Potential PTE Areas

[Ivo]

Having just read through the DTV Airport thread, I have stumbled upon this post from 142094 from about nine months ago:

Seeing as Teeside isn't in a PTE area, I think it is about time a new one is created for that area. Seems a logical step to improve transport in what is quite a heavily populated area.

This has gotten me thinking. Supposing the Coalition were willing fund new PTE areas, where would we all consider proposing? The ones I can think of, shown in decreasing order of likelihood and with a line dividing realistic and not-so-realistic, would be as follows:

1: Avon (Bath, Bristol,, Clevedon, Portishead, Thornbury, Weston-super-Mare, Yate)
2: South Hampshire (Eastleigh, Fareham, Gosport, Havant, Hythe, Portsmouth, Romsey, Southampton, Waterlooville)
3: Glamorgan (Barry, Caerphilly, Cardiff, Newport, Penarth, Pontypridd)
4: East Midlands North (Beeston, Derby, Eastwood, Hucknall, lkeston, Nottingham)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5: Teesside (Billingham, Darlington, Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar, Stockton)
6: Sussex Coast (Brighton, Hove, Littlehampton, Shoreham, Worthing)
7: South Essex (Basildon, Billericay, Canvey Island, Rayleigh, Rochford, Southend, Thames Haven, Wickford)
8: East Midlands South (Birstall, Leicester, Wigston)
9: Dorset Coast (Bournemouth, Christchurch, Ferndown, New Milton, Poole, Ringwood, Wimborne)
10: Lothian (Edinburgh)

N.B.: I have ignored county and district boundaries for this, which is obviously a thorn in some of these ideas (especially East Midlands North).

A few points about each one:

Avon: Bristol have previously attempted to set up a PTE for the Avon area, which had support (if not finance) forthcoming from the other three councils in the area. Bristol is one of two non-PTE areas to be represented in the Core-Cities Group.
South Hampshire: Considered for Metropolitan Borough status in the 1970s, and home to two of the south's most powerful cities. There is the slight of animosity between the two main centres though!
Glamorgan: Easily the most densely populated area in Wales, and an area under regeneration. Although home to a lower population than many of the others in this list, there is also the slight matter of the WAG. Both Cardiff and Newport are dominated by independent bus companies.
East Midlands North: Nottingham is one of two associate members of the PTE Group, and is the only non-PTE area to have a fully-fledged and operational light rail system. Nottingham is one of two non-PTE areas to be represented in the Core-Cities Group. East Midlands Airport is close by.
Teesside: An area of regeneration and home to numerous industries. Subject to vast rail improvements come the Tees Valley Metro scheme. Middlesbrough in particular is need of loving care, which could be provided in transport terms by a PTE.
Sussex Coast: The second largest English conurbation south of the A14 and home to one of Britain's most successful (and popular) bus operators. Already home to a Metro-esque railway service between West Worthing and Brighton.
South Essex: A key area of the Thames Gateway scheme and soon to be home to Britain's largest container port. The combined population of the four districts represented in this scheme is larger than that of Nottingham. Southend Airport is set to be handling 2,000,000 passengers a year by 2020.
East Midlands South: Leicester is one of two associate members of the PTE Group, and is well-served by railway connections, especially to nearby airports. It has good motorway connections and is well known for being a "nearly" city in the sporting world.
Dorset Coast: A large conurbation with numerous claims to fame, including among others Britain's most well-off seaside town and the world's most expensive area to live outside of major cities. Both of the main two centres serve as major international gateways.
Lothian: Scotland's capital city and home to a (severely delayed!) modern tram system. Waverley station is the busiest station in all of Britain outside of PTE areas, and by a fair margin.

Of these, the ones I would like to see most are Avon, South Hampshire and South Essex, but obviously I can call two of those home...

 

[tbtc]

Supposing the Coalition were willing fund new PTE areas

Actually improve the power of local government (rather than take a "divide and rule" approach to local affairs)? What dangerous socialist thinking

Glamorgan: Easily the most densely populated area in Wales, and an area under regeneration. Although home to a lower population than many of the others in this list, there is also the slight matter of the WAG

This is the one I could see working best, for the simple reason that it includes a lot of self-contained train services, so there's a much better opportunity to improve things. One of the problems with other areas is that few train services would be entirely within the boundaries (e.g. East Midlands South), so there's not a lot they can do (unless they are willing to fund things outside the area too and deal with conflicting services). The "Valley" lines are a pretty much stand-alone operation, so could be improved without needing to impact upon anything else. Sadly I think the WAG wouldn't want a significant alternative power on their doorstep, but Glamorgan is your best suggestion

Sussex Coast: The second largest English conurbation south of the A14

That's a "claim to fame" I've never heard before

Seriously though, I think the future is to merge PTEs. At the moment they are hamstrung by boundaries and lack the power to change anything. IIRC there is only one single train service each hour wholly within South Yorkshire - the Adwick - Sheffield service - even the "return working" strays outside the boundaries), so there's little SYPTE can do to improve train services without straying into neighbouring areas.

A lot of GMPTE services stray into Lancashire/ Yorkshire/ Derbyshire etc, same with WY Metro. Compare this to the way SPT can implement things in Strathclyde or Centro in the West Midlands.

However, a combination of the Liverpool/Manchester/W Yorks/S Yorks PTEs would have a lot of clout, would be able to fund aquisition of new stock, would be able to make much more significant improvements.

At the moment, local government likes to subsidise bus services (including building "Guided Busways") partly because they can controll these better and see the benefit in their area. If SYPTE wanted to fund a dozen new DMUs for commuter routes into Sheffield then these would spend half their working lives in neighbouring counties (due to the way services run). But if those neighbouring counties were part of the same mega-PTE then there's a better business case to improve things (as they could factor in the benefits at both ends of the line)

 

[Mojo]

The Local Transport Act which allows the creation of new Integrated Transport Authorities (ITAs) only covers England & Wales, so you can forget about the Scotland one. I believe Scotland already has "transport partnerships" something similar to ITAs, though.

Greater Bristol is probably the closest to getting an ITA, having local campaign and pressure groups, and motions in 2 of the 4 unitary authorities in favour of ITAs. Unfortunately one, North Somerset is leading the opposition AGAINST the ITA. Only Bristol City are hugely in favour of it. Many of them prefer having the current situation of the "West of England Partnership," presumably because they don't want to be more accountable and like to get away with doing nothing and wasting our money on loony buses.

 

[sprinterguy]

I’d like to see “Avon” (Bristol area), “Glamorgan” (Cardiff Valleys and surrounding area), “East Midlands” (Derby & Nottingham area) and “Teesside” (Middlesborough, Saltburn, Nunthorpe, Stockton, Hartlepool, Eaglescliffe & Darlington) PTEs, as I think these areas could benefit most from having an ITA presence to organise and monitor activity, and would give the opportunity the PTEs to operate effectively.

I would also suggest that a “South Coast” PTE covering Bournemouth, Poole, Southampton & Portsmouth may hold promise.

Seriously though, I think the future is to merge PTEs. At the moment they are hamstrung by boundaries and lack the power to change anything. IIRC there is only one single train service each hour wholly within South Yorkshire - the Adwick - Sheffield service - even the "return working" strays outside the boundaries), so there's little SYPTE can do to improve train services without straying into neighbouring areas.

A lot of GMPTE services stray into Lancashire/ Yorkshire/ Derbyshire etc, same with WY Metro. Compare this to the way SPT can implement things in Strathclyde or Centro in the West Midlands.

However, a combination of the Liverpool/Manchester/W Yorks/S Yorks PTEs would have a lot of clout, would be able to fund aquisition of new stock, would be able to make much more significant improvements.

I too have agreed in the past that a “Super PTE” encompassing Merseyrail, GMPTE, SYPTE and Metro would be a good idea, as many of the services in that area cross several of those PTE areas, and the collaborative lobbying power of such an organisation would be sizeable. However, I wouldn’t call for the existing PTE structures and boundaries to be disbanded per se: Rather I would leave the four PTEs as they are, in charge of affairs in their respective conurbations and set up an umbrella organisation to coordinate collaborative efforts between two or more of the constituent members on issues that require it.

 

[jopsuk]

Pretty sure the only "travel partnership" in Scotland is Strathclyde- which has recently given up any responsibility for the rail system. However, I get the impression that Transport Scotland is becoming a sort of "super PTE" for the whole country?

 

[WatcherZero]

There has been talk of a northern super-pte over the years creating a two tier system where there would be one body providing overall strategic direction but with implementation handled by the existing PTE's. In reality it would be more like a club and club council rather than a single integrated organisation.

 

[sprinterguy]

There has been talk of a northern super-pte over the years creating a two tier system where there would be one body providing overall strategic direction but with implementation handled by the existing PTE's. In reality it would be more like a club and club council rather than a single integrated organisation.

That sounds like the right way to do it

 

[CarterUSM]

Pretty sure the only "travel partnership" in Scotland is Strathclyde- which has recently given up any responsibility for the rail system. However, I get the impression that Transport Scotland is becoming a sort of "super PTE" for the whole country?

Aye, more or less it would seem.

 

[scotsman]

10: Lothian (Edinburgh)
...
Lothian: Scotland's capital city and home to a (severely delayed!) modern tram system. Waverley station is the busiest station in all of Britain outside of PTE areas, and by a fair margin.

Devolved power, Coalition can't do anything.

 

[Ivo]

Sussex Coast: The second largest English conurbation south of the A14

That's a "claim to fame" I've never heard before

Sorry; just to clarify, I've just realised that I missed one important point here. It should say, "not including Greater London". Bristol is the largest, then Brighton et al.

I wonder if that idea previously mooted about Havant to Poole would work. However, the New Forest would cause problems, because it's quite a large expanse of essentially nothing! Mind you, Centro manage it between the NEC/Airport and Coventry... Having said that though, if you include out to Bournemouth you might as well go the other way to Brighton or possibly even Eastbourne - and that is too far.

The other one that has a debatable potential for expansion is South Essex. If you allow Thames Haven, you should allow Stanford-le-Hope. And if you allow Stanford, Tilbury and Grays. Ditto; if Billericay, Brentwood. But by the time you reach these two areas, you may as well merge with TfL; in particular, both Brentwood and Grays already have TfL services.

@ Mojo; I call the following: North Somerset are idiots. For the record, where do Bath & North-East Somerset and South Gloucestershire stand?

 

[Statto]

I'm surprised that Glamorgan &, Lothian wasn't part of the original PTEs when they were created in the 1960s

 

[WatcherZero]

I believe Glamorgan was seriously considered, Lothian was rejected for being too small and non-metroized? (is that a word?) unlike its neighbour.

 

[merlodlliw]

Valley lines was its own TOC I recall, when we had FNW up here,sadly missed by me, but bunched up to become part of the Wales & Borders franchise,sadly I don't see WAG making any change back towards a Valleys PTE.
In my opinion the Wales & Borders franchise is too big & clumbersome with this everything must go to Cardiff thinking.

 

[WestCoast]

While PTEs bring about benefits to people using services within the borders, in terms of fares and services, it can be very frustrating for people using services beyond the boundaries of a PTE area. Particularly where through services stretch beyond PTE areas.

The difference between the GMPTE/Metro fares and the fares across the border in Lancashire as an example can be excruciatingly large.

 

[WatcherZero]

To be fair they spend the money on trains that county councils would be spending on bus route subsidy.

 

[jopsuk]

Edinburgh's "Metro" area pretty much stops (or has stopped) by the time you reach the bypass. There's not very many rail stations in that area- other than Waverly and Haymarket, there's:
One on the line to Fife (South Gyle)- maybe two (Dalmeny)
One on the lins to Glasgow via Falkirk and Bathgate (Edinburgh Park)
Three on the Shotts/Carstairs line
Two on the stub of the Waverly line
One on the East Coast main line

There are no rail services contained within the "metro" area

It has a council-owned, comprehensive bus network that extends slightly beyond its boundary- a PTE wouldn't really improve on that.

 

[WestCoast]

To be fair they spend the money on trains that county councils would be spending on bus route subsidy.

Yes, they do certainly improve services. I'd just like to see a bit more joined-up thinking on the whole network. Some PTEs seem to have much more influence (£££££ are involved but there are other factors) than others, look at GMPTE and West Yorkshire Metro. Modern 333s running on "MetroTrain" Airedale and Wharfedale lines (with refurbished 3-car pacers aswell) while Greater Manchester has yet to see that standard of investment - 3 180s as a necessity seems to be the limit.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Valley lines was its own TOC I recall, when we had FNW up here,sadly missed by me, but bunched up to become part of the Wales & Borders franchise,sadly I don't see WAG making any change back towards a Valleys PTE.
In my opinion the Wales & Borders franchise is too big & clumbersome with this everything must go to Cardiff thinking.

Problem with the PTE's is there too small as City Regions have evolved since the early 70's and the transport ripple from major regional centers is far larger. i.e you get Manchester Commuters as far south as Wem in Shropshire using ATW services. Likewise I know there's a Birmingham Commuter using Caersws on the Cambrian.

In Wales we have 4 Transport Consortia made out of local councils however there powers over rail are non existent/ very limited but dependent on the will of the individual members there influence on rail varies. The South East Wales Transport Alliance (SEWTA) Basically old Gwent and Glamorgan bar Swansea/Neath Port Talbot has driven a number of rail improvements and helped secure EU funding for projects. In Mid Wales we have TraCC (Cerdedigion, Powys and South Gwynedd) I seriously doubt apart from the efforts of their Coordinator how much they have lobbied WAG on rails behalf due to the parochial village pot hole crisis approach of most Mid Wales County Councilors.

Whether theirs any mileage in giving these bodys more oomph I don't know. Wales's only FTSE 100 Company Admiral Insurance was behind a recent call to develop the whole of the SEWTA Area into an integrated modern public transport zone, they argue Cardiff itself is too small to be a major player due its population (350,000) but if its commuter belt was properly integrated into it (c1.4 million) it could thrive. I concur that you have to ditch traditional boundary s and think bigger. Ironically BR had Network South East, ahead of the game?