humber bridge tolls impact assessment

8/14/2019 Humber Bridge Tolls Impact Assessment

1/42


2/42

Humber Br idge To l l s Impac t Asses smen tFinal Report

Project No: 147001October 2008

10 Eastbourne Terrace,London,W2 6LGTelephone: 020 7053 1300Fax: 020 7053 1301Email : [email protected]

Prepared by: Approved by:

____________________________________________ ____________________________________________

TKS JS

Status: Status Issue no: 0 Date: 07 October 2008

humber bridge - draft 19.doc

(C) Copyright Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited. All rights reserved.This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the commissioning party and unless otherwise agreed in writing by ColinBuchanan and Partners Limited, no other party may copy, reproduce, distribute, make use of, or rely on the contents of the report.No liability is accepted by Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited for any use of this report, other than for the purposes for which itwas originally prepared and provided.

Opinions and information provided in this report are on the basis of Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited using due skill, care anddiligence in the preparation of the same and no explicit warranty is provided as to their accuracy. It should be noted and is expresslystated that no independent verification of any of the documents or information supplied to Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited has

een made b


3/42

Humber Bridge Tolls Impact AssessmentFinal Report

Conten t s

1 Introduction 2 1.1 Purpose of this research 2 1.2 Economic context 2 1.3 Bridge Toll History 3

2 Methodology 5 2.2 Qualitative research 5 2.3 Quantitative research 5

3 Economic Impact Assessment 7 3.1 Agglomeration impacts 7 3.2 Applying the Agglomeration Impacts 17

3.3

Results 17

4 Social Impact Assessment 20 4.1 Introduction 20 4.2 Health Travel 20 4.3 Job Seekers 22 4.4 Higher Education 25 4.5 Social/ friends and family 25 4.6 Cultural 26 4.7 City-regional amenity footprint 26

5 Additional Impacts 31 5.1 Business Impacts 31 5.2 Retail impacts 34

5.3

Environmental impacts 34

5.4 Transport impacts 34 5.5 Historical/psychological barrier 35

6 UK-wide Impacts 36 6.2 Removing economic barriers is a promising regional investment 36 6.3 Strategic port enhancement 36

7 Summary and Findings 37 7.1 Impact summary 37 7.2 Key findings 37

Tab les

Table 3.1: Results Economic impacts of toll reduction/elimination, in millions,2008 prices, undiscounted 18

Table 3.2: Agglomeration impacts by industry, millions, 2008 prices 19

Table 5.1: Business survey respondents by sector 31

Table 7.1: Results Economic impacts of toll reduction/elimination, in millions,2008 prices, undiscounted 38


4/42


Figures

Figure 3.1: Statistical relationship between productivity and employment density 8

Figure 3.2: Hull accessibility generalised journey times with current 2.70 toll 10

Figure 3.3: Distribution of workplace for Hull residents that work, by Census ward,

2001 10

Figure 3.4: Distribution of workplace for East Riding residents that work, byCensus ward, 2001 11

Figure 3.5: Grimsby accessibility with current 2.70 toll 11

Figure 3.6: Scunthorpe accessibility generalised journey times with current2.70 toll 12

Figure 3.7: Distribution of workplace for North Lincolnshire residents that work, byCensus ward 2001 13

Figure 3.8: Hull accessibility no toll 15

Figure 3.9: Grimsby accessibility no toll 15

Figure 3.10: Scunthorpe accessibility no toll 16 Figure 4.1: Focus Group 1 Hull: Where do you live (blue dot)? Where is the

furthest you would be willing to travel for work (red dot)? 22

Figure 4.2: Key nature parks, nature amenities 27

Figure 4.3: Religious facilities 28

Figure 4.4: Sports facilities 29

Figure 4.5: Cinemas and theatres 30

Figure 5.1: How much do you spend on Bridge tolls each month? 32

Figure 5.2: The Bridge tolls impact my business in the following areas: 32


5/42

2


1 I n t r o d u c t i o n

1 .1 Purpose o f th i s r e sea rc h1.1.1 This research seeks to better understand the impact of the Humber Bridge tolls on the

Hull and Humber Ports City Region. Economic and social impacts are considered,particularly the potential economic barriers to output and productivity caused by theconstraint on accessibility.

1.1.2 An earlier study examined the economic impacts of the Bridge tolls. Since then, threekey changes make a re-assessment worthwhile:

The city-regional focus of Government policy has more fully developed,positing city regions as the engines of economic development, and making the

functionality of city regions, particularly in targeted under-performing areas, a keypriority. As the Humber Bridge is a key element of connectivity, and thus synergyand economic functionality across the Hull and Humber City Region, the role of thetolls in potentially creating an obstacle to city-regional development needsunderstanding.

Agglomeration methodology a way of estimating how an increase inaccessibility increases productivity and output has become fully established andaccepted by the Department for Transport (DfT). This approach, developed byColin Buchanan (CB) to quantify the benefits of Crossrail and to successfullysecure its funding, was not used in the previous study and will be applied here toquantify the economic benefit of increased accessibility achieved in different tollingscenarios.

Scottish toll elimination elimination of tolls in Scotland earlier this year has

brought increasing attention to the economic impact of tolls in the UK, and providesadditional assessment of toll impacts to serve as reference for looking at theHumber Bridge tolls.

1.1.3 Given Government priorities to support city regions and to balance regional inequalities,helping the Hull and Humber Ports City Region perform at its economic best is a naturalpriority. If the Bridge tolls are found to constrain the City Regions economic growth anddevelopment, there is a clear alignment with policy priorities to consider altering the tollsto allow the City Region to perform at its economic best. This would be both good forreducing inequality, and has the potential to be a good investment for the UK, increasingoutput and productivity and reducing the need for future subsidy into the City Region.

1.1.4 It is under this heading that we assess the economic and social impacts of the Bridgetolls on the City Region. The remainder of the report contains the following:

Chapter 2 - MethodologyChapter 3 - Economic Impact AssessmentChapter 4 Social Impact AssessmentChapter 5 Additional ImpactsChapter 6 UK-wide ImpactsChapter 7 Summary/Findings

1 .2 Ec o n o m i c c o n t e x t1.2.1 The Hull and Humber Ports City Region is a key urban area in Yorkshire and the Humber.

The region as a whole has been transitioning from a largely industrial past to a morecompetitive higher-end services and manufacturing economy. Yorkshire and the Humberhas made good strides on economic performance indicators in recent years, but stillunder-performs England on most economic performance measures. The region has the


6/42

3


second-lowest level of highly skilled graduates, with only 25% of residents having thehighest NVQ level qualification, compared to 30% for England as a whole. Similarly,productivity in Yorkshire and the Humber is the second-lowest of the regions, at 16,000Gross Value Added (GVA) per worker, compared to 19,000 in England. Yorkshire andthe Humber remains one of Englands under-performing regions, and a priority forstrategic economic development.

1.2.2 The Hull and Humber Ports City Region contains about 18% of Yorkshire and theHumbers population, and 16% of its jobs. The City Region performs just below theregion on most economic indicators. Productivity and employment in the City Region are

just below the regional average and average earnings across the City Region are 17%lower than the national average. Hull and Humber Ports has a much larger share ofworkers in manufacturing (17%) than on average across England (11%) or in the region(13.9%). High-end financial services jobs are a smaller share of employment in the CityRegion (13%) than the region (18%) or England (22%). The City Region has madeprogress in recent years and it is understandable why that the City Region remains thefocus of continued economic development to help improve the City Region and regionscompetitiveness.

1 .3 Bridge To l l His to ry1.3.1 The Humber Bridge opened to traffic in 1981, after nine years of construction. The

Bridge was funded by loans from the Government, but difficulties with the constructionand high interest rates over the construction period meant the Bridge opened withconsiderably more debt than expected (151 million in 1981). The toll for a car to crossone way was 1 at the time of opening. Higher debt and interest rates than projected,coupled with lower than expected Bridge usage, caused the debt to grow to 439 millionby 1992 and placed pressure on Bridge tolls required to repay the debt. Tolls on the

Humber Bridge have since become among the highest in the UK.1.3.2 After several years of significant levels of grant aid from the Government to the Bridge

Board to stabilise the debt, a plan was set in 1998 to achieve repayment. TheGovernment wrote off 62 million of the debt, reduced the interest rate on the remainingdebt from 12% to 7.75%, and set up terms for debt repayment, setting the tolls at 2.30,subject to review every two years.

1.3.3 With toll increases set to keep pace with inflation, the debt is scheduled for repayment by2032. A 2008 study commissioned by the Bridge Board states that since 1998, the tollincome has covered the interest due in full and repaid a total of 23.7 million of the debt.The present remaining debt is approximately 330 million.

1.3.4 The current toll at 2.70 per crossing for cars (due to rise later in 2008) is the highest ofany crossing in the UK. Toll exemptions are relatively limited, and can be found inAppendix 2.


7/42

4


Case Study: Toll Impact Assessment in Scotland

The Scottish Executive commissioned a study (SDG 2007) to assess the economic, social, andenvironmental impacts of toll reduction/abolition on the Tay and Forth Bridges. The context for these twobridges was quite different than the Humber Bridge in that tolls for a car were 0.80 at the Tay Bridge and1 at the Forth Bridge at the time. Few would-be Bridge users were put off by a toll at this cost, and,therefore, toll elimination was found in focus groups to have very little impact on travel behaviour: In thefocus groups, across all user groups the financial cost of the tolls were considered to be insignificant andpeople stated their belief that removing the tolls would have no effect on the volumes of traffic on eitherbridge nor the frequency of their own journeys across either bridge (p. 9). Indeed, people were moreconcerned about congestion at the toll bridges and many suggested raising the toll at the Tay Bridge to 1so that queues at toll barriers would move more quickly.

The approach used to estimate economic impacts was based on dynamic modelling using relative cost oftravel as a means to measure attractiveness to different areas, and measuring the increase in jobs filled as aresult of the increased attractiveness. This model showed that toll reduction would add to jobs andemployment in some areas, but take away from jobs and employment in other areas. Fife and Dundee werefound to gain in terms of residents in employment, but at the expense of Edinburgh and Lothians. Theexercise demonstrated significant redistribution of jobs, but less than 0.01% employment growth.

Traffic modelling showed that toll removal would increase miles travelled and traffic emissions and noise, aswell as present a loss in public sector income. Increase in congestion resulting from toll elimination was anegative impact for both bridges.

At the time of the study, there was an outstanding debt from construction at the Tay Bridge of 13 million,which was the primary reason that tolls had been retained until the time of the study. Managing traffic

demand was the main reason for retaining tolls at the Forth Bridge, which was already operating at capacityduring peak hours. Increased congestion from toll elimination was modelled, presenting a significantnegative impact.

For these reasons, the report recommended retaining the tolls on both bridges.

Of interest to this study, Scottish Enterprise was quoted as stressing their city-regional model for economicdevelopment, and that to enable the city region to flourish, the best possible transport links with minimalimpediments to the mobility of the available workforce should be provided (p. 65). Scottish Enterprise,therefore, supported abolishing the tolls.

Tolls were abolished in February 2008, principally along political rationale, and citing benefits that airpollution and congestion would be reduced.

We note that the methodology used in the Scotland study was consistent with the methodology used in theprevious Humber Bridge economic impact evaluation. Our study uses an updated agglomeration approach.


8/42

5


2 Methodo logy

2.1.1 The methodology for this research broadly followed two strands: qualitative andquantitative. This allowed a quantified scale of the impacts to be assessed and also anexplanation of the reasoning behind the impacts.

2 .2 Qual i t a t ive resea rch2.2.1 The qualitative research contained a broad range of approaches to learn more about how

the Bridge tolls impact the local economy. At one level, we sought to open up the studyto anyone wishing to express his or her story of the Bridge toll impact. Colin Buchananset up dedicated email and postal addresses to gather public response. The purpose ofthe study and the call for stories from individuals was advertised on all four councilwebsites and in other affiliated council publications and also was picked up in localnewspapers and radio. Over 300 responses were received.

2.2.2 On a second level, specific groups and individuals were targeted to learn more aboutparticular impacts. In a method agreed with the project team, the qualitative researchfocused on three groups thought to be particularly impacted by the tolls:

Those travelling for health care (patients and visitors)Students either travelling for a course or potential students constrained by tollsJob seekers

2.2.3 For these categories, focus groups and interviews were conducted, as well as particularefforts to encourage relevant people to get in touch with us through our email addressand postal address.

2.2.4 Further targeted interviews were also conducted with business representatives fromindustries thought to be particularly impacted by the tolls, namely distribution, port,transport and manufacturing industries. Other relevant stakeholders, such as Chamberof Commerce officials, the Bridgemaster, PCT representatives, and bus service providerswere also interviewed. A total of 30 such interviews were conducted.

2.2.5 A focus group was also held among local economic development officials from all fourcouncils and included representatives from the Chamber of Commerce and the HumberEconomic Partnership. The findings of this session were used to inform the direction forthe inquiry.

2 .3 Qu a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h

2.3.1 A quantitative approach was undertaken to estimate the scale of the impact of theHumber Bridge tolls on the economy. This approach is centred on agglomerationmodelling. Agglomeration modelling is a technique that CB has been instrumental indeveloping, and this approach has been a key part of valuing the benefits of otherschemes, such as Crossrail. The approach applied here is in line with DfT guidance, andinvolves modelling the productivity benefits that would be gained as a result of theenhanced accessibility derived from lower tolls. The approach is described more fully inChapter 3.

2.3.2 These agglomeration impacts have then been supplied to Experian for applying in theirYorkshire and the Humber Regional Economic Model. Experian has built and maintainedthis model in conjunction with Yorkshire Forwards Chief Economics Unit, and this modelprovides long-term input-output tables forecasting economic performance. The model is

updated every six months and provides a robust way of modelling the likely effects of


9/42

6


agglomeration impacts across the economy, namely assessing the likely secondary andmultiplier impacts that would result from any agglomeration impacts assessed.

2.3.3 Other quantitative elements of inquiry have included:

Retail assessment conducted by Experian demonstrates impacts on retailexpenditure patterns generated by different toll scenarios

A city-regional footprint has been developed indicating the accessibility ofvarious amenities across the four districts and indicating how this changes with tollscenarios

Business surveys were commissioned by the Chamber of Commerce andFederation of Small Businesses to better understand the impacts of the tolls onbusiness more broadly

A job-seeker survey asked selected job seekers across the four districts if the tollimpacts their job search


10/42

7


3 Ec o n o m i c I m p a c t A s se s sm e n t

3 .1 A g g l om e r a t i o n i m p a c t s

Agglomeration explained

3.1.2 City regions are economic drivers the very core of economic growth and development.Scale and agglomeration (or density) essentially what makes a city a city have longbeen thought to be connected to these productive advantages. Ability to offer a criticalmass of highly qualified labour, support services, information, infrastructure and marketshave all been linked to competitiveness and economic performance. However, thereasons behind these connections are complex.

3.1.3 Agglomeration/density is thought to be linked to productivity in six key ways:

Denser areas allow a higher degree of specialisation , increasing efficiency Reduced transport time and costs for products/goods/services from one stage to

the next or from producer to consumer occurs in denser areas if the transportinfrastructure is sufficientIncreased density increases the prevalence of knowledge spillovers , increasinginnovation Denser areas allow firms to have access to larger markets of suppliers (especiallylabour supply) and consumers, allowing competition to enhance the quality ofinputs and outputs

Efficiencies of scale are created in denser markets where suppliers are reachingmore potential customers

Reduced land take in denser areas allows more economic activity to take placeon a fixed piece of land

3.1.4 In addition to understanding the nature of the linkages between density and productivity,a broad body of economic research estimates the scale of these linkages.

3.1.5 Based on research by Dan Graham, the DfT specifies agglomeration elasticities thatshould be applied for different regions and sectors of the UK economy. These elasticitiesare ratios indicating how a change in effective density impacts productivity/output. Forexample, across England, the recommended agglomeration elasticity is 0.043. Thismeans that a 10% increase in effective density, holding all other factors constant, isassociated with a 0.43% increase in productivity. Doubling the effective density of anarea creates a 4.3% increase in productivity.

3.1.6 The appropriate area-specific elasticities, as recommended by DfT, have been applied inthis assessment.

3.1.7 Further work has explored this relationship across Britain. Quantitative research hasconsistently shown a positive relationship between employment density and productivity,as emphasised in recent Greater London Authority Reports (Ormerod et al, 2005; GLAEconomics, 2008). Higher productivity is reflected in higher salaries. Figure 3.1 illustratesthe positive relationship between changes in employment density (increasing from left toright log(emp01) on the X axis) and changes in earnings (as a proxy for productivity increasing from bottom to top earn01 on the Y axis) for major UK urban centres.


11/42

8


Figure 3.1: Statistical relationship between productivity and employment density

Earnings differential and log of employment density, 2001

log(emp01)

e a r n

0 1

-2 0 2 4 6

0

1 0 0

2 0 0

3 0 0

Source: Ormerod et al, 2005

3.1.8 The positive relationship between earnings differentials and employment density isdetectable even at relatively low levels of density. But the relationship intensifies at theright side of the figure. The observations in the shaded portion of the figure are the cityregions of Greater Manchester, Tyne and Wear, West Midlands and 27 London boroughs

all dense urban areas.

3.1.9 As a result of such findings, policy practitioners increasingly understand the importance ofagglomeration to economic performance in a service based economy, as well as itscontribution to sustainability. This was acknowledged in the most recent State of theEnglish Cities Report for 2006:

As the economy continues to shift from manufacturing to services, ideas and innovation are driving economic growth and changing the value of density itself. Firms in large metropolitan areas value their workers more highly, because workers there are more

productive. They grow more productive over time because of the variety of jobs and information spillovers within and between industries (State of English Cities, Departmentfor Communities and Local Government, Volume1, p214).

Agglomeration in the Humber

3.1.10 In the shift towards developing strong city regions in the UK economy, the concept of theHull and Humber Ports City Region has developed within the framework of the NorthernWay. City-regional synergies and agglomeration benefits are a key element of successfulcity regions. However, the geography of the Hull and Humber Ports City Region poses achallenge to gaining these synergies and drawing together a meaningful city-regionaleconomic relationship in practice. The City Region contains two districts north of theHumber (Hull and East Riding) and two south (North Lincolnshire and North East


12/42

9


Lincolnshire). The Humber Bridge provides the only connection across the Humber atthe centre of the City Region, with the nearest alternative crossing at Goole.

3.1.11 In the basic economic profile of the City Region, Hull is the leading city, with a majority ofhigher-end services employment, and the North Bank contains a large workforce in Hulland East Riding. However, developable land on the North Bank in key areas of economicinterest can be difficult to find. On the South Bank, developable land is in ample supply,though the workforce on the South Bank is relatively small. Achieving synergies betweenthe two complementary areas is a logical aim for the development of the City Region.

3.1.12 In any case, because of the estuary, accessibility and agglomeration across the CityRegion would be limited. However, the toll on the Humber Bridge further limitsaccessibility considerably.

3.1.13 Transport guidance provides standard values of time which show the trade-offs betweentravel time and money that people are willing to make and indicate likely travel behaviour.

The DfT value of time for commuting (in 2002 values and prices) is 5.04/hour, whichtranslates to 6.48/hour in 2008 prices and values. This indicates that an averagecommuter is ambivalent between spending an extra hour commuting and spending anextra 6.48. Paying the Bridges standard car toll of 2.70 one way is the equivalent ofadding an additional 25 minutes to a journey.

3.1.14 We note that this study is in line with DfT guidance, and is applying the national standardvalue of time. However, as income in the City Region is around 17% lower than theaverage in England, the actual barrier of the Bridge tolls is likely even greater for localresidents. Therefore, the results produced are likely to be a conservative estimate of thebarrier of the toll.

3.1.15 By translating the cost of the toll into minutes and adding it to journey times, these

generalised journey times show the impact of the toll on accessibility. Figure 3.2 presents accessibility within 15, 30, 45 and 60 minutes generalised journey time of Hull.These figures are indicative of generalised journey time, but actual journey times canvary with time of day, congestion, etc. These figures are indicative of the total cost of a

journey in minutes, including tolls (generalised vehicle operating cost has beenexcluded).

3.1.16 From Hull, only the northern portion of the South Bank is accessible within a 45 or 60minute generalised journey. Grimsby, Scunthorpe and much of North and North EastLincolnshire are the equivalent of considerably more than an hours journey away.Correspondingly, Figure 3.3 shows where Hull residents work, and many Hull workers arespread across the North Bank, with very few crossing to the South. The same trend isapparent among workers from East Riding, with few crossing over the Bridge for work(Figure 3.4 ).


13/42

10


Figure 3.2: Hull accessibility generalised journey times with current 2.70 toll

Figure 3.3: Distribution of workplace for Hull residents that work, by Censusward, 2001


14/42

11


Figure 3.4: Distribution of workplace for East Riding residents that work, byCensus ward, 2001

3.1.17 Similarly, from Grimsby, while Lincoln and Skegness are just within an hours drive, Hullis further ( Figure 3.5 ). Employment trends show that most North East Lincolnshireresidents that are employed work within the district, though some do spread into NorthLincolnshire and a few to Hull.

Figure 3.5: Grimsby accessibility with current 2.70 toll


15/42


16/42

13


Figure 3.7: Distribution of workplace for North Lincolnshire residents that work,by Census ward 2001

3.1.19 The impact of the toll on perceived journey costs and on travel behaviour is dramatic inthese figures, but it also matches with the perspectives of local residents and businesses:

Fortunately my company pay for the tolls for me, otherwise I would be spendingalmost 10% of my wage on it.

My husband is self-employed ... the cost of the Bridge tolls and fuel has a bigimpact on his earnings. He tries to condense the work into 3/4 long days tominimise costs but customer expectations often mean this is not possible.

The toll tends to keep South Bank people on their side of the Humber, and NorthBank people on theirs.

[Because of rising tolls] in the future I may have to consider if I can afford to workacross this side of the river. This would be a great shame, as I dont want to have

to leave a job that I really like and enjoy.Employment for myself and husband is avoided in Hull I'm presently looking atapplying for two jobs in Hull, but with the cost of the tolls, they are reallyuneconomical to apply for and would constitute a pay cut.

I just feel that hundreds and thousands of people have either turned down a jobopportunity or maybe not even applied in the first place because the extra cost oftravelling from the south side of the Humber, (I know both my fiance and Ihave ignored opportunities in the past because of the cost alone) I know of friendsand family who often look on the internet, local newspapers for career opportunitiesand will not even consider any jobs in the Hull area because of the strain it will puton their finances.


17/42

14


I work as an engineer in local government in Hull, but I could not realistically takeup a position on the South Bank (which are the closest authorities) to further mycareer as any increase in pay would be counteracted by the daily toll you wouldhave to earn an extra 1300 per year just to stay the same.

As a lecturer in Nursing at Hull University I have anecdotal evidence thatparticularly young people, on the South Bank, are being put off from becomingnurses through training in Hull because of the excessive tolls.

Last year I was recruiting for an office based position for a German speaker herein Hull. There were only 3 suitably qualified applicants at the time, one of whomwas based on the South Bank. That candidate dropped out before the interviewstage owing to the cost of tolls on the journey to work rendering the salary packageunattractive.

As a major multi national company with bases of operations on both the North andSouth Banks of the Humber [the toll] has a significant impact in recruitment,especially of apprentices. Good applicants are put off applying for positions, simplyby the sheer cost of getting to work every day.

We are a small IT Support Business based in Hull that carries out installations andprovides support to businesses on the North and South banks. The cost of Bridgetolls is a factor when calculating costs and means that we have to charge more forour services to South Bank based businesses. This penalises them and blunts ourcompetitive edge.

3.1.20 How different would accessibility be without tolls? Figure 3.8 - Figure 3.10 show thegeneralised journey times with no toll, and the difference is significant.

3.1.21 From Hull, most of North and North East Lincolnshire are accessible, with Barton andSouth Ferriby within 30 generalised minutes (as close as Beverley), Scunthorpe within 45minutes and Grimsby comfortably within an hour. For Hull businesses, most of North andNorth East Lincolnshires 320,000 residents are now within commuting distance,increasing the available labour pool.

3.1.22 From Scunthorpe and Grimsby, the North Bank opens up, with Hull between 30-60minutes drive and much of East Riding being accessible within an hour. Residents inand around Scunthorpe and Grimsby are now within commuting distance of an additional120,000 jobs in Hull.

3.1.23 Accessibility in a 1 toll scenario is mapped in Appendix 4.


18/42

15


Figure 3.8: Hull accessibility no toll

Figure 3.9: Grimsby accessibility no toll


19/42

16


Figure 3.10: Scunthorpe accessibility no toll

Measuring agglomeration impacts of the Humber Bridge 3.1.24 The Humber Bridge has a significant impact on accessibility and agglomeration, but what

does this mean in economic terms?

3.1.25 By applying the known relationships between agglomeration and productivity, asdiscussed earlier in this chapter, the change in productivity resulting from a change inaccessibility and agglomeration (in this case, because of a change in Bridge tolls) can becalculated. The impacts of both toll elimination and toll reduction to maintenance onlylevel have been calculated. The no toll calculation is explained first, followed by theresults for the maintenance only/1 toll. The methodology is the same for both scenarios.It is assumed that the toll reduction occurs in 2009 and the effect lasts until 2032 whenthe debt is scheduled to be repaid and therefore the future of the toll is uncertain.

3.1.26 First, the change in effective density in moving from the current scenario to a no tollscenario is calculated. Effective density is a measure that looks at both employment andaccessibility. For this exercise, key cities and towns are considered, as changingaccessibility must be calculated between designated pairings. This makes sensemethodologically, but also practically, as most agglomeration benefits are likely to occurbetween key economic areas, rather than among rural areas.

3.1.27 In terms of accessibility, the change in generalised journey time is calculated. This isprovided in Appendix 8. Combining this with employment growth forecasts produces thechange in effective density when the toll is eliminated.

3.1.28 DfT-specified elasticities are then applied to the change in effective density to show theeffect on productivity. These elasticities are by area, so the correct elasticity for each

town/city identified is applied. For example, an elasticity of .039 in Hull implies that a


20/42

17


10% increase in effective density generates a 0.39% increase in productivity. Theelasticities used are shown in Appendix 8.

3.1.29 This process produces the direct agglomeration impacts of alternative toll scenarios. Twomore steps are then performed to derive the total net impact.

3 .2 A p p l yi n g t h e A g g l o m e r a t i o n I m p a c t s

Induced and indirect benefits

3.2.2 In addition to the direct impacts that increased productivity as a result of agglomerationwill have, there are also indirect and induced impacts. To assess how the agglomerationbenefits would be likely to trickle through to the sub-regional economy, Experian hasmodelled the agglomeration impacts through their Yorkshire and the Humber Regional

Economic Model.3.2.3 This model is maintained by Experian for Yorkshire Forwards Chief Economics Unit and

provides a macro-economic forecast of regional trends. The model is updated every sixmonths and is used by a range of partners, including the Environment Agency and theGovernment Office for Yorkshire and Humber.

3.2.4 By feeding in the changes in productivity associated with the two tolling scenarios tested,Experian are able to model out the total impact of agglomeration providing a scale ofthe induced and indirect benefits and also an indication of the sectors most likely tobenefit. As Experians model covers the period up until 2025, that is the end year forthese estimates, and we assume that the induced benefits remain constant 2025-2032.

3.2.5 The modelled results indicate that the induced benefits of the agglomeration-related

output increase add a further 30-50% of the annual GVA benefit to the City Region.

Redistribution of toll expenditure

3.2.6 In the toll reduction and elimination scenarios, the City Region would also expect to seebenefit from the increased incomes of residents no longer spending income on tolls. Thetotal amount of toll fares paid per year in the current scenario has been calculated andcompared to that paid in the alternative scenarios. The difference between the two is theredistributed toll fund, and we apply the Humber Bridge Studys (2008) finding that 79%of Bridge users have their ultimate origin within the City Region.

3.2.7 We therefore assume that 79% of redistributed toll fees are redistributed within the CityRegion as household income. Residents then have choices about where this money isspent, and some may then leak outside of the City Region when it is re-spent, whilesignificant portions are likely to stay within the City Region, yielding further benefit.

3 .3 Resu l t s3.3.1 Table 3.1 presents the net impacts to the City Region, as modelled.

3.3.2 The agglomeration-based increase in output in the City Region is estimated to be 21.3million in 2009 , when there is no toll, compared to continuing the toll at the current levelwith the scheduled increases for inflation. The total output gain up to 2032 equals598.4m . These and all values in this section are undiscounted, in 2008 prices.Furthermore, an additional 18.1m in toll payment is redistributed to residents in the CityRegion in 2009, and a total of 509.9m is redistributed by 2032. With the City Regions


21/42

18


GVA in 2005 valued at 13.1 bn, the annual increase in 2009 represents a 0.3% increasein annual GVA.

3.3.3 In the toll reduction scenario, the same process has been applied. This scenario has tollsfor an ordinary car reduced to 1 per crossing in 2009, and tolls for other classes ofvehicle are reduced proportionately. The toll would rise in line with inflation until 2032,when the future of tolls in the comparative current scenario is no longer clear. This levelof tolling is roughly equivalent to what is required to maintain the Bridge, so we also callthis our maintenance toll scenario.

3.3.4 In the maintenance toll scenario, agglomeration increases the City Regions output by10.5m in 2009 , and the total increase in output up to 2032 is 263.9m. Redistribution oftoll payment adds a further 11.2m to residents in the City Region in 2009; this totals315.8 by 2032.

Table 3.1: Results Economic impacts of toll reduction/elimination, in

millions, 2008 prices, undiscounted

1 toll no tollDirect + induced

agglomeration benefit10.5 21.3

Toll money redistributed tothe City Region

11.2 18.1 2 0 0 9

Total city-regional benefit 21.7 39.4

Direct + inducedagglomeration benefit

263.9 598.4


315.8 509.9

2 0 0 9

- 2 0 3 2

( u n

d i s

c o u n

t e

d )


3.3.5 It is noted that in the no toll scenario, the maintenance cost of the Bridge is assumed tobe covered by the Highways Agency. There is mixed precedent on who coversmaintenance costs of bridges. According to the Highways Agency, they cover all bridgeson the trunk road network in England with very few exceptions. Many large bridges (forexample, the Tyne Bridge on the A167 in Newcastle, the Barton Bridge on the M60 inManchester, the Runcorn Bridge on the A533 in Runcorn, and the A19 Tees Viaductbetween Middlesbrough and Stockton) are covered by the Highways Agency, while a few,like the Humber, are tolled. There could be logic here to suggest that the Humber Bridgeis a needed piece of city- regional infrastructure and could be moved to the formercategory.

3.3.6 Experians modelling also applies the DfTs sector-specific elasticities and estimates theagglomeration impacts on specific sectors across the City Region ( Table 3.2 ).Distribution activity and services are found to gain particularly, both key sectors in theCity Regions strategic development.


22/42

19


Table 3.2: Agglomeration impacts by industry, millions, 2008 prices

No Toll Impact 1 Impact AverageDistribution2009 2009-2025

undiscounted2009 2009-2025

undiscounted

Primary industries 0.1 1.5 0.0 0.7 0%Manufacturing 2.2 37.9 1.1 17.3 10%Construction 2.4 44.8 1.2 19.9 11%Distribution/retail/wholesale 10.8 205.7 5.3 92.6 50%Communications 1.4 28.2 0.7 12.9 7%Services 4.5 90.9 2.3 42.0 21%TOTAL 21.3 409.1 10.5 185.4 100%

*Please note, in the above table, figures are presented for 2009-2025 (not 2009-2032, as above) to beconsistent with the extent of the Regional Economic Model.

3.3.7 A complete breakdown of the sector-specific and geographic impacts can be found inAppendix 6.


23/42

20


4 Soc ia l Impac t Asses smen t

4 .1 I n t r o d u c t i o n4.1.1 In addition to modelling the economic impacts of increased accessibility in output terms,

key potential social impacts have also been assessed, in the areas of health travel, jobseekers and higher education.

4 .2 Heal th Trave l4.2.1 Many residents on the South Bank travel to the North Bank for specialist services on the

NHS. Travel across the Bridge for these services is not exempt from toll. If a patientqualifies for a higher level of income/disability benefit, then they may qualify for a

programme of toll reimbursement (a similar programme exists for those crossing theBridge to visit prisoners). A full listing of toll exemptions is found in Appendix 2; pleasenote that the health care reimbursement is not an official exemption, it is a reimbursementprogramme run separately from the Bridge Board.

4.2.2 For example, the North Lincolnshire PCT provided the following list of services for whichthey have a contract with Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust:

Neurosurgery Plastic Surgery Cardiothoracic Surgery Nephrology Renal Dialysis Neurology

Radiotherapy Specialist elements within Cardiology, Haematology and Cancer services.

4.2.3 Hull and East Yorkshire is the nearest provider for these services, though services arealso available elsewhere, with Leeds, Sheffield, Doncaster and Lincoln the next closestproviders of similar services. These alternatives are both distant and sometimes notpossible patients stated the need to go to a certain hospital on the North Bank in orderto have a procedure done by the same doctor they were already seeing or otherwisebeing connected to the health care they were already receiving.

4.2.4 From April 2007 to March 2008, there were just fewer than 4,800 referrals from NorthLincolnshire PCT to Hull and East Riding. Approximately 84% of patients took up thesereferrals. There were also a further 4,200 in-patient episodes of patients from NorthLincolnshire in Hull and East Riding, and over 12,000 outpatient follow-up visits. Thisequals a total of over 20,000 annual occurrences of patients travelling across theHumber for NHS medical care. Although we were unable to obtain similar figures forNorth East Lincolnshire, with a similar resident population and health care offer to NorthLincolnshire, it is likely that a similar number of occurrences are generated from NorthEast Lincolnshire.

4.2.5 Therefore, it is estimated that healthcare travel for patients totals 40,000 round-tripsacross the Bridge, costing an estimated 216,000 in Bridge tolls amounting to less thanhalf a percent of annual toll revenue. Therefore, a programme to subsidise Bridge travelfor patients is estimated to require 216,000, although further study would be advisable toestimate the nature of additional health care trips that may be generated, and also thenumber of referrals that result in multiple trips, adding to the cost of toll relief.


24/42

21


4.2.6 It is noted that the opening of a new cancer centre at Castle Hill Hospital on the NorthBank may increase the number of crossings for South Bank residents.

4.2.7 Those visiting patients or other associated journeys are not included in the abovecalculations, and would require further funding for toll relief.

4.2.8 Among residents, the requirement to pay for tolls when travelling for health care is widelyresented, and also highlighted in the previous toll impact study. That study cited thatresidents feel strongly against tolls when travelling for health care reasons, and that thereshould be no toll for those travelling for healthcare reasons, at the point of access.

4.2.9 Since that study, there has not been progress in terms of changing accessibility for thosetravelling for health care reasons, and residents expressed strong feelings toward tolls forpatients. One key concern was that the tolls cause additional financial hardship topatients (particularly those battling lengthy illnesses) at an already difficult and stressfultime, and a time when income is already restricted for many. Another concern was that

those in the hospital on the North Bank receive fewer visits and loved ones are less ableto visit and care, aiding recovery:

Both my parents and my husbands parents have suffered ill health over the lastfew years and we were unable to visit as often as we wanted. My father in law wasvery ill last year and my husband was travelling across the Bridge four times dailyover a considerable time (he runs his own business and still had to work inScunthorpe) - obviously this put considerable strain on the family budget. NorthBank resident

My wife is under the rheumatologist at Hull Royal Infirmary and we live in N Lincs.While she has disabled driver concessionary tickets when she is using her own carso the routine visits do not involve the payment of a Bridge toll she has had moreextended stays in the hospital and the return toll is a considerable expense whenone is visiting daily, particularly when the cost of parking at HRI is also taken intoconsideration. North Lincolnshire resident

When my wife was in the hospital for several weeks for cancer treatment on theNorth Bank, she would be allowed occasional day trips out. She was only justwell enough to leave the hospital so going home was really about all she could do,and these brief days out to come home with the family were a real treat for her atthe time. With each of these days home needing four trips across the Bridge andcosting 11 in tolls alone, we were lucky we could afford it. Im sure many otherscant. South Bank resident

Having cancer was bad enough without struggling to manage on benefits for thefirst time in my life and the extra cost of the tolls was a level of stress I could havedone without. South Bank resident

When my husband was diagnosed with cancer and had to make many trips overthe Bridge to Castle Hill Hospital, where are we supposed to find the money? South Bank resident

4.2.10 Local NHS officials suggest that previous recommendations to eliminate tolls for patientshave not progressed because there is no obvious body to take control of the issue and tocover the cost of the toll for those patients. As most of the toll goes towards paying offthe debt, the Bridge Board suggest that they would have to find another means of raising

the funds (likely to involve putting up tolls for others) in order to cover the cost of lettingpatients travel for free. The Bridge Board suggest the NHS should cover the cost, while


25/42


26/42

23


4.3.3 The full details of the findings during these sessions are presented in Appendix 5.

4.3.4 In summary, the cost of the Bridge tolls appeared to be a barrier to those living in Hull. Atleast five out of 30 participants indicated that they would be willing to cross the Bridge forwork if it were financially viable, though at the present it is not. Others felt working on theSouth Bank would be just too far, while a few were constrained by public transport andpoor bus connectivity across the Bridge.

4.3.5 Most respondents had access to private transport, and a significant number were willingto travel around an hour each way to work. There was significant promise that reducedtolls across the Humber would widen the job search and opportunities for a number ofthese longer-term, targeted job seekers.

4.3.6 Our focus group in Grimsby, however, offered less promise for the toll making asignificant difference in job search patterns. Most of these participants did not haveaccess to a car, and distance and public transport provision were the key factors in the

geography of their job search; the tolls were not really a factor.4.3.7 Our findings were further validated by a survey undertaken by Job Centre Plus of its

clients. For this research, two questions were added to their regular survey related to theHumber Bridge. Respondents were from Barton, Immingham, Scunthorpe, Grimsby,Hull, Beverley and Hessle. Of the 166 respondents, 39% said that the tolls discouragethem from looking at jobs across the Bridge. Furthermore, 43% said that they had neverpreviously seriously considered a job across the Bridge. The Bridge appears to bepresenting a barrier to job search to some local job seekers.

Mid-level worker advancement

4.3.8 Many residents wrote in describing their difficulty in finding new posts to advance their

careers because the cost of the tolls limited their job search area. These mid-levelworkers were considered to be those with work experience (not new graduates) lookingto progress to positions requiring more responsibility and experience. Mid-level workerswere more sensitive to the tolls than more senior-level managers, where higher earningsmake the cost of the toll relatively less of a barrier.

4.3.9 Many experienced workers described missed opportunities on the other side of theHumber that are not financially viable because of the Bridge, or the unsustainability oftheir current commute over the Bridge, because of the toll. This was the key issue raisedby East Riding residents, many of whom expressed difficulties with a cross-Bridgecommute or expressed that they were unable to take up promising posts on the SouthBank.

4.3.10 Many two-income families described difficult choices where one person has better careerprospects on one side of the Bridge, and the other has better opportunities on the other,making it impossible to move to avoid the tolls, and resulting in one career beingsacrificed. Just a small sample of the evidence of barriers to career advancement andmatching appropriate workers with jobs within the City Region:

I have considered jobs 'across the water' but definitely taken into account the costof the tolls on a daily basis, would only consider employment if an employersubsidised the cost of the tolls. South Bank resident

My husband is a senior advisor in part of the Civil Service and I am a primaryschool teacher; Hull would undoubtedly benefit from our skills, particularly as Iunderstand there is a problem with attraction and retention of quality staff ineducation. However, there is no way that either of us would consider applying forwork over the river as we would be adding a huge cost to our travel because of the


27/42

24


tolls; I am currently taking a leadership programme and feel aggrieved that whenthe time comes for me to look for a senior leadership position I will be unable tolook at areas within the whole 360 degree radius from my home. Barton resident

I currently live on the South Bank only five miles from the Bridge. I am seekingnew employment and am finding that the Bridge tolls are very prohibiting in termsof seeking interviews for employment and in the positions that I can take intoconsideration. There are vacancies on the North Bank that are only six to ten milesfrom where I live that I cannot consider because of the cost of the tolls. To payeach way every working day means having to earn approximately 1700 before taxmore than an equivalent position on the South Bank. South Bank resident

After six years of crossing the Humber Bridge for travel to work, I moved to thesouth side of the Humber Bridge, this meant my wife having to find a job on thesouth side also. We both enjoyed living in Hull but the 1000 a year to cross the

Bridge just for work was a cost we could no longer tolerate. South Bank resident

I work in Hull within a Criminal Justice agency but live on the South Bank. I onlywork part-time and the cost of petrol, Bridge tolls and parking is crippling me. Themain office in the area as with most local companies is in Hull I therefore have hadto start looking for alternative employment as I cannot afford to keep the job I havewhich incidentally I love. I have 29 years experience in my field which will be lost tothe people I help in what is a public service. South Bank resident

I have recently begun working in Scunthorpe and I live in Ottringham in the EastRiding of Yorkshire. I wanted a career change and therefore the job in Scunthorpealthough a fair travelling distance was a career move for me. I love the job I do butunfortunately due to the compound impact of rising fuel and associated travelling

costs with the expense of the Bridge tolls. I am looking for a job closer to home andalso not necessarily in the area I want to work as I simply can not afford to travelany more. Ottringham resident

I live in Hull and work as a locum social worker on a freelance basis. I amcurrently contracted with North Lincolnshire in Scunthorpe. I have access toemployers both North and South of the Humber estuary in terms of job availability.I now find myself in a position whereby I will be terminating my currentcontract because of the high cost of travel to work via the Bridge. In future I will berestricting my choices to employers north of the Humber, e.g. North Yorkshireand East Yorkshire in order to avoid the Bridge toll. Hull resident

Although I am enjoying my work as a social worker in North Lincolnshire verymuch, in the future I may have to consider if I can afford to work across this side ofthe river. This would be a great shame, as I dont want to have to leave a job that Ireally like and enjoy. East Yorkshire resident

4.3.11 This evidence strongly indicated the toll as a barrier in the City Region to the kind ofsynergies and wide labour pools that are so much a part of agglomeration.

4.3.12 Furthermore, this speaks to the challenge and disadvantage that a fragmented labourpool presents to potential developers looking to grow new industries on the South Bank.


28/42

25


4 .4 Higher Educa t ion4.4.1 Discussions with higher education officials and responses from students and potential

students revealed that some particularly on the South Bank -- are limited by the tolls.Students looking to take a continuing education or part-time course that live on the SouthBank are likely to find it difficult to do so on the North Bank, both because of time andcost of travel:

I am a recent university graduate living on the South Bank who has been lookingto take a postgraduate course, the Bridge tolls put me off from looking at theUniversity of Hull. South Bank resident

4.4.2 However, it seems that for most full-time undergraduate students, many students fromthe South Bank that want to go to Hull University want to move away this tends to be anintegral part of the decision. Other students that might want to stay more locally andcommute may go to Lincoln or choose closer further training. As many full-timeundergraduates seek accommodation away from home, the option to move across to Hullis usually planned by many students opting to go across to the North Bank for University.Higher education professionals said that students they work with do not indicate that thisis a barrier to their choosing to study in Hull.

4.4.3 Other educational barriers, however, emerged. On the South Bank, professionalsindicated some difficulty recruiting teachers, and indicated that there are often goodcandidates from the North Bank that end up dropping out if there is no toll compensation.One school mentioned that in exceptional circumstances, they have been forced to paytolls for a supply teacher from the North Bank at short notice, as there is no alternativeand such teachers would not come over without toll compensation.

4.4.4 Another barrier emerges with the resources available through Hull University. In manyways, the South Bank misses out from the wider sharing of skill and knowledge and

community benefit that radiates from a large university, like Hull. For example, traineenurses and teachers at Hull University are required to do work placements. Theseplacements are of benefit both to the trainees and to the organisations, providing someadditional help in low staff areas, and also helping the receiving organisations to hopefullyrecruit the trainees. However, because of the Bridge, placements on the South Bank arenot as desirable as on the North Bank. Although trainees are forced to take placementsacross the Bridge, bearing the added cost, the South Bank is gaining less than itotherwise would both with fewer trainees and with the negative perception of theseplacements.

4.4.5 Furthermore, Hull University is one of Hulls largest employers, and although theUniversity has a significant number of support jobs, very few employees come from theSouth Bank. One University official said that this is likely to be because of the tolls and

that without them the University would be better connected to the South Bank in a varietyof ways. This again illustrated the kind of knowledge linkages that are valued inagglomeration, and illustrates how the tolls are limiting the city-regional synergiesquantified in the agglomeration impact calculations.

4 .5 Soc ia l / f r i ends and fami ly4.5.1 Although residents acknowledge that accessibility for visiting across the Humber is much

improved because of the Bridge, the toll limits many social interactions across the Bridge,and this was a common negative impact described by residents. Residents with friendsand family on the other side of the Humber explain how, though near, visits are fewerthan they otherwise would be.


29/42

26


4.5.2 These impacts seemed to fall particularly heavily on pensioners and the elderly, bothbecause relative to fixed incomes the increasing toll is a relatively larger barrier, and alsothat pensioners that become unable to drive have few good public transport optionsacross the Bridge.

4.5.3 Mixed families and parents with child sharing arrangements on either side of the Bridgealso noted the considerable expense of visits and the reduced or augmented visitingpatterns that result:

My Dad lives in Hull and because the Bridge is expensive I can only get to seehim once every two weeks, i think that it should be cheaper or free so I can see mydad more. South Bank resident (age 10)

My husband's family live over the Bridge in Beverley. However, we do not visit asmuch as we would like due to the tolls. It is such a shame as his Nana andGrandma both live over the Bridge and are in their 80's. South Bank resident

I am prevented from visiting an old aunt and uncle, both in their late eighties,because I am unable to afford the toll on the Humber Bridge. I am a pensionermyself now, and there is no alternative bus service available. North Bankresident

4.5.4 We also heard how business-related social activity is limited because of the Bridge. Forexample, members of the Hull and Humber Chamber described that events are heldseparately on the North and South Banks, with members generally only attending on theirown side (rather than meeting and mixing with each other). One educational consultantdescribed that she holds regional events on both sides of the Humber because peoplewont travel across because of the tolls. Without the tolls, she believes she could holdone event and people could meet each other.

4.5.5 These informal social interactions foster the kinds of knowledge spillovers that are a partof the agglomeration advantages of competitive city regions.

4 .6 Cul tu ra l4.6.1 Many residents indicated that their leisure activities are restricted because of the toll.

This was true for residents on both banks those on the South wished to cross north fortheatre, music and natural attractions in Yorkshire. Residents on the North Bankmentioned wanting to learn more about Lincolnshire and discover natural attractions, andothers mentioned wanting to go to places like Pleasure Island in Cleethorpes:

I am also a big Jazz fan so visit Hull Truck Theatre and The Goodfellowship Innfor their events. I would love to go more but I'm afraid that the cost of the Bridge is

becoming more and more prohibitive. South Bank resident

For 3 years I have attended music lessons every fortnight in Hull. I live inKillingholme, North Lincolnshire. I attend a music shop in Hull, which I consider tobe a small business. With living costs and the price of petrol rising significantlyover the last few months I have stopped my tuition as I have not been able toafford to continue with my lessons. Killingholme resident

4 .7 Ci ty -reg iona l ameni t y foo tp r in t 4.7.1 In addition to the economic impacts of limited connectivity, limited connectivity also

restricts access to social and cultural amenities. In order to better understand whereresidents need to go to assess different amenities, this section presents maps of different

amenities and discusses the accessibility implications of the tolls.


30/42

27


4.7.2 Locations for these amenities were gathered from Council websites, yellow pageslistings, and other internet sites.

4.7.3 Across all the amenities, the maps indicate how increased accessibility north to southacross the City Region enhances choice across all factors. As these amenities contributeto quality of life, increased access also contributes to the City Regions attractiveness forworkers, residents and visitors.

4.7.4 As indicated in Figure 4.2 , the South Bank has a particular wealth of nature parks andrelated amenities. Increased access would benefit in this way to North Bank residents.

Figure 4.2: Key nature parks, nature amenities

4.7.5 The City Region has a wealth of religious facilities, though several groups anddenominations are only found in Hull. As Figure 4.3 indicates, increased accessibilityacross the Humber would give many on the South Bank increased access to a widerrange of religious facilities, particularly for those in the northern part of North Lincolnshire,closest to Hull, where there are few such facilities.


31/42


32/42

29


Figure 4.4: Sports facilities

4.7.7 The northern parts of North Lincolnshire would again benefit particularly from increasedaccess to the North Bank in terms of cinemas and theatres ( Figure 4.5 ). Otherwise, thenearest similar amenities are in Scunthorpe or Grimsby. All of the South Bank would belikely to benefit, though, with access to the more unique and diverse theatre offer in Hull.


33/42

30


Figure 4.5: Cinemas and theatres

4.7.8 The City Region contains a good stock of sport and leisure amenities, and increasedaccessibility enhances the choice and opportunity available for all residents. There is a

particular benefit for those just across the Bridge from Hull. The access to naturalamenities in Lincolnshire is also significant, as many North Bank residents wrote in ontheir desire to access these.


34/42

31


5 A d d it i o n a l I m p a c t s

5 .1 B u s i ne s s I m p a c t s

Business survey

5.1.2 Although the economic impact modelling indicates the scale of impacts of toll reductionon businesses from a broad perspective, further work was undertaken to understand localbusiness perspectives and to verify what impacts the tolls have.

5.1.3 The Hull and Humber Chamber of Commerce commissioned a survey of members onboth banks of the Humber, to help understand how businesses are impacted by the tolls.Respondents were from a wide array of sectors ( Table 5.1 ).

Table 5.1: Business survey respondents by sector

Sector RespondentsProfessional Services 57Manufacture of other goods 24Other 23Transport and distribution 21Construction 19Retailing/wholesaling 17Not stated 16Public or voluntary sector services 14

Other services 13Marketing/media 7Hotels/catering 5Manufacture of electronic or I.T. goods 4Production of raw materials, agriculture, fishing, mining,utilities

3

Consumer services 1TOTAL 224

5.1.4 Business respondents were found to have a wide range of monthly expenditure on tollsdirectly, from a few pounds per month to up to 5,000 per month ( Figure 5.1 )


35/42

32


Figure 5.1: How much do you spend on Bridge tolls each month?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

25poundsor less

25-50pounds

50-100pounds

100-200pounds

200-500pounds

500-1000

pounds

1000poundsor more

N u m

b e r o

f r e s p o n

d e n

t s

5.1.5 Business respondents also stated that Bridge tolls impacted their business in a variety ofareas, with impacts on staff recruitment and recruiting new business most prevalent.

Figure 5.2: The Bridge tolls impact my business in the following areas:

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%50%

recruitment staff retention recruiting newbusiness

choice ofsuppliers

s h a r e o

f r e s p o n

d e n

t s

5.1.6 Several respondents commented on the strength of these impacts:

The tolls particularly affect the recruitment of suitably qualified staff. We also haveemployees who travel every day across the Bridge which is a significant financialburden on them, which for us may lead to staff retention problems. We also sufferin attracting new clients from across the Bridge due to the tolls. business withmultiple premises on the South Bank


36/42


37/42

34


5 .2 Re t a i l i m p a c t s5.2.1 Many residents, particularly on the South Bank expressed a desire to shop more in Hull

and Beverley, and that the tolls keep them shopping more in Scunthorpe and Grimsbyand at alternatives to Hull, such as Doncaster, Meadowhall, Leeds and Sheffield.

5.2.2 Therefore, toll reduction could be expected to have a significant impact on retail spendingpatterns in the City Region, and we have examined the likely impacts using retailmodelling by Experian.

5.2.3 The modelling indicates that, with toll reduction, South Bank residents take advantage ofbetter access to Hulls stronger retail offer. North Bank residents also choose to shopmore on the South Bank, and benefit from increased retail choice. Toll reduction orelimination would likely increase retail spend in Hull and Beverley, and Grimsby andScunthorpe would likely see modest declines in retail spend immediately following tollreduction. It could be expected that this scale of decline could be countered by a few

years worth of ordinary growth in retail expenditure. Hull would become more accessiblefor occasional shopping, though would still remain far enough away that it would notreplace more routine shopping in Grimsby and Scunthorpe. For more on the modelledretail impacts, please see Appendix 9.

5 .3 En v i r on m e n t a l i m p a c t s5.3.1 Toll reduction would be expected to impact on travel patterns and, therefore, on distances

travelled and related carbon emissions.

5.3.2 On the one hand, toll reduction is likely to encourage increased use of the Bridge andgenerate additional journeys. It may also reduce bus use and ride-sharing, whichcurrently keeps carbon emissions down.

5.3.3 However, on the other hand, increased journeys across the Bridge may replace other journeys that are longer in distance for example, shopping trips from Scunthorpe toMeadowhall are likely to be replaced by shorter trips to Hull. Also, drivers (including HGVdrivers) that currently divert around the Bridge via Goole because of the toll wouldshorten their journeys by using the Bridge.

5 .4 Tr a n sp o r t i m p a c t s5.4.1 Without a transport model, for this research, we are unable to draw precise conclusions

about how travel and transport patterns are likely to change with changes in toll.However, a recent study by Faber Maunsell gives an indication of the likely changes inBridge traffic as a result of toll changes. Toll reduction was found to increase Bridgetraffic, mainly from cars and small vehicles. However, the increase in traffic at a reducedtoll was not enough to make total toll collection the same as the current scenario.

5.4.2 In terms of public transport, bus service across the Bridge is of key concern because theservice (currently around 1-2 buses per hour between Hull and either Scunthorpe orGrimsby) is not frequent enough for commuters or hospital visits, and many users find itinconvenient. Would toll reduction (including for buses) reduce fares, increase ridership,and increase the frequency of services?

5.4.3 Discussions with the two bus providers Stagecoach and EYMS suggest this isunlikely. Bus tolls were reduced to 8 in the last toll increase, and therefore represent asmall share of their operating cost. Both operators suggest that further toll reduction isunlikely to change their fares significantly, and they believe it would take quite a

significant shift in fares to increase demand. Also, many passengers are using


38/42

35


concessionary bus passes, so their demand is insensitive to fare change, and otherpassengers only use the bus across the Humber because the tolls are so high if tollsare lowered, more of these passengers may be able to afford to drive their cars.

5 .5 His to r i ca l /psycho log ica l ba r r i e r 5.5.1 While the tolls serve as a barrier to movement across the Humber, it is also clear that

there are deep set historical and psychological barriers between the North and SouthBanks for some residents. Although many residents expressed that they have to travel tothe opposite bank frequently for work, leisure, or to visit family and friends, othersexpressed a sort of rivalry between the banks and an animosity toward the other side.Although it is hard to put a finger on exactly the scale of this barrier, this does seem to bean issue dividing the City Region and worthy of consideration.

5.5.2 Although the Bridge tolls themselves are likely to only play a small role in this historic

barrier, it seems that they feed into this issue by limiting residents experiences on theopposite bank. The animosity seems greatest among residents that spend little time onthe opposite bank, and it seems likely that increased shared experienced across theHumber can, over time, help to ease some of the historical and mental barrier that exists.

The toll barrier is not just a physical one it is a mental one too - one considerswhether it is worth spending the money to go over to Hull or whether to stay andshop locally - this must also be the point being considered by folk over in Hull andsurrounding areas. We should be sharing our lovely towns and countryside - notdividing them! South Bank resident


39/42

36


6 U K -w i d e I m p a c t s

6.1.1 The key assessment in this study has been looking at impacts of toll reduction on the Hulland Humber Ports City Region. However, there are also reasons to believe that theseimprovements would also be good economic development strategy for the UK as awhole.

6 .2 Removing economic ba r r i e r s i s a promis ing reg iona li n v e s t m e n t

6.2.1 Addressing the regional economic imbalance is a UK priority, and the Hull and HumberPorts City Region is a crucial economic area in the priority region Yorkshire and theHumber. Enhancing local economic performance here and bringing it up to a national

standard is a priority.6.2.2 Although many forms of city-regional investments will be funded to improve the city-

regional economy, removing existing barriers to economic development, once identified,is often a simple and successful strategy to helping a city-region to operate at itseconomic best.

6.2.3 Toll reduction may require an implicit investment by the UK government; compared toother regional and city-regional level interventions, this may offer exceptional promise ofdelivering local economic development benefits. Removing key barriers to economicgrowth helps the Hull and Humber Ports City-region make the most of its strengths andopportunities and operate at its most competitive level.

6 .3 St r a t e g i c p o r t e n h a n c e m e n t

6.3.1 Toll reduction offers particular benefit to port and distribution industries in and around theCity Region, which has important strategic effects for the UK as a whole.

6.3.2 Tolls on the Bridge not only provide an immediate operational cost to these industries, butthey also impact on their competitiveness. Prime locations for port and distributionactivity on the South Bank have difficulty filling jobs, because of limited interest from theNorth Bank resulting from tolls. Furthermore, connectivity between these industries andcomplimentary service activities on the North Bank are limited.

6.3.3 Businesses expressed that location decisions are often impacted by the tolls, and there issome evidence to suggest that distribution centres have been choosing other locations,at least in part because of the toll expense.

6.3.4 The Hull and Humber Ports are a strategic centre of distribution for the UK, andstrengthening the offer here is good for UK competitiveness. Enhanced Hull and HumberPorts can provide alleviation from congestion at ports in the South East, and runninglorries across the UK from the Humber Ports, rather than the South East coast, relievesroad congestion in the South East. This also is more competitive as much more of theUK can be accessed from Hull within the four hours drive time directive than can beaccessed from the South East coast. Furthermore, less expensive land and labour in theCity Region makes it a more attractive and internationally-competitive port location.


40/42

37


7 Sum m ar y and Find ings

7 .1 I m p a c t s u m m a r y7.1.1 A reduction in tolls on the Humber Bridge is found to provide significant economic and

social benefits for the Hull and Humber Ports City Region. Furthermore, these benefitsoffer good strategic benefits for the UK. As the region is targeted for UK investment andpublic subsidisation to bring the city-regional (and regional) economy up to nationalstandards, toll reduction seems a logical target for such investment, given the benefitsmodelled. The benefits of toll reduction offer good return to economic developmentinvestment. Furthermore, benefit to the Hull and Humber Ports provides further strategicbenefits to UK competitiveness.

7 .2 Key f ind ings :

With the natural north-south divide across the Hull and Humber Ports City Region,the Humber Bridge plays a crucial role in facilitating the kinds of synergies acrossthe area that make city regions competitive. The Bridge allows movement ofemployees, goods, knowledge and information providing a deeper pool ofresources from which the City Region can draw.

Reducing the toll to 1 per car crossing results in 10.5m in agglomeration benefitplus 11.2 million in toll revenue going back to residents within the City Region, allin 2009.

Toll elimination creates 21.3m in additional output, plus 18.1m in toll moneyreturning to local residents in 2009.

Over the projected life of the tolls, the benefits in either scenario amount to 300-500 million (see Table 7.1 ).


41/42

38


Table 7.1: Results Economic impacts of toll reduction/elimination, inmillions, 2008 prices, undiscounted

1 toll no tollDirect + induced

agglomeration benefit10.5 21.3


11.2 18.1 2 0 0 9


Direct + inducedagglomeration benefit

263.9 598.4

Toll money redistributed tothe City Region 315.8 509.9

2 0 0 9

- 2 0 3 2

( u n

d i s

c o u n

t e d )


The output benefits accrue particularly to targeted city-regional sectors: distributionindustries and high-end services.

There are also significant social benefits in key areas:- Health travel

- Improving opportunities for some long-term unemployed- Increasing opportunities for continuing education- Increasing social and leisure opportunities

In the immediate term, a strategy should be developed to clarify and simplify theprocess for toll reimbursement for patients that are eligible.

With toll reduction, the entire City Region benefits from access to increased retailchoice, but while retail spend would likely increase in Hull and Beverley, retailexpenditure in Scunthorpe and Grimsby would likely decline.

Instead of these benefits, continuing the tolls as at present would continue toconstrain the city-regional economy.


42/42

londonBrIsTolcArdIffedInBurgHglAsgowmAncHesTernewBuryBelfAsTduBlIngAlwAycHInAmAdrId

humber bridge tolls impact assessment

Documents