|
Contribution to objectives
and alleviation of key problems
Appropriate contexts
Adverse side-effects
The contribution each CTP outlined above makes to achieving transport
policy and alleviating key problems is made below. Consideration of the
contribution is made against what would have happened if there were no
CTP, i.e. planning permission for expansion (and hence increased production)
not granted and/or continued and possibly significant increases in road
traffic and congestion.
Objective
|
Pfizer
|
Manchester Airport
|
Stockley Park Business Park
|
Nottingham City Hospital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Urban regeneration around the site
|
|
|
N/a
|
N/a
|
|
= Weakest
possible positive contribution, |
|
= strongest
possible positive contribution |
|
= Weakest
possible negative contribution |
|
= strongest
possible negative contribution |
|
=
No contribution |
Contribution to alleviation of key problems
|
Problem
|
Pfizer
|
Manchester Airport
|
Stockley Park Business Park
|
Nottingham City Hospital
|
Congestion-related delay
|
|
|
|
|
Congestion-related unreliability
|
|
|
|
|
Community severance
|
|
|
|
|
Visual intrusion
|
|
|
|
|
Lack of amenity
|
|
|
|
|
Global warming
|
|
|
|
|
Local air pollution
|
|
|
|
|
Noise
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction of green space
|
|
|
|
|
Damage to environmentally sensitive sites
|
|
|
|
|
Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility
impairments
|
|
|
|
|
Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic
groups
|
|
|
|
|
Number, severity and risk of accidents
|
|
|
|
|
Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area
|
|
|
|
|
|
= Weakest
possible positive contribution, |
|
= strongest
possible positive contribution |
|
= Weakest
possible negative contribution |
|
= strongest
possible negative contribution |
|
=
No contribution |
The contribution made by Pfizer, Manchester Airport and Nottingham City
Hospital may be over estimated, but they are awarded two ticks to demonstrate
the difference between these plans and the plan at Stockley Park.
Appropriate contexts
There are no areas where CTPs are inappropriate as such, but implementation
will be more acceptable in areas where there is a demonstrable need, i.e.
areas where there is a serious congestion problem and/or high density
areas where there is little space for expansion beyond the current property
boundaries. If and when a more robust case can be made for the contribution
of CTPs to an individual firms profitability, these constraints will no
longer apply.
There is more likely to be a demonstrable need in areas with a high density
of business, be this a city centre, main street in a small market town,
or a suburban business park. By definition, this makes non-residential
area types most appropriate. However, where businesses are located in
residential areas and many employees drive to work there remains a need
for a CTP. Safety of local residents, severance and liveable streets should
be more significant motivators and influences on the measures implemented
in such cases. Where many employees are local measures suitable for short
journeys, such as those facilitating walking and cycling, may be most
suitable. Where employees are not local, public transport links are likely
to be needed. Appropriate Area Types indicates the areas where the need
for CTPs is likely to be greatest, making them more acceptable and the
areas appropriate to such work.
Appropriate area-types
|
Area type
|
Suitability
|
City centre
|
|
Dense inner suburb
|
|
Medium density outer suburb
|
|
Less dense outer suburb
|
|
District centre
|
|
Corridor
|
|
Small town
|
|
Tourist town
|
|
|
= Least suitable
area type |
|
= Most suitable
area type |
It should be noted that isolated single occupant business sites, or multi-occupant
business, retail or leisure parks are particularly suitable, so long as
public transport links to near by public transport hubs already exist
or can be created as part of the CTP, or many employees travel from the
same residential areas and can ride share.
Adverse side-effects
Experience in the UK and the Netherlands suggests that there are no significant
side-effects resulting from CTPs. The US experience suggests that CTPs
can be very unpopular amongst the business community, but this may have
more to do with the way they were introduced than the CTPs per se. The
implication here is that CTPs need to be introduced in a phased approach
with the idea and information preceding action to avoid negative political
fall out. The same principle applies within a company to maintain positive
staff relations.
|