Leicestershire Local Transport Plans

       Help with file formats used on this website

S.1 This is the second Local Transport Plan (LTP2) for the County of Leicestershire, covering the period 2006/07 to 2010/11.  It sets out our transport strategy for the county, which is based on a thorough review of transport needs, and details a five year implementation programme.

S.2 We submitted a Provisional LTP2 in July 2005. This was rated ‘promising’ by DfT but there were a number of areas identified where improvements could be made. We have taken the opportunity in the development of the final LTP not only to address these areas, but also to introduce many more improvements to ensure we fully explain what we are doing and why, and to take every opportunity to ensure we use the most cost-effective measures to achieve our objectives.

S.3 This final LTP has also been developed based on the feedback we received on the Provisional LTP, as well as from extensive consultation with our stakeholders and the public.  Since submission of the Provisional LTP we have also progressed work on finalising our accessibility strategy, developing our network management role, and developing a rights of way improvement plan and a transport asset management plan, all of which are reported here. The LTP also includes an updated work programme and revised targets and indicators, based on the 2006/07 settlement and financial planning guidelines for the remaining years.

S.4 Joint working with Leicester City Council is vital, given the strong interdependence between the city and the surrounding county urban area. This Plan, which is comprehensive for Leicestershire, shows how we manage this joint planning and programming.  The Central Leicestershire LTP, which is comprehensive for Leicester, also details the same planning processes and investment programmes for all of urban Central Leicestershire.

S.5 When developing LTP2, we have been heavily influenced by the wider implications of transport and the many interests that depend on the effectiveness of the transport system. Safe, efficient and effective transport is needed to support and strengthen the economy and tackle social deprivation, and can improve the quality of people’s lives in many other ways. We have prepared LTP2 to deliver transport improvements that will support these wider aims of the County Council.

S.6 It is clear that we cannot plan and develop Leicestershire’s improvements in isolation from those around us. Our LTP is therefore set in the context of both national and regional policies, and those of our near neighbours. With respect to national policies, we have particularly sought to deliver the national shared priorities for transport. With respect to our near neighbours, of greatest importance is our partnership with the City Council to help and support them in delivering their vision for the city.

S.7 Within this wider context, LTP2 represents the first five years of a longer-term strategy. We have already made substantial progress during LTP1.  LTP2 builds on the successes achieved so far and the lessons learned on what has worked well and, equally importantly, what has worked not so well.

S.8 The county has very diverse transport needs, ranging from the major urban conurbation of Leicester and Central Leicestershire, through busy county towns to substantial rural areas.  We cannot use computer models to assess the impact of all our proposals across such a wide and varying area. We have, however, used much evidence and analysis throughout the LTP to identify the scale of the transport problems and opportunities in Leicestershire and to be clear on what we can achieve through our proposals. These include:

 Traffic and transport models we have developed and updated for Central Leicestershire, Loughborough and Melton Mowbray

 National and local transport trends and statistics

 Experience from LTP1 in both Leicestershire and Central Leicestershire

 National and local evidence on what best practice has achieved in LTP1

 National and local accident trends and statistics

 Comparisons with other similar authorities.

S.9  Building on this evidence and analysis, we have used our many partnerships and public and stakeholder consultations to guide and inform our proposals.  We will continue to work with our partners to deliver them.

S.10 It is important to be clear about how effective our work is in helping those most in need, and to check that we carried out an equality impact assessment as our proposals developed.  Our impact on the environment is equally important, and we carried out a strategic environmental assessment to ensure that none of our work will have unacceptable environmental effects.

S.11 In developing the LTP we have:

 Set out our vision and longer-term strategy

 Identified six priorities and related objectives for LTP2, to help deliver the vision

 Set the initial aspirational targets for each objective that we would like to achieve, so as to guide the development of our strategies

 Developed the most cost-effective strategies and measures to achieve each objective and to work towards our initial targets

 Identified a range of performance indicators we will use to measure and monitor our performance

 Shown how the delivery of the measures will also improve other aspects of quality of life in Leicestershire communities.

S.12 We then give details of the major schemes we propose to build in LTP2 and set out the most cost-effective balance of spending both within and between our objectives, given the resources available to us. This enables us to see how close we can get to our initial aspirational targets and has informed the setting of targets for a wider range of performance indicators.

S.13 Then we set our targets out in more detail and give trajectories towards them for each of the next five years.  Finally, we explain the management and review systems we have in place for programme and financial control, and describe how we will monitor and manage the risks to delivery of both the programme and our targets.

S.14 Our longer-term transport strategy must ensure that the transport system can meet the many demands placed on it in the future.  It must reflect the aspirations of our stakeholders and particularly our Community Strategy aim of making Leicestershire “a vibrant and thriving county in which to live, work and play, where people have access to quality services and which looks to the future by maximising opportunities for its young people.”

S.15 To support and help deliver this, our aim for transport is “to achieve a transport system for Leicestershire which meets our requirements for access and economic development in a way which seeks continuous improvement in sustainability and people’s quality of life”.

S.16 Our longer-term strategy sets out five objectives to achieve both these aims.  These are to:

 Provide the right transport conditions to help economic growth, through continuing emphasis on managing our existing road system effectively so as to reduce congestion and maximise capacity, with the focus on high technology information and control systems; the use of Smarter Choices to influence driver behaviour; continuing emphasis on developing bus services both as a mean of providing access for all and as an alternative to the car in combating congestion; working with the rail industry to ensure that rail services, local and intercity, play their full part; and working both with the rail industry to maximise the use of rail for freight and with the road freight industry to plan improved HGV access with minimum nuisance

 Improve access to facilities for all, through continued investment in bus services, walking and cycling, as well as effective management of land-use planning decisions which affect the geographical relationship of people’s homes to the facilities they need to access

 Reduce transport’s impact on the environment, through local measures to reduce pollution and traffic nuisance, as well as an increasing contribution to controlling the emission of carbon dioxide

 Keep transport safe, by persisting with and further developing our casualty reduction work over the long-term

 Make sure that our highway assets are properly maintained and renewed for the long-term, by using increasingly sophisticated asset management techniques coupled with sustained and cost-effective investment.

S.17 Guided by our longer-term strategy, we identified the following six objectives and initial targets for our proposals for the next five years:

 Tackling congestion, by increasing the use of public transport, walking and cycling with less growth in car mileage and more effective use of congested roadspace.  The initial target is that congestion as measured by vehicle delays in the morning peak period should be no worse anywhere in Leicestershire in 2010 than it was in 2003

 Improving access to facilities including employment, education, health care and food shopping, particularly where analysis shows the greatest levels of social deprivation.  The initial target is for access times by scheduled public transport to main centres to be better in 2010 than they became in 2004 with the completion of our hourly bus services network

 Reducing road casualties through local safety schemes and speed management activities as well as continuing road safety education, training and publicity campaigns.  The initial target is to reduce the number of people killed and seriously injured on all roads in Leicestershire by 2010 to half the 1994 to 1998 average

 Improving air quality in the traffic-related air quality management areas through action plans and robust monitoring of nitrogen dioxide levels against national target levels.  The initial target is that there should be no local traffic related air quality management areas in Leicestershire by 2010

 Reducing the impact of traffic through local communities, near schools and within town centres by reducing vehicle speeds and in exceptional cases re-routing the traffic.  Our initial target is that, by 2010, there should be no villages or larger communities where a majority of local people think urgent action is necessary to reduce the impact of speeding traffic on the quality of life

 Managing transport assets in the most cost-effective way through robust condition monitoring, timeliness of intervention and economies of scale in repairs and renewal.  The initial target is to remove the maintenance backlog on all footways, carriageways, rights of way, bridges, street lighting columns and traffic signal installations by 2010.

S.18 The strategies and the range of prioritised measures we will use to deliver our objectives are summarised below:

S.19 As the economy grows, people become better off and their need and desire for travel increases.  The road network has a finite capacity and as a result congestion increases, with all that that entails for economic activity and people’s quality of life.  We cannot build our way out of this, but by making the best use of the existing road space, making the alternatives to the car more attractive and taking other steps to influence travel behaviour, we can manage the growing demand for transport and the congestion problems it causes.

S.20 Our longer-term strategy sets out how we need to tackle congestion if the county’s continued economic development is not to be threatened.  There is no single solution and a full range of measures is proposed, working in combination with each other.  The strategy has been developed based on the existing and future congestion problems identified in Leicestershire.  We also identify those measures that we have considered but, for a variety of reasons relating to cost, practicability or value for money, have decided not to take forward in LTP2.

S.21 Based on our strategy testing work, the general approach we will adopt to tackling congestion will involve a package of measures to influence demand so that fewer vehicles attempt to use congested roads.  We will also manage and enhance congested road space to produce more free-flowing traffic.  Improvements to local bus services are key to the strategy and we have fully integrated our bus strategy within this.  Our package of measures to tackle congestion includes:

 Using the land use planning system to influence to need to travel and mode used, and to ensure developers provide the necessary infrastructure to service new developments properly

 Making Smarter Choices work, to influence people’s travel behaviour towards more sustainable options

 Walking and cycle improvements

 Making better use of road space

 Managing demand through parking policies

 Making the most of train services

 More park and ride in Central Leicestershire

 Improving bus performance

 Managing the network to enable traffic to flow more freely.

S.22 We are focusing a substantial part of our capital investment in Central Leicestershire and Loughborough, where congestion is currently worst.  This will provide the best value for money in the short term and provide a firm basis to take our longer-term strategy forward. We have used modelling work in Central Leicestershire, and national best practice, to demonstrate what we expect the impact of some of our proposals will be.

S.23 We demonstrate how we work to deliver our strategy with our partners, including Leicester City Council, district councils, the Highways Agency, public transport operators, schools, businesses, neighbouring authorities and freight operators.

S.24 Our vision for accessibility is “to work with partners to ensure that scarce transport resources are directed to those groups and individuals most likely to suffer from social exclusion and where improving accessibility will be of the greatest benefit to society as a whole”. Our proposals focus on improving access to facilities for those who do not have a car available or who choose not to use a car. We have a two-part strategy for providing this improved access. The first pays particular attention to the needs of people on low incomes, so that we ensure we make targeted improvements for them. Leicestershire is a relatively affluent county but, despite this, there are pockets of deprivation in some of the urban areas. Here, low incomes, and for some people disability as well, cause particular difficulties in gaining access to work, to education, to health facilities and to shops. These difficulties reinforce deprivation and make it harder still for people in these circumstances to improve their position.

S.25 The second part of our strategy is a development of work we have been undertaking over a long period to bring about general improvements to access by public transport, walking and cycling. This helps the many people living across the county who do not have access to a car, particularly those on low incomes, elderly people and teenagers. It also gives improved choice for those who do have a car available and thus contributes to tackling congestion and pollution and improving personal health.  Improvements to local bus services are key to our strategy for improving access to facilities and hence we have fully integrated our bus strategy within the accessibility strategy.

S.26 Our overall strategy is therefore a combination of the general and the specific and includes:

 Accessibility in context - how accessibility supports the wider objectives of our partners and ourselves

 Targeted improvements - our analysis of current accessibility relating to social deprivation, our engagement with partners to assess their concerns, and from that the preparation of priorities for action

 Improving access for all - a description of our continuing work to improve access for all and of our plans for further improvement

 Our accessibility strategy action plan - takes the priorities for action previously described and turns them into a cost-effective specific action plan for the LTP2 period.

S.27 Our package of measures to deliver accessibility shows how we will work with partners to achieve our objective through:

 Bus improvements

 Walking improvements including rights of way

 Reducing the fear of crime

 Cycling improvements.

S.28 The strategy for delivering accessibility demonstrates how we work with our partners, including Leicester City Council, the district councils, PCTs, Job Centre Plus, those involved in the Local Area Agreement, the local education authorities and public transport operators to deliver our proposals.  We demonstrate also the importance we attach to revenue and partner funding which complements our LTP2 capital programme.

S.29 Our strategy reflects the high priority we give to improving road safety in the Leicestershire Community Strategy, our Medium Term Corporate Strategy and our Local Public Service Agreement (PSA) with the Government in which we have successfully achieved a greater reduction in killed and seriously injured road casualties (KSIs) than the national target.

S.30 Our strategy is set in the context of the national strategy and has been informed by the monitoring and review of that strategy. It focuses on tackling the causes of all types and severity of road casualties so that our roads are safer for everyone. The strategy has developed continuously as casualty figures and trends are monitored both in Leicestershire and nationally.  It has also been informed by the progress we have made in LTP1.

S.31 In 2004 we were on track to achieve all our LTP targets, some of which were already more stretching than the Government’s, and in many cases we were well ahead of trajectory. Our most serious child casualties have fallen dramatically. We have performed exceptionally well compared with similar authorities and now have one of the lowest casualty rates per 100,000 population in all categories of casualties where national comparisons can be made.

S.32 Within this overall picture there are however a number of areas of continuing and increasing concern, both nationally and in Leicestershire, which we address in our strategy. Fatal casualties are not falling as much as KSIs, motorcycle KSIs now account for 20% of the total, and rural casualties are not falling at the same rate as urban casualties.

S.33 Our strategy for the next five years has been developed to build on our experience and progress so far and sets out how we will achieve our objective through:

 A safer road environment

 Lower and more appropriate traffic speed

 Improved safety for vulnerable road users

 Improved safety for people in the more disadvantaged communities

 Better driver behaviour and skills.

S.34 The safety strategy shows how we work with our partners, particularly through the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Road Safety Partnership, to deliver our proposals. We explain the increasing importance we attach to our substantial revenue funded education, training and publicity work and the importance of ensuring value for money by monitoring the effectiveness of our measures, by seeking additional resources to supplement our own and by introducing new and innovative techniques.  

S.35 Clean air is an essential ingredient of a good quality of life and air pollution can have a serious effect on people’s health. One of the main sources of air pollution is road traffic, particularly in congested urban areas. Recent reports from Defra show how air quality is predicted to improve generally, but this will not solve all local pollution hot spots known as Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs). Our congestion strategy will help the general improvement in air quality so our air quality strategy focuses on those few areas where the Government’s air quality objectives are not met due, at least in part, to road traffic. The problem in each case is the level of NO2.

S.36 We have carried out extensive work with the district councils, both individually and through our Air Quality Forum, to ensure that our air quality work is focussed on those areas most in need of improvement.  We have also set out to ensure that our proposed actions are challenging but at the same time realistic as to what can be achieved by the range of measures proposed.

S.37 Our strategy sets out:

 How we have reduced from over 20 AQMAs to only three where we now believe NO2 objective levels are currently exceeded. These are in Loughborough, Lutterworth and Kegworth

 Our Air Quality Action Plans (AQAPs) for these areas and our district councils’ support for them and how we propose to deal with the remaining six non-motorway original AQMAs which have not been revoked, but where current measurements show NO2 already below the objective level.

S.38 We show how we have worked with our partners through the Air Quality Forum, and how we aim to achieve best value from our action plans by carrying out the most cost-effective measures. We also have to show that, despite our best efforts, we expect two AQMAs, in Loughborough and Lutterworth, to be still above the NO2 objective level in 2010.

S.39 We have developed our strategy, action plans and monitoring arrangements in close collaboration with all the district councils, as the statutory environmental health authorities, and with Defra. This has enabled us to be confident that we can focus our efforts in from over twenty original AQMAs to the three where it is clear that NO2 objective values are currently exceeded. These three AQMAs are all on A class roads and the action plans reflect the difficulty of seeking significant traffic growth reduction on these strategic routes: we therefore seek improvements across a large range of measures.

S.40 Our strategy recognises that AQMAs where nitrogen dioxide is not currently above the threshold level will still need ongoing monitoring, and that further LTP AQAPs may need to be introduced with the first or subsequent LTP2 progress reports.

S.41 Problems caused by traffic are a major source of concern for Leicestershire people, as has been made repeatedly clear in many consultations. Despite a vigorous programme of work during LTP1 there remain over 300 locations in the county where residents have requested action to reduce the impact of traffic. Although vehicles may become quieter and less polluting, and the rigorous application of Smarter Choices can provide some relief, the problems traffic creates for local communities will remain, seriously affecting the quality of life in those communities.

S.42 This local priority, therefore, builds on our successful programme of speed reduction work carried out throughout LTP1. Our package of measures for LTP2 show how we will achieve our objective through:

 Schemes which reduce inappropriate traffic speeds, using a variety of techniques but with a particular emphasis on entry treatments and vehicle activated signs

 The further introduction of Home Zones with new development

 Following the recent completion of our heavy lorry route network, further work to minimise the impact of lorries on communities they must still travel through

 In exceptional circumstances, the provision of bypasses.

S.43 The strategy requires co-operative working with a range of partners, including Leicester City Council, the district councils, the Highways Agency, neighbouring authorities, freight operators, public transport operators, schools, businesses and Sustrans.  In a number of instances, partner funding contributes significantly to the success of the programme, including significant funding from developers.  As with all our other investments, we ensure best value by monitoring the effectiveness of our measures, seeking additional resources to supplement our own, and introducing new and innovative techniques.  

S.44 Our strategy for the maintenance and renewal of carriageways, footways and highway structures aims to meet the day to day requirements of all current users of the assets as well as safeguarding the long term physical integrity of assets for future users in a way which minimises whole-life costs. Defects can undermine the effectiveness of the alternatives to car travel and emergency repairs to poorly maintained roads or structures, or poor planning of routine repairs, can contribute significantly to worsening traffic congestion.

S.45 This work has benefited from increased DfT funding during LTP1.  For LTP2 we have adopted a broader, more strategic approach in conjunction with the development of our Transport Asset Management Plan (TAMP).

S.46 Our TAMP sets out:

 How we work with our partners to share best practice

 How we use appropriate management systems to manage and improve our assets

 How we work with other stakeholders and communicate with our customers

 How we use condition-based information systems for maintenance and renewal to minimise whole-life costing

 How we are continuing to improve our procurement processes to increase our efficiency and effectiveness

 How our programmes for LTP2 will continue the steady improvement in condition we achieved in LTP1.

S.47 We have developed a prioritised implementation programme, based on the final funding allocation for 2006/07 and planning guidelines for future years.  This is designed to have the maximum impact on objectives, performance indicators and targets by the best combination of those measures into work programmes.  This work is done at two levels:

 At the more detailed level, by identifying what priority should be given to each measure within the set of measures for each objective if we are to be as effective as possible in meeting that objective within any given funding level

 At the higher level, identifying what relative level of spending we need to give to each of the objectives if we are to come as close as possible to meeting our initial aspirational targets.

S.48 We have done this in an iterative process and in doing so we have had to make choices, because the resources available to us are not sufficient to allow us to meet all our initial targets.  

S.49 Against our initial targets, the analysis leads us to conclude:

 Reducing congestion: We will not be able to prevent congestion getting worse without spending far more than we have available.  We can check its growth, however, and have set targets to so do in Central Leicestershire (with Leicester City), and in Loughborough

 Improving access to facilities: We can secure a marginal improvement in access times by public transport to main centres, but the percentages of people within given access times are already very high and it would not be value for money to seek significant improvement

 Road reducing casualties: We do not believe we can quite reach a 50% reduction in killed and seriously injured casualties but we can come close to it and will bring about an improvement above the Government’s national 40% target

 Improving air quality: We believe we can meet the target everywhere except in central Loughborough, where we need the major scheme to secure the necessary reduction, and in Lutterworth

 Reducing the impact of traffic: The initial target was highly aspirational and we do not believe we can justify spending a high proportion of available funds in attempting to meet it.  We will instead target a continued rolling out of individual schemes for local communities using a revised approach with increased emphasis on behavioural measures

 Managing transport assets: We are optimistic that we can bring most of our assets to a ‘steady state’ condition, and so meet our initial aspirational target, by the end of the LTP2 period.  Some caution is necessary, however, as our condition information is not yet fully comprehensive, and we have a particular concern over the longer-term replacement requirement for our street lighting columns.

S.50 Whilst it is not surprising that we cannot fully meet our initial aspirational targets, we will nevertheless be able to make substantial progress in meeting our objectives over the next five years.

S.51 To achieve this we plan to spend in our prioritised capital programme about:

 £15m to tackle congestion and improve air quality

 £6m to improve access to facilities

 £7m to reduce road casualties

 £2m to reduce the impact of traffic

 £53m on managing transport assets.

S.52 Of this total, about £11m will be spent on linked programmes with Leicester City Council to tackle congestion and improve access in Central Leicestershire, and there will be substantial further expenditure in Central Leicestershire on programmes which do not need to be linked directly.  We also plan to spend approximately £5m of the Council’s own capital resources over the five year period as well as approximately £23m a year of the County Council’s revenue funds.

S.53 Our park and ride scheme will cost well over the £5m threshold for ‘major’ schemes but we will fund it from LTP block funds, on a 50/50 basis with Leicester City Council, so as to ensure that we can deliver this vital contribution to reducing congestion in Central Leicestershire as soon as possible.

S.54 Two other improvements will make similarly important contributions but, because of their cost, can only be afforded if separately funded by Government as major schemes.  The first is Earl Shilton Bypass, which will transform the town centre environment and greatly improve road safety.  We have submitted a separate bid for this, it has been prioritised for an early start of works in the regional prioritisation process, and we await the Government’s decision on funding.  The second is the Loughborough town centre transport scheme.  This will contribute greatly to town centre regeneration as well as removing the local air quality problem, helping to improve bus facilities and reducing road accident casualties.  It too has been prioritised in the regional process for an early start and we will submit a major scheme bid for it in 2006.

S.55 We have identified a number of performance indicators for each of our objectives and set targets for them, to help us to monitor, manage and review our performance.  Where possible we have used indicators that directly measure progress towards the objective.  To supplement these we have also used intermediate outcome indicators to measure the outcomes of individual measures within each objective and we have also used a small number of contributory output indicators that measure how much of a particular activity has taken place.  We have tried to ensure that all our targets are realistic but challenging and have taken account of:

 The final planning guidelines and how we have distributed funds between the measures

 The evidence and analysis carried out in developing the LTP, including progress we were able to make during LTP1 where we have comparable performance indicators in LTP2

 The conclusions we drew with respect to the realism of our initial aspirational targets

 Comparative analysis with other counties

 Government criteria for the minimum level of target to be considered either satisfactory or stretching with respect to some indicators.

S.56 There are always risks involved in the timely delivery of our scheme programmes and the progress we are able to make towards our targets, particularly if circumstances change over the next five years.  We have learned from our experiences during LTP1 to develop comprehensive systems to manage these risks so that we can take corrective action at the earliest opportunity.

S.57 The LTP is completed by a series of appendices, including a full statement of our extensive consultation and the full bus strategy.  Overall, the LTP lays out the full process of developing and defining our transport plans for the next five years, starting by assessing what is demanded of the transport system and working through a careful assessment of available measures to the definition of a complete integrated programme.  

S.58 This programme is designed to meet a series of challenging targets.  We have already demonstrated in the first LTP period our ability to work effectively with partners to this end.  Now, in the second LTP, we have improved further our partnership working, our strategies and our performance management systems.  With these, and the resources and expertise we have made available, we believe we can meet fully the challenge that our new targets present.