design junction to assist pedestrians and make walking routes more direct (W9)
¾
•
Allandale
Change traffic priorities to favour pedestrians e.g. on Leighton Buzzard Road (W10)
¾
•
Leighton Buzzard Road
Fishery Lane
London Road / Station Road
St Albans Road
Leighton Buzzard Road
Improve access for pedestrian and cyclists, especially from the south (W11)
¾ Apsley
¾ Jarman Park
•
Provide pedestrian and cycling links to employment zones from residential areas (W12)
¾
Residential zones to Maylands
•
Provide step-free access to the platforms at railway stations to assist the elderly and infirm as
planned (W13)
•
Introduce lighting to improve dedicated (often off-street) links, existing underpasses (where an
at-grade crossing is inappropriate), and perceived safety and security (W14)
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Plough roundabout
Fishery Lane
Gadebridge Park / underpass to park
Briery Way
St Albans Hill
Pennine Way
Queensway (under the Nickey Line)
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
68
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Cycling
7.14
Cycling improvements will have a significant benefit in improving access for those without access
to a private car as well as providing benefits in terms of health promotion. The key improvements
build on the emerging Dacorum Cycling Strategy and are listed below:
•
Introduce on-street cycle lanes where appropriate, or alternatively widen pavements to
introduce off-street cycle tracks to enhance safety and to support new developments e.g. in
Two Waters and Apsley (C1)
¾ London Rd/ Station Rd
¾ Plough roundabout / Leighton Buzzard Rd
¾ Fishery Lane
•
Introduce appropriate and improved signage to make routes easier to follow (C2)
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
Access to Nickey Line
London Rd/ Station Rd
St Johns Road
Grand Union Canal
Nickey Line
Fishery Lane
Cambrian Way/Fletcher Way
Briery Way
Longlands
•
Provide cycle maps to enable understanding of routes, including at fixed locations around
town (C3)
•
Facilitate cycling access to the Grand Union Canal path by providing ramps (C4)
¾ London/ Station Rd
¾ Fishery Lane
•
Increase and improve cycle parking (mainly in the town centre, at the rail station, at key
employment sites such as Maylands, sports and leisure centres, and in local centres) with
CCTV to make it more secure (C5)
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
¾
•
Town centre
Rail Station
Maylands
Key employment sites
Local centres
Sports and leisure centres (e.g. Dacorum Leisure Centre, Longdean Sports Centre,
Jarman Park)
Introduce shared cycle tracks where appropriate, mainly in less urbanised locations (C6)
¾ St Albans Road
¾ Redbourn Road
•
Widen pavements/towpaths to provide for cyclists to use (C7)
¾ Queensway
¾ Grand Union Canal
•
Introduce CCTV at cycle stands (C8)
¾ Marlowes
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
69
•
Introduce lighting to improve security and personal safety (C9)
¾ Briery Way
¾ Marlowes
•
Re-design junctions to assist cyclists and make routes more direct e.g. Advanced Stop Lines
(C10)
¾ Briery Way to Ellingham Road link
¾ Leverstock Green Road
•
Provide ramp access to the Nickey Line and connect the Nickey Line into Jarman Park (C11)
•
Improve pedestrian/ cyclist infrastructure to improve access to schools (C12)
¾ Longdean School
¾ from Felden to Hemel Hempstead School
•
Provide pelican crossings to assist cyclists crossing heavily trafficked roads (C13)
¾ Longfield
•
Develop the cycle network from NCN Route 57 (on Nickey Line) into town centre (C14)
•
Introduce off-street cycle routes in green areas (C15)
¾ Gade Valley
•
Develop “green corridors” for cyclists e.g. NE-SW (C16)
•
¾ The Wayside
¾ Brickfield Ave
¾ Longfield
¾ Fourdrinier Way/ Malmes Croft
Improve Plough Roundabout to ensure cyclists can use it safely (C17)
•
Improve maintenance of highways especially adjacent to kerbs (C18)
•
Improve links from Hemel Hempstead Station into town across the Boxmoor Trust Land along
the canal (C19)
Passenger transport
7.15
With the planned population increase in Hemel Hempstead the enhancement of passenger
transport systems should be a priority. Buses and rail provide higher capacity vehicles for moving
people than the private car. Provision for easy access by public transport should be designed into
all new developments. Where there is increased population the need for new bus services to
integrate with residential areas will be considered.
7.16
The following interventions have been identified, partly in response to the passenger transport
survey, as potentially beneficial changes.
Public Transport Information and Integration
•
Improved information at bus stops to improve confidence in the network (PT1)
•
Providing real-time passenger information at bus station and stops to provide confidence in bus
services (PT2)
•
Provide real-time information at railway stations (PT3)
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
70
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
•
Ensure integrated timetabling (between bus services and with railway services) to make linked
trips easier (PT4)
•
Promote integrated ticketing (e.g. Plusbus) to enable easy transfer between buses and with
trains to make linked trips easier (PT5)
Bus improvements
7.17
A variety of bus-based measures are proposed in order to encourage greater use of services and
to reduce the dependency upon the private car in Hemel Hempstead. The proposals encompass
improvements to service provision, changes in timetabling and ticketing, bus priority measures, as
well as new capital infrastructure or vehicle provision.
Service Provision
7.18
In order to provide a public transport service that is both convenient and reliable to use continuous
improvements are required to bus service provision within the town. The establishment of quality
bus partnerships is one way of achieving this but, more generally, consideration of bus provision
and service frequency is required in both peak and off-peak periods.
•
Establish a Quality Bus Partnership and Performance Improvement Plan, involving bus
operators and the local authorities, to assist in the planning of infrastructure improvements and
service enhancements (B1)
•
Improve the quality of bus service provision in terms of reliability, maintenance (including
cleaning) and driver training (B2)
•
Investigate the potential for higher service frequencies to encourage patronage e.g. to every
20mins (B3)
•
Extend bus services onto new routes to provide a more comprehensive network e.g. from HH
station to main destinations - Maylands, Apsley; from Maylands to town centre for shoppers;
from Old Town to shopping area; to Jarman Park from residential areas; introduce orbital bus
services; integrate bus services with the planned new residential areas (B4)
•
Review the levels of subsidies to bus operators for non-commercial services for example at
weekends and during the evenings to maintain service levels and provide for the elderly and
young (B5)
Timetabling and Ticketing
7.19
It is important that the bus services meet the ever changing needs of travellers in Hemel
Hempstead. This is particularly important within the context of the proposed scale of development
in and around the town and the impact that this will have upon the movement of people. Continual
reviews of timetabling are therefore important. In addition fares structures also need to be
considered as a mechanism for encouraging travel by bus instead of by private car.
•
Review of timetables to ensure that it matches customer needs (B6)
•
Review the fares structure or lowering fares to encourage patronage (B7)
•
Extend the concessionary fare schemes, e.g. for the young, to enable the socially excluded to
access life-enhancing activities (B8)
Bus Priority
7.20
With congestion a particular issue along a number of corridors in Hemel Hempstead the use of bus
priority measures provides a mechanism for ensuring greater reliability of bus services provision. In
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
71
addition, there will generally be an associated reduction in journey times for bus travel thus
providing greater encouragement for people to use the services. A range of potential measures are
proposed from bus priority at junctions through to bus only routings.
•
Providing bus priorities on key routes such as bus lanes and transponders to ensure priority at
traffic signals to make buses an attractive alternative to car use e.g. along A414 (B9)
•
Constructing a kerb guided busway (or rapid transit system) on key routes to provide bus
priority e.g. along the central reservation of A414 (B10)
•
Improve road layouts for buses e.g. Leverstock Green (B11)
•
New road provision for bus only routes e.g. link Hillfield Road and Turners Hill to provide easier
access for buses into hospital and similar linkages between neighbourhoods (B12)
Infrastructure and vehicles
7.21
In addition to some of the proposed bus priority measures other infrastructure measures are
proposed along with capital investment in vehicles to provide improved operating conditions.
•
Improve access into schools for buses e.g. Hemel Hempstead School (B13)
•
Review bus stop locations using mapping to locate stops more appropriately to be near main
origins and destinations (B14)
•
Introduce new vehicles including low-floor buses to enhance the journey experience (B15)
•
CCTV on buses and at bus station to enhance security and personal safety (B16)
•
Construct a new bus station as part of the Waterhouse Square development to attract
passengers, relocating it closer to the town centre than car parking, and making it covered,
safe and DDA compliant with enhanced access (B17)
Rail
7.22
Rail services provide an important element of the public transport service provision connecting
Hemel Hempstead to nearby localities as well as into Central London. Improving the level of
service provision is important in encouraging individuals to use rail as an alternative to private car
trips. A range of measures are proposed from shorter-term stabilisation of the service timetable
from Hemel Hempstead to longer-term investment in capacity.
•
Stabilise railway service timetable (R1)
•
Increased frequencies to make journeys easier (R2)
•
Introduce CCTV onto rail stations to enhance safety and personal security (R3)
•
Increased track capacity to enable more trains to be run (R4)
•
Introduce longer trains to increase capacity (R5)
•
Feasibility study of enhancing the station as a gateway to the town (R6)
Social Inclusion
Provide access for the mobility impaired
7.23
Inclusive design is a requirement for all transport-related infrastructure. A variety of measures
should be provided to serve the needs of a range of mobility impaired groups, such as the provision
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
72
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
of ramps, lowered kerbs on strategic pedestrian routes, high kerbs at bus stops providing step-free
access, and audible and tactile information on routes and crossings.
Set up a Community Transport Partnership to address the needs of the elderly and frail
7.24
Partnership working with a number of interest groups representing sometimes conflicting mobility
needs is required to ensure inclusive design of new or amended transport infrastructure.
Community transport and taxis are particularly useful for those with mobility impairments. Potential
measures include:
•
Improve street level access for pedestrians and the mobility impaired with dropped kerbs (CT1)
•
Develop a Community Transport partnership using a social responsibility fund (CT2)
•
Allow more taxis to collect passengers at the railway station, to enhance choice (CT3)
•
Provide more subsidised home to school and home to hospital taxis to promote social inclusion
(CT4)
•
Expand the existing Dial-a-Ride service to cater for more people, especially for elderly (CT5)
•
Use Demand Responsive Transport (DRT) to serve the hospital (CT6)
Highways and freight
7.25
As the LTP2 points out car trips will remain a very important mode of travel in Hertfordshire,
including Hemel Hempstead. It is therefore important that a suitable level of network provision is
maintained and that strategic enhancements are made where there is a clear justification in terms
of enhancing accessibility and supporting the economic vitality of the town.
7.26
An important element of providing an efficient highway network is managing the impact of freight
traffic into the town. Given the close proximity of the M1 there is good strategic access to the area
for freight movements, however it is important that appropriate measures are put in place to ensure
that freight can access the town itself without conflicting with other vehicular road users as well as
non-motorised traffic.
Highway Improvements
7.27
A number of proposals have been identified to maintain and enhance the highway network:
•
Improve road markings (H1)
•
Designate “Green” corridors for use only by sustainable modes e.g. Bunkers Lane (H2)
•
Re-design site entrances e.g. into Jarman Park to enable safer access (H3)
•
Designate an AQMA at Junction 8 (H4)
•
Widen roads e.g. Durranthill Road, A414 St Albans Road (H5)
•
Re-design roads e.g. Bourne End slip road onto A41, Two Waters flyover (H6)
•
Provide HOV/HGV lane (e.g. on A414) (H7)
•
Maintain highways, including traffic calming features e.g. A414, Maylands Avenue, resurface
Link Way (H8)
•
Re-design junctions to improve safety e.g. Plough Roundabout, on A4146 Leighton Buzzard
Road, Maylands and A414, between Box Lane and Felden Lane (H9)
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
73
•
Re-design entrances and improve access for vehicles e.g. into Maylands especially for HGVs,
at the junction of Green Lane, and into Cupid Green off Redbourn Road, as well as a Woodhall
Farm egress (Sainsbury end of Shenley Road) (H10)
•
Provide new roundabouts e.g. at junction of Leverstock Green Road and Bedmond Road (H11)
•
Make roads narrower to provide more space for walking and cycling e.g. Leighton Buzzard
Road (H12)
•
Re-design roundabouts along A414 St Albans Road to increase capacity (H13)
•
Construct a by-pass e.g. the North East Relief Road (as proposed in the Local Plan) or
Northern Bypass (include provision for cyclists) (H14)
•
Provide new bridges across railway line, river and canal e.g. into Manor Estate from Apsley, to
complement the Durrants Hill Road bridge (H15)
•
Introduce congestion charging/road pricing e.g. cordons at congestion hotspots (H16)
Freight
7.28
Managing freight traffic within the town is an important aspect of maintaining an efficient highway
network. Ensuring that freight movements are understood and adequately catered for is essential.
Consideration should be given to access routes for development sites, including any conflicts with
passage through residential areas. Various options are proposed:
•
Develop a freight travel plan (H17)
•
Improve route maps for hauliers (H18)
•
HGV parking in Maylands (H19)
•
Introduce lorry ban in residential areas (H20)
•
Introduce a Low Emission Zone to improve air quality e.g. along A414 (H21)
•
Designated lorry routes e.g. into Maylands (H22)
•
Freight transhipment facilities e.g. at Maylands (H23)
Traffic and network management
7.29
Efficient management of the existing highway network will generate benefits in terms of potential
reductions in peak hour flows and more reliable journey times through the town.
Traffic Management and Road Safety
7.30
Traffic management and improving road safety are key elements of this UTP. Managing speeds is
an important tool in achieving both these aims and the following measures might be pursued:
•
Investigate average speed cameras to manage traffic flow e.g. along Leverstock Green Road,
Green Lane, St Albans Road, Link Way (T1)
•
Reduce speed limits e.g. Breakspear Way (currently 60mph) (T2)
•
Enforce road traffic laws more effectively (T3)
•
Introduce measures to reduce speeding e.g. in Chaulden, Bunkers Lane, Chambersbury Lane
(T4)
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
74
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
•
Provide more road safety training (T5)
•
Introduce Home Zones e.g. Adeyfield (T6)
•
Make the Old Town an historic core (T7)
Network Management
7.31
Improvements in traffic flows around towns can often be achieved through effective network
management. As Hemel Hempstead continues to grow it is important that the impact of traffic
growth is continually monitored and appropriate measures put in place to mitigate any adverse
impacts. The use of Traffic Management Systems and Intelligent Transport Systems can be an
important tool is making the most efficient use of network capacity. Alternative road configurations
and operations can also enhance the flow of traffic.
•
Review impact of new traffic lights onto Leighton Buzzard Road from Moor End Road (Kodak
Building) (T8)
•
Introduce traffic signals e.g. at A414 St Albans Road / Green Lane junction, A414 and
Maylands Avenue (T9)
•
Introduce Urban Traffic Management Systems (UTMC) and Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS)
(T10)
•
Install a one-way system in the Old Town (T11)
•
Designate “Red Routes” to ban stopping and parking e.g. Queensway (T12)
•
Provide roundabouts e.g. at junction of Shenley Road and Redbourn Road, and Cupid Green
(T13)
Road Traffic Information
7.32
Providing appropriate information to drivers can significantly improve the movement of vehicles
around town centres. Highlighting appropriate routing around Hemel Hempstead could help reduce
the pressures on elements of the network. In addition variable message signs, particularly in
relation to parking, can be an important element of reducing circular traffic movements around town
centres.
•
Provide signage for drivers (T14)
•
Variable message signs (T15)
Parking and Park & Ride
7.33
Town centre parking policy can have a significant impact upon individuals’ choices when it comes
to travel. If parking is readily and cheaply available then this will encourage people to drive into
town centres. It is therefore important to effectively manage parking provision, whilst
acknowledging that it remains important for the vitality of retail areas for individuals to have the
option to park nearby. Ad hoc parking can cause congestion problems in sensitive areas and so it
is important to maintain an appropriate balance in allowing convenient access to facilities whilst
ensuring that the private car does not dominate the local environment. Restricting parking in
sensitive areas, such as around schools, is therefore important.
7.34
A review of parking standards could not be undertaken by a single district in isolation as it would be
more effective for any review and any possible reduction of parking standards to be undertaken on
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
75
a county-wide or sub-regional basis. Any possible reduction is better directed to where it could be
related to other policies e.g. Accessibility Zones or public transport improvements, and to types of
schemes to which it should normally relate (particularly commercial schemes which are regarded
as destinations in their own right).
7.35
Dacorum Borough Council has significant influence over the arrangements for parking in the town.
The following measures could be implemented:
Parking
•
Introduce more CPZs around key destinations, especially those located in residential areas
(P1)
•
Remove parking around schools e.g. John Fitzgerald Kennedy School (P2)
•
Discourage parking in sensitive locations e.g. St John’s Road, around HH Station, High Street/
Piccotts End (P3)
•
Enforce parking restrictions including preventing HGV parking on Three Cherry Trees Lane and
removing double parking in residential areas (P4)
•
Reduce car parking standards for new developments, on a County-wide or sub-regional basis
(P5)
•
Develop a secure HGV parking site e.g. off M1 junction 8 in Maylands (P6)
•
Reduce parking availability (P7)
•
Raise parking charges to encourage sustainable transport, P&R, and to manage traffic (P8)
•
Provide coach parking e.g. in Maylands (P9)
•
Provide more motorcycle parking at major destinations e.g. railway stations, Maylands,
Marlowes (P10)
•
Improve parking where appropriate e.g. at Adeyfield Community Centre, ski centre and provide
new car parks in town centre (P11)
•
Provide more parking for disabled drivers (P12)
Park and Ride
7.36
Park and ride can be an effective measure in encouraging individuals not to drive into congested
town centre areas but to travel in by bus. In order to be successful there needs to be a clear
incentive for individuals to use the service, either because it is more convenient, reliable or faster to
use or that there is a financial saving.
•
Facilitate P&R e.g. at Maylands (P13)
Contribution towards LTP2 objectives
7.37
As a package of overall measures each of the areas described above would make an important
contribution towards achieving the objectives set for the LTP2; some will have a greater impact
than others. Table 7.1 overleaf highlights this:
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
76
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Table 7.1 Contribution to LTP2 objectives
Improve
safety
Make
best use
of
existing
network
Manage
growth of
transport
Develop
transport
system
Smarter
Choices
√
√√
√√√
Walking
√
√√
√√
√
Cycling
√
√√
√√
√
Schools access
√
√√
√
Buses
√
√√
√
√√
Community
transport
Contribute
to
economic
efficiency
Mitigate
impact
on air
quality
Raise
awareness
of
sustainable
modes
Reduce
need
for
travel
√
√
√√√
√√
√√
√√
√
√√
√√
√√√
√
√√
√√√
√
√
√√
√
√
√
√
√
Provide
better
access
√
√√√
√√
Rail
√
√
Highways &
freight
Traffic &
network
management
√√
√
√√
√
√
√
Parking & P&R
√
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
77
8
Delivery Programme
8.1
Appendix A sets out the detailed programme of interventions and measures that comprise the
Hemel Hempstead UTP. They are categorised by mode and type of measure. Information is given
on the particular issues facing the town that the measures address, the UTP objectives to which
the measure will contribute, the estimated costs, the lead agency tasked with taking it forward, the
timescale for implementation, the indicative priority and the potential outcomes.
8.2
Measures have been categorised using a simple code:
Table 8.1 Code for measures
Code letter
Type of measure
SC
Smarter Choices interventions
W
Walking and pedestrian measures
C
Cycling measures
PT
Public Transport Information and Integration
B
Bus improvements
CT
Community Transport measures
R
Rail improvements
H
Highways and freight measures
T
Traffic and network management improvements, including road safety measures
P
Parking and P&R interventions
Programme Summary
8.3
This section summarises the programme over four timescales:
•
Very short term wins – measures that could be implemented within 2-3 years;
•
Short term – measures that could be implemented over the next 5 years;
•
Medium term – measures that could be implemented 5-10 years from now; and
•
Long term – measures that could be implemented 10-20 years from now i.e. over the lifetime of
the Local Development Framework.
8.4
All costs are estimated and would need detailed re-examination prior to commencement of the
measures. The costs of many measures have not been provided (and are marked as TBC – to be
confirmed) since these costs will depend on a variety of factors such as the type of equipment
used, the geographical extent of the measures, etc, some of which may be subject to political
decisions.
8.5
While some measures are programmed for the medium/long-term, planning for their eventual
implementation could, and in some cases should, take place in the short term if they are to
progress even in the lengthy timescales anticipated. Many measures, especially larger schemes,
will require detailed modelling or a continuing political commitment prior to adoption. Delays in
securing planning permission or uncertainty in securing the necessary funding typically hinder
progress.
8.6
Four summary maps showing examples of the measures for each timescale are included in
Appendix F.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
78
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Very short term measures
8.7
Very short term measures are measures that could be implemented immediately, within 2-3 years.
8.8
Most require only small amounts of funding. The focus of these measures is upon improving
walking and cycling routes in particular, although smarter choice measures could also be
implemented within a short period. The very short term measures are outlined in Table 8.2 with the
priority status highlighted.
Table 8.2 Very short term measures
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
SC1
Develop and implement School Travel Plans
7.8
£10k per
school
HIGH
SC2
Introduce walking buses for primary schools e.g. in
Chaulden
7.8
£5k per school
HIGH
SC4
Workplace travel plans campaign
7.8
£100k
HIGH
SC5
Leisure Travel Plans (e.g. Jarman Park)
7.8
£30k per site
MED
SC6
Destination Travel Plans (Station, Hospital)
7.8
£30k per site
HIGH
SC7
Area Travel Plans (e.g. Maylands)
7.8
£60k per area
HIGH
W1
Pedestrian guardrail review (e.g. rail station, London/
Station Rd, Waterhouse St, Heath Ln)
7.13
£1-5k per site
MED
W2
Tactile paving at crossings (e.g. London Rd/ Station Rd,
Bridge St roundabout, Combe St roundabout)
7.13
£1k-2k per
crossing
MED
W3
Signage (e.g. St Albans Rd, Fishery Ln, Gadebridge Ln,
Piccotts End/ Fletcher Way, Cambrian Way, Briery Way,
Nickey Line, Longlands)
7.13
£500 per sign
LOW
W4
Pedestrian environment improvements (e.g.
Waterhouse St, Leighton Buzzard Rd)
7.13
TBC
HIGH
W5
Canal path seating (station to town centre, Grand Union
Canal to Apsley)
7.13
£2k per seat
LOW
W6
Informal & formal crossings/ refuges (e.g. Gadebridge
Lane to park, Great Elms Rd, London/ Station Rd at
Cotterells, St Albans Rd, Cambrian Way)
7.13
£2k-5k
(Informal)
TBC (formal)
HIGH
C1
Cycle lanes/ routes (e.g. London/ Station Rd, Plough
roundabout/ Leighton Buzzard Rd, Fishery Ln)
7.14
£1k per 20
metres plus
signage
HIGH
C2
Signage (e.g. St Johns Road, Grand Union Canal,
Nickey Line, London/ Station Rd, Fishery Ln, Cambrian
Way, Briery Ln, Longlands)
7.14
£500 per sign
LOW
C3
Cycle maps
7.14
£5k
MED
PT1
Improved bus stop information
7.16
£50k
MED
B6
Review timetables
7.19
TBC
HIGH
B14
Review bus stop locations
7.21
£250k
HIGH
CT1
Provide easier access for mobility impaired e.g. dropped
kerbs
7.24
£3k per
dropped kerb
MED
CT2
Set up a Community Transport partnership
7.24
£50k
LOW
CT3
Allow more taxis to collect at railway station
7.24
£10k
LOW
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
79
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
H1
Improve road markings
7.27
£50k
LOW
H17
Freight Travel Plans
7.28
£20k
MED
H18
Route maps for hauliers
7.28
£10k
LOW
P1
Expand CPZ schemes (e.g. around railway stations)
7.34
£50k per
scheme
MED
P2
Remove parking around schools
7.34
£20k per
school
HIGH
P3
Restrict parking in sensitive areas (e.g. St Johns Road,
rail station, High St/ Piccotts End)
7.34
£20k
MED
P4
Enforce parking restrictions in residential areas
7.34
£10k
HIGH
Short term measures
8.9
Short term measures are those that could be implemented over the next 5 years. Table 8.3 lists
such measures alongside their priority status.
Table 8.3 Short term measures
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
SC3
Safer Routes to School (e.g. Chaulden)
7.8
£25k per
school
HIGH
SC8
Personalised Travel Plans
7.8
£15 per
person
HIGH
SC9
Car sharing (e.g. Maylands, new developments)
7.9
£100k
MED
SC10
Car clubs
7.9
£250k
MED
SC11
Travel awareness campaigns
7.10
£200k
HIGH
SC12
Prevent or discourage pupils/parents from driving to
school
7.10
£100k
MED
W7
Pavement widening (e.g. London/ Station Rd, Bennetts
End Rd)
7.13
£2.5k-5k per
10 metres
HIGH
W8
Pavement extension (e.g. Leighton Buzzard Rd, Fishery
Ln, London Rd/ Station Rd, St Albans Rd)
7.13
£5k per 10
metres
HIGH
W9
Junction re-design (e.g. Allandale)
7.13
£75k-100k
MED
W10
Change traffic priorities to favour pedestrians (e.g.
Leighton Buzzard Rd)
7.13
£15k-20k per
signals
MED
W11
Improve access for pedestrians and cyclists into some
areas (e.g. Apsley, Jarman Park)
7.13
£50k per
scheme
MED
W12
Provide pedestrian and cycling links to employment
zones from residential areas
7.13
£15-£50k per
scheme
MED
C4
Canal access route/ramp (e.g. London Rd/ Station Rd,
Fishery Lane)
7.14
£20k per 10
metres of
narrow path
MED
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
80
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
C5
Cycle parking (e.g. at rail station, Maylands, local
centres, sports and leisure centres)
7.14
£1k-2k (one
Sheffield
stand); £5k10k (for cover)
HIGH
C6
Shared cycle track (e.g. St Albans Rd, Redbourn Rd)
7.14
£10k per 10
metres
HIGH
C7
Pavement/towpath widening (e.g. Queensway, Grand
Union Canal)
7.14
£2.5k-5k per
10 metres
HIGH
C8
CCTV at cycle stands (Marlowes)
7.14
£25k
(additional to
existing CCTV
system)
LOW
C9
Lighting (eg. Briery Way, Marlowes)
7.14
Up to £100k
LOW
C10
Junction re-design (e.g. Briery Way to Ellingham Road
link, Leverstock Green Road)
7.14
£75k-£100k
LOW
C11
Ramp access (e.g. Nickey Line)
7.14
£20k per
simple, short
ramp
MED
C12
Improve access to schools on foot/ cycle (e.g.
Longdean School)
7.14
£20k per
school
HIGH
PT4
Integrated timetabling between bus and rail
7.16
TBC
HIGH
B1
Quality Bus Partnership/ Performance Improvement
Plan
7.18
£25k
HIGH
B2
Better maintenance (incl. cleaning)
7.18
TBC
MED
B7
Review fare structures/ lower fares
7.19
£20k
MED
B13
Improve access into schools for buses
7.21
£25k-£150k
per school
MED
R1
7.22
TBC
HIGH
R6
Stabilise timetabling
Feasibility study of enhancing the station as a gateway
to the town (R6)
7.21
£25k
MED
CT4
Taxis for home to school/ hospital
7.24
TBC
LOW
CT5
Expand Dial-a-Ride
7.24
TBC
MED
CT6
DRT to serve the hospital
7.24
TBC
MED
H2
Designate “Green” corridors for use only by sustainable
modes (e.g. Bunkers Ln)
7.27
TBC
MED
T1
Average speed cameras e.g. Leverstock Green Rd,
Green Ln, St Albans Rd, Link Road
7.30
£200k per
camera
LOW
T2
Lower speed limits e.g. Breakspear Way
7.30
£30k per link
LOW
T3
Effective enforcement
7.30
TBC
LOW
MED
T4
Traffic calming (e.g. Chaulden, Bunkers Ln)
7.30
£10k per
100m
T5
Road safety training
7.30
£30k
MED
T8
Review impact of new traffic lights on Leighton Buzzard
Road
7.31
£20k
LOW
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
81
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
T14
Improved signage
7.32
£150k
LOW
P5
Reduce parking standards for new developments
7.34
£20k
MED
P6
Develop a secure HGV parking site
7.34
£200k
LOW
P7
Reduce parking availability (e.g. in Waterhouse Square)
7.34
£10k per
location
MED
P8
Higher charges for long-stay parking
7.34
£25k
MED
P9
Provide coach parking (e.g. in Maylands)
7.34
£200k
LOW
P10
Provide motorcycle parking (e.g. railway stations,
Maylands, Marlowes)
7.34
£50k
LOW
P11
New car parks (e.g. in town centre)
7.34
£5m
LOW
P12
Parking for disabled drivers
7.34
£50k
MED
P13
P&R (e.g. at Maylands)
7.35
£1.5m
HIGH
Medium term measures
8.10
Medium term measures are those that could be implemented some 5-10 years from now. Such
interventions tend to be larger and will require more detailed planning if they are to proceed. Many
bus and rail improvements could be achieved within this timescale. They are listed in Table 8.4
overleaf.
Table 8.4 Medium term measures
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
W13
Step-free access to platforms (rail station)
W14
Lighting (e.g. Plough Roundabout, Fishery
Underpass to Park, Briery Way, St Albans Hill)
7.13
TBC
MED
7.13
Up to £100k
MED
C13
Pelican crossings (e.g. Longfield)
7.14
50k-75k
(Pelican)
HIGH
C14
Develop network from NCN Route 57
7.14
£50k per 100m
HIGH
C15
Introduction of off-street cycle routes (e.g. Gade Valley)
7.14
£50k per 100m
HIGH
C16
Green corridors for cyclists (e.g. The Wayside, Brickfield
Ave, Longfield, Fourdrinier Way)
7.14
£50k per 100m
HIGH
C17
Improve Plough Roundabout to ensure cyclists’ safely
7.14
£500k (offroad)
HIGH
C19
Improve links from Hemel Hempstead Station into town
7.14
£500k
MED
PT2
Real Time Passenger Information at bus stops
7.16
TBC
HIGH
PT3
Real Time Passenger Information at rail stations
7.16
TBC
HIGH
PT5
Integrated ticketing between public transport services
7.16
TBC
MED
B3
Increased bus frequencies
7.18
TBC
HIGH
B4
Extension of bus services (e.g. orbital service)
7.18
TBC
HIGH
B5
Subsidy to operators
7.18
TBC
LOW
B8
Wider concessionary fare scheme
7.19
TBC
MED
Ln,
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
82
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
B9
Bus priority on key routes (e.g. on A414)
7.20
£1million
HIGH
B10
Guided busway (e.g. on A414)
7.20
£2m per km
LOW
B11
New road layouts e.g. Leverstock Green
7.20
TBC
LOW
B15
New vehicles (e.g. low-floor buses)
7.21
£100k / vehicle
MED
B16
CCTV on buses and at station
7.21
£500k
LOW
B17
New bus station at Waterhouse Square
7.21
£3m
LOW
R2
Increased rail frequencies
7.22
TBC
LOW
R3
CCTV at railway stations
7.22
£250k
LOW
H3
Re-design entrances to sites e.g. Jarman Park
7.27
£500k
MED
H4
Air Quality Management Area at Jct 8 of M1 and Plough
Roundabout
7.27
£80k
LOW
H5
Widen roads (e.g. on A414 and A4146)
7.27
£150k / 100m
LOW
H6
Redesign roads & junctions (e.g. Bourne End slip road,
Two Waters flyover)
7.27
£250k-£500k
LOW
H7
HOV/HGV lanes (e.g. on M1, A414)
7.27
£250k
LOW
H8
Maintain highways (e.g. A414, Maylands Ave, Link
Road)
7.27
£250k
LOW
H9
Junction improvements & roundabouts (e.g. Maylands
& A414, Plough Roundabout, Box Ln/ Felden Ln)
7.27
£500k - £750k
per junction
MED
H10
Re-design entrances and improve access for vehicles
(e.g. Green Ln into Maylands, Redbourn Rd into Cupids
Green, Woodhall Farm egress)
7.27
£500k per
access
LOW
H11
Provide new roundabouts (e.g. Leverstock Green Rd/
Bedmond Rd)
7.27
£500k each
LOW
H12
Make roads narrower (e.g. Leighton Buzzard Rd)
7.27
£5k per 10m
LOW
H13
Re-design roundabouts (e.g. A414)
7.27
£100k - £500k
LOW
H19
HGV park in Maylands
7.28
£200k
MED
H20
Lorry bans (e.g. in residential areas)
7.28
£100k
LOW
H21
Low Emission Zone (e.g. along A414)
7.28
£500k
LOW
H22
Designated lorry routes (e.g. into Maylands)
7.28
£500k
LOW
H23
Freight transhipment facilities (e.g. Maylands)
7.28
£5m
LOW
T6
Home Zones (e.g. Adeyfield)
7.30
£500k / street
MED
T9
New traffic signals (e.g. on A414 with Green Lane, with
Maylands Ave)
7.31
£40k per
junction
LOW
T10
Urban Traffic Control/ Intelligent Transport Systems
7.31
TBC
MED
T11
Install a one-way system in the Old Town
7.31
TBC
LOW
T12
Designate “Red Routes” to ban stopping and parking
(e.g. Queensway)
7.31
£300k
LOW
T15
Variable Message Signs
7.32
£2m
MED
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Page
83
Long term matters for further consideration
8.11
Long term potential measures could be implemented within 10-20 years from now i.e. over the
lifetime of the Local Development Framework to coincide with the new housing developments
planned in the EEP. Major construction schemes typically would take this length of time to be
implemented, even if planning were to be started soon. Table 8.5 identifies these measures.
Table 8.5 Long term matters for consideration
Code
Measure
Paragraph
Estimated
cost
Priority
Status
B12
New bus-only road e.g. linking Hillfield Road & Turners
Hill
7.20
£2m per km
MED
R4
Increased track capacity on West Coast Mainline
7.22
TBC
LOW
R5
Longer trains
7.22
TBC
MED
H14
New road construction (e.g. North East Relief Road)
7.27
£3m - £5m per
km
MED
H15
New bridges e.g. over canal
7.27
£2m - £5m per
km
LOW
H16
Congestion charging/ road pricing
7.27
TBC
LOW
T7
Make the Old Town an historic core
7.30
TBC
LOW
T13
Provide roundabouts (e.g. Shenley Rd/ Redbourn Rd)
7.31
£500k each
LOW
The involvement of partners
8.12
The active involvement of partners will be needed to ensure that all the proposed measures are
implemented according to the required timescale.
8.13
Amongst the multi-agency issues that will influence implementation are the following:
•
Political drivers (e.g. EEP) for new housing developments will require close liaison with the
Regional Assembly, for example regarding funding for transport infrastructure;
•
The impact of the Buncefield explosion and need to work with national and regional agencies
to regenerate the business park will be important for the Maylands Partnership;
•
Partnerships for transport systems, e.g. no formal bus quality partnership currently exists in
Hemel Hempstead, but might be considered;
•
The Council will need to work with the healthcare and education sectors, Highways Agency
and regional bodies e.g. the East of England Development Agency;
•
Cross-boundary working with other councils, notably the City and District of St Albans.
Page
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
84
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Appendix A
Hemel Hempstead UTP Interventions
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Develop and implement School
Travel Plans
Introduce walking buses for
primary schools
Safer routes to school
Workplace travel plans
campaign
Leisure Travel Plans (Jarmans
Park)
Destination Travel Plans
(Station, Hospital)
Area Travel Plans (e.g.
Maylands)
Personalised Travel Plans
Promote and develop car
sharing (e.g. Maylands, new
developments)
Promote and encourage car
clubs
Travel awareness campaigns
SC1
SC2
SC3
SC4
SC5
SC6
SC7
SC8
SC9
SC10
SC11
Smarter Choice measures
Measure (intervention)
C1; C2; C4; C5;
E3
C1; C2; C3
C1; C2; C3
C1; C2; C4; C5;
E3
C2; C3; C4; C5;
A2; E3
C2; C4; C5; A1;
E3
C2; C4; C5; E3
C2; C3; C4; C5;
A2; E3
C1; C4; C5; A3;
S1; S2; E3
C2; C4; A3; S1;
S2; E1; E3
C2; C3; C4; C5;
A3; E3
Major
Contribution
A1; A2; A3; S1;
S2; S3; E1
C5; A2; S3; E1
C5; A2; S3; E1
A1; A2; A3; A4;
S1; S2; S3; E1
C1; A5; A6; S1;
S2; E1
C1; S1; E1
C1; S1; E1
C1; S1; E1
A4; A6
C1; C5
C1; S1; S2; E1
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
Hemel Hempstead UTP Interventions Tables
£200k
£250k
£100k
£15 per person
£60k per area
£30k per site
£30k per site
£100k
£25k per school
£5k per school
£10k per school
Estimated cost
of measure
HCC
HCC
DBC
Mayland Partnership
(for Maylands)
HCC
Mayland Partnership
(for Maylands)
HCC
DBC
DBC
HCC
DBC
HCC
Lead agency
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Short-term
Quick-win
Quick-win
Time-scale
HIGH
MED
MED
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MED
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
Indicative
priority
SC12
Prevent or discourage pupils
from driving to school
C2; C4; C5; A3;
E3
£100k
HCC
Short-term
MED
Pedestrian guardrail review (e.g.
rail station, Waterhouse St)
Tactile paving at crossings (e.g.
London/ Station Rd, Bridge St
roundabout)
Signage (e.g. St Albans Rd,
Fishery Ln, Gadebridge Ln)
Pedestrian environment
improvements (e.g. Waterhouse
St, Leighton Buzzard Rd)
Canal path seating (station to
town centre/ Grand Union Canal
to Apsley)
Informal & formal crossings/
refuges (e.g. Gadebridge Lane
to park, Great Elms Rd, at
Jarmans Park)
Pavement widening (e.g.
London/ Station Rd, Bennetts
End Rd)
Pavement extension (e.g.
Leighton Buzzard Rd, Fishery
Ln)
W1
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
W7
W8
Walking
Measure (intervention)
C4; A2; A3; A4;
E3
C4; A2; A3; A4;
S1; S2; E3
A2; A3; A4; S1;
S2; E3
C2; C4; A2; A5;
E2; E3
C1
Major
Contribution
E1
C3; E1
C2; C3; C4; A5
C1; C4; E3
C3; A1; A4; S1;
S3; E1
C3; A5
C4; A1; A2; A3;
A4; S1
C4; A2; A4; S1;
E2; E3
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
£5 per 10 metres
£2.5k-5k per 10
metres
£2k-5k (Informal)
£2k per seat
TBC
£500 per sign
£1k-2k per
crossing
£1k-5k
Estimated cost
of measure
HCC
HCC
HCC
British Waterways (for
canal)
HCC
Thornfields (for
Waterhouse St
development)
HCC
HCC
HCC
Thornfields (for
Waterhouse St
development)
Lead agency
Short-term
Short-term
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Time-scale
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
LOW
MED
MED
Indicative
priority
Junction re-design (e.g.
Allandale)
Pedestrian crossings (e.g.
A414, Cambrian Way)
Improve access for pedestrians
and cyclist to some areas
Provide pedestrian and cycling
links to employment zones from
residential areas
Step-free access to platforms
(rail station)
Lighting (e.g. Plough
Roundabout, Fishery Ln,
Underpass to Park)
W9
W10
W11
W12
W13
W14
C4
C4; A2; A3; A4;
E3
C4; A2; A4; E3
C4; A2; A3; A4;
E3
C4; A2; A3; A4;
E3
C3; A4; S3
A2; A4; A5; S1;
S2; E2; E3
A5
A4; S1; S2; E2
Up to £100k
TBC
£15k-£50k per
scheme
£50k per scheme
£15k-20k per
crossing
£75k – £100k per
junction
HCC
London Midland
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Medium-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
MED
Cycle lanes/ routes (e.g.
London/ Station Rd, Plough
roundabout/ Leighton Buzzard
Rd)
Signage (e.g. St Johns Road,
Grand Union Canal, Nickey
Line)
Cycle maps
Canal access route/ramp (e.g.
London/ Station Rd, Fishery
Lane)
Cycle parking (e.g. at rail
station, Maylands)
Shared cycle track (e.g. St
Albans Road, Redbourn Road)
Pavement widening (e.g.
Queensway, Grand Union
Canal)
CCTV at cycle stands
(Marlowes)
Lighting (e.g. Briery Way,
Marlowes)
C1
C2
C3
C4
C5
C6
C7
C8
C9
Cycling
Measure (intervention)
C4
C4
C4; A2; A3; A4;
S1; S2; E3
C2; C3; C4; A2;
A3; S1; S2; E3
C1; C2; C3; C4;
A2; A3; E3
A2; A4; E3
C1
C2; C3; C4; A2;
A3; A4; S1; S2;
E3
Major
Contribution
S1; S2; E3
S1; S2
C3; E1
C5; A4
C5; A4
C4; A3; S1; S2
C1; C2; C3; C5;
A2; A3; A4
C3; A2; A3
C5; A1
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
Up to £100k
£25k (additional
to existing CCTV
system)
£2.5k-5k per 10
metres
£10k per 10
metres
£1k-2k (one
Sheffield stand);
£5k-10k (for
cover)
£20k (10 metres
of narrow path)
£5k
£500 (per sign)
£1k (20 metres)
plus signage
Estimated cost
of measure
HCC
DBC
HCC
British Waterways (for
canal)
HCC
HCC
London Midland (for rail
station)
British Waterways
DBC
HCC
HCC
Lead agency
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Time-scale
LOW
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MED
MED
LOW
HIGH
Indicative
priority
Junction re-design (e.g. Briery
Way to Ellingham Road link,
Leverstock Green Road)
Ramp access (e.g. Nickey Line)
Improve access to school by
cycle / on foot
Pelican crossings (e.g.
Longfield)
Develop network from NCN
Route 57
Introduction of off-street cycle
routes
Green corridors for cyclists
Improve Plough Roundabout to
ensure cyclists' safety
Improve maintenance of
highways
Improve links from Hemel
Hempstead Station into town
C10
C11
C12
C13
C14
C15
C16
C17
C18
C19
C4; A2; S1; E1
C4; A2; A3; S1;
S2; E1
C4; A2; A3; S1;
S2; E1
C4; A2; A3; S1;
S2; E1
C2; A4; A5
C2; C3; C4; A2;
A3; A4; S1; S2;
E3
C4; A2; A3; A4;
S1; S2; E3
C4; A2; A3; A4;
S1; S2; E3
A2; A3; A4; E3
C3; S3
C2; A4; A5
C2; A4; A5
C2; A4; A5
C5; A1
C2; C3; A1
C1; C2; C3
C1; C4; E2
A4; S1; S2; E2
£500k
£100k
£500k
£50k per 100m
£50k per 100m
£50k per 100m
£50k-£75k
(Pelican)
£20k per school
£20k per simple,
short ramp
£75k-£100k
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Sustrans
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
MED
MED
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MED
LOW
Improved bus stop information
Real Time Passenger
Information at bus stops
Real-time information at stations
Integrated timetabling between
bus and rail
Integrated ticketing between
public transport services
PT1
PT2
PT3
PT4
PT5
Public Transport Information
Measure (intervention)
C1; C2; C3; C4
C1; C4; A2; A3
C1; C4; A4; A5
C1; C2; C4
C1; C4
Major
Contribution
A2; A3; A5
C2; C3; A1; A2;
A3; A5; A7
C2; A4; A5
A1; A2; A5
C2; C3; C5; A2;
A3; A7
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
TBC
TBC
TBC
TBC
£50k
Estimated cost
of measure
Bus operators
Train operators
Bus operators
Train operators
Train operators
HCC
Bus operators
Lead agency
Medium-term
Short-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Quick-win
Time-scale
MED
HIGH
HIGH
HIGH
MED
Indicative
priority
Bus Quality Partnership/
Performance Improvement Plan
Improve bus service quality
Increased bus frequencies
Extension of bus services
Subsidy to operators
Review timetables
Review fare structures/ lower
fares
Wider concessionary fare
scheme
Bus priority on key routes (e.g.
on A414)
Guided busway (e.g. on A414)
New road layouts at Leverstock
Green
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
B9
B10
B11
Bus
Measure (intervention)
C3; A4; S3
C2; C4; A1; A2;
A3; A4; A7
C2; C4; A1; A2;
A3; A4; A7
C1; C2; C4
C1; C2; C3; C4
C1; C4
C1; C2; C4
C1; C2; C3; C4;
A2; A3; A4; A7
C2; C3; C4; A2;
A3; A4; A7
C1; C4; A7
C1; C3; C4; A2;
A3
Major
Contribution
C1; A5
A5; E1
A5; E1
C3; A1; A2; A4
A5
C2; C3; C5; A1;
A2; A3; A4; A5;
A7
C3
A5
A5
C2; A1; A5
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
TBC
£2 million per km
£1million
TBC
£20k
TBC
TBC
TBC
TBC
TBC
£25k
Estimated cost
of measure
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Bus operators
Bus operators
HCC
Bus operators
Bus operators
Bus operators
HCC
Bus operators
Lead agency
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Quick-win
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Short-term
Time-scale
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
MED
MED
HIGH
LOW
HIGH
HIGH
MED
HIGH
Indicative
priority
New bus-only road e.g. linking
Hill Field Road & Turners Hill
Improve bus access into
schools
Review of bus stop locations
New vehicles (e.g. low-floor
buses)
CCTV on buses and at station
New bus station
B12
B13
B14
B15
B16
B17
C2; C4
C4
C2; C4
C1; C4; A2; A3
C4; C5; A3
C4; A1; A4; A7
C3; A5
S2
C3; A2; A3; A4;
A5
C2; C3; A4; A5;
A6; A7; E1
C2; E1
C2; C3
£3m
£500k
£100k per vehicle
£250k
£25k-£150k per
school
£2 million per km
Thornfields
Bus operators
Bus operators
HCC
HCC
HCC
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Quick-win
Short-term
Long-term
LOW
LOW
MED
HIGH
MED
MED
Provide easier access for
mobility impaired e.g. dropped
kerbs
Set up a CT partnership
Allow more taxis to collect at
station
Taxis for home to school/
hospital
Expand Dial-a-Ride
DRT to serve the hospital
CT1
CT2
CT3
CT4
CT5
CT6
Community Transport
Measure (intervention)
C2; C4; A1
A1; A2; A4
A1; A3
A4
A1; A4
A1; A2; A4; S1
Major
Contribution
E1
C4
S2
C2
C1
E2
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
TBC
TBC
TBC
£10k
£50k
£3k per dropped
kerb
Estimated cost
of measure
DBC
DBC
DBC
DBC
DBC
HCC
Lead agency
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Time-scale
MED
MED
LOW
LOW
LOW
MED
Indicative
priority
Stabilise timetabling
Increased frequencies
CCTV at railway stations
Increased track capacity
Improved integrated interchange
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
Rail
Measure (intervention)
C1; C4
C4
C4
C2; C4
C1; C4; A2; A3
Major
Contribution
C2; A4; A5; E1
C2; A4; A5; E1
C1; C2; S1
A5
C2; C3; A1; A2;
A3; A5; A7
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
TBC
TBC
£250k
TBC
TBC
Estimated cost
of measure
London Midland
Network Rail
London Midland
London Midland
London Midland
Lead agency
Long-term
Long-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Time-scale
MED
LOW
LOW
LOW
HIGH
Indicative
priority
Improve Road Markings
Designate "Green" corridors for
use only by sustainable modes
Re-design entrances to sites
e.g. Jarmans Park
Air Quality Management Area
e.g. at Jct 8 of M1 and Plough
Roundabout
Wider roads (e.g. on A414 and
A4146)
Redesign roads & junctions e.g.
Bourne End slip road
HOV/HGV lanes (e.g. on MI,
A414)
Maintain highways (e.g. A414,
Maylands Av, Link Way)
Junction improvements &
roundabouts (e.g. Maylands &
A414)
Re-design entrances and
improve access for vehicles
Provide new roundabouts
H1
H2
H3
H4
H5
H6
H7
H8
H9
H10
H11
Highways and Freight
Measure (intervention)
C3; A4; A5; S3
A4; A5; S3
A4; A5; S3
C1
C1
C3; A4; S3
C3
E1
C3; A4; S3
C2; C4; S1; S2;
E1; E3
S3
Major
Contribution
C3
C3
C4
S1; S2
A4
C4
A5; S1; S2
C1
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
£500k
£500k per access
£500-£750 per
junction
£250k
£250k
£250k-£500k
£150k per 100m
£50k
£50k
TBC
£50k
Estimated cost
of measure
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Highways Agency
HCC
HCC
HCC
Highways Agency
HCC
HCC
HCC
Lead agency
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Quick-win
Time-scale
LOW
LOW
MED
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MED
MED
LOW
Indicative
priority
Make Roads narrower
Re-design roundabouts
New road construction (e.g.
Northern Ring Road, North East
Relief Road)
New bridges e.g. over canal
Congestion charging/ road
pricing
Freight Travel Plans
Route maps for hauliers
HGV park in Maylands
Lorry bans (e.g. in residential
areas)
Low Emission Zone (e.g. along
A414)
Designated lorry routes (e.g.
into Maylands)
Freight transhipment facilities
H12
H13
H14
H15
H16
H17
H18
H19
H20
H21
H22
H23
C3; A5; F1
C3; S1; S2; F1
C4; E1
C3; S1; S2
C3; A5; F1
C1; F1
C1; C3; C5; A5;
F1
C1; C2; C3; C4;
E1
C3
C3; A4; S3; F1
C3; A4; A5; S3
C1
F1
S3
S3
C3; A5
A1; A2; A3; A7;
S3; E3
A4; A5; F1
A5; A6
£5m
£500k
£500k
£100k
£200k
£10k
£20k
TBC
£2-£5m per km
£3-£5m per km
£100k-£500k
£5k per 10m
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Maylands Partnership
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Quick-win
Quick-win
Long-term
Long-term
Long-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MED
LOW
MED
HIGH
LOW
MED
LOW
LOW
Safety cameras (average
speed)
Lower speed limits e.g.
Breakspear Way
Effective enforcement
Traffic calming
Road safety training
Home Zones (e.g. Adeyfield)
Historic core zone for Old Town
Review impact of new traffic
lights on Leighton Buzzard
Road
New traffic signals e.g. on A414
Urban Traffic Control/ Intelligent
Transport Systems/ VMS
Install a one-way system in the
Old Town
Designate "Red Routes" to ban
stopping and parking
Provide roundabouts at key
junctions
Improved signage
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
T7
T8
T9
T10
T11
T12
T13
T14
Traffic and Network Management
Measure (intervention)
C1
C1; A4; A5
C1
C1; A4; A5
C1; C3
C1; C3
C1; C3; A4
A5
C2; C4; S1; S2;
E1; E3
S1; S2; S3
S1; S2; S3; E1
S1; S2; S3
S1; S2; S3
S1; S2; S3
Major
Contribution
E2
C3; A2; A3
S1; S2; S3; F1
S1; S2; S3
E2
C2; C4; E4
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
£150k
£500k
£300k
TBC
TBC
£40k per junction
£20k
TBC
£500k per street
£30k
£10k per 100m
TBC
£300k per link
£200k per camera
Estimated cost
of measure
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
HCC
Police
HCC
HCC
Lead agency
Short-term
Long-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Long-term
Medium-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Time-scale
LOW
LOW
LOW
LOW
MED
LOW
LOW
LOW
MED
MED
MED
LOW
LOW
LOW
Indicative
priority
T15
Variable Message Signs
C1
A4; S1; S2; S3;
F1
£2m
HCC
Medium-term
MED
Expand CPZ schemes (e.g.
around railway stations)
Remove parking around schools
Restrict parking in sensitive
areas
Enforce parking restrictions in
residential areas
Reduce parking standards for
new developments
Provide secure lorry parking
Reduce parking availability (e.g.
in Waterhouse Square)
Higher charges for long-stay
parking
Provide coach parking (e.g. in
Maylands)
Provide motorcycle parking
New car parks (e.g. in town
centre)
Parking for disabled drivers
P&R (e.g. at Maylands)
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P6
P7
P8
P9
P10
P11
P12
P13
Parking and Park & Ride
Measure (intervention)
C2; C3; C4; A2;
A5
A1; A2; A4
A5
C4; A5
C4; A5
C1; C2; C3; C4
C1; C2; C3; C4,
A6
A6; F1
C1; C2; C3; C4;
A6
C1; C2; C3; C4
C1; C2; C3; C4
C1; C2; C4; S1;
S2; S3
C1; C2; C3; C4
Major
Contribution
A6; A7; E1
E1
A6; E1; E3
E1; E3
E1; E3
A1; A5; S1; S3;
E1; E3
A1; A5; S1; S3;
E1; E3
C5; A3; E1; E2;
E3
A5; A6; S1; S2;
S3; E1; E3
Minor
Contribution
HH UTP objectives addressed
£1.5million
£50k
£5m
£50k
£200k
£25k
£10k per location
£200k
£20k
£10k
£20k
£20k per school
£50k per scheme
Estimated cost
of measure
Maylands Partnership
DBC
DBC
DBC
Maylands Partnership
DBC
DBC
DBC
DBC
DBC
DBC
DBC
DBC
Lead agency
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Short-term
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Quick-win
Time-scale
HIGH
MED
LOW
LOW
LOW
MED
MED
LOW
MED
HIGH
MED
HIGH
MED
Indicative
priority
Prioritisation of schemes is based upon how well they achieve the objectives of the UTP as well as a measure of deliverability
encompassing policy fit, value for money, feasibility and public/political acceptability.
Costs are estimates. All costs would need re-examination prior to commencement. The costs of many measures have not been
provided (and are marked as TBC – to be confirmed) since these costs will depend on a variety of factors such as the type of
equipment used, the extent of the measures etc, which may be subject to political decisions.
Appendix B
Approach
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Methodology
1.1
The preparation of the Hemel Hempstead UTP involved several tasks which
are summarised below.
Variations to the planned methodology were
introduced at the request of HCC in view of the initial findings of the study.
Legislation and Policy Review
1.2
A brief, but comprehensive, policy review of the major legislation and policy
documents that affect the District was undertaken. This task involved the
critical assessment of national, regional and local policies. With the publication
recently of the Stern Report, The Economics of Climate Change, and also The
Eddington Transport Study: the Case for Action, national policy appears to be
shifting further to the promotion of sustainable transport. The policy review
provided the context for the analysis and assessment of current and future
issues and problems in the area.
1.3
The review covered five levels of government but the focus was at the regional
and sub-regional level:
•
•
•
•
•
1.4
European Union;
National (Department for Transport, Department for Communities and
Local Government);
Regional (East of England Regional Assembly, East of England
Development Agency etc);
County (Hertfordshire County Council); and
District (Dacorum District Council).
This review focussed on those issues not covered by the policy review
undertaken for the West Herts Area Transport Plan, particularly the latest
policy developments.
Data Review / Gap Analysis
1.5
A review of existing data available to the officers of HCC and DBC, covering
local information and referring to relevant national and regional data of
relevance to the district, was undertaken. This task critically assessed the
outputs from existing data available to produce a demand analysis and
assessment of current and future issues and problems in the context of the
current population and the proposed increased growth.
The data review
included the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Policy data e.g. projected growth figures, congestion data, air quality;
Census;
LATS (London Area Transport Study) 2001;
Traffic and transport data;
Road accident figures;
Commercial data e.g. employee numbers within the Hemel Hempstead
area;
Mapped information e.g. showing key locations, transport infrastructure,
street lighting etc; and
Public opinion e.g. from the MORI Survey for LTP2.
1.6
Important gaps in our understanding of travel behaviour in the town were
identified. These led to us undertaking audits to identify where improvements
might be made to the walking and cycling networks as well as a survey of
passenger transport use.
1.7
This task also involved a review of current models covering the capability,
availability and suitability of both available strategic and local models for the
area. As a result of this task a report was prepared recommending that a new
model be developed for the town and this has subsequently been
commissioned.
Planned Major Development Review
1.8
Major growth at Hemel Hempstead has been recommended by Government
Inspectors who examined the draft East of England Plan. This involves
substantial new building within the town but also in the Green Belt around
Dacorum, particularly to the east.
1.9
The current position with regard to the major committed and planned
development for Hemel Hempstead was established and a review undertaken
of the current procedures for engaging with the private sector developers with
a view to maximising the potential for joint working between the Council and
developers that will ensure that the UTP can meet future development needs.
1.10
A matrix of planned development, with their proposed timescales, was
developed to identify and summarise the scale of investment that may occur in
the town.
1.11
Four particular developments are likely to have a significant impact upon the
town:
•
•
•
•
The provision of housing within the town from the Urban Capacity Study;
The redevelopment of Waterhouse Square (the Civic Zone);
The regeneration of the Maylands Business Park following the Buncefield
explosion in 2006; and
The planned expansion resulting from the East of England Plan.
Officer and Key Stakeholder Consultation
1.12
A series of interviews with officers from HCC and DBC, as well as other key
stakeholders, were undertaken to ascertain their views on current and future
problems in the town as well as possible opportunities and interventions. The
methodology adopted employed a pro-forma to enable a comparison of the
results to be carried out.
1.13
Consultees provided information through a face-to-face interview or by
telephone where the latter was not possible. Outline information encompassed
the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Timescale for interventions
Key stages of planned interventions
Expected costs of planned interventions
Funding sources
Certainty of funding
Partners involved
•
•
•
•
1.14
While this format proved applicable to developers providing information on a
particular project, other interviews regarding uncertain proposals were
recorded in a more flexible format. Interviews focussed around the
assessment of risks determining the likelihood of a development coming
forward. The following categories of risk were identified:
•
•
•
1.15
Expected impact of planned interventions on transport and land-use in
Hemel Hempstead
Likelihood of progress within planned timescale
Potential risks of planned interventions
Other comments
Environmental risks;
Political risks; and
Funding/ financial risks.
The outputs from the previous tasks were summarised in the ‘Health Check’
report that identified the key issues that the UTP would need to address.
Health Check
1.16
Following on from the legislation and policy review, the data review and gap
analysis, the review of planned major developments and the consultations with
officers and stakeholders, a ‘Health Check ‘ report was prepared.
This
identified the key issues and problems that would need to be addressed in the
UTP.
1.17
Alongside this, a report to the Board of Hemel2020 was prepared,
recommending that a new land-use and transport model be developed for the
town. This is now under development.
Walking and cycling audits
1.18
Walking and cycling audits of primary and secondary routes in and around
Hemel Hempstead were undertaken to identify locations where useful
improvements could be made to existing infrastructure in order to make these
modes more attractive to users.
1.19
These audits identified the existing, and possible future, barriers to walking
and cycling. The focus was on identifying where cycling and walking routes
are inconsistent, are of a poor quality or indirect, and would benefit from
investment. Thus the audits enabled the identification of possible solutions to
observed problems.
Public Transport Survey
1.20
In order to better understand the travel behaviour and needs of public
transport users in Hemel Hempstead, a postal return survey for rail and bus
passengers was undertaken. The aim of the survey was to help fill the current
gaps in knowledge and to improve the evidence base of the UTP.
1.21
The survey was circulated at the railway stations
Apsley at peak morning period) and also at the bus
Maylands business park. Further copies were made
Dacorum Borough Council, libraries, Connexions,
(Hemel Hempstead and
station as well as on the
available at the offices of
West Herts Community
College, the Old Town Theatre, community centres and shops. The survey
th
th
was undertaken on two days, March 10 and April 15 2008.
1.22
Over 200 responses were received and entered into an Access database and
the results analysed for inclusion into the UTP. Many suggestions for
improvements were made by respondents many of which form part of the
implementation programme.
1.23
Along with the responses to the Maylands Partnership travel survey that
focussed on car commuting, an improved database of the travel behaviour in
the town was developed.
Developing Targets
1.24
Based on the LTP2 objectives, a set of transport targets were developed for
the Hemel Hempstead UTP.
Planning for Real event
1.25
Towards the end of the project a key stakeholder workshop, the Planning for
Real event, was held. The list of delegates is attached in Appendix D and
included both Elected members as well as representatives of local
organisations.
1.26
The format or the Planning for Real day involved presentations of the key
issues with break out groups for detailed discussions based on maps of the
town. This enabled a range of issues/concerns to be highlighted along with
potential solutions to the transport challenges faced by the town to be
identified. Many of these proposals are contained in the list of measures in
Appendix A.
Identification of measures
1.27
The current situation with regard to transport problems in Hemel Hempstead
was reviewed in detail, including several site visits. This review identified
transport measures already implemented and how successful these have
been, those that have not been successful and the reasons why. Thus
opportunities for new measures were highlighted.
1.28
An extremely wide range of potential options could be implemented within the
context of the UTP framework. Many of these relate directly to transport
interventions to resolve current issues; however there are others that relate to
the widespread future land-use and planning proposals and the impact these
will have upon trip generation.
1.29
The initial strategy development process was to produce a ‘Long-List’ of
potential measures through assessment of the issues and opportunities.
Measures were derived from a variety of sources including:
•
Analysis of the existing data, policies, etc.;
•
Stakeholder consultation;
•
The walking and cycling audits;
•
The passenger transport survey;
1.30
1.31
•
The HCC/DBC Planning for Real event; and
•
Research sources .
1
The following areas provided the basis for the generation of measures and
schemes:
•
Network Management (ITS, signage)
•
Smarter Choices (Travel Plans, Personalised Travel Plans, car clubs, car
sharing, travel awareness campaigns)
•
Social inclusion measures (mobility impaired access)
•
Walking (Pedestrian routes, crossings, Rights of Way, street scene,
signage)
•
Cycling (Cycle routes, crossings, street scene, signage, secure parking,
ASLs)
•
Local buses (new station, bus priority, increased frequencies, low-floor
buses, bus stops, concessionary fares, subsidy, QBP/PIP)
•
Community transport and taxis (Dial-a-Ride, taxis for home to school/
hospital)
•
Passenger rail (increased frequencies, capacity enhancements, integrated
interchange)
•
Improved integration (integrated timetabling, integrated ticketing)
•
Improved information (PTP, RTPI, bus stop information)
•
Travel demand restraint (road user charging, reduce parking availability,
higher charges for parking, land-use planning)
•
Highways (new roads, HOV/HGV lanes, wider roads, new links)
•
AQMAs (LEZ)
•
Parking and P&R (reduce parking standards for new developments,
reduce parking availability, higher charges for long-stay parking, coach
parking, motorcycle parking, HGV parking)
•
Road safety improvements (safety cameras, re-engineering, encourage
safer driving, visible speed limits, lower speed limits, greater enforcement,
road safety training)
In total, 129 individual measures were identified that target one or more of the
UTP objectives.
1
Developing Urban Transport Strategies (IHT, 1996),
Konsult (the Knowledgebase on Sustainable and Urban Transport, Leeds Universityhttp://www.konsult.leeds.ac.uk/))
The Demand for Public Transport (TRL, 2004)
The EU Optimum2 Cookbook (European Commission, 2008)
Smarter Choices: Changing the Way We Travel (DfT, 2005)
The EU ELTIS website http://www.eltis.org
Appraisal
1.32
A comprehensive list of measures (in addition to those already implemented or
planned as part of LTP2) was assessed in order to identify what measures
could solve the priority issues in Hemel Hempstead. An objective-led appraisal
process was applied. Each proposed measure was assessed not only for its
contribution against the UTP objectives but also against a series of criteria
representing the extent of deliverability.
1.33
In terms of the assessment against the UTP objectives any measure that was
considered likely to provide a strong contribution to achieving a UTP objective
was ranked twice as important as a low contribution. In addition, those
measures delivering against more UTP objectives scored higher accordingly.
1.34
The ‘deliverability’ criteria encompassed the following four areas:
•
Policy fit (the extent to which the measure supported national, regional
and local policy);
•
Value for money (whether the measure provides value for money);
•
Feasibility (whether implementation is technically feasible); and
•
Acceptability (whether the measure is likely to be publicly and politically
acceptable).
1.35
Each measure was giving a rating of high, medium, low for all four areas and a
weighted score applied accordingly.
1.36
A total score was generated for each measure combining the ‘contribution to
objectives’ rating and the ‘deliverability’ rating from which the following the
measures were then ranked and then classified in terms of priority: high;
medium; or low.
Preparation of the Hemel Hempstead UTP 2008
1.37
This stage finalised the contents of the Hemel Hempstead UTP, ensuring that
it is highly relevant to the changing policy context, delivery framework and
institutional structures. It was based on the evidence and data collected. The
UTP is structured around the objectives of the Hertfordshire LTP2 whilst
meeting local needs.
1.38
An Implementation Table was developed with a range of proposals for Hemel
Hempstead. The package of measures will form the basis of funding bids with
each measure having clear justification whilst operating in a sustainable
transport strategy.
Appendix C
Public Transport Survey
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Public Transport Survey Summary Results
Responses
Age
•
55% respondents aged 26-60
•
38% over 60
•
7% under 25 (including 1% under 18)
Gender
•
51% male
•
49% female
Key results
All the reports generated by the database are recorded on the CD. Other reports can be generated
on request.
Passenger transport use
•
47% used bus
•
39% used train
•
2% used taxi
•
Other 12%
Reasons for Passenger Transport use
•
No access to a car (35%); greater convenience/ faster journey (31%); choose not to use a car
(17%); cheaper than a car (9%)
•
43% of females and 27% of males use PT due to lack of access to a car
•
37% of males and 27% of females use PT due to its greater convenience/ faster journey times
•
Those aged 26-60 use PT due to convenience/ faster journey (45%) or no access to car (24%)
•
Those aged 19-25 use PT due to no access to a car (79%) or greater convenience (14%)
•
PT is used during peak periods mainly for the convenience/ faster journey – other times due to
no access to a car
Trip purpose
•
Females use PT for going to work (40%) and shopping (28%)
•
Males use PT for going to work (56%) and shopping (23%)
•
PT used for work trips (70%) in 26-60 age group and 10% for shopping
1
Connections
•
41% view connections to HH rail station as good/ very good – 27% difficult/ very difficult (rest
don’t know)
•
5% view connections to Jarmans Park as good/ very good – 38% as difficult/ very difficult
•
13% view connections to Maylands as good/ very good – 24% as difficult/ very difficult
•
22% view connections to Old Town as good/ very good – 23% as difficult/ very difficult
•
60% view connections to Town Centre as good/ very good – 12% as difficult/ very difficult
•
22% view connections to Apsley as good/ very good – 25% as difficult/ very difficult
Main inconveniences
•
Price (30%)
•
Journey time (18%)
•
Interchanging (15%)
Journey rating
•
Convenient/ very convenient (77%); difficult/very difficult (23%)
•
80% say PT is convenient/ very convenient during morning peak period
Station access
•
42% walk
•
30% car (driver or passenger)
•
19% bus
•
7% taxi
•
2% cycle
2
Appendix D
List of ‘Planning for Real’ Attendees
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
List of Attendees
Name
Organisation
Cllr. Alan Anderson
Cllr. Peter Channell
Cllr. Herbert Chapman
Cllr. Ken Coleman
Cllr. Gary Cook
Cllr. Margaret Coxage
Cllr. Ian Laidlaw Dickson
Cllr. Terence Douris
Cllr. Alan Fantham
Cllr. Lloyd Harris
Cllr. Nick Hollinghurst
Cllr. Stephen Holmes
Cllr. David Lloyd
Cllr. Michael Moore
Cllr. Ian Reay
Cllr. Richard Roberts
Cllr. Elam Singam
Dacorum Borough Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Dacorum Borough Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Roy Bain
Tim Bellamy
Richard Blackburn
Rachel Boxall
Gerard Burgess
Maylands Partnership
East of England Regional Assembly
Dacorum Borough Council
Herts Chamber of Commerce
London Midland
James Dale
John Dales
James Doe
Nigel Downes
Pat Gray
Pam Halliwell
Robert Hollins
David Hughes
Keith Hutchinson
Trevor Land
Andy Knight
Sanjay Patel
Caroline Player
Peter Snow
Helena Spencer
Derek Wadland
Keith White
Hertfordshire County Council
Urban Initiatives
Dacorum Borough Council
WSP
Older Persons Forum
Dacorum Borough Council
Entec
Hertfordshire County Council
Highways Agency
Hertfordshire County Council
Sustrans
Hertfordshire County Council
Age Concern
Maylands Partnership
Entec
Hertfordshire County Council
Hertfordshire County Council
Lynn Basford
Derek Palmer
Peter Harries
Nasrin Azarkadeh
JMP
JMP
JMP
JMP
JMP Consultants Limited Registered Office: Mercantile Chambers, 53 Bothwell Street, Glasgow G2 6TS
JMP cares for the environment and uses recycled paper and card.
Registered in Scotland No. 88006
Appendix E
Glossary
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Glossary
Acronym
Explanation
AQMA
Air Quality Management Area
ASL
Advanced Stop Line
ATP
Area Transport Plan
CAD
Community Action Dacorum
CCTV
Closed Circuit Television
CO2
Carbon Dioxide
CPZ
Controlled Parking Zone
CT
Community Transport
DBC
Dacorum Borough Council
DDA
Disability Discrimination Act 1995
DfT
Department for Transport
DPE
Decriminalised Parking Enforcement
DRT
Demand Responsive Transport
EEP
East of England Plan
EU
European Union
HCC
Hertfordshire County Council
HGV
Heavy Goods Vehicle
HHH
Hemel Hempstead Hospital
HHTCMP
Hemel Hempstead Town Centre Management Partnership
HOV
High Occupancy Vehicle
IHT
Institution of Highways & Transportation
ITS
Intelligent Transport System
LDF
Local Development Framework
LEZ
Low Emission Zone
LTP2
Second Local Transport Plan
NCP
National Car Parks
NMT
Non-Motorised Transport
NCN
National Cycle Network
P&R
Park and Ride
PIP
Punctuality Improvement Plan
PPG
Planning Policy Guidance
PT
Public Transport
PTA
Passenger Transport Authority
PTP
Personalised Travel Plan
QBP
Quality Bus Partnership
RoW
Rights of Way
RSS
Regional Spatial Strategy
RTPI
Real Time Passenger Information
S106
Section 106 agreement (from the 1991 Town & Country Planning Act)
TRL
Transport Research Laboratory
UTMC
Urban Traffic Management System
VMS
Variable Message Sign
Appendix F
Summary Maps
Job No
Report No
Issue no
Report Name
H080017
1
2
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
Very short term measures
Short term measures
Medium term measures
Long term measures
050235_Hemel_Hempstead_urban transport plan.qxp
17/02/2009
08:23
Page C2
Hemel Hempstead
Urban Transport Plan
These are only some of our services.
Find out more at www.hertsdirect.org
or email us at hertsdirect@hertscc.gov.uk
Every Hertfordshire library has internet access
for the public
Highways House
41-45 Broadwater Road Welwyn Garden City
Herts AL7 3SP
January 2009
printed on recycled paper with a minimum of 75% made from de-inked post consumer waste
Care for older people
Support for schools, pupils and parents
Support for carers
Fire and rescue
Fostering and adoption
Support for people with disabilities
Libraries
Admission to schools
Road maintenance and safety
Protection for adults and children at risk
Trading standards and consumer protection
Household waste recycling centres
Design ref: 050235
Hertfordshire County Council making Hertfordshire an even better
place to live by providing:
Hemel Hempstead Urban Transport Plan
01438 737320
www.hertsdirect.org
Download PDF