2.Impact of the First Local Transport Plans

Overview

2.1This chapter sets out the LTP achievements and impacts. It looks at the difference implementing the LTP has made against the plan’s original aims and objectives. What worked well and indeed less well are highlighted, as are the foundations we have put in place for the Joint Local Transport Plan.

What difference has the first LTP made?

2.2Our area is a safer and easier place to get around as a result of the LTP.

2.3Whether it is delivering 12% growth in bus patronage on the A38 showcase corridor or the very popular A4 Portway park and ride or the 10% cut in traffic in the central area of Bristol or the 40% increase in people cycling or our High Occupancy Vehicle lanes making journeys 21% quicker [S1]for car sharers and taking 1,000 cars a day off the A4174, the LTP has provided the focus and the foundation for turning our aspirations into reality.

2.4We have met our objectives (go to Table 2.2) and tackled the problems of congestion, traffic growth at up to three times national levels, massive growth in housing and rural accessibility outlined in Chapter 1.

2.5More local impacts have been keenly felt by residents. Dedicated School Travel Plan officers developing School Travel Plans have led to reductions in traffic at peak times, reducing congestion and easing parking problems. Then there are the additional benefits of making the surrounding roads safer for children walking or cycling to school.

2.6Community transport has been revolutionised with a fast developing network of services and record numbers of passengers carried. Without these services many residents would not be able to make the journeys they do. Shopping trips, health trips or simply trips to see friends are now much easier and especially for the elderly and less mobile.

2.7Accident levels, particularly for children killed and seriously injured, have fallen to their lowest levels since 1996. The roads too have improved. More funding for maintenance has cut the backlog for parts of the network.

2.8We have established a set of transport user priorities. This helps us to target investment, reallocate road space and ensure good design in new developments for our priority modes of transport. Pedestrians, cyclists, public transport and disabled people come at the top of our list with the single occupant private car user towards the bottom.

2.9The LTP has provided the impetus to work alongside other areas of policy, planning and implementation. This has enabled the delivery of large-scale projects that impact not only on transport but on areas such as improving the town centre environment and stimulating economic regeneration. Pooling resources has meant substantial projects can be implemented to a greater combined impact than just transport schemes alone. Schemes such as the new bus and coach station, £500m regeneration of the Broadmead shopping centre and redevelopment of Harbourside and Queen Square in Bristol, Big Lamp Corner in Weston-super-Mare, Kingswood Town Centre and Walcot Street in Bath have all delivered greatly enhanced local environments and stimulated local business.

2.10Co-ordination and working closely with the bus industry has led to improved service provision, investment in staff, new low emission, and easy access buses. Costing £13.5m, 116 new buses are on the streets in Bath greatly improving reliability and service frequencies and raising bus patronage.

2.11Without the LTP traffic levels would have grown unchecked. Cycle use would have stayed static at best. Bus passengers would not have grown by a million. Accidents would have still fallen due to our long track record in road safety but at a slower rate. The road maintenance backlog would have taken longer to tackle. People are healthier. The percentage of residents taking exercise, walking/cycling, five times a week has increased by 30% over the LTP (Bristol Quality of Life Survey, 2005). In short the LTP has made a difference.

What are the key achievements of the first LTP?

2.12The achievements of the LTP can be summarised as:

  • Innovation
  • Integration
  • Investment
  • Delivery
  • Meeting Targets

Innovation

2.13Whilst our LTP had a strong focus on tried and tested, value for money schemes we have had to be equally innovative in our approach in tackling our congestion, traffic growth and accessibility problems. Innovation has been encouraged throughout the LTP introducing a Freight Consolidation Centre, hospital serving park and ride, High Occupancy Vehicle Lanes, , ferries, taxi sharing, the first purpose built Cycle Resource Centre in the UK, electric pool cars for staff, Clear Zone trailblazer and the now nationally adopted ‘Walk on Wednesdays’ school travel initiative. We have tackled problems and issues rather than simply focusing on trying to implement schemes.

2.14Our LTP presided over the shift from ‘output’ to ‘outcome’ targets. We met this challenge developing and refining our approaches and targets. In 2003 for example South Gloucestershire was faced with more than 50 local targets, many based around scheme numbers. An extensive public consultation exercise trimmed these back to 31 enhanced outcome based targets.

2.15North Somerset Council’s cycling targets were adjusted in 2004. The LTP set a number of targets (including output ones) for the LTP period and up to 2012 for each of the main towns in the district. In 2004 the Council adjusted this by setting a single target for the whole district and dropping the output targets.

Integration

2.16We have worked at every level, internally and externally, locally, regionally, nationally and internationally to integrate the LTP into the wider picture. We have built on the relationship between transport demand and land-use planning in our Local Plans and emerging Local Development Frameworks.

2.17We have worked with statutory and voluntary service providers to deliver our Community Strategies’ transport objectives (go to Chapter 3). Our Quality of Life indicators for improving transport and accessibility are being met through the Bristol Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy, Weston Vision, the Mendip and Cotswolds Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty management plans, the Forest of Avon Plan, Primary Care Trusts action plans, Crime and Disorder Partnerships and Active for Life initiatives.

2.18Internally we have set up new structures to deal with the changing transport environment integrating social services, education and public transport. Across the South West we have linked into the Regional Spatial Strategy and helped steer its Transport Strategy. Nationally and internationally we have taken part in the VIVALDI (Visionary and Visible Actions through Local Transport Demonstration Initiatives) clean urban transport strategies and the PRoGRESS (Priority Road Use for Greater Responsibilities, Efficiency and Sustainability in Cities) urban transport pricing schemes projects.

1

1

Investment

2.19We have invested heavily in our LTP. Not just with LTP integrated transport allocation but also with our own capital and revenue resources. We have also attracted over £40m of external investment from Government, European and private sector funds and bids. Table 2.1 lists the range of successful funding.

Table 2.1: Successful Transport Funding outside of the LTP / Funding £m
European Projects (Vivaldi, Progress) / £2.7m
South West Regional Development Agency / £5m
Department of Environment Food and Rural Affairs / £0.6m
Objective 2, Single Regeneration Budget, URBAN / £0.21m
Aggregate Fund Levy / £0.01m
Sustrans / £0.11m
Developer Contributions / £14.1m
New Deal Funding / £0.51m
New Opportunities Fund / £0.25m
Public Service Agreements / £1.7m
Child pedestrian training scheme grants / £0.16m
Child Pedestrian casualty reduction grants / £0.1m
School travel Plan bursaries / £0.28m
Voluntary Travel Plan bursaries / £0.28m
Urban Bus challenge / £1.68m
Rural Bus Challenge / £1.23m
Rural Bus Subsidy Grant / £3.3m
Home Zone Challenge / £0.6m
LTP supplementary bids (including Vivaldi, A4174 Ring Road) / £4.7m
LTP Exceptional Maintenance Bids / £4.72m
Personalised Travel Planning grants / £0.05m
CCTV in Public Car Parks award / £0.25m
TOTAL / £42.34m

2.20Bidding for recycled Supplementary Credit Approval (SCA) has been just as successful. SCA funding for the emergency slope stabilisation work at Hinton Hill, completion of the Rural Bus Interchange Hub programme and resolving roadside hazards caused by dead elms are all good examples of how we can bid for and spend funding efficiently and effectively.

2.21Cultivating partnerships, meeting our joint aspirations and promoting common understanding are all positive outcomes from this investment.

Delivery

2.22Effective delivery of the LTP programme over the last five years has been at the heart of the progress made towards achieving our key aims and objectives. Each year of the plan LTP resources have been fully utilised.

2.23Nearly £75m has been spent on delivering integrated transport schemes over the LTP period. Figure 2.1 shows how we have spent LTP funding on meeting our objectives and Figure 2.2 shows how this has been broken down by mode.

2.24In terms of scheme numbers Figure 2.3 shows just how many schemes have been delivered on the ground.

Meeting Targets

2.25Delivering schemes has helped us deliver on targets. Focussing on outcomes we have delivered on:

Local Bus Patronage increased

  • Bus Patronage up by 12% on routes targeted with LTP investment (compared with decrease nationally).
  • Park and ride patronage up 28% in Bath (local target met) and 21% in Bristol.
  • Community Transport patronage up 316% in South Gloucestershire (local target met), 70% in Bristol, 42% in Bath and North East Somerset and 43% in North Somerset.
  • 6.4% growth in bus patronage in North Somerset in 2003/04 due in part to the introduction of a ‘flat fare’ of £1 on town centre services in partnership with service 7 showcase route investment.

Local Rail use increased

  • The number of passengers using the local rail network up 41%.

Levels of Cycling Increased

  • Cycling up 26% across the Greater Bristol area.

Levels of Walking Increased

  • 14% increase in walking in Bristol as a whole and 24% increase in the City Centre.
  • Pedestrians in North Somerset increased by 22%.
Traffic Levels Reduced
  • Traffic in the Central Area of Bristol cut by 10% (local target met).
  • 1,000 fewer vehicles a day using the A4174 Avon Ring Road.
  • Number of children being driven to school in North Somerset reduced by 6%.
  • Traffic levels in Bath down 11%, Midsomer Norton and Radstock down 1%.

Road Safety Improved

  • Lowest ever children killed and seriously injured figures in South Gloucestershire.
  • North Somerset target to reduce children killed and seriously injured on track.
  • Killed and seriously injured figures reduced by 28% 2004 to 2005 in North Somerset.

Have the Key Aims and Objectives of the LTP Been Achieved?

2.26As discussed we have made substantial improvements in the LTP period. The objectives of the LTP were closely linked with the policy aims of the Government’s 1998 White Paper. Broadly each of us has followed the same objectives. Below Table 2.2 sets out our collective objectives with a short statement on progress and how the objective has been achieved. The focus is on good performance, targets met and successful schemes delivered. Figure 2.3 illustrates where some of the schemes are and summarises our achievements.

Table 2.2: Key Aims and Objectives
LTP Objective / Achievement/Progress
To improve the local air quality / Improved air quality is an outcome from reducing congestion, enhancing public transport and encouraging sustainable and behavioural change. Success in all areas has meant:
  • South Gloucestershire local target to reduce the number of ‘Poor Air Quality’ days when air pollution exceeds National Air Quality Standards has been met. Down from 81 days in 2000/01 to 13 in 2005/06.
  • Kingswood Town Centre scheme (go to Ch 5 Wider Impacts) continues to show a drop in Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) levels compared to before the scheme went in.
  • North Somerset met its local air quality targets for Banwell with Benzene and NO2 both below the capping target levels of 16.25 and 40 ug/m3 respectively.
  • Bristol’s Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) adopted. Progress made in retrofitting cleaner exhaust emissions technology to the older part of the bus fleet.
  • Bristol through its Centre of Excellence status organised a Best Practice seminar on air quality. Now an annual event.
  • Bath’s Air Quality Action Plan for the A4 London Road has been adopted.
  • Local targets for Benzene, NO2, PM10 and National Air Quality Standards all on track in Bath and North East Somerset.
  • 116 new easy access, low emission buses introduced in Bath by First.
  • Bath participated in the DTI Foresight programme for Clearzones (trail blazer in 2001).
  • NO2 levels in Bristoldown on 2000/01 baseline.
LINK For more on air quality go to Table 5.3.
To reduce the growth of road traffic and need to travel, develop and implement travel plans and reduce car journeys to school / Travel Plans
We have targeted resources at working with employers on travel plans for existing and new developments. This helps to reduce overall travel and impact upon single occupancy car use. Achievements include:
  • Working with Weston General Hospital, North Somerset Primary Care Trust, Royal United and St Martins Hospitals in Bath, Wessex Water, Bath University, Ministry of Defence, Orange, Rolls Royce and Weston College on their Travel Plans.
  • Close working with Bristol International Airport (BIA) on their surface access strategy - of increasing importance in the light of the BIA’s intention to expand substantially following the 2003 Air Transport White Paper.
  • Innovative schemes such as the car share multi occupancy parking bays in Bath and penalty based targets.
  • Active Green Commuter Clubs and Travel Forums.
  • Eye catching and successful campaigns such as ‘Jam Busting June.’
  • Avonwide Travel Award scheme - nine of the recent winners achieved 7% or more reductions in single car occupancy.

School Travel Plans

School travel plans are starting to make a real impact.
  • School trips by car in South Gloucestershire fallen from 39% in 2000/01 to 33% in 2005/06. 90 schools now have School Travel Plans and 60 safer routes to school schemes implemented.41 schools have been successful in reaching the required standard to be awarded the Government Capital Grant.
  • 63% of pupils in Bath and North East Somerset are now covered by School Travel Plans. This has reduced car travel by 2% and increased the number of children walking to school by 6%.
  • Travel to school by non car modes in Bath and North East Somerset has risen from 52% in 2002 to 59% in 2005. 69% of schools now have School Travel Plans.
  • In North Somerset 41% of pupils now travel to school by car compared to 47% in 2003. 75% of all schools now have School Travel Plans.
  • In Bristol, cycling to secondary schools increased towards the end of the LTP after an initial fall.

Car Sharing and HOV lanes

Car-sharing has been encouraged through the joint promotion of the car sharing database , now with over 4,000 members, and by implementing the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on the A4174 and A370 (go to Box 2B). For North Somerset this has also helped the Council meet its local target of limiting car growth to less than 3% per annum.

Traffic Growth and Congestion

In the central area of Bristol traffic levels have been cut by an impressive 10% (local target met).
In South Gloucestershire it is encouraging that the growth of road traffic is continuing to reduce where:
  • Over the LTP period traffic growth was 7% in line with the published trajectory.
  • Annual mode share surveys showing fewer car journeys to work when compared to 2001/02.
  • Cycling and walking to work has doubled over the LTP period.
  • Proportion of commuters car sharing has risen from 8.8% in 2000/01 to 13.1% in 2005/06.
  • % of visitors to town centres using non car modes has risen from 32.8% to 37.4% over the same period.
In Bath and North East Somerset:
  • 11% fall in traffic levels in central Bath.
  • 1% falls in Midsomer Norton and Radstock.
  • 2 to 3% falls across most key corridors.
  • Phased introduction of Urban Traffic Management Control improved traffic flows in Bath providing new bus priority measures and pedestrian crossings.

Parking

Decriminalisation of parking in Bath and Bristol has led to improved enforcement and movement of traffic. Buses have benefited from better access to bus stops. Residents’ parking zones in Bath, on street pay and display and increased park and ride provision have reduced the number of commuter journeys in the City.
Parking standards have been applied to new developments particularly in the central areas helping to reduce car use for commuting.
As a result of all these initiatives commuters are increasingly using more sustainable alternatives in their journey to work.
LINK For more on travel plans go to Table 5.5.
To reduce road accidents for all road users (especially children, cyclists, pedestrians and mobility impaired) / Considerable resources have been invested through the LTP in addressing road safety.
There is, however, concern over the data. There is evidence that base data for 1994-98 significantly under-recorded injury accidents, and for the period 2002-04 new police guidance on data recording meant that a number of slight injuries were inconsistently reported as serious. Together these two factors have masked improvement in performance.
Nonetheless results include:
  • The number of children Killed and Seriously Injured (KSI) in South Gloucestershire has fallen by 68% (from 19 in 2001 to 6 in 2005). This is the lowest level ever recorded in South Gloucestershire and means the 2010 target has been met six years ahead of time.
  • North Somerset’s target to reduce child KSI accidents is on track and there have been no child fatalities since July 2001. This is due to the large amount of resources deployed across the LTP, and justifies the strong road-safety focus of the LTP implementation programmes.
  • Bath and North East Somerset have exceeded the 2010 target to reduce child KSI.
  • For Bristol progress has been made with child KSI figures. The considerable work on road safety measures and safer routes to school in particular achieving a 17% decrease in Bristol over the five years.
  • KSIs in North Somerset have been reduced from the 1994-98 baseline of 98, down to just 80.
  • In South Gloucestershire there has been a general trend downwards in KSI, with some fluctuations. By 2005 accident numbers were at their lowest ever.
  • For Bristol overall totals for KSI casualties have fluctuated over the plan period, but in 2005 are still at the same level as that of the original and believed to be under recorded 1994-98 baseline.
  • In Bath and North East Somerset the KSI numbers have continued to fall but the 2010 target is not on track.
Examples of successful measures include: