Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 11
2. Enhance the quality of life for all Londoners,
3. Improve the safety and security of all Lon-
doners,
4. Improve transport opportunities for all Lon-
doners,
5. Reduce transport's contribution to climate
change and improve its resilience, and
6. Deliver services for the London 2012
Olympics and secure a lasting legacy.
These priorities have forced TfL to come to terms
with its funding issue with the government. In order
to expand the capacity of its surface transport system,
TfL must aim to achieve and sustain a state of good
repair--for example, the London Underground's
Annual Asset Management Plan, as agreed to by
TfL and contractors operating under public-private
partnerships, sets forth how investments are to be
made. The prioritization process, to a large extent, is
transferred to the public-private partnership con-
tractor. TfL sets the benchmarks for performance,
and the contractors make investments in renewals
and maintenance that will allow them to meet those
benchmarks.
The Nottingham story is one of need bringing
dreams to reality. In 1988 the Nottingham City
Figure 6 KTP list of maintenance upgrades includes Council, along with the Nottingham County Council,
converting catenaries to third-rail power for its realized that drastic transportation changes were
extensive tram system. necessary if the area's economy were to grow and
expand. Faced with an aging transport system, road
congestion, and ever increasing pollution, it was evi-
to third-rail-provided power for operational flexi- dent that something new and of major proportion had
bility and consistency with existing operations (see to be done--and that a huge sum of funds would be
Figure 6). required.
In 1994, the two councils presented their plans to
PRIORITIZING CAPITAL INVESTMENTS the British Parliament. After extensive and lengthy
deliberations in both the House of Commons and the
One would think that priority setting for capi- House of Lords, the Greater Nottingham Light Rapid
tal investment would be intuitive, with priority for Transit Act was passed in 1994. There was still much,
renewal and maintenance assigned to assets that are however, that the two councils had to accomplish
in the worst condition and that have the greatest risk before the tram system could be built.
of operating failure. This is not necessarily the case, Needing a tremendous amount of money to
however, at the transport systems visited by the design and build a system that would solve the major
ITSP team. issues facing the area, the two councils turned to pri-
In London, the priorities set by TfL are, on a vate industry to design, build, and operate a new tram
broad level, defined in the Mayor's Transport Strat- system. They selected Arrow Light Rail to receive
egy. The Transport Strategy establishes six key goals the concession to operate the tram and Arrow Fund-
for improving the city's transport services over the ing as the company to finance the building of the
next 2 decades, as follows: tram. This was done by Arrow Funding securing a
1. Support economic development and popula- private finance initiative (PFI), which was backed by
tion growth, the national government.
11
