3. problems and opportunities - west of england · 27 3. problems and opportunities 3.1...

27

3. Problems and Opportunities

3.1 Introduction3.1.1 The JLTP area faces significant transport

problems but also presents opportunities.Focusing on the four Shared Priorities ofcongestion, accessibility, road safety andair quality plus quality of life (go toBox 2C) this chapter identifies the keyareas of concern, the extent of theproblems, their causes, and their impact.It also looks at the opportunities forchange and links to development growth.

3.1.2 The four Shared Priorities are closelylinked to one another. Tackling oneShared Priority will have benefits for theother three as Table 3.1 shows.Congestion is the key Shared Priority inthis respect.

3.1.3 In assessing existing and new problemsand opportunities we have been able todraw on a considerable base of evidence.The main sources of evidence arehighlighted in Box 3A.


Links4Developing Strategy (Ch4)4Congestion (Ch 5)4Accessibility (Ch 6)4Road Safety (Ch 7)4Air Quality (Ch 8)4Asset Management (Ch 9)

Summary• Congestion – journey time unreliability

• Accessibility – gaps in transport network

• Safety – targets to reduce killed andseriously injured casualty figures not ontrack

• Air Quality – over 100,000 people living inAir Quality Management Areas

• Regional and Sub-Regional Issues –infrastructure deficit

• Housing and economic growth – highlevels and major new areas

• Asset management – maintainingtransport infrastructure

Table 3.1 - Links between Shared Priorities

Impact on Other Shared Priorities

Shared Priority Congestion Accessibility Road Safety Air Quality

Congestion 44 4 44

Accessibility 44 4 4

Road Safety 4 4 4

Air Quality 44 4 4

44 Major impact 4 Moderate impact

Congestion on the A38

28

Final Joint Local Transport Plan 2006/07 - 2010/11


3.2 Congestion Extent of Congestion3.2.1 Overall, the volume of traffic on the JLTP

area’s roads has grown by 21% over thelast ten years as can be seen in Table 3.2.This is faster than the national average. Insome areas, such as the North Fringe,where there has been large-scale growthin employment, traffic levels have grownas high as 30% (go to Figure 3.1).

3.2.2 Congestion is a major issue in the JLTParea, highlighted by GBSTS opinion

Congestion on M32

Box 3A Summary of Evidence BaseWork carried out previously as Range of surveys and studies; monitoring in Annual Progresspart of the first round of LTPs Reports; Best Value monitoring; air quality monitoring.

Issues identified by the Review of Regional Transport Strategy; draft Regional Regional Assembly Spatial Strategy.

Input from the Greater Bristol Includes South West Area Multi-Modal Study; Bristol/ Strategic Transport Study, other Bath to South Coast Study; Bristol Integrated Transportstudies and models and Environmental Study; Bristol Area Traffic Survey,

Bath Multi-Modal Model; North Somerset Traffic Model; personal travel surveys; travel plan surveys; interchange audits; traffic counts; parking audits, Accession mapping.

Development trend data Census 2001; housing and employment land surveys; from review/ monitoring of shopping surveys.Structure Plan/ Local Plans

Feedback from partners, Consultation on Provisional and Final JLTP (go to Box 4A); stakeholders and the public Best Value surveys; Citizens’ panels.

Summary• Traffic congestion and journey time

unreliability make Bristol one of the mostcongested cities in Britain

• Lost time due to congestion is costing atleast £350m a year to the local economy

• In Bristol, 21% of travelling time at peakperiods is spent stationary

• Buses are badly affected by trafficcongestion, affecting reliability

• Road and rail local networks areinsufficiently developed to carry thecurrent growth of traffic

• 50% of motorway traffic in the peakperiods has both its origin and destinationwithin the area (local traffic) causingadded congestion at motorway junctions

• Congestion and journey time delays affectrural communities as well as urban areas

• Opportunities – provide alternatives,influence travel behaviour and managedemand

29



surveys and feedback from stakeholdersand the public. If levels of traffic continueto grow at their present rate thencongestion will become increasinglyworse. This is partly for structural reasonswith increased demand for road capacityand partly because of the adverse effectof incidents on the highway network.Congestion also continues to be aproblem on the local rail network.

3.2.3 Figure 3.2 identifies main areas of roadcongestion, focusing on central Bristol, theNorth Fringe and Bath and the radial andorbital corridors that serve them. GBSTSalso identifies peak period congestion andsummer peak congestion at key locationson the strategic road network,highlighting particular hotspots atmotorway junctions. There are alsolocalised problems where through trafficaffects villages.

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

Traf

fic

volu

me

(In

dex

1994

=100

)

National

North Fringe

Figure 3.1 - Traffic Growth in the North Fringe of Bristol

Table 3.2: Traffic Growth

Distance Travelled on the JLTP Area’s Roads 1994 to 2004(billion vehicle km per year) % change

1994 2004

JLTP area 7.5 9.1 +21%

Great Britain 421.5 498.6 +18%

Source: DfT National Road Traffic Survey.

Source: DfT National Road Traffic Survey and local surveys

30


3.2.4 Whilst congestion continues to get worse,the 2001 Census highlights that in theJLTP area 21% of journeys to work areunder 2km (potential walking distance) ofwhich 45% are made by car. 22% ofjourneys to work are between 2km and5km (potential cycling distance) with 68%by car. This problem is particularly acute inthe North Fringe of Bristol.

3.2.5 Data from GBSTS underscores thechallenge for the JLTP. In the period to2016, car use is forecast to grow and bususe to remain virtually unchanged despitepatronage growth in the LTP1 period. If noadditional action is taken to tacklecongestion, delays will grow (go toTable 3.3).

Causes of Congestion3.2.6 There are a number of underlying factors

causing increasing congestion in the JLTParea:

• Unattractive and expensive publictransport.

• Growing usage of cars relative to otherforms of travel.

• Land use and development changes.

• Road and rail infrastructureconstraints.

• Availability of free workplace andretail parking.

3.2.7 The 2001 Census shows that carownership in the JLTP area is higher thanthe average for England and Wales (Table3.4). Ownership rates are lower in Bristoland Bath & North East Somerset thanNorth Somerset and SouthGloucestershire, partly reflectingdifferences in urban and rural areas. Thisis highlighted by examining areas ofdeprivation within Bristol where carownership is particularly low.


BRISTOL

Bath

Yate

Kingswood

Keynsham

Saltford

Thornbury

M5

M48

M4

M4

M49

M5

A38

A38

A370

A37 A39

A4

A420

A46

A369

Winterbourne/FramptonCotterell

ChippingSodbury

NorthFringe

CribbsCausewayAvonmouth/

Severnside

Weston super Mare

Portishead

Clevedon

Nailsea

Yatton BackwellSouth Bristol

NortonRadstock

SOUTHGLOUCESTERSHIRE

BATH AND NORTHEAST SOMERSET

NORTH SOMERSET

SOMERSET

WILTSHIRE

GLOUCESTERSHIRE

Severn

Estuary

Motorway and Interchange

Main road

Railway line and station

Local Authority boundary

Links over 85% capacity - in 2003 AM peak period

N0 5km

Figure 3.2 - Congestion in the Joint Local Transport Plan Area

© Crown Copyright. All rights reserved. Bristol City Council. Licence No. 100023406 2006

31

3.2.8 It is not the growing car ownership itselfthat is the most significant problem facedin our area but the growing patterns ofcar use for work, leisure and shoppingtrips.

3.2.9 The 2002/3 National Travel Survey (NTS)shows that every year each person makesan average of about 1,000 trips andtravels over 6,800 miles. In large citiessuch as Bristol the average distancetravelled is about 6,000 miles but thisrises to over 8,000 miles for small townsand rural areas. Key national facts andfigures are:

• Each person made an average of 1,000trips each year;

• On average 640 of these trips (64%)are made by car and have an averagetrip length of 8.6 to 9.0 miles and takean average of 21-22 minutes;

• 50%+ of these car trips are less than5 miles;

• Each person made an average of just14 trips a year by bicycle;

• Cycle average trip length was 2.3miles, taking 20 minutes; and

• Bus average trip length was 4.5 miles,taking 31 minutes.



Table 3.3 - Transport Trends: GBSTS Morning Peak Final Tests Mode Base 2011 Do % 2016 Do %

(2003) Minimum Change Minimum* Change(estimated) from from

Base Base

All person trips:• by car 154,730 170,043 +9.9 175,251 +13.3

• by bus 13,607 13,613 0 13,653 +0.3

• by rail 4,424 4,615 +4.3 4,837 +9.3

• by park & ride 1,552 1,877 +20.9 1,846 +18.9

Car trips 148,639 166,430 +12.0 174,774 +17.6

Car kilometres 1,845,419 2,132,798 +15.6 2,261,233 +22.5

Total delay to 18,428 28,363 +53.9 34,072 +84.9cars (hours)

Time lost per car 36.0 47.9 +33.2 54.2 +50.9kilometre (seconds)

* Do Minimum scenario assumes housing growth 25% higher than current plannedlevels and no change to the strategic transport system apart from committedmotorway schemesSource: GBSTS Draft Final Results

Table 3.4 - Car Ownership Rates% of all households

Number of Bath & Bristol North South JLTP Englandcars or vans North East Somerset Gloucest- area andper household Somerset ershire Wales

0 22.0 28.8 18.2 13.4 21.9 26.8

1 44.9 46.6 43.6 44.6 45.3 43.8

2+ 33.0 24.6 38.2 42.0 32.9 29.4

Source: 2001 Census

32



3.2.10 As outlined later in this Chapter much ofthe development in the last 10 – 15 yearshas been low density and car-based withinsufficient investment in transportinfrastructure. Traffic generated by thisnew development has put added pressureon road capacity. This pressure has creatednew problems of congestion in the NorthFringe of Bristol, an area of significantdevelopment and extensive parking, andin areas of Outer Bristol as well as addingto existing problems in the city centres ofBristol and Bath. These pressures willgrow as developments continue throughthe five year plan period highlighting thecontinuing need to manage demand onthe road system and for newinfrastructure and public transport toserve them.

3.2.11 High car ownership rates and changes intravel patterns have resulted in high carusage not only for work journeys but alsofor a variety of other trips. Respondents tothe GBSTS survey were asked to identifythe one method of transport they usemost frequently for a number of journeytypes. Results are in Figure 3.3 and showthe dominance of the car for work,shopping and leisure trips.

3.2.12 This high level of car use for travel to workis supported by data from the 2001Census, which shows in urban areas 60%drove or were car passengers rising to 72%in rural areas.

3.2.13 As highlighted by GBSTS the motorwaynetwork in the JLTP area is used by manydrivers for local trips, for example 50% ofM5 traffic in peak periods has both itsorigin and destination within the JLTParea. The motorway network suffers fromrapid breakdown in operation followingaccidents and other incidents.

3.2.14 On the M4 and M5 in the Avon andSomerset Police area, closure of onecarriageway takes place on average 25times a year; closure of both carriageways6 times. Such closures cause massivedelays, with traffic flooding onto localroads to avoid the obstruction. Bothmotorways are subject to considerableseasonal variation in traffic. Holidaytraffic on the M5 in particular causes longdelays at Bank Holidays and during thesummer period.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Leisure (Base = 860)

School/college (Base = 177)

Shopping (Base = 856)

Work (Base = 722)

Car Bus Train Walk Cycle

11%

11%

6%10%

63%

5%

14%

6%

74%

6%

29%

13%

49%

8%

12%

6%

72%

Figure 3.3 - Most Frequent Mode of Transport of GBSTS Survey Respondents

Base: all respondents who make each type of trip

33



3.2.15 Rail usage is relatively low in the JLTP areabut the trends in growth have shown thepotential impact local rail travel can have.Comparisons of the last three Censusesshow that rail has steadily increased itsmode share of journeys to work since1981, with an overall 110% increase in railusage over the period. Additional rollingstock has been drafted in to meet theincrease. This, however, is against thebackground of a growing nationalshortage of trains and increasing costs.More frequent services and reliabilityissues have in turn created problems of

track capacity and congestion on thenetwork. Furthermore competition forlimited train paths between national,regional and local rail services has oftenresulted in local services receiving lowerpriority.

Impact of Congestion3.2.16 Average traffic speeds are now lower than

ever before in Bristol and Bath. Surveysshow that of the 8 ‘core cities’ outsideLondon, Bristol has the lowest peak trafficspeeds of just 16 mph (go to Figures 3.4aand 3.4b). It also has the lowest off-peak

City

19

20

21

22

23

TynesideLeeds/Bradford

West Midlands

SheffieldGreaterManchester

NottinghamMerseysideBristol

Ave

rage

Spee

d,m

ph

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

TynesideWest Midlands

MerseysideSheffieldNottinghamLeeds/Bradford

Greater Manchester

Bristol

Ave

rage

Spee

d,m

ph

City

Figure 3.4a - Peak Hour Traffic Speeds in English ‘Core’ Cities

Figure 3.4b - Off Peak Traffic Speeds in English ‘Core’ Cities

Source: DfT Survey 2004: “Traffic Speeds in English Urban Areas” – excluding motorway network

34



speeds on local roads . At peak periods21% of travelling time is spent stationary.Department for Transport data suggestthat there has been a steady decline inaverage speeds over the last decade.Congestion through causing delays alsocreates significant problems for thefreight and logistics industry and theemergency services.

3.2.17 Congestion on busy radial routes adds tocommunity severance. It creates barriersfor more vulnerable travellers, such ascyclists, pedestrians and disabled people.High vehicle flows accentuate thisseverance and detract from the quality oflife for local people by creating noise,pollution, road safety and healthproblems. Examples of this are the busyA4 and A420 roads cutting across innercity areas already suffering from multipledeprivation.

3.2.18 Bus services are often held up incongestion such that bus journeys in peakperiods are very often considerably longerthan in the inter peak. Recent surveysundertaken to inform development of buspunctuality targets confirm this situationwith only two-thirds of services found tobe starting on time.

Opportunities for Change3.2.19 Making small changes to our travel habits

can have a large impact. For example, ifeveryone who drives to work by cartravelled by alternative means just once afortnight then traffic levels would be 10%lower, similar to those experienced duringschool holidays.

3.2.20 The GBSTS surveys illustrate that justunder three-quarters of respondents(73%) stated that they would be verywilling (35%) or willing (38%) to use busesas an alternative to the car ifimprovements were made. For greatestimpact the JLTP must concentrate onproviding alternatives to the car andfocusing marketing and information onthose willing to change.

3.2.21 There are opportunities to make bustravel more attractive by increasing thereliability and frequency of services andthe general standards of passengercomfort and amenity. Funding from theintegrated transport block allocation givessome scope for improvements butsignificant changes would come throughthe two bus-based Major Scheme bids (goto Chapters 5 and 10). There is also scopefor extensive improvements in marketingand information.

3.2.22 The GBSTS surveys show that about a fifthof work, shopping and leisure trips are onfoot or by cycle but this goes up to a thirdfor trips to school and college. Data fromthe 2001 Census show that over 40% ofresidents in some inner urban areaswalked to work but the average for ruralareas was less than 5%. Similarly, cyclingto work is highest in inner Bristol (11% inAshley) and lowest in rural wards. Theproportion of Bristol residents cycling towork (4.6%) is high on a national level,exceeding cities such as Nottingham(3.7%) and Leicester (4.0%).

3.2.23 Clearly it is important to maintain andincrease the role of cycling and walking,especially for short journeys. A small shiftaway from car use for both trips to schooland work would see a substantial increasein cycling and walking with consequenthealth benefits. By targeting children wecan seek to foster a cultural change infuture generations’ travel habits.

3.2.24 Aside from promoting alternatives, wehave powers through the TrafficManagement Act 2004 to manage theroad network more effectively and ensurethat maximum benefits are received forCycling parking at Bristol Temple Meads

35



all road users. To meet our NetworkManagement Duties each Councilappointed ‘traffic managers’ with greatercontrols over issues such as illegalparking, misuse of bus lanes and otherfacilities and road works undertaken byutility companies. These controls have thepotential to reduce congestion and speedup bus travel. Chapter 5 sets out how weare using these powers to deliver ourNetwork Management Duties, liaising asnecessary with the Highways Agency.

3.2.25 Managing traffic flows is another areawhere we can exploit Urban TrafficManagement and Control (UTMC)technology to ensure that maximumcapacity is squeezed out of the busysections of our road network. Theauthorities have a wealth of experiencefrom working locally, nationally andthrough European demonstration projectsand will seek to roll out best practice interms of Intelligent Transport Systems(ITS).

3.2.26 Demand restraint measures complementnetwork management and can have asignificant impact on people’s travelchoices. These range from trafficmanagement measures such as one-waystreets or road closures to fiscal measuressuch as parking charges and, potentially,congestion charging or workplace parkingcharges. By working together we candevelop consistent and coherent pricingregimes to ensure that car drivers areencouraged to change to other modes oftravel where congestion is at its worst.

3.2.27 For rail, the Great Western RouteUtilisation Strategy published by theStrategic Rail Authority in June 2005 aimsto address further growth by bringing inhigher capacity trains and adjustingtimetables. It appears possible, however,that the potential for future growth hasbeen underestimated at 1% per annum,demonstrated by the 30% growth in railtrips during the last 5 years. We believethere are opportunities for growththrough targeted improvements of the railnetwork. We will continue to work with

the DfT, train operating companies andNetwork Rail to support our vision forlocal and regional rail travel.

3.2.28 In summary, the opportunities for tacklingcongestion fall into three categories.These are taken forward in Chapter 5Congestion and Chapter 11Implementation Programme:

• Provide alternatives to the car;

• Influence travel behaviour; and

• Manage demand (including selectiveroad widening and new roadinfrastructure where appropriate).

3.3 Accessibility

Extent of the Problem3.3.1 Accessibility is about tackling the

problems of getting around. It’s aboutovercoming barriers. Barriers whichprevent people accessing jobs, shops,schools and services such as hospitals.These are not just transport problems.Geographical locations are vitallyimportant for both existing and planningfor future services. Dispersed servicesespecially in rural areas are harder toaccess on foot or by cycle and difficult toserve by public transport.

3.3.2 These problems of getting to work,schools, doctors’ surgeries, food shops andchildcare were all highlighted in therecent Rural Transport Partnership ‘ParishUnmet Rural Transport Needs Study.’

3.3.3 Mapping accessibility across the JLTP areausing the Accession software has revealedwide variations in how people can accesshealth, employment and educational

Summary• Communities and individuals isolated due

to the lack of convenient or attractivetransport.

• Accessibility Strategy identifies issues andAction Plans to rectify them.

• Public transport provides a keyopportunity for change.

36



facilities (go to Figures 3.5, 6.2, 6.3 and6.4). These results are confirmed by ourconsultation work with partners, othergroups and organisations who raisednumerous issues (go to Box 6B).

3.3.4 One in five households in the JLTP areahave no access to a car (go to Table 3.4)and are therefore more reliant on publictransport, walking and cycling than othersections of the population. Added to thisare the 50% of households with access toonly one car. They may similarly need tolook to these other modes of travel formany journeys, for example where the caris used for commuting and is not availablefor shopping and other trips during theday.

3.3.5 Other people who are likely to haveparticular accessibility problems are:

• 81,000 people with ill health;

• Similar number who have a disabilityor other form of long term restrictionon mobility (2001 Census);

• 78,000 people in the JLTP area aged 75or more;

• 8% of Bristol’s population (2001Census) from ethnic minorities;

• Young carers without access to a car;

• Young people without access to a cargetting to work.

3.3.6 Over 8% of the population are estimatedto have some form of physical or learningdisability. Many are car drivers. Otherslook to bus, rail, taxis and communitytransport to meet their travel needs.

3.3.7 The expected increase in older people inthe JLTP period is likely to be particularlymarked in the 60 to 69 age bracket. Manyof these residents may continue to usecars to a significant extent but may alsowish, or find it essential, to rely more onother travel modes. The forecasts suggestthere will be a 16% increase in thenumber of people aged over 85.

CausesLocation

3.3.8 The location of services is a major cause ofaccessibility problems. The main hospitalsites for example have very largecatchment areas. Providing good publictransport access from all parts of the JLTParea urban and rural, is always going to bechallenging. This, however, is critical topromoting social inclusion. At the otherend of the spectrum local decisions areoften just as important regarding servicessuch as the closure of post offices. Loss ofa local service can have dramatic impactson accessibility in rural areas withalternatives being inaccessible without acar.

3.3.9 Cultural and recreational facilities areoften widely spread, at locations less wellserved by public transport. These includelibraries, swimming pools, sports centres,sport fields, multiplex cinemas, heritagelocations and the two Areas ofOutstanding Natural Beauty.

Bus Services and Interchanges

3.3.10 Limited funding restricts the extent of thebus network whilst a lack of goodinformation can leave potential usersunaware of what bus services exist intheir area. For people with learningdifficulties this can be a serious barrier togetting out and about. Many bodies, forexample service providers or touristattractions, provide minimal or no,information on public transport to theirpremises. Information on bus fares is alsonot readily available.

3.3.11 Access to destinations, including someemployment areas, retail parks, hospitals

Improving accessibility with Dial-A-Ride

37



and other facilities, can be more difficultwhen they are away from the main radialbus corridors. Many facilities have a publictransport service but only along onecorridor and anyone living away from thiscorridor is poorly served. This is especiallythe case for many rural communities withbus service punctuality and reliabilityproblems creating further problems.

3.3.12 Reaching hospitals, further education,work, training and other destinations bypublic transport often involves changingbuses and trains. Convenient and effectiveinterchange can aid accessibility andproduce seamless journeys. Enhancedinterchange is one of the aims of the BusAction Plan (go to Chapter 5) and a keyconcern of stakeholders.

3.3.13 Fares often put the cost of journeysbeyond the reach of low-income groups.This especially affects those seekingeducation and training where the locationof further education courses adds to theproblem. Travelling from out of townareas can also be expensive. Commercialfares tend to exclude discounts in peakperiods when many student journeys aremade.

Walking and Cycling

3.3.14 Cycling and walking networks often relyheavily on the all-purpose highwaynetwork, where heavy traffic flows, fumes(go to Chapter 8 Air Quality), vibration,noise and intimidation all deter walkingand cycling. There may also be gaps in thenetwork, evident in both rural and urbanareas. Both issues can adversely affectaccessibility.

3.3.15 In some areas, rivers and railways formphysical barriers to movement. Bridgesovercome these barriers although thegaps between crossings are sometimesquite long. Crossing problems remain onthe Floating Harbour in Central Bristol, therailway line in Weston-super-Mare, theRiver Avon in parts of Bath, M32 andA4174 Avon Ring Road.

ImpactIsolation

3.3.16 The lack of convenient or attractivetransport can leave people feelingisolated. Isolation is made worse by poorinformation, people’s concerns aboutpersonal safety and by poorly designed ormaintained public transport infrastructureand the low quality of public spaces,footways and lighting.

Rural and Urban Areas

3.3.17 Residents of rural and even some parts ofurban areas, may find it difficult to get toessential services without a car. Aroundhalf the area’s population live in one-carhouseholds. This is particularly the casefor people living in the four main areas ofmultiple deprivation: inner urban areas tothe north east of Bristol city centre; southBristol; outlying estates at LawrenceWeston and Southmead; andcommunities to the south of Weston-super-Mare town centre.

3.3.18 Getting around for these groups can be amajor challenge. Inaccessibility levels aregraphically shown in Figure 3.5 showingthe dominance of car based access to theNorth Fringe employment area of Bristolcompared to public transport access.Park Street Pedestrians

Cyclist in Weston-super-Mare

38



Opportunities for change3.3.19 An Accessibility Strategy has been drawn

up, working in partnership with localhealth, education, employment, transportproviders and other groups andorganisations (go to Chapter 6). Thishighlights accessibility issues in the JLTParea and, through a series of potentialAction Plans, the steps we intend to taketo rectify them. As set out below theseAction Plans will focus on healthcare,employment and education. Future ideasfor Plans will look at rural, cultural,recreational and food access issues.

3.3.20 Across the whole of the JLTP area theexpansion of the concessionary travelscheme from April 2006 will provide amajor opportunity to improveaccessibility. It will remove the costobstacle for all passengers with aconcessionary pass. If the full benefits ofthe extension of concessionary passes areto be realised then it will be important

that non-cost obstacles such as physicalaccessibility and routeing of services tofacilities such as hospitals are also tackled.

Access to healthcare

3.3.21 Moving services, for example healthcare,out into the community and away fromcentralised locations is another way toimprove accessibility. We will link the JLTPwith initiatives such as the Bristol HealthService Plan. We are working with thePrimary Care Trusts and hospital truststhat cover Bristol, South Gloucestershireand North Somerset through theirTransport, Accessibility and Town PlanningCross-Cutting Group.

3.3.22 Healthcare in Bath & North East Somersetis subject to separate arrangements.Strategic mapping of bus services hasalready highlighted that access to theRoyal United Hospital (RUH) in Bath isrestricted for many people. Accessibilityissues have been considered in the

BRISTOL

Bath

Yate

Kingswood

Keynsham

Saltford

Thornbury


ChippingSodbury

NorthFringe

CribbsCauseway

Avonmouth/Severnside

Weston super Mare

Portishead

Clevedon

Nailsea

Yatton Backwell

South Bristol

NortonRadstock



NORTH SOMERSET

SOMERSET

WILTSHIRE

GLOUCESTERSHIRE

Severn

Estuary

BristolInternationalAirport

By Car

By Public Transport

0 to 30 minutes

0 to 30 minutes

Figure 3.5 - Accessibility in the North Fringe of Bristol


39



context of the RUH Travel Plan andsolutions put in place with help fromUrban Bus Challenge funds (go to Box 6C).Further action plans will be produced tohelp this hospital.

Access to Work

3.3.23 Public transport improvements representthe key opportunities for tacklingaccessibility. By delivering significantimprovements to the public transportnetwork, especially through the two bus-focussed Major Scheme bids (go toChapter 10), we aim to provide greateraccess to employment and services acrossthe area. It will allow the JLTP to ‘plug’ theremaining gaps in the public transportnetwork with a range of innovativesolutions such as demand responsivetransport, community transport or taxisharing services as set out in Chapters 5and 6. Box 3B gives an example of aninnovative scheme in Weston-super-Mare.

Access to Education

3.3.24 The JLTP aims to improve access to pre-schools, schools, further education andskills training through public transport,walking and cycling measures. Forschools, action will be through SchoolTravel Plans (go to Influencing TravelBehaviour in Section 5.3) and changes inhome-to-school transport. Improvingaccess to Further Education colleges is thefocus of one of the Action Plans in theAccessibility Strategy (go to Table 6.6).

3.3.25 Problems experienced by people withlearning difficulties have become

apparent through contact with theLearning Partnerships set up by the fourCouncils. The arrangements necessary toundertake bus journeys are seen asdifficult to grasp, and fraught with risks ofembarrassment. A ‘travel buddy’ schemehas been set up in Bristol to provideescorts to people with learning difficultiesuntil they are confident enough toundertake journeys by themselves. Alearning difficulties Action Plan isproposed in the Accessibility Strategy (goto Table 6.6).

Rural, Cultural and Recreational Facilitiesand Food Shopping

3.3.26 For rural areas we will investigate ideasfor future Action Plans (go to Box 6F).Providing new bus services for examplecan have two-way benefits, enabling cityand town residents to access thecountryside and rural residents to accessthe town or city (go to Box 6C for theChew Valley Explorer). This helps tostrengthen the financial viability ofservices.

3.3.27 A limited number of services can bemoved to where people live. For examplemobile libraries take the service toresidents rather than residents travellingto the libraries. Access to food hasrecently become easier through theexpansion of deliveries by food stores, andorganic produce is also available indelivered form. These are all ideas forfuture Action Plans.

Box 3B Case Study

Access to Weston General Hospital

Weston General Hospital is recognised as bothan important health facility and a majoremployer in Weston-super-Mare. Through asuccessful Urban Bus Challenge bid a halfhourly bus service is now provided from thehospital to Locking Castle, Worle. This enablesresidents to travel across Weston-super-Mareto work or visit the hospital.

Travel road shows helping people to get to work

40


3.4 Road safety

Extent of the Problem3.4.1 In the JLTP area, around 500 people are

killed or seriously injured on our roadsevery year. The total number of allcasualties in 2004 was 14% higher thanthe 1994 -1998 average although thisconceals variations across the JLTP areaand particularly between built-up andrural areas. In common with many partsof the country the area has experiencedan increase in injury accidents involvingpowered two wheelers in recent years.Cyclists also account for an increasingshare of casualties.

Causes3.4.2 The factors that cause collisions and

injuries are complex. By far the greaterproportion of road casualties occur withinthe built-up areas (locally, three quartersof all casualties in 2001-2003 occurred onroads with speed limits of 40mph or less).

Here traffic flows are highest, there is agreater density of vehicular turningmovements, and the greatest potential forconflict between drivers and other roadusers. These problems are exacerbated bymany drivers travelling at inappropriatespeeds.

3.4.3 With the concentrations of pedestrians incity and town centres the design andmaintenance of public spaces, crossingsand footways have an impact on safety.Road casualties in disadvantaged areasare weighted disproportionately towardschild casualties and irresponsible driving.High levels of intrusive through-traffic arealso a factor in inner city suburbsincluding areas of multiple deprivationadjoining Bristol City Centre. High vehiclespeeds in rural areas typically lead togreater severity in accidents.

3.4.4 Pedestrians are often poorly served,especially where major roads splitcommunities. Walking and cycling in ruralareas, both for day-to-day trips andleisure, do not mix comfortably withheavy and/or fast traffic. This is also trueof horse riding. Poor street lighting andlack of facilities can also have an impacton road safety.

Impact3.4.5 Figure 3.6 shows the trend in killed and

seriously injured (KSI) casualties whichhave increased by 12% on the 1994-1998average. The figure increased sharply in


Summary• Targets to reduce killed and seriously

injured figures not on track.

• Powered two wheeler accidentsincreasing.

• Road safety problems in deprived and ruralareas.

• Opportunity to target resources andschemes to tackle these problems.

Table 3.5 - Casualties by Road User Class (KSI - Killed and Seriously Injured)

1994-98 Average 2004 % Change

All KSI All KSI All KSI

Pedestrians 586 123 566 116 -3% -6%

Cyclists 350 38 400 54 +14% +42%

Power Two 356 80 486 134 +37% +68%Wheelers

Car occupants 2423 204 2833 200 +17% -2%

Other 245 22 237 21 -3% -5%

Totals 3960 467 4522 525 +14% +12%

41

2002 due at least in part to the revisedaccident reporting system that wasintroduced by the Avon and SomersetConstabulary in that year. On this basis itis evident that our area is currently not ontrack to achieve the LTP1 2010 target.

3.4.6 Table 3.5 shows casualty numbers for2004 compared to the 1994 to 1998average figures for each road user class.

3.4.7 Car occupants form the largest groupwhen all casualties are considered. In2004 they represented 63% of all

casualties. The largest numerical andpercentage increase in KSI figures hasbeen amongst powered two wheelers(68% increase from 80 to 134).

3.4.8 Figure 3.7 shows the trend in child KSIcasualties which have fallen by 19% onthe 1994-1998 average. The trend lineshows that the figures are susceptible towide annual fluctuations. This is due tothe relatively small numbers of casualties.



0

100

200

300

400

500

600

467512

462455

555

498

525

392408423438453

360376312328344

297 281

199994-98 Ave

2000 2004200320022001 20092008200720062005 2010

Actual KSI Casualties

LTP1 Target

Year

Nu

mb

erof

KSI

Casu

alti

es(A

llA

ges)

Figure 3.6 - Killed and Seriously Injured Casualty Trend in the JLTP Area

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

51

56

6467

5248

5049

48

5454

5860

4245

3639

3330

199994/98 Ave

2000 2004200320022001 20092008200720062005 2010

Actual Child KSI Casualties

LTP1 Target

Year

Nu

mb

erof

Ch

ildK

SICa

sual

ties

Figure 3.7 - Child Killed and Seriously Injured Casualty Trend in the JLTP Area

42



3.4.9 The number of slight casualties in 2004was 14% above the 1994-1998 average of3493. However the number of slightcasualties has remained relativelyconstant over the last four years as shownin Table 3.6.

Table 3.6 - Number of SlightCasualties, JLTP AreaYear Number of

Casualties

1994-98 3493average

1999 4410

2000 4017

2001 4041

2002 3912

2003 3839

2004 3997

Opportunities for Change3.4.10 The JLTP presents the opportunity to

reduce child casualty rates and achievesignificant reductions in the number ofpeople killed and seriously injured in roadaccidents.

3.4.11 By working jointly there is the opportunityto target resources and schemes in costeffective ways to tackle road safety on anarea-wide basis. A road safety partnershipwill be brought together ensuring safetycameras and funding are integrated intothe LTP system alongside other safetymeasures. The form of a partnership isyet to be decided but will allow localauthorities, the Police and other agenciesthe opportunity to pursue a mix of roadsafety measures to make greatercontributions towards road casualtyreductions.

3.4.12 We will work with other agencies andmake greater use of technology, such asUrban Traffic Management and Controlsystems. If killed and seriously injuredfigures are to be brought back on target,extensive education and trainingprogrammes will be needed, withpowered two wheelers a priority.

3.5 Air Quality, Noise and theEnvironment

Extent of the Problem3.5.1 In the light of increasing concerns

surrounding climate change and carbondioxide emissions, of which road traffic isa rapidly growing source, a specialist CO2

assessment study was commissioned. Thestudy suggests that in the JLTP area, thetotal CO2 emissions from road transport in2004 were 2.25 million tonnes. Motorwayand trunk road traffic is the major sourceaccounting for about 55% of the totalwith urban traffic 30% and traffic on ruralroads the remaining 15%. Withoutintervention total emissions are expectedto rise to 2.67 million tonnes in 2011.

3.5.2 There are national air quality targets thatthe JLTP must meet. These focus onNitrogen dioxide (NO2). Bath’s LondonRoad corridor and a large part of Bristolwill not meet these targets and have beendeclared Air Quality Management Areas(AQMAs) with Air Quality Action Planssetting out what needs to be done. TheAQMAs are shown in Figures 3.8 and 3.9.One of the Bristol AQMAs also covers aninner city area of multiple deprivation(Index of Multiple Deprivation, 2004).

3.5.3 The Bristol AQMAs (go to Figure 3.8) coveraround 25% of the city including thecentral area, most major radial routes andthe M32 corridor. A second area covers theM5 corridor in Avonmouth. Over 100,000people live within the AQMAs. Within thecentral AQMA an estimated 97% of NOxemissions are from road traffic.

Summary• Traffic levels are a key determinant of CO2

levels, with motorways and trunk roadsaccounting for about 55% of emissionsand traffic on urban roads about 30%.

• 70% of NOx emissions due to road traffic.

• Over 100,000 people live in Air QualityManagement Areas.

• Opportunity to tackle congestion andimprove air quality.

43



3.5.4 Currently, the Bath AQMA (go to Figure3.9) covers an area east of Bath city centrealong the A4 London Road corridor. Anestimated 72% of NOx emissions are fromroad traffic; with the majority specificallyrelated to through heavy goods traffic,particularly that heading to and from theSouth Coast ports.

3.5.5 An estimated 30% of the UK populationsuffer from noise levels that scientists andhealth experts consider to beunacceptable. In urban areas this figure isfar higher and the EU have introduced

policies aimed at limiting exposure tonoise. The EU Directive on the Assessmentand Management of Environmental Noise(2002/49/EC) will come into force duringthe JLTP period. In a process similar tothat of Air Quality management itrequires local authorities to develop NoiseManagement Strategies and Action Plansto reduce exposure to noise fromtransport sources, control thedeterioration of the noise climate in urbanareas and protect existing quiet areas.

2003 AQMA

City Boundary

0 2 Km

Figure 3.8 - Bristol Air Quality Management Areas


44



Causes

3.5.6 The majority of emissions come from roadtransport and this is demonstrated forBath and Bristol in Figures 3.10 and 3.11.For Bristol, cars and taxis generate around26% of NOx emissions, buses 14% andHGVs 24%, emphasising the need to focusactions on tackling poor air quality fromtransport. Table 3.7 sets out the currentlevels of NO2 in both the Bristol and BathAQMAs compared with the nationaltarget for 2010.

Original 2002 AQMA

Proposed Amendment to AQNA

0 500 metres

Figure 3.9 - Bath Air Quality Management Area


Shoppers in Central Bath

45Links4Developing Strategy (Ch4)4Congestion (Ch 5)4Accessibility (Ch 6)4Road Safety (Ch 7)4Air Quality (Ch 8)4Asset Management (Ch 9)


Industrial Combustion

25%

Road Traffic70%

Commercial & Residential

Combustion5%

Cars &Taxis26%

LGV 6%

HGV 24%

Buses 14%

Figure 3.10 - Emissions of NOx in Bristol

Traffic in Bath

71%

14%

8%

6% 1%

Road Traffic

Domestic

Industry

Rail

Other

Figure 3.11 - Source apportionment of the NOx emission for Bath and North East Somerset

Table 3.7 - Indicator: Annual Mean Roadside NO2 levels (µµg/m3)Area 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2010

Target

Bristol AQMA 48.6 49.9 45.9 54 48 46

Bath AQMA 49.9 56.5 58.4 60.9 53.3 47

46



3.5.7 Bristol data is based on the average of 21roadside monitoring sites in centralBristol. Bath AQMA data is from amonitoring station on London Road.

3.5.8 In relation to noise, transport is the mostpervasive source in the environment. Formost people, road traffic is the main causeof exposure to ambient noise.

Impact3.5.9 Emissions from transport sources

contribute towards five of the seven keypollutants set out in the National AirQuality Strategy (1997) and updated inthe Air Quality Regulations (2000). Thesecan have a serious effect on people’shealth. Exposure to poor air qualityseriously affects the most vulnerablemembers of society such as the veryyoung, very old and people with cardio-respiratory problems.

3.5.10 The European Commission estimates over32,600 deaths occur annually in the UKfrom exposure to poor air quality. For theJLTP area the figure is 540, more than tena week. Many more suffer from chronicand acute ill health from continuedexposure to pollution. Deprivedcommunities often suffer the worstimpacts with houses located in ‘canyon’streets (typically narrow streets with tallbuildings) carrying high volumes of traffic.

3.5.11 Exposure to noise can cause ill health,triggering physiological problems,increased blood pressure, loss of sleep,poor digestion and other stress-relateddisorders. Other illnesses such as heartdisease and psychological conditions canget worse. Noise exposure can also limitconcentration resulting in impairedlearning and lower productivity in schoolsand workplaces.

3.5.12 Noise levels vary considerably, with thoseliving in proximity to busy roads sufferingfrom the highest levels of exposure.Surveys in Bristol suggest that over 70% ofrespondents are concerned about levels ofnoise in the city and 85% about airpollution in the city.

Opportunities for Change3.5.13 By successfully tackling congestion the

JLTP will go a long way towards improvingair quality and reduce CO2 emissions andclimate change (go to Box 3C). There isthe opportunity to deliver packages ofmeasures through the JLTP to improve airquality in AQMAs and other vulnerableareas (go to Table 4.3 StrategicEnvironmental Assessment).

3.5.14 There is considerable scope to work withbus operators to improve the average ageof their fleets and introduce vehicles thatmeet the highest emissions standards.The two bus based Major Scheme Bids (goto Chapters 5 and 10) will help to deliverthis. Similarly, we can work with freightoperators on a number of solutions to try

BOX 3C

Climate ChangeNationally transport is estimated to accountfor over 20% and locally 36% of CO2 emissions.

In order to understand the contribution of theJLTP towards reducing climate change a CO2

impact assessment was undertaken byspecialist consultants. This shows thatimplementation of all the JLTP measurestogether with the Greater Bristol Bus Networkmajor scheme could limit growth in CO2

emissions to about 8% by 2011 compared to18% without any intervention. Potentially thisincrease can be pegged back to about 2% withefficiency improvements in the vehicle fleet.

Particular focus is being given to providingalternatives to the car, influencing travelbehaviour and managing demand (go toChapter 5). Key measures include workplaceand school travel plans, personalised travelplanning and improvements to walking andcycling infrastructure.

In addition to local initiatives set out in theJLTP, national actions are also required toimpact on levels of CO2, not only targeted attransport but the wider issues of energy useand pollution from residential and commercialproperties.

47



and limit the impact of pollution fromHGVs during periods of congestion.Encouraging small changes in travelbehaviour at an individual level (go toChapter 5 Influencing Travel Behaviour)and more efficient driving styles canreduce emissions.

3.5.15 Traffic related noise can be reduced inseveral ways, for example throughrenewal of carriageways and targetedmaintenance. At the same time bettermanagement of the road network willdeliver noise reduction benefits. Forexample, through a mix of information,signage and restrictions we can deterHGVs from using unsuitable routes inresidential areas or across public spaces.Many of the measures in Chapters 5 -10have benefits in terms of reducing theimpact of traffic noise. The EU Directiveprovides the platform to ensure that noiseimpacts are fully considered as the JLTP isimplemented.

3.6 Sustainable Communities andEconomic Growth

Extent, Causes and Impact3.6.1 The JLTP area is the major focus of

population, employment and services inthe South West. Almost 400,000residents were in employment at the timeof the 2001 Census and the area providesemployment for about 500,000 people.Table 3.8 shows changes in employmentin the previous ten years, particularly thehuge growth of jobs in the North and EastFringe of Bristol.

3.6.2 Land use and development changes haveand will continue to have a significantimpact on travel behaviour, use of the carand increasing congestion.

3.6.3 Past growth has put further pressure onthe transport system with increased roadtraffic and rail usage. There have beensome improvements in public transportbut much remains to be done. Aconcerted effort has been made to tackledeprivation and pursue regeneration butextensive programmes still need to beimplemented. Environmental problems,such as poor public spaces and visualintrusion, continue although someprogress has been made in dealing withthem.

3.6.4 Investment in transport infrastructure hasnot kept pace with the scale ofdevelopment. Making good this deficitwill lay the foundation for achievingfuture growth but it must beaccompanied by new infrastructure.

3.6.5 This is illustrated by the example of theNorth Fringe where as Figure 3.1 showstraffic has grown by 30% in the last tenyears. The pressure placed on existinginfrastructure is immense. Congestion,delays and roads at near capacity aregrowing problems. A developer fundedpackage of measures (go to Box 11B) willhelp to mitigate the impact of futuredevelopment (go to Box 3D) but existingproblems remain. Potentially these aredeterring ‘would be investors’ with knockon effects for the JLTP area’s economy as awhole.

Summary• Economic growth within our area has

remained at high levels.• The Regional Spatial Strategy identifies our

area as having a continuing key role in theregion and further major developmentareas will come forward.

• Development has created many problemsof accessibility, diverse journey patterns,increased journey lengths and high caruse.

Houses under construction

48



1

4

5 6

2 3

710

911

12

13

14

15

17

16

18

19

8

BRISTOL

Bath

Yate

Kingswood

Keynsham

Saltford

Thornbury


ChippingSodbury

NorthFringe

CribbsCauseway


Weston super Mare

Portishead

Clevedon

Nailsea

Yatton Backwell

South Bristol

NortonRadstock



NORTH SOMERSET

SOMERSET

WILTSHIRE

GLOUCESTERSHIRE

Severn

Estuary


Major Development Areas1. Western Riverside2. Southgate3. University of Bath4. Filton Northfield5. Wallscourt Farm, Coldharbour Lane and Harry Stoke6. Emersons Green East7. Temple Quarter8. Harbourside9. Courages Brewery, Redcliffe and Bristol Bridge10. Broadmead11. Marlborough Street12. St Michael's13. Hengrove Park, Hartcliffe Campus and Imperial Park14. Port of Bristol/Royal Portbury Dock15. Bristol International Airport16. Avonmouth17. Severnside18. Portishead19. Weston-super-Mare

N0 5km

Figure 3.12 - Major Development Areas


Table 3.8 - Changes in Employment 1991 to 2001Main Employment Areas 1991 2001 Change

Central and North Bristol 121,970 130,887 +7%

Bristol North Fringe 37,120 67,502 +82%

Bath 40,780 51,958 +27%

South Bristol 38,670 47,687 +23%

Weston-super-Mare 24,030 32,141 +34%

Kingswood & East Fringe 18,710 27,528 +47%

Clevedon, Nailsea & Portishead 14,160 22,944 +52%

Bristol Port area 16,680 18,183 +9%

Yate, Chipping Sodbury, Thornbury 11,180 15,571 +39%

Keynsham & Norton-Radstock 13,650 14,896 +9%

JLTP area 388,960 495,043 +27%

Source: 1991, 2001 Census

49



Box 3D - Major Developments in the Period to 2011

Development Area Transport CommentBath1. Western Riverside: 40 hectares mixed Requires integrated and comprehensive

development regeneration scheme. transport strategy.900 dwellings by 2011 and community facilities.

2. Southgate: Major retail redevelopment in New bus/ rail interchange, improved the city centre, including enhanced pedestrian/ traffic management.streetscape/public spaces and traffic management.

3. University of Bath: Continued expansion on Bus service enhancement, pedestrian/ cycling campus. links and highway works.

Bristol North Fringe4. Filton Northfield: 74 hectares mixed use New distributor road linking the A38 to Cribbs

development. 2,200 dwellings, local Causeway. Developer funding for enhancements facilities and 14 hectares for mixed to bus infrastructure and services. Capital employment. contribution towards North Fringe

Infrastructure Scheme.

5. Wallscourt Farm, Coldharbour Lane and Provision of key bus links, including the Romney Harry Stoke: 2,900 dwellings, 10.9 hectares Avenue bus link. Capital contribution towards employment land. Range of local facilities. North Fringe Infrastructure Scheme.

Emersons Green East6. Emersons Green East: 175 hectares of land Capital contribution towards North Fringe

to the east of the A4174 Avon Ring Road. Scheme. Developer funding for enhancementsIt will include a new Science Park, 1,500 to bus infrastructure and services.dwellings, mixed employment uses and local facilities.

Opportunities for Change3.6.6 Development pressures are a major

opportunity for change. Planning for theexpected growth in housing and businessover the next 10 to 15 years will require aconcerted effort and additionalinvestment to avoid unacceptableincreases in congestion. It will beimportant that the spatial distribution ofnew developments is such that itmaximises accessibility and minimisesjourney lengths. Figure 3.12 and Box 3Dshow the sheer scale of developmentexpected over the next five years. Newdevelopments will be reviewed to ensurethat developer contributions providesufficient capital and revenue funding fortransport in advance of occupation. Thereare also opportunities to work with

SWRDA and other agencies to optimisetransport provision in regeneration andother major development schemes.Workplace travel plans (go to Chapter 5Influencing Travel Behaviour) have animportant role to play too.

New Bristol bus and coach station

50



Bristol City Centre7. Temple Quarter: 46 hectares mixed-use New parking and public transport facilities

regeneration project centred on historic and, in longer term, enhanced interchange atTemple Meads Station. Phase 2 will create Temple Meads. Comprehensive Travel Plans to a high-density, mixed-use development, cover this and other major developments in space for 10,000 seat Bristol arena, Bristol.700 dwellings, public spaces, new waterfront and leisure facilities, hotel, restaurants, bars, cafes and shops.

8. Harbourside: 66 hectares regeneration Developer funding for improved pedestrian/projects. Major leisure, housing and office cycle facilities, bus services and highway development planned for Harbourside’s improvements on Anchor Road. New public car north shore and new waterside housing. park and constrained private parking.

9. Courage’s Brewery, Redcliffe and Bristol Bridge: Major regeneration project Developer contributions sought for new to create "Redcliffe Village", a mix of new pedestrian/cycle bridges and other facilities.housing, offices and service shops. Former Courage brewery will be transformed into apartments and offices.

10. Broadmead: Retail expansion to increase Re-routeing of the Bond Street dual-the scale of shopping by a third with carriageway to create more space for a new23,300 sq m office floor space and some flagship store. Replacement of existingresidential accommodation. outdated car parks with 2,650 space, mainly

short-stay, multi-storey car park. Coach parking. Improved pedestrian and cycle routes to and across site.

11. Marlborough Street: Redevelopment with New bus station.law courts and housing.

12. St Michael's: Master plan by Bristol Good links to public transport system and high University to create a new campus area; quality pedestrian/ cycle links will be anredevelopment of the former children's important part of this development.hospital complex into new university buildings including a landmark tower.

South Bristol13. Hengrove Park, Hartcliffe Campus Improved routes and linkages for pedestrian

and Imperial Park: Major mixed-use and cycle access. Safety measures. Scope for regeneration development providing a 50m revised bus routes and new bus interchange.swimming pool and leisure sports complex,

over 1,000 dwellings, South Bristol Community Hospital, over 70,000sq m of business and retail space and an education campus providing for primary, secondary and further education and special needs.

Port of Bristol/ Royal Portbury Dock14. Port of Bristol/ Royal Portbury Dock: Both dock areas have unrivalled rail and road

5000 people are employed at the Port of links to the national networks. Use of the Bristol. It has 31 berths and a throughput of bespoke rail links should be maximised. 12 m tonnes p.a, a threefold increase since Improvements are due to take place at

51



3.6.7 Local planning policies are beingreviewed and provide theopportunity for greater integrationbetween land use and transport.This will ensure maximumaccessibility to major developments,adopting a common approach toparking standards and identifyingthe transport infrastructure neededfor individual developments. Thedesign of new housing, office,shopping, leisure and other schemescan be influenced through thedevelopment control system toprovide people with the opportunityto make sustainable transportchoices.

1990. It is the main commercial port in the Junction 19 in 2006/07. The “inland” location South West and is both a national and of the port means that goods can be carried regional gateway. To cater for growth and much closer to the population by ship and thus the globilisation of world trade the feasibility is more sustainable than for other ports. of creating a new container terminal on the Avonmouth foreshore to cater for larger new ships is being examined by the port company.

Bristol International Airport15. Bristol International Airport: New £27 The airport suffers from a lack of rail access

million airport terminal opened in 2000. and poor road links to the motorway network, Government White Paper supports its especially from the north; the proposed A38-continued role as the region’s main airport A370 link road would improve this. Only 4.6% growing from four million passengers per of passengers use public transport to the annum (mppa) to 10mppa - 12mppa by 2030. airport; better publicity and improvements to Will require a terminal extension, and may the Airport Flyer and services to Weston-super-require an extended runway and a new Mare required.taxiway. Emerging Master Plan focuses on growth to 2015 and looks at issues between 2016 and 2030.

Avonmouth/Severnside16. Avonmouth: 70 hectares have planning New spine road once development reaches

permission for a mix of industrial uses agreed level. Improved pedestrian and cycle (2,500 jobs by 2011). Another 100 hectares routes to cross the area. Enhancements agreed of development sites expected with release for main access junctions once traffic reaches of land at the former Britannia Zinc site. critical levels. Limited scope for public

transport improvements.

17. Severnside: 35 hectares at Western New spine road once development reaches Approach Phase 1 available (1,200 jobs). agreed level. Improved pedestrian and cycle Further expansion of both sites is subject routes to cross the area. Enhancements agreed to resolution of flood risk, environmental for main access junctions once traffic reaches and transport constraints. critical levels. Limited scope for public

transport improvements.

Portishead18. Portishead: Substantial brownfield housing Developer-funded bus services , improvements

development at Port Marine, Dockside and to M5 J19 and local highways secured, plus a Ashlands. £1m contribution towards re-opening the

branch line for passenger services.

Weston-super-Mare19. West Wick: Consent for 600 dwellings and Employment has lagged behind residential

12 hectares of employment land. Area growth resulting in high levels of car-based Development Framework identifies out-commuting and congestion at M5 J21; potential locations for employment-led, future development strategy is employment-mixed use development with an additional led to address jobs deficit. Some developer-17,500 jobs and 16,000 dwellings to 2021 funded improvements to J21 2006/07, plus in the Town Centre, RAF Locking and contribution to sustainable transportWeston Airfield areas. measures; further improvements to J21 and

bus/rail services required.

52



3.6.8 Looking beyond 2011 the spatial strategyfor the JLTP area (RSS February 2006)foresees the West of England continuingto experience high rates of growth in jobs,population and housing. Acceleratedinvestment in transport and socialinfrastructure will be required to enablethis to happen.

3.6.9 The RSS proposes that over the period2006-2026 land is made available to meetgrowth of about 92,000 jobs at Bristol, upto 20,000 jobs at Bath and for between8,500 and 10,000 jobs at Weston-super-Mare. Over the period to 2026 the RSSanticipates up to 100,000 dwellings areneeded within the West of England area.About a quarter of this housingdevelopment is expected to occur in theperiod of this JLTP on committed sites.Most of the housing requirement will bemet by sites within the existing urbanareas. Nonetheless the RSS envisages theneed for a number of well planned urbanextensions beyond 2011.

3.6.10 Co-ordinated investment in physical andsocial infrastructure from local, regionaland central government funds and the

private sector, in line with ‘The WayAhead’ (the South West’s response to theGovernment’s ‘Sustainable CommunitiesPlan) will be required. An ImplementationPlan is being drawn up to identifyinfrastructure costs. The extent, timingand phasing of investment will be criticalto the area’s ability to implement thespatial strategy. The main features of thesub-regional spatial strategy are outlinedin Box 3E.

3.6.11 Through the RSS and LDFs, and workingwith business, community and transportinterests, we can shape the pattern ofdevelopment and influence the location,scale, density, design and mix of landuses. This can help achieve JLTP objectivesby reducing the need to travel and thelength of journeys. It will make it saferand easier for people to access jobs,shopping, leisure facilities and services bypublic transport, walking and cycling.

3.7 Quality of Life Issues

Extent, Causes and Impact3.7.1 The JLTP is not just about getting around,

tackling congestion and improving roadsafety and air quality. The Plan feeds intomany other aspects of our daily lives andhas a significant role to play in improvingthe quality of life or ‘liveability’ for us all.These include:

• Healthy communities;

• Quality of public spaces and betterstreetscapes;

Summary• Concerns about community safety,

security, health and crime.

• 8.2% of population suffer from ill health.

• Opportunities for city, town andneighbourhood enhancements.

• Reducing the gap between the poorestareas and the average.

• Maintain and enhance the quality of life inall areas.

BOX 3E

Main Features of West of England Spatial Strategy

• Balanced growth of three urban areas ofBath, Bristol and Weston-super-Mare,maximising use of previously developedland but providing for urban extensions tomeet longer term needs;

• Investment needed in key transportinfrastructure;

• Bristol to maintain role as Core City andeconomic hub;

• Bath to recognise economic opportunities,respecting its World Heritage Site statue;

• Economic-led development at Weston-super-Mare, town centre regeneration;housing phased with economicperformance.

Based on Section 4 of February 2006 RSS

53

• Community safety, personal securityand crime;

• Neighbourhood renewal andregeneration;

• Landscape and biodiversity.

Healthy Communities 3.7.2 Walking and cycling as part of our daily

life can play an important part towardsincreasing physical activity and have largehealth benefits. The link betweentransport, physical activity and health isnow recognised at the highest levels andnine Government departments havejoined forces in the Activity CoordinationTeam (ACT) to develop a national deliveryplan for physical activity. The ACT’s coretarget is to increase participation inphysical activity so that 70% of thepopulation reach minimum recommendedlevels by 2020. For adults the

recommendation is a minimum of 30minutes of moderate physical activity onat least five days a week to maintainhealth.

3.7.3 Inactive people have almost double therisk of dying from coronary heart diseasethan those taking regular exercise. Agrowing body of research indicates thatpeople who are active in their daily liveshave reduced levels of sickness.

3.7.4 The 2001 Census showed that 165,000people in the JLTP area had a limiting longterm illness, about one in six of the totalpopulation and broadly in line with thenational average. There were significantvariations between different wards,reflecting areas of deprivation andconcentrations of the elderly (go to Figure3.13). About 81,000 people wereidentified as suffering from ill health,representing 8.2% of the total population.



15.5 to 18.9

12.1 to 15.5

8.7 to 12.1

5.3 to 8.7

Figure 3.13: Percentage of 0 to 64 Year Olds with a Limiting Long Term Illness


54


3.7.5 Wider issues of obesity and public healthare also set out in the CommunityStrategies. Transport-related initiativesbeing pursued to improve health andwell-being focus on increasing levels ofphysical activity and better access tohealthy food. The Walking to Healthproject in South Gloucestershire is anexample of partnership working betweenthe local authority, the local Primary CareTrust and the Forest of Avon. Walk toSchool campaigns link with other child-focused strategies. Other partnership-working initiatives with localcommunities have helped to encourageactive lifestyles via promotion of the LocalRights of Way networks for example inand around the Gordano Valley.

Quality of Public Spaces and Better Streetscapes

3.7.6 Shortcomings in the design andmaintenance of public spaces; streets andhighways; street furniture; lighting andsignage; and walking and cycling facilitiesaffect the public’s perception of their localenvironment and personal security. Safetyis a key aspect of ‘liveability’, particularlyin disadvantaged communities in the JLTParea’s three principal urban areas. If wecan re-design both the physical and thecultural environments to make it moreaccessible it will enable people to walkand cycle more frequently. Enhancementscan benefit the public realm in city, townand village.

3.7.7 Associated with the poor quality designand maintenance of many public spaces issubstandard public transportinfrastructure with inadequate on-streetinformation and poor facilities for walkingand cycling. These work against the aim ofpromoting sustainable travel choices andimproving accessibility for those withoutcars.

Community Safety, Personal Security and Crime

3.7.8 Crime and fear of crime feature asimportant issues in all of the fourCommunity Strategies. They are the focus

of the local Crime and DisorderPartnerships and local community safetystrategies. A viewpoint survey undertakenin South Gloucestershire in 2002 foundthat 42% of residents did not feel safeafter dark, 43% in Bristol’s 2003neighbourhood survey. A 2004 MORIsurvey in North Somerset confirmed thatpeople place priority on community safetyand living without fear of crime asimportant factors in “what makes a goodplace to live”.

3.7.9 Consultation on Bristol’s Policing Plan in2002 highlighted concerns in the southernparts of the city about the generalcondition of streets including litter,lighting and graffiti as well as abandonedcars. Vehicle crime was identified as aparticular problem in Central and NorthBristol. In Bath and North East Somersetthe community safety strategy stressesthe link between anti-social behaviourand the appearance of the street scene.Another important community safetyissue is the incidence of attacks on busdrivers.

Neighbourhood Renewal andRegeneration

3.7.10 Over 40 communities in Bristol andWeston-super-Mare suffer from multipledeprivation and there are substantialareas in both these urban areas and Baththat are in need of regeneration. SingleRegeneration Budget funding hasaddressed local transport problems insome locations and regeneration effortsare continuing in all of the three principalurban areas (go to section 3.6)

3.7.11 Bristol is one of the NeighbourhoodRenewal Fund Areas identified for specialfunding nationally because of itsconcentrations of health and crimeproblems as well as deprivation in termsof employment, education and skills andhousing. Local Neighbourhood andRenewal Action Plans in three inner Bristolareas have been produced by localcommunity partnerships and includemeasures to enhance accessibility, road


55

safety and public spaces. Bristol was alsoselected as a focus for New Deal forCommunities initiatives, focusing on‘Community at Heart’ just north of thecity centre.

3.7.12 North Somerset receives funding from theSafer Stronger Cleaner Fund. Thissupports delivery of the National Strategyfor Neighbourhood Renewal.

Landscape and Biodiversity3.7.13 Part of the very attraction for people living

in the JLTP area is the high quality of life.Historic cities, towns and villages,conservation areas, the two Areas ofOutstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) allcontribute to this (go to Figure 3.14).Taking the two AONBs, the Mendip Hillsand the Cotswolds, as examples they havehigh landscape and biodiversity qualities.Both AONB management plans highlight

the adverse impact that traffic andhighway-related schemes can have onlandscape and biodiversity. Traffic alsoimpinges on other rural environments,detracting from village character. TheStrategic Environmental Assessmentcarried out as part of this plan (go toSection 4.9) sets out the impact of varioustransport options on environmentalindicators.

Opportunities for Change3.7.14 Increasing walking and cycling can play an

important role in meeting the nationaltargets for increasing physical activity.Part of a report by the Chief MedicalOfficer for England suggests - “shorterbouts of physical activity, of 10 minutes ormore, interspersed throughout the dayare as effective as longer sessions ofactivity”.



Mendip Hills AONB

Cotswolds AONB

BRISTOL

Bath

Yate

Kingswood

Keynsham

Saltford

Thornbury


ChippingSodbury

NorthFringe

CribbsCauseway


Weston super Mare

Portishead

Clevedon

Nailsea

Yatton Backwell

South Bristol

NortonRadstock



NORTH SOMERSET

SOMERSET

WILTSHIRE

GLOUCESTERSHIRE

Severn

Estuary


N0 5km

Motorway and Interchange

Main road

Railway line and station

Local Authority boundary

Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Figure 3.14: Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)


56


3.7.15 Many of the measures in Part 2:Influencing Travel Behaviour of Chapter 5are based around encouraging people totry walking or cycling for shorter journeys.There is a growing body of evidence that‘soft’ measures, such as improvedinformation and cycle training, combinedwith ‘hard’ measures such asimprovements to the physicalenvironment can have a significantimpact on encouraging people to developdifferent travel habits. By working withpartners in other sectors such as healthand education there is scope to jointlypromote the benefits of increasingphysical activity and develop projectstargeted at specific groups.

3.7.16 In addition, action plans to reduce healthinequalities are being pursued by thearea’s five Primary Care Trusts inpartnership with the Councils and others.For example, in Weston-super-Mare aHealthy Living Centre was opened inSouth Ward in 2004.

3.7.17 There are opportunities for tacklingproblems of anti-social behaviour throughinvestment in city, town centre andneighbourhood enhancements, improvedlighting, CCTV and other measures.Similar action can be taken at a local levelin relation to shopping areas and localfootpath and cycle networks. This includesappropriate management of Local Rightsof Way where there is perceived orreported incidence of crime and anti-social behaviour.

3.7.18 Considerable scope exists for improvingthe quality of life through schemes formanaging traffic and speed, Home Zoneprojects, ‘Quiet Lanes’ in rural areas andsecuring good design in newdevelopments. In the Bristol urban areasix Home Zones will be implemented by2006 with the active involvement of localcommunities to improve quality of life intheir areas.

3.7.19 By protecting and promoting areas wherepedestrians and cyclists can enjoy a saferenvironment we can increase the amountof walking and cycling. Aside from thehealth and environmental benefits,increasing the level of activity in publicspaces can help reduce the fear of crimefor more vulnerable groups. Historic towncentres and villages, which already enjoy ahigh quality of life, need to be maintainedand enhanced.

3.7.20 As with Accessibility (go to section 3.3),public transport improvements will have amajor impact on quality of life. Newopportunities for accessing jobs,education, health facilities and otherservices will be opened up. Ensuring newdevelopment fully takes into accountquality of life issues will be important.

3.8 Asset Management

Extent, Causes and Impact

3.8.1 There are approximately 4,800 km of roadthat need to be maintained, made up ofapproximately 400 km of principal or Aroads, 1200 km of non-principal or Broads, and 3,200 km of unclassified roads.


Avon Gorge

Summary• JLTP area has extensive local transport

assets that need to be maintained.

• Carriageways and footways needstructural works across the area.

• Bridges and other structures needattention.

• Street lighting and other street furnitureall have to be maintained.

57

3.8.2 The Government target for arresting thedecline of the highway network ismeasured through Best Value Indicators.Based on these indicators Table 3.9 showsthe proportion of roads and footways inthe JLTP area where structuralmaintenance needs to be considered.

3.8.3 These figures show that overall there isstill a third of principal roads, amountingto 150km, that needs structuralmaintenance. The Table alsodemonstrates that a quarter of non-principal roads, totalling 280km, werebelow standard. Almost a third offootways were in need of attention,inevitably having a negative impact onwalking, both in terms of safety and itspotential for attracting a higher modeshare for shorter journeys.

3.8.4 Generally, the condition of the highwaynetwork is directly related to the numberand type of vehicles using it. The JLTParea’s important role as a focus foreconomic and housing growth has beenaccompanied by increases in both privatecar and goods vehicle traffic, all puttinggreater demands on road surfaces. Thesedemands will increase with greater trafficvolumes and future development (go toTable 3.2 and section 3.6).

3.8.5 As well as carriageways and footways theJLTP area has a range of bridges, viaducts,retaining walls and other structures. Theircondition varies but all need maintenanceto ensure their safety and ability tofunction efficiently. The variety ofstructures arises from the area’stopography, geography and history. Thisalso applies to street furniture, includinglighting, which makes such a contributionto ‘liveability’ and the local environment.

Opportunities for Change3.8.6 Over the period of the JLTP we will be

working together to produce a JointTransport Asset Management Plan. Thiswill provide the opportunity to identify indetail the condition of local transportassets and define annual capitalprogrammes for the maintenance offootways, carriageways, bridges and otherstructures to ensure maximum value formoney on all measures.

3.8.7 This level of joint working also providesopportunities for joint procurement,design and delivery of maintenanceschemes, providing further opportunitiesto achieve value for money efficiencies.



Table 3.9 - Condition of Roads and Footways

% where structural maintenance should be considered

Road Condition Bath and Bristol North South JLTPBaseline North East City Somerset Gloucester- area(baseline year) Somerset shire

Principal roads 35.8 42.8 23.9 33.1 33.9BVPI 223(2004/05)

Non-principal roads 21.0 26.8 26.6 22.3 23.5 BVPI 224a(2003/04)

Unclassified roads 16.0 7.0 13.8 17.3 13.3BVPI 224b(2003/04)

Footways 28.0 36.8 14.1 35.0 29.6BVPI 187(2003/04)

58


3.8.8 Efficiency in highway maintenance will bespurred on by the requirement of theTraffic Management Act 2004. Under this,planned works must be organised tominimise their impact on trafficmovement and authorities must adhereto the same standards as utilitycompanies.

3.9 Public Rights of WayExtent, Causes and Impact

3.9.1 The JLTP area includes an extensive PublicRights of Way (PROW) network, which isapproximately 3,000 km in length andcomprises Footpaths, Bridleways, BywaysOpen to All Traffic and Roads Used asPublic Paths. These routes have the samelegal protection afforded to publichighways and, with legally defined cycletracks, are collectively termed Local Rightsof Way, (LROW). Locally, there has been asignificant expansion in the provision ofother (often permissive) multi-user routesfor public access in recent years such asGreenways, National and Local Trails, cycleand multi-user routes, including theNational Cycle Network (NCN).

3.9.2 The JLTP authorities recognise the integralrole that the LROW network plays indeveloping an integrated transportnetwork for the area, which has thepotential to offer extensive sustainabletravel opportunities for walkers, disabledpeople, horse riders and cyclists for alljourney purposes.

Opportunities for Change3.9.3 Developing a network of safe and

attractive routes can improveopportunities for sustainable access toessential services and facilities whichmeets the present and future recreationalneeds of all members of the community,including those with visual impairment ormobility problems.

3.9.4 The JLTP authorities are producing aROWIP following a process of assessmentand consultation. This will involve accessand user assessments and the preparationof Action Statements designed to identifypriorities and issues that future projectsshould assess.

3.9.5 Encouraging greater use of the LROWnetwork can help to improve road safetyby providing safer and attractive traffic-free routes to work, school and leisureopportunities for walkers, cyclists, horseriders and disabled people. Greater use ofsustainable modes such as walking andcycling on these routes can also help topromote healthy lifestyles.

3.9.6 A safe and convenient LROW network canhelp to improve accessibility tocommunity facilities and services. It canthus promote social inclusion andcohesion particularly for people fromdisadvantaged groups or areas.Development of the ‘Rights of WayImprovement Plan’ (ROWIP) andAccessibility Action Plans for the JLTP areawill help to identify local accessibilityneeds. These plans will aim to improvesocial inclusion by addressing barriers toaccess, e.g. physical barriers on thenetwork such as stiles, gates, poorsurfaces or lighting and steep gradients,and social barriers such as fear of crime,lack of route information or limitedawareness of the network’s intended roleand potential.


Exploring public rights of way

3. problems and opportunities - west of england · 27 3. problems and opportunities 3.1...

Documents