Freight Measures within Norwich's CIVITAS Project Chris Mitchell, Norwich City Agency Manager, Norfolk County Council
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Freight Measures within Norwich’s
CIVITAS Project
Chris Mitchell, Norwich City Agency
Manager,
Norfolk County Council
11
Why CIVITAS
– Economic links
– Political support
– Previous innovative schemes
– POLIS
– Successful in CIVITAS II
– Interreg project
– Funding
– Innovation
22
Our partners in CIVITAS SMILE
– Malmo, Sweden
– Tallinn, Estonia
– Potenza, Italy
– Suceava, Romania
– Norwich Site:
• Norfolk County Council
• Norwich County Council
• University of East Anglia
• First Eastern Counties
• Anglian Bus and Coaches
• SmartMoves (City Car Club)
• Global Commodities UK Ltd
33
Freight Measures within Norwich’s
CIVITAS Project
• Strategic Freight Holders Club
– Group of operators, councils etc set up to develop and oversee freight related
projects
• Urban Transhipment Centre
– Transhipment centre for Norwich to reduce amounts of pollution caused by
HGVs entering the city
– Priority Access for clean goods vehicles
– Use of bus lanes by clean HGVs
• Customised Traffic & Travel information for freight operators
– Encouragement of Freight fleet operators to use ‘clean’ vehicles by providing
bespoke traffic & travel information
44
Freight Stakeholders Club
Preliminary approach to operators:
• Letters to 700 companies
• Adverts in trade press
• Web site exhibition
• Web site promoting CIVITAS measures
• Initially 8 expressions of interest (5 from Norfolk)
Main barriers:
• Operators unsure what it could achieve
Way Forward:
• Use stakeholders club for specific issues in disseminating Norwich
CIVITAS proposals and Local Transport Plan work
• Use feedback information in developing CIVITAS measures
• Disseminate national and regional Freight policies and issues
Results:
• The consequences of implementing ‘Freight Measures’ have grown the
Freight Stakeholders Club to over 100 companies, if only some
participation is established on a ‘need to know’ basis
55
The Urban Trans-shipment Centre and
dedicated vehicles.
66
Location of Norwich
20 miles = 32 km
Journey time
~30 minutes
Consolidation
Centre
77
Norwich City Centre
Retail Core
X
The Mall
Chapelfield
88
The City of Norwich
‘A Fine City’
y A thriving regional city
y A major commercial, retail and tourist centre
y A historic city with many listed buildings
y City retains a medieval street pattern
y Largely pedestrianised retail core
Challenges and Issues
y Central road system not well suited to use by HGVs
y Time and size restrictions on vehicle access
y Poor air quality in some central areas
- vehicle emissions a significant contributor
99
Norwich Area Transportation
Strategy (NATS)
NATS aims to:
y Provide easy access to and within the city
y Maintain the economic health of Norwich
y Make sure that journeys are sustainable
y Minimise adverse impacts of transport on:
- people’s health and their enjoyment of the city
- the natural and historic environments
NATS seeks to achieve this by:
y Encouraging alternative forms of transport
y Discouraging non-essential motor vehicles
y Reducing accidents
y Mitigating the environmental impacts of traffic
10Situation without consolidation
All supplier deliveries are made directly into
the city centre with freight vehicles competing
for space with other road users
11The consolidation concept
Supplier deliveries are made to an out of city
consolidation centre, where deliveries are
grouped together for onward delivery
12Applying the concept to Norwich
Research
y Studied Bristol (CIVITAS-VIVALDI) experience
y Bristol scheme a success in terms of:
- customer recruitment and satisfaction
- environmental benefits
- political support and public recognition
y But concerns about financial sustainability
Development
y Scheme to target retail deliveries to city centre
y Form commercial partnership with logistics company
y Use existing infrastructure and fleet to minimise costs
y Use funding to develop and promote the scheme
y Charge for deliveries from consolidation centre
13Procurement Process
Stage 1 - Expressions of Interest
y Letters to all organisations with a goods vehicle
y operating centre for 10+ vehicles in Norfolk
y Advertising in logistics trade press
y Information sent to trade associations (RHA, FTA)
y Eight expressions of interest received
Stage 2 - Formal Tender
y Three companies invited to submit formal tenders
y Tenders received from two national carriers and one
local carrier
y Foulger Transport (local carrier) selected as
preferred bidder
14Procurement
Partnership with Foulger Transport
Norfolk County Council (part funded by CIVITAS)
y Project management (Mott MacDonald)
y Funding for employment of Development Manager
y Funding for marketing and promotion
Foulger Transport
y Employment of full time Development Manager
y Engagement with businesses to recruit customers
y Operation of Norwich Freight Consolidation Centre
y from a new Warehouse on the A11 corridor serving
Norwich
15Our approach
Retailer contact
y Started with the two shopping Malls
y Meetings with Mall managers in July to:
- introduce concept
- secure support
- introduce scheme to tenants
- obtain contact list
y Initial contact with retailers in the Malls
y commenced in August
y Two months of contacting and visiting retailers
16Norwich Freight Consolidation Centre
y Initial contact at local branch level:
- 147 initial introductory letters
- 101 followed up by phone
- 55 meetings with retailers
y Provided detail of inbound operations
y Not decision makers
y Generally referred to head office
y 58 head offices contacted
y 38 requests for quotation
y 22 customers so far
17Progress to date
Barriers to success
y General sense of apathy towards the scheme
y Main concerns:
- Cost
- Delay
- Increased handling (security / damage)
y Significant proportion of inbound via parcel carriers y
(TNT, DHL, City-Link etc)
y Of 115 companies:
- 12 supplier responsible for inbound
- 65 have own dedicated systems
- 57 use parcel carriers
- 60% of parcel traffic with TNT / DHL / UPS
18Progress to date
Barriers to success
y Congestion, delay, pedestrian core, access
y restrictions in Norwich not generally seen as a
y problem
y Companies won’t change system for one location
y Nothing to force participation
y No incentives to encourage participation
y Participation is optional
19Progress to date Likely areas of success y Reaction to changing more onerous access restrictions to City streets y Where an operator sub-optimally sends a vehicle to y Norwich y Where there are a number of drops in Norfolk which y can be taken to NFCC so retailer then increases y utilisation of vehicle and driver y Where Foulger can collect from retailer’s DC on a y backload basis y Where for that individual retailer Norwich is a y problem (e.g. distance, time constraint) y Where retailer wants to stop delivering to the ‘high y street’ y Where there is a cost saving and this is the priority 20
An example
Whittard of Chelsea
y First customer
y Two stores in Norwich
y Off peak weekly vehicle delivery from Northampton
y DC to stores (230 mile trip)
y Peak deliveries twice weekly (8 weeks to Christmas)
y NFCC solution:
- weekly backload collection
- store pre-picked stock locally
- provide 2+ deliveries per week to stores
21Lessons learnt
y Slow process but progress is being made
y Resistance to change but recent economic climate
has increased enquiries
y Decisions not made locally
y Difficult to engage decision maker
y Approach often seen as a commercial sell
y Reinforce message that scheme is an initiative
y supported by both County and City Councils
y Currently no stick but this is being developed through
controlled access to City
y Have to identify key benefit to user
y Familiarity with similar schemes (e.g. Bristol,
Sheffield, Meadowhall, Heathrow) is no guarantee that
retailer will engage with a proposal for Norwich
22Use of Bus Lane By Norwich Freight
•
Consolidation Centre Vehicles
Original measure objective to allow environmentally friendly vehicles to use Bus Lanes (Euro 3 or
Euro 4)
• Main issues:
• Lack of political and public support
• Lack of bus lanes with suitable width
• No control over numbers of vehicles in bus lane
• No contact with drivers
• Difficult to identify vehicles (enforcement problems)
• Measure objective amended because:
• Bus lanes were available on direct route from NFCC to city centre (Newmarket Road)
• Drivers would be know
• Control over numbers of vehicles in bus lane
• Vehicles would be liveried making identification easier
• Still some public concern, so mitigating measures adopted:
• Training for drivers who drive the NFCC vehicles
• Vehicles fitted with blind spot lenses to see cyclists
• Code of conduct for drivers
• Trial scheme for 1 year with monitoring
• Scheme introduced September 2008, evaluation still ongoing.
23Interim evaluation
200
Minimum Saving
150 Maximum Saving
Time Saving (Secs)
100
Bus lane time savings 50
0
AM PEAK OFF PEA K PM PEA K
• Main benefits during pm peak -50
• Using bus during off peak can result in -100
delays, stuck behind bus/cyclist Tim e Of Day
Fuel Consumption Savings
Combined consolidation/bus lane effects 8000.0
7000.0
6000.0
• Small savings at present because of limited
Fuel Saving (l)
5000.0
consolidation 4000.0
• Benefits coming from swapping large 3000.0
vehicles with smaller NFCC vehicles 2000.0
• Benefits will increase exponentially as more 1000.0
customers use scheme as consolidation 0.0
Nov 07 to Jun 08 Best Case Scenrio July 08 to 9 month period w ith increased
increases Nov 09 access restrictions
CO Savings
• Barriers to success (bus lane): 16000.0
• Public perception 14000.0
12000.0
• Width of bus lanes
CO saving (G)
10000.0
• Effects on other users (cyclists) 8000.0
6000.0
4000.0
2000.0
0.0
Nov 07 to Jun 08 Best Case Scenrio July 08 to 9 month period w ith increased
Nov 09 access restrictions
24Traffic and Travel Information For
Freight Operators
Project:
• Trial traffic information system with selected operators
• Selected operators:
• Foulgers – freight haulage
• D F McCarthy – fresh food distributor
• Develop system for that can be provided to other operators
Viewer concept:
• Traffic information collected and stored on Common Information Database
• Viewer installed on PC allows the viewing and interaction with certain
Aspects of information held on the database
• Viewer can be customised to meet the needs of freight companies
Information currently available on viewer:
• Road works
• Road closures
• Events reported to the Urban Traffic Control Centre
• Other events (street parades, traffic signal failures)
25Interim evaluation
Benefits and Issues:
• Simplified version required (quick look system)
• Depot personnel cannot continually monitor screen
• Benefit from link with vehicle tracking systems
• Benefit to obtain accident information
• More detailed information on event required
• New version being produced
Main barriers:
• Information alone not big enough incentive to operators
• Operator has to make a judgement on event effect
• On-going support service an issue (may need to charge)
Way Forward:
• Revised viewer being produced based on feedback
• Examine ways to link to vehicle tracking systems
• Examine potential to expand viewer to other companies (technical support issues)
26Thank You
Chris Mitchell
Norfolk County Council
County Hall, Martineau Lane, Norwich NR1 2SG
chris.mitchell@norfolk.gov.uk
www.civitas-initiative.eu
27You can also read
