Lorry routes and bans first principles assessment

First principles assessment

Why introduce lorry routes and bans?

The popularity of Lorries for the movement of goods is unsurprising given the efficiency and reliability of the service, combined with the relatively short distance of the average freight trip. The development of JIT (just-in-time) delivery systems, with growth in out-of-town distribution centres, has eliminated many town centre lorry trips by individual suppliers. However, this development has led to the growth in small and medium sized vehicles

Although the total number of heavy Lorries registered has declined in the UK , the average weight and size has increased, which gives rise to complaints made about noise and exhaust emissions. Pedestrians, cyclists and car drivers feel their safety is compromised, especially on unsuitable roads, usually because Lorries have no alternative. In a survey:

33% hearing lorries were bothered by them
Heavy Lorries are 13 times more noisy than cars in congestion
Vibration correlated best with lorry flows
37% consider lorries produce worse fumes

Lorry routes and bans may help combat such problems and help prevent damage to existing infrastructure. Each year there are around 1000 bridge strikes by over height vehicles and loads, some of which cause great damage to bridge structures, which result in serious hazards to rail and road and imposing heavy costs of delay and congestion.

Heavy goods vehicles are an important contributor towards total traffic noise, and will remain so. Bans would reduce traffic noise on the roads covered by the bans. It is still questionable whether lorry bans would have any effect upon physical damage caused by air-borne vibration of heavy goods vehicles

Many people suffer from high exposure to pollutants emitted by road traffic. Although lorry bans may reduce the amount of air pollution, benefits would be confined to specific places and specific pollutants.

Heavy lorries are the main cause of damage to road surfaces and the structure of roads. They may contribute to damage to underground services and buildings but no assessment has been made.

Heavy lorries contribute highly to congestion, especially in terms of breakdowns, accidents, spilled loads, illegal parking and loading and unloading. A ban or new lorry routes would help relieve some of the congestion.

Short and Long Run Demand Responses

Lorry routes and bans are likely to increase the demand for car use in some cases. This is due to reduced congestion from certain routes and the motorist experiencing a more efficient transport system, thus making driving a more attractive option. However, where Lorries are re-routed, car use is likely to fall as these routes become more congested. Along these routes, demand for public transport may increase.

Expected Impact On Key Policy Objectives

Response	Reduction in road traffic	Expected in situations
	None	Where roads are uncongested, and no Lorry ban or routes or in affect.
	None	Lorries may leave longer for their journeys to avoid banned routes. Journey times are longer so they need an earlier departure time.
	Increased	Lorries re-route to avoid bans or follow compulsory routes
	None	Lorries are unlikely to change their destination
	None	Lorries are unlikely to reduce the number of trips they make.
	None	Lorries are the only viable option for mass haulage in most cases.

Short, Medium and Long term Responses

Response		Short Term	Medium Term	Long Term
		Weak response	Weak response	Weak response
		Weak response	Moderate Response	Moderate Response
	Change Job Location	No Response	No Response	No Response
	Compress Working Week	No Response	No Response	No Response
	Ride Share	No Response	No Response	No Response
		No Response	No Response	No Response
		No Response	No Response	No Response

Supply Impacts

Lorry Routes are likely to increase the supply of road space available to lorry drivers, especially if they have specially designated lorry lanes. If Lorry bans are in affect, total supply of road space to lorries is inevitably going to fall.

Financing Requirements

Lorry routes and bans are not likely to incur considerable cost in their implementation. The major cost associated is that of road markings and signings.

Expected Impact on Key Policy Objectives

The removal of Lorries from certain routes is likely to contribute to economic efficiency, environment in those areas and increased safety along those routes. Less congestion will lead to increased trade in the area as it is more accessible. Less lorries means the environment will improve in that particular area, in terms of air quality and noise. However, increased journey times and distance will increase pollution overall. This is because lorries are travelling further and hence producing more hazardous fumes. The re-routing of Lorries is likely to lead to decreased safety along those routes.

Contribution to Objectives

Objective	Scale of contribution	Comment
		Time savings should be significant and reliability of public transport should be improved
		Less congestion will lead to more liveable streets. However where lorries are re-routed may lead to less liveable streets in these areas
		Overall, lorry journey distance will increase, leading to more pollution in terms of air quality and noise
		Less congestion means pubic transport will become more efficient, which provide benefits to the less mobile
		Re-routing lorries from certain areas will enhance safety levels
		Reduced congestion means areas are more accessible and hence increased trade. Haulage companies however may suffer from increased operating costs from longer journey times.

Expected Impact on Problems

Lorry routes and bans have considerable potential to reduce problems associated with congestion, environment and safety in an area. However where Lorries are re-routed may lead to an increase of problems, such as congestion and pollution, in that area. Lorry routes and bans can tend to merely move the problems to another area rather than the eradicate them.

Contribution to Alleviation of Key Problems

Problem	Scale of contribution	Comment
Congestion-related delay		Congestion will be reduced as lorries are re-routed or banned from areas, although this may lead to increased car use.
Congestion-related unreliability		Public transport is likely to become more efficient as a result of decreased congestion.
Community severance		Removal of lorries from certain areas, especially residential areas, will lead to less community severance
Visual intrusion		Less lorries will mean a more pleasant area.
Lack of amenity	None
Global warming		Lorry journeys will tend to increase as a result of bans and re-routing away from sensitive areas.
Local air pollution		By reducing the emissions of NOx, particulates and other local pollutants by lorries
Noise		By reducing Lorry traffic volumes
Reduction of green space	None	Lorry routes and bans are likely to take advantage of existing infrastructure
Damage to environmentally sensitive sites	None
Poor accessibility for those without a car and those with mobility impairments		A more efficient public transport system will benefit the less mobile
Disproportionate disadvantaging of particular social or geographic groups		Those close to new lorry routes or subjected to increased flows as lorries find alternative routes
Number, severity and risk of accidents		Reducing Lorry flows from sensitive areas will reduce accidents.
Suppression of the potential for economic activity in the area		By improving an area’s accessibility and by improving the efficiency of the local road network, although decreased lorry access may suppress turnover for business who rely on lorries for deliveries

Expected Winners and Losers

Group	Wins	Loses	Comment
Large scale freight and commercial traffic		Yes	Lorry routes and bans will lead to longer journeys as a result of routing away from sensitive areas or new routes to avoid bans. As a result, operating costs are likely to rise.
Small businesses	Yes	Yes	Small businesses are likely to be both winners and losers. Less congestion will mean access will be increased. However, delivery costs may rise as haulage companies experience higher operating costs.
High income car-users	Yes		Less congestion as a result of fewer lorries means journey times are shorter, although this may eventually rise as people realise the benefits of car travel
Low income car-users with poor access to public transport	Yes		Again Less congestion as a result of fewer lorries means journey times are shorter, although this may eventually rise as people realise the benefits of car travel
All existing Public Transport Users	Yes		Existing bus users will benefit from the enhanced service quality as a result of less congestion
People living along parallel public transport routes	Yes		Services are likely to become more frequent and reliable

Barriers to implementation

Scale of Barrier

Barrier	Scale	Comment
Legal	Minor	Some form of planning approval or traffic regulations will generally be required, though usually no need for legislation or public inquiry
Finance	Minor	Total scheme costs are generally relatively low
Political	Major	Removing lorries away from sensitive areas is likely to be perceived as politically acceptable. It may give rise to protests from haulage companies
Feasibility	Minor	There is unlikely to be major problems when re-locating lorries, although consultation with Highway agencies is likely. The policy is likely to include only Road Markings and Signing, although in some cases some infrastructure changes may occur.

Text edited at the Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT