Key Elements of the Combined Option
- Cycling and walking networks
- Public transport extension including tunnel
- Orbital highway development including tunnel
- Congestion charging in peak periods
Sustainability implications
The economic efficiency of the Combined Option is good. The increase in car
transport costs due to the congestion charging are offset by a lowering in
transport costs due to the improved public transport and the orbital highway.
This combination of transport measure would result in a readjustment of land
uses with jobs and households moving outside the city, especially to the East
Cambs and Huntingdonshire districts that offer cheaper housing, but would now
be served by improved transport.
There is a 5% overall reduction in the cost of production compared to the
Base Case, which would help to maintain the competitiveness of the Sub-region.
Exporters would reduce costs by 140 million per year.
From the social point of view, the impact is not significant. Similar mixes
of socio-economic groups are located in the city and surrounding districts.
There is some reduction of the high income groups in the city, and an increase
in the Hunts and East Cambs districts. This change may improve social balance in
the futures.
There is an increase in mobility that offers people a wider choice of
transport modes and a reduction in travel time. The public transport element
would provide people with an improved alternative to paying the congestion
charge. All groups benefit about equally.
From an environmental point of view, the Combined Option is somewhat mixed.
There is a reduction in carbon emissions for trips into the city, but this is
counteracted by the increase in traffic within and outside Cambridge.
Considering all the effect the carbon emissions do not change significantly from
the Base Case.
The Combined Option includes the orbital highway, which would have an adverse
environmental impact around the south and east of Cambridge, mitigated by
tunnels and landscaping. If the public transport tunnel were affordable, the
Combined Option would remove a substantial part of public transport from the
streets and provide the opportunity to improve the urban environment of
Cambridge City Centre.
| Investment Costs |
Cycling & Walking |
2 |
| Equipment etc |
Public Transport |
409.4 |
| |
Orbital Highway |
120 |
| |
Congestion Charging |
8 |
| |
Total Costs |
539.4 |
| Annual Benefits |
User: tolls |
-38.6 |
| |
User: cost savings |
5.7 |
| |
User: time savings |
28.2 |
| |
User: convenience |
-1.1 |
| |
User Total Benefits |
-5.8 |
| |
Operator: revenues |
38.6 |
| |
Operator: costs |
-8.2 |
| |
Operator Total Benefits |
30.4 |
| |
Government Benefits |
-1.3 |
| |
Total Benefits |
23.3 |
| Rate of return |
Social |
4.4 |
Results
- Car traffic reduces substantially with fewer trips into Cambridge and
less delays
- Public transport use increases
- Walking and cycling little change
- Environmental improvement in the City centre, the impact of the orbital
road is mitigated by tunnels. Less local air pollution in the City, but no
overall change in fuel consumption and carbon emissions
- Cost of living and production costs reduce substantially making the
Sub-region much more competitive
- Investments cost is large but there is overall transport economic
benefit. The revenue raised from the congestion charge can contribute to the
costs of the transport improvements
|
