text: est shir Thi cal rans ort an ( TP3) Worce ters re T rd Loc l Tr spo Pla (LT ) nsul ion Com ents and Of er Re onse Summ Con ltati C mme d ffice espo e mary nuar 011 Jan ry 20 LTP3 Main Comments in Reference to "There are a variety of factors that can impact Document - on public safety whilst using Worcestershire's transport networks, these Noted, these issues are covered in a number of LTP3 policies in great detail. In particular, the Public include: - for example, where pedestrians wish to cross busy roads, or Walking and Public Realm Policy, the Cycling Policy, the Integrated Passenger Transport Policy, Health and cyclists wish to use the same road space as motorised vehicles" -there are the Motorcycling Policy. These are currently available on the LTP3 website. Note that the LTP3 26/10/2010 Mrs I.D. E- Mail Safety Yes safety issues increasingly in relation to cyclists using pavements & putting Traffic Management Policy contains a network user hierarchy, which outlines the approach by Objective pedestrians at risk, taxis blocking bus stops and forcing passengers to which WCC will seek to mitigate user conflict for limited space at the more congested parts Paragraph therefore board/disembark in middle of traffic flows -rising public concern of the network. (not which needs addressing numbered) Noted - This approach was used because a single large document is generally not user friendly. Interesting approach to see linked plans but unfortunately this does not Separate policy documents allow for a greater level of detail for those who may be interested 26/10/2010 Mrs I.D. E- Mail Yes make for an easily readable document. in single modes or policy areas. Increased detail will help to make the policies easier to deliver. Integrated 2.9.2 Passenger transport information for all modes is provided at the Transport County's bus and rail stations; I Disagree! Bus timetables are not available at Noted - we will amend the paragraph accordingly, and will endeavour to resolve this issue in 26/10/2010 Mrs I.D. E- Mail Policy - Yes Worcs rail stations-additionally the info office at Worcester Foregate Street policy terms. Paragraph is only open 9-4pm. 2.9.2 Noted. (1). The Integrated Passenger Transport Policy seeks to address a number of these For true integration we need to have regular bus services linking Worcester issues in addition, the emerging Worcester Transport Strategy and Major Scheme Bid contains Shrub Hill Station with both Park & Ride sites and the City Centre. Need to a number of measures which are proposed to improve the integration between modes. (2). integrate Park & Ride tickets with train season tickets (as existing 'plus bus' Achievement of regular interval services on the network is an aspiration of the LTP3. However, which is more favourably priced). Bus tendering should include provision of the available budgets for tendering of supported bus services are limited, which constrains regular peak time journeys e.g. Ombersley Rd First Group bus services have Worcestershire County Council's ability to achieve this aspiration, particularly in the short 27/10/2010 Mrs I.D. E- Mail Yes significant gaps at peak times, and two buses travelling the same route term. (3) The provision of enhanced passenger transport infrastructure (such as priority within 5 mins of each other , then nothing for an hour and there seems no measures) along key corridors do measurably improve operating conditions, leading to a way passengers can influence the timetabling in the foreseeable future. number of benefits including: more reliable services, reduced journey times, increased Disagree with the limited bus lanes in Worcester City. How much impact do demand and reduced operating costs for bus companies. This improved financial performance these actually have? enables improvements to frequencies, periods of operation, and quality on a commercial basis, i.e. with no or reduced public subsidy. Rail Noted. We are aware that the infrastructure required to deliver these proposals are contained Key priority to have more frequent rail services to Alvechurch/Redditch 05/11/2010 Dr S. T. E- Mail improvemen Yes within Network Rail's plans for Control Period 4 (up to 2015). We are fully supportive of these from Birmingham, followed by same for Bromsgrove ts proposals and are working with partners in the rail industry to progress this. OMG. I have just read through LTP3 - well not in its entirety, but let's be Noted. An executive summary was not applicable in this case, given the breadth of content. 05/11/2010 Mr R. W. E- Mail honest, has anybody read it all? Where is "The Executive Summary"? Would No Instead, the LTP3 has been split into a number of smaller policy and plan documents, which that not have been helpful? together form a compendium. 05/11/2010 Mr R. W. E- Mail As regards my input: I believe actions should be prioritised toward the No Noted, this is exactly the approach of the LTP3. The Essential References Document, which number of people involved, and the time / cost of their journeys, so let's was produced as part of the compendium, provides significant information on traffic delays target traffic delays. The ones that immediately come to mind are 1) the across the county, including the sections referred to. Phase 1 of the Worcester Transport road between junction 7 of M5 and the southern river bridge at The Ketch. Strategy and the LTP3 Delivery Plan include measures to improve conditions on the A4440 between M5 Junction 7 and Powick (junction with the A449). 2) The A38 coming into and leaving Worcester. I am sure that there are 05/11/2010 Mr R. W. E- Mail No See above many more. Noted, however, junction capacity and operational improvements and small scale investments targeted at key pinch points on the transport network (across all modes of transport) can The problem is that to alleviate these problems will take significant sums of significantly improve network conditions. The current funding environment is extremely 05/11/2010 Mr R. W. E- Mail No money which will be in short supply. competitive. Therefore, Worcestershire County Council' have and will continue to develop strong business cases for investment in our transport networks. This is dependent upon robust appraisal based on evidence. (See Scheme Appraisal Framework in the LTP3 Main Document) 07/11/2010 South Motorcycling and the lack of inclusion in LTP3 Motorcycles Yes Responded by e-mail: Birmingham Motorcycle General Comments : I have previously attended a meeting with regard to I have just picked up your comments for LTP3. Thank you for these. I wonder however, if you LTP3 and found it woefully lacking in anything to do with motorcycling or have found the Motorcycling Policy on the web which forms part of the LTP3 compendium. Action Group improving parking, access to bus lanes, implementation of composite man This policy was specifically requested following comments that were received at previous hole covers, advance stop lines or improving driver awareness. meetings attended by MAG. Motorcycle parking in Redditch and Worcester needs vastly improving, I have attached a link to help: access to bus lanes in Redditch is critical especially for smaller scooter and bike riders who are forced onto duel carriageways especially to access the www.worcestershire.gov.uk/cms/pdf/LTP3_MCP_PUBLIC_DRAFT.pdf college from the Batchley side of town. If you have any comments on this document, we would very much like to hear from you. If it At the meeting I was told the needs of motorcycles where lumped in with is easier, please send them back directly to me. Of course, if you've already seen the car drivers..disgusting attitude as a four wheeled vehicle does not react to document and have no further comments then thank you once again for the taking the time slippery roads, man hole covers or pot holes in the same way as a 2 wheeled to send your original email. vehicle. Kind regards Can you please tell me why you are so anti motorcycling in Worcestershire? 08/11/2010 South I welcome the inclusion of Motorcycles into the policy and thank you for Motorcycles Yes Responded by e-mail: Birmingham that but what I would really love to see is some specifics on how you can Motorcycle improve the road infrastructure to be more 2 wheeled orientated for That's really helpful. If you think of anything else please forward it to me. Action Group example; For information, we are trying to take a multi modal package approach to projects as they 1. Do you know that councils can now buy composite manhole covers tend, as a whole, to offer better value for money and greater benefits in comparison to their which are much cheaper than the metal cast ones and do not get stolen by costs. This also makes them more attractive to potential external funders (most of our capital the local scrap man. When a motorcycle hits a cast cover in the wet they projects will be funded externally by funders such as the Department for Transport, for are extremely dangerous when you consider a very wet slippery surface is example). A multi-modal approach means that all transport users are considered (motorbike, hit by an area of rubber the size of a 10 pence (which is about the amount of cycle, pedestrian, bus user, car user etc) within a single project and this would encompass such tyre that is ever on the road at any one time). things as surfaces and man hole covers as well as parking etc.. Projects examples would include town centre enhancements or corridor improvement schemes rather than say, building a new A number of Councils are now implementing these covers which both cycle path. improve safety for ALL road users and save significant cost. In terms of attending a meeting " when is it? If we can attend we will, although don't let this 2. I have previously asked that in Redditch a number of Bus Lanes be prevent you from sending anything in that could contribute to the policy (such as the opened up again for safety reasons to Motorcycles. manhole cover idea as it could be possible to embed this, which would mean that any future manholes purchased would meet this spec). For example there is a very short bus lane totalling around 10 metres at the top of Easemore Road in the Town Centre. Thank you once again. At present any college student or rider of a small bike or scooter (usually learners) when wanting to go to the college and living on the older Batchley side of the town have to ride around the town centre and to avoid the bus lane join the main ring road on a very fast and dangerous junction, ride a With respect to your comment on the busways in Redditch. These are a specific issue in the mile extra around the 3 lane ring road which is very dodgy for low powered Borough. A busway is fundamentally different to a bus lane, which is a part of a multi-use vehicles and then join the slip road for the Police station and college. highway which is allocated for bus use. In the case of bus lanes, allowing motorcycles to use Not only does this add time to the journey and waste fuel but puts lives at these does not normally present a problem, as motorcycles are able to use these facilities risk. safely by obeying the Highway Code. I also would love the bus lane in Woodrow again to be opened up to bikes A busway (such as those in Redditch), unlike a bus lane, is not classified as a public highway. as I cannot see the harm in this when West Midlands County and Avon and These structures are designed for the exclusive use of buses, and as such would not be Somerset Counties have opened theirs. considered safe for other modes to use. There have already been a number of accidents associated with this busway. A recent safety audit identified that this situation would be Could you explain why WCC isn't? greatly exacerbated if general traffic were permitted to use the busways. As such, Worcestershire County Council will not consider opening up the busways in Redditch for 3. have also asked for more secure Centre of town bike parking as their is general use under any circumstances. It is minded, however, to consider allowing motorcycles none at present that is safe to leave a Motorcycle at for long periods. to use bus lanes on a case by case basis. The Traffic Wardens allow us to park in the push bike park in front of the Yorkshire bank but could ticket us if they wanted, they are just being kind. This location is ideal as it is central to the shops and under the surveillance of the town centres CCTV cameras. The above ideas seem to fall on deaf ears, I am in contact with my MP which is useless to be honest and doesn't return emails, unlike Jacqui Smith who did. Maybe another meeting can be arranged for us to put our ideas forward to the LTP3 committee, MAG are also launching a new Manhole cover campaign at the NEC bike show soon which is sponsored by the industry and road safety partners, maybe WCC could get on board and be pro active with this. The man hole initiative is called 'Get A Grip' and is being launched with Noted. ministers in Parliament as we speak today and will be officially launched to the public at the NEC bike show soon. We would love WCC to get involved with this and our campaigns manager said he is happy to come and meet with you guys and bring along examples of the material etc. Basically the problems with Cast Metal Manhole covers is that they are very heavy for Council workers to lift, thus do result in claims and sickness days due to bad backs and folk dropping them on their feet etc. The new composite ones are very much cheaper than the metal ones to buy and also as i said earlier do not get stolen by the rogue scrap men for cash. They also last longer and when wet do not provide the horrible slimy surface than cast metal ones do thus resulting in less road traffic accidents from not just motorcyclists but also all forms of transport. To be honest with all the above benefits it is really a bit of a no brainer and I do not understand why everyone doesn't implement these, even if it is just on traffic islands and bends where bikes are banking over, often the manhole cover is right in your path and hard to avoid on a busy island like those in Redditch. Please can I have a Quality Street. The Third Worcestershire Local Transport Plan Compendium (LTP3) is currently in draft, and can be found on Worcestershire County Council's website at As a constituent I am writing because I know you are currently deciding www.worcestershire.gov.uk/LTP3. This plan contains a number of documents which may be Local Transport budgets, and making decisions that will affect where I live. of interest to you with regard to Quality Streets: I understand that with budget cuts and reduced government spending, the The Walking and Public Realm Policy " This draft policy document sets out pressure is now on to deliver value for money in local services. I would like Worcestershire County Council's aspirations for improving the public realm, to see you focus your transport budgets on making my street into a space particularly in urban areas, to encourage better use of our streets by encouraging for people as well as cars, by redesigning it to reduce the speed and volume walking and cycling. Examples of this include removing unnecessary barriers (such as of traffic. Doing this will make it easier for all of us to choose to travel by bollards, safety fencing and A-boards) and planting street trees to improve the feel of foot and bike from our front door, and whether to work, the shops, to the streets. bus stop or train station. The more of us who do this, the less we will all Walking and The Transport Safety Policy - This draft policy document includes a policy on 20mph 08/11/2010 Ms P. Email need to spend on the consequences of congestion, CO2 emissions and Yes Public Realm zones, which sets out Worcestershire County Council's intention to implement such physical inactivity, and the safer and more pleasant our communities will be. zones where the public request them. As West Mercia Police currently do not support Making our streets safe, attractive and social spaces will enable us all to these zones, public support will be critical if Worcestershire County Council is to be have a better quality of life. With you help, these 'quality streets' will be able to generate a suitably robust business case to warrant their installation. places for people to meet and children to play outdoors, less speeding, noise and pollution " quality streets for quality lives. The Smarter Choices Policy " This draft policy document sets out how Worcestershire County Council intends to use a variety of methods to encourage people to walk, As a first step, please tackle the one thing that stops me from walking, cycle or use passenger transport; particularly for short trips. cycling and feeling safe on my local streets, and has been recognised by the British Crime Survey, as the most commonly mentioned problem behaviour The costs of rebuilding existing streets can be expensive, however, Worcestershire County " speeding traffic., Council will seek to do this where funding and public demand is identified. As part of the LTP3, we have also developed a Highways Design Guide, which sets out standards for Please make 20mph the default speed limit across areas where people live, transport infrastructure in new developments which encourage the principles of Quality work and play- including my street. Streets, whilst maintaining the ability for streets to accommodate service vehicle movements (refuse vehicles, post vans, removal vans etc) and residential car parking. This is the first step to enabling us all to make smarter travel choices. Thank you for your comments. Please pass this letter on to the Executive Member for Transport and other lead officers. Further information on Quality Streets can be found at www.quality- streets.org.uk I read in a local newspaper about the development of the LTP3, I wonder if the county has taken into consideration the impact that the coach makes on local transport. Both scheduled services and day trips are common in the Noted. The Multimodal freight policy contains a specific policy on the provision of joint coach County. Coaches are a valuable resource to travellers and local economies and freight parking at strategic locations both within urban environments and along key across Great Britain. Investment in local coach facilities such as designated interurban corridors. Worcestershire County Council' recognises the role of scheduled drop off, and pick up zones, coach parking facilities and convenient signage coaches (during LTP2, Worcestershire County Council' developed the Sixways Park and Ride CPT West 10/11/2010 Email for coaches and passengers, can enable to destinations to capitalise on the Various Yes site to perform a Coachway function and worked closely with the coach industry to ensure Midlands estimated £1.2 billion spent every year as a result of coach journeys. The CPT that enhanced facilities were provided that met passenger needs. This included new purpose is the trade body for Buses, Coaches and Light Rail and we are more than built passenger waiting facilities.) We will review the Integrated Passenger Transport Policy keen, on seeing local authorities recognising the great contribution that with a view to increasing references to coach travel. Thank you for your offer to meet - we these forms of transport makes to local economies by under pinning them. look forward to working collaboratively with you in future. We would be very happy to meet with you and speak and learn about the Counties forward plans for these transport modes. Developmen The Major Scheme Bid is aligned only to Phase 1 of the Worcester Transport Strategy. i.e. the The transport schemes associated with the Worcester Transport Strategy t Control measures needed to address current transport problems in and around the city. Delivery of are combined into one major scheme bid to central government. The City (Transport) subsequent phases of the strategy will be reliant on funding availability including private of Worcester Urban Package, identified as being additional to the major Policy, pages sector contributions as well as central Government (Major Schemes/Local Sustainable 14/12/2010 Peter Brett schemes, seems to mirror the Worcester Transport Strategy Major Scheme 45 and 53, E- Mail Yes Transport Fund/ Regional Growth Funding). The LTP3 Worcester Package will provide a 20:32 Associates bid with regards to the transport schemes it promotes. If the Worcester Developmen platform to deliver a proportion of the Phase 1 enhancements to transport infrastructure and Transport Strategy Major Scheme bid is unsuccessful is the City of t Control services in Worcester, should the Major Scheme Bid be unsuccessful in the short term. The Worcester Urban Package envisaged to be a way to deliver elements of the (Transport) speed of delivery of the Worcester Urban Package elements of the LTP3 will be heavily Worcester Transport Strategy thorough locally funded contributions? Policy " dependent on funding opportunities, including developer contributions. Policy DC8 Noted - significant technical work has been undertaken to support the case for investment in Phase 1 of the Worcester Transport Strategy Major scheme bid focus's Worcester's Southern Link Road. This is recognised as a strategically important route, linking highway capacity improvements to the south of Worcester, identifying two Page 53 " the M5 with South West Worcestershire and Herefordshire. Traffic is currently subject to junction improvements to the south of Worcester City on the A4440. The The City of delay and unreliable journey times, particularly during the peak periods. Analysis using the 14/12/2010 Peter Brett E- Mail City of Worcester Urban Package also identifies two junctions on the Worcester Yes Worcester Transport Model has shown that these problems will increase significantly over 20:32 Associates Southern Link Road that will have junction upgrades. What work has been Urban time without investment in the multi-modal package of measures set out in the Worcester undertaken to confirm that this location requires capacity improvements Package Transport Strategy and associated Phase 1 Major Scheme Bid. Without investment in the ahead of other improvement schemes within Worcester City? capacity of this link, a proportion of "through/Cross-City" traffic will continue to route via the city centre rather than the orbital links, particularly at peak times, with consequent adverse impacts on congestion and air quality and hence the local economy and environment. Noted: It is clear that without contributions from alternative sources, including private sector contributions, many of the schemes and packages identified in the LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan will not be deliverable. It will be important, therefore, that new developments are The Development Control (Transport) Policy provides a strategic framework accompanied with appropriate investment in transport infrastructure and services, such that to support the delivery of new developments. It states guidance will be the Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. provided as to the likely contributions developments will pay. We would Developmen In the short term, developer contributions toward the transport infrastructure and services like clarification on when this is likely to be released and at what level this t Control required to support financially and environmentally sustainable development will be based on policy is expected to operate, i.e. will the policy set single contribution rates (Transport) the methodologies set out in the Worcestershire County Council Requirements for Transport that apply across Worcestershire County as part of a wider Community 14/12/2010 Peter Brett Policy, Assessments and Transport E- Mail Infrastructure Levy evidence base, or will the guidance focus on delivery of Yes 20:13 Associates Paragraph Statements and associated Section 106 and 278 agreements. In the slightly longer term, transport infrastructure through other processes, such as Section 106 (e.g. 1.1) : however, it is the intention of Worcestershire County Council to work in partnership with agreements linked to individual developments? The guidance identified in 2.6.4 and the the Development Control (Transport) Policy to identify the contribution Policy DC8 Worcestershire Borough, City and District Councils across the County to develop revised methodology for transport infrastructure will be produced after the consultation period for the LTP 3 has finished. Will the guidance be subject guidance on to a separate consultation process once it is produced? the likely levels of financial contributions toward transport infrastructure and services. This guidance will draw upon the assessment work undertaken to support the LTP3, assess the impact of new developments and to inform the emerging Infrastructure Delivery Plan. The guidance will be subject to consultation. Inconsistency between the LTP3 Economic Aim ''To enhance footfall in Worcestershire's town and city centres, by improving the public realm through resurfacing, regenerating, renewing and de-cluttering our public spaces, and ensuring that use of parking capacity is optimised'' and the first Noted, although not agreed. The public realm and parking objectives, whilst sometimes bullet point under this objective which relates to strategic traffic and contradictory, should seek to be complimentary if Worcestershire County Council and parking management plans which cover entire urban areas. The holistic Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Page 12 Yes partners intend to deliver successful, attractive urban realm projects. Worcestershire County nature of this doesn't seem totally consistent with the aim itself which as Council will, of course work in partnership with key stakeholders wherever opportunities to written relates only to town and city centres. Furthermore any review will do this exist. need to be undertaken in partnership with car parking operators including District Council's and private sector operators. However, Wyre Forest District LDF Core Strategy is consistent with the broad requirements of the aim. 1 Environmental Aim: Suggest that this is caveated to recognise that whilst st 14/12/2010 Wyre Forest DC E- Mail new road infrastructure should be planned to minimise transport noise it Page 16 Noted and agreed. 08:15 may inevitably bring transport noise which does not currently exist. The overall thrust of this Public Health and Safety objective is to be 14/12/2010 welcomed and supported. However, it has historically been used to support Noted. The LTP3 Walking and Public Realm Policy seek to embrace the Manual for Streets (and Wyre Forest DC E- Mail outdated design standards that are often without scientific foundation. The Page 19 - 21 08:15 subsequent documents) to develop appropriate and high quality public realm. latest government design guidelines in the form of Manual for Streets illustrate a more creative design approach within urban areas. Similarly, this argument needs to be balanced when considering inter-urban highways with the need to maximise the efficiency of movement particularly in the context of strategic routes to markets e.g. the A456 and A449 The aims and objective of the LTP3 are in broad alignment with those set Noted. This alignment of aims and objectives will help to ensure the delivery of developments 14/12/2010 Wyre Forest DC E- Mail out in the Wyre Forest District Local Development Framework, particular in which are sustainable with appropriate funding contributions from the private and public 08:15 respect of environment, design emphasis and economic regeneration sectors. From a Wyre Forest District Council perspective it is noteworthy that LTP3 contains a proposal to wait until confirmation of funding before producing Noted, although not agreed. The availability of all funding streams has, until very recently the first 'Delivery Plan'. This could introduce a significant element of been highly doubtful. As such, publication of any proposed schemes could potentially provide uncertainty for the Wyre Forest District Local Development Framework and a falsely optimistic view of the ability of Worcestershire County Council to deliver aspired in particular could have an adverse impact on the preparation of the site schemes. The recent announcement of funding allocations is being used to develop a more 14/12/2010 specific Development Plan Documents. Whilst there are significant Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Page 35 detailed delivery plan. All schemes will be subject to appraisal using the LTP3 Scheme 08:15 uncertainties in the current climate, there are a number of potential delivery Appraisal Framework. This will identify the case for and value for money of schemes, including mechanisms and funding opportunities and a draft, or indicative, delivery their ability to support the delivery of agreed outcomes and attract funding. This will be in line plan should be produced in order to illustrate how the LTP may be with previous dialogue between Worcestershire County Council and Wyre Forest District implemented. Otherwise the LTP3 seems to be a wish list without any Council. foundation. This does not bode well for forward planning purposes and provides insufficient certainty In terms of environment issues, the LTP3 makes a sweeping comment about 'urban areas becoming more attractive'. This observation may apply to the Noted and agreed. The approach to the design of streets in future must necessarily involve a 14/12/2010 Wyre Forest DC E- Mail more 'attractive' Worcestershire urban areas. However, the design of streets Page 34 more robust partnership approach between Worcestershire County Council and Wyre Forest 08:15 as spaces within Wyre Forest District urban areas often leaves much to be District Council to ensure that future schemes are not only functional, but also attractive. desired and serves to undermine the attractiveness of the urban areas. 14/12/2010 Other than the above comments the identified issues and options are Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Page 31 - 37 Noted. 08:15 broadly supported. Whilst there is a section entitled 'delivering the plan and prioritising schemes', there is concern at the lack of a more specific (short to medium term) delivery plan. The challenges of developing such a plan are recognised i.e. the uncertainties of funding. It is considered that the delivery planning elements of the LTP3 should look to be more detailed where possible. At Noted - the development of the Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework provides a robust present there is only a strategic context to delivery. However, mechanism for prioritising schemes, applying stronger weights to those schemes which have 14/12/2010 Worcestershire County Council can provide varying degrees of certainty on Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Page 35 -40 achieved part-funding through a variety of mechanisms. This will be used to develop the LTP3 08:15 particular schemes through prioritisation and indicating likely funding Detailed Delivery Plans, which will achieve optimum value for money and increased ability to sources and options for specific schemes. The authority can also explain its deliver schemes. intentions and timeframes for developing specific proposals. The section sets out objectives and weightings for prioritisation which are generally supported. It is understandable that the maximum weighting is given to costs and funding which places the emphasis on schemes which can be funded from sources other than Worcestershire County Council. Whilst this is understood, it may be appropriate to put the emphasis on partnership schemes which bring in significant match funding i.e. schemes that can make the limited amount of Worcestershire County Council funding go further. There is specific mention of a sample scheme to introduce kerbs in order to reduce edge of carriageway pot holes which sounds expensive. The 'Delivery Programme' (from page 45) is presented in a series of packages. This approach is supported. However, as mentioned above the approach outlined is purely strategic. The argument for this is the current Noted - Although a number of potential funding sources are available in the local area, there is uncertainty over funding. However, there are known funding sources absolutely no certainty that any of this funding will make its way into Worcestershire. As 14/12/2010 emerging including Tax Incremental Funding and Regional Growth Fund. It stated above, a detailed delivery plan is currently under development and will be shared with Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Page 45 08:15 would also be helpful for Worcestershire County Council to highlight WFDC upon its completion. The Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework will prioritise priority schemes and consider a range of delivery mechanism and likely schemes for funding based on their likely ability to deliver against agreed policies and scenarios for scheme delivery. The lack of any greater levels of certainty in outcomes, and hence represent high value for money. respect of commitment to specific schemes could serve to undermine the Wyre Forest District Local Development Framework. Wyre Forest District Council supports the inclusion of the Wyre Forest Transport Strategy which includes The Kidderminster Urban Package, The Stourport-on-Severn Urban Package, The Bewdley Urban Package and The Wyre Forest Rural Package. The proposals set out here, particularly the Major Scheme Bid for the Hoo Brook Link Road It is acknowledged that these schemes are ''being considered for inclusion'' and as such, the Council Noted - The detailed delivery plan has not yet been completed for the reasons stated in the would strongly support the inclusion of the Kidderminster Urban Package LTP3 draft document. Worcestershire County Council can confirm that the Stourport Relief 14/12/2010 Wyre Forest DC E- Mail within the Final LTP3. The Kidderminster Urban Package is considered to be Page 57 - 61 Road has been considered in the LTP3, although its delivery is dependent upon achieving 08:15 essential in achieving the vision, and implementing the policies set out funding. The LTP3 will be fully aligned with the Wyre Forest Core Strategy and will seek to within the District's Core Strategy DPD. It is concerning to note that there complement the proposals throughout. is no mention of the Stourport Relief Road within LTP3. The route has been safeguarded through the District Council's Core Strategy DPD, and this was supported by the County Council at the recent Examination in Public. It is felt that LTP3 could be better aligned with the Core Strategy given the weight that the document now has. Suggest re-wording as follows: "The ancient Wyre Forest, from which the District takes its name, can be found to the west of the area. To the North and East the District is largely rural, interspersed with the villages of Fairfield, Cookley, Blakedown and Wilden and a number of rural settlements, the 14/12/2010 largest of these being Wolverley and Chaddesley Corbett. (This change is to Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Page 57 Noted - text will be amended as suggested. 08:15 bring the profile in line with the settlement hierarchy set out within policy DS01 of the Core Strategy DPD). The District does not benefit from local access to the motorway network, however, despite this the area has good connections to the Black Country and wider West Midlands Conurbation to the north, and Worcester to the South, provided by the local Principal Road Network…….'' There are congestion issues on Kidderminster Ring Road and its approaches, the A451 Stourport Road, and the A448 between Kidderminster and Bromsgrove. Unfortunately, there are two Air Quality Management Areas in the Wyre Forest District…..There is a bus station in the centre of Kidderminster, however, this is poorly located and as a result, underused. Investment will be required……Wyre Forest District Council recently 14/12/2010 Page 57 Wyre Forest DC E- Mail adopted its Core Strategy, which set out a long-term approach to land use Noted and agreed 08:15 cont. planning in the District. The main theme of the document is regeneration, with the majority of the District's future growth, up until 2026, to be delivered on brown field sites. The launch of the 'ReWyre' project for Kidderminster reflects the aspirations of the Core Strategy for regeneration and growth, focussing on the regeneration of Kidderminster Town Centre (including Churchfields and the Stourport Road Employment Corridor). 14/12/2010 Amend: Schemes to improve access to key services and facilities for those Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Page 60 Noted and agreed 08:15 that do not have access to a car. Noted. These schemes were developed in response to known safety and accident problems (including fatalities). The A449 scheme was initiated by the Highways Agency (who were Reintroduce sections of dual carriageway on the A449 and A456. These responsible for the A449), whilst the A456 scheme was developed in partnership between roads have both been reduced to single carriageway routes without Worcestershire County Council and the Highways Agency. In developing the schemes a range consultation with the District Council. This has reduced the efficiency and of options were considered and appraised. Technical assessment has shown that that overall; 14/12/2010 Wyre Forest DC E- Mail capacity of these critical links and it is suggested that these works serve to both schemes have delivered safety benefits without undermining the efficient operation of 08:15 further undermine the local economy. Although it is recognised that these these roads. In certain circumstances road capacity is enhanced through minimising the works were designed to address safety concerns, it is unclear why variability in traffic speeds. It is understood that both schemes were consulted upon, albeit alternative options were not considered that the A449 scheme was managed by the Highways Agency. Worcestershire County Council worked closely with West Mercia Police and other key stakeholders in developing the A456 scheme. Traffic and Paragraph 2.2.2 suggests a Pricing Review to identify the current charges for Noted - However, off-street parking is only one element of total car parking capacity, as such, Parking 14/12/2010 existing parking capacity and will recommend future pricing policies. Wyre it is essential that such exercises in future are commissioned jointly, to take full account of on- Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Managemen 08:15 Forest has recently undertaken this exercise and it is considered that this street and off-street car parking capacity and enable both authorities to seek to manage this t Policy - should remain a function of the District Council. capacity in an efficient way. page 6 Multimodal 14/12/2010 The Council would question whether Kidderminster and Stourport-on- Freight Noted - a feasibility study will be required to identify whether a robust business case exists Wyre Forest DC E- Mail 08:15 Severn are large enough to make Freight Consolidation Centres viable. Policy - page for the development of a Wyre Forest Freight Consolidation Centre. 13 14/12/2010 Consider that the policies within this document should be revised to Developmen Noted: The Worcestershire County Council Requirements for Transport Assessments and Wyre Forest DC E- Mail 08:15 include thresholds at which they become applicable. It is considered that t Control Transport Statements referred to in Policy DC7 sets out the thresholds for the provision of the extent and volume of information being requested would not be (Transport) Transport Statements (less detailed) and Transport Assessments (more detailed). This ensures justifiable for modest development proposals and therefore some form of Policy that small scale developments are not required to provide significant information on the threshold should be clarified. transport impacts, whilst large scale developments (quite correctly in view of their impact on the transport network) are expected to provide such information. Developmen t Control Noted: New mixed use developments which combine residential with (some) employment, (Transport) 14/12/2010 Raise question over how new development can ''seek to reduce the length health, education, retail and leisure facilities can reduce the travel distance. Similarly new Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Policy - 08:15 of trips''. developments can be located close to and be integrated with, existing facilities, reducing Policy DC1 length of trips in comparison with more "remotely" located (less sustainable) developments. (4th bullet point) Developmen Noted: The Worcestershire County Council Accidents Studies Team continuously updates t Control accident data, which includes details of cluster sites, (based on information provided by the 14/12/2010 Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Consider that a clear definition of cluster sites should be included. (Transport) emergency services and bespoke surveys). The information is provided to developers to 08:15 Policy - enable them to consider transport safety when preparing their Transport Assessments or Policy DC3 Statements in support of their proposals. Noted: The Worcestershire County Council Requirements for Transport Assessments and Developmen Transport Statements sets out the method by which developers are expected to quantify the t Control impact on the performance of the transport network of travel demand generated by their 14/12/2010 Clarification as to how the requirements in this paragraph would work in Wyre Forest DC E- Mail (Transport) proposed development. On the basis of this assessment (and ongoing dialogue with the 08:15 practice would be welcomed Policy - para developers), the infrastructure and services needed to mitigate the impact on the network of 2.4.2 generated travel demand is identified and costed. Worcestershire County Council make available to developers a number of transport models to help with this assessment. Developmen Noted: In the current economic climate it is particularly important that the financial t Control sustainability of providing the transport services needed to deliver a development are fully (Transport) taken into account. This includes an allowance for the long term (20 year) financial 14/12/2010 This talks about a 20 year business case. Is this realistic given the current Wyre Forest DC E- Mail Policy - performance of the public transport services needed for a new development (and which will 08:15 economic climate? policy DC7 also underpin the forecast mode shares which influence the scale of enhancements needed to (3rd bullet road infrastructure to deliver the development). Worcestershire County Council make point) available to developers a number of transport models to help with this assessment. Noted: Worcestershire County Council does not operate or maintain rail services and facilities 6.10 in general and 6.10.13 in particular focus a large amount on Worcester- in Worcestershire. This function is performed by Network Rail and the Train Operating Birmingham journeys when the figures from Table 6.5 giving the top 50 rail Essential Companies. Worcestershire County Council recognises the importance of the Stourbridge 21/11/2010 flows show large numbers of journeys from Kidderminster-Birmingham and references Mr T. C. E - mail Yes Line to Worcestershire's local economy, and will work with the rail industry to secure 14:17 Black Country. Which are not discussed. It is important that you note the document / improvements to rail services and facilities along the route. The proposed enhancements to improvement needed in journey times on this flow with more regular Rail Kidderminster Station Interchange and to Hagley and Blakedown stations are testament to the services and less terminations at Stourbridge Junction. importance attached to this route. 21/11/2010 Mr T. C. E - mail The document in general is heavily biased in its discussion to South Essential Yes Noted, although this is not the case. Data was drawn from a variety of available sources. The 14:17 Worcestershire. An assessment should be made to ensure equal levels of References Wyre Forest towns are a high priority for Worcestershire County Council, which is reflected in discussion and planning is given to Wyre Forest issues. Document the considerable partnership work which is currently underway between Worcestershire County Council, Wyre Forest District Council, key stakeholders and developers. Just to check that you know that access to Redditch train station is poor Noted and agreed. Worcestershire County Council, in partnership with Redditch Borough 21/11/2010 Ms J. S. E - mail and often blocked by people parking along the entrance road - and please Rail Yes Council are working on the delivery of a Redditch Town Centre Enhancement Package. The 17:52 see note in general comments section rail/bus interchange is a key consideration of this proposal. I use the train from Redditch to Birmingham during the rush hours - and Noted: Worcestershire County Council does not operate or maintain rail services and facilities would be interested to know how you propose improving the service; also in Worcestershire. This function is performed by Network Rail and the Train Operating 21/11/2010 are able to do anything about parking at the station? Why don't rail users Ms J. S. E - mail Rail Yes Companies. Worcestershire County Council will continue to work with the rail industry to try 17:52 have free parking and, even worse, why do those who pay highest rail fares to secure improvements for Worcestershire's rail users (including parking and ticketing also get hit by a higher parking fee which almost doubles the cost of rail arrangements) travel? Worcestershire County Council has developed a Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework (SAF). This framework will enable the County Council to appraise all of its capital highways/transport schemes by developing them as part of a series of pre-defined integrated area packages, enabling prioritisation of schemes using evidence based approach for funding The proposed Keytec 7 Industrial Estate road link northwards over the rail and delivery and best value to be achieved. We will certainly include all three schemes in the 23/11/2010 Pershore Town line, east of Pershore railway station to connect with the A44 diverting E - mail Highway Yes SAF, however, it should be recognised at that our funding for new transport infrastructure has 14:55 Council lorries away from driving southwards along Station Road and increasing road been significantly reduced, therefore, the County Council's ability to deliver such schemes congestion in the centre of town. (particularly highway schemes) using LTP funding alone will be highly constrained (particularly in the short term). It will be important, therefore, that transport infrastructure required to deliver new developments are accompanied with appropriate private sector investment, such that the Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. Worcestershire County Council has developed a Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework (SAF). This framework will enable the County Council to appraise all of its capital highways/transport schemes by developing them as part of a series of pre-defined integrated area packages, enabling prioritisation of schemes using evidence based approach for funding The extension of the already popular cycleway (way marked and well and delivery and best value to be achieved. We will certainly include all three schemes in the 23/11/2010 Pershore Town utilised between Worcester and Pershore) to go on from Pershore to E - mail Cycle Yes SAF, however, it should be recognised at that our funding for new transport infrastructure has 14:55 Council Hinton on the Green and thence north to Evesham and south to Beckford, been significantly reduced, therefore, the County Council's ability to deliver such schemes connecting with cycle routes in Gloucestershire. (particularly highway schemes) using LTP funding alone will be highly constrained (particularly in the short term). It will be important, therefore, that transport infrastructure required to deliver new developments are accompanied with appropriate private sector investment, such that the Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. Worcestershire County Council has developed a Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework Now that we have the quantified visitor numbers to Croome Court, we are (SAF). This framework will enable the County Council to appraise all of its capital 23/11/2010 Pershore Town E - mail keen to ask for a minor diversion on the 382 bus service so that it can IPT Yes highways/transport schemes by developing them as part of a series of pre-defined integrated 14:55 Council service the court. area packages, enabling prioritisation of schemes using evidence based approach for funding and delivery and best value to be achieved. We will certainly include all three schemes in the SAF, however, it should be recognised at that our funding for new transport infrastructure has been significantly reduced, therefore, the County Council's ability to deliver such schemes (particularly highway schemes) using LTP funding alone will be highly constrained (particularly in the short term). It will be important, therefore, that transport infrastructure required to deliver new developments are accompanied with appropriate private sector investment, such that the Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. Worcestershire County Council has developed a Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework (SAF). This framework will enable the County Council to appraise all of its capital highways/transport schemes by developing them as part of a series of pre-defined integrated At meetings at County Hall, we have been assured that we qualified on area packages, enabling prioritisation of schemes using evidence based approach for funding accessibility grounds to create a new road link between Racecourse Road and delivery and best value to be achieved. We will certainly include all three schemes in the 23/11/2010 Pershore Town E - mail Industrial Estate and the Co-operative Supermarket, to enable buses to Highway Yes SAF, however, it should be recognised at that our funding for new transport infrastructure has 14:55 Council resume calling direct at Pershore Railway Station without the need to been significantly reduced, therefore, the County Council's ability to deliver such schemes reverse vehicles. (particularly highway schemes) using LTP funding alone will be highly constrained (particularly in the short term). It will be important, therefore, that transport infrastructure required to deliver new developments are accompanied with appropriate private sector investment, such that the Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. Thu West Mercia Page 11. - can I suggest that the bullet point should read Promote AND LTP3 Main 25/11/2010 E - mail Yes Noted and agreed Police CONTINUE TO IMPROVE coach parking facilities. Doc 13:5 Thu Page 20 improving Public Health and safety. Can I suggest an additional West Mercia LTP3 Main 25/11/2010 E - mail bullet point to read "consulting and working with partner agencies to Yes Noted and agreed Police Doc 13:5 improve highway safety through Education, Engineering and Enforcement. Thu Page 21 - Should refer to West Mercia Safer Roads Partnership not Road West Mercia LTP3 Main 25/11/2010 E - mail Safety Partnership. and we are now West Mercia Police not West Mercia Yes Noted and agreed Police Doc 13:5 Constabulary. Thu Page 22 you refer to giving consideration to allowing motorcycles to use Noted. It is acknowledged that this is a difficult issue. However, best practice in other areas West Mercia LTP3 Main 25/11/2010 E - mail bus lanes. I have to say that I doubt that we would support that element of Yes suggests that Worcestershire County Council needs to consider again and in full, the costs and Police Doc 13:5 LTP 3 benefits of this option. . I hope that the plan for a Stourport Relief road has been dropped. It is not necessary as there is only a slight problem in rush hours only (fine for the Noted. The cost of delivering this scheme is significant. As such, the benefits of investment 22/12/2010 Ms. P. A. C. E-Mail rest of day) and the amount of money needed to build the road would be Roads Yes will need to be quantified and must significantly exceed costs in order to attract funding from 17:26 massive compared to the small benefit. A waste of money that could go on a variety of sources, including the private sector and central Government. better things (also less environmental impact) Redditch Under section NE Worcestershire Transport Achievements first sentence NE 26/11/2010 Worcestersh Citizens Advice E - Mail should read as follows; partnership working to deliver benefits to local Yes Noted and agreed 15:19 ire Transport Bureau residents. Achievemen ts Redditch 26/11/2010 Citizens Advice E - Mail Point 4 under the bus service, a company name is not included. Bus Service Yes Noted, thank you for this. 15:19 Bureau The Essential References Document provides information on traffic volumes on the motorway Redditch 26/11/2010 Also I remain unsure how in your document you can have the busiest network in Worcestershire. The section you are referring to relates to the busiest sections of Citizens Advice E - Mail ERD? Yes 15:19 motorway junction at Bromsgrove but also at Worcester? motorway in Worcestershire. It does not seek to compare Worcestershire with the rest of the Bureau nation's motorway network. Redditch Not sure I understand some of your phrasing as descriptors for an area 26/11/2010 Citizens Advice E - Mail either and wonder if it is just me or that people would welcome simple LTP3? Yes Noted. We will try to make the text clearer and easier to understand. 15:19 Bureau phrases? 1. Noted - No, there is no link between size and number of issues. The purpose of this Redditch You appear to give more space to some smaller towns in the county, is this 26/11/2010 approach is to ensure a fair distribution of limited funds. 2. Noted - The LTP3 does not suggest Citizens Advice E - Mail because they have more problems? Redditch is the 3 largest station in rd Stations Yes 15:19 this. Investment in Redditch Station and Interchange will be packaged into the Town Centre Bureau terms of use but does not qualify for increased development, why is this? Enhancement proposals. In the profile, Hagley gets a brief mention but the station is not earmarked for any specific improvements. The Group feels that the building needs an (Page 46 -48) Mon Stourbridge interior refurbishment and staffing hours should be extended. The location North East Noted - A specific scheme for Hagley Station has now been included in the LTP3 Delivery Plan 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail of Hagley village places it firmly in the commuter belt for Birmingham and it Worcestersh Yes and is integrated with proposed improvements to Kidderminster and Blakedown stations. 15:48 Group could be more attractive if more trains called there. Hagley should be ire Transport promoted to the extent that local residents do not travel by car to Strategy Stourbridge Junction to 'rail-head' at its free car park. SLUG fully supports 'partnership working with the rail industry to develop a business case for the new transport interchange for Bromsgrove'. This Group, together with the Bromsgrove Rail User Group is frustrated that funding procurement is delaying the execution of the scheme to provide a (Page 46 -48) Noted. However, this refers to strategic rail infrastructure. Worcestershire County Council much needed facility. The development of Bromsgrove station and the Mon Stourbridge North East would not be able to promote this scheme without full support from partners in the Rail provision of an intensive electrified service will set in motion the 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail Worcestersh Yes Industry and DfT Rail. Worcestershire County Council maintains healthy dialogues with displacement of freight traffic from the Lickey route and necessitate the re- 15:48 Group ire Transport partners in the Rail Industry, and we continue to work to progress the Bromsgrove Station opening of the freight railway through Stourbridge and Dudley. The Strategy scheme. restoration of a passenger service from Stourbridge to Dudley (and beyond) is dependent on the 'domino effect'. SLUG would like to see more inter- city and semi-fast inter-urban train services calling at Bromsgrove, subject to the introduction of a regular shuttle service to and from Droitwich Spa. Mon Stourbridge SLUG supports partnership working 'to ensure the successful (Page 46 -48) Noted. It is recognised that the delivery of Bromsgrove Station improvements can form part 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail redevelopment of the Longbridge site'. Both Longbridge and Bromsgrove North East Yes of a wider enhancement of the strategic railway network. Whilst it is the wider Railway 15:48 Group stations have the potential to remove vast amounts of motor car traffic Worcestersh Industry that must lead on the strategic issues, Worcestershire County Council will support from the roads of Worcestershire but the bus network must be significantly ire Transport measures which enable and incorporate commitments to improve services to/from improved to maximise usage of the latter. To achieve a satisfactory mix of Strategy Worcestershire and in particular between the County and key economically important areas local and long distance train services on the Stourbridge Line, the Camp Hill such as Birmingham, London and the South East, and Bristol/South Wales. Line needs to be re-opened for passenger trains so as to provide extra capacity for semi-fast services in and out of Birmingham. (Page 51) SLUG acknowledges and agrees with the statement that 'there is (Page 50-54) Noted. Worcestershire County Council support improvements in the quality of rail services Mon Stourbridge an infrequent service between Worcester and Cheltenham'. The line to South linking the county with Cheltenham, Gloucester, Bristol and the South West/South Wales. 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail Cheltenham is the strategic link to the South West of England. An enhanced Worcestersh Yes Improved rail links will support the economy and also help to address traffic congestion issues 15:48 Group train service to Cheltenham or Gloucester and beyond is a prerequisite to ire Transport (again with positive impacts on economic performance) any development of a Worcestershire Parkway Station. Policy SLUG also recognises that there is 'no direct link to Arriva Cross-Country (Page 50-54) services (operating between the North East/East Midlands, Birmingham and Noted. However, this refers to strategic rail infrastructure. Worcestershire County Council Mon Stourbridge South the South West/ South Wales)'. This is a situation which could be remedied would not be able to promote this scheme without full support from partners in the Rail 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail Worcestersh Yes by extending or amalgamating existing London Midland services to bolster Industry and DfT Rail. Worcestershire County Council maintains healthy dialogues with 15:48 Group ire Transport the Arriva Cross-Country provision. Naturally Worcester Foregate Street partners in the Rail Industry, and will raise this issue. Policy Station would need to be incorporated into any new diagram. (Page 50-54) Mon Stourbridge (Page 52) SLUG fully supports the introduction of passenger information South Noted. This will require investments in ITS equipment, which is now included in the revised 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail screens at transport interchanges and would like to see live information of Worcestersh Yes LTP3 Delivery Plan. 15:48 Group connecting services available at all Worcestershire stations. ire Transport Policy SLUG supports Worcestershire Parkway Rail Interchange providing it is based on the model at Smethwick Galton Bridge. Smethwick GB is a split (Page 50-54) Support noted. Worcestershire County Council will continue to work with partners and key Mon Stourbridge level station offering local to intercity connection and vice versa. SLUG has South stakeholders to progress Worcestershire Parkway, with the aim of delivering a high value 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail successfully lobbied for additional services to call there i.e. the Birmingham Worcestersh Yes scheme of benefit to Worcestershire businesses, residents and visitors and the railway 15:48 Group International to Holyhead trains, thus providing additional journey ire Transport industry as a whole. opportunities. A Worcestershire Parkway station must be attractive to Train Policy Operating Companies. (Page 50-54) Stourbridge SLUG urges Worcestershire County Council and Network Rail to upgrade South Noted. Schemes to enhance both stations are incorporated in the Worcester Transport Mon Line Users E mail facilities at Foregate Street and Shrub Hill. The overall appearance of both Worcestersh Yes Strategy and the LTP3 Delivery Plan. 27/12/2010 Group stations is less than satisfactory. ire Transport 15:48 Policy SLUG is pleased that 'Kidderminster ranks as second busiest station in the county'. It is the only rail head for Stourport and Bewdley. The Strategy (Page 57) Noted. Worcestershire County Council is developing the Kidderminster Station Interchange Mon Stourbridge acknowledges that train and bus usage is steadily growing in the Wyre Wyre Forest scheme in partnership with the Wyre Forest District Council, the Rail Industry and the Severn 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail Yes Forest area and recognises the need for better interchange facilities. The Transport Valley Railway. In particular the County Council are seeking the funding necessary to progress 15:48 Group Group identifies the proposed Kidderminster rail/bus interchange at Strategy this valuable scheme. Kidderminster station as the best opportunity to develop integrated public transport and would like to see construction commence in the immediate future. Proposals for regeneration in the Horsefair, Churchfields and Clensmore area are not detailed but upgrade of roads in the vicinity, particularly the (Page 57) Noted - Worcestershire County Council is contributing to the Masterplan that is being Mon Stourbridge bridge over the Worcestershire and Staffs Canal, could facilitate the Wyre Forest developed for the Churchfields area of Kidderminster. We will continue to work with partners 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail Yes introduction of a Town Centre circular bus route, serving the Railway Transport to identify improvements to local transport infrastructure and services to facilitate 15:48 Group Station, Swan Centre, Clensmore, Crossley Retail Park and the General Strategy regeneration of this area. Hospital. SLUG strongly promotes INTEGRATED PUBLIC TRANSPORT, The ideal is achievable and much of the infrastructure is already in place. The reluctance of the Severn Valley Railway to offer commuter services means that Bewdley (and Stourport) need better bus links to the railway station. The (Page 57) Noted - The current funding situation will make it difficult in the short term to maintain and Mon Stourbridge private sector should be encouraged to provide the links commercially, Wyre Forest enhance bus services in Worcestershire. However, Worcestershire County Council will 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail Yes even if some railway mileage is duplicated. Whittles 125 bus service Transport continue to work with operators and key stakeholders to make best use of limited funds to 15:48 Group (Stourbridge-Kidderminster-Bewdley-Bridgnorth) indicates a strong demand Strategy improve accessibility in support of economic and environmental objectives. for access from the Black Country to the Wyre Forest area and beyond. How many more innovative bus routes could be constructed out of (presently) tendered services? SLUG finds the Strategy to be strong in aspiration and commitment. Many of the ideas therein need only fine-tuning. Although costly major Thank you for your comments. Worcestershire County Council will support any proposals for Mon Stourbridge engineering is required for Worcester stations capacity improvements, light rail operation by the rail industry, where these are shown to represent value for money, 27/12/2010 Line Users E mail cheaper solutions to other station shortfalls do exist. Worcestershire has Summary Yes have strong business cases and achieve agreed policy outcomes. However, Worcestershire 15:48 Group not embraced Light Rail as a third modal service and should consider County Council is not in a position to fund the costs of Light Rail schemes, given the very high suitability where practical. All in all, SLUG welcomes WLTP3 and eagerly set-up costs. awaits the execution of its objectives. No mention in original statement on the importance and acknowledgement Hanley Castle Noted. A Transport and Climate Change Policy has been developed as part of the LTP3 29/12/2010 E mail of Climate change and environmental issues 'enhancing (built) and natural Page 1 Yes Parish Council Compendium. environment' does not cover this. Economic Prioritising of transport routes ' For example, interurban roads Hanley Castle 29/12/2010 E mail should be prioritised for freight and longer distance motorised traffic,' and Page 11 Yes Noted and agreed. Parish Council public transport/ buses These are places where visitor coaches can safely wait, pick up and drop off visitors before Hanley Castle 29/12/2010 E mail What are coach layover facilities in Urban areas? Page 11 Yes continuing onwards to designated coach parks. A good example is the recently constructed Parish Council Sixways Park & Ride, which incorporates a coach station for National Express. Hanley Castle Noted. During the LTP3 period, strategic traffic and parking management plans will be 29/12/2010 E mail Support robust parking enforcement policy Page 12 Yes Parish Council prepared in partnership with key stakeholders and which will cover entire urban areas. Hanley Castle Communication systems using simple personal technologies i.e. texting to Noted: Will ensure that this is contained within the IPT strategy along with the relevance of 29/12/2010 E mail Page 14 Yes Parish Council update bus times plus information points at key stops 'text services' within rural areas in particular. Hanley Castle 29/12/2010 E mail No mention of use of river/water for freight transport Page 14 Yes Noted. This is included in the LTP3 Multimodal Freight Policy. Parish Council Hanley Castle Environmental aim 1; reduce noise by reducing speeds in urban or built up Noted. Managing the impact of transport on the environment (including noise) is an important 29/12/2010 E mail Page 16 Yes Parish Council areas. element of the LTP3. Noted. Maintaining and where feasible, improving accessibility, including in rural areas, is referenced within the LTP3. The current funding situation will make it difficult in the short Hanley Castle Urban areas becoming more popular, but acknowledgement that poverty 29/12/2010 E mail Page 34 Yes term to maintain and enhance bus services in Worcestershire. However, Worcestershire Parish Council exists in less accessible rural areas County Council will continue to work with operators and key stakeholders to make best use of limited funds to maintain and improve accessibility. Hanley Castle The Big Society theme...how does the strategy seek to reflect this in using 29/12/2010 E mail Yes Noted - Please see the LTP3 Smarter Choices and Integrated Passenger Transport Policies. Parish Council local knowledge of needs etc when it comes to e.g. bus routes and times? Noted - The current funding situation will make it difficult in the short term to maintain and 29/11/2010 Wythall Parish General Comments Bus routes are very important to Wythall here in the enhance bus services in Worcestershire. However, Worcestershire County Council will E - Mail Bus Service Yes 14:02 Council North of the County and would wish to retain as many as possible continue to work with operators and key stakeholders to make best use of limited funds to maintain and improve accessibility. The general objectives are what one would expect to see in a strategic Noted - Maintaining and where feasible, improving accessibility, is referenced within the LTP3. document However there are some specifics that concern parishioners in The current funding situation will make it difficult in the short term to maintain and enhance 29/11/2010 Powick Parish Powick. As both a non driver myself and Chairman of the Parish Council, E - Mail Bus Service Yes bus services in Worcestershire. However, Worcestershire County Council will continue to 12:52 Council some of these specifics include Improving the 363 bus service particularly in work with operators and key stakeholders to make best use of limited funds to maintain and the evenings and at weekends Improving the 44 bus service on Sundays, improve accessibility. particularly in the evening. It would seem sensible to consider extending the 44 to run from Malvern Noted. This proposal has already been discussed with bus operators who run the majority of to the Royal Hospital and then on to Warndon Villages, Shire Business Park, 29/11/2010 Powick Parish this service on a commercial basis. We will continue to monitor the use of this route in E - Mail Blackpole and back into Worcester thereby connecting up the employment Bus Service Yes 12:52 Council conjunction with the operator, and will seek to encourage enhancement opportunities where centres in north and east Worcester with the employees arriving from the these arise. West of the city 30/11/2010 Droitwich Spa Just to confirm that the Town Council had no comments to make on the E - Mail LTP3 Noted 09:46 Town Council LTP3 Transport It was helpful to have the separate document 'Transport and Air Quality 31/12/2010 Bewdley Town and Air Noted. The LTP3 includes a Bewdley Urban Package of enhancement measures, and includes a E mail Policy' which highlights the long outstanding concerns expressed about 11:43 Council Quality scheme intended to address air quality issues. Welchgate Bewdley. It is vital this issue is tackled somehow. Policy 31/12/2010 Bewdley Town E mail Overall the Town Council supports the objectives of the LTP for the 15 year LTP3 Noted. 11:43 Council period through to 2026 and within it the Bewdley Urban Package. Noted - The Kidderminster Station Interchange Scheme has been specifically designed to Better bus services to Kidderminster railway station and coordination with promote direct cross-town bus services improving links between the Wyre Forest and the rail train services to Birmingham and Worcester " these appear haphazard at network. This will include services to and from Bewdley and Stourport. The Kidderminster North East present and mostly require users to break their journey in Kidderminster Urban Package will also help towards this aim. The current funding situation will make it 31/12/2010 Bewdley Town Worcestersh E mail town centre and either walk up Comberton Hill or catch another bus. There difficult in the short term to maintain and enhance bus services in Worcestershire. However, 11:43 Council ire Transport is a distinct lack of integration with the train timetable with the inevitable Worcestershire County Council will continue to work with operators and key stakeholders to Strategy result that users feel travel by car is far more reliable and time-efficient make best use of limited funds to improve accessibility. Worcestershire County Council will which of course increases the traffic especially at peak times; also continue to work with partners in the Rail Industry to try to encourage better integration of transport modes. A 20mph speed limit throughout the town centre but particularly so as to 31/12/2010 Bewdley Town improve conditions and reduce speeding along the High Street which is Bewdley Noted. Worcestershire County Council would be happy to work with you to consider this E mail 11:43 Council largely composed of listed and historic buildings and having very narrow Urban proposal as part of the proposed Bewdley Public Realm Enhancement Scheme. pavements and therefore public safety issues.. Package I am very concerned to see that notwithstanding the Stratford- Honeybourne (Oxford/Worcester/Cheltenham) Rail Line having been included in your existing LTP2 there is no reference to it in your LTP3, Worcestershire County Council has included its stance on both schemes in the LTP3 Long despite being told that it would be included. The existing Honeybourne- Term Delivery Plan, subject to confirmation of local benefits and the business case. It is agreed 29/12/2010 Mr T. B. E mail Long Marston line, which is the only freight branch in the County, is not Delivery Plan that schemes such as these may bring strategic benefits to the rail network and cannot be 10:55 even mentioned. The potential of Honeybourne Airfield, Vale of Evesham as seen as a purely local. As such Worcestershire County Council would expect it to be led by a freight/road/rail interchange is not mentioned either. This was promoted the rail industry, with local support provided where the local benefits have been proven. by the County 10 years ago. I trust that these omissions will be corrected in the final draft of LTP3. Noted. Worcestershire County Council acknowledges the important role that rail freight can play in supporting the economy and reducing the congestion and environmental impacts of freight haulage. It is recognised, however, that rail freight schemes are often strategic in The area considered by the plan includes routes that are important to the nature and can involve infrastructure investment outwith the local area and that successful 31/12/2010 DB Schenker future development of rail freight traffic. DB Schenker believes there is schemes must have the active support of key stakeholders, including the private sector (e.g. E mail 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd considerable potential for the growth of rail freight traffic to the benefit of Train Operating Companies, businesses, haulage companies, Network Rail) and public sector the local area, particularly in economic and environmental terms. (e.g. Department for Transport Rail, Office of the Rail Regulator etc.). Therefore, Worcestershire County Council expect rail freight schemes to be led by the private sector and associated key stakeholders, with local support provided where proposals deliver local benefits to the economy and environment. Long term forecasts anticipate a doubling of rail freight nationally by 2030. Noted: Worcestershire County Council acknowledge and support the role of rail freight It is disappointing, therefore, that the Multimodal Freight Policy is not more where local benefits to the economy and environment have been proven. Worcestershire 31/12/2010 DB Schenker supportive towards the development of rail freight. The Policy recognises E mail County Council expect that such rail freight schemes will be led by the private sector and 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd that 'Rail is particularly well suited to bulk freight movements' (section 2.4.1) associated key stakeholders and look forward to discussing the business case for investment and 'New rail freight locations will in general require planning permission in such facilities with the parties involved. and suitable locations will need to be identified' (section 2.4.2). Policy F3 advocates working towards the identification and development of opportunities to develop rail freight, but there is no specific commitment to support new routes or terminals that will facilitate rail freight growth in Worcestershire. From an environmental point of view, rail has strong sustainable credentials. The emissions and carbon dioxide produced in the movement of freight by 31/12/2010 DB Schenker Noted: Worcestershire County Council acknowledge and support the role of rail freight E mail rail are up to fifteen times less than those produced by the equivalent road 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd where local benefits to the economy and environment have been proven. transport. The expansion of rail freight, therefore, can do much to reduce overall environmental impact. As part of the Multimodal Freight Policy, suitable locations with potential to be used as future rail freight terminals should be detailed, and protected Noted: Worcestershire County Council expect that such rail freight terminal schemes will be from other development that would hinder their use as such. Strategic led by the private sector and associated key stakeholders and look forward to discussing the opportunities for new or re-opened rail lines, together with potential business case for investment in such facilities with the parties involved. In terms of the 31/12/2010 DB Schenker enhancements of existing routes, should also be detailed in a similar manner E mail Honeybourne Line proposals, the LTP3 includes reference to this scheme. It is agreed that this 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd to the existing Local Transport Plan 2. DB Schenker remains supportive of scheme may bring strategic benefits to the rail network and cannot be seen as a purely local the re-opening of the rail route from Stratford-on-Avon through Long one. As such Worcestershire County Council would expect it to be led by the rail industry, Marston and Honeybourne towards Cheltenham Spa ('The Honeybourne with local support provided where the local benefits have been proven. Line'), which was included in Worcestershire's Local Transport Plan 2 under the heading 22.214.171.124 Infrastructure improvements. DB Schenker sees much potential in the development of new markets served by the Honeybourne Line, particularly in the inward movement of general merchandise as part of a wider logistics supply chain and in the Noted: Worcestershire County Council expect that such rail freight schemes will be led by the 31/12/2010 DB Schenker E mail outward movement of agricultural produce. Recent development of a private sector and associated key stakeholders and look forward to discussing the business 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd high capacity dry bulk hopper rail wagon is expected to open up markets case for investment in such facilities with the parties involved. not traditionally accessible to rail, including the transport of grain and other agricultural produce. The reinstatement of the rail route south of Stratford-on-Avon also has the Noted: Worcestershire County Council, the LTP3 includes reference to this scheme, subject to potential to provide much needed additional capacity for through rail confirmation of local benefits and the business case. It is agreed that this scheme may bring 31/12/2010 DB Schenker E mail freight traffic, both for diversionary purposes when other routes are strategic benefits to the rail network and cannot be seen as a purely local one. As such 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd blocked by engineering work and by providing a route for permanent traffic Worcestershire County Council would expect it to be led by the rail industry, with local as a relief to existing rail lines that are already approaching capacity. support provided where the local benefits have been proven. Noted: Worcestershire County Council, the LTP3 includes reference to this scheme, subject to The route through Long Marston south to Cheltenham Spa (already partially confirmation of local benefits and the business case. It is agreed that this scheme may bring 31/12/2010 DB Schenker E mail reopened as a leisure railway) would provide an alternative to the existing strategic benefits to the rail network and cannot be seen as a purely local one. As such 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd Birmingham " Bristol route via Ashchurch. Worcestershire County Council would expect it to be led by the rail industry, with local support provided where the local benefits have been proven. 31/12/2010 DB Schenker The reinstatement of the former curve ('East Loop Junction " South Loop Noted: Worcestershire County Council, the LTP3 includes reference to this scheme, subject to E mail 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd Junction') close to Honeybourne would allow access to/from the Cotswold confirmation of local benefits and the business case. It is agreed that this scheme may bring rail route in the direction of Oxford. The Cotswold route between Oxford strategic benefits to the rail network and cannot be seen as a purely local one. As such and Worcester has been recently upgraded by Network Rail and, in Worcestershire County Council would expect it to be led by the rail industry, with local conjunction with a link to Stratford-on-Avon, would provide an alternative support provided where the local benefits have been proven. Worcestershire County Council to the existing railway between the Midlands and the Thames Valley via look forward to discussing the business case for investment in such infrastructure with the Banbury parties involved DB Schenker believes that the re-opening of the Honeybourne Line is 31/12/2010 DB Schenker Noted: Worcestershire County Council look forward to discussing the business case for E mail important to the future of rail freight and will ensure that our support for 12:04 Rail (UK) Ltd investment in such infrastructure with the parties involved. this is reinforced through the relevant railway industry processes Noted. These comments will be taken into account in the development of the ROWIP plan. In 31/12/2010 Ramblers' E-mail Please see Appendix A for the full letter particular, we note the reference to the local sustainable travel fund and would welcome the 08:37 Association opportunity to take your views into account when submitting a bid to this fund. Noted. The LTP3 strategic Delivery Plan contains a number of rail proposals which include the potential for re-opening the Honeybourne to Stratford railway line. We note your support for the replacement of the Abbey Bridge in Evesham and expect an imminent result from our Major Scheme funding application to the Department of Transport. With respect to your Vale of 31/12/2010 comments on bus services we note your aspirations for enhancements to bus infrastructure Evesham Civic E mail Please see Appendix for the full letter 08:28 and services in your local area. Unfortunately, service enhancements may not be viable in the Society short term due to the current economic climate. We note your comments on the pedestrian crossings, pinch points, street scene and provision of infrastructure to promote motorcycling, as well as the Briar Close link (Black Bridges) Worcestershire County Council will seek to address these issues as part of future package schemes in the Evesham area. Noted - A Stourport Relief Road Phase 1 will feature in the forthcoming LTP3 delivery plan. The approach for developing the delivery plans is represented by the Scheme Appraisal Framework (SAF). The SAF has been developed to guide directorate capital spending (including S106 funds from developers and grant allocations) to optimise value for money. This will involve the development of the 13 pre-defined packages in the LTP3, of which Stourport on Severn is included, into a clear set of integrated schemes (i.e. not single-mode). This approach will develop a clear understanding of the transport infrastructure and service Stourport requirements in each area, prioritised according to overall business case, including value for 01/12/2010 Mr T. A. Letter Please see Appendix for the full letter. Yes Relief Road money, support for policies etc. The SAF will be used to help prioritise the various elements of the package and also to prioritise between packages (particularly in terms of phasing). The results of the SAF will prioritise and plan LTP3 spending over the first Delivery Plan period (2011/12 " 2014/15), with the packages tailored to available funding. Schemes will then be reviewed using SAF, given the socio-economic situation of the country, county and local district, every 3 years, towards a rolling 5 year plan of improvements, over the next 15 years. 01/12/2010 The LTP3 includes a Bewdley Urban Package of enhancement measures, and includes a scheme Mr D.J.S. E - mail Changes to affect the air pollution issues in Bewdley's Welch Gate Yes 14:13 intended to address the Air Quality Management Area in Welch Gate issues. , Bewdley. Concern over plans to improve air quality in Welch Gate, Bewdley. The resulting queues along Dowles Road in Bewdley from changing priorities at the junction of Dog Lane and Welch Gate will result in far more CO 2 emissions from idling vehicles. Having seen the recent queues caused by Noted. Any scheme to help to improve air quality in Bewdley would involve an integrated road works and having experienced queues before the current priority was package of measures, including encouraging use of the bypass by through traffic, traffic established I know that traffic congestion will be ill served by allowing the management measures designed to reduce queuing (particularly in areas which are air quality 01/12/2010 Mr D.J.S. E - mail Welch Gate bandwagon to be given a victory. The real solution is to prevent Yes sensitive), public realm enhancements to support the economic vitality of the town centre 14:13 vehicles using Welch Gate as a through route. There is a bypass! and measures to encourage use of walk, cycle and passenger transport (particularly for short Alternatively the removal of dwellings in Welch Gate would improve air distance journeys to/from/within Bewdley). In combination these measures will help to flow and speed up the traffic. Clearly neither solution will appeal to the mitigate the impact of transport on air quality. residents. There is however a precedent. Looking at the bottom of Park Lane and the end of Dog Lane can be seen the remains of homes demolished to make way for road improvements in the Mid 20th century. Noted. Thank you for your numerous points raised in this letter. Worcestershire County Council is not a local planning authority and as such any comments relating to increased developments should be directed to Malvern Hills District Council. However, Worcestershire County Council will continue to work closely with the local planning authorities to ensure that new developments are accessible and do not cause adverse impacts on the highway networks. Proposals for the North West Link Road, electric car charging points, Worcestershire Parkway Lower and a West of Worcester Park and Ride site have been included in the LTP3 strategic delivery 07/12/2010 Broadheath Letter Please see Appendix for the full letter plan. It is clear that without contributions from alternative sources, including private sector Parish Council contributions, many of the schemes and packages identified in the LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan will not be deliverable. It is important, therefore, that new developments must be accompanied with appropriate investment in transport infrastructure and services, such that the Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. To help ensure this, the LTP3 is and will continue to be closely aligned with the emerging and relevant Local Development Plans and Core Strategies. The South Worcestershire cycle forum regularly meet council staff to discuss cycling issues & policy for Worcester & the southern area of the county. During the last few years we have been encouraged & grateful for the council's positive approach to cycling & the benefits it can bring. 8th South Noted and agreed. The LTP3 includes Cycling and Smarter Choices Policy documents which Choose how you move / The Diglis Bridge & new cycling infrastructure all December Worcestershire Letter draw on the lessons learnt from the Worcester Sustainable Travel Town Pilot Project. The final help to encourage more people to see cycling as the best option for short 2010 Cycle Forum version of the LTP3 includes a more detailed Delivery Plan. urban journeys. LTP 3 continues this positive approach but currently is short on specific proposals. Choose how you move taught us that inexperienced cyclists; what you define as 'leisure / utility' cyclists require safe continuous routes to their destination. With limited funds the priority must be to link existing cycling routes into continuous routes linking suburban areas to town & city centres. When cyclists reach their destination they require adequate, safe, secure sheltered parking for their bikes. This need not be a council provision but could be a Noted and agreed. The LTP3 Development Control (Transport) Policy makes specific reference 8th South planning requirement for private developments. LTP 3 is a 15-year for the need for new developments to cater for the needs of sustainable modes (including December Worcestershire Letter programme 2011 " 2026. This needs to be split into shorter time periods with cycling). Schemes which involve the provision of secure cycle parking have been included in 2010 Cycle Forum clearly defined objectives that can be worked toward. The cycle forum will each of the three biggest urban areas (Kidderminster, Worcester and Redditch) in the LTP3. continue to work with the council to promote cycling, bringing our concerns to their attention. I submit this initial document within the 31st December deadline. We shall be discussing LTP 3 in greater detail with council staff at our next meeting on the 21st January 2011. Noted. The LTP3 includes reference to the potential reinstatement of the Stratford-upon- Avon - Honeybourne - Cheltenham rail line, subject to confirmation of local benefits and the business case. It is noted that this is a strategic scheme that may bring wider benefits to the The case for the reinstatement of the Stratford-upon-Avon - Long Marston 09/12/2010 rail network and cannot be seen as a purely local one. As such Worcestershire County Council Mr M. B. E- Mail - Honeybourne railway line and in the longer term to Cheltenham Spa. 09:29 would expect it to be led by the rail industry (including DfT Rail, Network Rail and passenger Saved under shared/current projects/ ltp3/consultaiton/responses and freight train operating companies), with local support provided where the local benefits have been proven. Worcestershire County Council look forward to discussing the business case for investment in such infrastructure with the parties involved I note that RS7 from LTP2 indicates that there should be 20mph zones outside schools subject to a review. I would like to know what success WCC 16/12/2010 has had in implementing this policy from LTP2 and what percentage of 2.5.1 Road Noted. A separate response on this specific issue is being prepared by the Worcestershire Mr M. H. E Mail Yes 11:56 schools now have 20mph zone. I would like Policy RS7 to be explicitly Safety County Council Accident Studies Team and will be issued direct to the consultee. carried over to LTP3 so that all schools have a 20mph zone. It would appear that WCC has had limited success in implementing this policy after 5 years! In Cleeve Prior, we have had WCC do an Audit of the B4085, despite RS7 16/12/2010 being in the policy, WCC appear that they are not going to implement a Noted. A separate response on this specific issue is being prepared by the Worcestershire Mr M. H. E Mail Yes 11:56 20mph zone. Is there any point of trying to help formulate policy if the County Council Accident Studies Team and will be issued direct to the consultee policy will be ignored by WCC if it is inconvenient? In the essential references document Paragraph 5.3.2 you state that Noted. There was an error in the Essential References Document. Thank you for pointing this according to the Office for National Statistics Worcester City has the out to us. We have corrected the document. In summary, the population of Worcestershire is lowest projected population growth of 7.3% to 2026 whilst Bromsgrove set to increase from 555,300 in 2008 to 571,000 in 2016, and to 596,100 by 2026. This represents would increase by 17.8%. However your table 5.5 actually shows an increase of 7% between 2008 and 2026. Bromsgrove has the largest projected increase of 16/12/2010 Bromsgrove's population falling whilst Worcester City's population increases 11%, whilst Redditch has the lowest projected population growth of 6%. Worcester's growth in MR A.F. E Mail 11:36 by 16.5%. I therefore checked with the ONS website and found that the first projected to increase by 5.5%. In terms of the over 65 element of the Worcestershire statement was correct. Table 5.5 is most important because as you correctly population, this is forecast to increase by 45% between 2010 and 2026, with the largest growth identify age distribution is vital concerning transport needs let alone total forecast for Redditch (58%), and the lowest for Worcester (32%) The scale of the forecast population, perhaps you can tell me how the figures in table 5 were growth, when combined with the changing age structure, will inevitably increase demand for calculated. many services and the volume of travel. Noted - The arguments stated in LTP2 remain correct for LTP3. Congestion in Worcester City is generally confined to peak periods (e.g. 0730 " 09:30),, when commuters are travelling on 2) Your arguments for increasing the number of Park and Ride sites have the transport network. Park and Ride, whilst providing alternatives for short stay visitors, is turned the reasons for their introduction in LTP2 completely on their head. principally focussed at users of long stay car parks (i.e. commuters). However, in other towns At that time it was to ease congestion within the City of Worcester, now it and cities where Park and Rides have been installed, these sites tend to become popular with 16/12/2010 MR A.F. E Mail is proposed to have more, to free up long term parking spaces for short shoppers and visitors as well as commuters. Increasing parking capacity through Park and Ride 11:36 term parking within the City centre; thus increasing the possibility of sites will enable more people to access Worcester City, without causing increases in congestion. Yet at the same time you give cogent reasons of the impact of congestion on the road network, leading to increased economic activity. This is recognised by congestion upon the economics of the County. the business community who are in support of additional transport schemes (including Park & Ride) which target traffic congestion and make conditions more attractive for consumers which will in turn attract retail consumers and boost the local economy. 3) It is known that traffic is abstracted from bus routes by park and rides and A range of investments are also proposed for Malvern in the LTP3 Delivery Plan, which will although you may try to mitigate this loss by allowing the bus service to improve accessibility to and conditions in the town. It is noted that the economy of incorporate the Park and Ride site into its designated schedule it will still Worcestershire benefits from agglomeration. In that there are a number of large towns with lead to some loss because of the necessary level of frequency needed by 16/12/2010 buoyant local economies, which work together to create a dynamic local economy. Therefore, MR A.F. E Mail these sites. However there is a far greater reason for not building such sites 11:36 it is Worcestershire County Council's view that any investments to improve accessibility to and that is the economic disadvantage it could create for Malvern Town by Worcester (as the largest settlement in Worcestershire) in conjunction with investment in abstracting customers from their shops to the benefit of Worcester City. other towns such as Malvern, will result in wider benefits which will be felt in the other towns Surely we need to collaborate and make the area attractive to visitors not in the county and beyond. compete with towns 4 or 5 miles down the road. 4) Whilst Malvern has natural advantages Worcester does not take Agreed, Worcester City Council and Worcestershire County Council have invested heavily in advantage of the River running through the centre of the town, I have little improving the riverside in Worcester. This is being supported by private sector investment, 16/12/2010 doubt that if it were boarded by park land with associated facilities it could MR A.F. E Mail particularly in the Diglis area of the city. It is Worcestershire County Council's view that all 11:36 be made much more of an attraction as well as an attractive site for visitors (both day trippers and longer stay visitors) should be supported and encouraged developers which could pay for the associated works. We must encourage through investment in supportive infrastructure and services. longer stay visitors not day-trippers. 5) The Gross Value Added per resident is shown as only £16074, a £1000 lower than the West Midlands average and £4500 lower than that for Noted - Worcestershire County Council and the Worcestershire District Councils work closely 16/12/2010 England. We will not increase this figure by fighting each other but by together to promote and support Worcestershire's diverse economy. This partnership has MR A.F. E Mail 11:36 complementing each others USP's. I would suggest with Malvern's place in resulted in continued increases in GVA per resident over time. The case for freight the Technology field we should create Worcester into a Freight consolidation centres are considered in the LTP3. Consolidation Centre. 6) Within the time span of the Plan Period there will be the extension of the High Speed rail-link to Birmingham, the construction of a deep water berth at Bristol Docks as well as the Governments intention to make Broadband Noted. Worcestershire Parkways proposals have and are being considered as part of the LTP3 16/12/2010 available to all homes by 2015. Internet shopping will dominate retail sales; in MR A.F. E Mail Delivery Plan. Worcestershire County Council will continue to work with key stakeholders to 11:36 its infancy at the moment it has still increased "white van movements" by promote and develop the strategic and local business cases for such schemes. 12% as your documents show. With a largely rural hinterland there will be great opportunities for towns such as Worcester with an enviable position so close to the Motorway network. Investment into a consultancy in this field, possibly linked to the Parkway rail proposal would be much more beneficial for the whole area. 7) You talk about the use of P&R sites as possible lorry parks may I suggest that you investigate the parking facilities at County Hall first. There is already a limited degree of night time and weekend security: there is the Noted and agreed. Worcestershire County Council is certainly not averse to use of its car 16/12/2010 Orchard Cafe facility which could be franchised out to provide showers and parks for overnight freight parking. However, a suitable business case would be required to MR A.F. E Mail 11:36 meals and it has an ideal location close to junctions 6 & 7. I think that it support investment in enhancing the quality of the infrastructure to enable this change of use would be good politically (with a small p) in these times for Local to take place. Government, to be seen using its assets as a means of earning additional revenue. 8) It would seem to be well worth the money to investigate bus punctuality Noted. Worcestershire County Council will continue to work closely with bus operators to 16/12/2010 for non frequent services when you show that we are over 10% worse than MR A.F. E Mail encourage improved operations management and will also seek to address the key pinch 11:36 either Warwickshire or Herefordshire. Poor service only encourages greater points on the network which can undermine service punctuality and reliability. car usage 9) I am pleased to see that the Taxi now has a place in your approach and I believe could be effective in rural areas as a demand led service operated 16/12/2010 on a shared basis but only to specific points and at specified times. When Noted. The LTP3 Delivery Plan includes a scheme to investigate potential demand responsive MR A.F. E Mail 11:36 the new Localism Bill is enacted this could be a joint effort between the transport schemes for rural areas. County Council and groups of Local Parish Councils, allowing the latter to be the managing agents. 10) Instead of creating new footpaths, I believe that we should promote existing footpaths as a tourist facility; tied in with the appropriate bus timetable we could encourage tourists into the rural areas. With the 16/12/2010 pressures on Local Finance this would probably have to be an online facility. MR A.F. E Mail Noted. 11:36 Some Parish Councils produce their own maps; others may need to be encouraged, which could be picked up in a pub or local shop. We must encourage bus usage in the rural areas and again this could persuade visitors to stay longer. Worcestersh ire Fri 'To promote technology-led growth benefiting all sectors and parts of the Sustainable Transition 17/12/2010 Letter county' Ideally this would be green technology-led growth. The LTP3 Community Noted. The LTP3 and its policy documents actively promote green and sustainable transport. Malvern Hills 12:04 should encourage this by supporting green transport. Strategy Objectives (page 4) Fri A reliable and efficient transport network is indeed important. Increasing The Noted. We have developed a number of minimum standards for infrastructure and services in Transition 17/12/2010 Letter the efficiency of existing transport and encouraging the accessibility of non- Economic Worcestershire, to ensure that future enhancements bring about systemic improvements to Malvern Hills 12:04 car modes of transport are welcome. For a car journey, the main problem is Objective sustainable transport networks in the County. However, Worcestershire County Council is often parking at the destination. For public transport more issues need (page 9) acutely conscious of affordability. Worcestershire County Council is keen to work with addressing " Finding out when it runs...easy access to accurate and up to partner organisations to find sustainable ways to provide and maintain supportive date information, remembering that not everyone has internet access - infrastructure across Worcestershire. particularly old people. " Is it at a useful time? " Getting to the stop " and the stop for the return journey, which, in Malvern, may be up a steep hill. " Can you sit down at the stop? Is there a shelter? " Will it come? This is an area in which input from local users and potential users would be particularly helpful, as they would have detailed knowledge of the locality and problems which a young car-driver may not appreciate. The Transition movement and the local authority have broadly the same The Fri Transition aims, with Transition being particularly keen on lessening the dependence Environment 17/12/2010 Letter Noted. Malvern Hills on oil, both to help the environment, and to plan for the likely increase in Objective 12:04 price, and ultimate shortage. (page 15) Less cars more health! The smarter choices initiatives are to be welcomed. The Public Fri Working actively with user groups could greatly enhance their effectiveness. Health and Transition Noted - we would welcome your support in the development of our smarter choices package 17/12/2010 Letter Transition Malvern Hills may be able to help with ideas and possibly Safety Malvern Hills in the Malvern Hills. 12:04 contacts, as the transition model focuses on identifying and pursuing local Objective practical actions. (page 19) Perhaps the idea of bringing services to the public could be adapted for consultations The 'real time' information on Malvern station is unreliable Fri The Equality Transition Centralisation of facilities can increase the distance to travel e.g. there is no 17/12/2010 Letter Objective Noted. Malvern Hills longer a surgery in Barnards Green People without cars are often also 12:04 (page 23) without internet access Public transport costs are high, which could particularly affect young people when the EMA is abolished Giving the public suitable opportunities to influence planning is a great aim, which can be enhanced by ensuring that consultation can be easily accessed The Quality Fri Transition by the people affected. In order to gain maximum value for limited funding of Life 17/12/2010 Letter Noted. We will be in touch to ask for a list of contacts. Many thanks. Malvern Hills for rights of way improvement, could local walking groups be contacted Objective 12:04 directly? Some of them target less active people, so would be able to make (page 27) suggestions as to where a small improvement would have most impact. The Asset Fri Noted. However, LTP3 necessarily is a multimodal strategy, recognising the diverse needs and Transition Managemen 17/12/2010 Letter Transition philosophy is to discourage cars roles of each transport mode, in particular in support of economic performance and Malvern Hills t Objective 12:04 protecting and improving our environment. (page 29) Fri Transition It is regrettable that supporting economic growth is given much higher Results of Noted - The objectives and their prioritisation reflect the views of the County Council Elected Letter 17/12/2010 Malvern Hills priority than reducing carbon emissions and improving the quality of life Objective Members. 12:04 and a healthy natural environment. Weighting Exercise (page 37, figure 1,3) The Great Fri Malvern Transition Assuming that the 'enhancements' refer to shared space, the package is to 17/12/2010 Letter Urban Noted. Malvern Hills be welcomed. 12:04 Package (page 54) The unusual configuration of steep and narrow streets in Great Malvern does not lend itself to pedestrianisation or to a one-way system. Perhaps the present road space will be "shared" with pedestrians who will have as much if not more right on the road space as motorists. At present the roads even in the town centre are clearly prioritised for motorists, except at designated crossing points, and then only when the pedestrians have been given the right to cross by the motorist stopping at traffic lights. Shared space would take these "rights and certainties" away from motorists and give priority to pedestrians. The net result - a calmer town centre catering primarily for pedestrians but which motorists could navigate their way through at low speed. It is to be hoped that limited funds will be carefully The Great targeted to help less active people e.g. carefully positioned seats. Because Noted - Worcestershire County Council is working with Malvern Hills District Council on a Fri Malvern Transition of the unusually steep nature of Church Street, some parking for elderly and scheme to consider a 'shared space' type approach to Great Malvern's public realm. Also, 17/12/2010 Letter Urban Malvern Hills disabled people would be needed. Transition Malvern Hills could help with investment is planned in Malvern Link Railway Station to encourage Park & Ride, cycling, 12:04 Package ideas and sources of information for the smarter choices programme. There walking and bus/rail interchange to access rail services to Worcester and beyond. (page 54) is a shared car ownership scheme already operating in Colwall. A loan scheme which allows people to try out electric bicycles has led to increased use of electric bicycles instead of cars. In other parts of the country there are successful community transport schemes such as sharing lifts in private cars or taxis, and community owned minibuses. The main problem with Malvern Link station seems to be the car park charges, which have led to an increase in on road parking. Residents do show an interest in parking and riding. People with bus passes are willing to use them to go to Worcester, but the bus inevitably winds its way round Malvern. So they parked on Morrisons car park and caught the bus from there, until Morrisons introduced charges. The LTP3 shares many of the aims of the Transition Movement. Transition Fri Transition Malvern Hills may be able to help with local knowledge and contacts for 17/12/2010 Letter Noted. Thank you for this offer. Malvern Hills consultation. Through the wider transition movement, information is 12:04 available on novel transport schemes which are already running. There is no reference to the depot at Long Marston, which despite falling 22/12/2010 partially outside of the County is accessed from the Cotswold Line near Mr R.F. E-Mail Freight 2.4 Yes Noted - mention is made in the delivery plan. 15:36 Honeybourne in Wychavon. This depot has been used in the past for storing rolling stock and is the only freight branch in the county. Also in relation to the above point it may be useful to investigate/mention Noted: The LTP3 includes reference to this scheme, subject to confirmation of local benefits the potential for the future restoration of part/all of the former and the business case. It is agreed that this scheme may bring strategic benefits to the rail 22/12/2010 Mr R.F. E-Mail Honeybourne line which would be particularly useful for freight trains (as it Yes network and cannot be seen as a purely local one. As such Worcestershire County Council 15:36 avoids the Lickey incline). The route is saved in the adopted Wychavon would expect it to be led by the rail industry, with local support provided where the local Local Plan (2006). benefits have been proven. In the main LTP document (page 49) it omits the mention that services from 22/12/2010 Great Malvern and Worcester to London Paddington also call at Pershore, Mr R.F. E-Mail Yes Noted. The document has been amended. 15:36 Evesham and Honeybourne. There is also no mention of the services from Hartlebury to Birmingham Moor Street. These services are also important. The We have logged your comments as part of the LTP3 consultation. Please note that we have Bromsgrove 23/12/2010 We are keen for an update on your proposed spring 2011 traffic included all the transport elements that were discussed and documented previously into the Town Centre E - mail Yes 13:34 management study for Bromsgrove. LTP3 delivery plan into a series of packages for delivery in future (subject to funding and Regeneration business case). Partnership I appreciate your concerns on Major Scheme entries; however, we are limited as to how many With respect to feedback on the LTP3 as part of your Consultation. We are Major Schemes we can bid for, particularly in the short term. Major Schemes are currently The concerned that on page 45 'The Delivery Programme " The Major Schemes' defined as those schemes which have a total cost in excess of £5 million. To achieve funding in Bromsgrove that Bromsgrove is not listed, when we believe the successful this way, a sizeable local contribution (as much as 50% of total costs) must also be sought to 23/12/2010 Town Centre E - mail implementation of your NEW transport strategy and therefore the packages Yes match fund this investment. As many of the schemes proposed for Bromsgrove have the 13:34 Regeneration for Redditch and Kidderminster rely on the effectiveness of the transport potential to be funded by other means (in particular, maintenance and the Local Sustainable Partnership infrastructure in Bromsgrove and specifically the development of the major Transport Fund, for example), it was decided that the Major Scheme route was not the most public transport interchange in the town. appropriate means of funding the delivery of the North East Worcestershire Transport Strategy in Bromsgrove during the LTP3 plan period. The critical issue is that all schemes are captured within delivery packages in the LTP3. The way The in which these schemes can be funded will undoubtedly change over the life of the LTP3. So, Bromsgrove whilst not currently proposed, we are not necessarily discounting the possibility of a major 23/12/2010 Town Centre E - mail Please can you record our concerns (stated above) under the consultation? Yes scheme for Bromsgrove in the medium to long term, should this method of funding be 13:34 Regeneration considered appropriate in future. Please note that no new Major Schemes are being accepted Partnership for consideration by the Department for Transport for funding during the Spending Review period. It may also be useful to mention that car parking at some of the railway 22/12/2010 Mr R.F. E-Mail stations may need to be increased to cope with the growth in demand Yes Noted and agreed - the revised delivery plan contains some schemes which address this issue. 15:36 (particularly as many of the stations serve a large rural area). Feel that the north side of Worcester needs to be bridged in the same way the southern side has been with the Diglis Bridge. Spanning the river (identified in the Worcester Transport Strategy) ideally from near the old tip at Henwick Park over to either (ideally) the Duckworth Trust or the northern Bridge for 22/12/2010 end of the racecourse will have considerable sustainable transport benefits Noted. A scheme which includes a 'Waterworks Bridge' has been included in the LTP3 Delivery Mr N. B. E-Mail north Yes 14:22 as well as linking up the green spaces including Gheluvelt Park and all that Plan. Worcester follows both sides of the River. The result being that the city is linked with sustainable transport centrally as well as in the north and south of the city. Also provides access to a children's park and for which Henwick Park and St. John's is desperately lacking. It is arrogant of Worcestershire County Council to expect the residents of Worcestershire to give up their cars in favour of second rate public transport when they are incapable of making their own staff use the free facilities instead of their cars, this is especially pertinent when the elected 23/12/2010 Members retain private parking facilities for themselves within the County Noted. However, LTP3 necessarily is a multimodal strategy, recognising the diverse needs and Mr P. S. E-Mail Yes 10:52 Hall campus. The proposals within this document can be likened to the roles of each transport mode. Newtown Road bus lane, going from nowhere to nowhere with bits missing in the middle and stopping well short of the intended destination. This fiasco is a good indication of the capability of Worcestershire County Council to plan and deliver an integrated transport system. A significant number of our students (possibly the majority) travel to Noted. Worcestershire County Council is currently implementing schemes which will help to College by bus. The cost of and accessibility to public transport is therefore improve conditions for buses and other road users along the Newtown Road and Bromyard Worcester of major importance to the College in terms of attracting students. Road Corridors in Worcester. These measures will enable more efficient east<->west journeys 23/12/2010 Home to Sixth Form E-Mail Students who travel across the city are often faced with difficult bus Yes by all modes across the city and will help to encourage bus companies to improve their cross- 10:52 School College journeys as they often have to change buses in Worcester. We would city services, offering faster and more reliable services. Worcestershire County Council will therefore welcome the introduction of cross city bus services to and from continue to work with operators to identify opportunities to improve bus operations in the the College. city of Worcester. Worcester Disappointingly the number of students who cycle to College is small so we 23/12/2010 Noted. A scheme for the development of a signposted cycle route between Worcester City Sixth Form E-Mail also welcome the development of clearly signed and safe cycle routes along Cycling Yes 10:52 Centre and Redhill is now included in the LTP3 Delivery Plan. College with the positive externalities and cost savings that such travel bestows. There are some very positive points in Worcestershire's LTP - we are 23/12/2010 impressed with the commitment to walking and cycling and look forward to Sustrans E-Mail yes Noted - Thank you. 12:46 working in partnership with Worcestershire to increase walking and cycling opportunities and make this a reality. The plan is very good- there are opportunities not considered such as Noted - This will be considered as part of all station improvement schemes that are promoted 23/12/2010 Sustrans E-Mail links to the train stations for cyclists that are not made reference to. yes in the LTP3 delivery plan. We would be delighted to work with you to ensure this aspect is 12:46 Worcester is in a perfect position to achieve this. properly considered. 23/12/2010 Sustrans E-Mail Sustrans would welcome the opportunity to discuss many of the aspects of yes Agreed. We would also welcome this. 12:46 this plan in more detail 12 weeks is the statutory consultation period for strategy documents and schemes. This is In our view the consultation process was inadequate. Less than three consistent with national and County Council Corporate guidance. In developing the LTP3 a months is not sufficient time to consider a large number of complex variety of public exercises were undertaken in order to understand the issues and challenges documents. Furthermore we cannot find any evidence that in developing Wyre Forest facing the travelling public and their priorities in terms of 30/12/2010 this LTP the council engaged with the wider community of transport and Friends of the E - mail Process improving the Worcestershire transport network. These are detailed in the Essential 14:13 environmental groups. It is also disappointing that the consultation process Earth References Document, Section 3. Once understood, these issues did not include any public exhibitions and meetings. Being able to have a then influenced and helped inform the third Local Transport Plan (LTP3) so that the policies dialogue with officers is a key part of any consultation and is an opportunity and plans could be developed in a for the public to understand how it will affect them and their locality. 'fit for purpose' and meaningful way. Although the effects of climate change and the impact of rising fossil fuel prices are mentioned in the main document the policies set out and the Wyre Forest Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework point to a 'business as usual' 30/12/2010 Friends of the E - mail scenario. It does not represent a real step change in transport planning Strategy Noted. Please see the LTP3 Transport and Climate Change Policy. 14:13 Earth which is necessary in order to make the necessary urgent reduction in CO2 emissions. Considering that the LTP covers the next 15 years it is not bold enough in strategy to cope with the likely changes during the plan period. A striking omission is the lack of targets to be achieved over the 15 years Noted. The LTP3 policies actively promote increased use of sustainable transport modes. Wyre Forest covered by the policy. There are no targets for an increase in active travel 30/12/2010 Worcestershire County Council will continue to monitor the success of its approach using a Friends of the E - mail and public transport use, or for a decrease in road traffic. The targets need Strategy 14:13 scheme-by-scheme basis; however, setting overall targets in the current uncertain economic Earth not be too specific but should at least give an idea of the desired effect of and financial climate would not be appropriate. the LTP. Apart from developer contributions there is very little consideration given to ways in which in which funding can be outside the traditional process of Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 the local transport capital settlement or the local government settlement. Noted. Many of the funding mechanisms referred to are challenging to implement and would Friends of the E - mail Funding 14:13 Consideration should be given to other means of raising funds such as road require strong political support. Earth pricing, business rate supplements, higher parking charges and workplace parking levies. A new avenue of funding is the recently announced Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF). The Local Transport Minister has said that bids to the Wyre Forest LSTF will be regarded more favourably if they have involvement for 30/12/2010 Friends of the E - mail community groups. The guidance will tell local authorities that if they wish Funding Yes Noted. 14:13 Earth to bid successfully they need to show commitment to sustainable transport through funding pledges made from other sources including the health sector and developer funds. Wyre Forest The Committee on Climate Change Progress Report sets out the need to Noted. The LTP3 policies actively promote increased use of sustainable transport modes. 30/12/2010 Climate Friends of the E - mail reduce the overall distance travelled by car from 2010 if the UK is to achieve Yes Worcestershire County Council will continue to monitor the success of its approach using a 14:13 change Earth the target in the Climate Change Bill. In the draft policy there are no scheme-by-scheme basis; however, setting overall targets in the current uncertain economic estimated annual reductions in CO2 from transport resulting from the and financial climate would not be appropriate. measures proposed in the draft. There needs to be policies which give a comparative advantage to sustainable travel modes leading to a reduction in car travel. Sustainable travel needs to be safer, quicker, cheaper and more convenient to produce a significant modal shift. WCC has had success in reducing carbon emissions and has won several Wyre Forest awards for its achievements. It has been short listed in the Low Carbon 30/12/2010 Climate Friends of the E - mail Council category awarded by the Local Government Chronicle. To continue Yes Noted. Our approach is outlined in the LTP3 Transport and Climate Change Policy. 14:13 change Earth this progress the council needs to focus on reducing carbon emissions from transport. Although 20mph zones are undoubtedly effective a better option is the Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 implementation of a default 20mph limit in all residential areas. 'Total 20'' is Transport Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 an inexpensive and popular way to improve safety, reduce pollution and Safety Policy installation. Earth encourage smarter travel choices. The benefits are:- Wyre Forest Reduction in CO2 emissions and improved air quality. A study in Germany 30/12/2010 Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their Friends of the E - mail showed that on average car drivers changed gear 12% less often, braked 14% Yes 14:13 installation. Earth less often and required 12% less fuel Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 20 mph limits cost 50 times less than 20mph zones. In Portsmouth 20 mph Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 limits cost only £333 per street. installation. Earth Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 Traffic flow is improved because at 20 mph the gap between vehicles is Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 shortened. installation. Earth Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 Health improvements because of improved air quality and a shift to more Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 active modes of transport such as cycling and walking. installation. Earth Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 Better quality of life and reduced inequalities. Slower speeds benefit non- Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 car users reducing noise and pollution. installation. Earth Self enforcing. Strong support from local communities and increasing police focus on community policing means that 20 mph limits can be enforced Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 with a 'light touch' Road users are more likely to respect 20 mph limits Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 because they have experienced the benefit of the lower limit in their own installation. Earth locality. 72% of drivers are reported to support 20 mph in residential areas (British Social Attitudes Survey 2005). 30/12/2010 Wyre Forest E - mail Twenty local authorities are now committed to 20 mph as the default speed Yes Noted. The LTP3 Transport Safety Policy gives consideration to 20 mph limits and their 14:13 Friends of the limit for residential areas. Portsmouth is the local authority which has led installation. Earth the way in implementing 20 mph. Two years after implementation there has been a 22% reduction in road causalities. There is a lot of good policies in this document which if implemented will improve the experience of cyclists. The aim of increasing the number of cyclists is closely related to local road safety strategies. There should be a Wyre Forest recognition that cyclists benefit from 'safety in numbers'. The benefits of Noted. The LTP3 actively promotes the use of sustainable modes as part of a balanced and 30/12/2010 Friends of the E - mail increased cycle use and improved road safety for cyclists and other road Cycling Yes integrated multi-modal approach which recognises the roles of all transport modes in 14:13 Earth users should be seen as entirely complimentary aims. The emphasis should supporting the economy and protecting and enhancing the environment and quality of life. be on tackling the fears which prevent people from cycling and not the negative approach that more cyclists will lead to an equivalent rise in causalities. We welcome the commitment in the Cycling Policy (C2) to consider Advanced Stop Lines (ASLs) at all signal junctions. More ASLs at signal junctions would improve the cyclists' experience of riding on the public highway and increase safety. However this policy does conflict with how Noted. Worcestershire County Council will consider ASLs at all junctions, where installation the county council has acted over ASLs at the junction of Bewdley Road can be justified on need and safety grounds. Worcestershire County Council cannot commit Wyre Forest and Sutton Road in Kidderminster. On one arm of the junction the depth of 30/12/2010 to install ASLs at all junctions in the county. However, where a local need is identified, they Friends of the E - mail the reservoir was reduced to below that set out in Transport Signs & Cycling Yes 14:13 will be considered for implementation. The specific example to which you refer was removed Earth Regulations, General Directions (2002). An ASL was removed from another as a result of a safety audit at the junction, which identified that the junction would be safer if arm of the junction. Wyre Forest Cycle Forum was consulted and made a the ASL were actually removed. case for leaving the ASLs as they were but despite this the changes were made. If WCC has a real commitment to this policy then ASLs must be installed to the current design standard and there should be a strong presumption against their removal. Because of funding restrictions and the need to enhance health, quality of life and deliver environmental benefits the LTP should give priority to Smarter Choices packages. There needs to be appropriate partnerships with Noted. The LTP3 contains a Smarter Choices Policy. Smarter Choices schemes are included for Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 businesses, statutory agencies such as health trusts, and the third sector to Smarter a number of areas in the LTP3 Delivery Plans and as part of a balanced and integrated multi- Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 help deliver Smarter Travel Choices packages. There will be a need for Choices modal approach which recognises the roles of all transport modes in supporting the economy Earth complimentary small capital schemes such as 20 mph speed limits, cycle and protecting and enhancing the environment and quality of life. parking and cycle priority measures which will enhance the benefits of STC partnerships. There are very few references in this policy to encouraging car clubs. When cars are made available near where people live, at their workplace or Noted. Worcestershire County Council trialled the use of Car Clubs in Worcester City. This Wyre Forest through a car share scheme then those who join such schemes think was unsuccessful and so a strong business case would be required to attract the necessary 30/12/2010 Smarter Friends of the E - mail differently about how they make journeys. They tend to use public Yes funding. However, Worcestershire County Council does have a successful car share scheme 14:13 Choices Earth transport or walk and cycle more. It is not an anti-car measure but it is which we actively encourage employers to use through work place travel plans. (See LTP3 effective in reducing car use. It can be an effective lever for local authorities Smarter Choices Policy and Development Control (Transport) Policy.) to manage car parking and use. The council should consider providing financial help to organisations to set up and run car clubs. This would good value for money in terms of the environmental and quality of life benefits. Noted. The LTP3 necessarily is a multimodal strategy, recognising the diverse needs and roles There is no mention in this policy about reducing car use by removing Traffic and Wyre Forest of each transport mode and each segment of the travel market. A balanced and integrated 30/12/2010 spaces and/or higher charges. More provision of park and ride schemes is Parking Friends of the E - mail Yes approach is required which recognises the roles of each mode of transport in supporting 14:13 likely to encourage more car use when the aim should be to reduce road Managemen Earth agreed objectives, including supporting the economy and protecting and improving the traffic for reasons of energy security and climate change. t Policy environment. The section on rail freight is superficial in its treatment of this key mode of Wyre Forest Multimodal 30/12/2010 sustainable freight transport. There is a need for freight road/rail Friends of the E - mail Freight Yes Noted. This concept is considered in the LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan. 14:13 interchanges within the county to reduce the number of HGVs on the Earth Policy counties roads. With the reduction to the Bus Services Operators Grant and cuts in government funding for councils there will be pressure to cut services and/or raise fares. To offset this, the council should enter into more quality Integrated Wyre Forest partnerships or quality contracts with bus operators. The benefit of having a 30/12/2010 Passenger Noted. The Integrated Passenger Transport Policy makes reference to the importance of Friends of the E - mail single operator in a particular area is that services can be protected and fare Yes 14:13 Transport partnerships to improve the quality of passenger transport. Earth increases controlled. The successful bus operator will get the maximum Policy return from profitable routes reducing the pressure to raise fares. The council should negotiate contracts which will cover fares, frequency and vehicle quality. In the main document the Kidderminster Urban Package lists improvements to passenger transport interchange facilities in the town centre. The existing bus station is described as of poor quality and needing investment. Yet it is a new development completed in 2004 and the main problem is that it is Wyre Forest 30/12/2010 underused. Only about half of bus services use the station because First Bus Noted. This issue will be addressed as part of the Kidderminster Town Centre Public Realm Friends of the E - mail Yes 14:13 prefers to use bus stops in the town centre. The main dropping off and pick Enhancement Scheme in the LTP3 Delivery Plan. Earth up point for many local services is now Exchange Street where the taxi rank is also situated. At peak times there can be congestion and increased air pollution as buses, taxis, and other vehicles compete for space. Resolving this problem should be a given high priority. This compendium of policies contains many of the measures that are necessary to move to a sustainable transport system which will significantly Wyre Forest Noted. LTP3 necessarily is a multimodal strategy, recognising the diverse needs and roles of 30/12/2010 reduce CO2 emissions and build in resilience to rising fossil fuel prices. This Friends of the E - mail Yes each transport mode and their ability to support the delivery of agreed outcomes, in 14:13 will depend on which policies are emphasised. Transport packages which are Earth particular those associated with the economy and environment. biased toward road building will only continue the unsustainable environmentally damaging policies of the past. Noted. Thank you for your insightful and useful comments. We agree with the majority of your points. Worcestershire County Council welcomes your support of the Development Control (Transport) Policy. It is clear that without substantial funding contributions from alternative sources, including the private sector, many of the schemes and packages identified in the LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan will not be deliverable. It is important, therefore, that new developments be accompanied with appropriate investment in transport infrastructure and services, such that the Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. To help ensure this, the LTP3 is and will continue to be closely aligned with the emerging and relevant Local Development Plans and Core Strategies. We note and strongly agree with your comments regarding improving strategic road and rail links between South Worcestershire and the wider region and country and associated South international transport hubs such as Birmingham International Airport. Clearly, some elements Worcestershire of the strategic transport network are outside of the control of Worcestershire County Authorities Council. However, we will continue to work in partnership with organisations such as the 30/12/2010 (South Letter The Full Letter is Provided in the Appendices to this Document. Yes Highways Agency, Network Rail, the Department for Transport and Train Operating 00:00 Worcestershire Companies to promote and develop schemes such as Worcestershire Parkway and Development improvements to M5 Junction 6, which will help to improve connections between Plan) Worcestershire and the wider world. The support of the South Worcestershire Authorities for these and other schemes will be important in helping their development, funding and delivery. The LTP3 and its associated Delivery Plans is and will continue to be closely aligned with the economic, environmental, quality of life and planning policies and objectives of Local and National Governments. The LTP3 detailed Delivery Plans will be developed such that the packages of schemes taken forward have strong business cases and thereby represent value for money in terms of their ability to deliver against agreed objectives. The work undertaken to develop and appraise the Worcester Transport Strategy and associated Phase 1 Major Scheme Bid means that the components of the LTP3 Worcester Package are strongly evidenced based. We welcome your support for the major transport schemes in South Worcestershire (Evesham Abbey Bridge & Viaduct Replacement, Worcestershire Parkway and Worcester Transport Strategy Phase 1) and look forward to working with you in developing and implementing these schemes as funding becomes available. We would prefer to retain the City of Worcester urban package as is with the Worcestershire Parkway railway interchange being considered as a major and strategic county scheme with benefits that extend far beyond the city boundaries. We also note your comment about parking in Great Malvern however Worcestershire County Council must view this within the context of the other Worcestershire towns and taking account of on as well as off-street parking capacity, controls and pricing. Parking demand and capacity issues in Malvern, are recognised as an issue and will be considered as part of the LTP3 Great Malvern and Malvern Link packages. However, the scale of parking problems are different to those in some other urban areas, such as Worcester, Bromsgrove and Kidderminster, for example. This feedback relates mainly to the aspects of the Plan that relate to rural areas. The Plan refers to 'rural packages', but provides little detail of what is Noted - A scheme to consider options for rural passenger transport provision (including proposed. Public transport in rural areas is complicated by narrow roads, demand responsive transport) is incorporated in the LTP3 Delivery Plan. The current funding Chaddesley smaller and fragmented centres of population and, typically, fewer 30/12/2010 situation will make it difficult in the short term to maintain and enhance bus services in Corbett Parish E - mail passengers per trip. Simply extending urban services into rural areas may not Yes 13:22 Worcestershire. However, Worcestershire County Council will continue to work with Council be an appropriate, cost-effective or sustainable answer; something more operators and key stakeholders to make best use of limited funds to maintain and improve tailored may be needed, for example, smaller vehicles, with flexible or on- accessibility. demand scheduling. What has been learned from the Redditch Taxibus service? Perhaps the Plan also needs to consider how to connect the formal public Chaddesley 30/12/2010 transport system with informal/volunteer services (e.g. Dial-a-Ride). Would Noted - A scheme to consider options for rural passenger transport provision is incorporated Corbett Parish E - mail Yes 13:22 more funding to support these types of schemes be a better use of in the LTP3 Delivery Plan. Council resources than subsidising the rural bus routes with low passenger volumes? In our area, travel to School is still predominantly by car. Parents seem Noted - The current funding situation will make it difficult in the short term to maintain and Chaddesley 30/12/2010 disinclined to ask for bus services, but might opt for public transport if they enhance bus services in Worcestershire. However, Worcestershire County Council will Corbett Parish E - mail Yes 13:22 could see that an effective service was in place. Perhaps a more proactive continue to work with operators and key stakeholders to make best use of limited funds to Council approach is needed, rather than waiting for visible demand from parents? maintain and improve accessibility. Noted. Thank you for your comments. These will be taken into account whilst the Walking December Ramblers' and Public Realm and Rights of Way documents are updated. We note your comments on our 30, 2010 E - mail Highlights of the full letter available in Appendix Association integrated delivery plan approach. We believe that a more integrated plan will deliver better 8:33 AM value for money for Worcestershire tax payers. LTP Structure: The main document is clear and succinct in setting out the 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail goals and objectives of the LTP and the supporting policies and the links to Yes Noted. the series of topic plans. LTP Objectives: We broadly support the proposed objectives for the LTP and particularly welcome the objectives on the environment and quality of life. With respect to the latter, we welcome the specific reference to the 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail Yes Noted. The LTP3 text will be amended. historic environment and heritage assets. We suggest a minor amendment to the wording to better accord with PPS5 as follows: '… conserving our historic environment and heritage assets'. Economic Objective: We welcome the positive link made between the economy and improvements to the public realm, including de-cluttering Noted. The LTP3 Transport Accessibility Policy actively encourages improvements to initiatives. We suggest that more prominence could be given to improving accessibility and increased travel choice as part of a balanced and integrated multi-modal 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail Yes accessibility by sustainable transport modes to Worcestershire's tourism approach which recognises the roles of all transport modes in supporting the economy and attractions outside of the urban areas, given their role in supporting the protecting and enhancing the Worcestershire environment and quality of life. County's visitor economy. Quality of Life Objective: Under this objective we recommend that an additional aim on quality design should be included to help deliver the main 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail objective. A commitment to the design and delivery of schemes which Yes Noted. Worcestershire County Council will seek to include these comments within the LTP3. respect the character and quality of the natural, built and historic environment would serve to support the objective and provide a positive framework of overarching design principles for future schemes and proposals. It would also provide the opportunity to include a link to improvements to the public realm which can contribute to quality of life as well as the economic viability of city centres as covered by the economic objective. As part of the aim on enhancing public engagement, we suggest that positively promoting the undertaking of community based street audits could further strengthen this aim. The Streets for All series of practitioner advice notes, produced by English Heritage, includes a toolkit for a community based street audit together with other practical case studies. www.helm.org.uk/server/show/category.19645 Asset Management Objective: The range of highway assets linked to maintaining the transport network can include heritage assets, as for example, listed or scheduled bridges, linear features such canals and disused railway lines, and signage, street furniture etc. In developing maintenance programmes for the range of asset groups, it will be important that their potential heritage significance is recognized and taken into account. Noted. Worcestershire County Council will seek to incorporate this within its Transport Asset 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail Yes Staffordshire County Council's guidance, Conservation within the Highway - Management Plan in future iterations. Structures of Historic Importance, offers a good practice example of how this can be positively approached. We suggest that this approach to guidance could further help to deliver the aims under this objective and consideration given to producing a similar document individually or as part of the Transport Asset Management Plan. · Worcestershire Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework: We recommend that the explanation in Table 1.10 for the Quality of Life Objective gives greater prominence to conserving and promoting the Noted. Worcestershire County Council will seek to incorporate this within its Scheme 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail Yes enjoyment of the historic environment and heritage assets as per the main Appraisal Framework. objective. As currently presented only the natural environment is mentioned. Delivery Programme: We generally welcome the prominence given to public realm improvements and decluttering exercises as part of the proposed investment packages for each of the broad area strategies. As these are progressively developed we would welcome the opportunity to offer 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail further comments, particularly where heritage assets are likely to be Yes Noted. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss proposals with you in more detail. impacted and proposals offer the potential to enhance the management or enjoyment of the historic environment. At this stage we cannot offer comments on the list of possible major schemes without further information on their content and potential impacts on heritage assets. Policy W4 Public Realm: We recommend that the policy wording in the first 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail paragraph is amended to also refer to heritage assets, for example '... Yes Noted. conserving and enhancing landscape, townscape, biodiversity and heritage assets'. Policy W11 Street Furniture: We suggest the policy could more positively promote the undertaking of community based street audits to help inform de-cluttering exercises as well as proactively engage the community. We 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail Yes Noted. The LTP3 will embrace this approach. also recommend that the policy gives greater emphasis on the design of new street furniture and ensuring that it respects the character of the local area. Policy W12 Paving Materials: We generally support the content of the policy 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail Yes Noted and its consideration of local character and historic streetscapes An additional policy area where we suggest consideration could be given is the role of existing infrastructure such as canals and indeed urban rivers in Noted - The LTP3 will embrace this approach and will be referenced in the Walking and 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail encouraging walking and cycling. Successfully integrating their use with the Yes Cycling Policies. wider townscape and area can be of value as already demonstrated by improvements to the river area in Worcester. With regard to the SEA Environmental Report, we welcome the inclusion of our suggestions in response to the Scoping Report. The Environmental 31/12/2010 English Heritage E - mail Report provides a clear overview of the assessment process, the response Yes Noted to the consultations, and how the draft Strategy should be amended to take account of its findings. At this stage we have no further comments. 31/12/2010 Hereford and E-Mail Please see Appendix for the full letter. Yes Thank you for your detailed comments. Worcester Chamber of We understand your frustrations about the lack of a Strategic Delivery Plan at the time of Commerce writing of the draft LTP3. However, this has since been addressed following the subsequent clarification from Central Government of LTP3 funding. We also recognise your concerns that we were unable to provide printed copies of the documents. We have provided these in Adobe Acrobat format, which enables easy reading on screen, saving the costs of printing and dissemination. This is standard practice for Worcestershire County Council consultations of this nature. The quick win suggestion identified is welcomed. Worcestershire County Council will consider whether this might be adopted in the County to support congestion relief and economic growth. We are pleased to note your support for a planned approach to the management of traffic and parking in urban areas. Worcestershire County Council is keen to work with the Borough, City and District Councils and stakeholders in Worcestershire to develop a holistic, urban area specific approach which recognises local needs and balances the desire to park against economic activity and traffic flow requirements. In particular, we note your comments about retaining on-street parking in Market Towns. Worcestershire County Council has and will continue to seek to do this when delivering public realm schemes in these areas. Worcestershire County Council does not provide freight parking facilities; however, some of the Borough, City and District Councils make their car parks available for overnight freight parking. Worcestershire County Council would support any additional provision being provided, however, we would suggest that this should be developed by the private sector as commercial operations to meet identified demand. Worcestershire County Council has invested heavily in innovative materials and processes to 31/12/2010 Hereford and E-Mail Please see Appendix for full letter reduce the impacts of severe weather on our transport networks. New developments are now Worcester required to mitigate against the effects of flooding and we are changing the way we maintain Chamber of our highways to make them more resilient to extreme temperatures. Commerce The assertion that new roads and transport schemes and services are the only measures likely to bring about job creation and investment opportunities is not wholly supported by Worcestershire County Council. Worcestershire already has a well developed transport network. The private sector has considerable power to reduce congestion, by encouraging staff to make use of the most appropriate transport mode for their journey to work and not to be wholly reliant upon the car. Measures such as these help to manage traffic flows (particularly during the peak periods), releasing highway capacity for use by consumers and freight movements. Clearly, any new infrastructure must be paid for, and so continuing to expand our networks will impose increased and ongoing maintenance costs, which must be borne by the taxpayer. Making better use of existing infrastructure, conversely, will bring about enhanced accessibility without increased costs. 31/12/2010 Redditch Letter Noted. Thank you for your detailed response. We note your comments on the Worcestershire Borough and LEP. The LTP3 now includes additional information about the LEP and will continue to be Bromsgrove integrated with LEP objectives. Potential LEP-related funding streams (such as the Regional District Growth Fund) are and will continue to be investigated for those transport schemes which Councils Please see Appendix for the full letter support the economic performance of Worcestershire. Worcestershire County Council welcome the opportunity to continue to work closely with Redditch Borough and Bromsgrove District Councils to assess the implications of increased development in their respective areas and to ensure that schemes are integrated such that Yes funding potential is maximised for the benefit of Worcestershire residents. It is clear that without substantial funding contributions from alternative sources, including the private sector, many of the schemes and packages identified in the LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan will not be deliverable in the short term. It is important, therefore, that new developments be accompanied with appropriate investment in transport infrastructure and services, such that the North East Worcestershire economy, environment and quality of life are not undermined. To help ensure this, the LTP3 is and will continue to be closely aligned with your emerging Local Development Plans and Core Strategies. We welcome the suggestion to more closely integrate the LTP3 policies and strategies with your Local Development Frameworks, Worcestershire County Council notes the comments on Bus Lanes, however, the infrastructure in Redditch are actually designated as Bus Ways. That is to say, they Please see Appendix for the full letter. have been designed from the outset for the exclusive use of buses, and not general traffic. The Redditch Bus Ways would therefore be exempted from any policy referring to Bus Lanes. Worcestershire County Council intends to roll out a smarter choices programme which will cover all areas of the county including North East Worcestershire. This will help to promote the provision of sustainable new developments and use of walk, cycle and passenger transport modes to help mitigate the impact on the highway network and the economy of generated 31/12/2010 Redditch Letter travel demand. Borough and Bromsgrove We note your comments on buses however; Worcestershire County Council's ability to District support bus services has been significantly reduced. As such, proposals for new bus services Councils will require a commercially viable business case to enable delivery. Worcestershire County Council does not provide bus shelters at bus stops however, we look forward to working with district councils to find ways to maintain and enhance bus stop infrastructure. The LTP3 climate and change policy seeks to be compliant with the county climate change policy and as such is considered compliant with district strategies. Current guidance does not require LTP3 to undergo a sustainability appraisal. The Bromsgrove and Redditch packages include measures to improve walk, cycle and passenger transport infrastructure. However, the delivery of these measures will be dependent upon funding, including from the private sector, through developer contributions. Following the meeting of the Council's Development Control (Policy) Committee on Tuesday 4 January I would be grateful if you could give due consideration to the following additional, to those submitted by Rebecca Mayman on 30 December 2010, representations. There is general support for Noted - The LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan incorporates specific mention of the need to Wychavon 31/12/2010 E - mail the additional comments made by Malvern Hills District Council's Planning Yes improve the performance of the Worcester Southern Link Road as part of the wider multi- District Council Committee in particular in relation to the Southern Link Road and modal Worcester Transport Strategy. Worcestershire Parkway. With respect to the former it is considered vital that capacity issues at the Whittington Road roundabout are addressed as soon as is practicably possible. Also it is recommended that the dualling of the Southern Link Road be included as one of the Major Schemes. There is also continuing support for Wychavon the North West Link Road at Worcester notwithstanding deliverability 31/12/2010 E - mail issues. There is strong support for the proposed relatively high weighting to Yes Noted. All schemes mentioned have been incorporated in the LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan. District Council be given to those scheme/projects which support economic growth as the key objective in the emerging South Worcestershire Development Plan is to foster economic prosperity. It is hoped that the weighting will help prioritise essential rather than desirable transport infrastructure delivery. Members advocate the inclusion of the Keytec Industrial Park/A44 Link Road, as set out in the Wychavon District Local Plan, especially given the serious capacity issues of the traffic lights junction at Pinvin and the likelihood of major housing development at Station Road and Wyre Road being allocated in the South Worcestershire Development Plan. The Local Wychavon 31/12/2010 E-Mail Plan also safeguards a number of railway lines, for example the Stratford to Yes Noted. All schemes mentioned have been incorporated in the LTP3 Strategic Delivery Plan. District Council Cheltenham Line or both enhanced rail use and cycling /walking and Members would like to see this set out in the Rural Package for South Worcestershire. With respect to the Droitwich Spa Package there is strong support for enhancements at the railway station and one of these should be increasing car parking capacity. Noted. Thank you for your extensive and helpful comments. We will take these into account, specifically in relation to our Strategic Environmental Assessment, the LTP3 main document, 31/12/2010 Natural England Letter Please see Appendix for the full letter. Yes and the development control, transport and climate change, and transport and air quality policies. Noted. Thank you for your extensive and helpful comments. We note your proposals and will consider these in the development of future capital and maintenance package investments in Evesham 31/12/2010 E-Mail Please see Appendix for the full letter. Yes Evesham and surrounding areas. However it should be recognised that many of the proposals Cycling Forum particularly those relating to the A46 could potentially be costly to deliver and challenging to implement. Thank you for your focussed comments. We note the issues you have raised wand will Alvechurch consider these in the delivery of the North East Worcestershire transport strategy. We have 31/12/2010 E-Mail Please see Appendix for the full letter. Yes Parish Council included within the strategic delivery plan both the Bordesley by-pass (developer funded) and a corridor maintenance and enhancement scheme focused on the A441 and environs. Signage - lack/ vandalism. Maintenance - hedges, signs + Safety risk of falling ownership. Probation service could objects from bridges - maintain - volunteers. Publicise agree solve it. Safety cameras - healthy activity. Enforce farmers etc A448 concern- issue over to maintain theirs as part of their the cameras there. There subsidies etc. Green Lanes. Publicity - Junction One Bromsgrove. is a sign. Need outside maps for Rights of Way for areas. Congestion etc. (M42/ J1). Possibly schools, speeds may be Ranges of volunteers. Engage use a wind farm as a solution, lowest around school voluntary sector. Signs on improve circulation. Not going to times. Visual speed signs infrastructure for reporting. solve with by-passes. work better. Where are Considered maintenance. Funding for the fixed sped cameras? schemes - concerns over D.C. explained the development. Cover over capacity of process behind the West roads NE of Redditch if development Mercia Partnership and proceeds. PB explained the funding. development infrastructure process + contributions + funding. Very supportive of Parish Paths Partnership. Local knowledge very valuable. Could path clearing be combined with Lengthsman role? Proactive Parishes could provide service to neighbouring parishes as active volunteer groups are key to success. Use ROW to link walking/cycling routes and upgrade f/ways to b/ways where width is sufficient to allow cycling where they provide a link on the cycle network. Good traffic flow Right of ways are a nuisance. at roundabouts. Alleyways ASBOS. We need gating Look at engines in vehicles Reduce street alleys permanently closed. Make it Whoosh Bus. Encouraging new car furniture. Too easier for gating alleys to be purchasing. Electric car provision much clutter. Traffic signals. Barbour introduced. Do not open up any power points. Offering Road surface to Road phasing. more. Clear routes - well advertised alternatives plugged in places. good standard. Roundabout lane but clear remedies where there's a Lowesmoor / Sidbury stationary Crossings. Better marking. problem. Don't discourage people traffic Look at signals SCOOT quality - more from walking but it's the abuse. It is a systems. expensive design issue keep barriers and put materials/ more up. products. Simple information - Road markings to plain English. Choose improve flows. How You Move (CHYM) Street furniture worked well in Warndon. To be considered from Warndon - safety public problem W Worcester. Question Newtown reduction is Travel plans to be outset of planning ASBO problems. Consider closure of Road. Vehicle design -low supported. De- stronger + monitored. process. School parking R o Ways Gating orders - make emission. Mode shift to clutter Schools& employment & provision costs. easier. Design/ lighting issues but not Sustainable Modes. Private and supported. Too Congestion - SCOOT retail. PT information - Influenced by parking a solution on own. Requires review. public vehicles - low emissions, many signs. traffic control. Junction colour coded routes. Speed cameras - are standards & pricing. Particularly in terms of safety/ ASBO possibly electric cars if they are Infrastructure design - amend to Balance of info & good at improving safety Also linked with TRO's problems. Where new roads affordable? Complication of spend targeted minimise queues. infrastructure. Need to in surrounding areas. Is considered, must be well designed to measures - sustainable modes, and to minimise look in the benefits of important but linked design out the problems. A design plugged in places. Need traffic long-term CHYM with with all other parts of issue? Not narrow & dark. Strategic moving - SCOOT? Sidbury. maintenance. infrastructure the LTP3 issues. Consider whole improvements. life costs. CAPEX. Distribution of info is OPEX. key. Website - PT info to be more user friendly Concern over written time tables not being "easily" available - Improve "Public increase in font size. transport" systems to Older generation in Whilst supporting school to reduce rush particular. Not everyone "safety" initiatives we hour bus etc. has a computer. Need should look to increase More emphasis on Promotion of car Treatment of less for more comprehensive speeds overall to footway condition. sharing. High priority used routes timetables. Not much decrease journey times. Lower tolerances for should be given to should not be evidence of the "spares" Keeps traffic flowing on defects. Prioritise accessibility to general overlooked. Emphasis on the need being available in the principal roads network? walking schemes on health services in rural Highlighting of for good, cycling, walking Hub + spares plan for Road safety partnership All ok footfall. Greater visibility communities. Difficult minor roads and Public transport buses. Only selected bus needs to review of programmes of also to access hospitals junctions from facilities. company/ times can parameters and involve planned works. Enhance by bus (both patients main roads published tables should members to identify "priority" of certain and visitors) Adherence should be be all. Consideration local issues. Reduce routes i.e. housing to "disability" access to considered. needs to be given to "clutter" of signs is estates to schools. vehicles. More short rural areas. I.e. central important. Too much term spaces (restricted Wychavon even though emphasis on vehicles not to disabled) in shopping they may be costly. Are cycles, pedestrians etc. areas. we preventing cheaper services by over specifying bus requirements? St Georges Church to Hoobrook - Air quality important. problem with volume of traffic. E.g... Horsefair in Also problems at Welch Gate, Kidderminster and Bewdley Stourport. Need to keep No support for 20 mph Welchgate, Stourport. traffic moving through Bewdley limits. Speed bumps very LTP3 link with DC's rather than stopping it. Change unpopular e.g... Local plans/ policies e.g... kerbs at island at top of by-pass Question need referendum in Bewdley. Bewdley, Kidderminster. to get more traffic down by-pass. for two Speed limits impose Need to find out how to Make turn to Hales Park. Expand pedestrian themselves outside pedestrianise Stourport - view of problem at Welch Gate to crossings on Need but shelters in schools. Need to look at encourage street capture source of problems i.e... Birmingham Road rural areas - particularly Difficult to shop using safety issues at markets etc.? Need for Approaches. Need to reduce near St George's through grants + Stronger links with public transport? Wolverley - coaches "conservation a read volume of traffic through Church. One will particularly for elderly transport & vehicle Different views. Need mounting pavements. policy e.g. to encourage Support for proposals. Lots of good Stourport. Need to put right turn need to be people. Need to look at cleanliness fleet. Inch data/ research re use of Use more common better street lighting + stuff. Need more info re Public Rights into Lion Hill from Bridge Street + removed when mobile home parks and contractors. More public transport for shared spaces as per on other furniture style, also of Ways York St. Change direction new primary their transport needs control needed. shopping. Better public continent. Better design in Kiddermisnter. Some priorities. Sainsbury's junction school e.g... Little lakes, transport to shops. preferable to speed inappropriate signage in Kidderminster - need review of developed! Need Kingsford. limits. Fixed speed Kidderminster Vicar signage at major junction. Priority to join planning camera's not effective Street needs review. of junctions at Welch Gate. e.g... Schools + people simply break Need to look holistically Pollution issue from asset when approaching at solutions. Need to Kidderminster to Blakedown - trial development. camera. Activated signs work very closely with back at Land Oak junction due to better then fixed speed DC's regarding reduction of dual carriageway to cameras. development of policies single lane. Need to open up dual Wyre forest - carriageway. Reduction of cross Kidderminster + over's good. Cause of accidents, Bewdley. road, and human error???? RAIL - Do everything we can to encourage rail use. Access to stations is a problem. Problems getting between bus and rail interchange - no link. There is a barrier for new arrivals. Landscaping may remove barriers. Alvechurch have to encourage people to get Concern that on road there. Enforcement a paths go nowhere. parking @ Barnt Green. Concern over TRO Affordable parking for exemption not if they are rail stations. Parking sharing the carriageway of Enforcement. Issue of residents Policies of other vehicles. Amsterdam parking outside peoples houses. In Waste of money. Change organisations - Centro anecdote - frightened of the centres they do not have their the mindset, can be etc. Work closer with cycles, nightmare, 106 agreements - possible spaces. VF - explains complexity of positive. Needs more them. Price of parking + Fuel efficient, small if frightened of crossing changes? Tighter working schemes. More residential parking details, time, If used well comparisons of other car safe but they can be an Problems with town road. Point that to locals with Districts. Innovative schemes in residential streets in and they can be a parks. Talk to other important mode of centre Redditch. are used to it. How well for raising funds. urban centres. Consult the residents. fantastic resource. partners. Bromsgrove transport. Issues with Vehicles get stuck are they used? Linking to Developments will have Hopwood for HGV Enforcement resources. Parking Needs resources to Station - do it! Concern rider behaviour. under the bridge. How work. 1% priority to residents owning a car but overnight parking. Issue around Stations. Charge £10 support them. Can we over costs - please does Redditch Ringway is in would the consultation cycling. Need to give if the quality of with lay-by +HGV reasonable. Park and Ride (P+R) is put them elsewhere? it! BUS SHELTERS - New issue of speeding work with the bridge people respect on the infrastructure is higher parking. Not enough great in certain areas. P+R for people Sensible use of the ones with community cycling. No problem removal scenario in carriageway - change the enough it will encourage capacity. Serious going to Birmingham and parking in money. No, mixed. Will input. Match fund WCC/ with it but road quality Redditch? Ideas of the ethos. Only do it where people to walk. Cycle requirement for HGV rural areas. Cost effective - if an they happen in B+R? Borough funding on is an issue. Encourage bridge, example of people ask for it. The Lane. Concern over facilities etc. HGV integrated approach is taken. Issue Limited scope for use in stops. Ownership small engine Burcott. Wants info on infrastructure. Promote wasting money on facilities with BOSCH. that resident in Bromsgrove and B+R, but can be useful if clarifies. Praise for RTI - B motorcycles but road the process, funding, cycling to schools infrastructure that isn't Redditch are paying for the there is an accident - + Redditch. Involve the quality issue. OK with responsibility. (Redditch) Priority for used or linking + having Worcester P&R. Well worth while diversion signs around kids, less likely to using small engines on cycles at certain times - paths which actually go using P&R. No P&R in north Bromsgrove. Flap signs - vandalise. BUS ROUTES - bus lanes. Bus Lanes. reward the community. places. Worcestershire. Need an integrated too manual, technology, Review of Wythall Congestion outside approach, wider view that investing has benefits. (subsidised) point out schools and walking/ in Worcester and P+R will give wider the costs and low cycling will reduce this benefits. patronage, loss of the 69 promote independent. + 50 A. Innovative Concentrate on young materials on bus stops. people to encourage older VFM.VEHICLES - Use people. smaller, accessible + efficient vehicles. Concern over age of drivers (80+). BUS LANES - Fuel efficient taxi's Concern over bus lanes. Enforcement. Waste of road space. Wasting infrastructure with bus lanes and could add to congestion. Need a countywide bus map. Improvements to General opinion that ITS basic information is unnecessary expense, provision are required Better fully connected Concentrate on signage though there was before considering RTPI. routes and information and preventing HGVs on uncertainty over costs it When service 363 showing these for family Policies are a bit unsuitable routes. is perceived as a very changed timetable he cycling. Add information contradictory e.g. develop Supportive of work of costly area. Improving Scooter to work Malvern Hills hasn't got CPE [Civil was unable to get paper provision to policy list. on existing transport FQP. Concern over lorry information provision is scheme is valuable. Parking Enforcement] and so there copies from Passenger Cycle lanes need to start networks but contribute parking. Croft Rd is in an important particularly in Primary objective of isn't the option to implement Transport from date of and end in sensible places. to new facilities. unsuitable location providing meaningful this policy should be to residents parking schemes etc. P&R change. Regular bus users Currently too piecemeal. Concerned that to stick bringing lorries into city (real time/ up to date) reduce casualties will not work whilst there is don't need timetables Need to be more strategic rigidly to policy 'reduce unnecessarily. Similar information for all involving motorcycles. cheap/free city centre long stay but occasional users do with section 106 monies. need to travel' will situation occurring in modes. Best use of Against use of bus parking in Worcester. Needs a and simplified versions as Something similar to impoverish rural areas as Upton. Cattle market existing equipment e.g. lanes. Concerned about strategic overview of parking pricing these people provide THINK! BIKE campaign there will be no rural site identified years ago validation of signal dangers of motorcycles to support carrot and stick approach potential for increasing aimed at better awareness development it will be but not gone forward. control is important. speeding and to sustainable travel and P&R. Would patronage. Bus operators of cyclists on some of the focused on urban areas Raised concern over Validation of SCOOT is undertaking. Supports like to see a shared services approach are not customer rural lanes with limited alone. Economic growth encouraging HGV important. Biggest motorcycles in bus to resolve district parking pricing and focussed enough. Staff visibility. Quiet lane status should be spread across operators moving from problem for ITS is when lanes county transport strategy. can be rude or ill could help. Sweeping and the county as a whole. rural areas as this will info is out of date e.g. informed. Parkway has maintenance along cycle have negative impact on major delays at Junctions been discussed for 30 yrs routes is important. rural economy. but drivers discover that and is still no further this is incorrect and ITS along. This scheme is a loses all credibility. priority for making real difference in Worcs Making routes safer. Provision of cycles. Cycle routes not joined up. Real time bus shelters. Where is the lorry park Cleaner markings on roads. Promoting services. going? Can it go to Six Enforcement. Cycle Reliability. Bus passes. ways or Cattle Market? lockers better facilities at Integrated ticketing. Look at practicality if Need to look at policy provision of rail stations. Safe provision Integration with rail + routes in city centre. P+R are they in the right place? in City Centre. Look at times need to link up Signage. Clear signage for Parking policy - need to consider issue of stolen bikes - (bus + rail) Review of directions. Chaos where economics. People want come - open shelters. Encourage where the buses lorries get stuck. Signage for lorry parks. there a balance public realm - need a commuter cycling + operate. Walking Consolidation centres a VMS - useful for non city vision. PR linked info car parking. schools. Clearer markings. distance to stops. 31 bus good idea. Low emission residents. Car parking Street meters - on Spetchley Road Bells. Cycling maps. Cycle - May drink water. zones. Move lorry park - information on major for e.g. + around the hospital coach lanes are SAFE - V Parkway - Rail decent need to be near M5. works. Might need more parking overnight needs a review - important. Separation parking. Park + Ride near Work with freight VMS on way into city. involve visit Worcester. Bus Lane pedestrians + cycling Parkway Station. Buy industry to create policy. enforcement be careful. Worcester Separate. Cycle lane land at Shrub Hill. Halts Water + rail freight. Re- city transport street does fit with discipline. Awareness. should be promoted. investigate Shrub Hill. master plan. Footpaths are wide Taxi for bus lane. Metal Box all for rail. enough. Put cycle lanes Community transport is Canals have gone to where they will fit. Bells vital - works well as it is. leisure. Encouraging on bikes. Use with other Too many taxi's - need a leisure - water buses etc. modes - should be enough review. space. New roads (shared use) Real time information Make dangerous sections systems long term safer - priorities. Cycle hire Consultation. Parking strategy. Promoting (similar London?) Join up outside city. Relocate services (information) network to fill in "gaps". city parking. Partnership reliability is key. Road markings to be - agree. Continue. Integrated ticketing. Co- Parking - Standards. clearer both on and off- Enforce freight bans. ordinate Timetables Adequate provision, off SCOOT. Planning (DC) Parking road. Security - better Signage edge of city to (Rail/Bus and Bus/Bus). road parking is provided. standards. Enforcement. Park & Ride. facilities at stations in city direct HGVs. Information Bus routes - review. Bus Commercial - Promote WCC support lead to Pricing must consider retail viability. and elsewhere. Open - in advance of stop locations (walking Bus services - process sustainable toward mode shift. Greater Public Realm (pedestrianisation) shelters but lockable. problems. Consolidation VMS? If in place must be distances) Worcs could be better more strategic transport M/C discipline M/C important & linked to parking? Cycle routes - well lit and centre. Associated with legible. Useful to non- Parkway - agreed. Good user involvement. infrastructure not training. No priority Review locations & charging signed. Information + low emission zones. residents. Car parking parking + good PT links + Better procedure for committed to "local" area over above status quo. examined in the round. City Council promotion of cycle. Freight parking must information. Emergency/ Park + ride. Bus costs Passenger Transport / district. Ensure aligned M/C parking within car involvement. On street parking - Schools - promoting of have facilities. (near M5) maintenance warnings. reduced to enable PT to services & with travel plan. parks. M/C lockers - differential parking charges visitors/ cycling. Safety is Work with freight Include on radials (all?) be more attractive. Infrastructure. Ombersley Road/ No. M/C safety on the residents. Coach parking - review. paramount for children partnerships on Shrub Hill / Sherriff Barbourne Road parking strategic roads (A4440) Better facilities. Look at pick-up/ set safety. Shared use consolidation idea. Rail Street development area and walking. Role of Park down facilities / locations. footpaths where fright good idea. Rail - interchange. Rail halts - & Ride? On-street parking Enforcement of TRO's. infrastructure is freight facilities Shrub promote them. Good by commuters. appropriate width. Bells \Hill. Water/ canal - not thing. Taxi's Review safety. Education on cycle a priority for freight. numbers, use bus lanes? facility use and driver Leisure focuses not Only if properly liveried. training. Wylds Lane freight. Capacity issues? Too appropriate? many? CT - vital. Keep as it currently operates. Earlier member involvement in consultation content to We must make sure that Park & Ride - is it good value? High ensure all their Need to ensure swifter the policy does not capital costs, is there a good return, concerns are addressed adoption of new exclude rural areas. support the idea. "bravery" will be prior to published developments. Ensure Make sure that is we Ensure co-ordinated required to push some of this policy consultation going out. closer liaison between provide cycle routes they services are provided to through - will we persevere. Will Comprehensive but district + county to are safe. ensure shorter journey districts support policy? Parking cost affective administer all aspects and times. Prioritise services facilities should reflect the type of consultation is required. conditions within rather than providing town. Tourist towns require spaces More emphasis on permissions. "nice to haves". more than shopping/ business areas. consultation than showing how ell we have done. Need to review parallel versus herringbone parking bays in Bewdley, Demand for cycle lanes - Stourport etc. herring bone would cost versus benefit? Canal Sainsbury's staff in provide more parking! Need to be towpath best used in Kidderminster can't walk able to stop effectively & efficiently Kidderminster. Choice of to work from Franche due Put electronic signs at Cross ticketing needed. if highways to have most positive locations for cycle routes. to poor paths at Puxton key bus stops with E.g. one ticket for bus & impact. Look at West Bromwich Need new motorway link Essential to liaise Safety of chosen routes. Marsh. Part of Stourport, service info. Give traffic rail. Explained that one model for on street parking charges. at Bromsgrove - would closely with business Cars parked on cycle lanes adjacent the Gilgal, relief light priorities for buses. already exists. Need Support for proposals Need for discussions with DC's re help Wyre Forest sector. where no off road parking. road. Would be very Integrate bus timetables better info for charging structure & enforcement. businesses. Look into cycle hire at helpful. New road from from different providers Councillors and the Encourage / support DC's to stations establish pilot sugar beat site to - one stop shop! public. introduce on street charges rather scheme? Set up in Hoobrook would be very than WCC do. Look at more use of partnership with business useful. SVR between Kidderminster & in Worcestershire BOSCH Bewdley. Problems with lack of coach parks need to link with freight parking, Stourport Bewdley etc. Wyre Forest District Responses to LTP3 th Officer Comments for Cabinet Approval 10 January 2011 Document and Page Issue Section The Third Page 12 Inconsistency between the LTP3 Economic Aim ""To enhance footfall in Worcestershire"s town and city centres, by Worcestershire Local improving the public realm through resurfacing, regenerating, renewing and de-cluttering our public spaces, and Transport Plan (LTP3) ensuring that use of parking capacity is optimised"" and the first bullet point under this objective which relates to strategic traffic and parking management plans which cover entire urban areas. . The holistic nature of this doesn"t seem totally consistent with the aim itself which as written relates only to town and city centres. Furthermore any review will need to be undertaken in partnership with car parking operators including District Council"s and private sector operators. However, Wyre Forest District LDF Core Strategy is consistent with the broad requirements of the aim. st The Third Page 16 1 Environmental Aim: Suggest that this is caveated to recognise that whilst new road infrastructure should be Worcestershire Local planned to minimise transport noise it may inevitably bring transport noise which does not currently exist. Transport Plan (LTP3) The Third Page 19-21 The overall thrust of this Public Health and Safety objective is to be welcomed and supported. However, it has Worcestershire Local historically been used to support outdated design standards that are often without scientific foundation. The latest Transport Plan (LTP3) government design guidelines in the form of Manual for Streets illustrate a more creative design approach within urban areas. Similarly, this argument needs to be balanced when considering inter-urban highways with the need to maximise the efficiency of movement particularly in the context of strategic routes to markets e.g. the A456 and A449 The Third The aims and objective of the LTP3 are in broad alignment with those set out in the Wyre Forest District Local Worcestershire Local Development Framework, particular in respect of environment, design emphasis and economic regeneration. Transport Plan (LTP3) The Third Page 35 From a Wyre Forest District Council perspective it is noteworthy that LTP3 contains a proposal to wait until Worcestershire Local confirmation of funding before producing the first "Delivery Plan". This could introduce a significant element of Transport Plan (LTP3) uncertainty for the Wyre Forest District Local Development Framework and in particular could have an adverse impact on the preparation of the site specific Development Plan Documents. Whilst there are significant uncertainties in the current climate, there are a number of potential delivery mechanisms and funding opportunities and a draft, or indicative, delivery plan should be produced in order to illustrate how the LTP may be implemented. Otherwise the LTP3 seems to be a wish list without any foundation. This does not bode well for forward planning purposes and provides insufficient certainty. The Third Page 34 In terms of environment issues, the LTP3 makes a sweeping comment about "urban areas becoming more Worcestershire Local attractive". This observation may apply to the more "attractive" Worcestershire urban areas. However, the design of Transport Plan (LTP3) streets as spaces within Wyre Forest District urban areas often leaves much to be desired and serves to undermine the attractiveness of the urban areas. The Third Page 31-37 Other than the above comments the identified issues and options are broadly supported. Worcestershire Local Transport Plan (LTP3) – Issues and Challenges The Third Page 35-40 Whilst there is a section entitled "delivering the plan and prioritising schemes", there is concern at the lack of a more Worcestershire Local specific (short to medium term) delivery plan. The challenges of developing such a plan are recognised i.e. the Transport Plan (LTP3) uncertainties of funding. It is considered that the delivery planning elements of the LTP3 should look to be more – Delivering the Plan detailed where possible. At present there is only a strategic context to delivery. However, Worcestershire County and Prioritising the Council can provide varying degrees of certainty on particular schemes through prioritisation and indicating likely Schemes funding sources and options for specific schemes. The authority can also explain its intentions and timeframes for developing specific proposals. The section sets out objectives and weightings for prioritisation which are generally supported. It is understandable that the maximum weighting is given to costs and funding which places the emphasis on schemes which can be funded from sources other than Worcestershire County Council. Whilst this is understood, it may be appropriate to put the emphasis on partnership schemes which bring in significant match funding i.e. schemes that can make the limited amount of Worcestershire County Council funding go further. There is specific mention of a sample scheme to introduce kerbs in order to reduce edge of carriageway pot holes which sounds expensive. The Third Page 45 The 'Delivery Programme' (from page 45) is presented in a series of packages. This approach is supported. Worcestershire Local onwards However, as mentioned above the approach outlined is purely strategic. The argument for this is the current Transport Plan (LTP3) uncertainty over funding. However, there are known funding sources emerging including Tax Incremental Funding – Delivery Programme and Regional Growth Fund. It would also be helpful for Worcestershire County Council to highlight priority schemes and consider a range of delivery mechanism and likely scenarios for scheme delivery. The lack of any greater levels of certainty in respect of commitment to specific schemes could serve to undermine the Wyre Forest District Local Development Framework. The Third Page 57-61 Wyre Forest District Council support the inclusion of the Wyre Forest Transport Strategy which includes The Worcestershire Local Kidderminster Urban Package, The Stourport-on-Severn Urban Package, The Bewdley Urban Package and The Transport Plan (LTP3) Wyre Forest Rural Package. The proposals set out here, particularly the Major Scheme Bid for the Hoo Brook Link – Delivery Programme Road It is acknowledged that these schemes are ""being considered for inclusion"" and as such, the Council would strongly support the inclusion of the Kidderminster Urban Package within the Final LTP3. The Kidderminster Urban Package is considered to be essential in achieving the vision, and implementing the policies set out within the District"s Core Strategy DPD. It is concerning to note that there is no mention of the Stourport Relief Road within LTP3. The route has been safeguarded through the District Council"s Core Strategy DPD, and this was supported by the County Council at the recent Examination in Public. It is felt that LTP3 could be better aligned with the Core Strategy given the weight that the document now has. The Third Page 57 Suggest re-wording as follows: Worcestershire Local Transport Plan (LTP3) The ancient Wyre Forest, from which the District takes its name, can be found to the west of the area. To the North – Wyre Forest Area and East the District is largely rural, interspersed with the villages of Fairfield, Cookley , Blakedown and Wilden and Profile a number of rural settlements, the largest of these being Wolverley and Chaddesley Corbett. (This change is to bring the profile in line with the settlement hierarchy set out within policy DS01 of the Core Strategy DPD). The District does not benefit from local access to the motorway network, however, despite this the area has good connections to the Black Country and wider West Midlands Conurbation to the north, and Worcester to the South, provided by the local Principal Road Network……."" There are congestion issues on Kidderminster Ring Road and its approaches, the A451 Stourport Road, and the A448 between Kidderminster and Bromsgrove. Unfortunately, there are two Air Quality Management Areas in the Wyre Forest District….. There is a bus station in the centre of Kidderminster, however, this is poorly located and as a result, underused. Investment will be required…… Wyre Forest District Council recently adopted its Core Strategy, which set out a long-term approach to land use planning in the District. The main theme of the document is regeneration, with the majority of the District"s future growth, up until 2026, to be delivered on brown field sites. The launch of the "ReWyre" project for Kidderminster reflects the aspirations of the Core Strategy for regeneration and growth, focussing on the regeneration of Kidderminster Town Centre (including Churchfields and the Stourport Road Employment Corridor). The Third Page 60 Amend: Worcestershire Local Transport Plan (LTP3) Schemes to improve access to key services and facilities for those that do not have access to a car. – The Wyre Forest Rural Package Omission Reintroduce sections of dual carriageway on the A449 and A456. These roads have both been reduced to single carriageway routes without consultation with the District Council. This has reduced the efficiency and capacity of these critical links and it is suggested that these works serve to further undermine the local economy. Although it is recognised that these works were designed to address safety concerns, it is unclear why alternative options were not considered. Traffic and Parking Page 6 Paragraph 2.2.2 suggests a Pricing Review to identify the current charges for existing parking capacity and will Management Policy recommend future pricing policies. Wyre Forest has recently undertaken this exercise and it is considered that this should remain a function of the District Council. Multimodal Freight Page 13 The Council would question whether Kidderminster and Stourport-on-Severn are large enough to make Freight Policy Consolidation Centres viable. Development Control All policies Consider that the policies within this document should be revised to include thresholds at which they become (Transport) Policy applicable. It is considered that the extent and volume of information being requested would not be justifiable for modest development proposals and therefore some form of threshold should be clarified. Development Control Policy DC1 Raise question over how new development can ""seek to reduce the length of trips"". th (Transport) Policy (4 bullet point) Development Control Policy DC3 Consider that a clear definition of cluster sites should be included. (Transport) Policy Development Control Para 2.4.2 Clarification as to how the requirements in this paragraph would work in practice would be welcomed. (Transport) Policy Development Control Policy DC7 This talks about a 20 year business case. Is this realistic given the current economic climate? rd (Transport) Policy (3 bullet point) Draft Worcestershire Local Transport Plan 3: Response from South Worcestershire Authorities – Worcester City Council, Malvern Hills District Council and Wychavon District Council Page/Paragraph Number Response Draft Local Transport Plan 3 LTP3 Objectives (Pages General support for the 6 LTP3 Objectives. In particular 5&6) we support the economic objective, which will be strongly reflected in the emerging South Worcestershire Development Plan. The three South Worcestershire authorities have clearly stated that the development plan should be economic prosperity led. If economic growth really is the main priority then it is considered that there should be more detail set out in the objectives about improving links with the rest of the Country and the world via links with Birmingham Airport. Worcestershire will not attract inward investment without better and more direct links to major urban areas. Page 5 – first paragraph On a point of detail, should this read: Worcestershire LTP3 "In accordance with the National and Local objectives, a Objectives series of local transport-specific objectives have been identified for the Worcestershire LTP3."? Page 10 – Worcestershire Concerned that this appears to have formed the sole County Economic basis for targeting investment in Worcestershire's Assessment transport networks. The Economic Assessment identifies the Public Sector as the largest economy in Worcestershire at 26.3%. This is unlikely to continue to be the case following the Comprehensive Spending Review. LTP3 Economic Aim: To Strong support for the first bullet point to prioritise improve journey time limited funding towards investment in the transport reliability and network infrastructure and services in the busiest/most used efficiency (Page 13) transport corridors. The Worcestershire LEP Submission placed a very strong emphasis on the need for infrastructure provision to support the local economy. Links must be improved to the motorway network around Worcester to resolve issues of unreliability. We would also suggest that policy relating to improved lorry parking facilities across the County should be more explicitly referred to under this aim. Page 22 – LTP3 Public Only "considering the imposition of 20mph zones" when Health & Safety Aim the criteria set out apply sounds very much like an aim which may well not be implemented. We suggest this should read "Implement 20mph zones in residential areas where…" Page 29 – Asset Should read "LTP3 Asset Management Objective" Management Objective Table 1.8 Page 31 – Table 1.9 Note the reference to the inclusion of a detailed delivery Issues and Challenges plan within the first row. We would expect to see more 1 Page/Paragraph Number Response detail on this in 2011. The South Worcestershire Authorities wish to emphasise that the provision of transport infrastructure is a key objective for the South Worcestershire Development Plan. This is crucial to improving the economic prosperity of the area. Page 31 – Table 1.9 Note the reference to the ability for delivery partners to Issues and Challenges contribute towards objectives under the second row. The challenge specifies "that where schemes are promoted which require additional funding they will be required to prove that funding is available and in place in order to be included in the LTP3" This is a key concern and may prove to be very restrictive given the implications arising from the Comprehensive Spending Review. Difficulties will be compounded as the Worcestershire Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) was not included in the initial round of LEPS approved by Government. Page 32 - Table 1.9 Note the reference to the Development Control Policy. Issues and Challenges Support for a more robust approach to ensuring that developers contribute towards delivery and maintenance of transport infrastructure. Page 33 - Table 1.9 Concern that accessibility for the ageing population will Issues and Challenges become a real problem across South Worcestershire during the plan period due to funding cuts in rural bus services. Note that the emphasis is on "seeking to maximise accessibility to essential services and facilities, within the constraints of available funding and demand to travel." Page 36 – Objectives for Note the reference to "improve connections to national Prioritisation and international transport networks (regional, rail, motorways and airports) under The Quality of Life Objective. This is the first real reference to improving Worcestershire's connections on a national scale and is crucially important to the local economy. It would therefore seem more appropriate for this to be included under the Economic Objective. Page 37 – Figure 1.3 It is noted that the Objectives have been weighted by Results of Objective the County Council. It is considered that perhaps these Weighting Exercise should have been subject to wider stakeholder input during Stage 1 of the Consultation process. We would also suggest that as a minimum the weighting exercise needs to be re-run every three years in advance of drawing up each funding/delivery round. Page 38 – Scheme Input It is considered that in the interests of transparency it and Prioritisation would be useful for WCC to publish those transport related issues that were highlighted by the Councillors in their constituencies. Issue identification could have been published alongside the LTP3, as it would not commit WCC to implementing the schemes at this stage. Perhaps these could have been included in the essential references document, paragraph 3.4.3 of this 2 Page/Paragraph Number Response document refers to the fact that transport related issues have been "collated by area", but does not actually outline them. Page 45 – The Major Support for the major schemes listed in particular: Schemes - Evesham Abbey Bridge & Viaduct Replacement - Worcester Transport Strategy – Phase 1 - Worcestershire Parkway Interchange Page 45 – The Packaged Support for the grouping of transport schemes together Approach to Delivery as packages of investment to deliver greater benefits and increase the business case for investment. LTP 3 should recognise that even within the packages there will be strategic priorities for Worcestershire as a whole, such as Worcestershire Transport Strategy 1. Pages 50-55 – South Support for the South Worcestershire Transport Worcestershire Transport Strategy and the packages it includes. However, we Strategy would expect to see more detail under each package during 2011. The detail underpinning the delivery and action plans for South Worcestershire will be particularly important to understanding how much in practical terms growth and transportation can be brought together. This will need to be developed in time for the LTP3 Submission. It must be emphasised that transport infrastructure has been highlighted as a key objective for the emerging South Worcestershire Development Plan. We strongly urge WCC to work with the South Worcestershire Authorities to formulate a strategic response on a timetable compatible with both the LTP3 Submission and the preparation of the South Worcestershire Development Plan Preferred Option and its associated Infrastructure Development Plan Pages 51-52- Transport Lack of Infrastructure Provision across South Achievements in South Worcestershire and particularly within Worcester itself is Worcestershire likely to be a significant inhibitor to economic growth and the delivery of future development. Page 52 – Transport It is noted that the draft document cannot point to any challenges in South significant transport achievements within the Malvern Worcs Hills District. On a point of detail the last sentence of this paragraph should read: "In South Worcestershire, transport improvements will be grouped into five packages" Under the list of packages consider that the final point "Maintaining the availability of limited river crossings in South Worcestershire" should be moved further up the list. This is very important to the future planning for South Worcestershire and to its local economy. In 3 Page/Paragraph Number Response particular, LTP3 will need to address the strategic constraint represented by Holt Fleet Bridge and its importance to the rural economy to the West. Pages 53-55 – transport Welcome the inclusion of town-specific packages for packages Upton-Upon-Severn and Tenbury Wells. However, due to flood risk it is essential that any public realm enhancements are considered alongside the potential for increased flood risk and surface run-off. Page 53 – City of Strong support for the delivery of Worcestershire Worcester Urban Package Parkway Rail Interchange to provide direct access to the strategic rail network in South Worcestershire. Strong support for the Southern Link Road junction upgrades to reduce congestion on this key route for local and strategic traffic. This is also extremely important to facilitate the movement of goods vehicle traffic to support the local economy. Consider that the City of Worcester Urban Package should be re-named "City of Worcester" as the schemes included are not specifically urban. For example, the Worcester Parkway Rail Interchange will involve works beyond the city itself. We would also seek further clarity on the reference to rail station improvements with at least two stations within the area to be enhanced with improved facilities and access modes. There are only two rail stations within the City itself. Page 54 – Upton-Upon- Under the second bullet point – public realm Severn Urban Package enhancements – should "Old" actually read "Upton- Upon-Severn"? Suggest that the package also includes the enhancement of accessibility at the Upton Bridge area and considers redesignating the B4211 as an A road. Page 54 – Great Malvern Support for the proposals to enhance Malvern Link Urban Package Railway Station to improve the quality of facilities. Support for the role of Malvern Link as a Park and Ride facility as this will help to address commuter traffic levels along the A449. Development Control (Transport) Policy Page 1 – Para 1.1.2 Strong support for the recognition that significant investment will be required in Worcestershire's transport infrastructure and services. Recognise that contributions from the private sector are essential if new developments are to be provided with multi modal infrastructure and services. Page 4 – Para 1.4.1 Note and support the specific objectives for 4 Page/Paragraph Number Response development control and land use planning policy. Page 10 – Policy DC.4 Support maximising the use of existing transport infrastructure and services but it must be recognised that new infrastructure will be required within the South Worcestershire area to support its economic prosperity. Page 11 – Paras 2.4.1- Strong support for an evidence based approach 2.4.2 supporting planning applications to ensure that all new developments in South Worcestershire are provided with transport infrastructure to deliver sustainable growth. Pages 13-14 – Policy Recommend that wording should be incorporated into DC.8 Developer either the policy or the background paragraphs to Contributions for transport acknowledge the likelihood of a forthcoming Community infrastructure and Infrastructure Levy (CiL) and that policy will need to be services. set through Local Development Frameworks to adopt a CiL and set out mechanisms for pooling of resources to provide strategic transport infrastructure. Integrated Passenger Transport Policy Page 4 Support for the 3rd bullet point and the recognition that passenger transport is economically important in terms of reducing congestion, particularly along key inter- urban corridors and to/from/within congested urban areas, this requires that it provides a realistic transport choice for car users. Page 32 – Policy IPT10 – In delivering this policy, it is recommended that Delivering an affordable Worcestershire County Council should consider and value for money implementing streamlined bus services that are passenger transport rationalised based on demand and usage. It is noted network that there are still many empty buses running regularly which would be better used on alternative routes. Traffic and Parking Management Policy Page 2 – Table 1.1 Note and support the recognition that parking measures should be sensitively designed using an area based strategic approach to increase economic activity and enhance the performance and viability of urban and rural economies by making them accessible and attractive foci for investment. An element of flexibility should also be retained in the cost of parking due to the lack of alternative, affordable and reliable public transport choices within South Worcestershire, particularly within the rural areas. Page 4 – Para 1.4.1 Support for the specific objectives but would wish to see another objective included which recognises the need to regenerate urban centres and ensure they remain attractive. Page 6 – Para 2.2 Note that Worcester and Evesham have been identified Strategic Management of as urban areas where parking has been identified as a Traffic and Parking Issues major area of concern. Would suggest that the car parking pricing review and recommendation of future pricing policies needs to fully consider the economic vitality of these areas. Concern that Great Malvern has not been identified as 5 Page/Paragraph Number Response an urban area within South Worcestershire where parking is a major concern. Both traders and residents of the town have complained of the shortfall in off-street car parking, particularly in the upper part of town off the Worcester Road and behind Belle Vue Without better parking provision and supervision the economic well being of retail traders in Great Malvern is under threat. Transport Asset Management Plan General comment that savings could be made across Worcestershire from switching street lights off in areas which are not located at major road junctions during non-peak hours. 6 Date: 7 January 2011 Our ref: (Case 3268) 11152&14019 Block B Government Buildings Whittington Road WORCESTER WR5 2LQ By Email Draft Worcestershire Local Transport Plan Strategy 2011-2026 European Directive 2001/42/EC (the SEA Directive) Thank you for your consultation on the above, which was received by Natural England in October 2010. Thank you for allowing us extra time to respond. Natural England is a non-departmental public body. Our statutory purpose is to ensure that the natural environment is conserved, enhanced, and managed for the benefit of present and future generations, thereby contributing to sustainable development. Natural England's starting position on transport Natural England's views on the LTP3 start with our position on transport. Our positions are available online via: http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/position/positions/default.aspx. We acknowledge the over-arching messages set out in your consultation covering letter, namely the LTP3's objectives and the County Council's views on 'Does transport matter for the performance of the Worcestershire economy?'. Natural England's views on the points the Council has made under these headings are fundamentally rooted in the following beliefs: Current transport trends cannot be sustained without damaging the natural environment and people's quality of life. Transport policy should aim to deliver net environmental gain and, in so doing, ensure that the delivery of economic and societal benefit is not at the expense of the natural environment. A fundamental cultural shift in the way society views mobility is urgently needed. Transport investment should focus on managing demand and prioritising environmentally sustainable, low carbon modes and technologies. All types of transport should cover the full costs of the damage they incur on the natural environment and of their emissions. Transport must ensure the highest levels of protection and enhancement for England's protected landscapes, habitats, sites and species and that protected areas should become exemplars of environmentally sustainable transport networks. 1 Our guidance document entitled 'Guidance on Local Transport Plans and the Natural Environment' provides advice to local transport authorities on how they might achieve prioritisation and protection of the natural environment in the development and implementation of their LTPs. It is also intended to provide an early and clear indication of what Natural England will be looking for when responding to LTP consultations. I have provided this guidance document along with this consultation response for your information. Consultation format The LTP3 consultation's structure, comprising a whole raft of electronic documents, does not make for a straightforward task in terms of defining key points on which to focus and respond. Unfortunately this is compounded by a feedback form that offers no indication of, or structure relating to, the points on which the County Council seeks feedback. This results in a consultation that is difficult to get to grips with and raises a question over whether the County Council are genuinely seeking the views of stakeholders, partners and the wider public. Natural England has focused its attention on the SEA and HRA elements of the process together with the LTP3 Main Document and the following three policy areas in the LTP3: Development control (transport) Transport and air quality Transport and climate change, Habitat Regulations Assessment Natural England notes the following text in the LTP3 '2.5.1 Alongside the SEA there will also be an assessment of the impacts of the LTP3 on sites of European nature conservation importance (Natura 2000 sites – Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar sites) in the Worcestershire area, as required under the EU Habitats Directive (EU Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and Wild Fauna and Flora ) and the transposing U.K. Regulations (The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations, SI 2010 No. 490). The HRA is largely dependent upon scheme-specific information in order to assess the potential effects of LTP3 on Natura 2000 sites. It is therefore being undertaken after the scheme information comes to light. (our emphasis). The HRA is being undertaken in close collaboration with Natural England, the sole statutory consultee for HRA. The results of the assessment will be reported on at a later date.' We wish to express our concern that the Draft LTP3 would appear to be out for consultation before the Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) process has been started. HRA is a legal requirement intended to ensure that the proposals are not likely to lead to adverse effects on the integrity of sites protected under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010. HRA should be an iterative process integrated into the plan making process and informing the development of the plan, much like SEA. For this reason, Natural England advises that HRA activity starts early in the plan making process. As local authorities develop their LTPs they will need to undertake HRA screening to determine whether the LTP is likely to have a significant effect on a European site, alone or in combination with other plans and projects. If it cannot be excluded on the basis of objective evidence at this stage that a significant effect will not arise, the LTP must then be subject to an Appropriate Assessment. If the Appropriate Assessment cannot rule out adverse effects on the integrity of a European site then the LTP should be amended to eliminate these potential effects. Where adverse effects on the integrity cannot be eliminated, the LTP can only proceed if there are no satisfactory alternative solutions to the relevant element(s) of the plan, there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest and adequate compensatory measures are secured to ensure the overall 2 coherence of the network of European sites. Where a priority habitat or species (as defined by the Habitats Directive) is present then the only reasons that could justify the adoption of the LTP would be those which relate to human health, public safety or beneficial consequences of primary importance to the environment. Natural England West Midlands have had a report produced intended to aid local authorities in their HRA processes. The report pulls together information on European sites in the West Midlands. I have provided this document for your reference. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Natural England welcomes the Council's thorough approach to the SEA and we are pleased to note that the points we raised in our letter dated 17 August 20101 have all been addressed. We are satisfied with the evidence base and agree with the mitigation and enhancement recommendations made. This opinion is based on the information provided by you, and for the avoidance of doubt does not affect our obligation to advise on, and potentially object to any specific development proposal which may subsequently arise from this or later versions of the LTP, and which may despite SEA have adverse effects on the environment. Specific comments on main Environmental Report The draft Walking and Public Realm policy scored 'uncertain impacts' for biodiversity, landscape and cultural heritage due to the absence of any reference to lighting. We propose that a minor amendment addressing the scope for lighting to impact on biodiversity would address this. For the draft 'ransport and air quality policy', the consideration of options in relation to resolving difficulties in AQMA must take account of wider environmental resources e.g. protected areas such as Sites Of Special Scientific Interest, as well as wider biodiversity. Bewdley with its location close to the Wyre Forest SSSI is a possible example. Natural England welcome section 9.6 in the Mitigation and Enhancement Recommendations section on the benefits of urban tree planting. However we are unclear on exactly what recommendation is being made here. We suggest the recommendation should be for the LTP3 to recognise the value of street trees and take opportunities to plant more whenever they present themselves. We also propose that this approach should be widened to cover urban greening in all its forms, not just street trees2. These points may be addressed by integrating/cross referencing with paragraph 9.8 on the consideration of biodiversity in transport design and maintenance as there is no mention of Green Infrastructure here either. We fully support the integrated approach proposed in paragraph 9.13 on taking account of cumulative effects on landscape. Asset condition monitoring – 9.14 – Natural England supports the suggested reference to heritage assets within the Transport Asset Management Plan, and recommend that natural heritage is included within this. 1 SEA Scoping Consultation response 2 Please refer to our LTP Guidance (attached) and the section on Green Infrastructure 3 Specific comments on Appendix B – Environmental Baseline Biodiversity Paragraphs on 'regional and local planning policy' could be strengthened by adding references to Biodiversity Action Plans (BAP), 'andscapes for Living' and Green Infrastructure – these are good examples of projects with local expression. We recommend the LTP3 team speaks with the Biodiversity and Landscape Team (contact = Emily Barker) to discuss this topic. The potential for pollution to impact designated sites is mentioned frequently, but sites at risk are not defined. Ancient Semi Natural Woodland (ASNW) should be specifically mentioned in relation to pollution, although we note that ASNW are specifically mentioned in the section on landscape, which we welcome. We support paragraph 6.6.10 on 'opportunities': 'The provision of green infrastructure and walking and cycling routes could provide significant opportunities to enhance the biodiversity of the County, for example by including wildlife corridors in any such plans.' However, this is the only mention of Green Infrastructure (GI) in the report. GI should have greater prominence. Para 6.6.9 – We note some references to geology and archaeology here and suggest the title is amended accordingly. Landscape We propose this section should be called 'landscape and townscape'. Section 7.3 on the policy context is very limited, with no mention of European context e.g. European Landscape Convention or regional or local context. We propose this should be addressed and suggest speaking to your colleague Emily Barker accordingly. Table 18: Summary of landscape baseline information at local, regional and national levels We suggest the Council refers to Countryside Quality Counts for the baseline assessment of landscape condition www.countryside-quality-counts.org.uk. Under opportunities, Natural England wishes to promote AONB's as exemplars of sustainable transport and would welcome the Council's promotion of this through the LTP3. Travel for leisure is recognised as the fastest growing source of traffic, and is an issue for the countryside as a whole and our environmentally protected areas in particular. Two areas of Worcestershire are designated as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), the primary purpose of which is the conservation and enhancement of their natural beauty; the Malvern Hills and The Cotswolds. AONBs need environmentally sustainable transport networks that cater for both residents and visitors and, in turn, should become exemplars of such networks. A relevant local example is the Malvern Hills Hopper, which ran until earlier this year. Comments on the LTP3 Main document 4 The Economic Objective - Page 11 - Worcestershire Economic Strategy – LTP3 supporting criteria 'Excellent access by all modes of transport to/from and within Worcestershire's areas of tourism, including rural areas, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and major towns and cities' We refer the council to the relevant section of our LTP guidance document, acknowledging the value to the County of tourism. We wish to emphasise the parallel need to ensure that transport provision and management thereof effectively safeguards resources such as the Malvern Hills and The Cotswolds AONBs. The Environment Objective – Page 16 – Supporting text 'A specific Transport and Climate Change Policy has been produced as part of the LTP3 Compendium. However, the approach to reducing the impacts of transport on the environment in Worcestershire must necessarily be far wider in scope if it is to achieve meaningful progress against this objective. A combination of making changes to our travel patterns, focusing limited funds on transport interventions designed to enhance local environments (by improving local air quality and reducing noise, for example) and embracing new technologies and innovations that reduce the impacts of transport on our environment will all be explored during the LTP3 plan period'. Natural England welcomes and supports this statement. The Quality of Life objective – Page 27 - Physical & mental health Mental health as part of quality of life and links with the natural environment The natural environment is a significant component in contributing to Quality of Life and all built environment is subsumed within a natural context. The text should acknowledge the value of natural environment in influencing quality of life and providing ecosystem services. Issues & challenges for LTP3 – The scale of future development and associated funding contributions 'The scale of new development in Worcestershire is currently uncertain, so contributions from the private sector may be more difficult to secure' We acknowledge that the thrust of this statement is concerned with funding. Nonetheless the link here with development management is key to seeking beneficial interaction between transport and land use planning tools - e.g. Green Infrastructure provision that safeguards transport networks from flooding and ensures alternatives to the private car are integrated into new development Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework Objective Weighting Exercise Natural England is concerned to note that the Environment Objective clearly set out in Table 1.10 of the Main Document is omitted from the bar chart in Figure 1.3 setting out relative weightings proposed by County Councillors. The phraseology used in Table 1.10 is not used in Figure 1.3. This is confusing and needs to be corrected urgently. Geographical sections; South Worcestershire Transport Strategy – South Worcestershire Rural Package We welcome the reference to Green Infrastructure and refer the Council to our LTP guidance for our views on the subject. Kidderminster Urban Package (including Major Scheme Bid) A451 (Stourport-Kidderminster) transport corridor enhancements, including the Hoobrook Link Road (providing a strategic link between the A451 Stourport Road and the A442 Worcester Road). 5 Natural England is aware of the long standing LTP aspirations regarding this link road. We draw the Council's attention to the significant challenge posed in terms of such a route's relationship with the Wilden Marsh & Meadows Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). As a public body the Council has a duty3 to conserve and enhance SSSI. We would welcome the opportunity to meet with the Council in order to understand better the Major Scheme Bid and the extent to which the SSSI has been factored into its formulation. Comments on policy Development Control Policy Natural England broadly welcomes the range of policies set out in this document. We offer the following specific comments: DC1 & DC2 - We propose that the LTP3 Team ensures dialogue takes place with the Council's Biodiversity & Landscape Team (Contact = Emily Barker) to discuss the impacts of transport related measures in these contexts. DC4 – We note the qualification with respect to those developments that lead to transport network capacity being exceeded. We propose that through master-planning and design including innovation and technology the expectation here needs to become more stringent i.e. that the presumption should be in favour of schemes that do not exceed the 'network capacity threshold'. This would be consistent with the Council demonstrating a proactive demand management approach. Certainly in our view the criteria for pursuing those schemes that do exceed network capacity should be based on much more than simply the ability to pay. DC11 – The policy wording infers that each transport mode is treated equally. We propose that private cars should constitute a 'least preferred' option in policy terms, after walking, cycling and public transport, consistent with the policies elsewhere in this document. Transport and Climate Change Policy Natural England broadly welcomes the range of policies set out in this document. Due to the cross – cutting nature of the Climate Change theme it is apparent that the policies represent 'statements of intent'. However the tools needed to effect such intentions lie within the rest of the policy documents. Due to the evolving understanding of Climate Change Natural England encourages the Council to make full use of the compendium format for LTP3 so as to allow for efficient updating and amendments as that understanding develops. Transport and Air Quality Policy Natural England broadly welcomes the range of policies set out in this document. We welcome and support the clear message regarding the need to integrate transport and land-use planning. Our comments (above) on the development control policy are pertinent. We also welcome specific reference to protected areas (AONB and Sites of Special Scientific Interest) in the context of air quality policy. Should you wish to discuss this response please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address. Please forward a copy of the decision notice to our office at the above address. Yours sincerely, 3 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (As amended) – Section 28 (G) 6 7 Sent: 03 January 2011 18:40 Subject: Worcestershire LTP WORCESTERSHIRE LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN (LTP) Thank you for the notification of the consultation on the Worcestershire Local Transport Plan. I apologise for the delay in forwarding our comments. In August (letter dated 5 August 2010) we submitted comments on the Scoping Report for the Strategic Environmental Assessment. This also included our general guidelines for the consideration of the historic environment and heritage assets as part of Local Transport Plans (LTP). We have a number of comments on the main LTP document as follows. LTP Structure: The main document is clear and succinct in setting out the goals and objectives of the LTP and the supporting policies and the links to the series of topic plans. LTP Objectives: We broadly support the proposed objectives for the LTP and particularly welcome the objectives on the environment and quality of life. With respect to the latter, we welcome the specific reference to the historic environment and heritage assets. We suggest a minor amendment to the wording to better accord with PPS5 as follows: '… conserving our historic environment and heritage assets'. Economic Objective: We welcome the positive link made between the economy and improvements to the public realm, including de-cluttering initiatives. We suggest that more prominence could be given to improving accessibility by sustainable transport modes to Worcestershire's tourism attractions outside of the urban areas, given their role in supporting the County's visitor economy. Quality of Life Objective: Under this objective we recommend that an additional aim on quality design should be included to help deliver the main objective. A commitment to the design and delivery of schemes which respect the character and quality of the natural, built and historic environment would serve to support the objective and provide a positive framework of overarching design principles for future schemes and proposals. It would also provide the opportunity to include a link to improvements to the public realm which can contribute to quality of life as well as the economic viability of city centres as covered by the economic objective. As part of the aim on enhancing public engagement, we suggest that positively promoting the undertaking of community based street audits could further strengthen this aim. The Streets for All series of practitioner advice notes, produced by English Heritage, includes a toolkit for a community based street audit together with other practical case studies. http://www.helm.org.uk/server/show/category.19645 Asset Management Objective: The range of highway assets linked to maintaining the transport network can include heritage assets, as for example, listed or scheduled bridges, linear features such canals and disused railway lines, and signage, street furniture etc. In developing maintenance programmes for the range of asset groups, it will be important that their potential heritage significance is recognized and taken into account. Staffordshire County Council's guidance, Conservation within the Highway - Structures of Historic Importance, offers a good practice example of how this can be positively approached. We suggest that this approach to guidance could further help to deliver the aims under this objective and consideration given to producing a similar document individually or as part of the Transport Asset Management Plan. Worcestershire Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework: We recommend that the explanation in Table 1.10 for the Quality of Life Objective gives greater prominence to conserving and promoting the enjoyment of the historic environment and heritage assets as per the main objective. As currently presented only the natural environment is mentioned. Delivery Programme: We generally welcome the prominence given to public realm improvements and decluttering exercises as part of the proposed investment packages for each of the broad area strategies. As these are progressively developed we would welcome the opportunity to offer further comments, particularly where heritage assets are likely to be impacted and proposals offer the potential to enhance the management or enjoyment of the historic environment. At this stage we cannot offer comments on the list of possible major schemes without further information on their content and potential impacts on heritage assets. With regard to the series of Transport Policy Documents, are comments primarily focus on the Walking and Public Realm Policy as follows: Policy W4 Public Realm: We recommend that the policy wording in the first paragraph is amended to also refer to heritage assets, for example '.. conserving and enhancing landscape, townscape, biodiversity and heritage assets'. Policy W11 Street Furniture: We suggest the policy could more positively promote the undertaking of community based street audits to help inform de-cluttering exercises as well as proactively engage the community. We also recommend that the policy gives greater emphasis on the design of new street furniture and ensuring that it respects the character of the local area. Policy W12 Paving Materials: We generally support the content of the policy and its consideration of local character and historic streetscapes. An additional policy area where we suggest consideration could be given is the role of existing infrastructure such as canals and indeed urban rivers in encouraging walking and cycling. Successfully integrating their use with the wider townscape and area can be of value as already demonstrated by improvements to the river area in Worcester. With regard to the SEA Environmental Report, we welcome the inclusion of our suggestions in response to the Scoping Report. The Environmental Report provides a clear overview of the assessment process, the response to the consultations, and how the draft Strategy should be amended to take account of its findings. At this stage we have no further comments. I trust the above recommendations will be of help in finalising the Strategy. Yours sincerely English Heritage l Visit the new English Heritage website: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk . The site has a new, dedicated section for heritage professionals: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/professional together with information on days out http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/daysout, heritage news http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/about/news, looking after listed properties http://www.english- heritage.org.uk/your-property and the latest information on heritage protection: http://www.english- heritage.org.uk/caring/listing. Response to LTP3 consultation This response concentrates on matters relating to walking as a sustainable and efficient travel choice, particularly, but not exclusively, for shorter 'urban' journeys, echoing the opening paragraph of the Walking & Public Realm Policy document [W&PRP] which seeks to provide 'the strategic framework for the development of measures which help to make journeys on foot safer, easier and more pleasant…' [All references below are to paragraph numbers unless cited otherwise]. W&PRP at 1.1.4 recognises that the countywide Public Rights of Way network covers 'urban and rural areas, canal towpaths, short-cuts in residential estates and routes across public open spaces' [and continues] '(the rural, usually unsurfaced, parts of the…Network are covered in a separate LTP3 Rights of Way Improvement Plan Policy)'. Although there are well-known historical reasons for this distinction between urban and rural we do not feel, in future policy terms, it is a necessary or helpful one. For example, assuming them to be 'public', the 'rural' ones are usually either public rights of way [PRoWs] as shown on the Definitive Map or permissive routes (possibly on 'Access Land' as now mapped following the CRoW Act 2000). The surfaced 'urban' ones such as the short-cuts quoted above can also be assumed to be 'public' but whether they are on the Definitive Map is almost fortuitous, especially if they came into being as part of 'modern' developments (residential or otherwise). They can as easily be classified as 'Link Footpaths' with allocated numbering quite distinct from the numbering employed by the Definitive Map. To the urban walker seeking an efficient route between A & B the distinction is largely immaterial. Similarly a route across a public open space within an urban area may, for historical reasons, be a PRoW but as the whole space is obviously public that route may be one of several to cross it that cannot be identified as distinct from the others. We recognise and appreciate that W&PRP at 2.5 specifically discusses 'Integration and Links with [the] Rights of Way Improvement Plan' and understandably states that that Plan has an emphasis on countryside routes, it also states that 'elements of the rights of way network within urban areas, which are usually paved, are covered as part of this policy'. However we believe there is great scope for extending that policy to include much more of the public urban network (whatever its current nomenclature). Our argument therefore is for a holistic approach that brings together all public paths into an integrated network, capable of being mapped as 'routes for travel' in the way most useful to the 'everyday', as well as the 'recreational' walker. This would thereby acknowledge and encourage walking as a sustainable alternative to motorised transport. All this is of course within the 'Public Realm' which, as defined in W&PRP at 1.1.5, places these routes into a much broader context. We concur with that approach. We believe that the 'stakeholders' listed in 1.3.5 should include all residents of Worcestershire, not just their 'representatives'. It is hard to see why a person wanting, for example, to discover and use the most efficient in-town walking route to local facilities necessarily requires a 'representative'. This information should be directly available to all and everyone should at least have had the opportunity of contributing to the evaluation, identification and mapping of such routes. The walking maps for the majority of Worcestershire's urban areas, cited in W&PRP 2.2, are a very welcome innovation. However close examination and regular use of them has shown up a number of deficiencies and inconsistencies that need to be looked at and rectified if possible (although rumour suggests their future is uncertain any event). Their purpose, too, as aids to planning 'in- town' walking routes is unclear. We would like to see more 'recommended' routes with average or typical walking times. The directional signs, also cited in 2.2. are again a useful innovation but we are unsure as to what criteria are used to establish the locations of the signs and the chosen routes. As part of the 'Smarter Choices' initiative we would like to see a clear and consistent policy on this signage and suggestions invited for new ones - particularly within towns and urban fringe areas - which would chime with the issues mentioned above. We note the assurance in the Rights of Way Improvement Plan document [ROWIP] at 1.6.5 that 'In delivering the ROWIP, the County Council will ensure that it gives careful consideration to the links and key policies and action between the two documents [i.e. certain elements of AIRS* and the wider LTP3] and the ROWIP. We agree that 'Critical to this process will be providing for effective working with the AIRS and LTP3 steering groups, to prevent duplication of effort in the delivery of the respective action plans and reviews as they take place'. [*Access and Informal Recreation Strategy] Section 5 'Monitoring and Review' of the ROWIP also informs us at 5.1.1 that this Plan supersedes the document that was published in July 2007 [i.e. the original Plan] and harmonises this Plan with that of the 'wider Worcestershire LTP3 Compendium (2011 to 2026)' However we are told in 5.1.2 that the separate ROWIP Action Plan has been dissolved - despite it being the key document setting out the targets for the year ahead - and incorporated within the LTP3 etc. which will apparently fully integrate the ROWIP 'as part of a truly multimodal approach to the planning and delivery of transport in Worcestershire'. At least that recognises walking as a mode of transport! We do understand the thinking behind this approach but regret the demise of the ROWIP Action Plan, which was also designed to monitor actual annual performance against defined indicators. That Plan was developed in co-operation with the Local Access Forum (LAF), who recognised that a credible monitoring process was vital. Indeed a standing sub-group of the LAF was set up for that purpose. Yet we are now told in 5.1.4 that 'monitoring mechanisms will be developed in co- operation with the Local Access Forum and regular update reports will be provided to the Local Access Forum', which, while obviously welcome, is hardly an innovation. However we do welcome the assurance in 5.1.5. that a progress report will be produced as part of the LTP3 delivery process. We hope that it will be made widely available and interested parties can be notified of its publication. It seems likely that LTP3 and its associated policy and background documents were developed prior to the initial announcement on 22 September 2010 of a new Local Sustainable Transport Fund [LSTF], which was the subject of a subsequent written statement by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport on 13 December 2010. As the ROWIP and the other documents cited above very understandably put a great deal of emphasis on the gloomy present , and likely future, availability of funding is it possible that the LSTF might provide a source of funding for modest projects which, according to the announcement 'will be particularly welcome if they can demonstrate support from, and the involvement of voluntary and community organisations and the private sector'? -------------------------- C B. Ramblers' Association, District Footpath Secretary Wychavon. December 2010. 1 Worcestershire LTP3 Consultation – Cycling in Worcestershire Response on behalf of the newly formed Evesham Cycling Forum The Evesham Cycling Forum. The Evesham Cycling Forum has yet to be properly constituted. A public meeting was held on 9 December at Evesham Town Hall attended by 35 people and the speakers. Several people indicated that they would be happy to form a forum, but due the proximity of Christmas, the first meeting will be in the early New Year. This response if based on what was said at the meeting and from correspondence before and after the meeting with Colin Tether. The first meeting of the group will be in the early New Year. After that meeting it is hoped that many more comments will be forthcoming which will be sent on to supplement this report. Format of this response. Part 1 of this response looks at the LTP3 in general terms and makes proposals and suggestion about Cycling. References are made in Part 1 to locations in Part 2. Part 2 of this response makes particular suggestions for Evesham and the surrounding area. The suggestions are partly used as examples and partly proposals that could be implemented during the period of the plan. No plans have been submitted. It is hoped that these will become available together with further comments. Types of Cycling Cycles can be used for all sorts of purposes. Generally those going to work to the shops and to school are called "Utility" Cycling. Racing, mountain biking, touring and going to the pub are called "Leisure" Cycling. Many cyclists are just Utility Cyclists, probably more nowadays are Leisure Cyclists and some do both. It is considered important that both types of cycling are addressed in the LTP3. It is no good just providing leisure routes if people cannot cycle to work safely. However, it is important to provide leisure routes to allow children and the inexperienced adult to gain confidence on the roads and to provide the health benefits that cycling brings. This response tries to show that both types of cycling must be addressed at the same time if the benefits of cycling outlined in the LTP3 are to be realised. 2 Part 1 – Response to the LTP3 in General Terms. Looking Forward to 2026 The LTP3 is for the years 2011 to 2026. Although this is planning for the fifteen years, it is also a plan as to how we would like to see the County's transport system in 2026, ready for the next fifteen years or so. The Plan does address the subject of Climate Change, but it does not address the subject of the United Kingdom's vulnerability to shortages of oil and gas supplies. It is probable that oil prices will rise in real terms during the period of the plan and it is possible that an international crisis will make mean that oil will be in very short supply. There is a very real risk that car use will be limited and therefore alternative transport modes should be put in place to cater for this eventuality. In practice this means every effort should be made to ensure public transport, cycling and walking modes are viable. It is certain that in 2026, most families will have access to bicycles and if other transport modes are not available, then at least a bicycle can be used. There are few other certainties. Many of the proposals made in this submission are quite radical and there may not always be funds at present to support these. However, the plan is for fifteen years and during this time funds should become available. To put this into context, the cost of the A46 ring road around Evesham, which ironically has caused problems for cyclists, is probably much more than the cost of all the suggestions made in this response for promoting cycling. Cycling's Place in the Local Transport Plan. Cycling as a mode of transport scores very well and this is acknowledged in the plan and supporting documents. Cycling supports all five National Objectives in the Long Term Transport Strategy as well as supporting the Worcestershire Sustainable Community Strategy Cross-Cutting Themes and Objectives. Cycling is the only mode which can easily be used for journeys of moderate length which promotes health, is almost zero carbon and reduces road congestion. It is available to young people and older people alike. For shorter journeys it can be quicker than car or public transport when parking is taken into account. To summarise, it is accessible, easy, cheap, sustainable, efficient and promotes health. Why do so few people cycle in 2010 in Worcestershire? It is difficult to answer this question easily but there seem to be a number of reasons. 3 Historically, cycling was very popular from the late nineteenth century until well after the Second World War. The four main reasons for a decline in use are: The option to use a motor car instead of a bicycle as cars became cheaper in real terms and more people learned to drive. Generally longer journeys to work, shops and sometimes schools with the provision of better roads and motorways and out of town shopping. The fear, (real and perceived) that cyclists experience of using roads because of the presence of large volumes of fast moving vehicles and heavy good vehicles. The lack of confidence by many people who will never learn to start riding bicycles when they are young and not be able to learn easily as adults. Worcestershire, particularly in the Vale of Evesham, has a high percentage of heavy freight on quiet rural roads where farms or food outlets are serviced. The poor infrastructure for cyclists and walkers pose considerable challenges on these roads. Availability of Bicycles The current small usage of bicycles may seem strange as in 2010 physically cycling could not be easier. Compared to the heyday of cycling, modern bicycles are less expensive, weigh much less, have much better gears and brakes. Lighting for bicycles has improved and good, lightweight cycle clothing is available. Different types of cycle are now available to suit all types of people and different types of usage. Leisure Use and the Local Plan Cycles are used for leisure use possibly more than ever before. This use has the advantage that it provides healthy exercise and can allow new cyclists to gain confidence in using cycles in more mundane circumstances. Leisure use, whether it be racing, mountain biking or BMX will usually use the public highway to some extent and therefore should have an influence on the Local Plan. Accident Risk to Cyclists Policy C1 of the LTP3 Cycling Policy is supported. However, more needs to be done to allow people to be aware of risk in cycling as discussed below. The DTp publication, September 2010 Road Safety Web PublicationNo.17 - Cycling, Safety and Sharing the Road: Qualitative Research with Cyclists and Other Road Users is of great interest. In the Executive Summary it is stated: 4 Many of the barriers to cycling are the negative side of motivations, such as: inconvenience; the perceived effort involved; negative aspects of being out in the open; commitment; and personal security However, the most important barriers to road cycling are related to ORUs: the behaviour of ORUs; and the volume and speed of traffic. (Note: ORUs are Other Road Users) All County Councils have a legal obligation to carry out studies into road traffic accidents (involving personal injury) and to take action both to reduce and prevent accidents (Road Traffic Act 1988, section 39(3)). Worcestershire County Council does have an Accident Studies team but any request for accident particular statistics incurs a cost of £75. There are a few statistics published on the webpage see link: http://www.worcestershire.gov.uk/cms/transport-and-streets/streets/accident- studies.aspx The statistics show total casualty numbers from 2000 to 2009, in terms of all killed and seriously injured, children killed and seriously injured and all slight injuries. No other details are supplied at all. This is in contrast to the websites of all surrounding counties which show comprehensive reports with much more detail including, in most cases, the details of cyclist casualties. It suggested that Worcestershire has been negligent in this respect and that details of all road user types, including cycle casualties should be freely available. Proposal 1: Worcestershire County Council should publish a comprehensive Annual Road Accident Report including details of cycle casualties. In Policy C1 it is stated that Worcester County Council will look to: Tackle Road safety hazards which discourage people from cycling. Discussion at the Cycle Meeting illustrated that the major deterrent to cycling was the danger from other road users. Various sites were mentioned as particularly dangerous including crossing the A46 roundabouts. Policy C1 is supported but it is felt that this process should be open and that road users should be able to assist in the process by informing the Council where they feel are the dangerous places or they have had accidents. 5 Proposal 2 Road users should be able to submit information on locations where they feel at risk and provide reasons and possible improvements It is also suggested that road users have a right to be able to find out where the dangerous locations are within their area. In this way, road users would be able to make an informed choice about routes and the modal choice for a journey, for example a daily return trip to school. It is suggested that this information should be made freely available and published annually as a list of sites with number of accidents and the types of road user involved in them. Proposal 3: Details of road accidents should be freely available and published annually. How can the Local Transport Plan promote Cycling? In general Policy C2 of the LTP3 Cycling Policy is supported. However, "The position of cycling in the modal hierarchy (see LTP3 Traffic Management & Parking Policy) for the road in question" is not supported. Main Roads The Local Plan can influence the design and provision of highways and paths. With single exception of motorways, every single public road in the County is available to bicycles and there are many other routes cyclists can use. It is stated in the LTP3 that: "Worcestershire County Council has powers and duties to ensure that: The highway network is accessible to all, well maintained, has minimal congestion and is kept in a safe state" It is also stated that, in the Traffic and Parking Management Policy, Table 3.1 Transport Modal (User) Hierarchies in Worcestershire, that, for Main routes, cyclists have the lowest hierarchy. This in turn affects Policy TMP2, Transport Modal (User) Hierarchies in that basically cyclists will be least regarded in the design of main roads. This approach is strongly objected to because: Main roads generally run between centres of importance and there is a demand to use them by all users including cyclists Main roads are direct and usually well graded and therefore suitable in that respect for cyclists. Therefore other design characteristics should also be made suitable for cyclists. It is these main roads that have been priorities for freight where the cyclists can be, or perceived to be at the greatest risk. Therefore special efforts should be to allow cyclists to use them safely and easily 6 How to make Main Road suitable for cyclists It is often possible to provide for the cyclists with a separate lane on the side of the main road or by the shared use of a wide footway where appropriate. Only in the last resort should a separate side road or path diversion be used which will often be much slower than the main road. Junctions on main roads, especially roundabouts, usually present the main risks to cyclist. Attention needs to be given to these junctions to make them safer for cyclists and easier to use. In Policy C1 it is stated: "Constructing new or converting existing roundabouts with continental-style geometry which slow entry traffic speeds and make cyclists more visible". This is supported but also signalisation of roundabouts has been shown to markedly reduce accidents for cyclist and also assists pedestrians. Another method is to provide a separate toucan type crossing to one side of the roundabout. Ref 1. There are locations on the approach to a major junction where the nearside lane is shown by arrow is for left turn only. In these circumstances the cyclist does not often have the speed to get into the straight ahead lane and therefore will be in the wrong position at the junction. This is extremely difficult and dangerous for cyclists and should never be allowed. Any locations with these markings should be changed. Ref 2. Proposal 4 - It is proposed that all main roads have plans produced showing how the road will be developed to allow safe use by cyclists. Urban Roads In Table 3.1 Transport Modal (User) Hierarchies in Worcestershire, cycling is placed second after pedestrians, which is agreed. However, there is perhaps a category missing from the list of modes which is parking, as parking occurs on most urban streets and conflicts with moving traffic. Like main roads, it is important to cater for cyclist where possible although the opportunities will be less in built up areas. To make conditions suitable for cyclists the following are proposed: Proposal 5 – Speed Limits in Urban areas Where roads are narrow in urban areas, it is proposed that a general 20mph speed limit should be introduced to make conditions safer for pedestrians and cyclists. Ref 3. Proposal 6 – Cycle Friendly Traffic Calming in Urban areas All traffic calming must be designed with the cyclist in mind. Full width road humps should be avoided and chicanes have a slip lane for cyclists. Ref 4. 7 Proposal 7. – Limiting parking on Streets Where parking stops the free use of a well used street by cyclists or prevents the future implementation of a cycle lane, then that parking should be removed. Ref 5. Policy C6 of the LTP3 Cycling Policy is generally supported but felt to be too timid. The statement "Consideration will be given to trialling enhancements to enable an assessment of the appropriateness of the enhancement" shows a very cautious approach unlikely to provide many beneficial results. Proposal 8 – One way streets and Gyratories Most one way streets have been installed either to prevent rat running or because the road is too narrow to allow two way traffic. In either case, the problem was not caused by cyclists, but it does mean that cyclists have to go a long way round, often with fast moving traffic. Opportunity should be made wherever possible to allow cyclists to use one way streets in both directions and provide contra flow lanes in gyratory schemes. No new one way streets should be installed without exemptions for cyclist. Ref 6. A County Cycle Network Policy C1 of the LTP3 Cycling Policy is supported in respect of "The County Council will seek to create a network which is convenient and comfortable to use, enhances accessibility to key destinations, is safe and attractive". This Policy is agreed, however, distinction must be made between different types of cyclist, Utility and Leisure. It is suggested that the main road network should be made suitable for cyclists AND there should a network which is generally off road, or using quiet country roads. This provision is important for the following reasons: To enable less confident cyclists to travel by cycle without using the usual road network. To enable young cyclists to gain confidence in using cycles so that they may use the usual road network as they grow older. To enable leisure cyclists to use the network to get fit. To provide for tourism etc. Cycle paths and local Networks Detail design is important. All barriers should be removed or designed to be easily ridden past. Dropped kerbs should be installed. Signing should be included to show that cycling is allowed. Ref 7. 8 Road Maintenance Policy C3 of the LTP3 Cycling Policy is supported. It is important that signed cycle routes should be surfaced with smooth surfacing rather than the bumpy surface dressing type often provided on country lanes. Cycle Parking Policy C7 of the LTP3 Cycling Policy is supported but should be more positive. Specific mention should be made of the County Council working to provide cycle parking at railway stations. It is suggested that to encourage cycling, more and better cycle parking should be installed. The current best type is the Sheffield type where the frame rather than the wheel is locked up and the cyclists are less likely to get dirt from the wheel whilst locking up. The Butterfly type stand should never ever be provided. Butterfly stands are difficult to use as they involve bending down between the cycle and the stand in a confined space. The wheel will often be dirty so hands get dirty too. There is a risk that the cycle will be stolen leaving the front wheel behind. There is a risk that the cycle will be pushed over resulting in a buckled front wheel and damage. Ref 8. Wherever possible, stands should be under cover and very close to the entrances to shops, stores and offices with obvious CCTV surveillance, not just within 20 metres. Ref 8. It has also been suggested that safe cycle storage schemes could be introduced in shopping centres using vacant shop premises. New Developments within Worcestershire. Policy C4 of the LTP3 Cycling Policy is supported. However it is also important that no development can ever lead to a reduction of amenity for cyclists in the surrounding area. Part 2 – Response to the LTP3 with reference to Evesham and the Vale. Evesham in a wider Cycle Network It is agreed that the more continuous a cycling infrastructure, the more people use it. The County Council's own consultation, 78% of respondents said that there was not enough provision for cyclists in Worcestershire. This is particularly true in the Vale of Evesham where specific provision for cyclists is minimal. At present Evesham is not connected to the National Cycle Network. Quotes from Local Cyclists: 9 Evesham should be a hub of cycle routes, situated centrally between Alcester, Stratford on Avon, Moreton on Marsh, Cheltenham, Tewkesbury and Worcester. So far there are no cycle routes from Evesham, save the route to Sedgeberrow along the A46 from the outskirts of Evesham. When some of these things have been done I seriously think Evesham could begin to promote itself as a cycle friendly tourist area - which in time could be as big a tourist attraction as fishing is now. Leading to new small business opportunities. Problems getting out of Evesham Evesham itself is neatly contained within the A46 trunk road and the river Avon. Together the A46 and the river have made an almost impenetrable barrier to pedestrian and cycle traffic. The A46 Ring Road The A46 was completed in the early 1990s and since then traffic has built up steadily until it is extremely difficult and dangerous to cross by pedestrians and cyclists because the speed and volume of traffic does not allow long enough gaps. It is physically easier to cross at the roundabouts. However, cycling around these roundabouts is always risky for cyclists and perceived to be so. It is therefore proposed that substantial investment is needed within the period of the LTP3 to bridge the barriers of the A46 by cycle/pedestrian bridges or other measures (Ref 1): Twyford Roundabouts. Signalise roundabout or provide Toucan crossing, depending on accident record. Between the river Avon and Offenham Road. Install bridge. Badsey Roundabout. Signalise roundabout or provide Toucan crossing, depending on accident record. Badsey Lane. Install bridge. Broadway Road roundabout. Signalise roundabout or provide Toucan crossing, depending on accident record. The Vale Park Roundabout. Signalise roundabout or provide Toucan crossing, depending on accident record. Cheltenham Road Roundabout. Signalise roundabout or provide Toucan crossing, depending on accident record. The A46 itself is not pleasant to cycle along but there is room to improve it for cyclists. It is possible that space could be found on the carriageway by reducing the over-wide lanes which lead to speeding and accidents between motor vehicles Otherwise space could be found on the wide verges. 10 The River Avon. The South Worcestershire Transport Strategy includes the challenge of "Maintaining the availability of limited river crossings in South Worcestershire". There is a strong case for increasing the number of river crossings for walkers and cyclists as a relatively low cost way of improving infrastructure and the use of healthier, safer and more environmentally friendly travel modes. The river is bridged in three locations in or close to Evesham: Abbey Bridge: This bridge is due for replacement and it is essential that proper separate provision is made for cyclists. Workman Bridge: This bridge is narrow and unsuitable for cycling. It is felt that not much can be done to the bridge itself but the following could be considered: Make the bridge one way into town. At the moment the only traffic travelling from Evesham to Bengeworth is from the multi-storey car park and a few residential and commercial properties at the town end of the bridge. If the bridge were to be made one way, then the footways could be widened and a contra flow cycle lane could be provided. Install a separate bridge for cyclist and pedestrians just upstream of the current bridge. This could become of more immediate necessity if it was decided to do away with the current gyratory system in Evesham as more traffic would be using the bridge Simon de Montfort Bridge: This bridge carries the fast moving A46 traffic which is in two wide lanes over the bridge. Cycling along the carriageway is most unpleasant due to the speed of the traffic and the heavy goods vehicles. There are no footways provided and walking along the verges is difficult due to the uneven surface and vegetation. It would be possible to provide separate cycle pedestrian lanes beside the A46 which would link in with other routes described below. New Bridge Proposal – Close to Evesham Marina. The proposal made by the Vale of Evesham Civic Society for a cyclist/pedestrian bridge close to Evesham Marina is vigorously supported. This is of particular relevance in view of proposed developments off Offenham Road and Common Road. This bridge would connect into the wider Cycle Network and reduce the congestion in the centre, particularly over Workman Bridge. New Bridge Proposal – Evesham to Hampton A new cyclist/pedestrian bridge is suggested between Evesham and Hampton in the vicinity of Blind Lane. This would supplement or replace the historic 11 Hampton Ferry. This bridge would also connect into the wider Cycle Network and reduce the congestion in the centre, particularly over Abbey Bridge. Sustrans Proposals Sustrans work to promote cycle routes in Worcestershire is supported. However it is felt that some current routes proposed are too circuitous to be used by more than the leisure cyclist. They ought to be supported by more robust plans. Evesham to Harvington and beyond. It is suggested that a route could be put in place easily by extending the Evesham Country Park proposal made elsewhere. Evesham to Stratford on Avon. The current proposal for the National Route 41 Evesham to Badsey, Bretforton and Honeybourne would benefit from a bridge over the A46 to Knowle Hill. An alternative route to Stratford would be via Offenham and North Littleton and would use the proposed bridge by Evesham Marina. In addition another bridge over the A46 could be introduced over the A46 between the railway and the river which would also provide a crossing for a long distance footpath. Evesham to Tewkesbury. The current proposal is via Hinton on the Green and Elmley Castle, rather than through Sedgeberrow. This adds over 3 miles to a journey that could be made more direct and no less attractive by extending the dedicated cycle path along the A44 by a mile. Evesham to Pershore. It is understood that the current Sustrans plan is for a route via Little Comberton. It is suggested that a better and more direct route would be via Charlton, Fladbury, Lower Moor and Wyre Piddle . This route would take in all those villages and would be easy to implement. Specific Leisure Routes from Evesham Evesham is within a beautiful part of the country with the attractions of the Cotswolds and Bredon Hill nearby. The area attracts leisure cycling and Mountain Biking. There is a case for promoting certain routes to allow these interests. A good example of a leisure route is the Greenway running from Long Marston to Stratford. Many Evesham residents take their children by car to Long Marston to use this. It is suggested that Evesham needs a similar route to allow children to gain confidence in handling bikes. It is suggested that there is a need to encourage family participation at weekends with another one or two routes made safer and with good signage and organisation - such as the Blossom Trail and Bredon Hill Rides organised by St John's Ambulance - but maybe shorter, flatter routes which take in some of the outlying villages/cafes/pubs etc. (Once parents begin to feel confident in the safety of cycling they will be happier to let their kids cycle to school etc). 12 The routes below form parts of longer distance routes outlined above. They could be introduced before the major routes are completed. Suggested Leisure Routes are: To Bredon Hill. Bredon Hill is very popular with Mountain Bikers. Some of a route via Sedgeberrow is already installed. To Charlton and Cropthorne. It is suggested that the route using the access road to the Evesham Sewage Works is made a cycle route and extended from Pershore Road to the villages using existing paths and country roads. To Evesham Country Park. A route to the Country Park is physically possible using the existing footpath alongside the river which passes under the A46 at the Simon de-Montfort bridge. This route could be improved by using sections of the old railway line running from Evesham towards Harvington. Cycling within Evesham Cycling within Evesham is difficult due to the narrow and congested streets, the many one way roads and the gyratory, the two narrow river crossings which are the only routes between Evesham and Bengeworth/Hampton. Proposals have been made above for new river crossings. High Street. Comment has been made that it is disappointing that no provision was made for cyclist (save parking places) in the recent Enhancement scheme. It is suggested that cycle lanes could be introduced at least along the northern section. It is also suggested that this road should be made 20mph with appropriate cycle friendly traffic calming (Ref 3) Advance STOP Lines. There need to be advance stop lines at all signalled junctions within Evesham. It is noted that these were NOT installed in the enhancement scheme when the signals at Swan Lane were renewed. Lane Markings. (Ref 2) There are two traffic lanes on approach to the A46 roundabout at Twyford. The left one is left turn only and should be made straight on and left. One Way Streets. The following One Way streets in Evesham are all lightly trafficked. It is suggested that all these roads could allow cycling against the main traffic flow without any problem (Ref 6). With these roads, the continental system should be used which only needs a simple change to the traffic order and the signing. No contra flow lanes are needed. It is believed that such schemes are now being carried out in London. Avon Street Briar Close Brick Kiln street Castle Street 13 Oat Street Rynal Street Gyratory System. Evesham has a part Gyratory system using Mill Street, Chapel Street and Swan Lane. It is suggested that a contra flow cycle lane could be introduced into Mill Street to enable cyclist to reach Workman Bridge from the residential area to the north. Riverside Paths. Evesham has a wonderful riverside path extending from Workman Bridge, under Abbey Bridge and Hampton Ferry to Evesham Sports Club. This path's status is uncertain but it is suggested that it does form a good path for leisure cycling, especially to those with children gaining confidence in cycling. It is suggested that signing should show that cycling is allowed so that walkers and cyclists alike are aware of the dual use. It is also suggested that the riverside route which currently ends at the Sports Club should be extended under the railway bridge to Worcester Road by ATS Tyres. Evesham Urban Paths. Evesham has many longer distance paths running between housing developments, especially on the Hampton and Bengeworth side of the town. These are shown on the excellent Evesham Walking and Cycling Map issued by Worcestershire County Council. It is suggested that many of these should be allow cycling. For example: Briar Close to Riverside path by Sports Club Broadway Road to Hazel Road Burford Road to Drakes Lea Davies Road to St. Philips Drive Fairfield Road to St Richards Road School Road to Hampton Ferry St Marys Road to Common Road (Not shown on Evesham Walking and Cycling Map at all) Waterside to The Link. Two sections of this route are shown on the Evesham Walking and Cycling Map, as Traffic Free Cycle Routes. However, no signs are erected to confirm this and there are barriers and a need for drop kerbs at certain points (Ref 7). Cycle Lanes on Urban Road. At present no roads within Evesham have any cycle lanes. On the busier roads it is suggested that these could be installed where width allows and parking must not be allowed to take place (Ref 5). Abbey Road Broadway Road Cheltenham Road High Street 14 Vale Business Park. Vale Business Park is the only development of any size outside of the A46 ring road. It is very important that people should be able to reach it by cycle. It is suggested that a separate light controlled crossing is installed for pedestrians and cyclist, probably on the north-east side of the roundabout, to connect the Vale Park to The Link. It is further suggested that a cycle/pedestrian access route into Vale Park from the Cheltenham Road and the Broadway Road should be made. The A46 itself could become a route with proper cycle lanes installed alongside the carriageway. Safe Routes to School. (Ref 3)It is suggested that a 20mph speed limit on all areas around Evesham schools and on main road routes to schools during the entry/exit times. More needs to be done to encourage cycling to school. If possible, driving to school should be discouraged. Cyclists and Traffic Calming Measures. (Ref 4) Comment has been made on the design of traffic calming measures which are not cycle friendly. An example is Davies Road in Evesham where there are no separate slip lanes for cycles. Cycle Parking. (Ref 8) It is noticed that cycle parking has been introduced at many new developments but is either of the Butterfly Type which is universally unpopular or too far way from the store entrance. Examples are: Lidl Supermarket in Port Street. Butterfly type are provided near the store entrance but rarely used. B& Q Store in The Link. There is a covered cycle parking space but it is some 60 metres from the store entrance and rarely used. Halfords Store in The Link, which has a large cycle section. There is no cycle parking at all nearby. Cycle Parking at Evesham railway station also needs improvement with additional under cover, secure Sheffield type stands. End of Response CT 3.1.2011 . . 15 Much of the value of the LTP3 lies within the associated documentation (the Compendium) which looks in greater detail at particular dimensions of transport policy. Given the geographical position of Alvechurch, as earlier mentioned, and developments within the Parish, we have particular interest from among the Compendium policy documents in the following - cycling, development control, integrated passenger transport, multi model freight, traffic management and parking, transport safety and walking and the public realm. It will not be surprising that our interest stems from existing and anticipated issues and concern which can be linked to one or more of the transport policy sectors listed above. We now move to a consideration of how these matters separately affect the four main settlements within Alvechurch Parish although in some cases there will be an overlap. Hopwood The current use of the A441 between Birmingham and Junction 2 of the M42, and increasing future use associated with the Longbridge redevelopment puts Hopwood at the centre of a number of the transport policies in question. There are issues to do with managing traffic volumes and speeds, the short term and long term parking of freight and other vehicles in lay -bys near Junction 2, close to the M42 service area itself, and opportunities for Hopwood residents safely to move along and across the main road ( to include here access to bus stops). Moving away from vehicle traffic the opportunities for the development of the sustainable transport modes, like cycling and walking ,are hampered by the poor state of pathways within Hopwood and connecting Hopwood to the main settlement of Alvechurch village along the Birmingham Road. We emphasise again that this cluster of Hopwood issues should be the local top priority set for incorporation within the transport scheme appraisal framework for this part of the County. Alvechurch Village We recognise and applaud previous County Council developments here regarding transport safety and traffic management and parking that to date represent a success story. Residents still have concerns expressed through the Partners and Communities Together (PACT) meetings about excess speeds approaching the village centre from Birmingham and exiting the village towards Redditch. The management of car parking around the school is still problematic and the case for 20 mph zoning needs further exploration. This should be part of the statutory work on the Sustainable Modes of Travel to School Plan. As to sustainable transport for the wider public the regular, daily bus service ( number 146) between Birmingham and Redditch conveniently stops at a number of places in Alvechurch Village and also in Bordesley and Hopwood (in these latter two with issues about safe crossing of the main road to the bus stops.) But there are current concerns about the continuation of bus service number 182 /183 with sufficient frequency between Bromsgrove and Redditch via rural routes in our Parish. Alvechurch railway station could carry increased passenger traffic particularly if service frequency should grow between Redditch and Birmingham. In due course there should be opportunities for a link via Barnt Green or Longbridge stations from Alvechurch with trains proceeding down to Bromsgrove. As it is the public transport services between Alvechurch and the District centre of Bromsgrove town are very under- developed. Improvements to footpaths, already mentioned from Hopwood and needing attention on exiting Alvechurch towards Bordesley should be in the local delivery programme and this could be associated with a cycle way development. The public realm in Alvechurch village centre suffers from several road junctions mixed with parking that does not support safe movement by pedestrians – a review of pedestrianisation possibilities and revised car parking arrangements is desirable in the mid- term. More immediately there are issues around the retention of the mini- roundabout adjacent to the Red Lion Public House which will see increased vehicle use due to the new housing development on the old school site. The roundabout, while aiding speed management on the Birmingham Road, does not provide a safe view of traffic that is approaching the roundabout from the Birmingham Road for those drivers having the right of way to enter it from Tanyard Lane. ALVECHURCH PARISH COUNCIL Response from Alvechurch PC to the Worcestershire County Council Consultation on its draft Third Local Transport Plan Alvechurch Parish Council recognises the significance of the draft Third Local Transport Plan (LTP3) to the economic and social well being of the County and its residents. The documents forming the plan are to be applauded for their wide ranging perspective on transport policy and its broader impact, and for the depth of consideration provided on the specific policies helpfully set out in Compendium form. Alvechurch Parish Council prefers to provide its response to the consultation on LTP3 in this document, rather than though completion of the on- line response form. It recognises our major interest in transport policy which in turns stems from the geographical position of the Parish in North East Worcestershire and the transport policy implications that flow (with such Parish features as Motorway and major Junction, A -roads, bus and rail links, canal location, walking and cycling opportunities) but also because of the physical separation of the principal four settlements within the Parish itself. (We set out later in this response our judgement on the key transport policy- related issues for the Parish with brief commentary). We appreciate it is both a necessary and a brave task to develop LTP3 in these difficult financial times. It has to be hoped that the Plan's 15 year time span (2011-2026) will see some of it being implemented in times when better and more funding for transport planning, in the broad sense, will be available. More immediately we do welcome the appearance now of this broad strategy statement, tied to the objectives of the County Sustainable Community Strategy, and see the sense in transport policy developments being grouped into five year, detailed "delivery plans", the contents of which are derived from the new Worcestershire Transport Scheme Appraisal Framework. For obvious reasons we appreciate the higher priority in the Appraisal Framework given to programmes that are cost effective and promote economic objectives. We do have some concerns that objectives important to Parish communities like ours around equality (meaning accessibility to transport options) and quality of life are given relatively low priority in the decision taking on transport priorities. Importantly, and as a means for a Parish Council like ours to emphasise our concerns on behalf of the very local community interests, we are encouraged to note that the draft LTP3 main document (page35) responds to the Government's localism agenda. It identifies the importance of transport policy finding a way to meet local aspirations and the headline "Local choices and local benefits" is one we will wish to champion. It is for this reason that we set out later in this document some of the current "transport" issues affecting the Parish, so they are early candidates for consideration for the LTP3 package approach to implementation. We do not sense that the outline of the North East Worcestershire Rural Package given on Page 48 of the Plan main document gets very close to the issues and concerns of Alvechurch Parish. References there to the re-development of the Longbridge site has particular relevance to the Hopwood part of our Parish; that on the smarter programme on transport choice needs to be related to possible developments benefiting the Alvechuch rail station and improved rail links variously to Redditch, Birmingham and to Bromsgrove stations( while currently there is debate about possible reduction in the already infrequent bus service connecting Bromsgrove and Redditch through rural routes), and reference to sustainable transport infrastructure (important to us in terms of walking, cycling and public transport increased choices) strangely refers to "across the Borough" rather than to the District of Bromsgrove. In our view and recognising the several significant settlements in Bromsgrove district , often with their own Parish Councils, and having regard to the favoured "package" approach to developing transport programmes, we think there is a case for a sub plan that explores a" Bromsgrove District larger settlements rural package" of possible transport works. Rowney Green Issues here are chiefly to do with traffic speed through the village settlement with traffic volumes increasing at certain points of the day due to the location of the Bordesley Hall Business Park. The village roads are quite narrow and there is no footpath or lighting extending the length of its built- up area. With no footpath running along Rowney Green Lane and Radford Road into Alvechurch centre, and with threats to the frequency of the single bus service, there is little scope for residents reducing the use of private vehicles. Car traffic on the Holloway, both from the village and that using the Bordesley Hall Business Park, and lorry traffic misdirected through the Holloway and onto the narrow Storrage Lane by satellite navigation equipment, requires a series of traffic management and safety measures like realignment of parts of the Holloway road itself, changes to the speed signage and more regular road resurfacing than currently takes place. Bordesley The principal matter here is the volume of vehicle traffic proceeding along the A441 through the settlement area. A 40mph speed limit is in place but there is a case for changes in signage on the nearby motorway network and on other A –roads to seek to move lorry traffic away from the A441 at this point. In any event the situation should be kept under review for means to improve the safe passage of residents and other pedestrians across this busy road, particularly in the vicinity of bus stops. In the longer term and in the period covered by LTP3 the case for a Bordesley by- pass will need further consideration , particularly so if housing developments should take place in due course at the boundary between Redditch Borough and Bromsgrove District. Alvechurch Parish Council will be ready, as the adoption of and action following LTP3 proceeds, to discuss further with relevant County Councillors and County Transport Officers the particular issues and challenges for the Parish as outlined above. Alvechurch Parish Council 31 December 2010